The future of LEADER/CLLD: what we know so far
This article provides some clarity on the role of LEADER in the proposals for the new Multiannual Financial Framework and the CAP post-2028.
Discussions on the future of LEADER have intensified since the publication of the proposals for the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) 2028-2034 and the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) by the European Commission (EC) in July 2025. Proposals are being discussed and reviewed by the co-legislators, the Council of the EU and the European Parliament, in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure (‘co-decision’).
The EU CAP Network plays a role in providing neutral spaces for exchanges among CAP stakeholders from all Member States and between the EC and CAP stakeholders. In the case of the future of LEADER, such exchanges happen mainly at the meetings of the Subgroup on LEADER and Territorial Development and during the informal meetings of LEADER Managing Authorities from all Member States.
Based on concerns and questions from stakeholders raised at these events, this article provides more details on the EC proposal and the process, drawing on clarifications available at the time of writing (May 2026).
The proposed policy framework – in a nutshell
The MFF proposals refer to an ambitious budget of EUR 2 trillion, of which 44% is allocated to the National and Regional Partnership Plans (NRPPs), a new way of organising EU funding to make it simpler and more flexible. Instead of having many separate programmes (e.g. for regional development, agriculture, social policy, border control), each EU country would create one single NRPP that brings all these funding streams together and aims to reduce regional disparities, support quality employment, education, skills and social inclusion, farming and fisheries, and help manage border challenges. The CAP is proposed to be integrated into the NRPPs, and LEADER is proposed to continue as a CAP intervention.
The main points of the EC proposal are:
- LEADER remains mandatory for all Member States, at least in rural areas with disadvantages;
- LEADER and the Community-led local development (CLLD) methodology are fully preserved in the legal draft;
- Multi-sector CLLD, including LEADER, is facilitated in the single NRPPs;
- There is no longer an obligatory minimum allocation set at the EU level – Member States have flexibility.
These points are included in both the proposed NRPP regulation and the CAP regulation, as shown in the image below.
-
[lext box] NRP regulation Art 74 Territorial and local cooperation initiatives
- (b) LEADER as a type of community led local development
- (c) Smart-village strategies
Art 76 Community led local development
- CLLD method incl. the strategy (defined in Art. 75)
- Support to preparation of the strategy and implementation of the operations
- and 4: Tasks of local action groups
Art 75 Integrated territorial and urban development
- Relevant also to community led development focused on rural areas
- Content of the strategies, incl. contribution to objectives in Art 2 and 3 (wide range of objectives of the NRP)
- Selection of the strategies
Art 77 Support under LEADER
- (a) – (d) use of simplified cost options
- Support under LEADER for preparation and implementation
[right box:] CAP Regulation
Art 5(1) Type of (CAP) support
- LEADER is CAP intervention (point (l))
- LEADER cannot be funded from the ring-fencedallocations for the CAP
[blue round shape:] Art 18 LEADER
- Support for preparation and implementation of the strategies under conditions of Art 76 is obligatory for MS
- Cover at least rural areas with specific disadvantages
- and 4. other rules on support
[box at the bottom of the slide:] Budget tracking and performance framework Regulation
- Multi-sector support, integrated territorial tools
- Intervention field 335: Community led local development/LEADER and other integrated territorial tools
- Contribution to environmental, climate and social objectives; Output and result indicators
The table below – provided by DG AGRI at the 4th LEADER Subgroup – captures the key points of continuation and some changes expected for LEADER in the MFF proposal.
LEADER/CLLD today and tomorrow
|
|
CAP Plans 2023-27 |
Proposed MFF Regulations 2028-34 |
|---|---|---|
|
LEADER is obligatory to all Member States |
yes |
yes |
|
Minimum financial allocation set at EU level |
yes |
no, flexibility for Member States |
|
LEADER/CLLD method -role of local action groups |
yes |
yes |
|
Simplified cost options |
optional, encouraged |
obligatory for some costs, others optional or encouraged |
|
CLLD/LEADER to encompass other policy areas beyond CAP |
yes, but different rules for ESF+ and ERDF (administrative burden) |
yes, one system of NRP Fund to facilitate integration and synergies |
|
Networking of LAGs at national and EU level |
yes |
yes |
|
Operational details: timing and organisation of selection of local development strategies, lead fund option, share of running costs, delegation of additional functions to LAGs |
yes, defined at the EU level |
no, flexibility for Member States |
|
Obligation to cover at least rural areas with disadvantage |
no |
yes |
-
LEADER/CLLD today and tomorrow
[table - left column] [no title for this column]
LEADER is obligatory to all Member States Minimum financial allocation set at EU level LEADER/CLLD method -role of local action groups Simplified cost options CLLD/LEADER to encompass other policy areas beyond CAP Networking of LAGs at national and EU level Operational details: timing and organisation of selection of local development strategies, lead fund option, share of running costs, delegation of additional functions to LAGs Obligation to cover at least rural areas with disadvantage [central column]
CAP Plans 2023-27 yes yes Yes optional, encouraged yes, but different rules for ESF+ and ERDF (administrative burden) yes yes, defined at the EU level no [right column]
Proposed MFF Regulations 2028-34 yes no, flexibility for Member States yes obligatory for some costs, others optional or encouraged yes, one system of NRP Fund to facilitate integration and synergies yes no, flexibility for Member States yes
Towards an agreement: institutional discussions
In line with the ordinary legislative procedure, the Council of the EU and the European Parliament jointly negotiate and adopt EU laws, as co-legislators. At the level of the Council of the EU, the key points of discussions so far have been:
- Concerns about sufficient funding for LEADER in the absence of obligatory ring-fencing at the EU level. LEADER and wider CLLD would need to compete for funding with various policy priorities within a wider NRPP;
- The need to keep LEADER open to a wide range of rural projects and beneficiaries;
- Targeting LEADER for rural areas with disadvantages versus the benefits of covering all rural areas;
- Practicalities of the integrated approach: multi-sector CLLD including LEADER;
- Implications of simplified cost options, especially for small projects, which can be very heterogeneous.
The EC President issued two letters to the EU Council and European Parliament to clarify specific aspects of the proposal related to rural development and its potential funding. These included the proposal of a ‘rural target’ amounting to 10% of each NRPP (see below).
The European Parliament established a joint regional, agricultural, and budgetary committee to discuss the proposal; the EU Council Presidency coordinated proposals, notably related to the transfer of certain articles from the NRPP to the CAP regulation; while the Committee of the Regions and the European Economic and Social Committee have adopted opinions, appointed rapporteurs, and started the work on reports to be published in late 2026.
A vote in plenary in the European Parliament is expected in December 2026, after which the trilogues (i.e. the negotiations involving the EC, the Parliament and the Council) on the legislation can commence at the beginning of 2027. The new MFF is planned to enter into force on 01/01/2028.
More details about the policy process and the timeline can be found in the presentations provided by DG AGRI at the 4th LEADER Subgroup.
-
Preparation for the NRP Plan/ CAP Chapter
CAP Strategic Plans 2023 - 2027
NRP Plans 2028 - 2034
- [first line] EU > MFF/CAP proposals > CAP national recommendations > Plans’ approval
- [2nd line - dates] 2025 > 2026 > 2027 > 2028 > 2034
- [3rd line] MS > Preparation of the plans
- [4th line] EU-MS > Co-decision process
Advocacy actions by civil society organisations, consultation, and partnership in preparation of NRPPs
The NRPPs will be designed and implemented in close partnership between the Commission, the Member States, regions, local communities, and all other relevant stakeholders. Partnership is a key feature in the preparation, implementation, and evaluation of the NRPPs, ensuring the involvement of regional, local, urban and other public authorities, civil society organisations, and economic and social partners. The process is in its first stages, and Member States are getting organised – there will be opportunities for involvement at the national and/or regional level, and stakeholders are encouraged to take an active role in the process. The EU CAP Network will also contribute throught its activities in the coming months.
After the publication of the proposal for the new CAP, civil society stakeholders at the national and EU levels have also launched advocacy actions aimed at safeguarding LEADER. At the EU level, discussions are very intense.
Notably, ELARD’s position acknowledges the opportunities for simplification, flexibility, and integrated approaches offered by the Proposals, yet emphasises some risks to the effectiveness of LEADER/CLLD in rural areas.
A discussion paper by AEIDL raised questions about the role of the regions and local communities in the new policy framework and argued for the safeguarding of the budget for LEADER, networking, cooperation, LAGs, and the Local Development Strategies. The paper also emphasised the LAGs’ role in creating social cohesion and resilience.
Ongoing discussions
While the LEADER/CLLD method and the main functions of LAGs, as well as support for the preparation and implementation of Local Development Strategies, are retained, LEADER stakeholders have requested clarifications about several points. DG AGRI colleagues respond where possible in formal and informal discussions organised by the EU CAP Network.
A key point of concern for stakeholders refers to the rural target. At least 10% of the resources of each NRPP outside the ring-fenced amounts for income support to farming and fisheries will be dedicated to support a consistent agenda of measures addressing rural areas’ specific needs and challenges, building synergies across policy domains. Measures contributing to a comprehensive policy response to rural needs will be tagged with a specific territorial code ’rural areas’, and the amount contributing to rural areas under those measures will be aggregated to meet the rural target. The EC specifies that “successful tools like LEADER will continue to play a key role in supporting the development of rural areas.”
However, stakeholders remain concerned by the lack of a ring-fenced budget for LEADER at the EU level, and whether Member States will decide to count support for LEADER under the 10% ‘rural target’.
The EU CAP Network continues to follow and facilitate discussions, particularly through the SoLTD and networking meetings for LEADER stakeholders. More updates will be shared at our future events and in the upcoming editions of the LEADER newsletter – make sure you are subscribed to receive timely updates and LEADER news!
