Structural funds and the evaluation of community economic development initiatives in the UK: A critical perspective

Abstract

Armstrong H. and Wells P. (2006) Structural Funds and the evaluation of community economic development initiatives in the UK: a critical perspective, Regional Studies 40, 259–272. Since their inception within UK Structural Funds programmes in the 1990s, community economic development (CED) initiatives have experienced a rapid expansion. Evaluation methods have struggled to adapt to what was a radically new type of policy. This paper charts the rise of CED in the UK's Objective 1 and 2 programmes, and it examines the main problems posed by CED for Structural Funds monitoring and evaluation. Whilst progress in adapting the monitoring and evaluation methods to CED has been good, a number of key challenges remain to be faced by the eventual ex-post evaluations of the 2000–06 programmes and for the 2007–13 programming period. The key challenges are identified and possible ways forward are discussed.

Community economic development  Structural Funds  Evaluation  UK programmes

Armstrong H. et Wells P. (2006) Les Fonds structurels et l'évaluation des initiatives visant le développement économique des communautés au RU: une critique, Regional Studies 40, 259–272. Depuis leurs débuts comme partie intégrante des programmes financés par les Fonds structurels au Royaume-Uni dans les années 1990, les initiatives visant le développement économique des communautés (DEC) ont connu une forte progression. Les méthodes d'évaluation n'ont guère réussi à s'adapter à ce qui a été en effet un genre de politique radicalement différent. Cet article cherche à tracer l'essor du DEC pour les programmes Objectif 1 et Objectif 2 au Royaume-Uni, et examine les principaux problèmes que pose le DEC pour ce qui est du suivi et de l'évaluation des Fonds structurels. Tandis que l'on a fait des progrès quant à l'adaptation des méthodes de suivi et d'évaluation au DEC, il reste un nombre de défis clés auxquels devront à terme faire face les évaluations ex-post des programmes 2000–06 et les programmes prévus pour la période 2007–13. Les défis clés sont identifiés et leur avenir discuté.

Développement économique des communautés  Fonds structurels  Evaluation  Programmes au Royaume-Uni

Armstrong H. und Wells P. (2006) Strukturfondsevaluierung der lokalen Wirtschaftsentwicklungsinitiativen in Großbritannien: eine kritische Perspektive, Regional Studies 40, 259–272. Seit ihrer Bereitstellung im Rahmen der britischen Strukturfondsprogramme in den neunziger Jahren haben lokale Wirtschaftsentwicklungsinitiativen (Community Economic Development – CED) sich rapide vermehrt. Evaluierungsmethoden haben sich um Anpassung an das bemüht, was sich als ein ganz und gar neuer Policy-Typ erwies. Dieser Aufsatz erfasst den Anstieg von CED in den britischen Ziel 1 und 2 Programmen, und untersucht die Hauptprobleme, die sich aus CED für Monitoring and Evaluierung von Strukturfonds ergeben. Obschon gute Fortschritte bei der Anpassung von Monitoring- und Evaluierungsmethoden der CED zu verzeichnen waren, sehen die anstehenden Ex-post-Evaluierungen der von 2000–06 laufenden und der für den Zeitraum 2007–13 aufzustellenden Programme sich weiterhin einer Anzahl wichtiger Herausforderungen gegenüber. Die Hauptherausforderungen werden identifiziert und möglicherweise einzuschlagende Wege besprochen.

Lokale Wirtschaftsentwicklung  Strukturfonds  Evaluierung  Programme in GB

Armstrong H. y Wells P. (2006) Los Fondos Estructurales y la evaluación de las iniciativas del Desarrollo Económico Comunitario en el Reino Unido: una perspectiva crítica, Regional Studies 40, 259–272. Las iniciativas del Desarrollo Económico Comunitario (CED) han experimentado una rápida expansión desde que en los noventa fueron integrados en los programas de Fondos Estructurales del Reino Unido. Los métodos de evaluación no lo han tenido nada fácil para adaptarse a lo que iba a ser un tipo de política radicalmente nueva. En este documento presentamos el aumento del CED en los programas británicos para los objetivos 1 y 2 y examinamos cuáles son los principales problemas planteados por el CED en lo que concierne el seguimiento y evaluación de los Fondos Estructurales. Aunque se ha logrado en cierto modo adaptar los métodos de seguimiento y evaluación para el CED, aún hay que dar respuestas a varios retos importantes en lo que respecta a las evaluaciones eventuales ex-post de los programas de 2000–06 y para el periodo de programación de 2007–13. Aquí identificamos los desafíos clave y argumentamos las posibles soluciones.

Desarrollo económico comunitario  Fondos Estructurales  Evaluación  Programas británicos

Acknowledgements

The paper draws on the results of an ESRC project, ‘The Changing Role of the Third Sector in the Governance of Regional Policy’ (ESRC Project No. R000223297), together with three successive evaluations of the Structural Funds programmes in Yorkshire and the Humber in which the authors have participated. The authors thank the journal editors and two anonymous referees for constructive and helpful comments. All remaining errors and misunderstandings are, of course, the responsibility of the authors.

Notes

1. CED is by no means confined solely to the UK Structural Funds programmes, and similar policies are now also to be found in virtually all Continental programmes. CED was, however, initially introduced within the UK's Structural Funds programmes, and most UK regions continue to have better developed and more generously funded CED priorities than their Continental counterparts. This is a reflection partly of the initial intellectual and academic impetus for CED generated in the UK, and partly because of the distinctive nature of social and economic exclusion in the UK. The UK has been distinctive within the EU in the 1990s and early 2000s in having adopted strongly flexible labour market policies and moving quickly from welfare to workfare policies, which have resulted in unusually extensive social exclusion problem areas at which CED policies are targeted.

2. The Tavistock Institute's Guide was produced at the instigation of the European Commission. It both updated and replaced an earlier series of ‘best practice’ evaluation manuals recommended to evaluators by the Commission (the MEANS Guide; European Commission, 1999). In practice, evaluators are not bound by these manuals, and considerable variation exists across the EU in both the manner and sophistication of the evaluation methods adopted. Nevertheless, the fact that these manuals were commissioned by the EU and are made available via the website of DG REGIO gives them an enormous influence on evaluation practice.

3. ‘Deadweight’ refers to changes (e.g. increases in employment) that would have occurred anyway, irrespective of the Structural Funds assistance. ‘Displacement’ refers to the phenomenon where the creation of economic activity by a Structural Funds project is at the cost of economic activity dislodged elsewhere (usually via increased competition).