the implementation of the european charter for …...european commission enterprise and industry...

European CommissionEnterprise and Industry

The implementation of the EuropeanCharter for Small Enterprises in the Western BalkansRaluca IpateDG Enterprise and Industry

Bucharest, 12 November 2009



History

●2003 EU- Western Balkans Summit in Thessaloniki

●2006 ‘Belgrade Declaration’– EC, OECD, EBRD and ETF

●2009 …


Participants

• Partner organisations: � EC, OECD, ETF and EBRD

• Partner economies:� Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Kosovo

under UNSCR 1244/99, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro and Serbia


European Charter for Small Enterprises1. Education and training for entrepreneurship

2. Cheaper and faster start-up

3. Better legislation and regulation

4. Availability of skills

5. Improving online access

6. Getting more out of the single market

7. Taxation and financial matters

8. Strengthening the technological capacity of SMEs

9. Successful e-business models and top-class business support

10. Developing stronger, more effective representation of small enterprises


The Charter process is organised to involve all lev els in the evaluation and input process

EC/ OECD CoreTeam

ETF and EBRD Contributions

EC/OECD Experts

National Charter Co-ordinators

Counter Assessment by

Independent Consultants

KEY ACTORS:

●EC/OECD Core Team leads project.

●European Training Foundation (ETF) and European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) provide inputs on their relevant Charter dimensions.

�ETF: Dimensions 1 & 4 (Human Capital)��EBRD: Dimension 7 (Finance)�

●The National Coordinator’s Team conduct a self-assessment based on the SME Policy Index.

●An independent assessment is conducted with the support of a team of consultants led by an international consultancy company.

●Bilateral meetings with SME policy stakeholders in the country.

Process

Annual Bilateral Meetings with

SME Stakeholders in

the Country


Strengths and Limitations

IC CoreIC CoreTeamTeam

Strengths Limitations• The indicators have been structured to be

fully compatible with the European Charter for Small Enterprises.

• Combination of original data collected by the partner organisations from different sources.

• Use of a grid facilitates public-private consultation and encourages action.

• The ‘grid’ approach also helps public officials to communicate better with respect to policy progress and areas where more reform is necessary.

• The SME Policy Index incorporates best practice examples and policy recommendations.

• Measuring effective implementation of government policy can be difficult.

• Distinction between scoring levels can be challenged, especially when above 3.

• A simple Weighting System has been incorporated to give more important indicators a higher weight.

• There tends to be a lack of general national statistics on SMEs.


Overall Conclusions

• Good progress since 2007 in implementing policies to support SMEs.

• It shows that a two-year policy horizon can be sufficient for elaborating

and implementing policy reforms with clearly defined objectives.

• Clear convergence towards the adoption of the guidelines of the Charter.

• Most partner economies have established the key institutions in charge

of SME policy, set up mechanisms of inter-ministerial co-ordination and

have a structured policy-framework for all Charter Dimensions of

implementation.

Results 2009


Overall Conclusions

• But: implementation is still in an early phase in some economies.

• Also: uneven progress across the 10 dimensions of the Charter:

• Good progress for policy areas that directly affect operational environment of

SMEs (e.g. company registration, regulatory reform, access to finance).

• More modest progress in introducing targeted policies for specific types of

SMEs (e.g. start-ups, innovative SMEs). Even in the cases where such policies

have been formulated, the amount of available resources is very low,

compared to EU Member States.

• The contribution of human capital to the region’s competitiveness remains a

particular constraint to the Western Balkan economies.

Results 2009


Overall Conclusions – Progress at Partner Level

• 2009 results confirm Croatia as the most advanced country.

• Serbia has shown significant improvements across a wide range of dimensions,

moving to policy implementation in areas such as start-ups or provision of business

services.

• The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Montenegro have made good

progress in human capital development and somewhat on provisions of business

support services.

• Albania’s policy performance has been remarkable and has improved in all the

ten dimensions, especially in company registration.

• Kosovo under UNSCR 1244/99 has progressed on the institutional front, by

establishing an SME Development Agency. But provision of services to SMEs is still

largely dependent on donor support.

• Bosnia and Herzegovina has made good progress in the dimension of access to

finance, but overall SME policy is still highly decentralised.

Results 2009


Why is this process important?

� Progress in reforms has become more visible.

� Identification of achievements and priorities.

� The enterprise policy in the EU and partner regions more closely connected.

� High level of participation by all the actors concerned.

� Common initiatives at the regional level.


Thank you for your attention!

http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/index_en.htm;

[email protected]


Results per Charter dimension

the implementation of the european charter for …...european commission enterprise and industry...

Documents