EUROPEAN TERRITORIAL CO-OPERATION - 2021-2027 Preparing the EU PEACE PLUS Programme for the 2021 - 2027 period - SEUPB
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
EUROPEAN TERRITORIAL CO-OPERATION 2021-2027 Preparing the EU PEACE PLUS Programme for the 2021 – 2027 period Stakeholder Engagement Survey Summary of Responses July 2020
European Territorial Co-Operation 2021 - 2027
Contents
1. Introduction and Methodology 3
1.1. Introduction 3
1.2. Methodology 4
2. Background of Respondents 5
2.1. Responses by organisation or individuals 5
2.2. Responses by location 6
2.3. Description of respondents 7
3. Survey Analysis – Peace-Building Activities 8
3.1. Context 8
3.2. Actions to improve community and social cohesion 9
3.3. Actions to improve employment opportunities 10
3.4. Actions to increase access to education 10
3.5 Actions to reduce marginalisation through improved housing and services 11
3.6. Actions to increase access to quality healthcare 11
3.7. Actions related to other peace building activities 12
3.8. Challenges for Peace and Reconciliation 12
3.9. Opportunities in relation to Peace and Reconciliation 14
4. North/South Economic, Social and Environmental Development of the Region 16
4.1. Context 16
4.2. Policy Objective 1 – A Smarter Europe 17
4.3. Policy Objective 2 – A Greener, Lower Carbon Europe 18
4.4. Policy Objective 3 – A More Connected Europe 19
4.5. Policy Objective 4 – A More Social Europe 20
4.6. Policy Objective 5 – A Europe Closer to Its Citizens 21
4.7. Challenges for the wider economic and territorial development of the Programme area 22
4.8. Opportunities for the wider economic and territorial development of the Programme area 23
5. Delivery Mechanisms and Administration 25
5.1. Context 25
5.2. Increasing simplification: flat rates and unit costs 25
5.3. Project development support 28
5.4. Project preparation lump sums 31
5.5. Match-funding 32
5.6. Programme delivery and implementation 33
Appendices 34
Appendix 1. List of consultation respondents 34
Appendix 2. Survey data frequencies 37
Appendix 3. Glossary of terms 54
Disclaimer
Information contained in this document reflects the views contained within the consultation responses received.
This document does not necessarily reflect the views of the Special EU Programmes Body.
2European Territorial Co-Operation 2021 - 2027
1. Introduction and Methodology
1.1. Introduction and environmental activities of mutual interest, which
The cohesion policy of the European Union provides a are normally associated with an INTERREG
framework for financing a wide range of projects and programme.
investments with the aim of encouraging economic
growth in EU Member States, their regions and third As part of its development and preparation of the
countries. The next round of programmes will cover PEACE PLUS Programme, the SEUPB invited input
the period 2021-2027. from a wide range of key stakeholders within the
Programme area of Northern Ireland and the Border
The EU – UK Withdrawal Agreement of 2019 reaffirms Region of Ireland, utilising public events and a
the commitment by the European Union and the stakeholder engagement survey. The survey is one of
United Kingdom to the North South PEACE and a number of sources of information which will influence
INTERREG funding programmes under the current the shape of the new Programme. The other sources
multi-annual financial framework and to the maintaining of information include but are not limited to:
of the current funding proportions for the future
programme. • Draft Regulations including EU Policy Framework
– European Commission;
Since 1995 there has been a PEACE programme in • UK / Northern Ireland and Ireland policies and
the region demonstrating the EU’s positive response strategies of relevance;
to the Northern Ireland peace process. The PEACE • Border Orientation Paper – European Commission;
Programme is unique across all member states and
• Socio-economic Profile (SEP) Area Analysis of the
has evolved with the progression of the peace process.
Programme Area;
The Special EU Programmes Body (SEUPB) manages
two cross-border cooperation programmes – the • Draft Joint Position Papers from Government
PEACE IV programme and the INTERREG VA Departments, Northern Ireland and Ireland;
programme. The SEUPB, in line with its statutory • Public Roadshow across the region, 16 events
remit has commenced the preparation of a single with over 1000 participants (pre Covid-19).
successor programme which is called the PEACE
PLUS programme, which will combine activities The survey and public consultations were
previously funded under the PEACE and INTERREG carried out prior to the COVID-19 crisis.
Programmes.
The quality and detail of the responses
PEACE PLUS is a new cross border programme that submitted was excellent as was the
will contribute to a more prosperous and stable society engagement at the public events. Thank
in Northern Ireland and the Border Region of Ireland. you to everyone who participated.
The programme will achieve this by funding peace
building activities and by funding activities that
contribute to the cross border economic and territorial
development of the region. The combination of the
PEACE INTERREG type activities in a single
programme and will include not only Peace building
activity but also wider North/South economic, social
3European Territorial Co-Operation 2021 - 2027
1.2. Methodology issue was at the lowest level of relevance/beneficial
The purpose of the stakeholder engagement survey and a score of seven meant the respondent felt the
was to obtain direct input from stakeholders on potential issue was at the highest level of relevance/beneficial.
funding themes for the PEACE PLUS Programme as Each question also had a Don’t Know box which a
well as feedback on delivery and implementation respondent could tick.
options as proposed by the draft regulations.
For reporting purposes these responses have been
Data collection regrouped as follows:
A wide range of communication tools and interventions
were employed to maximise awareness of the • Score 1, 2, 3 = Not Relevant/Not Beneficial
stakeholder engagement survey and support a high • Score 4 = Neither Relevant or Irrelevant (or
level of good quality responses. This included: beneficial/not beneficial)
• Score 5, 6, 7 = Relevant/Beneficial
• Stakeholder engagement events (November 2019
– January 2020). Over 1000 people attended 16 Respondents who answered Don’t Know or did not
events across the Programme area. In addition a answer the question are excluded from the relevant/
number of specific youth events were undertaken; not relevant (beneficial/not beneficial) analysis.
• Smaller events arranged by umbrella organisations;
Appendix 2 contains the survey frequency data for
• Direct Email Campaign;
each of the seventeen questions.
• Social media campaign;
• Website promotion; The survey also included fourteen open ended survey
• Advertising online and in print; questions. For analysis purposes, and to enhance
reader understanding, these were categorised into
• PR campaign.
key themes and summarised. Many respondents
The survey was available to complete online via the provided detailed responses running to several pages,
survey monkey platform from 10 December 2019 until along with additional documents. While it has not been
28 February 2020. Respondents also had the option to possible to include the full detail of all responses, the
respond to the survey by email or post. Documentation SEUPB PEACE PLUS team have reviewed every
was also available on the webpage in Irish and other response and made every effort to represent all
accessible formats were available on request. responses as fairly and comprehensively as possible
in this summary report.
Data analysis
A total of 320 valid responses were received (241 The analysis, as presented in the remainder of this
organisations and 79 individuals) and all were treated report, concentrates on four main areas of the survey,
equally. A response was deemed to be valid if the as follows:
respondent provided their name, address and answered
• Background of respondents;
at least one question in the survey. All valid responses
received an acknowledgment letter or email from the • The relevance of indicative actions to support Peace
SEUPB. A full list of respondents who agreed their and Reconciliation;
names could be published is attached at Appendix 1. • The relevance of activities that contribute to North/
South economic, social and environmental
Respondents were asked seventeen closed questions, development of the Region;
and the responses were rated using a scale of one to • Simplification of the administration, management and
seven. A score of one meant the respondent felt the implementation of the Programme and projects.
4European Territorial Co-Operation 2021 - 2027
2. Background of Respondents
2.1. Responses by organisation or individuals
Figure 1. Breakdown of responses
24.7%
Individual
Organisation
75.3%
As shown on in Figure 1 above, three quarters of the sample is represented by organisations and one quarter by
individual respondents.
5European Territorial Co-Operation 2021 - 2027
2.2. Responses by location
Figure 2. Survey responses by location
Figure 2 above shows the location of survey • reducing marginalisation through improved
respondents: housing and services was considered as more
relevant by those respondents who are based in
• The majority of respondents (228) were based in the Border Counties (79.3%) and Northern Ireland
Northern Ireland (71.3%); (73.6%) in comparison to those based in the rest
• Almost one fifth (18.8%) represented those in the of Ireland (68.4%) and other regions (66.7%);
Border Counties (60 respondents); • Policy Objective 4 – A More Social Europe was
• 7.8% or 25 respondents resided in other regions in viewed by respondents based in Northern Ireland
the rest of Ireland; (96.2%) and the Border Counties (96.2%) as more
• 1.6% were based in Scotland (5 respondents – not relevant when compared with those located in the
illustrated); rest of Ireland (89.5%) and other regions (83.3%);
and
• One response came from London and another
from America (not illustrated). • Policy Objective 3 – A More Connected Europe
which was rated as more relevant by respondents
The location of respondents was examined across the based in the Border Counties (90.4%) and rest of
survey questions. There were no discernible differences Ireland (88.9%) in comparison to those based in
in responses by origin/location of the respondent with Northern Ireland (82.4%) and other regions
the exception of: (83.3%). Over half of the respondents based in the
Border Counties rated PO3 at the highest level of
relevance (a rating of 7), compared to 34.6% in
Northern Ireland.
6European Territorial Co-Operation 2021 - 2027
2.3. Description of respondents
Respondents were asked to indicate which category best described them, based on the choices outlined below.
Respondents could chose more than one description.
Figure 3. Description of Respondents
Like to
Get Involved
Receive or
Received Funding
Participant or
Beneficiary
Stakeholder
Other
Applied for Funding
- Unsuccessful
0 10 20 30 40 50
Percent of Cases
Base 319 respondents (1 respondent did not answer)
As shown by Figure 3: • 20.7% of respondents (66) were stakeholders
associated with the management of the PEACE
• Half of respondents (159) who took part in the OR INTERREG programmes;
survey would like to get involved with the PEACE
• 39 respondents described themselves as Other.
PLUS Programme. 80.5% of these respondents
This included PHD students, a local elected
were from organisations (128), denoting an early
representative and board members from
interest in funding opportunities;
organisations;
• In addition, 46.4% of respondents (148), receive
• Only 9 survey respondents (2.8%) had previously
or have previously received funding from the
applied to the SEUPB for funding from the PEACE
PEACE or INTERREG programmes as a project
OR INTERREG programme and had not been
partner or a subcontracted organisation;
successful in receiving a funding award.
• 74 respondents (23.2%) were participants or
beneficiaries of a PEACE or INTERREG funded
project. 75.7% (56) of the participants or
beneficiaries were from organisations and 24.3%
(18) were individuals;
7European Territorial Co-Operation 2021 - 2027
3. Survey Analysis – Peace-Building Activities
3.1. Context • Increasing access to quality education (quality and
This section of the report focuses on the summary of inclusive);
responses in relation to peace and reconciliation • Reducing marginalisation through improved
activities as a distinct element of the PEACE PLUS housing and services;
Programme. • Increasing access to quality health care in the
region;
PEACE PLUS will fund Peace and Reconciliation
activities and these must be allocated within Policy • Other peace building activities.
Objective 4 of the draft EU Regulations1. Respondents
The above relates to actions listed under Policy
were asked to rate the relevance of the following
Objective 4 of the EU Policy Objectives as set out in
indicative actions as a means to achieve Peace and
the draft regulations.
Reconciliation:
Figure 4 below summarises the rating of the relevance
• Actions to improve community and social
of the individual actions, from relevant to irrelevant, as
cohesion;
a means to achieve peace and reconciliation.
• Improving employment opportunities;
Figure 4. Relevance of Actions for achieving Peace and Reconciliation under Policy Objective 4
Actions to improve community Relevant
5.0 94.7
and social cohesion
Irrelevant
Improving employment Neither Irrelevant / Relevant
7.6 7.7 84.7
opportunities
Improving access to
5.3 6.7 88.0
quality education
Reducing marginalisation through
13.9 11.9 74.2
improved housing and services
Improving access to
11.3 10.9 77.8
quality health care
Other peace
8.6 6.6 84.8
building activities
0 20 40 60 80 100
Percent
Appendix 2 contains the frequency data for each of the responses.
1 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/publications/regional-development-and-cohesion_en
8European Territorial Co-Operation 2021 - 2027
Key finding: Overall, respondents generally and contribute to society and where there is a
consider that the full list of indicative sense of belonging;
actions are relevant for achieving peace • Opportunity to consolidate and build on
and reconciliation. success to date, continuing to bring communities
together, remove barriers, ensure community
In the sections below, the rating of relevance for each
empowerment and engagement, promote
individual action for achieving Peace and Reconciliation
interculturalism and create lasting change.
is examined alongside the explanation for the rating as
well as recommendations for specific actions from Specific actions recommended by respondents to
respondents. increase social and community cohesion include:
3.2. Actions to improve community and • Creating opportunities for integration – cross
social cohesion communities, cross borders, between schools and
94.7% of respondents stated that actions to improve including refugees and new local communities;
social and community cohesion was relevant and 76%
• Skills development – examples include conflict
of this group rated it at the highest possible level of
resolution, restorative practice, mediation, trauma
relevance (grade 7).
informed practice and community leadership;
• 0.3% stated that it was not relevant; and
• Leverage existing infrastructure (shared safe
• 5% stated that it was neither relevant nor
space) and utilising community spaces as
irrelevant.
social economy /enterprise hubs;
Overall, the average rating is 6.5 which • Utilise other mediums – such as arts and craft,
suggests that respondents rated this music, sports and digital technologies;
action as highly relevant. • Target specific groups – including children and
young people (from different traditions), people of
Respondents were asked to explain why they had all ages, persons at risk of paramilitary control,
given their rating. Their responses can be grouped victims and survivors, political ex-prisoners and
under a number of headings as follows: new communities;
• Address specific topics – such as sustainable
• Continued need to address existing problems
peace, forgiveness, addressing conflict in a
such as sectarian division, segregation and the
non-violent way, respecting difference, equality and
lack of integration, inequality of access to services,
diversity, trauma related to the troubles/terrorism,
unemployment, socio-political polarisation and a
commemorations and anniversaries, as well as
sense that not everyone had experienced a
addressing local community needs.
benefit from the peace process;
• Build new structures – including local
• Desire to create outcomes in terms of
community capacity, community forums and new
sustainable peace, economic growth, a
structures to help communities to shape decisions.
productive, prosperous and positive society, where
there is attitudinal change, a functioning post
Some respondents also highlighted the need for small
conflict society where people feel valued by society
scale, local projects and for single identity projects to
engage hard to reach sections of the community who
have a particular set of needs.
9European Territorial Co-Operation 2021 - 2027
3.3. Actions to improve employment Respondents highlighted particular groups that should
opportunities be targeted such as school leavers, young people,
• 84.7% of respondents stated that actions to people out of work, job changers and those individuals
improve employment opportunities was relevant furthest removed from the labour market.
and 55.3% of this group rated it at the highest
possible level of relevance (grade 7); 3.4. Actions to increase access to
education
• 7.6% stated that it wasn’t relevant; and
• 88% of respondents stated that increasing access
• 7.6% stated that it was neither relevant nor to education was relevant and 57% of this group
irrelevant. rated it at the highest possible level of relevance
(grade 7);
Overall, the average rating is 5.9 which
suggests that respondents rated this • 6.7% stated that it wasn’t relevant; and
action as considerably relevant. • 5.3% stated that it was neither relevant nor
irrelevant.
In support of their rating of improving employment
opportunities as a relevant action for achieving peace Overall, the average rating is 6.0 which
and reconciliation, respondents’ comments are suggests that respondents rated this
summarised as follows: action as considerably relevant.
• To address existing problems of unemployment A wide range of comments were made by respondents
and under employment (which can lead to in support of their rating of the relevance of increasing
involvement in paramilitarism), of poverty, social access to education as outlined below:
exclusion, social isolation and low confidence/
self-esteem, and to address limited employment • To address existing problems - including
opportunities; segregated education and its potential
consequences such as recruitment to
• To achieve desired outcomes – including peace,
paramilitaries/anti-social behaviour, under
prosperity and a more “normal” society, with
achievement in education and access to
improved health, wellbeing and emotional
universities for young people in the border regions
resilience, where there is route out of poverty and
were also highlighted;
an equal distribution of wealth;
• To create desired outcomes - such as improved
• To target specific groups including the long term
skills and behaviours, personal growth, capacity
unemployed, young people, ex-prisoners and their
building, social development, sustainable
families and non-native English speakers.
livelihoods and to contribute to conflict
The initiatives recommended by respondents to transformation and peace and reconciliation;
improve employment opportunities were wide ranging • To address the needs of specific groups - in
and included quality community and local authority particular the most marginalised in society and
based training, more and better supported work those young people who do not fit into the system.
experience, research based apprenticeships and
training opportunities, social economy ventures in
rural areas, mentoring/role models, career pathway
guidance and peace building work leading to active
citizenship.
10European Territorial Co-Operation 2021 - 2027
Respondents highlighted a range of initiatives to Overall, the average rating is 5.6 which
increase access to education: suggests that respondents rated this
action as moderately relevant.
• Collaboration in the areas of shared education
and integrated education partnerships and Respondents felt increasing access to quality health
projects; care in the region was relevant for the following
• Creating specific projects to address educational reasons:
underachievement in the most affected groups, to
• To address existing problems including
encourage initiatives similar to young
economic and social deprivation, poverty, mental
entrepreneurs, engaging local enterprises to work
health issues (as a legacy from the conflict/
with schools and understanding of the social
troubles), high rates of suicide, alcohol and drug
economy;
addiction (which disintegrate cohesion of
• To invest in bursaries to create higher education
communities, families and individuals) and barriers
opportunities for the most marginalised.
to access to healthcare for rural residents;
3.5 Actions to reduce marginalisation • To achieve desired outcomes such as better
through improved housing and services general health of the population, reducing stress,
• 74.2% of respondents stated that actions to improving people’s capacity for social interaction,
reduce marginalisation through improved housing and their capacity to move into education, training
and services was relevant and 43% of this group or employment and to promote economic growth.
rated it at the highest possible level of relevance
A range of initiatives were recommended by
(grade 7);
respondents including; social prescribing, (especially
• 11.9% stated it wasn’t relevant; and
where actions are initiated and led by communities),
• 13.9% stated it was neither relevant nor irrelevant. the signposting of mental health services and advice,
other mental health interventions including using the
Overall, the average rating is 5.4 which
arts and nature based solutions and the development
suggests that respondents rated this
of a regional centre of excellence for addictions.
action as moderately relevant.
Target groups for improved health services were
Few comments were made in support of the relevance
identified by respondents as those requiring mental
rating, however, reference was made to addressing
health and addiction services and there should be a
segregated housing, decreasing the polarisation and
focus on cross-community provision. The health and
enabling PEACE PLUS to fulfil its potential.
wellbeing needs of victims and survivors was
highlighted as a positive activity. Support to address
3.6. Actions to increase access to
the issues of poor physical and mental of political ex-
quality healthcare
prisoners was identified as a need.
• 77.8% of respondents stated that actions to
increase access to quality health care in the region
was relevant and of this group 48% rated it at the
highest possible level of relevance (grade 7);
• 10.9% stated that it wasn’t relevant; and
• 11.3% stated that it was neither relevant nor
irrelevant.
11European Territorial Co-Operation 2021 - 2027
3.7. Actions related to other peace education, involved with the justice system, who are
building activities socially isolated, who have mental health problems
• 84.8% of respondents stated that actions related and who have a disability or learning needs), older
to other peace building activities was relevant and people who are isolated or lonely; people with learning
62% of this group rated it at the highest possible disabilities; refugees, asylum seekers and new
level of relevance (grade 7); communities; BAME communities and political ex –
• 6.6% stated that it wasn’t relevant; and prisoners.
• 8.6% stated that it was neither relevant nor A small number of respondents rated some of
irrelevant. the proposed actions as irrelevant. The most
common reason why employment opportunities,
Overall, the average rating is 6.0 which
education, housing and healthcare were deemed
suggests that respondents rated this
irrelevant was because this was the core responsibility
action as considerably relevant.
of government and other appointed bodies. There
Reasons provided for other peace building activity was also some concern expressed that by investing
being relevant included the risk to stability with cross- across a broad spectrum of actions which are already
border cooperation becoming re-politicised due to the responsibility of other government departments,
Brexit and the need to target specific groups such as this could dilute funding available for actions to improve
women working in grassroots Peace and community and social cohesion .
Reconciliation, as well as children and young people.
3.8. Challenges for Peace and
A wide range of other peace building activities were Reconciliation
recommended by respondents to the survey, as Respondents to the survey were asked to identify the
summarised below: main challenges for greater Peace and Reconciliation
within the region (it is highlighted that the survey was
• Specific topics – including transgenerational and undertaken prior to lockdown and Covid-19). These
intergenerational trauma, bereavement, conflict (to fell under a number of themes as outlined below:
be explored by children, parents/guardians and
educators together), language programmes Challenges posed by Brexit
(Ulster-Scots, Irish, sign language, English for new The most frequently cited challenge reported by a
communities and other languages to address large number of respondents was the changes and
language/cultural barriers) and respect for other uncertainty related to Brexit. It was also noted that the
people’s/communities traditions, history, culture fallout from Brexit will not be fully felt for some time yet.
and language; The key concerns as a result of the UK exit from the
European Union included:
• Structures / networks / capacities – including
cross community networking, cross border • Social challenges such as the impact on
capacity building, citizen assemblies, community community relations and disruption to community
engagement with policy makers and capital grants and social cohesion;
to run projects in the community;
• Economic challenges including for example, the
• Skills development – in the areas of leadership, impact on productivity and trade, the prices of
trauma training, relationship building and respect goods and services and freedom of movement;
for diversity.
• Political challenges including the potential for
Respondents highlighted specific target groups destabilisation of the peace process, compromised
including at risk young people (those struggling in good relations within Northern Ireland and
12European Territorial Co-Operation 2021 - 2027
between the two regions, greater polarisation on Respondents outlined a number of challenges for the
national identity issues (with potential for increased delivery of the PEACE PLUS Programme which
xenophobia and racism), potential for increased could impact the achievement of Peace and
paramilitary and dissident activity and increasing Reconciliation:
discussion regarding a border/unity poll
referendum; • Funding - the lack of grassroots funding or small
grant opportunities was deemed to be a challenge
• Legislative challenges such as the fear of the
for many smaller organisations who believed this
return of a hard border and complexities around
had the potential to impact on Peace and
changing governance.
Reconciliation in the communities. Respondents
Other Challenges from smaller charitable based organisations
Respondents outlined a number of other challenges outlined their struggle for success in the funding
to peace and reconciliation as illustrated below: application and some described the application as
bureaucratic and off putting. As mentioned
• Social challenges such as demographics (ageing multiple times throughout survey responses,
population and migration), education matters respondents felt that the new PEACE PLUS
(segregation and integration), health matters Programme must add value to other government
(inequalities, chronic illness, mental health and initiatives and not be a substitute for government
intergenerational trauma), segregated housing and funding;
communities, poverty and deprivation, isolation • Shared Facilities - respondents held strong
(rural, social and transport) and security (anti-social views about the need for the continued
behaviours, community relations and safety); development of shared facilities in order to bring
• Dealing with the past and ongoing division, for people from different traditions together in shared
example addressing the legacy of the past, spaces to interact;
prevailing divisions, intergenerational trauma, • Engagement – of hard to reach groups was
unresolved matters (flags, emblems and parades), deemed a key challenge for delivering Peace and
threats from dissidents, rural security issues and Reconciliation. This included hard to reach young
rural segregation (preventing residents from taking people, people from different sides of the
part in the economic and social life of their community, the business community not
community); traditionally engaged in peace activities and those
• Economic challenges for example economic at risk of involvement in paramilitary or criminal
issues caused by the troubles/ conflict, instability activity;
in the region has caused a lack of investment, • Contact hours - e.g. minimum of 26 hours over 3
failure to address economic inactivity and skills – 6 months period as a participant on PEACE
shortages, pressure on departmental and local Programmes was deemed as a barrier. Some
government budgets and its impact on the respondents posed the question of whether the
voluntary and community sector has reduced their Programme could concentrate on meaningful
capacity to deliver PEACE PLUS; individual pieces of work, rather than minimum
• Language and identity challenges such as hours and sustained contact;
disputes over cultural and identity rights at • Partnership working - the requirement for two
institutional and community level and partners on a common theme/issue could present
marginalisation/division in other areas such as difficulties in certain areas. Some respondents
gender, sexual orientation and race. called for more local community organisation led
delivery of projects;
13European Territorial Co-Operation 2021 - 2027
• Sustainability - after the grant funding period • Children and young people - such as engage
expires was a key challenge identified by multiple young people in peace and reconciliation, support
respondents. Respondents identified the need not marginalised and disadvantaged young people,
just for economic sustainability, but the reach out to more generic youth population, give
sustainability of benefits, particularly in young people the tools to manage their own
disadvantaged areas. The loss of technical and mental health, identify and develop young leaders
financial support from the European Union was as role models within their community, encourage
expressed as a concern and many believe that it youth participation and active citizenship and
will create a vacuum resulting in overall loss of promote social economy /enterprise models
impact and momentum in the sustainability of focussed on young people;
interventions; • Education – examples include tackle educational
• Monitoring and evaluation - in its current format under achievement, greater shared education and
was described by several respondents as learning and increase integrated schools;
excessive, onerous and deemed a barrier to • Language, culture and heritage – to understand
participation. It was recommended this was and integrate the culture of new communities,
simplified. Challenges were raised with regard to including refugees, asylum seekers and BAME, to
monitoring and data collection on the basis of use multi-cultural projects to explore, understand,
religious affiliation, especially concerning children respect and celebrate all different identities,
and young people; culture, heritage and language, to focus on cultural
• Brexit - challenge to the implementation of the identity, cultural awareness, cultural expression
programme as a whole due to potential economic and the importance to individual and community
downturn and divergence of priorities North and identity and more joint language initiatives to
South, wider implications on partnerships and highlight the way language could be treated in
challenges protecting and repairing relationships Northern Ireland;
post-Brexit. • Addressing legacy – for example continue to
deliver themes in support of peace and
3.9. Opportunities in relation to Peace reconciliation including building positive relations,
and Reconciliation peace walls, shared spaces and services and to
Respondents were asked to identify the main
ensure communities are provided with the skills
opportunities for greater Peace and Reconciliation
and knowledge so that historical narrative is
(previously addressed under the PEACE Programme.)
maintained accurately, victims’ issues are dealt
A wide range of opportunities were identified and
with sensitively and celebrations and
these are grouped together below under the headings
commemorations are delivered responsibly;
outlined, these are in no particular order of importance:
• Community development – to help areas
• Social opportunities - for example, a more equal become prosperous, healthier and better places to
and inclusive society, equal opportunities for live, work and socialise, for local organisations to
traditional and new minority communities and identify and respond to the needs and strengths of
those with disabilities, better health care and their communities and to empower local
services and improved housing in mixed areas; community groups through social
entrepreneurship;
14European Territorial Co-Operation 2021 - 2027
• Cross-border – opportunities to increase the level
of cross border cooperation to build the political
and socio-economic capital of the border regions,
to increase connectivity and sustainable mobility
North and South to family, employment, business
sector, education, housing and health care and to
develop links between local and regional elected
representatives/local government on both sides of
the border;
• Economic – opportunity to build a more
prosperous and vibrant economy, moving people
out of poverty, increase innovation, support
business start-ups, increase the number of skilled
workers and create a shared future;
• Shared spaces – build on community assets and
establish shared, safe and sustainable spaces and
to utilise the environment as a shared space.
Respondents outlined a number of opportunities for
the delivery of the PEACE PLUS Programme for
obtaining Peace and Reconciliation. These included
the opportunity to build on past achievements, rethink
how the programme is promoted within voluntary and
community sector, stimulate creativity and innovation
in programme development, strike a balance between
statutory and community priorities, meet the needs at
grass roots level and include those hard to reach
groups, derive the benefits of working in partnership
with other stakeholders while avoiding duplication of
services and focus on local community and actions.
15European Territorial Co-Operation 2021 - 2027
4. North/South Economic, Social and Environmental
Development of the Region
4.1. Context • Policy Objective 1: A Smarter Europe
This section of the report focuses on the summary of • Policy Objective 2: A Greener, Lower Carbon Europe
responses in relation to the wider economic, social • Policy Objective 3: A More Connected Europe
and environmental development of the region, as
• Policy Objective 4: A More Social Europe
distinct from peace and reconciliation activities. To
achieve this wider development PEACE PLUS can • Policy Objective 5: A Europe Closer to Its Citizens
select from the five Policy Objectives set out in the
Respondents to the survey were asked to rate the
draft EU regulations.
relevance of each Policy Objective and to explain why
they had given that rating. An overview of the rating
of each Policy Objective is provided in Figure 5 below.
Figure 5. Relevance of Policy Objectives
Relevant
PO1 A Smarter Europe 6.9 6.5 86.7
Irrelevant
Neither Irrelevant / Relevant
PO2 A Greener, Lower
7.8 7.8 84.3
Carbon Europe
PO3 A More
9.3 6.1 84.6
Connected Europe
PO4 A More
3.5 95.3
Social Europe
PO5 A Europe Closer
9.6 5.6 84.8
to It’s Citizens
0 20 40 60 80 100
Percent
Appendix 2 contains the frequency data for each of the responses.
16European Territorial Co-Operation 2021 - 2027
4.2. Policy Objective 1 – A Smarter • People and Community - building skills and
Europe capacity, creating vibrant communities, boost
As shown in Figure 5, 86.7% of respondents stated social development, improved opportunities and
that Policy Objective 1 A Smarter Europe was relevant life chances, reduced poverty and deprivation,
and 59% of this group rated it at the highest possible mitigate against digital exclusion and help keep
level of relevance (grade 7); people in the region;
• 6.5% stated it wasn’t relevant: and • Education and Skills - support for filling STEM
• 6.9% stated it was neither relevant nor irrelevant. skills gaps, reinforcing the need for third level
education, creating opportunities for innovation
Overall, the average rating is 6.0 which and collaboration between universities, research
suggests that respondents rated this centres, businesses and enterprises and to attract
policy objective as considerably relevant. and retain talent;
• Infrastructure - potential to strengthen regional
Actions under this Policy Objective could include:
infrastructure, address sub-standard connectivity
• Measures to boost the innovation capacity of the in rural areas and develop indigenous food, energy
region; and water systems.
• Measures to increase the uptake of advanced To achieve A Smarter Europe, respondents made the
technology; following recommendations for potential projects/
• Actions to improve the growth and initiatives:
competitiveness of the SME sector;
• Improvements to digital services. • Innovation/R&D – continued investment in
Centres of Excellence and research centres and
The relevance of Policy Objective 1 – A Smarter Europe continued innovation in the agriculture industries in
was affirmed with the positive comments of support areas such as carbon footprint, renewable energy,
made by survey respondents. Responses fell into flood control, clean water and biodiversity;
broad themes and are summarised below: • Advanced Technology – including advanced
manufacturing and robotics growth hub, help for
• Economy and employment – potential impacts businesses to diversify, use of Artificial Intelligence
include; to improve economic stability and technology across agriculture and adapting cutting
prosperity, to increase productivity and maximise edge biological and technological knowledge and
future growth. There is potential to increase methods for intensive and sustainable production;
employment, enable a shift to higher value added
• Skills – investment in training for young people
sectors, create smarter and higher paid jobs, to
(including placements and apprenticeships),
create innovative new businesses as well as
upskilling and reskilling generally and skills building,
consolidate existing businesses and to reverse the
entrepreneurship and innovation for rural
decline of SMEs. Investment could drive service
communities;
efficiencies and increase competitiveness. Finally,
investment could mitigate the impact of Brexit and • SMEs – for example, initiatives to assist micro
help industry to react to fast changing global businesses and SMEs to maximise digital
transitions; capability, help for SMEs and micro businesses to
scale and face Brexit challenges, innovation
support projects and business courses for existing
or prospective business owners;
17European Territorial Co-Operation 2021 - 2027
• Digitalisation - connect communities with new Reasons respondents gave in support of selecting
microwave broadband technologies around Policy Objective 2 – A Greener, Lower Carbon Europe
remote coastal regions and a Digital Innovation as relevant are grouped under the headings below and
and Growth Hub; included:
• Collaboration / Partnerships - establish
• Environment – environmental crisis exists today
interregional innovation partnerships in sectors
and needs to be addressed urgently in order to
where the region has demonstrated strengths,
reverse environmental decline, underfunding and
such as big data, bio economy, resource efficiency,
under investment and improve resilience to
connected mobility, Fintech, cyber security and
weather impacts. Decarbonisation, water quality,
advanced manufacturing. Develop partnerships
water and waste management, protecting the
between Councils, private sector and education
natural and built heritage and enhancing
departments to develop a high growth and highly
biodiversity were highlighted. The opportunity for
skilled society, business and academia
development of new skills e.g. retro fitting;
collaborations and help companies to scale
through collaborations. • Economy – environment issues impact economic
development. Opportunity exists to ensure
4.3. Policy Objective 2 – A Greener, sustainable fuel supply, address fuel poverty,
Lower Carbon Europe improve energy efficiency, as well as create jobs
• 84.3% of respondents stated that Policy Objective and improve productivity and competitiveness of
2 A Greener, Lower Carbon Europe was relevant, companies. Problems caused by economic
and 65% of this group rated it at the highest development at the expense of the environment
possible level of relevance (grade 7); are global;
• 7.8% stated it wasn’t relevant; and • People / Community – the environment is a
• 7.8% stated it was neither relevant nor irrelevant. unifying agenda, affecting the quality of life for
current and future generations, is relevant to health
Overall the average rating is 6.0 which and wellbeing, a sustainable future and a
suggests that respondents rated this prosperous society. People/communities are
policy objective as considerably relevant. concerned about the impact of climate change
and better resilience through adaptation to climate
Actions under this Policy Objective could include the change is needed. Natural environment is a
following: neutral space;
• Cross Border Cooperation – enables a more
• Measures to improve energy efficiency;
strategic regional approach and would create a
• Additional renewable energy production capacity;
more sustainable long term legacy.
• Smart grids for improved energy management;
• Actions and project ideas proposed by survey
• Improved disaster monitoring, warning or response respondents for Policy Objective 2 – A Greener,
systems; Lower Carbon Europe were wide ranging and
• Improved water and waste treatment; included:
• Measures to improve biodiversity. • Water and Waste Treatment – water quality
improvement, preservation and monitoring of
water supply, river restoration, improve urban
drainage, build on existing projects (Peace IV),
and empower and educate communities to protect
rivers and lakes;
18European Territorial Co-Operation 2021 - 2027
• Disaster Monitoring, Warning or Response • Rural/agricultural communities - Engage in
Systems - Community Resilience programmes green initiatives with extensive grass areas, forests
that increase capacity to respond to challenges and hedges and care for the environment.
and impact of extreme weather conditions and Innovative actions could be delivered through the
climate related emergencies, reinforce waterways agriculture sector e.g. energy production and
and river banks to protect rural dwellings; storage, biodiversity, water and waste
• Biodiversity – restore key habitats and species management, disaster monitoring and warning
including wetlands, peatlands and woodlands, response systems. Protecting the environment and
biosecurity to prevent invasive non-native species innovation within agriculture will require reskilling,
spread, tree planting for increased carbon storage as well as creating new employment opportunities;
including peace forests, naturalise urban areas • Other project ideas – including develop the
with tree planting, management of carbon circular economy, encourage sustainability across
resource in the marine environment and map and the voluntary and community sector, create a
monitor biodiversity levels; “climate solutions platform” to address challenges
• Renewable / Energy - increase capacity of of energy distribution and encourage SME
renewable energy distribution and storage facilities, innovation.
domestic/commercial energy infrastructure
projects, utilise wind and tidal energy sources,
4.4. Policy Objective 3 – A More
renewable energy management underpinned by
Connected Europe
• 84.6% of respondents stated that Policy Objective
research, burning of waste to produce power and
3 A More Connected Europe was relevant and
SMART grid for EV charging;
49% of this group rated it at the highest possible
• Transport - hydrogen vehicles, low carbon
level of relevance (grade 7);
alternative fuel buses, diversification of HGV fuel
• 6.1% stated it wasn’t relevant; and
sources, carbon neutral air transport, improve
pedestrian areas to improve air quality and support • 9.3% stated it was neither relevant nor irrelevant.
for green and blue infrastructure;
Overall, the average rating is 5.9 which
• Educational Programmes – for example citizen
suggests that respondents rated this
science initiatives, using nature as teaching
policy objective as considerably relevant.
medium, develop a climate action research and
education ‘exosystem’, empowering young people
This Policy Objective focusses on improving transport
e.g. environmental ambassadors programme and
(e.g. cross-border transport infrastructure) and ICT
awareness raising in the areas of climate change,
infrastructure.
biodiversity and recycling;
• Political / Local Authority – examples ranged Respondents to the survey identified a range of reasons
from work at grassroots level to mitigate climate in support of the relevance of this Policy Objective falling
change to Climate Citizens Assemblies and an into three categories as outlined below:
all-Ireland panel on environmental policies and
regional and transnational marine planning; • Cross- Border Connectivity - improvement in
cross border infrastructure is thought to help
attract investment, increase cross-border trade,
increase economic growth and competitiveness.
Connectivity is relevant to mitigate post Brexit
customs and regulatory protocols;
19European Territorial Co-Operation 2021 - 2027
• Transport Connectivity – will result in better • ICT – examples included improve digital
access to services and employment, is vital to connections on North/South basis, investing in
young people’s future, is required to address the digital infrastructure including urban and rural
needs of the growing population living within a 40 broadband, exploring 5G connectivity, especially in
mile commute of the Dublin/Belfast corridor and can rural areas and connect to other planned full fibre
reduce social isolation, tackle disadvantage and networks e.g. Project Kelvin.
exclusion, especially in rural and disadvantaged
areas. Transport connectivity will increase tourism 4.5. Policy Objective 4 – A More Social
and visitors. Local, regional and national Europe
sustainability can be improved with development of • 95.3% of respondents stated that Policy Objective
railways and greenways; 4 A More Social Europe was relevant and of this
group 76% rated it at the highest possible level of
• ICT Connectivity – there is poor ICT infrastructure/
relevance (grade 7);
Connectivity in Rural/Border regions, which is
crucial for those in marginalised communities and • 1.2% stated it wasn’t relevant; and
drives rural urban migration. Connectivity is • 3.5% stated it was neither relevant nor irrelevant.
important for business and quality of life through
connectedness, competition and productivity rates, Overall, the average rating is 6.5 which
enables remote working and has the positive knock- suggests that respondents rated this
on effect of lowering carbon emissions. policy objective as highly relevant.
Respondents identified a range of project ideas and Many of the PEACE activities and interventions for
actions as illustrated below: PEACE PLUS must be set within the context of this
objective. However, this objective can also fund
• Cross- Border Connectivity - improve rail/road activities for the wider economic, social and
between Dublin and Belfast and cross border environmental development of the region. Actions
networks between Drogheda, Dundalk and Newry, that can be funded under the activities include:
improve the Enterprise services with infrastructure,
hourly service and electrification, development of • Actions to improve community and social
railways generally, development of cross border cohesion;
route connecting Dublin to the border counties and • Improving employment opportunities;
strengthen links to South East extending to • Increasing access to quality education (quality and
Rosslare Europort; inclusive);
• Transport – affordable and accessible transport • Reducing marginalisation through improved
projects, community owner transport and housing and services;
improvements to public transport specifically for
• Increasing access to quality health care in the
rural communities. Development of an integrated
region.
transport system linking major towns to their coastal
perimeters and rural hinterland for citizens and Many of the responses received for this Policy
visitors, invest in cycle lanes and parks, walking Objective were reflective of the information provided in
routes and bridges and stimulate active travel. the earlier section of the report (PO4 Peace-building).
Capital investment in greenways and extension of Hence, the supporting information for rating the
waterways was also mentioned. Investment in zero relevance of PO4, recommendations for other
carbon and low carbon transport, electric vehicles activities/actions under this Policy Objective are not
and electrification of rail services; replicated in this section of the report.
20European Territorial Co-Operation 2021 - 2027
Some points are outlined in the section below that The average rating is 5.9 which suggests
were not raised under PO4 Peace-building. that respondents rated this policy
objective as considerably relevant.
Tackling the issues faced by specific groups including
BAME, disabled persons and underprivileged Actions under this Policy Objective could include:
communities was highlighted as relevant to this policy
objective. Gender inequality was also referenced. In • Activities to boost tourism;
terms of increasing employment, the lack of female • Measures to promote cultural heritage;
compared to male entrepreneurs was noted, as was
• Improving community facilities;
gender stereotyping in education (around skills and
• Measures to improve security.
vocations) and the need to attract and retain talent
through a highly skilled STEM workforce was
The relevance of Policy Objective 5 – A Europe Closer
mentioned. The need to address homelessness was
to its Citizens was affirmed with the positive general
also raised as a current issue that is relevant to
comments made by survey respondents. Responses
reducing marginalisation.
fell into broad themes and are summarised below:
Actions identified under PO4 (not previously identified
• People and Community – cultural heritage can
as peace-building activities) included cross-border
help develop mutual understanding, empathy and
links for education e.g. cross-border schools projects.
respectful relations. It can bring people together in
There were some additional actions noted in respect
a positive way and promote peace and cohesion
of increasing access to quality healthcare such as
through working on joint initiatives;
developing resources (digital tools to support health
• Economy and employment – tourism and
and wellbeing and research on the delivery of
hospitality are recent growth areas and are
healthcare through innovative digital technology),
important to economic sustainability, creating new
integrated health hubs and data sharing across the
opportunities especially for young people and job
health and social care sector. Reference was also
creation;
made to collaboration and the organisation of
healthcare. Examples of actions include cross border • Addressing Imbalance – there is a need to invest
health initiatives, cross sectoral collaboration to across all areas including rural, border and coastal
improve health outcomes by addressing root causes, areas.
community based services (for palliative care and
alcohol/drugs services), as well as health interventions To achieve A Europe Closer to its Citizens, respondents
delivered where people live and finally using voluntary made the following recommendations for projects/
and community services to help older people access initiatives:
health care.
• Activities to boost tourism – examples include;
4.6. Policy Objective 5 – A Europe to encourage domestic tourism/cross border
Closer to Its Citizens tourism, sustainable tourism, rural, wildlife and
• 84.8% of respondents stated that Policy Objective coastal tourism, community festivals, arts and
5 A Europe Closer to Its Citizens was relevant and cultural tourism, and niche areas of tourism e.g.
57% of this group rated it at the highest possible food, literacy tourism. Investment in marketing
level of relevance (grade 7); campaigns was also suggested, as well as
investing in larger international events in Northern
• 5.6% stated it wasn’t relevant; and
Ireland, interventions that drive tourism from
• 9.6% stated it was neither relevant nor irrelevant. Ireland to Northern Ireland and greater Irish/
Scottish collaboration on tourism matters. Finally,
21European Territorial Co-Operation 2021 - 2027
exploring employment opportunities for young • Long-term challenges, such as economic
people, the marginalised or those re-entering the inactivity, lack of skills/qualification, lower paid jobs,
workforce in the areas of community heritage and issues of productivity, entrepreneurship, innovation,
tourism; growth and competitiveness. Many of these
• Measures to promote cultural heritage – for challenges were emphasised for cross border areas.
example; development of educational programmes • Social challenges which were wide ranging in
to help understand diversity and different cultures, nature. Examples include; an ageing population,
embedding cultural heritage activities in wider high levels of migration, inadequate skills levels and
programmes, cultural heritage for crafts to bring skills gaps, unemployment and inactivity, health
communities together, language/cultural schools matters such as mental health, alcohol/drug
and cultural exchange programmes; dependency and chronic illness. The social
• Improving community facilities – for example; challenges specific to the border areas such as;
increasing the number of large shared spaces for depopulation generally, young people leaving due to
communities and visitors and ensuring access for lack of opportunity or investment and remote,
all in society, particularly marginalised/emerging marginalised poorly served communities on both
communities, developing attractive, well-resourced sides of the border;
facilities and using public spaces for cultural • Technology/Infrastructure challenges for
activity; instance; the lack of connectivity especially in
• Measures to improve security – including; border regions as illustrated by poor roads and
focussing on improving community relations to broadband infrastructure which impacts future
increase safety and reduce crime and the PSNI development and a lack of public transport
and Garda working in collaboration. infrastructure leading to an overreliance on cars.
There is also concern that technological
4.7. Challenges for the wider economic advancements such as automation and artificial
and territorial development of the intelligence may impact on low skilled workers;
programme area (INTERREG • Environmental challenges which were broad
Programme) ranging in nature and included; addressing the
Respondents to the survey were asked to identify the threats of climate change such as rising sea levels,
main challenges and opportunities for the wider floods, adapting to climate change in every aspect
economic and territorial development of the of life and transition to low carbon economy
programme area (previously addressed under the including delivering carbon-neutrality within the
INTERREG programme). agricultural sector. Water quality, pollution, waste
and biodiversity were mentioned, as well as the
Outlined below are the challenges identified by
energy sector and its management.
respondents and there is some similarity to the
challenges previously identified for greater peace and Finally, respondents identified a number of programme
reconciliation: delivery challenges including Brexit and its impact due
to potential economic downturn and the divergence of
• The political, legislative and economic
priorities North and South, the potential use of PEACE
challenges of Brexit were highlighted, particularly
PLUS funds to fill gaps in existing government budgets
the uncertainty that exists about its potential
North and South, the interoperability of data North and
impact across business and trade generally, the
South, barriers to participants to access programmes
environment, tourism and labour markets;
and the simplification of application and administrative
procedures.
22You can also read
