ACTIVITY OF MOUNTAINOUS REGIONS GMINA SELF-GOVERNMENTS TO OBTAIN EU FUNDS

Transcription

1 PROBLEMY ZAGOSPODAROWANIA ZIEM GÓRSKICH Zeszyt 56 PAN, Komitet Zagospodarowania Ziem Górskich 2009 PL ISSN TERESA MIŚ ACTIVITY OF MOUNTAINOUS REGIONS GMINA SELF-GOVERNMENTS TO OBTAIN EU FUNDS The paper evaluates activity of local governments in the field of obtaining financial support from available EU funds as well as significance of such support in dynamism of changes leading to improvement of spatial, economic and social integrity in mountainous regions. It has been found that local conditions and specificity of mountainous areas result in various degree of activity intensity in terms of taking advantage of the possibility to apply for EU funds. Local government officials of most administrative units (gminas) under research attempt to receive support from EU among others to improve and develop technical and social infrastructure and to protect environment, as well as to promote gminas in order to attract tourists attention at the same time improving local population s well being. EU funds influence greatly the process of dynamism of changes leading to improvement of spatial, economic and social integrity, confirmation and at the same time a very good example of which are mountainous gminas activities which created Local Activity Groups and which realize the Rural Regeneration Program and LEADER. Key words: local governments (gminas), mountainous areas, EU funds. Słowa kluczowe: samorządy gmin, obszary górzyste, fundusze UE. I. INTRODUCTION In EU there exists the longstanding (at the moment of 7-year duration) development planning connected inter alia with common means use such as structural funds. Among the rules of structural funds management, there is the rule of programming realized by national authorities in co-ordination with EU organs. Supplementation is also a rule of structural funds use means of such funds can only supplement and not replace national means to finance undertakings (Lissowska 2008). Polish admission to EU is a golden opportunity for Polish local governments since they can participate in such a big financial help for investments. The support means much more extensive development for which there has not been enough funds so far. First experience with Integrated Regional Operational Program (Pl. ZPORR) showed great interest of beneficiaries with financial support (Przybysz 2007). Local governments undertake a lot of activities influencing population s level of life and thanks to a lot of investments in the field of technical and social infrastructure

2 108 Teresa Miś they can also affect promotion of their gminas and draw attention of outside investors. Therefore, the paper evaluates local governments use of financial support from available EU funds as well as significance of such support in dynamism of changes leading to improvement of spatial, economic and social integrity in mountainous regions. The spatial range of research includes mountainous gminas located in three voivodships: małopolskie, podkarpackie and śląskie. The research poll was conducted in 94 local governments including 44 mountainous gminas and 50 gminas with specific handicaps (in accordance with regulation of Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development of 11 April 2007). Some gminas refused to participate in the research that is why the research includes data from 89 local governments. II. CHALLENGES OF MOUNTAINOUS LOCAL GOVERNMENTS IN TERMS OF EU FUNDS USE EU funds should be used by primarily local governments which as a part of their activity want or have to realize planned projects in order to be competitive on the EU market. In local governments, as beneficiaries, could apply for financial support available in various programs including i.a. Integrated Regional Operational Program for new investments such as: 1.1. Modernization and development of regional transportation network, 1.2 Environment protection infrastructure, 1.3 Regional social infrastructure, 1.4 Development of tourism and culture, 1.5 Information society infrastructure, 1.6 Public transport development in agglomerations, 3.1 Rural areas, 3.2 Areas meant for restructuring, 3.3 Degraded urban and industrial sites as well as former military sites, 3.5 Local social infrastructure. Financial support agreements were made under all the programs and EU Initiatives until November 2008 and the total EU contribution amounted to PLN, which makes about 102,8% of allocations for Since the beginning of the programs implementation, the total payments for beneficiaries reached over PLN, which makes almost 91% of available funds. Mountainous gminas located in rural areas were quite active in applying for EU financial support available within the Integrated Regional Operational Program (Pl. ZPORR) in (chart 1). Among 94 gminas under research, there were 52.1% of gminas which obtained financial support available within the Integrated Regional Operational Program (Pl. ZPORR). Considering the share of the areas under research in IROP funds absorption in , three analyzed voivodhips reached 4.5%. The most financial support under IROP was obtained by mountainous gminas located in śląskie voivodship. Realization of projects of region development, road construction, gas and waste networks etc. must be justified for horizontal purposes, however, projects for small local rural societies shall be more flexible. The catalogue of acceptable beneficiaries and acknowledged (qualified) expenses is clearly specified. Such traditional approach to structural funds practically prevents or limits own initiatives. And in rural areas

3 Activity of mountainous regions gmina self-governments to obtain EU funds 109 development can be achieved by way of programs reflecting local needs and involving rural areas population. Such programs as: LEADER approach and Rural Area Revitalization (Kamiński 2008). In Europe, plans of rural areas revitalization of great significance, understood as complex and detailed establishment of functions and methods of management result in high quality projects as well as complex area revitalization. The huge gap of civilization development and weakness of intraregional policy of voivodship governments towards rural areas make the shape of rural areas revitalization programs look like the one at the beginning of such processes in western Europe. Only three voivodships have their own regional programs of rural areas revitalization: opolskie (1997), pomorskie (2001) and śląskie (2002). In śląskie voivodship it was the Śląski Związek Gmin i Powiatów that undertook the initiative of rural areas revitalization promotion, and until the first half of 2002 it introduced the pilot project concerning 10 villages, and in 2004 another 40 soletsvos joined the project. In 2006 Seymik of the voivodship passed the realization of Śląsk Rural Area Revitalization Program for the years , another 40 soletsvos could join the project, and a grant program Competition of Rural Area Revitalization Undertaking financed by the voivodship was launched. In 2007 about 140 projects worth PLN were co-financed. Similar amount was scheduled for In the period , EU support meant to revitalize rural areas amounted to about 8 PLN for one inhabitant a year; in it will be about 29 PLN a year, which is far too little considering the needs. Average project co-financing making maximum 80% of its value amounted to PLN, projects in opolskie and pomorskie voivodships had the lowest average value ( PLN and PLN respectively), where the pressure stimulated by rural area revitalization programs to gain the support was the biggest. Substantially, the biggest number of projects was realized in the field of repair of sports fields and day-rooms, which shows the local communities degree of elementary needs dissatisfaction (Wilczyński 2008). The LEADER approach was introduced in Poland long before the accession already in the mid 90 s. The first attempts concentrated mainly on building local partnership involving various parties (e.g. in Strug Valley podkarpackie voivodship), however, the possibility to finance projects by partnership appeared later on, among others within partnerships that came into being with the support of Polish Environmental Partnership Foundation such as Zielone Bieszczady (The Green Bieszczady), Naszyjnik Północy (The North Necklace) or Krzemienny Krąg (The Firestone Ring). The rural areas pressure (including Polish Rural Forum) caused that in 2002 it became possible to use some of the SOP means for agriculture and rural areas development for activities of LEADER type. Therefore, activity 2.7 Pilot Program LEADER+ appeared in Polish rural SOP for Until the end of 2007, there were 324 applications for the payment of PLN, which means 40% of contracted means use. In Poland, in mountainous regions, there are three Local Activity Groups in Sub-Tatrian region operating within the Leader+ program. One of them is Stowarzyszenie Rozwoju Orawy (Orawa Development Association) with the program: Actions in

4 110 Teresa Miś favour of Orawa development. The other one is Stowarzyszenie Rozwoju Spisza i Okolicy (Spisz and Surroundings Development Association) with the program: With Spisz at large. And finally, Podhalańska Lokalna Grupa Działania (Tatra Local Activity Group) embraces a substantial part of Tatra region including gminas: Biały Dunajec, Poronin, Kościelisko and Czarny Dunajec with the program: Keep the heritage promote initiative. The main activity directions until 2013 within the LEADER program of the Tatra Local Activity Group are: Revaluation of precious natural and environmental heritage as well as cultural resources in the region of the Group, improvement of the quality of life, development of service, recreational, sports facilities to develop tourism, creation and development of micro-companies etc. Moreover, at the beginning of 2009, the head shepherds in the Małopolski Region signed the European Charter for Mountain Quality Food Products, which proves their activity and care for promotion and methods of food production in mountainous regions, and which certainly, in the times of special care for food safety, will encourage possible tourists to spend their free time in the mountains. All in all, new possibilities of socio-economic development of mountainous regions arose thanks to the LEADER program and local governments activities. Still, the main problems of mountainous regions are local governments low own incomes, environment and nature protection, mainly prevention of illegal dumping sites, improvement of traffic, social infrastructure, promotion of culture and tourism, improvement of the quality of living of people inhabiting rural areas. Creating conditions preventing rural areas depopulation means balanced development of mountainous regions. For the period , within the Rural Development Program (Pl. PROW), there are euro scheduled of which over euro will come from EU budget (of European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development), and about euro will be national funds. The PROW priorities are: 1. (economical): improvement of competitiveness of rural and forest sector, 2. (environmental): improvement of natural environment and rural areas, 3. (social): quality of life in rural areas and differentiation of rural economy, 4. Leader. Within the 1 axis, local governments can apply for financing such activities as: Integration of land property, to improve area structure of farms (Poviat Starost as an organ in charge of integration can be beneficiary). Moreover, local governments can apply within the axis 3 including such activities as: Basic services for rural economy and population, to improve basic services in rural areas including elements of technical infrastructure conditioning the socio-economic development, to improve living conditions and conditions of running a business. The scope of aid concerns realization of projects in the field of: water-waste management especially water supply, waste discharge and purification, including network and individual sewage systems, building the system of urban waste collection, segregation and disposal, building or distribution of renewable energy sources especially wind, water, geothermal water, sun, biogas or biomass. Gmina or organizational unit, for which the unit of local government is the organizer performing duties specified in the scope of support, can become the beneficiary. The maximum

5 Activity of mountainous regions gmina self-governments to obtain EU funds 111 amount of support scheduled to realize projects in one gmina in the period of Program realization cannot exceed: PLN for projects in the field of waste-water management, PLN for projects in the field of building the system of urban waste collection, segregation and disposal, PLN for projects in the field of building or distribution of renewable energy sources. Next very important action for local governments within the axis 3 is Rural areas revitalization and development whose aim is to: improve the quality of life in rural areas, promotion of rural areas, saving cultural heritage, development of rural society identity, increase of rural areas tourist and investment attractiveness. Gmina, cultural institution for which the organizer is a unit of local government, church or other religious association, non-governmental non-profit organization. The maximum amount of support scheduled to realize projects in one town amounts to PLN in the period of Program realization. The amount of support given to realize one project cannot be lower than PLN. According to Musiał (2008), for mountainous regions, apart from axis 3, axis 4: LEADER can also be important because it emphasizes building of social capital through inhabitant involvement and helps creating new workplaces. The instruments that are used to develop rural areas within the operational programs of the coherence policy are: Operational Program Infrastructure and Environment (Priority axis I: water-waste management, Axis II: Waste management and land surface protection, Axis IX: Environment-friendly electricity infrastructure and electricity productivity, Axis VI: TEN-T road network and air traffic management network, Axis VII: Environment-friendly transportation, Axis VIII: Transportation safety and national transportation networks, Axis XII: Improvement of patients safety and health care system), Operational Program Innovative Economy (Priority Axis VIII: IT society, increasing economy innovativeness, broadband Internet access for citizens, etc.), Operational Program Development of Eastern Poland (Priority Axis II: Information society infrastructure, Axis IV: Transport infrastructure). Regional Operational Programs (Pl.: RPO) are especially important in development of rural areas within the coherence policy. The scope of its support for rural areas development includes: development and improvement of local and regional infrastructure, enterprise development and increase of rural areas investment attractiveness, improvement of quality and access of public services in rural areas, investments in human resources and equalization of educational chances for rural areas inhabitants, infrastructure development for the sake of information society. Until the mid November 2008, within 16 Regional Operational Programs, there were announced total 128 competitions whose leading fields of financial support were meant to support small and medium companies (Pl.: MSP), road infrastructure, environmental protection and tourism. There were 4261 applications of a total worth of about PLN and there were 290 contracts worth over PLN signed with beneficiaries. The biggest number of contracts was signed in małopolskie voivodhip (67 contracts of PLN worth). As far as the value is concerned, the leader is Śląsk where 12 contracts were signed of PLN worth.

6 112 Teresa Miś According to the sums declared by particular regions, in 2009, the value of qualified expenses certified by EC within 16 Regional Operational Programs will amount to over PLN. III. USE OF EU FUNDS IN MOUNTAINOUS REGIONS IN EMPIRICAL RESEARCH Local governments of gminas from such voivodships as: podkarpackie, małopolskie and śląskie were quite active in applying for EU support. The question if in the years local governments used EU and national financial support was positively Table 1 Tabela 1 Use of financial support available within the Integrated Regional Operational Program in regionally (in ml. PLN) Korzystanie przez badane gminy górskie ze środków finansowych dostępnych w ramach Zintegrowanego Programu Operacyjnego Rozwoju Regionalnego (ZPORR) w latach w ujęciu regionalnym (w mln zł) No. Nr Specification Wyszczególnienie Number of gminas Liczba gmin Value of financial support Wartość środków finansowych Contribution Wkład własny Value of financial support per 1000 inhabitants in voivodship (in PLN) Wartość środków na 1000 ludności w województwie (w zł) Total Ogółem Voivodships under research Badane województwa małopolskie podkarpackie śląskie Source: own case study on the basis of Źródło: opracowanie własne na podstawie answered by 79 governments, i.e. 88.8% of gminas under research including 90.7% in Małopolska, 82.3% in Podkarpacie and 93.3% in Śląsk voivodship. The question if While applying for EU support, governments were helped by other institutions?, was positively answered by 61 gminas, which makes 68.5% of the total number of governments under research. The scope of help was mainly to make feasibility study which is difficult while applying for EU financial support (over 80% of governments under research) and to write the application form every tenth government with no significant differences between particular voivodships. Gminas government pointed mainly to private companies help (in connection with feasibility study) and to Agricultural Counseling Centers. As gminas governments state, the most important source of information on available EU funds were the Internet and Marshal s Office (Fig. 1). Employees of Agricultural Counseling Center, the Agency for Restructuring and

7 Activity of mountainous regions gmina self-governments to obtain EU funds 113 Source: own case study Źródło: badania własne Fig. 1. Sources of information on EU funds according to local governments authorities (in %) Ryc. 1. Źródła informacji o funduszach UE w opinii samorządów gmin w ujęciu regionalnym (w %) * respondents could choose more than one answer respondenci mogli wybrać więcej niż jedną odpowiedź Modernisation of Agriculture (ARMA) and professional press were important source of information for the Podkarpacie region. According to Musiał s research (2008), within the framework of mountainous regions support, a large institutional simplifications which make activities easier but are wrongly addressed and have a narrow scope of support. Modifications that were suggested are a kind of menu of ideas which need to be substantially elaborated. Decentralization of funds management enables better adjustment of support to particular mountain ranges and their natural and production specificity. There are a lot of possibilities of justified substantial support of deficit mountainous regions in Poland. The research includes reasons of refusal of EU financial support despite application (Fig. 2). According to local governors, among most important reasons are: exhaustion of funds within particular action and lack of compliance with required criteria

8 114 Teresa Miś Source: research poll Źródło: badania własne Fig. 2. Reasons of refusal of EU financial support (in %) Ryc. 2. Przyczyny nieotrzymania wsparcia finansowego przy ubieganiu się o wsparcie (w %) including incomplete documentation as pointed only by Małopolska region governments. Other reasons of not receiving EU support were lack of own funds, qualification criteria, necessity of making feasibility study and economic analyses as well as high costs of their implementation, not enough time to apply, substantial defects of applications, lack of building permits. Having analyzed the reasons of not taking advantage of EU support in the years , one can say that, according to local governors, the most important are too complicated procedures connected with applying and gathering appropriate documents (48% of all gminas under research) and lack of own financial means indispensable while applying for financial support for new investments in a gmina as indicated by 40% of all gminas under research, with no differences within regions. Lack of involvement of gmina office employees was also mentioned, which obviously is the result of too complicated procedures in the process of applying and making annexes. None of local governments being researched did not mention lack of information on funds and lack of offers from institutional environment as a main reason of not taking advantage of EU funds, which can prove adequate involvement of various institutions which transfer information on available EU funds and the possibility of their maximum use. Governments of mountainous regions mentioned mainly too little pool of financial means to prepare annexes to applications, little range of investments and exhaustion of funds as other reasons of not applying for EU support.

9 Activity of mountainous regions gmina self-governments to obtain EU funds 115 Source: research poll Źródło: badania własne Fig. 3. Proportion of local government under research declaring the use of financial support available within the Rural Development Program in Ryc. 3. Odsetek badanych gmin deklarujących zamiar korzystania ze środków finansowych dostępnych w ramach PROW na lata w ujęciu regionalnym New financial opportunity accepted for EU for is a great chance and challenge, especially for regions situated in difficult mountainous conditions. It seems to be an important issue to examine if in the following years local governments of gminas situated in handicapped mountainous regions will take advantage of structural funds allowed for Therefore, the research poll conducted among local governments of gminas situated in three voivodships included the following question: Are gmina authorities going to use EU funds in ? the positive answer was given by 83 gminas, which makes 93% of all under research including 94,3% of gminas in Małopolska, 87% in Podkarpacie and 100% in Śląskie voivodship. The research results suggest that in the nearest future the biggest number, over 55% of gminas under research, declare taking advantage of actions included within the Axis 3 of the Program for Development of Rural Areas for (Fig. 3). Governments wish to use the received within Axis 3 funds mainly to build recreational complexes, playgrounds for children, pavements, lighting and parking lots, tourism promotion. Every second gmina government pointed the willingness to use the money available

10 116 Teresa Miś within Axis 4, i.e. Leader program, inter alia in order to build regional museum, culture promotion, improvement of village aesthetics, building bicycle paths, etc. A kind of revival can be observed among Podkarpacie local governments which in the nearest future declare actions in the field of Revitalization and Development of Rural Areas and within LEADER approach. It shall be reminded here that Małopolska and Śląsk were involved in such actions already in , as mentioned before. Regional Operational Programs (Pl.: RPO) are meant mainly to support projects of regional character. Data included in projects of 16 regional operational programs shows that to realize them in the amount of about euro was scheduled from European Fund of Regional Development (Pl.: EFRR). It shall be kept in mind that every axis included in particular 16 regional operational programs has several various actions stipulated with regard to specificity of a given region and the condition to be successful is for local authorities to act quickly and purposefully. 72 local governments of mountainous gminas, which makes 80.9%, are going to apply for available funds within particular regional operational programs in , every third government declares use of Human Resources Operational Program and Infrastructure and Environment Operational Program (respectively: 32.6 and 29.2% of total number of gminas), and 6.7% of gminas want to take advantage of Innovative Economy Operational Program. Considerable big involvement of mountainous gminas especially in activities connected with specificity of mountainous areas can be seen, i.e. tourism development and culture promotion and development as well as obtaining funds for traffic and social infrastructure and environmental protection. Another very important issue that the governments were asked about was: Is the Government going to seek aid from outside institutions in the process of application for EU financial support in ? Almost 2/3 of respondents stated that they would seek help because the process of application and preparing annexes is too much time-consuming, which was given as the main reason (86.2% of the total number of gminas under research) and because of lack of qualified gmina employees, which was indicated by every fourth government. Moreover, results of the research poll show positive aspect connected with declared by gmina governments use of gmina specificity in socio-economic development. Almost 63% of all gminas under research are going to support tradition of social co-operation within LEADER program. It shall be mentioned that mountainous gminas are already experienced in such matter, among others: Biały Dunajec, Poronin, Kościelisko and Czarny Dunajec, which created Tatra Local Activity Group. It seems to be very profitable for the gminas under research to co-operate with other gminas as indicated by 46.1% of all gminas. Mountainous gminas of often low own incomes and few inhabitants (e.g. Cisna which in cannot get EU financial support for waste system because of too few inhabitants) co-operating with other gminas have bigger chance to realize investments and to obtain financial help from EU. The new financial opportunity accepted for EU in is a great opportunity and challenge especially for regions situated in difficult mountainous conditions.

11 Activity of mountainous regions gmina self-governments to obtain EU funds 117 IV. CONCLUSIONS Local conditions and specificity of mountainous regions result in various degree of activity intensity in the field of applying for EU funds. Local governments of most mountainous gminas under research attempt to obtain support from EU, inter alia to improve and develop technical and social infrastructure and environmental protection, as well as gmina promotion in order to attract attention of the most possible number of tourists thus to improve domestic conditions of local population. A very big involvement of local governments is necessary to realize structural funds of EU and this way it is possible to invest in gmina socio-economic development, especially in gminas situated in difficult mountainous conditions. Present data show that mountainous gminas governments are able to use the outside sources to finance investments. Over 2/3 of gmina local self-governments under research took advantage of UE and national funds available in , whereas more than 93% of total self-governments declare the willingness to apply for UE funds in a new financial perspective for EU in the period EU funds greatly influence dynamism of changes leading to improvement of economic, spatial and social integrity, confirmation and at the same time a very good example of which are mountainous gminas activities which created Tatra Local Activity Group within LEADER program and gminas which realize the Śląsk Rural Regeneration Program. Activities within axes 3 and 4 of Rural Areas Revitalization Program are a great opportunity for mountainous gminas which can realize strategic issues connected with programming document of EU. Let us hope that in the future gminas located in mountainous regions will be able to use EU funds more successfully. Faculty of Economics University of Rzeszów Reviewer: dr hab. Wiesław Musiał, prof. UR REFERENCES Lissowska M., 2008, Instytucjonalne ramy polityki gospodarczej [w:] Polityka gospodarcza. Teoria i realia. Janusz Stecewicz (red.), SGH, Warszawa, Kamiński R., 2008, Samoorganizacja i samorządność wsi potrzeby, możliwości, formy realizacji [w:] M. Kłodziński (red.), Wyzwania przed obszarami wiejskimi i rolnictwem w perspektywie lat , IRWiR PAN, Warszawa, Musiał W., 2008, Ekonomiczne i społeczne problemy rozwoju obszarów wiejskich Karpat Polskich, IRWiR PAN, Warszawa. Przybysz P., 2007, Ryzyko przy aplikowaniu o fundusze pomocowe Unii Europejskiej jako miara przygotowania samorządów do ich absorpcji. Samorząd Terytorialny 1 2 ( ), Wilczyński R., 2008, Programy odnowy wsi w Polsce [w:] Polska wieś Raport o stanie wsi, pod red. J. Wiklina, I. Nurzyńskiej, FDPA, Warszawa,

12 118 Teresa Miś TERESA MIŚ AKTYWNOŚĆ SAMORZĄDÓW GMIN W POZYSKIWANIU FUNDUSZY UNII EUROPEJSKIEJ W OBSZARACH GÓRZYSTYCH Streszczenie W opracowaniu poddano ocenie aktywność samorządów gmin w zakresie pozyskiwania wsparcia finansowego z dostępnych funduszy UE, a także znaczenie środków finansowych UE w dynamizowaniu zmian prowadzących do poprawy spójności przestrzennej, ekonomicznej i społecznej w regionie górskim. Stwierdzono, że lokalne uwarunkowania i specyfika obszarów górskich skutkuje różnym stopniem intensywności działania w zakresie wykorzystania możliwości ubiegania się o fundusze UE. Samorządowcy większości badanych gmin górskich starają się pozyskiwać środki pomocowe z UE, między innymi na poprawę i rozwój infrastruktury technicznej, społecznej i ochronę środowiska, a także promocję gmin w celu przyciągnięcia jak największej liczby turystów, a tym samym poprawę warunków bytowych dla miejscowej ludności. Fundusze UE wywierają duży wpływ na dynamizowanie zmian prowadzących do poprawy spójności ekonomicznej, przestrzennej i społecznej, czego potwierdzeniem i zarazem bardzo dobrym przykładem jest aktywność gmin górskich, które utworzyły Lokalne Grupy Działania i realizują Programy Odnowy Wsi oraz LEADER. Wydział Ekonomii Uniwersytetu Rzeszowskiego