Bruno Dente, Politecnico di Milano Aalborg, 14.06.12
description
Transcript of Bruno Dente, Politecnico di Milano Aalborg, 14.06.12
Bruno Dente, Politecnico di MilanoAalborg, 14.06.12
INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY FOR TERRITORIAL DEVELOPMENT
1. Identifying institutional preconditions for effective territorial strategies
2. Developing a methodology for measuring Institutional Capacity
3. Building performance indicators to measure Institutional Capacity
4. Producing policy recommendations for building Institutional Capacity
Project Goals
2
1. Alsace: Decentralization of the management of the OP
2. Aquitaine: Regional interventions and inter-governmental cooperation for innovation
3. Rhône-Alpes: Rhône basin multi-regional program management
4. Puglia: Evaluation Unit
5. Toscana: Integrated Sustainable Urban Development Projects
6. Sicilia: Territorial Integrated Programs for development (TIPs)
7. Puglia: reform processes and sectoral planning in the field of water, waste and soil protection
8. Lubelskie: the impacts of the Polish decentralization of the EU Structural Funds framework in the programming period 2007-2013
9. Dolnoslaskie: the relations between strategic planning and mid-term programming instruments
The Case Studies
3
Conceptual Framework
4
TERRITORIAL DEVELOPMENT
INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY1. Managing EU policy2. Using EU policy for regional
priorities3. Mainstreaming of EU principles
(partnership, evaluation, equal opportunities, transparency, etc.)
CAPACITY BUILDING POLICIES–Staffing–Training–Networking–Procedures–Institutional innovations
STRUCTURAL VARIABLES
INSTITUTIONAL THICKNESS
INSTED REGIONS CAN BE DIVIDED INTO TWO GROUPS, BUT:- CBP results largely independent on SV- SV and IC may be linked only by using the Institutional Thickness
framework
FIVE DIMENSIONS OF INSTITUTIONAL THICKNESS:- Consistency through time (e.g. Toscana vs. Alsace)- Framework Coherence (e.g. French regions and Toscana vs.
Sicilia)- Governance- Adaptation to change (e.g. Toscana and the French regions)- Resistance (e.g. resistance to central governments)
Contexts for Capacity Processes
5
TYPE ONE IC:- Experience explains procedural success (e.g. Italian regions),
but it is the starting level of IC that explains results (e.g. the French regions)
TYPE TWO IC: - Experience with designing and implementing development
projects is key
TYPE THREE IC:- Partnership is widespread (need or commitment?)- Evaluation, transparency, etc. are more easily mainstreamed,
but watch for effectiveness
Institutional Capacity: Key Lessons
6
TYPE ONE IC1. Amount of decommittment2. Procedural delays
TYPE TWO IC3. Level of co-financing4. High level of multilevel governance
TYPE THREE IC5. Mainstreaming of the different institutional features of EU
programmes6. Success in getting competitive development funding
Institutional Capacity: six basic Indicators
7
Capacity Building Policies (CBP)
8
INSTED RegionsImplemented CBPs
Staffing Training Networking Procedural Arrangements
Institutional innovations
Alsace ●● ● ●
Aquitaine ●● ● ●
Rhône-Alpes ● ●
Toscana ● ●● ●
Puglia (NUVAL) ●● ● ●● ●●●
Puglia (Waste, Water and Soil) ●● ● ● ●●● ●●●
Sicilia ● ●● ●● ● ●
Lubelskie ●●● ●● ● ●●
Dolnoslaskie ●●● ●● ● ● ●●
STAFFING:- Typical when the task is new, but levels of stability varyTRAINING: - Widespread, but great diversity (issues, actors, timing)NETWORKING:- Networking is widespread, but network complexity is limitedPROCEDURES: - Good for governing at arm’s length (e.g.Toscana, Puglia)INSTITUTIONAL INNOVATIONS: - Institutionalization and legitimacy are sensitive issuesMAIN PROBLEMS:- Limited long-term effects; conflicts and lack of integration;
inappropriate tailoring and design
CBP: Key Lessons
9
CBPs can break path dependency and improve capacity, no matter the starting level of development
TYPE ONE IC:- All CBPs can improve type one IC, but variable levels of
specificity and different impacts on receiving administrationsTYPE TWO IC: - Effects will be observable in the future, BUT procedures can
activate type two IC in the short run (e.g. Toscana, Sicilia, Dolnoslaskie)
TYPE THREE IC:- Permanent and integrated institutional innovations can help
fixing type three capacity gaps
CBP and Institutional Capacity
10
CBP and Institutional Capacity
11
CBPs TYPE one IC TYPE two IC TYPE three IC
Staffing ++ ++ +
Training ++ + +
Networking +++
Procedures +++ ++
Institutional innovations + ++ ++
Causal Mechanisms for effective CBPs
12
Incentive Stick and Carrots: competitive funds, performance reserve, performance
management (Lubelskie, Puglia, Toscana) Focusing Events: integrated projects (Toscana)
Reputation Certification: EU and national institutions can be certificators (Polish regions, NUVAL) Creation of communities: networking in development actions (All) Creation of rules of coordination: procedures for using the budget (Aquitaine)
Coordination
Creation of rules of coordination: organizational restructuring (Lubelskie); Unified application form for EU and non-EU funds (Aquitaine)
Repeated interactions: departments exchange (Lubelskie), Inter-sectorial groups (NUVAL); TIP Office and supervisory committee (Sicilia)
Actor certification: devolution of responsibility to the region (Alsace, Aquitaine)
Defense
Control feedback: external monitoring and evaluation (Lubelskie) Sticks: deadlines and commitments (Dolnoslaskie) Blame avoidance: legitimizing support (NUVAL) Precommitment: rule of decommitment (Rhône-Alpes); standards and procedures
(Toscana); structured application and signing of partnership agreements (Sicilia)
LOOK AT THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF IC: - financial management is important, but TYPE TWO and TYPE
THREE IC are needed for more effective cohesion policy
DIAGNOSE STRATEGIC PLANNING:- Allow for different development trajectories- Pay attention to formal implementations- Indicators may help
SELECT THE RIGHT CBP:- More specific strategies by looking at CBP effectiveness
WHY DOES IT WORK?- To increase transferability causal mechanisms may help
uncover causal chains
Next steps: Conditionalities and IC
13
DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPOSED INDICATORS- Develop consistency, replicability and comparability- Add indicators to the list, BUT watch for diversity across
countries
OPERATIONAL DATABASE OF SMART PRACTICES- Success stories of increased IC- Identifiable causal chains- Possibility to use secondary sources
Next Steps: Indicators and Smart Practices
14