18. Considers that the EU and the Member States should take action notably to enhance the use of the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund as a catalyst for attracting additional funding from the EIB, EBRD, other international financial institutions and the private sector, while encouraging initiatives based on public-private partnerships (PPP), such as EU Project Bonds; notes that SMEs can particularly benefit from investments that strengthen capacities, infrastructure and human capital; recognises the potential of extending the scope of innovative financial instruments so that they are used to greater effect as access to finance to c ...[+++]omplement traditional financing methods; stresses that the revolving nature of financial instruments and a flexible approach to integrating such instruments at regional level could achieve a multiplying effect of the EU budget, foster public-private partnerships, open up alternative sources of finance and provide an important new financing stream for strategic investments, supporting long-term, sustainable investments at a time of fiscal constraint;

50. Emphasises that the EU has enormous strength in its cities and that major urban infrastructure projects and innovative business parks provide the strongest appeal to investment; urges the Member States to undertake large-scale investment in infrastructure, new technologies and RD, including multimodal transport systems, in order to enhance the liveability and competitiveness of Europe's cities, building on their traditional strengths while ensuring that this investment is not detrimental to real territorial cohesion and balanced ...[+++]rural development;

The measures should aim to provide for social resilience policies, economic diversification or investment to improve competitiveness, where this is a viable strategy, taking into account the results of and experiences gained through the Special System of Assistance to traditional ACP suppliers of bananas[7] and the Special Framework of Assistance to traditional ACP suppliers of bananas[8].

The assessment of risk capital therefore implies a departure from the traditional way in which State aid control is carried out.

Provision of risk capital funding to enterprises cannot be linked to the traditional concept of ‘eligible costs’ used for State aid control, which relies on certain specified costs for which aid is allowed and the setting of maximum aid intensities.

The prohibition of Article 88(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 does not apply to aid relating to investments undertaken predominantly in the public interest and related to the conservation of traditional landscapes shaped by agricultural and forestry activities or to the relocation of farm buildings, the protection and improvement of the environment, improvement of the hygiene conditions of livestock undertakings and animal welfare and occupational safety at the workplace;