Monitoring and effects measurement
-
Upload
region-syddanmark -
Category
Documents
-
view
223 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Monitoring and effects measurement
Vi investerer i din fremtid
DEN EUROPÆISKE UNIONDen Europæiske Fond
for Regionaludvikling
DEN EUROPÆISKE UNIONDen Europæiske Socialfond
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
Analyse_effektmåling_2015_engelsk.indd 1 24-05-2016 11:22:04
w
Regional Udvikling / Strategi & AnalyseDecember 2015
Foto: Lasse Hyldager Fotografi
BackgroundIn 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 pro-jects.
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 wi-thin 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 illustra-tive 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.
Analyse_effektmåling_2015_engelsk.indd 2 24-05-2016 11:22:05
3REGION SYDDANMARK -- regional vækst- og udviklingsstrategi -- /
w
Monitoring and effects MeasureMent
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 partici-
pating 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
periods. Under Energy Efficiency turnover more than doubled from
2009 to 2014 for the group of companies in projects initiated from
2007 to 2009. For projects initiated in 2010 and 2011, turnover for the
participating companies under Offshore increased by 37 per cent from
2011 to 2014.
employment effects
Measuring effects requires more than just monitoring. Effects are
measuring by comparing the partic-ipant group with a control group
to assess if there is a statistically significant difference between the
developments of the two groups.
For the projects initiated in 2007 to 2009, significant employment
effects after five years are found within the areas of Energy Efficiency,
Off-shore, Tourism, and Broad Measures. Similarly, significant employ-
ment effects after three years are found for the projects initiated in
2010 and 2011 within Design and Creative Industries, Energy Efficien-
cy, Offshore, Health Care and Welfare Innovation, and Broad Measures.
The effects measurement indicates that the Southern Denmark Struc-
tural Funds projects initiated from 2007 to 2009 in the subsequent
period from the second half of 2009 until the second half of 2011 have
created employment of 400 full-time equivalents (FTE) within Energy
Efficiency, 800 within Offshore, 320 within Tourism, and 430 within
Broad Measures — in participant companies with employment of less
than 100 FTEs.
For projects initiated in 2010 and 2011 the effects measurement
indicates employment effects in the period from second half of 2011 to
second half of 2014 of 530 FTEs within Design and Creative Industries,
800 within Energy Efficiency, 400 within Offshore, 470 within Health
Care and Welfare Innovation, and 860 within Broad Measures — in
participant companies with employment of less than 100 FTEs.
The figures cannot be summed across key priority areas or project
periods.
turnover effects
The measurement of turnover effects shows that in the period 2009 to
2014 there were significant effects within Energy Efficiency and Off-
shore for projects initiated from 2007 to 2009.
In the period 2011-2014 there were significant turnover effects within
Design and Creative Industries, Health Care and Welfare Innovation and
Broad Measures for projects initiated in 2010 and 2011.
interpret with caution
The results indicate that the Structural Funds projects have had an ef-
fect. Nevertheless, the results should be interpreted with caution. The
effects measurement ensures similar characteristics in the participant
and control group as far as company size, activity, geographical location
as well as growth path prior to the period for which effects are measu-
red. Such similarities cannot be guaran-teed on other characteristics,
such as the motivation and commitment of the companies, their focus
on growth, development needs, etc.
Furthermore, the measurement only covers companies with less than
100 FTEs. The larger companies are excluded in order to avoid their
potentially dominating the measurement. Had they been included,
the effects would possibly be larger, but this would also increase the
uncertainty as to whether the effects could be attributed to project
participation or not.
Structural Funds programme in the Region of Southern Denmark
Analyse_effektmåling_2015_engelsk.indd 3 24-05-2016 11:22:12
-- monitorering og effektmåling 2015 -- /4
methodology
The data used is from Statistics Den-mark’s registers on the employment and turnover of Danish companies. Statistics Denmark and the Danish Business Aut-hority have carried out the data analyses, while interpretations and conclusions were made by the Region of Southern Denmark and the Danish Business Aut-hority.
The effects measurement is done by com-paring the development of participating companies with that of a control group of companies, which resemble the partici-pating companies but did not participate in the project themselves. If the group of participants performs better than the con-trol group, e.g. measures by job creation, this indicates that the project has had positive effects.
key priority areasThe present effects measurement focuses on those key priority areas around which the business de-velopment programme in the Region of Southern Denmark is centred:
• HealthCareandWelfareInnovation• EnergyEfficiency• Off-shore• DesignandCreativeIndustries• Tourism• BroadMeasures
All projects within the same area are tre-ated 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 uncer-tainty in the measurement of effects. At the same time, however, other uncer-tainty 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 projectsThe analysis exclusively concerns Struc-tural Funds projects, of which a total of 69 were initiated in the period 2007-2011 in 6 areas
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 companiesAll 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 ef-fects focuses on the private sector partici-pant companies. Public sector participants will typically also benefit from partici-pating in the projects, but the effects aredifficulttomeasureonthebasisofavailable register data. Thus, public sector entities among the 5,900 participants are excluded from the analysis.
In addition, double records – e.g. a company that has participated in more than one project – are excluded.
A company can only be included under the same key priority area once in each of the two project periods.
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. More-over, 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.
Monitoring and effects measurement for projects initiated in 2007-2009 and 2010-2011, respectively, within six key priority areas:
• DesignandCreativeIndustries
• EnergyEfficiency
• Offshore
• HealthCareandWelfareInnovation
• Tourism
• BroadMeasures
Focus on private sector company participants:
• The companies’ p-numbers (local kind of activityunit numbers) are matched with Statistics Denmark’s registers
• The development in employment and turnover of participant companies is monitored
• Measurement of employment and turnover effects within the six key priority areas
project start 2007 to 2009:
• 44 projects have reported 2,037 par-ticipating companies. Double records, public sector entities, and terminated or inactive companies are taken out.
• 767 companies monitored in the peri-od from second half of 2009 to sec-ond half of 2014.
project start 2010 and 2011:
• 25 projects have reported 3,848 par-ticipating 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 -- /4
Analyse_effektmåling_2015_engelsk.indd 4 24-05-2016 11:22:12
5REGION SYDDANMARK -- regional vækst- og udviklingsstrategi -- /
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
# o
f p
arti
cip
atin
g co
mp
anie
s
Design & Creative Industries Energy Efficiency Offshore Health Care & Welfare Innovation Tourism Broad Measures
44 projects started 2007 - 2009have reported 2.037 participating companies
25 projects started 2010 or 2011 have reported3.848 participating companies
69 projects with start in 2007 to 2011 have reported 5.885 participating companiesNo. of participants after starting year and key priority area
Job creation (Fte) turnover effects, mn.dkk.
project start 2007 — 2009 2010 og 2011 2007 — 2009 2010 og 2011
Design&CreativeIndustries — 532 — —
EnergyEfficiency 415 808 2.184 —
Offshore 808 409 569 —
HealthCare&WelfareInnovation —* 473 —* 526
Tourism 320 — — —
Broad Measures 434 864 — 2.098
Indicated total employment and turnover effectsEstimation in 2 nd half of 2014 — 3 and 5 years after project start
*To few participating companies
Analyse_effektmåling_2015_engelsk.indd 5 24-05-2016 11:22:12
-- monitorering og effektmåling 2015 -- /6
• 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 histori-cal growth pattern.
• • Effectsaremeasuredfor2009-2014forthosecompa-nies that participated in Structural Funds projects initi-ated 2007 to 2009, and for 2011-2014 for participants in projects initiated in 2010 and 2011.
• • Themeasurementofeffectsisdoneforeachofthesixkey priority areas and produces esti-mates of the abso-lute 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, respective-ly. Successes are companies with a positive employ-ment 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 De-sign and Creative Industries projects initiated in 2007-2009 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 bet-ween 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.
how are the eFFectS meaSured?
calculating effects estimates
Significant effects
As the tables demonstrate, significant employment effects after five years
are found for the projects initiated in 2007-2009 under the areas Energy
Efficiency,Off-shore,Tourism,andBroadMeasures.Similarly,significant
employment effects after three years are found for the projects initiated
in2010and2011withinDesignandCreativeIndustries,EnergyEfficiency,
Off-shore,HealthCareandWel-fareInnovation,andBroadMeasures.
The measurement of turnover effects shows that in the period 2009 to
2014thereweresignificanteffectswithinEnergyEfficiencyandOff-shore
for projects initiated from 2007 to 2009.
In the period 2011-2014 there were significant turnover effects within
DesignandCreativeIndustries,HealthCareandWelfareInnovationand
Broad Measures for projects initiated in 2010 and 2011.
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.
For the projects initiated in 2007-2009, estimates are calculated for year 1,
2, 3, 4, and 5. For the projects initiated in 2010-2011, estimates are calcu-
lated for year 1, 2, and 3.
Visualisation of estimated effects
In the figures with employment and turnover effects estimates, the darker
curves show the actual total employment and turnover development for
the participating companies in the periods, respectively, from second half
of 2009 to second half of 2014 and from second half of 2011 to second half
of 2014.
The yellow and light blue curves show the counterfactual development,
i.e. what the effect measure-ment estimates the development would have
been, had the companies not participated in the Structural Funds projects.
The numbers cannot be summed across priority areas or project periods.
Analyse_effektmåling_2015_engelsk.indd 6 24-05-2016 11:22:12
7REGION SYDDANMARK -- regional vækst- og udviklingsstrategi -- /
design & creative industries
employment turnover
The share of companies with growth The share of companies with growth
project start 2007-2009 Participants Controlgroup P-value Participants Controlgroup P-value
2nd half 2009 — 2nd half 2010 44% 33% 0,11 62% 57% 0,44
2nd half 2009 — 2nd half 2011 48% 35% 0,07 67% 57% 0,13
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 Controlgroup P-value Participants Controlgroup P-value
2nd half 2011 — 2nd half 2012 43% 38% 0,07 56% 46% 0,00*
2nd half 2011 — 2nd half 2013 49% 36% 0,00* 60% 47% 0,00*
2nd half 2011 — 2nd half 2014 50% 37% 0,00* 61% 46% 0,00*
energy effekticiencyemployment turnover
The share of companies with growth The share of companies with growth
project start 2007-2009 Participants Controlgroup P-value Participants Controlgroup P-value
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*
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 Controlgroup P-value Participants Controlgroup 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
2nd half 2011 — 2nd half 2014 54% 41% 0,00* 53% 50% 0,46
Design og creative industries, Energy Efficiency and Offshore The share of participating companies with a positive growth
offshoreemployment turnover
The share of companies with growth The share of companies with growth
project start 2007-2009 Participants Controlgroup P-value Participants Controlgroup 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 Controlgroup P-value Participants Controlgroup P-value
2nd half 2011 — 2nd half 2012 81% 40% 0,00* 63% 49% 0,04*
2nd half 2011 — 2nd half 2013 75% 38% 0,00* 72% 47% 0,00*
2nd half 2011 — 2nd half 2014 79% 40% 0,00* 63% 51% 0,09
7region Syddanmark -- rEgIOnal vækst- Og uDvIklIngsstratEgI -- /
* 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)
Analyse_effektmåling_2015_engelsk.indd 7 24-05-2016 11:22:13
-- monitorering og effektmåling 2015 -- /8
health care and welfare innovation
employment turnover
The share of companies with growth The share of companies with growth
project start 2007-2009 Participants Controlgroup P-value Participants Controlgroup P-value
project start 2010 & 2011 Participants Controlgroup P-value Participants Controlgroup P-value
2nd half 2011 — 2nd half 2012 55% 42% 0,00* 55% 51% 0,43
2nd half 2011 — 2nd half 2013 58% 40% 0,00* 62% 51% 0,01 *
2nd half 2011 — 2nd half 2014 58% 41% 0,00* 64% 49% 0,00*
tourismemployment turnover
The share of companies with growth The share of companies with growth
project start 2007-2009 Participants Controlgroup P-value Participants Controlgroup P-value
2nd half 2009 — 2nd half 2010 48% 40% 0,01* 52% 52% 0,97
2nd half 2009 — 2nd half 2011 48% 42% 0,08 51% 56% 0,18
2nd half 2009 — 2nd half 2012 47% 38% 0,01* 55% 55% 0,99
2nd half 2009 — 2nd half 2013 50% 37% 0,00* 58% 54% 0,19
2nd half 2009 — 2nd half 2014 50% 35% 0,00* 55% 52% 0,30
project start 2010 & 2011 Participants Controlgroup P-value Participants Controlgroup P-value
2nd half 2011 — 2nd half 2012 53% 47% 0,39 51% 53% 0,76
2nd half 2011 — 2nd half 2013 55% 41% 0,03* 59% 50% 0,16
2nd half 2011 — 2nd half 2014 55% 46% 0,15 59% 54% 0,39
Health Care and Welfare Innovation, tourism and Broad MeasuresThe share of participating companies with a positive growth
* 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)
Broad measuresemployment turnover
The share of companies with growth The share of companies with growth
project start 2007-2009 Participants Controlgroup P-value Participants Controlgroup P-value
2nd half 2009 — 2nd half 2010 59% 39% 0,00* 55% 55% 0,93
2nd half 2009 — 2nd half 2011 59% 40% 0,00* 59% 57% 0,81
2nd half 2009 — 2nd half 2012 58% 35% 0,00* 62% 54% 0,14
2nd half 2009 — 2nd half 2013 52% 34% 0,00* 62% 53% 0,10
2nd half 2009 — 2nd half 2014 54% 34% 0,00* 55% 51% 0,55
project start 2010 & 2011 Participants Controlgroup P-value Participants Controlgroup P-value
2nd half 2011 — 2nd half 2012 55% 40% 0,00* 55% 46% 0,00*
2nd half 2011 — 2nd half 2013 55% 40% 0,00* 60% 49% 0,00*
2nd half 2011 — 2nd half 2014 58% 41% 0,00* 63% 48% 0,00*
to few parcipating companies
-- monitorering og effektmåling 2015 -- /8
Analyse_effektmåling_2015_engelsk.indd 8 24-05-2016 11:22:13
9REGION SYDDANMARK -- regional vækst- og udviklingsstrategi -- /
2.100
2.200
2.300
2.400
2.500
2.600
2nd half of2008
2nd half of2009
2nd half of2010
2nd half of2011
2nd half of2012
2nd half of2013
2nd half of2014
no.
of f
ull-
tim
e eq
uiv
alen
ts
Actual development Counterfactual development
64 job*415 job*389 job*324 job*
Indicated employment effects within Energy efficiencyEmployment change in participating companies and estimated job creation
proJect Start 2007 —2009
* The share of companies with positive growth are significantly higher among the parcipating companies (5 per cent significance)
1.000
1.200
1.400
1.600
1.800
2.000
2.200
2nd half of2008
2nd half of2009
2nd half of2010
2nd half of2011
2nd half of2012
2nd half of2013
2nd half of2014
no.
of f
ull-
tim
e eq
uiv
alen
ts
Actual development Counterfactual development
808 job*690 job*
465 job*227 job* 268 job*
Indicated employment effects within OffshoreEmployment change in participating companies and estimated job creation
proJect Start 2007 —2009
* The share of companies with positive growth are significantly higher among the parcipating companies (5 per cent significance)
Analyse_effektmåling_2015_engelsk.indd 9 24-05-2016 11:22:13
-- monitorering og effektmåling 2015 -- /10
2.400
2.600
2.800
3.000
2nd half of2008
2nd half of2009
2nd half of2010
2nd half of2011
2nd half of2012
2nd half of2013
2nd half of2014
no.
of f
ull-
tim
e eq
uiv
alen
ts
Actual development Counterfactual development
320 job*284 job*132 job*
92 job*
Indicated employment effects within tourismeEmployment change in participating companies and estimated job creation
proJect Start 2007 —2009
* The share of companies with positive growth are significantly higher among the parcipating companies (5 per cent significance)
1.500
1.650
1.800
1.950
2.100
2nd half of2008
2nd half of2009
2nd half of2010
2nd half of2011
2nd half of2012
2nd half of2013
2nd half of2014
no.
of f
ull-
tim
e eq
uiv
alen
ts
Actual development Counterfactual development
434 job*
419 job*
435 job*190 job* 301 job*
Indicated employment effects within Broad measuresEmployment change in participating companies and estimated job creation
proJect Start 2007 —2009
* The share of companies with positive growth are significantly higher among the parcipating companies (5 per cent significance)
Analyse_effektmåling_2015_engelsk.indd 10 24-05-2016 11:22:13
11REGION SYDDANMARK -- regional vækst- og udviklingsstrategi -- /
5.000
5.200
5.400
5.600
5.800
2nd half of2009
2nd half of2010
2nd half of2011
2nd half of2012
2nd half of2013
2nd half of2014
no.
of f
ull-
tim
e eq
uiv
alen
ts
Actual development Counterfactual development
532 job*575 job*
Indicated employment effects within Design and Creative IndustriesEmployment change in participating companies and estimated job creation
* The share of companies with positive growth are significantly higher among the parcipating companies (5 per cent significance)
proJect Start 2010 — 2011
4.200
4.400
4.600
4.800
5.000
5.200
2nd half of2009
2nd half of2010
2nd half of2011
2nd half of2012
2nd half of2013
2nd half of2014
no.
of f
ull-
tim
e eq
uiv
alen
ts
Actual development Counterfactual development
808 job*575 job*604 job*
Indicated employment effects within Energy efficiencyEmployment change in participating companies and estimated job creation
* The share of companies with positive growth are significantly higher among the parcipating companies (5 per cent significance)
proJect Start 2010 — 2011
Analyse_effektmåling_2015_engelsk.indd 11 24-05-2016 11:22:14
-- monitorering og effektmåling 2015 -- /12
700
850
1.000
1.150
1.300
2nd half of2009
2nd half of2010
2nd half of2011
2nd half of2012
2nd half of2013
2nd half of2014
no.
of f
ull-
tim
e eq
uiv
alen
ts
Actual development Counterfactual development
409 job*
238 job*
150 job*
Indicated employment effects within OffshoreEmployment change in participating companies and estimated job creation
* The share of companies with positive growth are significantly higher among the parcipating companies (5 per cent significance)
proJect Start 2010 — 2011
2.000
2.200
2.400
2.600
2.800
2nd half of2009
2nd half of2010
2nd half of2011
2nd half of2012
2nd half of2013
2nd half of2014
no.
of f
ull-
tim
e eq
uiv
alen
ts
Actual development Counterfactual development
473 job*268 job*
106 job*
Indicated employment effects within Health Care and Welfare innovationEmployment change in participating companies and estimated job creation
* The share of companies with positive growth are significantly higher among the parcipating companies (5 per cent significance)
proJect Start 2010 — 2011
Analyse_effektmåling_2015_engelsk.indd 12 24-05-2016 11:22:14
13REGION SYDDANMARK -- regional vækst- og udviklingsstrategi -- /
5.200
5.400
5.600
5.800
6.000
6.200
6.400
6.600
2nd half of2009
2nd half of2010
2nd half of2011
2nd half of2012
2nd half of2013
2nd half of2014
no.
of f
ull-
tim
e eq
uiv
alen
ts
Actual development Counterfactual development
864 job*633 job*387 job*
Indicated employment effects within Broad measuresEmployment change in participating companies and estimated job creation
* The share of companies with positive growth are significantly higher among the parcipating companies (5 per cent significance)
proJect Start 2010 — 2011
1.900
2.400
2.900
3.400
3.900
4.400
4.900
2nd half of2008
2nd half of2009
2nd half of2010
2nd half of2011
2nd half of2012
2nd half of2013
2nd half of2014
mill
ion
DK
K.
Actual development Counterfactual development
2.184 mio.kr.*2.528 mio.kr.*
Indicated turnover effects within Energy efficiencyTurnover change in participating companies and estimated turnover effects
proJect Start 2007 —2009
* The share of companies with positive growth are significantly higher among the parcipating companies (5 per cent significance)
Analyse_effektmåling_2015_engelsk.indd 13 24-05-2016 11:22:14
-- monitorering og effektmåling 2015 -- /14
1.200
1.400
1.600
1.800
2.000
2nd half of2008
2nd half of2009
2nd half of2010
2nd half of2011
2nd half of2012
2nd half of2013
2nd half of2014
mill
ion
DK
K.
Actual development Counterfactual development
569 mio.kr.*
495 mio.kr.*507 mio.kr.*346 mio.kr.*
Indicated turnover effects within OffshoreTurnover change in participating companies and estimated turnover effects
proJect Start 2007 —2009
* The share of companies with positive growth are significantly higher among the parcipating companies (5 per cent significance)
4.900
5.100
5.300
5.500
5.700
5.900
6.100
6.300
2nd half of2009
2nd half of2010
2nd half of2011
2nd half of2012
2nd half of2013
2nd half of2014
mill
ion
DK
K.
Actual development Counterfactual development
Indicated turnover effects within Design and creative industriesTurnover change in participating companies and estimated turnover effects
* The share of companies with positive growth are significantly higher among the parcipating companies (5 per cent significance)
proJect Start 2010 — 2011
Analyse_effektmåling_2015_engelsk.indd 14 24-05-2016 11:22:14
15REGION SYDDANMARK -- regional vækst- og udviklingsstrategi -- /
1.900
2.100
2.300
2.500
2.700
2.900
3.100
3.300
3.500
3.700
2nd half of2009
2nd half of2010
2nd half of2011
2nd half of2012
2nd half of2013
2nd half of2014
mill
ion
DK
K.
Actual development Counterfactual development
526 mio.kr.*
1.016 mio.kr.*
Indicated turnover effects within Health Care and Welfare InnovationTurnover change in participating companies and estimated turnover effects
* The share of companies with positive growth are significantly higher among the parcipating companies (5 per cent significance)
proJect Start 2010 — 2011
7.700
8.700
9.700
10.700
11.700
12.700
13.700
14.700
2nd half of2009
2nd half of2010
2nd half of2011
2nd half of2012
2nd half of2013
2nd half of2014
mill
ion
DK
K.
Actual development Counterfactual development
222 mio.kr.*
2.227 mio.kr.*2.098 mio.kr.*
Indicated turnover effects within Broad MeasuresTurnover change in participating companies and estimated turnover effects
* The share of companies with positive growth are significantly higher among the parcipating companies (5 per cent significance)
proJect Start 2010 — 2011
Analyse_effektmåling_2015_engelsk.indd 15 24-05-2016 11:22:14
Regional Udvikling / Strategi & Analyse Damhaven 12 DK - 7100 Vejle
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 pro-jects.
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 wi-thin 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 illustra-tive 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.
detgodeliv.regionsyddanmark.dk
attraktivaktiv
produktiv
VÆKST OG UDVIKLINGSSTRATEGI
Analyse_effektmåling_2015_engelsk.indd 16 24-05-2016 11:22:17