1 / 10
Module 1 · Activity 1.2 · 35 min
Systemic Bioeconomy Explorer
Navigate the connections between bio-based sectors in rural territories

This module lets you explore the six sectors of the rural circular bioeconomy at your own pace. Each sector has four layers: what it is, real examples from Euro-MED territories, the policy levers available, and reflection questions for your own territory.

By the end you will have identified which sectors and connections are most relevant to your territory — the essential input for Activity 1.3 (Ecosystem Mapping Template) and Activity 1.4 (Policy Checklist).

🗺 Guided pathway
Follow the recommended sequence for first-time users. Covers all six sectors in a logical order.
Recommended: Agriculture → Livestock → Forestry → Food Processing → Bioenergy → Water & Nutrients → EU Policy
🔍 Free exploration
Go directly to the sector most relevant to your territory. Use the diagram on Slide 2 to navigate.
Both paths lead to the same content
Open Activities 1.3 and 1.4 alongside this Genially. Each sector slide shows you exactly what to note in each template.
Overview · Six interconnected sectors
The rural circular bioeconomy system

Click any sector to explore it in depth. In a circular bioeconomy, one sector's waste becomes another's resource — the connections between sectors are where most of the untapped value lies.

🌾
Sector 1
Primary Agriculture

Foundation of the rural bioeconomy — food, fibre, energy crops, and biological residues.

Explore →
🐄
Sector 2
Livestock

Meat, dairy, eggs — and manure, by-products, and wastewater as circular inputs.

Explore →
🌲
Sector 3
Forestry

Wood cascades, agroforestry, processing residues — among the most underused rural resources.

Explore →
🏭
Sector 4
Food & Processing

By-products from olive oil, wine, dairy, and fruit processing — currently treated as disposal problems.

Explore →
⚡
Sector 5
Bioenergy

The circular connectors — receiving organic inputs from every sector and returning energy and nutrients.

Explore →
💧
Sector 6
Water & Nutrients

The circularity infrastructure — capturing, processing, and returning nutrients and water to productive use.

Explore →
Key systemic connections: Agricultural residues → Bioenergy (feedstock) → Nutrients (digestate) → Agriculture (fertiliser). Food processing by-products → Bioenergy or high-value compounds. Forestry residues → Bioenergy or bio-based materials. Water treatment → Nutrients → Agriculture. One sector's waste is the next sector's resource.
🌾 Sector 1 · Primary Agriculture
Primary Agriculture

Foundation of the rural circular bioeconomy. Food, fibre, energy crops — and the biological residues that, when managed circularly, become resources for every other sector.

Activity 1.3 → Section 1: Note the bio-based agricultural sectors active in your territory.  Activity 1.4: Regulatory and financial readiness for agricultural residue valorisation.
What it is
Examples
Policy levers
In my territory →1.3

Primary agriculture is the foundation of the rural circular bioeconomy. It produces food, fibre, and energy crops — but it also generates significant amounts of biological residues (crop residues, manure, organic waste) that are currently underused in most Euro-MED territories.

When managed circularly, these residues become resources: inputs for bioenergy, organic fertilisers, bio-based materials, and nutrient cycles that reduce dependence on synthetic inputs. The circular logic inverts the conventional view of agricultural by-products as a disposal problem — they become the raw material for the next cycle.

Key connections to other sectors: Crop residues → Bioenergy (feedstock for anaerobic digestion or combustion) · Manure → Water & Nutrients (nutrient recovery) · Organic matter → Soil health → higher productivity · Agricultural residues → Food & Processing (if they are food crop by-products).

🇪🇸 Andalusia, Spain
Olive oil pomace valorisation through cooperative shared facilities
Cooperatives in Jaén and Córdoba invested in shared facilities to extract polyphenols for cosmetics, process pomace for bioenergy, and recover nutrients from wastewater as biofertilisers — keeping value in the territory instead of disposing of it.
🇭🇷 Dalmatia, Croatia
Lavender and medicinal herb cultivation with short bio-based value chain
Small-scale distillation and drying cooperatives combine lavender cultivation with crop residue return to the soil as organic matter — reducing fertiliser costs and improving soil health in a territory with fragile karst soils.
EU Waste Framework Directive — By-product classification (Art. 5)
Establishes conditions under which agricultural residues can be classified as by-products rather than waste — avoiding waste legislation triggers. Spain's Ministry for Ecological Transition has published guidance applying this to agricultural organic residues. The Junta de Andalucía applied it specifically to olive pruning residues, allowing them as biomass fuel or composting feedstock without waste management procedures.
EAFRD agri-environment-climate measures
The European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development funds practices that manage biological residues circularly — cover cropping, organic matter management, integrated pest management. These are direct policy levers for encouraging circular management of agricultural residues at farm level.
Before answering: open Activity 1.3 Section 1 (bio-based value chains and key actors). These questions help you populate the agriculture rows of your Ecosystem Mapping Template.
Which bio-based agricultural sectors are most active in your territory? List them by scale — which generates the most volume?
What agricultural residue streams are currently underused or treated as waste? What volume, and who currently manages them?
What is the most significant missing connection between agriculture and another sector in your territory — and who would need to be involved to create it?
🐄 Sector 2 · Livestock
Livestock

From a circular bioeconomy perspective, livestock's most significant output is often what comes alongside: manure, slaughterhouse by-products, and wastewater — waste management challenges that become valuable circular inputs.

Activity 1.3 → Section 1: Note livestock-based value chains and actors.  Activity 1.4: Governance readiness for shared manure management infrastructure.
What it is
Examples
Policy levers
In my territory →1.3

Livestock farming produces meat, dairy, and eggs — but from a circular bioeconomy perspective its most significant output is often what comes alongside: manure, slaughterhouse by-products, and wastewater with high organic content.

These streams are waste management challenges when left untreated, releasing greenhouse gases and polluting water systems. But when integrated into circular flows, they become valuable inputs: manure that produces energy and organic fertiliser through anaerobic digestion; animal by-products that generate proteins and fats for industrial applications; and livestock that can actively maintain landscape ecosystems, supporting biodiversity and soil health.

Key connections: Manure → Bioenergy (anaerobic digestion feedstock) → Digestate → Agriculture (organic fertiliser). Slaughterhouse by-products → Bio-based materials (proteins, fats). Livestock grazing → Landscape management → Biodiversity.

🇧🇦 Bosnia-Herzegovina, Hadžići
Manure to energy: anaerobic digestion for renewable electricity and digestate
UNDP/GEF-supported pilots promote anaerobic digestion of cattle and sheep manure. The Spreča farm converts manure into electricity and nutrient-rich digestate, reducing reliance on synthetic fertilisers and addressing methane emissions and water contamination from untreated storage.
🇨🇾 Cyprus
Halloumi whey valorisation: from disposal cost to circular input
Sheep and goat dairy production for Halloumi generates vast volumes of whey with high organic load. EU-funded initiatives and the Cyprus Agricultural Payments Organisation promote whey protein recovery for animal feed and residual liquid in anaerobic digestion for biogas production.
Denmark — regulatory framework for manure valorisation (not disposal)
Since 1985, progressive measures (NPO Plan, Danish Energy Agreement) transitioned the sector from pollution control to resource optimisation. By 2021–22, ~25% of Danish livestock manure was processed through biogas plants. Target: 60–70% by 2030. Key enabler: digestate classified as "degassed manure" — governed by agricultural fertilisation rules, not waste legislation. This one classification decision is the most transferable policy instrument from the Danish experience.
EAFRD investment support for manure processing infrastructure
The European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development explicitly supports investment in shared manure management and biogas facilities through rural development measures. Cooperative structures are eligible as beneficiaries, making EAFRD the primary co-financing vehicle for shared anaerobic digestion infrastructure in rural territories.
Before answering: open Activity 1.3 Section 1 (bio-based value chains) and Section 5 (gaps and barriers). These questions populate both.
What are the main livestock sectors in your territory and how is manure currently managed — as a waste problem, a fertiliser input, or valued for energy?
Is there an existing cooperative structure or farmers' association that could serve as the governance foundation for a shared biogas or nutrient management initiative?
Which nutrient management challenge is most critical in your territory — excess nutrients polluting water bodies, deficit of affordable organic fertilisers, or absence of infrastructure?
🌲 Sector 3 · Forestry
Forestry

Forests and agroforestry systems are among the most resource-rich environments in rural territories — and among the most underused in terms of circular value creation. The cascade principle is the key.

Activity 1.3 → Section 1: Note forestry value chains and actors. Section 3: ITS and KTO connections to forestry.  Activity 1.4: Infrastructure readiness for shared processing.
What it is
Examples
Policy levers
In my territory →1.3

Forests and agroforestry systems are among the most resource-rich environments in rural territories, and among the most underused in terms of circular value creation. Sustainable forest management produces wood of varying quality, each grade suited to a different application in the cascade: high-quality wood for construction and furniture, lower grades for panels and engineered wood products, processing residues for bioenergy.

Agroforestry systems — where trees are integrated into agricultural land — add further value by improving soil health, retaining water, providing shade for livestock, and generating additional bio-based outputs alongside the primary agricultural crop.

Key connections: High-quality timber → Construction/furniture. Lower-grade wood → Panels/engineered products. Processing residues → Bioenergy. Agroforestry → Soil health → Agriculture. Bark and secondary extracts → Bio-based materials/pharmaceuticals.

🇭🇷 Gorski Kotar, Croatia
From raw timber export to cascade use model with local processing jobs
The Croatian Forest Research Institute promoted a cascade use transition: high-quality wood for furniture and finished goods; residues and lower-grade timber for bioenergy. EU-funded Danube Region Programme support created local processing jobs and increased energy self-sufficiency through biomass-based district heating.
🇮🇹 Sardinia, Italy
Cork oak cascade: bottle stoppers → insulation panels → sustainable construction
Sardinia's cork oak forests (Gallura and Barbagia regions) demonstrate the cascade principle: high-quality cork for traditional bottle stoppers; secondary grades processed into insulation panels and flooring for sustainable construction — retaining multiple value streams in territory.
Portugal and Spain — montado/dehesa integration into CAP Strategic Plans
The montado (Portugal) and dehesa (Spain) — agro-silvo-pastoral systems based on cork and holm oak — cover millions of hectares and are recognised in both countries' CAP Strategic Plans for 2023–2027 as priority agroforestry systems eligible for agri-environment-climate support. Portugal's plan includes specific measures for montado management and cork quality improvement. The EU's EAFRD has recognised agroforestry as an eligible investment category since 2014.
EAFRD forestry and agroforestry investment measures
The 2023–2027 EAFRD programming period has expanded support scope for agroforestry. Investment in shared processing infrastructure (sawmills, drying facilities, bark extraction) is eligible where it serves multiple smallholders. The key governance design requirement is a cooperative or inter-professional structure that can act as a single eligible beneficiary for shared infrastructure investment.
Before answering: open Activity 1.3 Sections 1 and 2 (value chains and natural resource base). These questions populate both sections.
What types of forest or agroforestry systems exist in your territory — and what proportion of the biological value they produce currently stays in territory versus leaving as raw material?
Is agroforestry recognised and supported in your territory's current CAP Strategic Plan implementation, regional land use plan, or rural development programme?
What shared processing infrastructure (sawmill, drying facility, bark extraction unit) would most change the economic logic of forestry in your territory — and what governance model would make it viable?
🏭 Sector 4 · Food & Processing
Food & Processing

Food and beverage processing generates significant by-product volumes that most facilities currently treat as disposal problems. In the Euro-MED context these by-products contain valuable compounds that can be recovered before residual material returns to the soil.

Activity 1.3 → Section 1: Note food processing value chains and by-product streams. Section 5: Note shared infrastructure gaps.  Activity 1.4: Infrastructure and regulatory readiness.
What it is
Examples
Policy levers
In my territory →1.3

Food and beverage processing transforms primary agricultural products into consumer goods and industrial inputs — and generates significant volumes of by-products and waste streams that most processing facilities currently treat as disposal problems.

In the Euro-MED context this includes olive pomace from oil production, grape marc and lees from winemaking, cheese whey from dairy processing, and vegetable processing residues. Each stream contains valuable compounds — polyphenols, proteins, organic acids, sugars, nutrients — that can be recovered for use in cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, food ingredients, or bioenergy before the residual material is composted or returned to the soil.

The shared infrastructure problem: Capturing this value requires shared processing infrastructure and market connections that individual small processors rarely have the scale or resources to develop alone. This is the primary policy design challenge in the Euro-MED food processing sector.

🇬🇷 Central Macedonia, Greece
Peach and nectarine processing residues → cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, food colouring
Research by Aristotle University of Thessaloniki confirmed processing residues from Imathia and Pella are rich in phenolic compounds, antioxidants, and carotenoids. EU-funded circular economy projects extract these bioactive compounds for cosmetics and pharmaceutical industries — transforming agricultural waste into a high-value revenue stream.
🇧🇦 Una-Sana Canton, Bosnia-Herzegovina
Berry processing pomace → premium seed oils and nutraceuticals for EU export
A small enterprise supported by the local development agency pilots berry seed oils and dried fruit powder from raspberry and blueberry processing pomace — marketed as premium food ingredients and nutraceuticals to specialty food distributors in the EU. A territorial proof-of-concept for high-value residue valorisation at micro-enterprise scale.
EU Waste Framework Directive — End-of-Waste criteria and by-product provisions
The Waste Framework Directive allows reclassification of specific waste streams as secondary raw materials through End-of-Waste criteria once they meet quality standards and have a market. For bio-based food processing streams, several member states use "by-product" provisions to classify materials as products rather than waste. Italy has been particularly active applying these provisions to olive pomace, grape marc, and food processing wastewater given the economic significance of its agri-food sectors.
ERDF and EAFRD shared processing infrastructure investment
Both structural funds can co-finance shared processing infrastructure for by-product valorisation. The critical design requirements: a cooperative or inter-professional structure as the eligible beneficiary; a confirmed group of at least 6–8 enterprises committed to using the facility; and a viable fee-per-unit pricing model that makes the facility financially sustainable without ongoing public subsidy.
Before answering: open Activity 1.3 Sections 1 and 5 (value chains and gaps). These questions populate both sections.
What are the main food and beverage processing sectors in your territory — and what volumes of by-products do they generate? Are those by-products currently treated as waste, composted, or already being valorised?
Do the main food processors in your territory operate within cooperative structures? Does a cooperative or inter-professional association already exist that could become the governance foundation for shared by-product valorisation infrastructure?
Does your territory's public procurement currently include any sustainability or bio-based criteria for food and catering in public institutions? If not, what would be needed to introduce them?
⚡ Sector 5 · Bioenergy
Bioenergy

Bioenergy and biogas systems are the circular connectors of the rural bioeconomy — receiving organic inputs from almost every other sector and converting them into renewable energy and valuable outputs.

Activity 1.3 → Section 1: Note bioenergy value chains. Section 4: Note energy policy instruments in your territory.  Activity 1.4: Infrastructure and regulatory readiness.
What it is
Examples
Policy levers
In my territory →1.3

Bioenergy and biogas systems are the circular connectors of the rural bioeconomy: they receive organic inputs from almost every other sector (crop residues, manure, food processing waste, forestry residues, municipal organic waste) and convert them into renewable energy and valuable outputs.

Anaerobic digestion is the most versatile technology in this context, producing biogas that can generate electricity and heat or be upgraded to biomethane for grid injection or vehicle fuel, and digestate that returns nutrients to agricultural soils. Combustion of solid biomass (wood chips, pellets, agricultural residues) generates heat and power for rural homes, public buildings, and industries.

The circular logic: Biological material that would otherwise be wasted or emit greenhouse gases in uncontrolled decomposition is instead captured, valorised, and returned to the system. Bioenergy is not a separate sector — it is the circularity mechanism that makes the connections between sectors work.

🇮🇹 Emilia-Romagna, Italy
Po Valley cooperative biogas and biomethane — one of Europe's densest clusters
Leveraging intense livestock and cereal farming, numerous agricultural firms operate under cooperative structures — pooling organic waste into shared facilities. Plants produce renewable energy for the grid and digestate as nutrient-rich organic fertiliser, replacing synthetic nitrogen and reducing greenhouse gas emissions from manure storage while keeping economic value within the local farming community.
🇨🇾 Limassol, Cyprus
ACUA programme — decentralised composting units for food waste from hotels and restaurants
The EU-funded ACUA programme established autonomous composting units targeting mass-catering establishments (hotels and restaurants) to manage food waste within the urban network. Organic waste is transformed into compost directly supporting landfill diversion goals — a small-scale, distributed bioenergy and nutrient circularity model.
Germany — Renewable Energy Sources Act (EEG) as rural biogas model
Enacted in 2000 and revised multiple times, the EEG introduced guaranteed feed-in tariffs and priority grid access for renewable energy producers regardless of scale — enabling farm-scale biogas plants to proliferate. By the mid-2010s, Germany had over 8,000 biogas plants, the large majority on or near agricultural holdings. Subsequent revisions reduced subsidies for energy crops and redirected incentives toward waste-based feedstocks — demonstrating how policy design can be adjusted to align biogas development with circular economy objectives over time.
ERDF and EAFRD — bioenergy infrastructure investment
Both funds support bioenergy infrastructure investment in rural territories. Grid connection rules and feed-in arrangements are the critical enabling conditions — without them, small rural energy producers cannot sell surplus energy. In many Euro-MED territories, administrative and technical barriers to grid connection for small producers remain the most binding constraint on rural bioenergy development.
Before answering: open Activity 1.3 Sections 1 and 4 (value chains and policy instruments). These questions populate both sections.
What organic waste streams are currently generated in your territory that could serve as feedstock for a biogas or biomethane system? Are any already being used for energy, or are they all going to landfill?
What is the current status of grid connection rules and feed-in arrangements for small renewable energy producers in your national or regional context?
Are there public buildings in your territory currently heated with fossil fuels that could be retrofitted with a local bio-based heating system? What would the governance and financing model look like?
💧 Sector 6 · Water & Nutrients
Water & Nutrients

The circularity infrastructure of the rural bioeconomy — the systems that capture, process, and return biological nutrients and water to productive use rather than allowing them to become pollutants.

Activity 1.3 → Section 2: Note natural resource base (water). Section 5: Note water and nutrient management gaps.  Activity 1.4: Governance readiness for inter-institutional coordination.
What it is
Examples
Policy levers
In my territory →1.3

Water and nutrient management is the circularity infrastructure of the rural bioeconomy: the systems that capture, process, and return biological nutrients and water to productive use rather than allowing them to become pollutants. Agricultural and food processing activities generate wastewater and runoff rich in nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium — nutrients that, if recovered, can replace the synthetic fertilisers that represent one of the largest costs and carbon footprints in rural production systems.

Composting, struvite recovery, constructed wetlands, and advanced wastewater treatment all offer pathways for closing nutrient loops. Water management is equally important in the water-stressed Euro-MED territory, where competition for water between agriculture, industry, and urban uses is already a significant governance challenge — and will intensify with climate change.

Key connections: Agricultural runoff → Nutrient recovery → Fertiliser → Agriculture. Food processing wastewater → Treatment → Water reuse for irrigation. Constructed wetlands → Water purification + Biomass production → Bioenergy.

🇬🇷 Thessaly, Greece
Treated wastewater reuse for irrigation to address severe groundwater deficit
The Thessaly plain faces severe water deficit from intensive agricultural over-extraction. Regional authorities implement treated wastewater reuse for irrigation — reducing freshwater demand and dependency on synthetic fertilisers. A direct policy response to a governance challenge that will intensify with climate change across the Euro-MED territory.
🇧🇦 Una River Basin, Bosnia-Herzegovina
Constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment protecting Una National Park tourism economy
The Una River faces documented environmental pressure from untreated municipal wastewater and agricultural runoff. Nature-based solutions — constructed wetlands using aquatic plants like common reed — filter pollutants before they reach the river, protecting the water quality that underpins the territory's nature tourism economy. A dual-function infrastructure: water treatment and potential biomass production.
Netherlands — watershed-scale nutrient management framework under the Nitrates Directive
The most systematic watershed-scale nutrient management framework in Europe, driven by exceptional livestock density. Instruments include a manure processing obligation for farms in nutrient-excess areas, mandatory manure transfer records, and a national manure bank facilitating redistribution of processed manure to nutrient-deficit areas. Though more intensive than Euro-MED contexts, the policy instruments — nutrient accounting, processing obligations, redistribution infrastructure — are transferable models adaptable to Mediterranean agricultural landscapes.
EU Water Framework Directive and Nitrates Directive
The Water Framework Directive requires member states to achieve good ecological status for water bodies — creating a regulatory driver for addressing agricultural and food processing runoff at watershed scale. The Nitrates Directive sets limits on nitrogen application from agricultural sources. Both directives create compliance obligations that, combined with the EAFRD agri-environment measures, can be aligned to support circular nutrient management investments.
Before answering: open Activity 1.3 Sections 2 and 5 (natural resource base and gaps). These questions populate both sections.
How severe is water stress in your territory? Is groundwater declining, are rivers running low in summer, or is competition for irrigation water already creating conflicts between agricultural, industrial, and urban users?
Is there a nutrient management challenge in your territory — excess nitrogen or phosphorus entering water bodies — and is it currently being addressed at the farm level, the watershed level, or not at all?
Are there wetland areas or degraded natural habitats in your territory that could be restored as constructed wetland systems serving a dual function (water treatment and biomass production)?
EU Policy Architecture · Four instruments
The EU policy and funding architecture

Four EU policy instruments form the strategic and financial architecture for all rural circular bioeconomy work. Click any card to read the full description, why it matters, and what your institution can do. Your answers feed into Activity 1.3 Section 4 and Activity 1.4.

Activity 1.3 → Section 4: Policy instruments and funding programmes.  Activity 1.4: Complete the full policy checklist after reading all four instruments.
Policy instrument 1
European Green Deal (2019)

Overarching EU strategy for climate neutrality by 2050. The legitimacy anchor for all rural bioeconomy work — the highest-level political commitment your proposals can connect to.

Every bioeconomy investment framed in Green Deal terms has a stronger political case. Read what this means for your funding applications →
Policy instrument 2
EU Bioeconomy Strategic Framework 2025

Adopted November 2025. Positions the EU bioeconomy — valued at ~€2.7 trillion — as a pillar of industrial competitiveness and circular growth. First time explicitly aimed at SMEs and startups in rural areas.

The next 2 years are the most important window for influencing how this is translated into national programming. Read what to do now →
Policy instrument 3
Territorial Cohesion Policy (ERDF & EAFRD)

The funds that pay for the investments that translate bioeconomy strategy into physical reality. ERDF for regional innovation and infrastructure. EAFRD for rural sustainability. Both operate via co-financing through Managing Authorities.

A strategy without a clear map of which structural fund measures finance which investments has no implementation plan. Read how to build that map →
Policy instrument 4
Smart Specialisation Strategy (S3)

The most important governance lever for directing structural fund investment toward bio-based value chains. If bioeconomy is in your region's S3, ERDF co-financing for bio-based innovation is accessible. If not, it is significantly harder.

Getting bioeconomy into the S3 is a strategic governance priority. Read how →
How the four instruments connect: Green Deal sets the political direction → Bioeconomy Strategy 2025 provides the sectoral mandate → ERDF and EAFRD fund the investments → S3 determines which bioeconomy investments are eligible for ERDF. A proposal that explicitly connects all four is significantly stronger than one that references only one.
Activity complete · Your two outputs
Now complete Activities 1.3 and 1.4

You have explored all six bio-based sectors and the EU policy architecture. The reflection questions from each sector, and your answers to the EU policy self-assessment, are the inputs your two downloadable templates need.

Activity 1.3 · ~40 min
Regional Bioeconomy Ecosystem Mapping Template

A six-section structured template mapping your territory's bio-based assets, value chains, institutional actors, policy instruments, gaps, and EU strategic alignment. Use what you explored here as the evidence base for each section.

1
Section 1 — Bio-based value chains and key actors: Use your notes from Sectors 1–6 (the "In my territory" tabs).
2
Section 2 — Natural resource base: Use Forestry (Sector 3) and Water & Nutrients (Sector 6) reflection answers.
3
Section 3 — Institutional actors: Note the universities, ITS, KTOs, associations, and cooperatives relevant to each sector explored.
4
Section 4 — Policy instruments: Use your EU Policy (Slide 9) notes — ERDF OP name, EAFRD CAP Plan name, Managing Authority, S3 priority check.
5
Section 5 — Gaps and opportunities: Use the missing connections you identified in each sector's "In my territory" tab.
6
Section 6 — EU strategic alignment: Use the four Green Deal self-reflection answers from Slide 9.
Activity 1.4 · ~20 min
Policy Checklist for Rural Startup Readiness

A structured self-assessment across five dimensions: regulatory, financial, infrastructure, skills, and governance. Your answers generate a priority list of areas where policy action is most needed — feeding directly into your Regional Action Plan in Module 10.

1
Regulatory dimension: Use the policy lever tabs from all six sectors. What regulatory barriers came up most frequently for your territory?
2
Financial dimension: Use the ERDF/EAFRD and S3 notes from Slide 9. Which measures are accessible? Which require S3 inclusion first?
3
Infrastructure dimension: Use the shared infrastructure gaps identified in Sectors 1–6. Which is the most binding missing piece?
4
Skills dimension: Note where the reflection questions surfaced capacity gaps in your institution or in the enterprises you support.
5
Governance dimension: Use the cooperative structure and multi-actor platform gaps identified across all six sectors.
Both templates feed into Module 10 (Regional Action Plan). The Ecosystem Mapping Template becomes the territorial baseline. The Policy Checklist becomes the priority reform agenda. The more specific and honest your answers here, the more useful your Regional Action Plan will be.