Combining PPP with EU Grants
|
|
- Shavonne Jackson
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 To appear as Chapter in G. Schwartz, A. Corbacho, K. Funke (eds), "Public Investment and Public-Private Partnerships: Addressing Infrastructure Challenges and Managing Fiscal Risks," Palgrave/Macmillan, 2008 (forthcoming). Combining PPP with EU Grants Hugh Goldsmith 1 Most of the infrastructure that needs to be built over the coming years in the twelve new member states of the European Union (EU) will be eligible for support from EU grant funding programs. At the same time, public-private partnerships (PPPs) are an increasingly prominent procurement route for public infrastructure projects. PPP potentially offers efficiency benefits. So how to combine PPP with EU grants becomes an important question. The amounts at stake are huge. The investment needed to bridge the infrastructure gap in Europe, with both new construction and the modernization of existing assets, is guestimated by Deloitte (2006) at several trillion euros. In the latest budgetary planning period ( ), the EU plans to spend EUR 308 billion from structural funds in order to decrease disparities between the EU's poorer and richer regions. Most of the money will flow into the 12 new member states. Over 80 per cent of EU funds will go to so-called convergence regions, whose per capita GDP is less than 75 per cent of the EU average. The European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) can finance, among other things, infrastructure for research and innovation, telecommunications, environment, energy and transport, but it can also support financial instruments for regional and local development (capital risk funds, local development funds, and the like). The Cohesion Fund supports large projects in transport and environment in the 14 countries (EU12, plus Portugal, Greece and Spain on a transitional basis) whose Gross National Income per capita is less than 90 per cent of the EU average. In addition, the Trans European Networks (TENs) EU regulation also allows grant support, typically up to 20 per cent of investment costs, for major transport infrastructure projects of European interest, which can include PPPs. Using these various funds efficiently and effectively is a massive challenge. National authorities must decide how to use the funds, but there are a complex set of rules for defining expenditure eligible for grant support, establishing financial management systems and timing grant payments. But provided these rules are complied with, a capital investment project for, say, a new sewage treatment plant to comply with EU environmental standards, may receive up to 85 per cent grant subsidy from the European Commission (EC). Other EU Directives must be followed irrespective of whether the PPP involves EU grants. The procurement of public works or concession contracts must follow EU Procurement Directives 2 or the principles established in the EU Treaty in the case of service concessions. The 2006 revision to the Public Procurement Directives specify a procedure, the Competitive Dialogue, for awarding complex PPP projects. There are also State Aid rules to observe that can affect the level of subsidy permissible. After describing the experience to date, this paper suggests a framework for comparing the various models of combining grants and PPPs. It does not provide answers or a cookbook on how to in particular circumstances, since in practice this depends on many factors, including the sector, appropriate risk transfer, experience to date in the country, national legislative
2 2 framework, public sector capacity, fiscal constraints on co-financing, and so forth. This paper does, however, explain the new partnering initiatives that the EC together with the European Investment Bank (EIB) is taking to develop practical solutions. The proof of the PPP-pudding is in the eating or, in this case, in the successful delivery and operation of PPP projects, and the absorption of EU grants. For this we will have to wait several years to assess the outcomes. PPP and public subsidies PPPs are a way of procuring public infrastructure that focuses on future services to be provided (rather than simply building assets) on financial incentives to perform and on appropriate risk to be shared between public and private sectors. These goals are achieved through long-term, output-based, risk-sharing contracts that bundle design, construction, and finance with future operations and/or maintenance. A huge variety of such arrangements exists in Europe, from long-established French concessions and delegated management contracts to the UK s Private Finance Initiative (PFI). This spectrum of PPP approaches reflects different national attitudes to and legal frameworks for ownership and delivery of infrastructure and public utility services. The current fascination with PPP, which started in the UK and is now rapidly spreading to the rest of Europe, can be seen as a drive to introduce greater efficiency in the delivery of major construction projects within the context of a broader public sector reform agenda. However, fiscal constraints to public sector indebtedness, such as those under the EU Growth and Stability Pact, have also played a part in forcing public authorities to seek off-balance sheet ways of increasing infrastructure provision. Even so, Hemming and others (2006) demonstrate that PPPs are not without fiscal risks, depending on guarantees, risk transfer, and payment mechanisms. There is nothing new in the idea of combining PPP with grants. Many EU countries use subsidies to keep PPP projects affordable to users or to the public authorities paying for them. In the UK, PFI credits are how central government provides revenue support to local authorities responsible for paying unitary charges. In France and Italy, many PPPs are bid on the lowest value of subsidy required during the construction stage to meet predetermined affordability constraints. A few large, high-profile PPPs have received support from the Cohesion Fund, notably Vasco de Gama Bridge in Portugal and Athens airport in Greece. In the absence of any firm data on PPP projects that had received EU grants, Johnson and Kramarik (2005) estimated that less than 5 per cent of Cohesion Fund grants were given to PPP structures and that these grants were dominated by a few well-known large projects. The latest EC (2007) report on past experiences and future prospects for economic and socialcohesion policy, recognizes that PPPs should have a role to play in EU grant programs. PPPs are seen both as an important potential source of additional finance for investment and a tool to deal with chronic problems of delays and cost overruns in traditionally procured major projects, as highlighted in the evaluation by the research institute ECORYS (2004). But the limited progress to date is primarily due to public authorities having insufficient knowledge and capacity to deal
3 3 with such complex projects, to the absence of robust legal frameworks, and to a lack of economic incentive. As part of the preparation for enlargement, the Directorate General for Regional Policy, DG REGIO (2004), developed Guidelines for combining PPP and EU grants together with a Resource Book of case studies illustrating successful and problematic PPP projects across Europe in different sectors and with a range of contractual forms. Very few of the projects presented in the case studies actually received EU grants and these grants were mainly in the form of payments to the construction consortium and were included within overall state subsidies, such as the Perpignan-Figueras rail project between France and Spain. In addition to the usual prerequisites for entering into a PPP, the Guidelines and Resource Book state that PPP s involving EU grants must: ensure open market access and fair competition in the respect of state aid principles when applicable; protect the public interest and maximize value added to citizens; define the optimal level of grant financing both to realize a viable and sustainable project but also to avoid any opportunity for windfall profits (or losses) from grants; assess the most effective type of PPP for a given project (balanced risk distribution, appropriate duration, clarity of responsibilities and regulation). The Guidelines and Resource Book recognize the potentially important part that PPP could play in delivering EU policy objectives. But they also emphasize that the Commission needs to verify that a project fully complies with all relevant EU regulations and that EU-taxpayers interests are protected. The Guidelines offer very limited concrete guidance about practical issues to be addressed when submitting a PPP project to the Commission for grant support, other than to underline the importance of early dialogue with the Commission and EIB. Most importantly, they were prepared before the new financial regulations governing the use of structural funds came into effect. In practice, the case-by-case approach taken in the past and myriad of legal and procedural obstacles to be overcome did not always engender an efficient process. Grant approval can be slow and cumbersome and not necessarily in step with the tight financial deadlines implied by private finance, particularly for major projects. Perez (2004) documents the complexities of dealing with EU-related environmental, procurement, and state-aid issues when using Cohesion Funds to finance the Vasco de Gama Bridge. Even the disclaimer at the front of the Resource Book states that the case studies therein were not necessarily models for the proper choice of private partners in PPP projects under Community law. Recent jurisprudence from the European Court of Justice has revealed some of the complexities in entering into such partnerships, irrespective of whether grants are involved. 3 One of the main fiscal risks associated with mixing EU grants with PPPs is that the Commission could, in principle, reclaim misspent funds or refuse to disburse funds not used in line with EC regulations or directives. There is also a risk of decommitment of funds not spent fast enough under the so-called N+2 rule stating that committed program funds must be spent within two years. Timing of the grant application for major projects, speed of implementation, and careful adherence to EU rules are a vital discipline for using EU funds, with or without PPP.
4 4 Analytical framework Value-for-money The main rationale for doing a PPP is to leverage in private finance to replace limited public finance and to achieve value for money (VfM) through risk transfer, competitive bidding, and innovation. Maintaining competitive pressure and maximizing innovation should be core VfM drivers, irrespective of whether or not a PPP involves grants. The degree of risk transfer depends on the sector and project characteristics, but needs to be balanced against the increased pricing for private finance and other factors. Table 10.1 summarizes the VfM trade-off. Table 10.1 Drivers of value for money in PPPs Benefits Bundling Life-cycle approach Innovation Depends on scope in tender dossier Risk sharing Better risk management Private asset ownership Cost saving innovation and more efficient contracting Additional revenue generation Costs Transaction costs Bidding, negotiation, monitoring Renegotiation over life-cycle Private finance costs Pursuit of cost efficiency may impact service quality Institutional arrangements and administrative capacity requirements in public sector In practice, all VfM arguments rely on a counterfactual a hypothetical public sector alternative project capable of delivering the same benefits. Of course, if the economic fundamentals are wrong, a PPP cannot turn a bad project into a good one! The introduction of EU grants complicates the picture. The decision is no longer Will a PPP offer VfM? but instead becomes Given that EU grant funding is available, is it more efficient to procure the project or program using PPP or is it better to stick with traditional procurement?. The uncertainties produced by the new financial regulations, 4 for instance, on exactly how different payment mechanisms will be treated mean that public authorities may be reluctant to use a PPP because of concerns about delays, difficulties in receiving payments, and ultimately the risk of losing EU grants altogether. On pure VfM grounds, the potential gains from PPP clearly depend on how bad the public sector is at delivering and operating infrastructure projects in a particular sector. Furthermore, much of the potential for VfM comes from risk transfer to the private party, such that if projects go over time/budget, if operating costs are higher than expected, or if poor performance results in penalties, it is the private sector that bears the cost. Yet by its nature risk is contingent and may or may not occur on any individual project. Therefore, it may well be at the program level that VfM can really be achieved. While VfM provides an over-arching framework for analyzing PPP, we need another analytical framework for comparing alternative models of grant support to PPPs. The common rationale
5 5 across all models is that grants improve the affordability of a PPP project. But other factors need to be considered when choosing between models. In order to understand and compare different models of grant support to PPPs, we need to compare the efficiency of funding with the efficiency of outcomes in terms of VfM and risk. The relevant outcomes are both at the level of individual projects and at the level of programs. Specifically, we need to consider the (i) leverage of how much grant funds leave for additional private investment (debt and equity) to justify the cost and effort of including private finance; (ii) impact of grant finance on incentives for the private party to perform; and (iii) the fiscal risk to national authorities from different grant-funding models. Leverage The substitution of private finance with grants clearly reduces leverage, but for national authorities EU grant funds are effectively free. Thus, there is a big incentive to maximize their use on large projects to speed up absorption of EU funds and to keep user charges or unitary charges low in what are by definition relatively poor regions. The private finance model assumes that it is the private capital at risk that motivates the contractor to deliver on efficiency. There is also the issue that below a certain level of private investment, the transaction costs of involving private finance outweigh the potential efficiency gains. This is particularly relevant for the 85 per cent grant rates possible for individual projects under the Cohesion Fund. Incentives From a simplistic viewpoint, leverage and incentives are just flip sides of the same coin. The higher the private capital at risk, the greater are the private contractors incentives to deliver the project on time and on budget and to operate it according to the performance criteria in the contract. However, the notion that incentives are directly related to equity stake may be misleading. First, if equity is traded there may be no direct relationship between the owners of a PPP specialpurpose vehicle and the contractors for construction and/or operations stages. The scrutiny of projects by banks lending at risk helps to ensure that contracts are better designed, but doesn t fully protect against perverse incentives. Second, Smith (2007) illustrates how the detailed design of the contract, for instance, the use of penalty and reward mechanisms, as well as the form of partnership, can be as influential on incentives and behavior as equity stake. Nonetheless, the higher the level of private finance at risk, the more likely project stakeholders will be given the correct incentives to deliver.
6 6 Fiscal risk Other than with mega projects, fiscal risk is manifest at the program level. Individual projects may come in over or under budget and guarantees may or may not be called. But the cumulative effect of cost overruns across a public sector investment program can cause fiscal distress. The fiscal risk of the public sector depends on the extent to which future budgets are put at risk if the project does not perform. On the one hand, there is the direct liability of future payments under a unitary payment mechanism. On the other hand, there may be a conditional liability if the project doesn t go as planned. Although EU grants improve the overall fiscal position of the recipient country and can provide a massive boost to investment and growth, they may nonetheless leave the public authorities with a contingent liability if either grants are withdrawn, claimed back, or if the project goes significantly over budget. The fiscal risks are borne by national or local authorities, because the EU grant is capped, and any additional costs necessary to complete the project are always a national responsibility. Models for PPP-grant blending A variety of models for combining grant finance 5 with PPP have been used in different Member States or have been proposed in the literature, see, for example, Price-Waterhouse- Coopers/Public Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility PwC/PPIAF (2006) and Deloitte (2006). These can be simplified down to four basic models, as illustrated graphically in Figure Model 1 Capex subsidy This model is the most commonly used. Grant finance subsidizes the upfront capital investment, thus reducing either future user charges or unitary payments from the granting authority. The rationale for the grant is that it improves affordability. Both France and Italy use this model combined with a tender to find the minimum value of subsidy required to deliver the project. Most previous EU grant-funded PPP projects have used this model. Model 2 Parallel co-finance This model is also widely used, especially for projects such as urban transport or roads that require subsidies and can be readily divided into separate contracts. For example, the public granting authority funds the construction of Lot A of a motorway under traditional procurement, but Lot B is let as a PPP concession together with the contractual responsibility to operate and maintain the full motorway. The applicability of this model depends on the divisibility of an overall project into separate components without creating excessive interface problems. The EC grants simply substitute part of the public funding requirement on the traditionally procured project, using well-tested procedures for cost definition and payment of grant funds.
7 7 construction EU Grant National Private Model 1 - Capex subsidy Savings due to grant operations Unitary payments or user charges.. Model 3a Payment subsidy Component A Component B Model 2 - Parallel Co-finance Separate construction contracts EU Grant National Private savings Unitary payments or user charges.. Single operations SPV Private Model 3b Debt repayment construction EU grants 2015?.. construction EU grant repays % debt.. Private operations Private operations Model 4 Investment Fund EU Grant National Private Investment Fund Private funds EU grants National funds projects Savings due to grants Figure 10.1 PPP grant support models Model 3a Payment subsidy, and 3b Debt repayment In this case, the grants are used to subsidize future unitary payments (3a) by the granting authority to the PPP Company. While in principle this sounds straightforward, the mechanisms to define the level of support and to commit future funds to payments that may not start for over five years present many practical difficulties, including dealing with positive or negative adjustments for performance and with inflation. Another approach is to pay off a proportion of the debt immediately the project is operational (3b), thus lowering future unitary charges. Model 4 Co-investment in PPP fund In this model, public sector grants are combined with private capital in a fund that invests in a number of PPPs. Risk is spread across the portfolio. Such funds are already used for urban regeneration projects in the UK. The mechanism for selecting private investors should be fair and transparent. Any conflicts of interest between the investors and downstream project investments need to be addressed upfront. Given that the public sector investor will have different objectives from a private investor seeking maximum financial return, for example,
8 8 affordability or the provision of social housing, a risk sharing mechanism must be agreed that reflects the different parties objectives. Table 10.2 Potential impact of EU grants Model 1. Capex Subsidy 2. Parallel Co-finance 3. Payment Subsidy 4. Investment Fund Affordability HIGH MODERATE HIGH LOW Leverage LOW MODERATE HIGH HIGH Incentives MODERATE MODERATE HIGH HIGH Fiscal risk MODERATE LOW LOW NONE Characteristics Most common model Bid criteria can include lowest value of subsidy Widely used in transport Grants can be targeted to eligible components Like PFI credits Equity, debt or guarantees Private partners enter as investors at level of Fund Examples Key issues for using PPP with EU grants Vasco de Gama Bridge Timing of grant commitment Transaction costs versus scale of private finance Fiscal risk depends on payment mechanism and guarantees HSL, Florence tramway Timing of grant commitment Interface problems Ability to slice up project UK Schools Only for availability schemes Eligible expenditure period beyond 2015 EU Grant Regulations unclear Definition of project cost Urban development fund Social objectives vs. profitability Selection of private investment partners Recycling of profits Comparison Table 10.2 summarizes the relative impact of EU grants under the different models. The comparison assumes that a PPP is the preferred procurement route over traditional procurement because it potentially offers VfM. To maximize affordability on an individual project, Model 1 with a fixed upfront subsidy of, say, 85 per cent, is the proven approach. How the level of grant is fixed relative to construction costs, when this depends on the outcome of a competitive bidding process, requires some reflection, as it is well known that bid criteria influence the strategic behaviour of contractors. For simplicity, to fix the upfront subsidy amount or the percentage has its appeal, but if affordability can be defined in advance, for instance via a pre-set level of tolls, then tendering the project on the basis of minimum subsidy required to delver the project can also be attractive. It must be remembered that bidders may bid low with the intention of renegotiating in response to any changes required by the granting authority. Model 2 has the advantage of separating the two procurement procedures and potentially allowing the rapid absorption of EU funds on a traditional procurement contract. But only certain types of projects lend themselves to this type of investment slicing. There may also be interface
9 9 problems if the public sector contract is delayed or has quality issues, when the private contractor will have to take over operation of the overall project. Model 3a has the attraction of maximizing incentives in the construction phase to deliver on time and budget, but still provides a subsidy to help affordability. The difficulty is that currently the regulations are geared up to subsidize the capital costs of projects, not future performance related availability payments. Several member states have written to the Commission seeking clarification on precisely this issue in relation to TENs as well as Structural Funds. The regulations limit any financial expenditures under the funds to 2015 (two years after the end of the programming period), although there may be ways to overcome this limitation by making a make a one-off payment to some form of holding fund. Another interesting variant, Model 3b, halfway between models 1 and 3a, would be to pay off a proportion of the private debt once the project has been successfully delivered. This maximizes incentives during the construction phase, but avoids problems of time limits on eligible expenditure. If the purpose is to maximize leverage, then Model 4 may be preferred. On the other hand, absence of grants will negatively impact on affordability. There is no best model: all depends on local circumstances and the objectives of the public granting authority. New rules and instruments As mentioned already, the rules governing EU grant funds have changed. Following lengthy discussions with Member States, the new implementing Regulation for the Structural and Cohesion Funds was adopted by the Commission in December The regulation sets out detailed rules on how the funds will be managed in the programming period. It contains a number of changes from previous regulations aimed at increased simplification, transparency, and accountability. However, some of the changes potentially have significant implications for PPP. Johnson and Kramarik (2005) and Deloitte (2006) identify various practical barriers to combining EU funding and PPP under the new regulations. These barriers are created by specific regulations concerning the absorption of Structural and Cohesion funds, the definition of final beneficiaries, the application of state aid rules and the way in which revenue generating projects are analyzed to determine the grant rate. The main areas of uncertainty introduced by the new regulations are: the definition of public versus private eligible expenditure and the need for additionality at the program level, that is, private finance cannot substitute overall national cofinancing; whether a private beneficiary can be an initiator of a project; whether availability payments or shadow tolls should be treated as revenues for the project; how the co-financing rate calculation will work in practice in the case of revenue generating projects;
10 10 the impact of state aid rules in different sectors on the maximum co-financing rate; the implications of additionality requirements at the program level; timing of the application and grant decision relative to financial close for major projects requiring ex-ante approval; implications of the N+2 rule in case of availability based payment schemes with payments extending beyond the time horizon of the financial regulation (2015); developing appropriate models for grant blending and tender/bid criteria in different sectors. On a positive note, the potential role of PPPs is recognized and encouraged in the new regulations, which make several explicit references to PPP mechanisms, usually in association with the EIB, including the use of infrastructure and urban development funds. The largest single area of concern is Article 55 of the new regulations addressing revenue generating projects: Eligible expenditure on revenue-generating projects shall not exceed the current value of the investment cost less the current value of the net revenue from the investment over a specific reference period. Does project revenue include shadow tolls or availability payments? What is the reference period? If this refers only to revenues from user charges, it implies that the eligible expenditure for calculating the grant rate is net of the private finance contribution, as this must be covered by future toll revenues less operating expenses in order to attract private investment. These are very substantial questions that must be addressed before PPPs incorporating EU grants can be designed with confidence. Fortunately, help is at hand. Under the new Financial Regulations, the EC and EIB created a number of new initiatives related to PPP. JASPERS (Joint Assistance to Support Projects in European Regions) is a joint policy initiative of the EIB, European Commission (DG REGIO) and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD). JASPERS role is to assist the new Member States to absorb EU Structural and Cohesion funds over the budgetary-planning period by providing technical assistance for the preparation of high quality project funding applications for major projects, primarily in the transport and environment sectors. JASPERS brings together experts from EIB, EC, and EBRD to provide assistance at any stage of the project cycle from initial conception through to the final application for EU funding. The assistance may cover technical, economic, and financial aspects and any other preparatory work needed to deliver a fully developed project. JASPERS is demand-led through task requests from Member States, several of whom have requested support with preparing pilot PPP projects and help with interpreting the new regulations. JASPERS can facilitate a dialogue between national authorities, advisors, and Commission officials responsible for interpreting the regulations. JESSICA (Joint European Support for Sustainable Investment in City Areas) is a new policy initiative of the EIB, DG REGIO, and the Council of Europe Development Bank (CEB). JESSICA s objective is to provide Member States and authorities managing EU funds a tailored solution to financing projects for urban renewal and development, using a combination of grants and loans, or other financial products as appropriate. The JESSICA Taskforce within the EIB is
11 11 specifically focused on the identification, financing, and realization of sustainable urban regeneration projects by channeling EU structural funds through Urban Development Funds. JESSICA works together with the managing authorities to provide funding for a wide variety of PPPs or other urban development projects capable of repaying in the long-term the resources invested in them (revolving funds). The structural fund regulations foresee simplified procedures for accessing funds via JESSICA. A further initiative still under discussion is the proposal to form a European PPP Expertise Centre as a network of national and regional EU PPP Taskforce units, with some core staffing and funding provided by EIB and EC. The purpose will be to identify, share and disseminate best practice related to PPP across the EU public sector. Working themes on which best practice papers have been requested include the Competitive Dialogue procedure and PPP-EU grant blending. Prospects There is a clear EU policy commitment to allow and even encourage PPP-EU grant blending. However, the mechanisms for doing this depend on the interpretation of the detailed rules in the Financial Regulations. These introduce a number of uncertainties, which can only be resolved through dialogue with Commission services using real pilot project applications. Areas of concern for PPP include the definition of eligible expenditure, the treatment of revenue generating projects, the method of accounting for expenditures, and last but not least the period of availability of committed funds. The main additional fiscal risks associated with EU grant co-financing of PPPs is decommitment of funds or need to repay funds in the case of mis-procurement or misuse of funds. Despite a limited number of successful examples from previous programming periods, there is a clear need to establish new success stories under the new regulations that can demonstrate both that EU funding rules can be followed and that there are advantages over traditional procurement methods. The JASPERS and JESSICA joint initiatives between the EC and EIB are specifically designed to support Member States in developing, among other things, PPP projects in the transport, environment, and urban sectors. But it will take time to arrive at a dealflow of well-prepared PPP projects incorporating EU grants. In the meantime, the Portuguese and Greek pilot projects offer many lessons for new countries seeking to use PPPs for Cohesion Fund projects. Experiences in other EU countries offer other learning points about possibilities and pitfalls. Sharing experiences at the EU level through public sector knowledge networking is another way to boost the public sector s capacity to plan and deliver complex PPP programs. Finally, it is essential that public authorities don t embark on PPP for the wrong reasons that is, for purely fiscal treatment reasons and not in a search for efficiency and improved quality of contracted public service.
12 12 The guiding objectives in choosing a procurement route should be to: make best use of EU grant funds; improve the cost and time certainty of public procurement; deliver better public services; achieve demonstrable VfM. The role that PPP will play in the delivery of those objectives will only be known when the programs come to be evaluated sometime after In the meantime, public authorities should explore all avenues for more effective use of both national and EU taxpayers funds in partnership with the EC and EIB. References Deloitte and Touche, 2006, Application of the PPP Principle on the Economic and Social Cohesion Policy, PROJECT 1p/05, Final Report for the Ministry for Regional Development of the Czech Republic, 3 May., 2006, Closing the Infrastructure Gap: The Role of Public-Private Partnerships, Deloitte Development LLC. DG REGIO, 2003, Guidelines for Successful Public-Private Partnerships (Brussels: European Commission), March., 2004, Resource Book on PPP Case Studies (Brussels: European Commission), June. ECORYS, 2004, Ex post evaluation of a sample of projects co-financed by the Cohesion Fund ( ), Report to DG REGIO (Rotterdam: ECORYS). EC, 2004, Green Paper on public-private partnerships and Community law on public contracts and concessions, COM (2004), 327 final., 2006, Council Regulation (EC) 1083/2006, Laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999, Official Journal of the European Union,. 31 July., 2007, Growing Regions, growing Europe, Fourth report on economic and social cohesion, (Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities), May. Hemming, R., and a Staff Team from the Fiscal Affairs Department, 2006, Public-Private Partnerships, Government Guarantees, and Fiscal Risk (Washington: International Monetary Fund). Johnson and Kramarik, 2005, The Application of PPPs in the Financing of Transport Projects from EU Funds, Report for the Ministry of Transport of the Czech Republic, Prague, November. Medda, F., and G. Carbonaro, 2007, Public Private Partnerships in Transportation: Some Insights from the European Experience, Paper presented at the Joint Congress of the European Regional Science Association (47th Congress) and ASRDLF (Association de Science Régionale de Langue Française, 44th Congress), Paris, August 29 September 2. Perez, B. G, 2004, Achieving Public-Private Partnership in the Transport Sector, Diebold Institute-Deutsche Bank Public-Private Monograph Series (Westport, Connecticut: Praeger Press), September. Price Waterhouse Coopers (PwC), 2004, Developing Public Private Partnerships in New Europe, London, PwC, May.
13 13 PwC/Public Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility (PPIAF), 2006, Hybrid PPPs: Levering EU Funds and private capital, Washington, PPIAF, January. Smith, B., 2007, What gets measured: Contracting for Delivery (London: The Serco Institute). 1. PPP Coordinator, Projects Directorate, European Investment Bank (EIB). The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and should not be attributed to the EIB. 2. Any public contract is subject to the EU Directive 2004/18/EC or EU Directive 2004/17/EC for contracts in the utilities sector. The Directives came into force on 1 January See decisions relating to TELEAUSTRIA (C-324/98), PARKING BRIXEN (C-458/03), TECKAL (C-107/98), STADT MöDLING (C-29/04)and STADT HALLE (C-26/03) concerning the applicability of fundamental EU Treaty provisions to concessions (equality of treatment, transparency in contract award, non-discrimination, proportionality and mutual recognition), and concerning contracting of in-house services. 4. Regulation EC1083/2006 Jul 2006 and Implementation Rules EC1828/2006 Dec The use of public funds to provide guarantee instruments is not addressed in this paper.
2017 CEF Transport Blending Call. FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS Blending features Last update 12 July 2017 (new questions in blue)
2017 CEF Transport Blending Call FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS Blending features Last update 12 July 2017 (new questions in blue) 1. What is an Affordability analysis? In the context of a PPP, affordability
More informationThe European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) and the European Investment Advisory Hub (EIAH) - Drivers for the real economy
The European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) and the European Investment Advisory Hub (EIAH) - Drivers for the real economy Workshop Financing opportunities for projects in agriculture and rural
More informationAttracting Private Sector Investment in Infrastructure Experiences from India
UNESCAP High-level Expert Group Meeting on Infrastructure Public-Private Partnerships for Sustainable Development Attracting Private Sector Investment in Infrastructure Experiences from India Cherian Thomas
More informationEuropean Association of Public Banks
DG Competition stateaidgreffe@ec.europa.eu HT 618 Register-ID : 8754829960-32 24 February 2012 EAPB comments on the Consultation Paper on the Research, Development and Innovation State aid Framework Dear
More informationErasmus for Young Entrepreneurs Users Guide
Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs Users Guide An initiative of the European Union Contents PAGE 1.0 Introduction... 5 2.0 Objectives... 6 3.0 Structure... 7 3.1 Basic elements...7 3.2 Four phases...8 4.0
More informationThe Growth Fund Guidance
The Growth Fund Guidance A programme developed in partnership between Big Lottery Fund, Big Society Capital, Access the Foundation for Social Investment Guidance What s it all about? The social investment
More information( ) Page: 1/24. Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures SUBSIDIES
14 July 2017 (17-3798) Page: 1/24 Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures Original: English SUBSIDIES NEW AND FULL NOTIFICATION PURSUANT TO ARTICLE XVI:1 OF THE GATT 1994 AND ARTICLE 25 OF THE
More informationSynergies between funding sources to large infrastructure. Louis-Philippe Carrier, Smart Development expert, JASPERS Prague, 3 March 2016
Synergies between funding sources to large infrastructure Louis-Philippe Carrier, Smart Development expert, JASPERS Prague, 3 March 2016 2 I JASPERS: Who are we? JASPERS: Joint Assistance to Support Projects
More informationAccess to Risk Finance under Horizon European Community Steering Group for Strategic Energy Technologies. Brussels, 17 September 2012
Not legally binding Access to Risk Finance under Horizon 2020 European Community Steering Group for Strategic Energy Technologies Brussels, 17 September 2012 Marie-Cécile ROUILLON 1 EC - DG Research and
More informationFROM GRANTS TO GROUNDBREAKING:
ISSUE BRIEF #10 FROM GRANTS TO GROUNDBREAKING: Unlocking Impact Investments An ImpactAssets issue brief exploring critical concepts in impact investing Jointly authored by Amy Chung of Living Cities with
More informationEFB Position Paper: Fostering Long-Term Entrepreneurship
EFB Position Paper: Fostering Long-Term Entrepreneurship Entrepreneurship: any attempt at new business or new venture creation, such as self-employment, a new business organisation, or the expansion of
More informationBrendan Smyth - DG REGIO Co-ordinator. ordinator Eckart Tronnier - EIB Sector Manager Gerry Muscat - EBRD Co-ordinator. ordinator
Brendan Smyth - DG REGIO Co-ordinator ordinator Eckart Tronnier - EIB Sector Manager Gerry Muscat - EBRD Co-ordinator ordinator Brussels, October 10th, 2006 1 What is JASPERS? Joint Assistance to Support
More informationAccounting for Government Grants and Disclosure of Government Assistance
International Accounting Standard 20 Accounting for Government Grants and Disclosure of Government Assistance This version includes amendments resulting from IFRSs issued up to 31 December 2010. IAS 20
More informationadvancing with ESIF financial instruments The European Social Fund Financial instruments
advancing with ESIF financial instruments The European Social Fund co-funded by the European Social Fund are a sustainable and efficient way to invest in the growth and development of people and their
More informationREPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL. Financial support for energy efficiency in buildings. (Text with EEA relevance)
EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 18.4.2013 COM(2013) 225 final REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Financial support for energy efficiency in buildings (Text with EEA relevance)
More informationRegulation (GBER)
The General Block Exemption Regulation 2014-2020 (GBER) Roxana Laiu Camelia Grozea Bernhard Von Wendland JASPERS Networking Platform State aid seminar 8 July 2014 1 The GBER 2014-2020 The GBER 2014-2020
More informationPolicy Rules for the ORIO Grant Facility
Policy Rules for the ORIO Grant Facility Policy Rules grant facility ORIO 2012 1. What is ORIO?... 3 2. Definitions... 3 3. The role of infrastructure... 4 4. Implementation... 5 5. Target group... 5 6.
More informationAccess to finance for innovative SMEs
A policy brief from the Policy Learning Platform on SME competitiveness July 2017 Access to finance for innovative SMEs Policy Learning Platform on SME competitiveness Introduction Entrepreneurship is
More informationBuilding synergies between Horizon 2020 and future Cohesion policy ( )
Building synergies between Horizon 2020 and future Cohesion policy (2014-2020) Magda De Carli Unit B5 -Widening Excellence and Spreading Innovation DG Research & Innovation Research and Innovation 1 Contents
More informationA shared agenda for growth: European Commission Services
A shared agenda for growth: European Commission Services A shared agenda for growth Our presence: Global and European Grant Thornton is one of the world s leading organisations of independent assurance,
More informationAPPENDIX B: Organizational Profiles of International Digital Government Research Sponsors. New York, with offices in Geneva, Vienna, and Nairobi
United Nations - Division for Public Administration and Development Management (UN-DPADM) New York, with offices in Geneva, Vienna, and Nairobi Maintaining international peace and security, developing
More informationNovember Dimitri CORPAKIS Head of Unit Research and Innovation DG Research and Innovation European Commission
November 2013 Dimitri CORPAKIS Head of Unit Research and Innovation DG Research and Innovation European Commission dimitri.corpakis@ec.europa.eu How European regions invest in R&D Out of a total of 266
More informationSri Lanka Accounting Standard LKAS 20. Accounting for Government Grants and Disclosure of Government Assistance
Sri Lanka Accounting Standard LKAS 20 Accounting for Government Grants and Disclosure of Government Assistance CONTENTS paragraphs SRI LANKA ACCOUNTING STANDARD LKAS 20 ACCOUNTING FOR GOVERNMENT GRANTS
More informationIncentive Guidelines Start-Up Finance
Incentive Guidelines Start-Up Finance 2017-2020 Issue Date: 31 st May 2017 Version: 1 http://support.maltaenterprise.com Malta Enterprise provides support to interested applicants to understand the objectives
More informationSri Lanka Accounting Standard-LKAS 20. Accounting for Government Grants and Disclosure of Government Assistance
Sri Lanka Accounting Standard-LKAS 20 Accounting for Government Grants and Disclosure of Government Assistance -609- Accounting -610- Definitions 3 The following terms are used in this Standard with the
More informationSTANDARD GRANT APPLICATION FORM 1 REFERENCE NUMBER OF THE CALL FOR PROPOSALS: 2 TREN/SUB
STANDARD GRANT APPLICATION FORM 1 PROGRAMME CONCERNED: 2 ACTIONS IN THE FIELD OF URBAN MOBILITY REFERENCE NUMBER OF THE CALL FOR PROPOSALS: 2 TREN/SUB 02-2008 [Before filling in this form, please read
More informationSCOTTISH ENTERPRISE REGIONAL AND SME INVESTMENT AID SCHEME
SCOTTISH ENTERPRISE REGIONAL AND SME INVESTMENT AID SCHEME 2014-2020 SCHEME REFERENCE NUMBER: SA.39217 LEGAL BASIS The Scottish Enterprise Regional and SME Investment Aid Scheme 2014 2020 (the Scheme )
More informationPresentation of the Workshop Training the Experts Workshop Brussels, 4 April 2014
Presentation of the Workshop Training the Experts Workshop Brussels, 4 April 2014 Hervé DUPUY Deputy Head of Unit Broadband Policy Unit (CNECT B5) herve.dupuy@ec.europa.eu Part 1 BACKGROUND Background
More informationAccounting for Government Grants and Disclosure of Government Assistance
IAS Standard 20 Accounting for Government Grants and Disclosure of Government Assistance In April 2001 the International Accounting Standards Board adopted IAS 20 Accounting for Government Grants and Disclosure
More informationHealth Technology Assessment (HTA) Good Practices & Principles FIFARMA, I. Government s cost containment measures: current status & issues
KeyPointsforDecisionMakers HealthTechnologyAssessment(HTA) refers to the scientific multidisciplinary field that addresses inatransparentandsystematicway theclinical,economic,organizational, social,legal,andethicalimpactsofa
More informationThe Commission s future spending plans in accordance with climate targets
The Commission s future spending plans in accordance with climate targets & Environment Event on EU Spending Brussels, 7 December Stephane.Ouaki@ec.europa.eu Investment (Unit B2)-DG The Connecting Europe
More informationThe Role of Research and Innovation Organizations on Supporting the Investment Plan for Europe Initiative
2017 4th International Conference on Innovation in Economics and Business IPEDR vol.87 (2017) (2017) IACSIT Press, Singapore The Role of Research and Innovation Organizations on Supporting the Investment
More informationGRANT APPLICATION FORM for investment grants (INV GAF)
IDENTITY OF THE PROJECT 1 Blending Facility WBIF 2 Grant Number/code 3 Date of Steering Committee 4 Sector(s) 5 CRS-code 6 Beneficiary country 7 Name of project 8 Lead International Financial Institution
More informationConclusions and Recommendations of Expert Working Group on European Investment Bank (EIB) loan finance for building sustainable cities and communities
Conclusions and Recommendations of Expert Working Group on European Investment Bank (EIB) loan finance for building sustainable cities and communities Stand: 25.05.2007 Hinweis: Neuer Herausgeber dieser
More informationThe Access to Risk Finance under the European Funding Programmes WEBINAR
Health Market The Access to Risk Finance under the European Funding Programmes WEBINAR 29 th of September 2014 Antonio Carbone - APRE H2020 NCP Access to risk finance, SME & ICT Objective To matchmake
More informationCEF Transport Blending Call Info Day
CEF Transport Blending Call Info Day 08-05-2017 Jukka LUUKKANEN Head of EIB Helsinki Office European Investment Bank Group EIB at a Glance We are the world s largest International Financial Institution
More informationAccounting for Government Grants
170 Accounting Standard (AS) 12 (issued 1991) Accounting for Government Grants Contents INTRODUCTION Paragraphs 1-3 Definitions 3 EXPLANATION 4-12 Accounting Treatment of Government Grants 5-11 Capital
More informationDeploying an Alternative fuels infrastructure for Transport in the EU
Deploying an Alternative fuels infrastructure for in the EU Radisson Blue Plaza Hotel, Ljubljana, Slovenia Brussels, 14 th November dorothee.coucharriere@ec.europa.eu Investment (Unit B2)- DG Clean Power
More informationI 2 Program Frequently Asked Questions
I 2 Program Frequently Asked Questions What is the Genome BC Industry Innovation (I 2 ) Program? The I 2 Program offers repayable growth capital to businesses (with less than 500 employees), commercializing
More informationThe Goal: most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world
Human Capital Investment: The LISBON Challenges http://www.eib.org 1 Lisbon European Council, March 2000 THE LISBON STRATEGY The Goal: most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world
More informationAccounting for Government Grants
175 Accounting Standard (AS) 12 (issued 1991) Accounting for Government Grants Contents INTRODUCTION Paragraphs 1-3 Definitions 3 EXPLANATION 4-12 Accounting Treatment of Government Grants 5-11 Capital
More informationFrequently Asked Questions Funding Cycle
Frequently Asked Questions 2017-2019 Funding Cycle November 2017 Table of Contents The Funding Model... 1 Eligibility and Allocations... 3 Differentiated Application Process... 6 Preparing a Funding Request...
More informationGeneral terms and conditions of Tempo funding
1 June 2017 1 (6) General terms and conditions of Tempo funding Contents 1 Scope of application and publicity of the funding decision... 2 2 Monitoring of costs... 2 3 Eligible costs... 2 3.1 Principles...
More informationA Primer on Activity-Based Funding
A Primer on Activity-Based Funding Introduction and Background Canada is ranked sixth among the richest countries in the world in terms of the proportion of gross domestic product (GDP) spent on health
More informationThe 10 billion euro question. How to most effectively support innovation in Poland. Marcin Piatkowski Senior Economist The World Bank, Warsaw
The 10 billion euro question. How to most effectively support innovation in Poland Marcin Piatkowski Senior Economist The World Bank, Warsaw Seville, November 2, 2011 Outline Economic growth in Poland
More information4RE Resource Efficiency Waste Prevention Implementation Fund
GUIDANCE DOCUMENT 4RE003-000 Resource Efficiency Waste Prevention Implementation Fund 1. Background and Aims Resource Efficient Scotland is a programme delivered by Zero Waste Scotland which helps organisations
More informationACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly The EU blending mechanism: Experiences of KfW development bank
ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly The EU blending mechanism: Experiences of KfW development bank Brussels, 17 March 2016 Christoph Gabriel Krieger Regional Manager, West Africa and Madagascar KfW Development
More informationBusiness Environment and Knowledge for Private Sector Growth: Setting the Stage
Business Environment and Knowledge for Private Sector Growth: Setting the Stage Fernando Montes-Negret Sector Director Private and Financial Sector Development Department, Europe and Central Asia (ECA)
More informationNovember 4, 2013 Office of Transportation Public Private Partnerships
November 4, 2013 Office of Transportation Public Private Partnerships Dear Sirs, Via email: i66ppta@vdot.virginia.gov Re: Response of Shikun & Binui Ltd. (a member of the Arison Group) to the Request for
More informationOverview of fi-compass. advisory platform and its activities. ENERGY EFFICIENCY FINANCE MARKET PLACE Ja n u a r y
ENERGY EFFICIENCY FINANCE MARKET PLACE 18-19 Ja n u a r y Overview of fi-compass 2017 advisory platform and its activities Miglena Dobreva, Financial Instruments Advisor fi-compass, Advisory Services,
More informationELENA TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
European Investment Bank (EIB) ELENA TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE European Investment Bank 1 ELENA Results Facility operational since January 2010 > 50 projects signed/approved for ELENA grants totalling EUR ~100
More informationThe European Entrepreneur Exchange Programme. Users' Guide. European Commission Enterprise and Industry
The European Entrepreneur Exchange Programme Users' Guide European Commission Enterprise and Industry Contents 1.0 Introduction...5 2.0 Objectives...6 3.0 Structure...7 3.1 Basic elements...7 3.2 Four
More informationURBACT III Programme Manual
URBACT III Programme Manual Fact Sheet 2B Implementation Networks Table of contents Fact Sheet 2B 1. Main objectives and expected results... 1 2. Network s development... 3 3. Partnership... 4 4. Activities
More informationTowards a Common Strategic Framework for EU Research and Innovation Funding
Towards a Common Strategic Framework for EU Research and Innovation Funding Replies from the European Physical Society to the consultation on the European Commission Green Paper 18 May 2011 Replies from
More informationCOMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
EN EN EN COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES Brussels, 5.11.2008 COM(2008) 652 final/2 CORRIGENDUM Annule et remplace le document COM(2008)652 final du 17.10.2008 Titre incomplet: concerne toutes langues.
More informationCOMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT. Accompanying the document. Proposals for a
EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 7.6.2018 SWD(2018) 308 final COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT Accompanying the document Proposals for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN
More informationRepublic of Latvia. Cabinet Regulation No. 50 Adopted 19 January 2016
Republic of Latvia Cabinet Regulation No. 50 Adopted 19 January 2016 Regulations Regarding Implementation of Activity 1.1.1.2 Post-doctoral Research Aid of the Specific Aid Objective 1.1.1 To increase
More informationGAO MILITARY BASE CLOSURES. DOD's Updated Net Savings Estimate Remains Substantial. Report to the Honorable Vic Snyder House of Representatives
GAO United States General Accounting Office Report to the Honorable Vic Snyder House of Representatives July 2001 MILITARY BASE CLOSURES DOD's Updated Net Savings Estimate Remains Substantial GAO-01-971
More informationInnovation for Growth i4g. Major Findings and R&I policy recommendations of the first ten. i4g policy briefs. February 2013
Innovation for Growth i4g Relation of research & innovation with smart, sustainable and inclusive growth Major Findings and R&I policy recommendations of the first ten i4g policy briefs. February 2013
More informationIncentive Guidelines Start-Up Finance
Incentive Guidelines Start-Up Finance Issue Date: 24 th February 2016 Version: 1 http://support.maltaenterprise.com Malta Enterprise provides support to interested applicants to understand the objectives
More informationThe European Commission Mutual Learning Programme for Public Employment Services. DG Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion PEER PES PAPER UK
The European Commission Mutual Learning Programme for Public Employment Services DG Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion PEER PES PAPER UK Peer Review Effective Services for Employers Paris, January
More informationSix Key Principles for the Efficient and Sustainable Funding & Reimbursement of Medical Technologies
Six Key Principles for the Efficient and Sustainable Funding & Reimbursement of Medical Technologies Contents Executive Summary... 2 1. Transparency... 4 2. Predictability & Consistency... 4 3. Stakeholder
More informationHorizon 2020 Financial Instruments for the Private Sector, Especially SMEs An Overview
Horizon 2020 Financial Instruments for the Private Sector, Especially SMEs An Overview Samuël Maenhout Policy Officer of Unit for "SMEs, Financial Instruments and State Aid" (B.3) DG Research and @ 'Bridging
More informationInstructions for completing the CFC Application Form
THE COMMON FUND FOR COMMODITIES 8 TH OPEN CALL FOR PROPOSALS Instructions for completing the CFC Application Form CFC does not charge any fees during the application procedure. However, on approval of
More informationGLOBAL INFRASTRUCTURE FACILITY OPERATING GUIDELINES
GLOBAL INFRASTRUCTURE FACILITY OPERATING GUIDELINES As Adopted by the GIF Governing Council on 20 April, 2015 And Revised on 16 June, 2016 A. INTRODUCTION 1. The Global Infrastructure Facility ( GIF )
More informationAID FOR TRADE: CASE STORY
AID FOR TRADE: CASE STORY OVERSEAS DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE Aid for Trade and Blended Finance 1 AID FOR TRADE CASE STORY: ODI Aid for Trade and Blended Finance Aid for Trade Case study submission to OECD/WTO
More informationRAPIDE - Action Groups
Subject: Themes for Dear RAPIDE Partners! Below you ll find the general description of all RAPIDE Action Groups and the preliminary distribution of RAPIDE partners along these different Action Groups.
More informationThe future of innovation in view of the new EU policies: Europe 2020, Innovation Union, Horizon Nikos Zaharis, SEERC December 29, 2011
The future of innovation in view of the new EU policies: Europe 2020, Innovation Union, Horizon 2020 Nikos Zaharis, SEERC December 29, 2011 1 Europe 2020 5 Targets for the year 2020: 1. Employment 75%
More informationSSAP 35 STATEMENT OF STANDARD ACCOUNTING PRACTICE 35 ACCOUNTING FOR GOVERNMENT GRANTS AND DISCLOSURE OF GOVERNMENT ASSISTANCE
SSAP 35 STATEMENT OF STANDARD ACCOUNTING PRACTICE 35 ACCOUNTING FOR GOVERNMENT GRANTS AND DISCLOSURE OF GOVERNMENT ASSISTANCE (Issued March 2002) The standards, which have been set in bold italic type,
More informationNew Zealand Equivalent to International Accounting Standard 20 Accounting for Government Grants and Disclosure of Government Assistance (NZ IAS 20)
New Zealand Equivalent to International Accounting Standard 20 Accounting for Government Grants and Disclosure of Government Assistance (NZ IAS 20) Issued November 2004 and incorporates amendments to 31
More informationAssessment of Erasmus+ Sports
Background paper N 3 February 2015 Assessment of Erasmus+ Sports The Erasmus+ Sport programme has been launched in 2014. The results of the first call for proposals are now published. 302 organisations
More information2011 Call for proposals Non-State Actors in Development. Delegation of the European Union to Russia
2011 Call for proposals Non-State Actors in Development Delegation of the European Union to Russia Generally: to promote inclusive and empowered society in partner countries by supporting actions of local
More informationINCENTIVES AND SUPPORT SYSTEMS TO FOSTER PRIVATE SECTOR INNOVATION. Jerry Sheehan. Introduction
INCENTIVES AND SUPPORT SYSTEMS TO FOSTER PRIVATE SECTOR INNOVATION Jerry Sheehan Introduction Governments in many countries are devoting increased attention to bolstering business innovation capabilities.
More informationFrequently Asked Questions
Fast Track to Innovation Pilot (2015) Call opening: January 6, 2015 First Cut-off Date: April 29, 2015 Frequently Asked Questions Official European Commission document December 2014 Contents A. Eligibility
More informationCOMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES Brussels, 20.4.2004 COM(2004) 304 final COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND
More informationSmart cities in Europe Can public procurement be used as leverage to drive smart city solutions?
Smart cities in Europe Can public procurement be used as leverage to drive smart city solutions? 9 3 Smart cities in Europe The future of the built environment Part of the Smart cities in Europe series
More informationReport. To the Chair and Members of CABINET
Report Date: 20 th March 2018 To the Chair and Members of CABINET APPROVAL TO PROGRESS THE FUNDING AGREEMENT WITH SHEFFIELD CITY REGION AND ASSOCIATED BACK TO BACK AGREEMENT WITH NETWORK RAIL AND TO ACCEPT
More informationAccounting for Government Grants and Disclosure of Government Assistance
Indian Accounting Standard (Ind AS) 20 Accounting for Government Grants and Disclosure of Government Assistance (This Indian Accounting Standard includes paragraphs set in bold type and plain type, which
More informationHigh Level Pharmaceutical Forum
High Level Pharmaceutical Forum 2005-2008 Final Conclusions and Recommendations of the High Level Pharmaceutical Forum On 2 nd October 2008, the High Level Pharmaceutical Forum agreed on the following
More informationInnovFin Thematic Products - Energy Demo Projects (EDP)
InnovFin Thematic Products - Energy Demo Projects (EDP) Risk finance for first-of-a-kind demonstrators Innovative, first-of-a-kind energy technologies face a "valley of death" on the way from demonstration
More informationRe: Rewarding Provider Performance: Aligning Incentives in Medicare
September 25, 2006 Institute of Medicine 500 Fifth Street NW Washington DC 20001 Re: Rewarding Provider Performance: Aligning Incentives in Medicare The American College of Physicians (ACP), representing
More informationREPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL. Report on the interim evaluation of the «Daphne III Programme »
EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 11.5.2011 COM(2011) 254 final REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Report on the interim evaluation of the «Daphne III Programme 2007 2013»
More informationLocal Energy Challenge Fund
Guidance for applicants to the Local Energy Challenge Fund Managed by Local Energy Scotland as part of the Scottish Government s CARES programme Version 1 15th August 2014 Local Energy Challenge Fund Guidance
More informationTowards faster implementation and uptake of open government
Towards faster implementation and uptake of open government EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ENGLISH A study prepared for the European Commission DG Communications Networks, Content & Technology by: Digital Single Market
More informationAnnual results: Net income from ordinary operations increased by 21%
. Annual results 2002 For more information, please contact: Sandra van Campen Phone: +31 20 569 5623 Diemen, February 18, 2003 Annual results: Net income from ordinary operations increased by 21% Highlights
More informationAnswers to questions following the call for tender for a Fund Operator for the EEA and Norway Grants Global Fund for Regional Cooperation
Answers to questions following the call for tender for a Fund Operator for the EEA and Norway Grants Global Fund for Regional Cooperation Question 1: Does re-granting experience refer to direct experience
More informationGUIDE FOR APPLICANTS INTERREG VA
GUIDE FOR APPLICANTS INTERREG VA Cross-border Programme for Territorial Co-operation 2014-2020, Northern Ireland, Border Region of Ireland and Western Scotland & PEACE IV EU Programme for Peace and Reconciliation
More informationPriorities for exit negotiations
February 2017 What should be the government s priorities for exit negotiations and policy development to maximise the contribution of British universities to a successful and global UK? As government looks
More informationPublic Diplomacy, Policy Research and Outreach Devoted to the European Union and EU-Canada Relations
Public Diplomacy, Policy Research and Outreach Devoted to the European Union and EU-Canada Relations CALL FOR PROPOSALS Application Deadline: 22 September, 2009 This Call for Proposals is designed to pursue
More informationHORIZON The New EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation Gaëtan DUBOIS European Commission DG Research & Innovation
HORIZON 2020 The New EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation 2014-2020 Gaëtan DUBOIS European Commission DG Research & Innovation The Multiannual Financial Framework 2014-2020: European Council
More informationCAPACITIES WORK PROGRAMME PART 3. (European Commission C (2011) 5023 of 19 July 2011) REGIONS OF KNOWLEDGE
WORK PROGRAMME 2012-2013 CAPACITIES PART 3 REGIONS OF KNOWLEDGE (European Commission C (2011) 5023 of 19 July 2011) Capacities Work Programme: Regions of Knowledge The work programme presented here provides
More informationA STRATEGIC public private partnership
A STRATEGIC public private partnership SINGAPORE SPORTS HUB, where singapore comes to play The Singapore Sports Hub has been developed under a 25-year Public-Private Partnership (PPP) agreement between
More informationCOPY REGULATION OF THE MINISTER OF FINANCE OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA NUMBER 223/PMK.011/2012
COPY REGULATION OF THE MINISTER OF FINANCE OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA NUMBER 223/PMK.011/2012 CONCERNING SUPPORT FOR FEASIBILITY IN PARTIAL CONSTRUCTION EXPENSES IN COOPERATION PROJECTS BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT
More informationPartnership Financing: Improving Transportation Through Public Private Partnerships
Partnership Financing: Improving Transportation Through Public Private Partnerships Executive Summary Long-term funding sources for transportation are uncertain, and innovative alternatives for both financing
More informationEU funding opportunities for small and medium-sized enterprises
EU funding opportunities for small and medium-sized enterprises A. Definition The SME definition currently in force in Community law is that adopted with the Recommendation 96/280/EC. This definition is
More informationAn action plan to boost research and innovation
MEMO/05/66 Brussels, 1 October 005 An action plan to boost research and innovation The European Commission has tabled an integrated innovation and research action plan, which calls for a major upgrade
More informationconsultation A European health service? The European Commission s proposals on cross-border healthcare Key questions for NHS organisations
the voice of the NHS in Europe consultation AUGUST 2008 NO. 1 A European health service? Key questions for NHS organisations The draft proposals aim to clarify the rules around existing rights to get treatment
More informationTransatlantic Strategy Forum
EUROPEAN COMMISSION DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR EXTERNAL RELATIONS Transatlantic Strategy Forum CALL FOR PROPOSALS N o RELEX/C1/2009/TSF Application Deadline: 14 April 2009 An amount of EUR 50,000 was earmarked
More informationREPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL
EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 6.8.2013 COM(2013) 571 final REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL on implementation of the Regulation (EC) No 453/2008 of the European Parliament
More informationConsultant Opportunities with the EBRD
Consultant Opportunities with the EBRD Mr Andrea Baldan Head of Operations Technical Cooperation Team Lisbon (P), 21 st and 22 nd March 2013 6 things you need to know in order to be successful in providing
More information