OpenLobby.EU
Explore

European Association for Innovation in Local Development - Association Européenne pour l'Innovation dans le Développement Local

AEIDL

AEIDL is rooted in local development and the social economy.

Lobbying Activity

Meeting with Cristina Guarda (Member of the European Parliament)

27 Jan 2026 · MFF - Rural Areas

Meeting with Gordan Bosanac (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur)

27 Jan 2026 · Exchange of views on MFF and rural areas

Response to EU’s next long-term budget (MFF) – implementing EU funding with Member States and regions

29 Oct 2025

This is a technical, follow-up submission that draws on emerging evidence gathered by AEIDL. This submission responds to the European Commission second consultation on the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) 20282034, as a result of our involvement in the RURBANIVE project, rather than a submission of the project itself, which contributed to the earlier consultation last May. It considers emerging findings from the RURBANIVE (RUral-uRBAN synergies emerged in an immersIVE innovation ecosystem) Horizon Europe project where the AEIDL is responsible for the formulation of EU policy recommendations for smart, sustainable and inclusive EU polices for local development. Circular Bioeconomy The circular bioeconomy benefits from a clear strategic positioning as a growth engine for the green transition. This creates opportunities for city-region systems to valorise waste, enhance resource recovery, and stimulate innovation in bio-based industries. However, granular indicators risks weakening accountability: progress on systemic transformation suck as industrial symbiosis, closed-loop resource flows, or waste-to-value models may not be fully captured. Opportunities in designing complementary monitoring tools that measure both environmental and socio-economic impacts, ensuring urbanrural resource loops are visible in outcomes. Ecosystem and Biodiversity Restoration The MFF proposals integrates ecosystem objectives both narrowly, for example biodiversity, soils, water and more broadly, as in industrial ecosystems, innovation. The reinforcement of the Do No Significant Harm principle ensures stronger environmental safeguards, yet creates compliance challenges for projects in agriculture, infrastructure, and industry. A key opportunity is the growing recognition of industrial ecosystems, which opens pathways to embed ecological resilience in economic strategies. Culture and Rural Attractiveness, Heritage Access Cultural support remains quantitatively rich but qualitatively narrow. Indicators of the new Performance Framework track jobs, audiences, and media outputs, but resilience, inclusiveness, and fair working conditions remain marginal. Metrics still favour quantity over quality, lacking measures on fair working conditions, income diversity, or digital access. Opportunities lie in expanding indicators toward resilience, inclusiveness, and trust, which would align cultural policy with broader territorial and social cohesion goals. Enhanced Mobility Transport remains comprehensive in modal scope and aligned with climate targets, with explicit attention to safety and digitalisation. Unfortunately, the indicators of the new MFF Performance Framework remain supply heavy. A major opportunity exists in expanding multimodal and social sustainability metrics, for example by measuring modal shift, climate adaptation of infrastructure, affordability ratios, and accessibility for elderly and disabled users. Improving logistics and shortening value chain Transport funding focuses on infrastructure and decarbonisation but overlooks rural mobility needs. Current indicators track km built or vehicles deployed, ignoring challenges like low-density demand, affordability, and accessibility. Addressing this gap requires new social sustainability metrics and better multimodal coordination to integrate rural areas into wider transport networks. Territorial Awareness: user engagement and landscape The proposed Single National and, where appropriate, Regional Plans for the post-2027 EU budget should incorporate urbanrural functionalities into the criteria for funding programmes. Leaving it entirely to Member States, as the new NRPP and ERDF Regulation, and the new Performance Framework, without legally binding criteria set at EU level would seem as reversing progress of previous programming periods in terms of recognising demographic challenges of rural areas such as depopulation or spatial targeting of urban or rural inequalities and functional area appr
Read full response

Response to Citizens energy package – protecting and empowering consumers in the just transition

4 Sept 2025

This contribution is submitted by AEIDL (the European Association for Innovation in Local Development), grounded on the evidence of the Horizon projects FUTURAL, SMARTERA, RURACTIVE. AEIDL objective is to contribute to bringing the EU closer to its citizens and to promote interaction at the local level. Since 1988, AEIDL has provided networking opportunities, analysis, evaluation, promotion and information, and has built up a wealth of expertise and knowledge on local innovation. AEIDL welcomes the European Commissions effort to strive for an energy transition leaving no one behind. Energy transition is preconditioned to unlock EUs digital and green futures, and foster EU priorities on strategic autonomy and competitiveness. However, such transition cannot happen without communities. Key Facts: The Paradox of Rural Energy Transition As the Joint Research Centre recently showed, 72% of renewable energy production takes place in rural areas and this potential is largely underexploited (Perpiña Castillo et al., 2024). Hence, it is a paradoxical that rural areas are more vulnerable than cities to energy poverty (Dokupilová et al., 2024; Hormigos Feliu et al., 2025). This is widely caused by the presence of fewer energy efficient and bigger buildings to heat lower income and educational levels, ageing population. Further, rural areas experience the so-called rural energy efficiency gap, which is a slower uptake of energy efficiency measures due to higher financial barriers, awareness and access barriers, and geographical barriers (Papantonis, 2024). Energy poverty has a knock-on effect on rural citizens ability to engage with the digital and climate transition, and access basic services. Being renovation and energy costs higher for rural dwellers than other EU citizens, this creates a serious impediment to the exercise of EU fundamental rights in rural areas and causing a misalignment to the new EU Right to Stay. Given these premises, the EU Citizens Energy Package should: Capitalise on Existing Knowledge, Data, Networks, in particular evidence from the JRC and Rural Observatorys work, Rural Energy Community Advisory Hub, Rural Pact Support Office, Communities for Climate project. Accelerating Energy Communities o Provide good practices and technical support to EU MSs, particularly in view of the NRP and Social Climate Fund Plans o Finance energy communities through future programmes, inter alia FP10, EU Competitiveness Fund, EU Connecting Facility o Provide toolkit to local mayors who wishes to guide energy transition in their community o Map and gather existing financing streams/incentives for energy community initiatives at different stages (initial, consolidation, grow) and levels (EU, national, regional) o Assess the major barriers hindering energy communities across MSs, target groups and territories. Engaging Deeply Citizens o Develop explanatory tools and information on the added value of engaging in energy community projects o Help MSs to develop advisory and supporting infopoints close to citizens leveraging on existing networks in particular in rural regions (e.g. Local Action Groups, EU Direct Centres) o Provide technical assistance to MSs to ensure that marginalised communities are not left behind Ground Individual Actions into Territorial Plans: Encourage MSs to establish linkages between community energy projects and wider territorial programmes (S3, LEADER Development Plans, Smart Villages) Ensure Policy Coherence and Long-Term Coordination with other policy sectors tackling with energy transition, incl. EUs Long Term Vision for Rural Areas, Housing Plan, Fit for 55 Package, EU Climate Law, CAP, Cohesion Policy Funds, Just Transition Mechanism, and National Energy and Climate Plans, emerging NRPPs Investigate Conflicts and Demystify Myths: Assess Assess emerging trade-offs and between energy transition and other sectors (e.g. farming, land use, tourism)
Read full response

Response to Policy agenda for cities

26 May 2025

This contribution is draw from the preparatory work carried out by the European Association for Innovation in Local Development (AEIDL) for the RURBANIVE (RUral-uRBAN synergies emerged in an immersIVE innovation ecosystem, Grant No.No. 101136597) Horizon Europe project for the forthcoming Policy Brief on this topic. In so doing the uploaded submission document seeks to provide the Agenda for Cities 15 Strategic policy options: 1. Codification and Consolidation of Definitions: There is a need to codify and consolidate the definitions of urban and rural areas, linking them to spatially targeted EU funds such as EU Structural and Investment Funds. 2. Functional Areas Requirement: Both Functional Urban Areas and Functional Rural Areas must be complementary and should be a requirement for planning EU-funded interventions, including EU Structural and Investment Funds and the European Semester. 3. Embedding the Rurban Approach: The new Agenda for Cities should fully embed the rurban approach, integrating urban-rural functionalities into policymaking and EU investments. 4. Codification of Existing Urban Acquis: Rather than seeking new explicit EU competences on urban matters, the existing urban acquis should be codified to provide more consistency, transparency, and visibility. 5. New EU urban powers Advance a coordinated European Union approach towards housing by framing affordability and quality of housing as cross-cutting challenges, while respecting subsidiarity. 6. Inclusivity and Proportionality: The new Agenda for Cities should ensure inclusivity and proportionality, involving all concerned authorities and stakeholders regardless of size and capacity. 7. Integration of Mission Approach: The EU Mission Climate-Neutral and Smart Cities should be integrated into the overall Agenda for Cities, aligning with the new Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF). 8. Coordination and Expansion of Urban Epistemic Community: To enhance the structural coordination between the intergovernmental dimension of the EU urban acquis of Urban Development Group (UDG) and the Commission services, the epistemic community should be expanded to other policy areas and departments. 9. Direct Link to Better Regulation/Impact Assessment: The Agenda for Cities should incorporate the Urban Agenda for the EU (UAEU) partnership structures and directly link them to the Better Regulation/Impact Assessment processes. 10. Consolidation of EU Funding and Support Instruments: Apply the principles of "comply or explain," "necessity check," and "Swiss knife" to consolidate existing EU funding and support instruments for cities. 11. Dedicated Window for Cities in the European Competitiveness Fund: The European Competitiveness Fund should contain a dedicated window for cities, including an expanded version of the Horizon Europe Cities Mission. 12. Mandatory Use of Functional Areas: Investment in urban areas of shared management funds should require the use of Functional Areas and be reported via the European Semester National Reform Programmes. 13. Sub-delegation to Urban Authorities: Strategic decisions should be the responsibility of urban authorities themselves, according to their competences as defined by domestic legal and constitutional arrangements. 14. Mission Approach for EU Urban Initiatives: Existing EU urban initiatives should be subject to the principles of "comply or explain," "necessity check," and "Swiss knife," and be made subservient to the strategic requirements of a new EU Urban Mission. 15. Mainstreaming SDG11: SDG11 should be mainstreamed as a performance management tool within the Agenda for Cities, making it an enabling condition to receive Sustainable Urban Development funding. More details and references in the full submission that has been uploaded.
Read full response

Response to EU Start-up and Scale-up Strategy

11 Mar 2025

The EU innovation and competitiveness agenda should unleash the potential of all EUs territories, including rural and remote regions (as defined in Article 174-175 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU). Rural areas can provide an invaluable contribution to Europes innovation. Rural areas hold a considerable number of key resources (e.g. energy, water, ecosystem services, critical raw materials) which are necessary to support EUs innovation agenda. Furthermore, in sectors such as food, transportation, energy, home living, the number of rural startups in some key sectors is higher than to startups non-rural areas and hence contributing more widely to Europes competitiveness . Building from the emerging evidence from various Horizon Europe projects where AEIDL is responsible for EU policy recommendations, in particular SMART ERA (Smart community-led transition for Europe's Rural Areas) , FUTURAL (Empowering the future through innovative smart solutions for rural areas.) and GRANULAR (Giving Rural Actors Novel data and re-usable Tools to Lead Public action in rural Areas) and SHERPA (Sustainable Hub to Engage into Rural Policies with Actors) as well as the AEIDL Policy Statement for the present EU term 2024-2029 this submission aims to highlight the importance of local and regional governments and local economic ecosystems and value chains in achieving European objectives such as economic, social, and territorial cohesion, sustainable mobility, and digital services. Recommendations: 1) 1. The EU should ensure the future Startup and Scale Up Strategy are territorially proofed and further detail how the innovation gap should be closed across EU regions. 2) The EU should ensure that the new EU Competitiveness Fund is designed and tailored to support rural innovation ecosystems. 3) 3. The EU should base its Startup and Scale-up Strategy on the ongoing work of the Joint Research Centre and the Rural Observatory on Innovation and Entrepreneurship in Rural Areas 4) The EU should ensure the EU Single Market and the European Semester provide a framework to cooperation MSs action on innovation, circular economy practices, efficient public procurement, and enhanced administrative capacity. 5) The EU and Member States should ensure the issuance of small-scale innovation schemes (e.g. Interreg Alpine Space small funds, Horizon Europe cascade funding), simplified cost options (e.g. Horizon Europe funds) and one-stop-shop platforms (e.g. Rural Toolkit) to facilitate local actors accessing and using funds to enhance local innovation ecosystems 6. Aside from supporting new startup-ups, it is fundamental to support existing SMEs and family businesses into innovation and repositioning their offer on local and international markets 7. The revision of EU Public procurement directives will have a strong role into determining new financing opportunities for innovative startups and enterprises
Read full response

Response to Evaluation of the Public Procurement Directives

7 Mar 2025

Local and regional governments, often in partnership with private, voluntary and civic organisations in the local community play a crucial role in providing public services that impact daily life. The regulatory framework for these services is established at the EU level, ensuring that public money is spent effectively. Building from the emerging evidence from various Horizon Europe projects where AEIDL is responsible for EU policy recommendations, in particular SMART ERA (Smart community-led transition for Europe's Rural Areas, Grant Agreement No. 101084160) , as well as the AEIDL Policy Statement for the present EU term 2024-2029 this submission aims to highlight the importance of local and regional governments and local economic ecosystems and value chains in achieving European objectives such as economic, social, and territorial cohesion, sustainable mobility, and digital services. The proposals from the Draghi and particularly the Letta Report, which have been explicitly incorporated to the Political Guidelines and Mission Letters of the new Commission, seek to reinforce the functioning of the internal market but also ensure that the present negative externalities are also addressed. While the Draghi Report speaks of reinforcing Territorial Cohesion , Letta´s goes a step further and speaks of the Right to Stay as the other side of the coin that is Freedom of Movement. The Political Guidelines go a step further and speak of Right to Stay, which can be articulated in Art 174 TFEU as well as the European Social Pillar and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. Conversely the review of the 2014 Procurement Directives is an opportunity for procurement policy to help local communities to stay where they choose to do so. Incorporating local benefits as award criteria, such as buy local initiatives, conflicts with EU regulations. Public authorities are explicitly prohibited from considering the suppliers location when making award decisions. Even if these local benefit criteria are a minor part of the overall contract or the authoritys procurement activities, they risk being deemed discriminatory under EU law, particularly if procurement authorities and regulators take a very cautious approach to EU rules. Consequently, supporting the local economy and jobs through public spending becomes unnecessarily challenging. The EU rules should, therefore, offer some flexibility in this area. The Draghi and Letta report, included in the Commission priorities and reflected in the Competitiveness Compass, do include references to both the European Preference in strategic sectors, but particularly Letta opens the door for more buy local clauses (either explicit or as part of social considerations to be included in the Best Price Quality Ratio in awarding procurement contracts) in reflection of similar clauses that do exist in other major trading blocks, such as the USA Inflation Reduction Act. Furthermore, as emerging evidence from SMART ERA suggests, most rural areas are now basing their socioeconomic development on tourism, and that cross-sectorial alliances, solutions and mechanisms should be implemented between the tourism and agricultural sectors to ensure sustainable development practices, including procurement from local providers and fostering local or regional value chains. Supporting local production strengthens regional economies, fosters employment, and ensures resilience in supply chains, also emphasize the environmental benefits of reducing transport distances, which align with the EU Green Deal´s sustainability goals. There should be efforts for a more balanced approachwhile EU rules should promote competition, and indeed the Letta report is quite right that perhaps more agile enforcement of a lighter but more comprehensively applied regime EU Internal Market rules is necessary- it should also be recognized the strategic importance of locally sourced goods and services.
Read full response

Response to Uniform format for national restoration plans

7 Feb 2025

AEIDL, a Brussels-based NGO, advocates for EU policies on local development, nature restoration, and climate adaptation through various EU-funded projects. Our feedback is based on results from the H2020 MOVING project (GA No 862739), Horizon Europe BEATLES (GA No 101060645), and our official Policy Statement for the new EU Term. AEIDL supports a uniform template to help Member States define their national Nature Restoration Plans (NRPs) and ensure data consistency and harmonisation at the EU level. AEIDL welcomes the proposals contributions to: Guarantee that all Member States adhere to a consistent structure, facilitating easier comparison of plans. Ensure the design of NRPs follows intermediate horizons as per Articles 4 to 13 of Regulation 2024/1991. Capture how NRPs objectives are grounded in territorial characteristics, considering specific habitats, regional bioclimatic conditions, water availability, soil fertility, etc. Detail the policy coherence between NRPs and other EU and national policies and funds (especially the CAP and climate policies). Coherence with the Cohesion Policy (particularly Policy Objective 2) should also be sought. Collect data on knowledge gaps and methods to address them. We recommend addressing the institutional and non-institutional capacity for implementing restoration measures in the same section. Require Member States to estimate the climatic, land-use-related, and socio-economic impacts and benefits of NRPs (Section 4.1). We encourage including implications on climate adaptation, mitigation, disaster prevention, and territorial implications in Sections 4.1.1 and 4.1.3. Welcome measures to prevent significant deterioration (Section 6). We recommend connecting this section with the designation of protected and strictly protected areas by NRPs, as per Recital 46 of Regulation 2024/1991, and requiring Member States to provide contextual data of these areas. AEIDL believes NRPs play a crucial role in addressing major European challenges, including safer and healthier food production, fire prevention, climate change adaptation and mitigation, water quality improvement, and biodiversity conservation. However, the following recommendations should be addressed to improve the existing template: The current template fails to explicitly collect information on measures and restoration goals for territorial cohesion, particularly in areas targeted by Article 174 of TFEU, such as mountain ecosystems. We recommend gathering this data through additional or existing sections (e.g., Sections 2.3 or 4.1.3 of the template) and including it as a category in Section 14.1.3 in Part C. Additionally, as per Recital 5 of Regulation 2024/1991, we welcome ensuring that Member States explain how their NRPs contribute to priority ecosystems listed by the UN SDGs 14.2, 15.1, 15.2, 15.3. The current template fails to explicitly collect information on coherence with the design, implementation, and monitoring of Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) interventions, such as schemes for climate, environment, and animal welfare (eco-schemes); environmental, climate-related, and other management commitments; and natural or other area-specific constraints. We recommend coordinating the measurement of indicators for agricultural ecosystems with the CAP Performance, Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (PMEF) and its indicators established in Annex I of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 Article 7. For each targeted ecosystem (Part B), Member States should collect data on the total surface areas with improving and deteriorating conditions under Contextual Information. Monitoring and evaluation of NRPs should ensure that improving conditions in habitats in bad or poor conditions do not lead to detrimental trends in habitats in good conditions. Provide a clear monitoring and evaluation framework and reporting guidelines to ensure the efficacy of measures. Include provisions for corrective measures if objectives are not met
Read full response