Approach of rural development by Limousin (France) 731 000 inhabitants 731 000 inhabitants 43 inhabitant / km2 43 inhabitant / km2 39% population is rural.

Approach of rural developmentApproach of rural developmentby Limousin (France)by Limousin (France)

• 731 000 inhabitants731 000 inhabitants

• 43 inhabitant / km243 inhabitant / km2

• 39% population is rural39% population is rural

A rural development policy founded

on infraregional project areas: the “districts” 14 “rural” districts- averaging 30,000 hab., 1100

km², 48 municipalities, per district

2 Regional parks= 21% of the Limousin region

22 structural hubs- Towns with an agglomerated

pop. of more than 2 000 inhabitants (average is 5,460 inhabitants) = urban framework of the rural zone

2 “agglomeration” districts- Limoges 200,000 and Brive

85,000 hab. = 40% of the Limousin population

A structure mirrored by the LEADERLocal Action Group

- 8 LEADER territories

80 % of municipalities and 50 % of the inhabitants of Limousin

- The rural districts and the National Regional Parks (some of which are grouped into one single LAG) = support territories for LEADER programmes

.

Founding principles of the Rural Development policy

A contractual and territorial policy in partnership with the French government and the French Departments (two three-year contracts for 2007-2013),

Strong coordination with the European EARDF programmes (axis 3 and axis 4), and also with ERDF (notably in terms of policies for welcoming new populations),

These integrated and multi-sector project approaches are part of a global approach led by the districts according to their own reality (demographics, employment),

Striving for mutualisation and the coordination of effort and means (leadership, seeking the structural character of actions…),

A convergence between a bottom-up approach (needs expressed by the districts) and a top-down approach (in line with regional policies),

Greater participation of local stakeholders (socio-professionals, associations, population…) in the preparation of the public decision and the evolution of the policies enacted,

Promotion and dissemination of the principles of rural development through territorial policies.

Action principles

Shared recognition of the project districts enables the coordination of public policies,

Greater complementarity in public interventions (region, state, Europe), ensures their coherence within a territory

Safeguarding the contractual planning of the interventions facilitates the work of the contracting authorities and funders, through the signing of agreements,

Creation of a solidarity mechanism based on equalisation between territories,

Territorial contracts (including Leader counterparts) must guarantee an overall financial framework adapted to the budgetary possibilities and safeguarded for the 2007-2013 period.

The content of territorial projects

The areas where the Region works with the territories can be arranged into 3 major themes:The attractiveness of the territory and lifestyle (policy for reversing rural exodus, cultural development, sports, services, health, pre-school children, mobility, habitat and training)

Economic development (support for business and crafts, tourism, forestry/wood and agriculture),

The environment and the management of natural resources and heritage (water resources, natural sites, landscape charters, local climate plans and non-moveable heritage).

And 2 more transversal axes: Support for leadership and engineering (general and thematic), Transversal approach to sustainable development the integration of sustainable development principles in projects .

Areas of intervention which are also those identified as priorities by the LAG.

UNION EUROPÉENNE PRÉFECTURE DE LA

RÉGI ON LI MOUSI N

Which synergies between ERDF and EARDF in Limousin?

1/ Policies that are primarily community-focused

Through the budgetary choices made: ERDF OP €127.2 M; EARDF €348.4M [for the record, Pillar I of the CAP represents €1.500 M]

Through the strategic choices made (Community Strategic Guidelines and Regulation – ref. i.e. articles 9 and 12 of the ERDF regulation and the EARDF budget limits set for each axis): ideological breach, is the “lisbonization” accepted in the 2007-2013 Financial Perspectives “ruro-compatible”?

Through the management choices made: General Management by financial instrument.

2/ A rather unfavourable translation on the national level

Government option in favour of a unique national plan – the National Strategic Plan for Rural Development (PDRH)

A national policy of the PDRH is imposed for 80% of available resources: €263.2 M in the Limousin region

A regional policy(Regional rural development policy (DRDR) that is “minimalist” on a financial level (€85.2 M in the Limousin region) but very open on the thematic level (90% of actions are eligible under EARDF rules)

National guidelines on the complementarity of ERDF/EARDF... to manage the shortage

3/ A regional focus on ERDF-Innovation and EARDF- competitiveness of the agricultural

sector

ERDF OP: 65% in favour of Research and Development/Economic aid compared with 35% for Regional attractiveness and sustainable development

EARDF regional rural development policy: 65% in favour of Axes 1 and 2 compared with 35% for Axis 3 (quality of life in a rural environment and diversification of the rural economy) and Axis 4 (the programme named LEADER – a French acronym for Links between actions for the development of the rural economy)

4/ An issue that is financially minor but politically sensitive

Avoid shared sectors (no economic aid and initially no EARDF cooperation…) in order to educate beneficiaries and ensure proper administrative coordination (“one-stop shop”)

For the shared sectors (public services, sports/tourism/culture infrastructures), define objective, simple and acceptable criteria (public, nature, total cost…)

Prioritise allocating the funds to the new challenges facing French rurality (welcoming new populations, residential economy, use of ICT, climate change…)

Favour the integrated approach by seeking to smooth out technocratic obligations (control delegation, single application, unique regional programming committee – CRUP, coherence with the regional planning and sustainable land development scheme – SRADDT – and the Agenda 21 plan for the Limousin region…)

5/ A practice that has trouble withstanding the shortage of financial

means

A high rate of planning (35% for ERDF and 35% for EARDF – cumulated national and regional policies) – the highest in France – which can demonstrate the relevance of the regional strategy;

A visible shortage: €30M of ERDF funds identified as needed, but only €10 M in funds available for Sports/Tourism/Culture facilities;

Biased responses: instructing authorities lack knowledge of boundaries (Measures 35 and 36 of the ERDF/Measure 321 B of the EARDF); the midway review is always running one reminder late; the current state of the CAP is swayed (Axes 3 and 4 are excluded in practice from modulation); the amount of earmarking is obstructive (basic infrastructures aren’t counted); the rigidity of community management (the “article 37-6 b – General Rules” style integration is contested)

6/Example of sports/culture/tourism and public

service equipments 

ERDF EARDF measure 321

Cultural, tourism and sports and leisure services

Limoges and Brive urban areas*

Measure 35 (projects over €1.5 M)

Rural areasMeasure 321 B (facilities costing

less than €600,000)

Measure 36 (all projects except those that fall into the measure 35 category )

Rural areas

Measure 35 (projects over €1.5 M)

Measure 36 (all projects except those that fall into the measure 35 category – whose cost is greater than €600,000 and less than €1.5 M)

Service hubs

Limoges and Brive urban areas*

Measure 36

Rural areasMeasure 321B (projects costing

less than €300,000)Rural areas

Measure 36 (projects costing over €300,000)

Facilities for early childhood and youthMulti-disciplinary health centres

Limoges and BriveCUCS zones (areas targeted

for improvement of social cohesion)

Measure 36 Rural areas

Measures 321A and 321B

Home care centres for the elderly

Limoges and Brive CUCS

zones Measure 36 Not eligible  

Employment services and welcoming new businesses

All areas or only CUCS zones ?

Measure 36 Not eligible  

Land development operations for the rehabilitation and re-use of commercial rustbowls

Limoges and Brive CUCS zones

Measure 36 Not eligible  

7/Example of transnational cooperation

Intervention measures

LAG

EPCI / NRP Local authorities, association,

Public institution

IntensityCooperation

EARDF

Measure 421 - 6,000

euro “first contacts” grant

OK

x

x

Measure 421 -Exchange best practices

OK

x

x

ERDF

Measure 5-1 -Rur@ct x x x

Measure 5-3 -Networks

x OK

OK

Measure 5-2 -Pilot projectSkills sharing

x OK OK

22èmeème pillar of CAP pillar of CAPEARDFEARDF

Cohesion policyCohesion policyERDFERDF

RUR@CT

Transnational cooperation(LEADER axis)

Territorial cooperation (objective 3)

European Rural Network

Regions for Economic Change

CAPITALISATION

TRANSFER

Convergence(objective 1)

Competitiveness(objective 2)

Axis 3 Axis 4

Pilot projects Pilot projects

Good practices Good practices

Axis 2 Axis 1

RUR@CT network of european Regions transferring good practices

for rural innovation in regional programmes

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION

Slide show created by the Commission for Cooperation ([email protected]) and the Department of Migration and

Territories ([email protected])

Slide show presented by Cédric Léger,Rur@ct Project Manager (c-lé[email protected]).