Total allocation of EU Structural Funds for the programming period 2007-2013

This is a historic dataset on amounts requested by Member States in their declarations of expenditure for the 2007-2013 EAFRD programming period. It provides the data per Declaration year, Quarter, Axis and Measure.

This is the final version of the dataset considering that all the programmes for the 2007-2013 programming period are now closed.

This brochure provides a description of 2007-2013 EAFRD programmes : https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/15e0ed5e-16d6-4766-8005-53c51522e779

This dataset provides the raw cumulative categorisation data on the projects selected for support as reported in the 322 ERDF/CF programme final implementation reports (FIR) as presented in the closure documeantation. The dataset is the best approximation of thematic content of what was financed during 2007-2013.

Each row presents a volume of EU support allocated to selected projects along with a combination of categorisation dimension codes. The Categorisation information system 2007-2013 was composed of 5 dimension providing information on:
- Priority themes (activities supported)
- Form of Finance
- Territorial context
- Location (NUTS codes)
- Economic Dimension

This raw data is of interest because it allows cross analysis of the different dimensions to answer questions such as:
- Which industries were supported under enterprise support measures? - (Comparing Priority themes vs Economic dimension)
- What sectors benefited from support to research activities
- What form of finance was used to deliver support to energy efficiency measures? - (comparing form of finance vs Priority theme)

More background information on the categorisation system 2007-2013 is available here: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/policy/evaluations/data-for-research/

A version of this data as at the end of 2014 was previously published here: https://cohesiondata.ec.europa.eu/2007-2013/2007-2013-ERDF-CF-Categorisation-Projectselection-/b5xq-38ds

The planned categorisation amounts under certain dimension were also published in dataset for end-2008 and end-2015 : https://cohesiondata.ec.europa.eu/2007-2013/SF-2007-2013-Categorisation-Planned-2008-and-2015/x2d8-jjj2

Statistics provided by the EU countries on the participation in ESF-funded projects during the ESF period 2007-2013.
The European Commission cannot guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the data or information provided by the Member States, nor does it accept responsibility or liability for any use made thereof.

This dataset provides the raw cumulative categorisation data on the projects selected for support as reported in the 322 ERDF/CF programme final implementation reports (FIR) as presented in the closure documeantation. The dataset is the best approximation of thematic content of what was financed during 2007-2013.

Each row presents a volume of EU support allocated to selected projects along with a combination of categorisation dimension codes. The Categorisation information system 2007-2013 was composed of 5 dimension providing information on:
- Priority themes (activities supported)
- Form of Finance
- Territorial context
- Location (NUTS codes)
- Economic Dimension

This raw data is of interest because it allows cross analysis of the different dimensions to answer questions such as:
- Which industries were supported under enterprise support measures? - (Comparing Priority themes vs Economic dimension)
- What sectors benefited from support to research activities
- What form of finance was used to deliver support to energy efficiency measures? - (comparing form of finance vs Priority theme)

More background information on the categorisation system 2007-2013 is available here: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/policy/evaluations/data-for-research/

A version of this data as at the end of 2014 was previously published here: https://cohesiondata.ec.europa.eu/2007-2013/2007-2013-ERDF-CF-Categorisation-Projectselection-/b5xq-38ds

The planned categorisation amounts under certain dimension were also published in dataset for end-2008 and end-2015 : https://cohesiondata.ec.europa.eu/2007-2013/SF-2007-2013-Categorisation-Planned-2008-and-2015/x2d8-jjj2

The data available provides ** VALUES BY PROGRAMME ** for outputs under 18 core indicators reported by over 300 ERDF/CF programmes across the EU.
[The aggregated country achievements values for the 4 years 2012-2015 are provided in a separate dataset: https://cohesiondata.ec.europa.eu/dataset/2007-2013-ERDF-CF-achievements-core-Indicators-tot/w9mt-s8si ]
Last data update: March 2018.

The values reported relate to achievements tracked in monitoring systems as reported by projects financed with EU investments in the period 2007-2015.
For three Member States - Croatia, Romania and Slokavia - the final values may include projects finances also in 2016 under specific provisions; in those cases the final values are nonetheless reported as "2015" in order to allow aggregation.

1. BACKGROUND:
After the negotiations on the ERDF and Cohesion Fund operational programmes (OPs) for 2007-2013, the Commission recommended the use of 'core indicators' for the main intervention areas. Core indicators can be used to compare and aggregate data across similar priorities or measures. Reporting on core indicators was not a legal obligation in 2007-2013. As a pilot, voluntary exercise it allowed the Member States (MS) and the Commission to establish reporting routines and detecting practical reporting issues. The effort undertaken to report against core indicators has improved accountability in the use of the Funds. Strategic reports were submitted by the MS twice in the course of the programming period (in 2009 and 2012), including core indicator data to communicate progress towards achieving policy objectives. Thanks to the use of core indicators, this was the first programme period in which indicator data could be aggregated and analysed across programmes.

2. USING THE DATA:
The data is provided by programme in annual cumulative time series 2012-2015 where values were reported. Annual value can be compare but **SHOULD NOT BE AGGREGATED** as they are already cumulative.

3. SCOPE OF THE DATA:

As part of the ex-post evaluation the reported indicators values for 2012 and 2013 available were examined in 2014-2015 by independent consultants. The synthesis report of their work (March 2015) is available here: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/policy/evaluations/ec/2007-2013/#1

The values for 2014 and 2015 were established by DG REGIO by comparing the values reported by the programme authorities for those years with the work of the consultant on the values reported for 2012 and 2013 and compiling a picture of the progress. The 2015 data is derived from the final report programme reports received in March 2017.

The following is the list of "core indicators" that were examined and can be found in the dataset when used and reported by the programmes:
CO04 Number of RTD projects (N° projects)
CO05 Number of cooperation project enterprises-research institutions (N° projects)
CO06 Research jobs created (FTE)
CO07 Number of direct investment aid projects to SME (Number)
CO08 Number of start-ups supported (Enterprises)
CO09 Jobs created in SME (gross, full time equivalent) (FTE)
CO12 Additional population covered by broadband access (people)
CO14 km of new roads (km)
CO15 km of TEN roads (new and reconstructed) (km)
CO16 km of reconstructed roads (km)
CO17 km of new railroads (km)
CO18 km of TEN railroads (new and reconstructed) (km)
CO19 km of reconstructed railroads (km)
CO24 Additional capacity of renewable energy production (MW)
CO25 Additional population served by water projects (people)
CO26 Additional population served by waste water projects (people)
CO29 Area rehabilitated (km2)
CO35 Number of jobs created in tourism (FTE)

The indicator "CO00 Aggregated Jobs (FTE)" found in the dataset is the result of calculations made by DG REGIO to provide a corrected aggregate value for indicators CO01, CO06, CO09 and CO35. In examining the data reported it became clear that CO01 was often not a correct