Bibliograph

Has the EU support to the food-processing industry been effective and efficient in adding value to agricultural products?, (pursuant to article 287(4), second subparagraph, TFEU)

Type

Label

Has the EU support to the food-processing industry been effective and efficient in adding value to agricultural products?, (pursuant to article 287(4), second subparagraph, TFEU)

Language

eng

Bibliography note

Includes bibliographical references

resource.entryConvention

successive entry

resource.frequency

annual

resource.governmentPublication

international or intergovernmental publication

Main title

Has the EU support to the food-processing industry been effective and efficient in adding value to agricultural products?

resource.natureOfEntireWork

bibliography

Oclc number

842909382

resource.regularity

regular

Series statement

EDC collectionSpecial report, no. 1/2013

Sub title

(pursuant to article 287(4), second subparagraph, TFEU)

Summary

As part of the EU's rural development policy grants are made available to enterprises that process and market agricultural products, which should also result in improving the competitiveness of the agricultural sector. The Court's audit examined whether the EU support had been effective and efficient in this respect, but found that member states do not direct the funding to projects for which there is a demonstrable need for public support. Without this, the measure risks becoming a handout--a general support to enterprises investing in the food-processing sector--with the attendant risks of distortion of competition and inefficient use of scarce public money. The Court provided recommendations that should allow the Commission and the member states to remedy the weaknesses mentioned

Table Of Contents

Executive summary -- Introduction -- Audit scope and approach -- Observations. Part one: has the measure been designed in a way that provides for the efficient funding of projects addressing clearly identified needs?; Part two: have member states implemented the measure with due regard to value for money?; Part three: have the Commission and the member states appropriately monitored and evaluated the results of the measure? -- Conclusions and recommendations -- Annex I: EU funds for measure 123 programmed and spent (as at December 2011) -- Annex II: list of projects audited and the Court's assessment of the efficiency and effectiveness of the grant -- Annex III: mid-term evaluation reports reviewed -- Reply of the Commission

Contributor