Search

90% of state aid to industry and services was earmarked for horizontal objectives of common interest, i.e. aid that is not granted to specific sectors of the economy (most notably aid measures for regional development, research, and environmental protection)

In 2011, regional development was the horizontal objective to which most resources were directed (26% of total aid to industry and services), followed by the environment (23%) and research, development and innovation (19%). SMEs, employment, training, risk capital, and other, received the least funds.

In principle, the Cohesion Fund is designed for member States with a GNI per capita of less than 90% of the Community's average. Under the current programme, the following countries are eligible to receive funds: Bulgaria, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Greece, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia. Projects in this context must be related to the improvement of trans-European transport networks or environmental protection

Since the onset of the global economic and financial crisis in 2008, the EC has issued a number of guidelines geared at disciplining member States' assistance measures to firms in difficulty. These measures were rolled out through two different subcomponents: two schemes for subsidized interest rate loans to produce green products, in Germany and France.

Public procurement policy in the EU aims to achieve the best value for money through open, transparent and non-discriminatory procedures, consistent with the underlying objectives of the internal market. The Directives also mention other aspects such as social, innovation, and environmental considerations that can be incorporated into technical specifications, selection and award criteria, as well as contract-performance clauses. Contracting authorities may lay down specific environmental conditions relating to the performance of the contract and may ask for evidence of environmental management measuresWhile the Green Public Procurement policy is voluntary, the European Court of Justice case law has shown that "it is acceptable to make use of environmental/ ecological award criteria, even if the criterion in question doesn't provide an immediate economic benefit for the contracting authority."

In 2007, the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) was replaced by two separate funds: the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) that covers Pillar II which includes measures aimed at addressing challenges faced by the EU's rural areas, such as assistance to less-favoured areas, investment aids for agriculture and forestry, and payments under some environmental programmes.

Under Article 69 of Council Regulation (EC) No. 73/2009 each member State may reserve up to 10% of the total amount available for direct payments to fund support for quality, marketing, environment, or risk management, or to assist farmers in disadvantaged areas, or types of farming in the dairy, rice, bovine meat, or sheep meat and goat meat sectors. Under the same provision, the amount of coupled aid provided under specific support is limited to 3.5% of the national envelope for direct aid.

The legal framework for each member State's rural development policy, which includes the policy measures they can take, was established in 2005 for the period 2007 to 2013. Rural-development policy is based on three "thematic axes": improving competitiveness; improving the environment ; and encouraging diversification and improving the quality of life in rural areas. In addition, some of the funding should be used to support "Leader" community projects which are projects run by local organizations to address specific local problems. All national strategy plans had been agreed by end-2008 with funding from national sources (average 40%) and the EAFRD. The total value of payments in 2011 on rural development from the EU budget was €11.5 billion, most of which was under the EAFRD. EU budgetary spending on agri- environmental measures, which are part of rural development, increased under the 2007-13 strategy (after a relatively slow start in 2007) and reached €3 billion in 2010 with an additional €2 billion from member States' budgets.

Support in the fruit and vegetables sector is structured through Producer Organizations, which may set up a fund to finance operational programmes approved by member States. The member States are required to establish national strategies, which define the objectives of the programmes (based on a list of objectives defined by the EU regime for fruit and vegetables) and the nature of the actions that are eligible for support under these programmes. Recognition of a producer organization is based on a number of factors including: that membership is voluntary; that the organization contributes towards the aims of the EU regime for fruit and vegetables; and based on evidence of its ability to provide services to its members. Among the eligible actions that producer organizations may choose to implement under operational programmes are: crisis prevention and management measures such as market withdrawal (where products are withdrawn from the market); non-harvesting (where no commercial produce is taken); and green harvesting (total harvesting of non-marketable products before normal harvesting). Crisis prevention and management also include promotion and communication, training, harvest insurance, and support for the administrative cost of setting up mutual funds. In addition, they may also implement measures related to planning of production, improvement and maintenance of product quality, marketing and promotion, training and environmental actions. Producer organizations' operational funds are 50% financed from the EU budget (in some cases 60%). In 2011, the EU provided a total of over €1 billion in support of the fruit and vegetables sector, including €786 million for operational funds for producer organizations and €195 million for assistance to producer groups for preliminary recognition as producer organizations.

The EU has exclusive competence for the conservation of marine biological resources under the Common Fisheries Policy and for negotiating agreements with other countries and international organizations. For other fishery matters, competence is shared between the EU and the member States. The member States are responsible for implementation of EU rules and have competence for registration of vessels and other matters related to the jurisdiction of vessels. In matters other than the conservation of marine biological resources, competence is shared between the EU and member States.