Monitoring and effects measurement
Structural Funds programme in the Region of Southern Denmark 2007-2011 • Design and Creative Industries • Energy Efficiency • Offshore • Health Care and Welfare Innovation • Tourism • Broad Measures
DEN EUROPÆISKE UNION Den Europæiske Socialfond DEN EUROPÆISKE UNION Den Europæiske Fond for Regionaludvikling Vi investerer i din fremtid
Analyse_effektmåling_2015_engelsk.indd 1
24-05-2016 11:22:04
w
Background In order to establish a solid foundation for monitoring and evaluation of the business policy measures, the Danish Business Authority, Statistics Denmark, the five Danish regions and the Regional Municipality of Bornholm have developed a tool that enables the monitoring of those companies that participate in business development projects. The tool can furthermore be used to assess if the projects have had effects for the participating companies. In the present report, the tool is utilised for monitoring and measuring the effects of Structural Funds initiatives within the strategic business development policy areas in the Region of Southern Denmark. All projects within the same area are treated as one in the analysis. In the English version of the report, a selection of illustrative results is included, primarily those concerned with measuring effects. The report has been produced in collaboration between Statistics Denmark, the Danish Business Authority and the Region of Southern Denmark.
Regional Udvikling / Strategi & Analyse December 2015 Foto: Lasse Hyldager Fotografi
Analyse_effektmĂĽling_2015_engelsk.indd 2
24-05-2016 11:22:05
Monitoring and effects measurement
Structural Funds programme in the Region of Southern Denmark Summary of results From 2007 to 2011 69 EU-supported projects were initiated in the Region of Southern Denmark, after recommendation from the Growth Forum of Southern Denmark. The projects fall under the key priority areas of Design and Creative Industries, Energy Efficiency, Offshore, Health Care and Welfare Innovation, Tourism, and Broad Measures. The Structural Funds projects have reported a total of 5,900 participating companies. The participating companies are primarily from the 22 municipalities of the Region of Southern Denmark, but there have also been participating companies from the other danish regions. Employment and turnover growth A simple monitoring shows that the total employment in the participating companies increased in all areas. Under the oldest projects, the highest increase was within Health Care and Welfare Innovation, while the highest increase among participants in the projects initiated in 2010 and 2011 was within Offshore. Turnover growth is recorded within five of six areas in both project
800 within Energy Efficiency, 400 within Offshore, 470 within Health
periods. Under Energy Efficiency turnover more than doubled from
Care and Welfare Innovation, and 860 within Broad Measures — in
2009 to 2014 for the group of companies in projects initiated from
participant companies with employment of less than 100 FTEs.
2007 to 2009. For projects initiated in 2010 and 2011, turnover for the participating companies under Offshore increased by 37 per cent from
The figures cannot be summed across key priority areas or project
2011 to 2014.
periods.
Employment effects
Turnover effects
Measuring effects requires more than just monitoring. Effects are
The measurement of turnover effects shows that in the period 2009 to
measuring by comparing the partic-ipant group with a control group
2014 there were significant effects within Energy Efficiency and Off-
to assess if there is a statistically significant difference between the
shore for projects initiated from 2007 to 2009.
developments of the two groups. In the period 2011-2014 there were significant turnover effects within For the projects initiated in 2007 to 2009, significant employment
Design and Creative Industries, Health Care and Welfare Innovation and
effects after five years are found within the areas of Energy Efficiency,
Broad Measures for projects initiated in 2010 and 2011.
Off-shore, Tourism, and Broad Measures. Similarly, significant employment effects after three years are found for the projects initiated in
Interpret with caution
2010 and 2011 within Design and Creative Industries, Energy Efficien-
The results indicate that the Structural Funds projects have had an ef-
cy, Offshore, Health Care and Welfare Innovation, and Broad Measures.
fect. Nevertheless, the results should be interpreted with caution. The effects measurement ensures similar characteristics in the participant
The effects measurement indicates that the Southern Denmark Struc-
and control group as far as company size, activity, geographical location
tural Funds projects initiated from 2007 to 2009 in the subsequent
as well as growth path prior to the period for which effects are measu-
period from the second half of 2009 until the second half of 2011 have
red. Such similarities cannot be guaran-teed on other characteristics,
created employment of 400 full-time equivalents (FTE) within Energy
such as the motivation and commitment of the companies, their focus
Efficiency, 800 within Offshore, 320 within Tourism, and 430 within
on growth, development needs, etc.
Broad Measures — in participant companies with employment of less Furthermore, the measurement only covers companies with less than
than 100 FTEs.
100 FTEs. The larger companies are excluded in order to avoid their For projects initiated in 2010 and 2011 the effects measurement
potentially dominating the measurement. Had they been included,
indicates employment effects in the period from second half of 2011 to
the effects would possibly be larger, but this would also increase the
second half of 2014 of 530 FTEs within Design and Creative Industries,
uncertainty as to whether the effects could be attributed to project participation or not.
REGION SYDDANMARK -- regional vækst- og udviklingsstrategi -- /
Analyse_effektmåling_2015_engelsk.indd 3
3
24-05-2016 11:22:12
Methodology The data used is from Statistics Denmark’s registers on the employment and turnover of Danish companies. Statistics Denmark and the Danish Business Authority have carried out the data analyses, while interpretations and conclusions were made by the Region of Southern Denmark and the Danish Business Authority. The effects measurement is done by comparing the development of participating companies with that of a control group of companies, which resemble the participating companies but did not participate in the project themselves. If the group of participants performs better than the control group, e.g. measures by job creation, this indicates that the project has had positive effects. Key priority areas The present effects measurement focuses on those key priority areas around which the business de-velopment programme in the Region of Southern Denmark is centred: • • • • • •
Health Care and Welfare Innovation Energy Efficiency Off-shore Design and Creative Industries Tourism Broad Measures
All projects within the same area are treated as one in the analysis. The projects that are included in the monitoring and effects measuring have different start and end dates. The earliest were initiated in 2007, while the most recent projects in this analysis started in 2011. To treat all projects within the same priority area as one, i.e. as one project, provides a useful over-view, and it may furthermore reduce the statistical uncertainty in the measurement of effects. At the same time, however, other uncertainty elements are introduced, implying that one should be more careful when interpreting the estimated effects. The projects are divided into two groups in the analysis: projects initiated in 2007 to 2009 and in 2010 to 2011, respectively. Structural Funds projects The analysis exclusively concerns Structural Funds projects, of which a total of 69 were initiated in the period 2007-2011 in 6 areas
4
Following recommendation of the Growth Forum of Southern Denmark, the projects are supported with 563 mn. DKK in EU funds. The EU funds provide co-financing of up to 50 per cent of the total costs of a structural fund project. This implies that the total budget for the 69 projects is at least 1.126 mn. DKK. Private sector participant companies All Structural Fund projects report every six months to the Danish Business Authority which specific companies have participated in a project. The 69 projects have reported a total of nearly 5,900 partic-ipating companies. The monitoring and measurement of effects focuses on the private sector participant companies. Public sector participants will typically also benefit from participating in the projects, but the effects are difficult to measure on the basis of available register data. Thus, public sector entities among the 5,900 participants are excluded from the analysis.
Monitoring and effects measurement for projects initiated in 2007-2009 and 20102011, respectively, within six key priority areas: • Design and Creative Industries • Energy Efficiency • Offshore • Health Care and Welfare Innovation • Tourism • Broad Measures
Focus on private sector company participants: • The companies’ p-numbers (local kind of activityunit numbers) are matched with Statistics Denmark’s registers
In addition, double records – e.g. a company that has participated in more than one project – are excluded.
• The development in employment and turnover of participant companies is monitored
A company can only be included under the same key priority area once in each of the two project periods.
• Measurement of employment and turnover effects within the six key priority areas
A company may, however, participate under more than one key priority area in both project periods. This means that one cannot sum the figures and effects across areas and project periods. The 69 projects have different start and end dates. The earliest were initiated in 2007, the most recent ones in 2011. Moreover, even within the same project, there may be differences in when companies start and finish their participation. The analysis does not account for this. All projects and participating companies within each key priority area are treated as one for each of the project periods, regardless of the concrete start and end date of the individual project and regardless of when individual companies participated in the particular project.
Project start 2007 to 2009: • 44 projects have reported 2,037 participating companies. Double records, public sector entities, and terminated or inactive companies are taken out. • 767 companies monitored in the period from second half of 2009 to sec-ond half of 2014. Project start 2010 and 2011: • 25 projects have reported 3,848 participating companies. Double records, public sector entities, and terminated or inactive companies are taken out. • 1,550 companies are monitored in the period from second half of 2011 to second half of 2014
-- monitorering og effektmåling 2015 -- /
Analyse_effektmåling_2015_engelsk.indd 4
24-05-2016 11:22:12
69 projects with start in 2007 to 2011 have reported 5.885 participating companies No. of participants after starting year and key priority area 1400
44 projects started 2007 - 2009 have reported 2.037 participating companies
# of participating companies
1200
25 projects started 2010 or 2011 have reported 3.848 participating companies
1000
800
600
400
200
0 2007
2008
Design & Creative Industries
2009
Energy Efficiency
Offshore
2010
2011
Health Care & Welfare Innovation
Tourism
Broad Measures
Indicated total employment and turnover effects Estimation in 2 nd half of 2014 — 3 and 5 years after project start
Job creation (FTE)
Turnover effects, mn.DKK.
2007 — 2009
2010 og 2011
2007 — 2009
2010 og 2011
—
532
—
—
Energy Efficiency
415
808
2.184
—
Offshore
808
409
569
—
—*
473
—*
526
Tourism
320
—
—
—
Broad Measures
434
864
—
2.098
Project start
Design & Creative Industries
Health Care & Welfare Innovation
*To few participating companies
REGION SYDDANMARK -- regional vækst- og udviklingsstrategi -- /
Analyse_effektmåling_2015_engelsk.indd 5
5
24-05-2016 11:22:12
how are the effects measured? •
The share of participating companies with a positive growth is compared to the correspond-ing share for the control group, i.e. non-participating companies with characteristics similar to those of the participating companies.
•
The control group if constructed so as to control for company geographical location, activity, size and historical growth pattern.
•
• Effects are measured for 2009-2014 for those companies that participated in Structural Funds projects initiated 2007 to 2009, and for 2011-2014 for participants in projects initiated in 2010 and 2011.
•
• The measurement of effects is done for each of the six key priority areas and produces esti-mates of the absolute employment and turnover effects.
How to read the results? •
The tables on the following pages show the “success rate” for the participant and control groups, respectively. Successes are companies with a positive employment or turnover growth in the period from second half of 2009 to second half of 2014 or from second half of 2011 to second half of 2014, respectively.
•
For example, 44 per cent of the participants in the Design and Creative Industries projects initiated in 20072009 experienced a positive employment growth from the second half of 2009 to the second half of 2010. The corresponding share for the control group is 33 per cent.
•
In principle, the difference between the participant and control groups can be coincidental. This can be tested statistically, however. If the p-value is close to zero
(cf. tables), one can rule out that the difference between the two groups is due to coincidence. •
The p-value from the Design and Creative Industries example shows that with 11 per cent probability the difference after one year between the participant and control group is due to coincidence.
•
Normally, it is assumed that the p-value should be 0.05 (5 per cent significance) or lower in order to be able to rule out coincidence. In the Design and Creative Industries example the p-value is higher, indicating that it cannot be ruled out, that the share of companies with positive growth is the same in the participant and control groups. In other words, there is not a significant difference between the share of successes among the two groups.
Calculating effects estimates Significant effects
For the projects initiated in 2007-2009, estimates are calculated for year 1,
As the tables demonstrate, significant employment effects after five years
2, 3, 4, and 5. For the projects initiated in 2010-2011, estimates are calcu-
are found for the projects initiated in 2007-2009 under the areas Energy
lated for year 1, 2, and 3.
Efficiency, Off-shore, Tourism, and Broad Measures. Similarly, significant employment effects after three years are found for the projects initiated
Visualisation of estimated effects
in 2010 and 2011 within Design and Creative Industries, Energy Efficiency,
In the figures with employment and turnover effects estimates, the darker
Off-shore, Health Care and Wel-fare Innovation, and Broad Measures.
curves show the actual total employment and turnover development for the participating companies in the periods, respectively, from second half
The measurement of turnover effects shows that in the period 2009 to
of 2009 to second half of 2014 and from second half of 2011 to second half
2014 there were significant effects within Energy Efficiency and Off-shore
of 2014.
for projects initiated from 2007 to 2009. The yellow and light blue curves show the counterfactual development, In the period 2011-2014 there were significant turnover effects within
i.e. what the effect measure-ment estimates the development would have
Design and Creative Industries, Health Care and Welfare Innovation and
been, had the companies not participated in the Structural Funds projects.
Broad Measures for projects initiated in 2010 and 2011. The numbers cannot be summed across priority areas or project periods. Calculating employment and turnover effects Estimates of the employment and turnover effects are calculated for the areas and project periods where significant effects are found.
6
-- monitorering og effektmåling 2015 -- /
Analyse_effektmåling_2015_engelsk.indd 6
24-05-2016 11:22:12
Design og creative industries, Energy Efficiency and Offshore The share of participating companies with a positive growth
Design & creative industries
Employment
Turnover
The share of companies with growth
The share of companies with growth
Project start 2007-2009
Participants
Control group
P-value
Participants
Control group
P-value
2 half 2009 — 2 half 2010
44%
33%
0,11
62%
57%
0,44
35%
0,07
67%
57%
0,13
nd
nd
2 half 2009 — 2 half 2011
48%
2nd half 2009 — 2nd half 2012
43%
31%
0,10
72%
53%
0,00*
2nd half 2009 — 2nd half 2013
39%
32%
0,27
62%
52%
0,12
2nd half 2009 — 2nd half 2014
38%
31%
0,33
64%
48%
0,02*
Project start 2010 & 2011
Participants
Control group
P-value
Participants
Control group
P-value
2 half 2011 — 2 half 2012
43%
38%
0,07
56%
46%
0,00*
2 half 2011 — 2 half 2013
49%
36%
0,00*
60%
47%
0,00*
2nd half 2011 — 2nd half 2014
50%
37%
0,00*
61%
46%
0,00*
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Energy effekticiency
Employment
Turnover
The share of companies with growth
The share of companies with growth
Project start 2007-2009
Participants
Control group
2nd half 2009 — 2nd half 2010
48%
41%
0,13
56%
51%
0,25
2nd half 2009 — 2nd half 2011
51%
41%
0,03*
60%
57%
0,48
2nd half 2009 — 2nd half 2012
59%
38%
0,00*
65%
56%
0,03*
P-value
Participants
Control group
P-value
2nd half 2009 — 2nd half 2013
56%
38%
0,00*
62%
55%
0,08
2nd half 2009 — 2nd half 2014
60%
38%
0,00*
65%
54%
0,01*
Project start 2010 & 2011
Participants
Control group
P-value
Participants
Control group
P-value
2nd half 2011 — 2nd half 2012
59%
41%
0,00*
58%
48%
0,01*
2nd half 2011 — 2nd half 2013
57%
39%
0,00*
55%
50%
0,16
2 half 2011 — 2 half 2014
54%
41%
0,00*
53%
50%
0,46
nd
nd
Offshore Project start 2007-2009
Employment
Turnover
The share of companies with growth Participants
Control group
The share of companies with growth P-value
Participants
Control group
P-value
2nd half 2009 — 2nd half 2010
65%
36%
0,00*
67%
55%
0,07
2nd half 2009 — 2nd half 2011
62%
39%
0,00*
80%
57%
0,00*
2nd half 2009 — 2nd half 2012
63%
36%
0,00*
80%
52%
0,00*
2nd half 2009 — 2nd half 2013
62%
34%
0,00*
75%
51%
0,00*
2nd half 2009 — 2nd half 2014
73%
35%
0,00*
77%
49%
0,00*
Project start 2010 & 2011
Participants
Control group
P-value
Participants
Control group
P-value
2nd half 2011 — 2nd half 2012
81%
40%
0,00*
63%
49%
0,04*
2 half 2011 — 2 half 2013
75%
38%
0,00*
72%
47%
0,00*
2nd half 2011 — 2nd half 2014
79%
40%
0,00*
63%
51%
0,09
nd
nd
* The share of companies with positive growth in employment or turnover are significantly higher among the parcipating companies than in the control group (5 per cent significance)
REGION REGIONSYDDANMARK SYDDANMARK---regional regional vækstvækst- og og udviklingsstrategi udviklingsstrategi --- //
Analyse_effektmåling_2015_engelsk.indd 7
7 7
24-05-2016 11:22:13
Health Care and Welfare Innovation, Tourism and Broad Measures The share of participating companies with a positive growth
Health Care and Welfare Innovation
Employment
Turnover
The share of companies with growth
Project start 2007-2009
Participants
Control group
The share of companies with growth P-value
Participants
Control group
P-value
To few parcipating companies
Project start 2010 & 2011
Participants
Control group
P-value
Participants
Control group
P-value
2 half 2011 — 2 half 2012
55%
42%
0,00*
55%
51%
0,43
2 half 2011 — 2 half 2013
58%
40%
0,00*
62%
51%
0,01 *
2nd half 2011 — 2nd half 2014
58%
41%
0,00*
64%
49%
0,00*
nd
nd
nd
nd
Tourism
Employment
Turnover
The share of companies with growth
The share of companies with growth
Project start 2007-2009
Participants
Control group
P-value
Participants
2nd half 2009 — 2nd half 2010
48%
40%
0,01*
2nd half 2009 — 2nd half 2011
48%
42%
0,08
2 half 2009 — 2 half 2012
47%
38%
2nd half 2009 — 2nd half 2013
50%
2nd half 2009 — 2nd half 2014
50%
Project start 2010 & 2011
Participants
Control group
2nd half 2011 — 2nd half 2012
53%
47%
0,39
2nd half 2011 — 2nd half 2013
55%
41%
0,03*
2 half 2011 — 2 half 2014
55%
46%
0,15
59%
nd
nd
nd
nd
Broad Measures
Control group
P-value
52%
52%
0,97
51%
56%
0,18
0,01*
55%
55%
0,99
37%
0,00*
58%
54%
0,19
35%
0,00*
55%
52%
0,30
P-value
Participants
Control group
P-value
51%
53%
0,76
59%
50%
0,16
54%
0,39
Employment
Turnover
The share of companies with growth
Project start 2007-2009
Participants
2nd half 2009 — 2nd half 2010
59%
39%
2nd half 2009 — 2nd half 2011
59%
40%
2 half 2009 — 2 half 2012
58%
35%
2nd half 2009 — 2nd half 2013
52%
34%
2 half 2009 — 2 half 2014
54%
Project start 2010 & 2011 2nd half 2011 — 2nd half 2012
Participants
Control group
P-value
0,00*
55%
55%
0,93
0,00*
59%
57%
0,81
0,00*
62%
54%
0,14
0,00*
62%
53%
0,10
34%
0,00*
55%
51%
0,55
Participants
Control group
P-value
Participants
Control group
P-value
55%
40%
0,00*
55%
46%
0,00*
2 half 2011 — 2 half 2013
55%
40%
0,00*
60%
49%
0,00*
2nd half 2011 — 2nd half 2014
58%
41%
0,00*
63%
48%
0,00*
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
Control group
The share of companies with growth P-value
* The share of companies with positive growth in employment or turnover are significantly higher among the parcipating companies than in the control group (5 per cent significance)
88
----monitorering monitoreringog ogeffektmåling effektmåling2015 2015----//
Analyse_effektmåling_2015_engelsk.indd 8
24-05-2016 11:22:13
Project start 2007 —2009
Indicated employment effects within Energy efficiency Employment change in participating companies and estimated job creation
no. of full-time equivalents
2.600 2.500 2.400 64 job*
324 job*
389 job*
415 job*
2nd half of 2012
2nd half of 2013
2nd half of 2014
2.300 2.200 2.100 2nd half of 2008
2nd half of 2009
2nd half of 2010
Actual development
2nd half of 2011
Counterfactual development
* The share of companies with positive growth are significantly higher among the parcipating companies (5 per cent significance)
Project start 2007 —2009
Indicated employment effects within Offshore Employment change in participating companies and estimated job creation
no. of full-time equivalents
2.200 2.000 1.800 1.600
690 job* 227 job*
268 job*
2nd half of 2010
2nd half of 2011
808 job*
465 job*
1.400 1.200 1.000 2nd half of 2008
2nd half of 2009
Actual development
2nd half of 2012
2nd half of 2013
2nd half of 2014
Counterfactual development
* The share of companies with positive growth are significantly higher among the parcipating companies (5 per cent significance)
REGION SYDDANMARK -- regional vækst- og udviklingsstrategi -- /
Analyse_effektmåling_2015_engelsk.indd 9
9
24-05-2016 11:22:13
Project start 2007 —2009
Indicated employment effects within Tourisme Employment change in participating companies and estimated job creation
no. of full-time equivalents
3.000
2.800 132 job*
284 job*
92 job*
320 job*
2.600
2.400 2nd half of 2008
2nd half of 2009
2nd half of 2010
Actual development
2nd half of 2011
2nd half of 2012
2nd half of 2013
2nd half of 2014
Counterfactual development
* The share of companies with positive growth are significantly higher among the parcipating companies (5 per cent significance)
Project start 2007 —2009
Indicated employment effects within Broad measures Employment change in participating companies and estimated job creation
no. of full-time equivalents
2.100
1.950 190 job*
301 job*
435 job*
434 job* 419 job*
1.800
1.650
1.500 2nd half of 2008
2nd half of 2009
2nd half of 2010
Actual development
2nd half of 2011
2nd half of 2012
2nd half of 2013
2nd half of 2014
Counterfactual development
* The share of companies with positive growth are significantly higher among the parcipating companies (5 per cent significance)
10
-- monitorering og effektmåling 2015 -- /
Analyse_effektmåling_2015_engelsk.indd 10
24-05-2016 11:22:13
Project start 2010 — 2011
Indicated employment effects within Design and Creative Industries Employment change in participating companies and estimated job creation
no. of full-time equivalents
5.800
5.600 575 job*
532 job*
2nd half of 2013
2nd half of 2014
5.400
5.200
5.000 2nd half of 2009
2nd half of 2010
2nd half of 2011
Actual development
2nd half of 2012
Counterfactual development
* The share of companies with positive growth are significantly higher among the parcipating companies (5 per cent significance)
Project start 2010 — 2011
Indicated employment effects within Energy efficiency Employment change in participating companies and estimated job creation
no. of full-time equivalents
5.200 5.000 4.800
604 job*
575 job*
808 job*
4.600 4.400 4.200 2nd half of 2009
2nd half of 2010
2nd half of 2011
Actual development
2nd half of 2012
2nd half of 2013
2nd half of 2014
Counterfactual development
* The share of companies with positive growth are significantly higher among the parcipating companies (5 per cent significance)
REGION SYDDANMARK -- regional vækst- og udviklingsstrategi -- /
Analyse_effektmåling_2015_engelsk.indd 11
11
24-05-2016 11:22:14
Project start 2010 — 2011
Indicated employment effects within Offshore Employment change in participating companies and estimated job creation
no. of full-time equivalents
1.300
1.150 409 job* 238 job*
1.000
150 job*
850
700 2nd half of 2009
2nd half of 2010
2nd half of 2011
Actual development
2nd half of 2012
2nd half of 2013
2nd half of 2014
Counterfactual development
* The share of companies with positive growth are significantly higher among the parcipating companies (5 per cent significance)
Project start 2010 — 2011
Indicated employment effects within Health Care and Welfare innovation Employment change in participating companies and estimated job creation
no. of full-time equivalents
2.800
2.600 268 job*
473 job*
106 job*
2.400
2.200
2.000 2nd half of 2009
2nd half of 2010
2nd half of 2011
Actual development
2nd half of 2012
2nd half of 2013
2nd half of 2014
Counterfactual development
* The share of companies with positive growth are significantly higher among the parcipating companies (5 per cent significance)
12
-- monitorering og effektmåling 2015 -- /
Analyse_effektmåling_2015_engelsk.indd 12
24-05-2016 11:22:14
Project start 2010 — 2011
Indicated employment effects within Broad measures Employment change in participating companies and estimated job creation
6.600
no. of full-time equivalents
6.400 6.200 6.000
387 job*
633 job*
2nd half of 2012
2nd half of 2013
864 job*
5.800 5.600 5.400 5.200 2nd half of 2009
2nd half of 2010
2nd half of 2011
Actual development
2nd half of 2014
Counterfactual development
* The share of companies with positive growth are significantly higher among the parcipating companies (5 per cent significance)
Project start 2007 —2009
Indicated turnover effects within Energy efficiency Turnover change in participating companies and estimated turnover effects
4.900
million DKK.
4.400 3.900 2.184 mio.kr.*
2.528 mio.kr.*
3.400 2.900 2.400 1.900 2nd half of 2008
2nd half of 2009
2nd half of 2010
Actual development
2nd half of 2011
2nd half of 2012
2nd half of 2013
2nd half of 2014
Counterfactual development
* The share of companies with positive growth are significantly higher among the parcipating companies (5 per cent significance)
REGION SYDDANMARK -- regional vækst- og udviklingsstrategi -- /
Analyse_effektmåling_2015_engelsk.indd 13
13
24-05-2016 11:22:14
Project start 2007 —2009
Indicated turnover effects within Offshore Turnover change in participating companies and estimated turnover effects
2.000
million DKK.
1.800
569 mio.kr.* 346 mio.kr.*
507 mio.kr.*
495 mio.kr.*
2nd half of 2012
2nd half of 2013
1.600
1.400
1.200 2nd half of 2008
2nd half of 2009
2nd half of 2010
Actual development
2nd half of 2011
2nd half of 2014
Counterfactual development
* The share of companies with positive growth are significantly higher among the parcipating companies (5 per cent significance)
Project start 2010 — 2011
Indicated turnover effects within Design and creative industries Turnover change in participating companies and estimated turnover effects 6.300 6.100
million DKK.
5.900 5.700 5.500 5.300 5.100 4.900 2nd half of 2009
2nd half of 2010
2nd half of 2011
Actual development
2nd half of 2012
2nd half of 2013
2nd half of 2014
Counterfactual development
* The share of companies with positive growth are significantly higher among the parcipating companies (5 per cent significance)
14
-- monitorering og effektmåling 2015 -- /
Analyse_effektmåling_2015_engelsk.indd 14
24-05-2016 11:22:14
Project start 2010 — 2011
Indicated turnover effects within Health Care and Welfare Innovation Turnover change in participating companies and estimated turnover effects 3.700 3.500 3.300
million DKK.
3.100 1.016 mio.kr.*
2.900
526 mio.kr.*
2.700 2.500 2.300 2.100 1.900 2nd half of 2009
2nd half of 2010
2nd half of 2011
Actual development
2nd half of 2012
2nd half of 2013
2nd half of 2014
Counterfactual development
* The share of companies with positive growth are significantly higher among the parcipating companies (5 per cent significance)
Project start 2010 — 2011
Indicated turnover effects within Broad Measures Turnover change in participating companies and estimated turnover effects
14.700 13.700
2.227 mio.kr.* 222 mio.kr.*
12.700
million DKK.
2.098 mio.kr.*
11.700 10.700 9.700 8.700 7.700 2nd half of 2009
2nd half of 2010
2nd half of 2011
Actual development
2nd half of 2012
2nd half of 2013
2nd half of 2014
Counterfactual development
* The share of companies with positive growth are significantly higher among the parcipating companies (5 per cent significance)
REGION SYDDANMARK -- regional vækst- og udviklingsstrategi -- /
Analyse_effektmåling_2015_engelsk.indd 15
15
24-05-2016 11:22:14
attraktiv aktiv produktiv
In order to establish a solid foundation for monitoring and evaluation of the business policy measures, the Danish Business Authority, Statistics Denmark, the five Danish regions and the Regional Municipality of Bornholm have developed a tool that enables the monitoring of those companies that participate in business development projects. The tool can furthermore be used to assess if the projects have had effects for the participating companies. In the present report, the tool is utilised for monitoring and measuring the effects of Structural Funds initiatives within the strategic business development policy areas in the Region of Southern Denmark. All projects within the same area are treated as one in the analysis. In the English version of the report, a selection of illustrative results is included, primarily those concerned with measuring effects. The report has been produced in collaboration between Statistics Denmark, the Danish Business Authority and the Region of Southern Denmark.
VÆKST OG UDVIKLINGSSTRATEGI
detgodeliv.regionsyddanmark.dk
Regional Udvikling / Strategi & Analyse
Analyse_effektmĂĽling_2015_engelsk.indd 16
Damhaven 12
DK - 7100 Vejle
24-05-2016 11:22:17