# data[].attributes.body
Could the SEEDINET project and/or its predecessor have happened with 'just' Finnish partners?

# data[].attributes.body
can you please explain again how the funding of the project with FR partners is organised?

# data[].attributes.body
You mentioned the Finnish share of the project coming to 200,000 euro - what have your French partners applied for?

# data[].attributes.body
What motivated you to go for transnational EIP-funded projects? How would you describe the need and the benefits?

# data[].attributes.headline
how do your appraoch to TNC for EIP compare with LEADER - have you learnt from LEADER TNC and vice versa? (anything LEADER can learn from EIP TNC?)

# data[].attributes.subject
how do your appraoch to TNC for EIP compare with LEADER - have you learnt from LEADER TNC and vice versa? (anything LEADER can learn from EIP TNC?)

# data[].attributes.body
How do you manage to ensure the synchronization of calls between the nations involved? Thanks a lot

# data[].attributes.body
Have you agreed on the selection criteria among the MAs involved, you think they need to be the same?

# data[].attributes.body
I think it is not really possible to agree on selection criteria (at least not all of it) between other member states, due to the fact that selection criteria of each CAP strategic plan has to be approved by the monitoring committee soon after approval of the CAP SP. In addition, each member state has also their own needs. However, before next funding period it could be an option to define a specific criterium for TNC in cooperation.

# data[].attributes.body
When are you planning to launch it?

# data[].attributes.body
Actually applying transnational project between regions is more flexible (than trannational project using national funding) since call times need not be synchronized: Finnish ELY-centres at regions have continuous call open for EIP AGRI Projects.

# data[].attributes.body
is the prep funding separate from the projects, as a "pre-project", with a separate funding?

# data[].attributes.headline
National / Regional EIP projects in Finland

# data[].attributes.subject
National / Regional EIP projects in Finland

# data[].attributes.body
Actually common policy also otherwise favours regional projects in Finland: budget per partner can be higher, in nationally funded projects the maximum sum of 500 000 has to be divided between at least 3 partners.

# data[].attributes.body
What is the size of the budget for pre-projects (euros)? What kind of costs are eligible?

# data[].attributes.body
For synchronizing a call you have to start planning and discussion with other member states in good time. It is difficult to make a total synchronization because of different needs and practices but you need to find some kind of compromise how you do it.

# data[].attributes.headline
is the information for SFC (=> EU CAP Network webisite) already asked in the project application?

# data[].attributes.subject
is the information for SFC (=> EU CAP Network webisite) already asked in the project application?

# data[].attributes.headline
Who puts it in SFC, is it the National CAP Network?

# data[].attributes.subject
Who puts it in SFC, is it the National CAP Network?

# data[].attributes.body
we think this sharing of information on the CAP Network website is essential to help induce more transnational EIP projects

# data[].attributes.body
Through transnational cooperation you may find skills and knowledge you don´t have in your own country, as well as new contacts. In that sense it fits very well to EIP. Also Leader has been a positive example on transnational cooperation.

# data[].attributes.body
New call for EU CAP Network Focus Group experts extended!

The topics to be covered by the three new Focus Groups are:

Focus Group 53: Production of protein crops under climate change

Focus Group 54: Local perennial plant genetic resources in view of climate change and biodiversity loss

Focus Group 55: Alternative solutions for livestock product differentiation

If you have practical experience on any of these topics and would like to share this with 19 other experts to identify promising and inspiring ideas for innovation, please apply by Thursday 19 September 2024 15:00 hrs CET (Brussels time).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Focus Groups on Innovation, knowledge exchange and EIP-AGRI

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Under the EIP-AGRI, 46 Focus Groups were set up between 2013 and 2021. As of 2022, the 'Support Facility for Innovation and Knowledge exchange including EIP-AGRI' sets up Focus Groups under the EU CAP Network.

# data[].attributes.body
I think we have learnt the whole process for EIP TNC from Leader. As Leader TNC has been going on for such a long time, it has already proofed what works and what does not. In the future, when we get more experience on EIP TNC there may also be something what Leader can learn from EIP.

# data[].attributes.body
For The Netherlands; these questions can be answered as YES. I see keeping SFC up to date will be crucial "... problems encountered relates to the quality and precision

of the available email contacts for OG project coordinators and partners reported by the Member States in the SFC database of EIP OG projects, including generic, no longer existing  and unusable email addresses" https://eu-cap-network.ec.europa.eu/publications/study-outcomes-achieved-eip-agri-operational-group-projects-under-cap_en#section--resources (A file containing 330 unusable email contacts within the SFC database of EIP OG projects was shared with DG AGRI on 8 March 2024). Besides that we have a strategic partnership with the Wageningen Universities library (for non academic information) Groen Kenninsnet. All EIP (NSP) projects get their own projectpage (and are approached by them to keep their project-page updated). Example: In de regio - Groen Kennisnet

# data[].attributes.body
Does the system include possibilities to report intermediate results from OG projects (Practice Abstracts)?

# data[].attributes.headline
Please, feel free to comment what is happening in your country regarding TNC EIP.

# data[].attributes.subject
Please, feel free to comment what is happening in your country regarding TNC EIP.

# data[].attributes.headline
is there a specific format for the full final report? e.g. certain content obligatory, how many pages etc?

# data[].attributes.subject
is there a specific format for the full final report? e.g. certain content obligatory, how many pages etc?

# data[].attributes.headline
Hello, how are the geotagged photos about the project handled

# data[].attributes.subject
Hello, how are the geotagged photos about the project handled

# data[].attributes.body
Question about the application: Do all OG

partners have access to the Hyrra, or does everything (work packages etc.) have to be completed by the lead partner? If yes, can they work on the platform at the same time?

# data[].attributes.body
How are the geotagged photos about the project handled?

# data[].attributes.body
Is it possible to obtain the survey on EIP implementation you mentioned in your presentation?

# data[].attributes.headline
What are the eligibility criteria for applicant and are these criteria the same in Estonia and Finland? Can any of project partners (academic, farms etc) apply?

# data[].attributes.subject
What are the eligibility criteria for applicant and are these criteria the same in Estonia and Finland? Can any of project partners (academic, farms etc) apply?

# data[].attributes.headline
Is it possible to collaborate with EEN (Enterprise Europe Network) in order to organize a joint matchmaking event?

# data[].attributes.subject
Is it possible to collaborate with EEN (Enterprise Europe Network) in order to organize a joint matchmaking event?

# data[].attributes.body
I have a question regarding the international travel voucher. Can they apply for it to meet potential partners and establish a transnational EIP? How does the process work? Do they need to submit a written justification explaining why the visit is necessary?

# data[].attributes.headline
Is there an opportunity to organize a joint brokerage event with the EEN (Entreprise Europe Network) Network)?

# data[].attributes.subject
Is there an opportunity to organize a joint brokerage event with the EEN (Entreprise Europe Network) Network)?

# data[].attributes.headline
Thought (up to discussion) about Synchronized calls/selection criteria

# data[].attributes.subject
Thought (up to discussion) about Synchronized calls/selection criteria

# data[].attributes.body
Synchronized calls/selection criteria/topics/funding rates/pre-requisites naturally make a lot of sense and huge comliment to the collegues from FI,Estonia, Sweden.. that your were able to achive that!

However, they are also relatively complicated to coordinate between the administrative authorities. From a purely technical point of view and in line with the EU Regulation, wouldn't it be possible to do it without them? As far as I know, there are generally no synchronized calls etc. in LEADER either.

Simplified: A LAG in one MS finds a cooperation partner (usually also a LAG) in another MS. A joint project is defined, i.e. it is also determined which work package is implemented by which cooperation partner/LAG (this is important for the distribution of funding and which MS ultimately sets up the funding). In the case of joint work packages such as project coordination/meetings, a logical financing key (allocation of MS) should also be proposed at application. At least an LOI, ideally an actual cooperation agreement that binds both partners to implementation in the event of approval. Both LAGs submit the project in their MS marked as a transnational project - does not necessarily have to be on the same day, as there may be other open calls/procedures in the different MS.

The faster MS selects the project according to the rules and selection procedure valid in the MS. Creates an approval that includes the funding of those work packages/activities of the MS belonging to the their LAG. However, the approval contains a condition that the project can only be implemented and funded if the second MS also selects the project and approves the work packages that fall under the financial allocation according to the rules valid in the MS. Only then can the project begin (without risk). Payment application then takes place separately in the respective MS according to the financial allocation of the approval. Both MS receive all reports.

Consideration: If LAGs are exchanged with OGs or a cooperation partner of the OG, an analogous implementation would probably be possible. If there are rules in the MS regarding the composition of the OG (e.g. at least X farmers, at least 1 consulting company, research partner), the entire transnational OG would of course always have to be considered, i.e. including the “foreign” OG partners. Similarly, in the case of evaluation of selection criteria, always consider the entire project.

Naturally also quite complex, but possibly lower-threshold and also feasible if there are no synchronized calls in advance between MS. The advantage would even be that there is no restriction as to which MS the OG partners come from, provided that the MS has approved transnational projects in principle.