Instrument for Pre Accession Instrument for Pre Accession [IPA][IPA]

IPA CBCIPA CBC & & IPARD IPARD

SEMAK Team, 2015 SEMAK Team, 2015

IPA is an integrated Pre-Accession Instrument to assist candidate and potential candidate countries and it ensure:

− Higher level of coherence and co-ordination of EU Assistance and

− better preparation for Structural, Cohesion and Rural development Funds through progressive emulation of EU funds rules

It replaces 5 different programmes and instruments:

Phare, ISPA, SAPARD, CARDS and Turkey pre-accession instruments

Financial envelope allocated for the period 2007–2013 was 11,565 billion €

IPA II (2014-2020) € 11.7 billion

Prepared in partnership with the beneficiaries, IPA II sets a new framework for providing pre-accession assistance for the period 2014-2020.

The most important novelty of IPA II is its strategic focus. Country Strategy Papers are the specific strategic planning documents made for each beneficiary for the 7-year period. A Multi-Country Strategy Paper will address priorities for regional cooperation or territorial cooperation.

IPA II targets reforms within the framework of pre-defined sectors. These sectors cover areas closely linked to the enlargement strategy, such as democracy and governance, rule of law or growth and competitiveness. This sector approach promotes structural reform that will help transform a given sector and bring it up to EU standards.

IPA is the financial instrument for the European Union pre-accession process for the period 2007-2013 with regard to IPA I, and 2014 – 2020 to IPA II.

Assistance is provided on the basis of the European Partnerships of the potential candidates and the Accession Partnerships of the candidate countries, which means the Western Balkan countries, Turkey and Iceland.

The beneficiary IPA countries are

Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Iceland, Kosovo, Montenegro, Serbia, and Turkey.

The beneficiary IPA countries

The aim of the IPA is therefore to enhance the efficiency and coherence of aid by means of a single framework in order to strengthen institutional capacity, cross-border cooperation, economic and social development and rural development. Pre-accession assistance supports the stabilisation and association process of candidate countries and potential candidate countries while respecting their specific features and the processes in which they are engaged.

ACTACT

Council Regulation (EC) No 1085/2006 of 17 July 2006 establishing an Instrument for Pre-Council Regulation (EC) No 1085/2006 of 17 July 2006 establishing an Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA)Accession Assistance (IPA)

The IPA is made up of five components:

1. the “support for transition and institution-building” component, aimed at financing capacity-building and institution-building;

2. the “cross-border cooperation” component

3. the “regional development” component, aimed at supporting the countries' preparations for the implementation of the Community’s cohesion policy ,

4. the “human resources development” component/ European Social Fund;

5. the “rural development” component

Status of Implementation of IPA financial assistance per country at 31st December 2013 against total funds committed (2007 – 2013):

IPA I Allocated Contracted Paid Percentage Contracted

Percentage Paid

Albania 512,037,790 340,129,252 208,188,304 66.43% 40.66%

Bi H 516,518,116 340,463,959 235,929,768 65.92% 45.68%

Croatia 254,165,147 241,139,563 167,873,568 94.88% 66.05%

Macedonia 248,191,651 134,902,876 94,954,199 54.35% 38.26%

Iceland 34,837,163 10,033,958 3,620,572 28.80% 10.39%

Kosovo 644,160,000 488,139,427 364,426,588 75.78% 56.57%

Montenegro

165,170,940 122,489,195 106,817,828 74.16% 64.67%

Serbia 1,207,777,326 851,440,943 655,964,421 70.50% 54.31%

Turkey 1,578,268,393 1,329,654,221 900,975,608 84.25% 57.09%

Total 5,161,126,525 3,858,393,393 2,738,750,858 74.76% 53.06%

Republic of Macedonia in Annual EU report for the financial assistance 2013

The management of IPA funds under the Decentralised Implementation System remained challenging for the national authorities throughout 2013 due to understaffing and insufficient managerial capacities in key institutions. Thanks to concerted efforts of the national authorities and the Commission, the loss of funds from Component I was reduced to EUR 3.3 million from a potential loss of around EUR 15 million.

With the finalisation of the programming and revision of all programmes under the different IPA Components in 2012, the year 2013 was dedicated to the preparation of the IPA II Indicative Strategy Paper 2014-2020.

Assistance under the IPA can take,the following forms:

investment, procurement contracts or subsidies;

administrative cooperation, involving experts sent from the Member States;

participation in Community programmes or agencies;

measures to support the implementation process and management of the programmes;

budget support (granted exceptionally and subject to supervision).

Instrument for Pre Accession Instrument for Pre Accession

Cross-border co-operation programmesCross-border co-operation programmes

IPA Cross-border co-operation programmes 2007-2013 represent the framework for rapid economic integration, aiming at reducing the existing differences between the levels of development of the cross-border regions, as well as improving the overall cultural, social and scientific cooperation between the local and regional communities. Involving the representatives from both sides of the border, who set up a joint programme, which is governed by a single set of rules, good neighbourhood relations are developed.

The Cross-border Cooperation Operational Programmes 2007-2013 are development programmes jointly designed by two bordering countries to tackle common problems and exploit shared potentials.

Macedonia is connected trough four NUTS III cross-border Euro-regions:

As far as geographical eligibility is concerned, the same rules apply as under the Structural Funds European Territorial Cooperation Objective (Objective 3). Eligible regions are NUTS III (or equivalent) regions along land and maritime borders between Member States and adjacent (potential) Candidate Countries as well regions along the maritime borders separated by max. 150 km

Main three priorities of the programmes are:

1) Economic and Social Development

2) Sustainable Management of Natural Resources

3) Technical Assistance.

Macedonia & Albania

The territory of the eligible area for the cross-border program between the Republic of Macedonia and Albania covers 19 969 km2, with a total population of 1 524 674 inhabitants. The overall borderline length is 191 km (land 151 km, river 12 km and lake 28 km) with four frontier posts operating permanently and one frontier post operating occasionally.

Macedonia & Kosovo

The programme area has a border length of 246km (21km of lakes), covering an area of 29,259 km² and a population of 2.222.629

The ultimate result should certainly be the economic prosperity of cross-border regions, political security and safety in the region, and easier and rapid process of european integration.

IPA beneficiary countries have very different funding needs. IPA is designed to meet these different needs flexibly, and provide a tailor-made funding solution through the following five components of IPA: Transition Assistance and Institution Building, Cross-Border Cooperation (CBC), Regional Development, Human Resources Development and Rural Development.

“Sharing borders-growing closer” holds especially true within IPA CBC:

EU funds management knowledge and experience capacity building for authorities in candidate countries

Knowledge and experience capacity building on preparation, application and implementation of projects in line with EU regulations

Promotion and strengthening of cooperation between institutions from neighbouring countries, both on central and local level

Promotion of the importance of EU accession and sharing the same values

Cooperation reinforcement for projects between public and private sector

IMPORTANT- SAME RULES OF IMPLEMENTING FOR ALL

All participating partners on all sides of borders use the same rules, implement projects jointly, and manage budgets together. This enables the establishment of long-lasting contacts between people, and joint cross-border activities to help economic development, support small-scale infrastructure, protect the environment, and foster research, culture, and education. It also increases the overall social cohesion along EU external borders. Furthermore, through the process of project identification, applying for funds and project implementation, partners from candidate countries gain valuable experience in management of EU funds. “Sharing borders-growing closer” holds especially true within IPA CBC

Instrument for Pre Accession Instrument for Pre Accession Rural Development Programme (IPARD) IPARD aims to assist in policy development as well as preparation for the implementation and management of the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy, Rural Development Policy and other related policies.

What is IPARD?What is IPARD?Instrument for Pre-acession Assistance for Rural Development

It will contribute to the:- implementation of the acquis communautaire concerning the Common Agricultural Policy - sustainable adaptation of the agricultural sector and rural areas in the candidate country

What are the Objectives of the IPARD Programme?

Contribution to sustainable modernization of agricultural sector, Encouraging the improvement of EU acquis related food safety, veterinary, phytosanitary and environment or other standardsContribution to sustainable development of rural areas, Preparing action plan concerning implementation of agri-environmental measures and local rural development strategies.

Republic of Macedonia is a part of Western Balkans Countries. The condition needs and problems in agriculture in whole Western Balkan are the similar. The Republic of Macedonia as well as the whole Western Balkan Region needs to improve the living conditions of villages and to find a way to create jobs for the residents of those villages.

The primary reason to do this is to stop outward migration and to develop basic food production processes.

The agriculture reforms can improve the whole situation, produce jobs in agriculture, established farms as businesses- known as family farms, growing up food production, stopped migration village- town, expanse export, increase GDP.

IPARD – Republic of Macedonia

Republic of Macedonia is one of only three countries which benefited from the use of IPARD 1 (the others being Turkey and Croatia). Its national IPARD 1 Programme for 2007-2013 was approved by the European Commission in 2007, with a total indicative budget of € 87.53 million.

In 2009, funding was authorized for three measures:•Investments in agricultural holdings •Investments in the processing and marketing of agriculture and fishery products •Diversification and development of rural economic activities.

Since 2009, the government has issued nine public calls for applications to use IPARD funds. To date, about 18% of the remaining IPARD 1 budget has been committed to fund about 300 projects.

The Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Water Management is prepared to consumed IPARD 2 funds 2014 to 2020, which will have the same scope as IPARD 1, plus forestry and advisory services.

For 2014, the European Commission (EC) allocated a 106 million Euro grant for the development of agriculture in rural communes of Macedonia. The program named IPARD 2 (Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance for Rural Development).

IPARD 2

1. Measure 101 Investments in Agricultural Holdings2. Measure 103 Investments in Physical Assets Concerning Processing and Marketing of

Agriculture and Fishery Products3. Measure 201 Agri- Environmental measures and organic farming4. Measure 202 Preparation and Implementation of Local Development Strategies -

Leader Approach5. Measure 302 Farm- Diversification and Business Development6. Measure 303 Improvement of Training

- Consideration should be given to higher aid intensity for environmental investments.- EU standard-compliant establishments should be still eligible for investments improving

their competitiveness.- National minimum standards should be met "no later" than at the end of investments.- Analysis of the national/EU standards and their enforcement could be included in the

sector analysis.

What the countries need to do?What the countries need to do? - The countries should make an effort to start preparing for this measures due to its

important contribution to the environmental policy. Some countries have already made an effort and started to prepare for this measure

- The countries should start with development of the environmental analysis and identification of the problems that should be tackled by the programme.

- Measure should be developed on the pilot level and consist of a limited number of rather simple sub-measures reflecting environmental needs of the countries.

- Baseline standards might seem to be difficult for the identification; however, in a first instance the countries should select their relevant national standards for the purpose of the measure. However, some new standards might have to be established- it will depend on the sub-measures to be chosen by the countries.

- Calculation of the premium within sub-measures requires involvement of the national institutions that will confirm its relevance.

- Involvement of the well trained advisors is crucial for the implementation of the measure.

- Some progress achieved with Leader implementation in some countries (particularly Serbia) through either IPA I component or other international cooperation; many countries have established national rural networks.

- When discussing a minimum size of LAGs territory (requested 5,000 inhabitants), the size of the whole country should be taken in consideration.

- It was proposed to increase a level of aid rate to provide incentives for newly established LAGs. Proposal was made to increase a value of small projects, (currently 1,000-5,000 euros).

- Managing Authorities have better competency to evaluate and select Local Development Strategies, therefore the whole process of LDS selection should be only the MA's responsibility (currently shared with the Agency).

- Also some of this measures suffers from the lack of proof of ownership for land and buildings and of lack of building permits, especially if national legislation provides for the respect of existing "village development plans".

- As regards location of projects, it was proposed that an investment should be located only in rural areas; however ownership of a project should be accepted also from urban areas.

- Micro and small enterprises should be eligible under all sectors.- It was proposed to add new sectors: forestry and wood processing.- Definitively a simplified Business Plan for small projects should be eligible.The funds also can be used for infrastructure and for irrigation. This project supports

equal regional development and the development of rural countries. The project is in line with the priorities of the government and the priorities of the European agenda for equal regional development.

But, infrastructure is only focused on the improvement of the condition of rural

areas. This is good investment since it offers the people a good reason to stay and live in villages.

CONCLUSION

However, economically we still need direct activities which will produce jobs to keep the people in villages. These jobs should be directly connected with food producing.

Our focus and our plan to work toward the solution to the problems of food production and agriculture, is on one side and to also focus on private sector promotion, local entrepreneurs, loans and energy efficiency, as the other side of activities.

Thanks for your attention and interest!

Klaudija Lutovska, Specialist of Strategic ManagementKlaudija Lutovska, Specialist of Strategic ManagementPresident, SEMAK NGOPresident, SEMAK NGO

Collaborator/ Expert:Collaborator/ Expert:Irving Leif, Ph.D. Irving Leif, Ph.D. Founder and Director at Viroqua Free University, Founder and Director at Viroqua Free University, Worker-Share at Small Family CSA Farm at Viroqua, WisconsinWorker-Share at Small Family CSA Farm at Viroqua, Wisconsin

Technical assistance:Technical assistance:Biljana Atanasova, Vice president, SEMAK NGOBiljana Atanasova, Vice president, SEMAK NGOAleksandra Simonovic, General Secretary, SEMAK NGOAleksandra Simonovic, General Secretary, SEMAK NGO