This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 52011SC1563
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING PAPER EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING PAPER EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING PAPER EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING PAPER EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT /* SEC/2011/1563 final - APP 2011/0436 */
1.
Executive summary
1.1.
Problem definition
Encouraging and facilitating citizens'
wider involvement in the European Union and what it stands for is of
great significance and importance. This ranges from the need to increase their
involvement in current affairs right back to the need of ensuring
a broader understanding of the history of the Union and its origins in the
aftermath of two horrific world wars. Previous citizens' programmes have
tackled these challenges with success and there is a substantial need for the
continuation of this work at EU-level to address these issues. The problem which the programme addresses
is the lack of capacity of citizens' organisations - general interest
organisations, different types of NGOs, stakeholder organisations, different
groups of intermediaries - to launch and/or influence genuine debates on EU
related issues at local, regional and national levels, which can be translated
into a pan-European perspective. As long as this persists, citizens are not
encouraged to link and to upscale their commitment and their engagement for
democratic principles to the European level. Increased understanding about the
EU, acquaintance with the historical foundations and values on which the Union
is built, and knowledge about the impact of EU policies on people's daily lives
allows citizens to fully benefit from the advantages of European citizenship
and to connect with the mission of the EU. The challenge is to reach out through
intermediaries to large groups of citizens who would normally not seek to
influence or take part in EU affairs and to facilitate the first steps towards
involvement in EU related topics across national borders or with a European
dimension. There is a need for a horizontal approach that does not aim to
replace specific dialogues or consultation processes at the EU level, but to
mobilise citizens at local level to debate concrete issues of European
interest. The current Europe for Citizens programme
2007-2013 is an important instrument which provides a framework for greater
citizens' participation in EU affairs. However, it needs to be built upon by
further intervention so as to provide the incentive for civic participation in
EU affairs, and a real catalyst for European citizens' associations to become
more involved in such matters. The ambitious challenge that the new "Europe
for Citizens" Programme proposes to tackle is three-fold: (1)
develop civil society capacity to participate in
the EU policy making process; (2)
develop supportive structures to channel the
results of such debates to policy-makers at the relevant levels; and (3)
offer opportunities for citizens to participate
in debates and discussions on EU-related issues, including from an historical
perspective. The programme aims to address the need for
more genuine debates on EU related issues at the local, regional and national
levels, which can be translated into a broader European perspective. It seeks
to reach out to a large number of citizens – those who would normally not seek
to influence or take part in EU affairs – through a broad set of organisations
to take a first step towards involvement, whatever the (EU related) topic or
format, as long as it is transnational or has a European dimension. With its
horizontal approach, its aim is not to replace other initiatives, or to
duplicate consultations at EU-level, but to mobilise citizens at "grass
roots" level to debate concrete issues of European interest and to develop
a deeper involvement in EU affairs. The programme will build on the analysis of
the strengths and the weaknesses of the current “Europe for Citizens”
programme (2007-2013), as regards its future programme design, targeting,
out-reach and visibility in societal and geographical terms, impact analysis
and valorisation/dissemination mechanisms.
1.1.1.
Financial framework
The proposed financial frame was set on 29 June 2011, when the
European Commission presented its multi-annual financial framework (MFF) for
the period 2014-2020. The indicative budget adopted for the future Europe for
Citizens programme was €203 million with an estimated distribution of €29
million per year.
1.2.
Subsidiarity
Article 11 of the Treaty on European Union
(TEU) stipulates the EU institutions' tasks of giving citizens and
representative organisations the opportunity to make known and publicly
exchange their views in all areas of Union action. The same article refers to
the institutions' duty to have an open, transparent and regular dialogue with civil
society, the Commission's obligation of carrying out broad consultations with
stakeholders, and introduces the Citizen's Initiative. Moreover, Article 20 of
the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) describes the rights
deriving from Union citizenship. In order to empower citizens to fully enjoy
these rights a better understanding of the EU is an important precondition. Appropriate means to ensure the achievement
of these Treaty provisions require to be provided. The "Europe for
Citizens" programme represents one of these means, just as, Regulation
211/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the citizens’
initiative, represents another. The Treaties call upon the EU "to give
citizens and representative associations the opportunity to make known their
views in all areas of Union action" and to "maintain an open,
transparent and regular dialogue with representative associations and civil
society". While a broad range of programmes and EU practice ensure
dialogues in sectoral policy areas, the Europe for Citizens programme provides
this opportunity at a horizontal level. By this, the Programme respects the
subsidiarity principle. These tasks can only be met by the EU, and not at the
Member State level. The Programme also respects the
proportionality principle. A programme (as opposed to a recommendation)
provides a flexible instrument, is open to all actors on equal terms, delivers
on capacity building and addresses a changing political situation.
1.3.
Objectives of the initiative
The general objective of a future programme
will be to: "strengthen remembrance and enhance capacity for civic
participation at the EU level". It answers to the need for a genuine
debate on EU related issues at the local, regional and national levels that can
be translated into a pan-European perspective, and the related need for
supportive structures to channel the results of such debates to policy-makers
at the relevant levels. In this regard, the programme would contribute by
developing the capacity of citizens' organisations to engage their members and
a broader public in the democratic life of the EU. The specific objectives will
comprise: (1)
Stimulate debate, reflection and cooperation on
remembrance, EU integration and history; (2)
Develop citizens' understanding and capacity to
participate in the EU policy making process and develop opportunities for
solidarity, societal engagement and volunteering at EU level.
1.3.1.
Operational objectives
Following the narrowed down specific
objectives proposed for the new Programme (above), a new set of operational
objectives should be applied. The latter will increase the capacity of the
Commission to set more firm indicators and subsequently be able to objectively,
and more in detail, establish progress and impact. (1)
Support organisations to promote debate and
activities on remembrance, European values and history; (2)
Support organisations of a general European
interest, transnational partnerships and networks to promote citizens'
interactions on EU matters; (3)
Horizontal dimension: Analysis, dissemination
& valorisation of project results through internal and external activities.
1.4.
Policy options
(4)
Following the first stakeholder meeting held on
22 June 2010 and in the period leading up to the Impact Assessment report, a
number of different responses to the problem defined in Section 1 have been
analysed. Three basic policy options with their respective sub-options have
been retained, and given rise to further consideration: (1)
Continue the "Europe for Citizens"
programme in its current form; (2)
Continue the "Europe for Citizens"
programme in a modified, "re-vamped", form. Four sub-options have
been considered: –
Mixed approach –
Support for larger grants only –
Wider geographical coverage –
Consultation tool (3)
Decentralise of the "Europe for Citizens"
programme, where no EU-wide programme would follow after the current programme
comes to an end on 31 December 2013. Four alternative, decentralised approaches
have been considered: –
Member State based approach –
Communication approach only –
Sectoral approach –
Merger with other programme
1.5.
Comparison of options
A comparative assessment of the three
options including their respective sub-options has been carried out. The
results are detailed below.
1.5.1.
Continue the Programme in its current form
This option is likely to be considered
insufficient in the context of the Commission's commitment to put citizens at
the centre of the European process, the new democratic principles introduced by
the Lisbon Treaty and in light of existing criticism on the too limited means
of the current programme. To continue the programme – without structural change
to the programme leading to increased efficiency, effectiveness and
sustainability – would not help to overcome the current situation of unmet
demand and of un-realised synergies.
1.5.2.
Adopt a re-vamped Programme
Option 2 presents a modified programme. It
would be implemented through a more efficient programme architecture and
strengthened exploitation of results. This new architecture would consist of
two "strands"– Remembrance and European citizenship" and
"Democratic engagement and civic participation" – that would provide
for a better exploitation of synergies among the broad variety of participating
organisations, for more flexibility for applicants in terms of developing their
proposals for a project or an initiative (abandoning the 4-action-approach of
the current Programme). A new cross-cutting feature "Valorisation" would
respond to the overarching concern for optimising results. Four sub-options
have been considered: Sub-option 1 "Mixed approach"
would put overall priority on outputs by: (1)
reducing pure one-off town-twinning projects to
a minimum and transforming town-twinning projects into multi-partner projects
which have a clear thematic orientation, some policy impact and a longer-term validity;
(2)
mainstreaming innovative citizens' projects and
support measures into the general multi-partner project part of the programme; (3)
striking an adequate balance of the operating
grants provided to think tanks and EU civil society organisations as regards
the number and level of subventions given; (4)
increasing the strategic focus of civil society
projects by selecting bigger and longer-term projects which foresee a concrete
contribution and ensure the feeding in of concrete ideas to the decision-making
process; (5)
increasing available resources for projects on
remembrance (and broadening the scope of actions carried out in this area) and
providing opportunities for projects on EU values and the history of EU
integration. (6)
developing visibility/valorisation actions as a
cross-cutting programme feature. Sub-option 2 "Support for larger
grants only" (300,000 – 500,000 €/project) would mean economies of scale
and chance for more structured work programmes, but has a considerable
draw-back: there are only a limited number of organisations which have the
necessary technical and organisational capacity to run big-scale projects. Sub-option 3 "Wider geographical
coverage" would extend the scope of discussion to "universal values/human
rights" and also invite neighbouring countries. This sub-option has two
draw-backs: It would require a substantially bigger budget. Moreover, "universal
values/human rights" might lead to such a wide scope that specific
objectives could no longer be defined. Sub-option 4 "Consultation tool"
would use the programme as a testing board for main EU policies and/or
challenges, for example setting up and funding citizens' panels that would
comment on given issues. Through such an approach, the EU institutions would
gain a better understanding of the issues at stake, and how to communicate more
efficiently its intentions to citizens. It would also provide a concrete link
between the programme and policy making. Draw-back: it would require a
substantially bigger budget or pump out resources of other channels of
participation.
1.5.3.
Option 3: Decentralisation of the Programme
In comparison with Options 1 and 2, Option
3 "to decentralise the programme" would have the weakest impact on
the needs identified under Section 1. Several sub-options have been analysed but discarded. Sub-option 1: "Member State based
approach" would leave it up to the Member States
to develop political participation and civic engagement around common EU
values. This would mean total decentralisation, and
simplification in terms of EU administration. It would also mean an opportunity
to fully tailor the EU debate to national concerns and perspectives. But it would also mean a serious risk of
limiting the scope to issues which are of purely national interest. There would
be no policy input for the EU institutions from EU-wide umbrella organisations
and think tanks organised at EU level. Nor would there be a possibility to
stimulate EU-wide debates. Sub-option 2
"Communication approach only" would mean to limit the general objective to communication only - to
provide information on EU mission and policies, and leave the participation
dimension to local levels. This
approach would have limited implications on the EU budget. At the same time, it would risk leading to
a “nationalisation” of the policy issues, and would not respond to the need for
a more participatory approach with bottom-up input to better respond to citizens'
needs. Sub-option 3:
"Sectoral approach" would mean that information and consultation objectives would continue to be attained
exclusively via sectoral dialogues: individual DGs consult their respective stakeholders. The debate would be focused on the sectoral
issues within each policy field. In the absence of a horizontal instrument,
this option would limit policy input from EU-wide umbrella organisations and
think tanks organised at the EU level. There would also be limited scope for
supporting capacity building for civic participation, and no possibility to
support EU-wide debate on reference points in European history. It should be noted that the Europe for
Citizens programme is a horizontal instrument that does not seek to replace
existing forms of dialogues or consultation, but to complement them. Sub-option 4: "Merger with other
programme". A merger with the future programme of
DG JUST covering justice and citizenship has been explored but was discarded
after careful examination by the two DGs as there was no evidence of possible
synergies due to their different objectives and target groups. Although a decentralisation of the
Programme has not been automatically discarded, it must be underlined that it
would come at a price – and would be in contradiction to the Commission
decision on the MFF 2014-2020 – facing not only strong opposition from
different sectors but also leaving a vacuum in the promotion of civic
participation and participatory citizenship at a European level. It would mean
the loss of an important instrument for the fostering of civic participation,
where no similar, existing horizontal instrument can cater for these needs.
Several other instruments aim at enabling dialogue between the EU institutions
and citizens, but within the limits of their respective sectoral policies. In conclusion, Option 2 "Re-vamped
programme", sub-option 1: "Mixed approach", is the preferred
option.
1.6.
Assessment of impacts
1.6.1.
Cost implications of the programme
On 29 June 2011, the European Commission
presented its multi-annual financial framework (MFF) for the period 2014-2020[1]. The indicative budget adopted
for the future Europe for Citizens programme was €203 million with an estimated
€29 million per year. It represents a slight reduction from the current
Programme (€215 million). These amounts do not take into account future correction
by indexation.
1.6.2.
Expenditure-related outputs
The programme outputs will cover project
grants (approx. 600 per year to an estimated cost of €15 million/year),
operational grants (approx. 90 per year to an estimated cost of €10
million/year) and service contracts (approx. 5 per year to an estimated cost of
€1 million/year). The main reason for proposing an "even"
distribution of outputs over the programme period (2014-2020) is the fact that
the "Europe for Citizens" programme is a "mature" programme
– no known or expected "peaks" to take into account. The need for
further engaging and involving citizens in EU matters is constant. The estimated amount of €29 million/year
will also cover the administrative costs (approx. €3 million/year) for an
executive agency to manage the programme.
1.6.3.
Impact on staff
Based on the experience from running the
current Europe for Citizens programme, it is estimated that the new instrument
would require: –
9 officials or temporary staff –
1 Seconded National Expert In total 10 persons would be assigned to
the management of the actions.
1.6.4.
Simplification and reducing the administrative
burden
Simplification is already of key importance
in the current programme and will be further developed in the new one. The use
of an executive agency for the running of the full programme cycle already
saves considerably in terms of administration and human resources. In addition,
the recourse to lump sums, flat rates and unit costs, e-applications, and
efficient on-the-spot checks by grouping visits to organisations in the same
region, further reduces the administrative burden as well as saves in real
budgetary terms. The ECORYS midterm evaluation indicates (p. 39) that
"there is some evidence from beneficiary and stakeholder interviews that the
Executive Agency is efficiently administering the programme, making significant
procedural improvements about finance, eligibility criteria, harmonisation of
processes and the development of e-forms for applications". It also
highlights the synergy effects with other programmes managed by the Executive
Agency.
1.7.
Monitoring and evaluation
The general objective to "strengthen
remembrance and enhance capacity for civic participation at the EU level"
will be measured against the number and quality of initiatives promoted by
citizens' organisations that aim to: 1) have an impact on the EU policy making
process, 2) strengthen cohesion in society, and 3) enhance the understanding of
the role of the EU. The long term target would be an enhanced capacity of civil
society to influence the European project. Milestones would be contributions to
the European Years in the form of intellectual input or activities to link the
Years with the local and regional realities, and contributions to political
platforms in the run-up to European elections 2014-2019. A baseline will have
to be established as the general objective is new to the programme. There are two specific objectives: 1)
"Stimulate debate, reflection and cooperation on remembrance, EU
integration and history" and 2) "Develop citizens' understanding and
capacity to participate in the EU policy making process and develop
opportunities for solidarity, societal engagement and volunteering at EU
level". The first objective will be measured against the number of
projects and the quality of results, and the percentage of first time
beneficiaries. The second objective will be measured against the number of
directly involved participants, number of participating organisations and
number of transnational partnerships and networks, the geographical coverage of
the activities, and the percentage of first time beneficiaries.. The new
programme will have to establish baselines for several of these result
indicators. The first report will be drawn up three
years after the start of he programme (31 December 2016 at the latest). The
objective of this report will be to provide an initial assessment of the
results obtained at the half-way stage so that any changes or adjustments that
are deemed necessary may be made for the second half of the programme (31
December 2017 at the latest). The ex-post report on the impact of the
action in question will be drawn up at the end of the 7-year-programme (1st
July 2023). The objective of this report will be to assess the comparative
results of the support mechanisms in light of the programme objectives. Evaluation measures will be carried out by
means of external and internal studies and surveys, missions and meetings. The
costs relating to these measures are standard expenditure under an EU programme
and will be covered out of the administrative budget of the future programme. [1] COM(2011)500 I A Budget For Europe 2020 - Part I -
Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the
European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions;
COM(2011)500 II A Budget For Europe 2020 - Part II
- Policy Fiches - Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament,
the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of
the Regions.