Contribution of RDP Priority 6 measures on the promotion of social inclusion and poverty reduction

This final evaluation report presents the contribution, results and impacts of Priority 6 of the RDP to the promotion of social inclusion and poverty reduction in the 2014–2020 programming period, and its findings to support the development of the 2023-2027 CAP Strategic Plan.

The purpose of the evaluation is to examine the relevance, efficiency and effectiveness of the RDP measures promoting social inclusion and reducing rural poverty, and to support the planning of the next programming period.

The focus of the evaluation work is to assess the results and impacts of the RDP measures under Priority 6 based on the criteria set out in the evaluation plan from the point of view of the administration, beneficiaries and potential stakeholders of social inclusion. During the evaluation, special attention is paid to examining the direct and indirect involvement of lagging social groups. In addition, the interdependence of the RDP and the various operational programmes relevant to poverty reduction and the experiences of implementing integrated convergence are reviewed.

Evaluation has been carried out using a combination of quantitative and qualitative analysis methods and synthetising the analysis results.

Within the framework of the evaluation, statistical data providing a picture of trends in rural poverty and social inclusion for the 2014-2020 period have been processed. The state treasury operational database, which provides an opportunity to monitor the progress of Priority 6 rural development interventions, and the evaluation criteria of the RDP calls published in the 2014-2020 period, have been analysed in detail. The evaluation has also included an analysis of the statistical relationship between poverty indicators and RDP payments.

The evaluation has included an examination of the Common Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (CMEF) and Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (PMEF) result and impact indicators relevant to rural poverty, social inclusion and other additional indicators to support the evaluation and its findings.

Five evaluation questions have been set up in cooperation with the Managing Authority in order to define the aspects and frameworks of the evaluation.

Limitations and challenges influencing the validity of findings are identified in the methods used to present synergies between the RDP and other Operational Programs (OP) since the correlations presented do not yet clearly demonstrate synergic relationships.

There has been a significant improvement in poverty reduction and social inclusion in Hungary during the 2014-2020 period. The poverty index used by the CAP, the AROPE indicator (At Risk of Poverty and Social Exclusion), has fallen from 37.8% to 22.2% in rural areas by 2020, probably due to a combination of social policy measures covering people at risk of poverty and increased job opportunities. However, despite the decrease, the share of people at risk of poverty and social exclusion is significant, affecting over one and a half million people in Hungary. Future social inclusion instruments should, in particular, focus on the extreme poverty population in rural areas and the integration of Roma, whose situation is worrying despite improving trends.

The RDP has enforced the promotion of social inclusion through selection criteria including the preference for applications from settlements most at risk of poverty, as well as for job creation, which mainly formulated quantitative commitments and not qualitative expectations.

The calls classified under Focus Areas 6A (facilitating diversification, creation and development of small enterprises and job creation) and 6B (fostering local development in rural areas) have also enforced social inclusion through the aid intensity. Depending on the applicant's organizational form and background, this is 10-20% higher than in the case of developments implemented in non-beneficiary districts and settlements.

One-third of the beneficiaries implementing LEADER developments have declared targets promoting poverty reduction and social inclusion. The Local Action Groups (LAGs) concerned are predominantly located in disadvantaged districts, where poverty and disadvantage create heightened needs. LEADER projects aiming specifically at social inclusion have a catch-up effect primarily through training, skills development and employment, but their contribution to the expansion and development of services crucial for social inclusion is only modest in relation to the amount of funds available.

In terms of payments per inhabitant, priority areas, i.e. areas that need development, appear to have an advantage for all types of settlements.

The synergistic mechanism of each OP can only be explored to a limited degree by relying on the operations database. It can be concluded that, based on the available data, synergistic effects can be expected from the parallel operation of RDP calls related to Focus Areas 6A and 6B and calls related to Priorities 1, 2 and 4 of the territorial operational programme.

In municipalities disadvantaged both socioeconomically and infrastructurally, the income effects of COVID-19 appear to be more moderate, which is probably related to the fact that the epidemic was less able to cause marked fluctuations in settlements with poorly developed economies and marginal labour markets.