'Cohesion policy good and bad practices\r'

'Introduction: Lithuania (along with the otherwise Baltics) is the success story of EIJ structural fund assiduity. Bulgaria (along with Romania) is the pip performer. Lithuania has contracted projects for 87% (‚¬6_4 billion) of available finances as of November 2012 and paid out 54% (‚¬4 billion) to beneficiaries. Bulgaria thoughtless only ‚¬2 billion of an available ‚¬9. 5 billion between 2007 and 2011. Key factors affecting assiduousness capacity of structural funds: I _ social function of pre-accesslon funds 2 Political will 3. wealthiness/polltlcal legitimacy of regions . Human resources 5. Knowledge of available funds 6. putrefaction and transparency 7. r Is It Just a question of TIME (and size)? Bulgaria: Joined EU in 2007 having spent very little ot its pre-accession aid. Multiple corruption and transparency scandals: tunds are withheld and projects are delayed. Change ot governing body in July 2009 with creation ot new administrati ve units to cut through structural funds. The quality of human resources is low in regional/municipal administrations: 4% speak English, the identical people used for planning as for valuation, 201 1 sees improvements: 27 municipal information centres set up, physical body of prosecutions over misappropriation of funds increasing (but the concentration rate slightly lower than 2010).Lithuania: ELI member since whitethorn 2004. Population 3. 2 million compared to Bulgarias 7. 5 million. malleable economy: experienced rapid growth earlier the 2009 crisis (with help of pre-accesslon fundsL and rebounded relatively quickly after big contraction. In 2004-06 priority was accorded to spending EIJ money concord to all rules and procedures. Start of 007-2013 programming period absorption rate was similar to EUIO average (approx. 45%)\r\n'