This study aims to analyse changes to the organisational models of Managing Authorities (MAs) responsible for the ERDF in national and regional programmes between 2000 and 2020. The MAs responsible for cooperation programmes (Interreg) are not included in this study. The key underlying objective of the assignment is to understand why some MAs have performed better than others over time. To achieve this, it is important to identify how MAs developed, addressed various challenges, interacted with other actors, and adapted to the changing regional, national, and European contexts.
Three key objectives to be achieved by implementing our approach proposed for data collection and analysis:
(Objective A) Provide robust and reliable evidence of the main changes in the organisational models of MAs over the three programming periods (2000–2006, 2007-2013, 2014-2020).
(Objective B) Based on the evidence collected on the main changes, we would contextualise them and would provide an analysis of how these organisational changes relate to the context in which the authority has been operating. Key features to consider would be the applicable EU legislation for managing the cohesion policy funds, EU and national policies and institutional context, and other social, economic and technological factors.
(Objective C) Based on the evidence collected on the key changes and the context in which/why they were happening, the study will look at organisational challenges for authorities linked to implementing the 2021-2027 programmes or to preparing the following programming period.
The study is built on the following principles:
1) Data collection and analysis at different levels by combining variables at macro-level (on EU legislation, EU and national/sub-national level, different social, economic and technological factors), meso-level (the organisational level of MAs) and micro-level (individual leaders and respondents to the study).
2) Using a mixed methods approach by combining qualitative (desk research, interviews) and quantitative (survey) methods of data collection and analysis, taking into account their strengths and weaknesses.
3) Participatory approach: involvement and contribution from MAs is crucial to collecting most of the data. Therefore, we work closely with our national experts and the selected MAs, especially during the in-depth analysis phase, to provide robust and reliance evidence.