The Experts below are selected from a list of 29412 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

John Bachtler - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • The contribution of EUropean Structural Funds to territorial cohesion
    Town Planning Review, 2005
    Co-Authors: Laura Polverari, John Bachtler
    Abstract:

    In considering how EU Regional Policy should evolve in future, there may be useful lessons in the recent experience of implementing the Structural Funds. While it is true that the long-standing objectives of EUropean Regional Policy have been primarily concerned with reducing economic and social disparities, it can be argued that the Structural Funds are already contributing to increased territorial cohesion within the EU. This paper pursues this proposition. It begins by examining the evolution of Structural Fund programmes over the past 15 years and then discusses the strategic objectives of Objective 1 and Objective 2 programmes, covering both the 1994–99 and 2000–06 programming periods. The paper considers explanations for the shifts identified, before concluding with some reflections about the future importance of territorial cohesion within EU Regional Policy.

  • Enlargement and EU Regional Policy
    2004
    Co-Authors: John Bachtler, Ruth Downes
    Abstract:

    The following paper examines the arguments about enlargement and cohesion with a summary of one of the preparatory studies undertaken for the Second Cohesion Report, as well as references to some of the Commission’s own research. The paper then outlines some of the options for the future of EU Regional Policy, describing four possible scenarios originally put forward in a discussion paper before concluding with some questions for discussion.

  • The transfer of EU Regional Policy to the countries of central and eastern EUrope : can one size fit all?
    2002
    Co-Authors: John Bachtler, Ruth Downes, Irene Mcmaster, Philip Raines, Sandra Taylor
    Abstract:

    ESRC Future Governance Paper discussing the transfer of EU Regional Policy to the countries of central and eastern EUrope.

  • EU enlargement and structural funds in scotland
    Quarterly Economic Commentary, 2001
    Co-Authors: John Bachtler
    Abstract:

    For over two decades, Scotland has been a major beneficiary of the Regional Policy of the EUropean Union (EU). By 2006, it is expected that Scotland will have received around £7 billion under the Structural Funds since the inception of ERDF in 1975. During the 1990s, when Structural Fund expenditure in Scotland was at its maximum, some two thirds of the Scottish population were covered by areas eligible for EU Regional Policy support, averaging over £250 million per year. In the current budget planning period (2000-2006), Scotland will receive a total of £1,094 million for the various EU-funded programmes now under way. This EUropean funding is now under threat. As the EU prepares for enlargement to take in up to 12 new members over the next decade, plans are being made to redirect Structural Funds to the poorer countries of Central and Eastern EUrope. Many of these countries have income levels well below those of the EU Member States, with extensive poverty, underdevelopment and industrial dereliction. Tackling these problems will be the priority for future EU Regional Policy, with any remaining available Structural Funds going largely to the present less-developed countries of the EU - Greece, Portugal and Spain. Without an increase in EU budgetary resources, it seems unlikely that the richer EU Member States, including the UK, can expect to receive much, or maybe any, funding under EU Regional Policy, after the end of the current budgetary period in 2006. The following paper considers the implications of the next reform of EU Regional Policy for Scotland. It begins by reviewing the political context for enlargement and the economic development challenges, and then reviews the emerging debate on scenarios for reform, identifying the issues for Scotland.

  • reforming the structural funds challenges for EU Regional Policy
    European Planning Studies, 1998
    Co-Authors: John Bachtler
    Abstract:

    Abstract The reform of the Structural Funds is intended to improve the efficiency of EU Regional Policy and accommodate the costs of EU enlargement through concentration of spending, simplification of bureaucracy and decentralisation of administration. For much of the past year, the key budgetary decisions have been deadlocked, pending the outcome of the German elections. Unlike previous reforms, the richer Member States are unwilling to make an increased contribution to the EU budget, and several are pressing for their budgetary imbalances to be reduced, a stance opposed by cohesion countries concerned at the implications of EU enlargement. The other contentious negotiating issue is area designation: the indicators and data used for designating the new Objective 1 and 2 areas; and the proposed coherence between designated Regional policies. With respect to programming, the Commission proposes to withdraw from detailed involvement in programme implementation but intends to maintain influence by specifying...

Gabriele Tondl - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • EU Regional Policy. Experiences and future concerns.
    2004
    Co-Authors: Gabriele Tondl
    Abstract:

    The EUropean Union's Regional Policy has become one of its principal Policy areas: It accounts for a major share of EU's budget and is of essential interest for its beneficiaries, the Southern countries and the new EU members of 2004. Created with the ambition to reduce income differences between countries and regions in the EU, it did not only achieve success and thus has also repeatedly been criticised. This paper wishes to present the most important facts of EU Regional Policy as it developed during the past two decades. It starts with the historical development and discusses the major theoretical arguments which motivate EU Regional Policy. Consequently, the Policy priorities, the so-called "objectives", are presented and the financial contribution made by the Structural Funds to old and new members is shown. The experience in objective 1 areas: Ireland, Spain, Portugal, Greece, the Italian South and East Germany, are discussed in detail. A look at the variety of Regional problems in objective 2 areas follows. The paper concludes with the main arguments involved in the present drafting stage of the future EU Regional Policy. (author's abstract)

  • Will the New EU Regional Policy Meet the Challenges of Enlargement
    Advances in Spatial Science, 2002
    Co-Authors: Gabriele Tondl
    Abstract:

    The EUropean Union has established an important tool to solve its cohesion problem, given by the substantial disparities in economic development between its members, with EU Regional Policy. This Policy concentrated its support on the lagging regions of the Union, the cohesion countries, Spain, Ireland, Portugal and Greece, and other objective 1 regions such as Southern Italy and East Germany. But EU Policy support is also an important tool to solve Regional problems in the richer EU members under the objective 2 Policy.

  • EU Regional Policy in the Periphery: Lessons for the Future
    SSRN Electronic Journal, 1998
    Co-Authors: Gabriele Tondl
    Abstract:

    This article analyzes the EUropean periphery's economic development and its experience with EU Regional programmes in the light of recent discussions on EU Regional Policy after 2000. After EU Regional Policy support increased in 1989, many regions advanced considerably in development, but others did not. Many used structural funds transfers for focused development policies with significant growth effects, but other experiences disappoint. Some regions could not assure efficient programme management and EU Regional policies are too complex. Future policies need to mobilize Regional entreprenEUrship and innovation, rather than competition for investment with generous grants, and to rebalance the present focus on infrastructure. Training is not sufficient to fight unemployment; creating new jobs also requires more flexible labour market regulation. As EU funding will decline after 2000 - with as much as a quarter of the peripheral regions losing objective 1 status, correct policies are vital.

  • EU Regional Policy in the Southern Periphery: Lessons for the Future
    1998
    Co-Authors: Gabriele Tondl
    Abstract:

    This article analyzes the EUropean periphery’s economic development and its experience with EU Regional programmes in the light of recent discussions on EU Regional Policy after 2000. After EU Regional Policy support increased in 1989, many regions advanced considerably in development, but others did not. Many used structural funds transfers for focused development policies with significant growth effects, but other experiences disappoint. Some regions could not assure efficient programme management and EU Regional policies are too complex. Future policies need to mobilize Regional entreprenEUrship and innovation, rather than competition for investment with generous grants, and to rebalance the present focus on infrastructure. Training is not sufficient to fight unemployment; creating new jobs also requires more flexible labour market regulation. As EU funding will decline after 2000 with as much as a quarter of the peripheral regions losing objective 1 status, correct policies are vital.

  • EU Regional Policy in the Southern Periphery: Lessons for the Future
    South European Society and Politics, 1998
    Co-Authors: Gabriele Tondl
    Abstract:

    Abstract This article analyzes the EUropean southern periphery's economic development and its experience with EU Regional programmes in the light of recent discussions on EU Regional Policy after 2000. After EU Regional Policy support increased in 1989, many regions advanced considerably in development, but others did not. Many used structural funds transfers for focused development policies with significant growth effects, but other experiences disappoint. Some regions could not assure efficient programme management and EU Regional policies are too complex. Future policies need to mobilize Regional entreprenEUrship and innovation, rather than competition for investment with generous grants, and to rebalance the present focus on infrastructure. Training is not sufficient to fight unemployment; creating new jobs also requires more flexible labour market regulation. As EU funding will decline after 2000 – with as much as a quarter of the peripheral regions losing ‘Objective 1’ status – correct policies are ...

Roberta Capello - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Regional innovation patterns and the EU Regional Policy reform toward smart innovation policies
    Growth and Change, 2013
    Co-Authors: Roberto Camagni, Roberta Capello
    Abstract:

    In the recent EU Regional Policy debate, two main documents captured the interest of experts: the EU Report EUrope 2020 (EUropean Commission 2010a), which presents the general context in which EUrope will act in the next decade, and the Barca Report to Commissioner for Regional Policies, Danuta Hubner (Barca 2009), paving the way towards a reformed Regional Policy. The first Report proposes a strategy based on three pillars—namely, smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. The second report discusses and proposes a new process of EU Regional Policy Reform, launched in preparation of the new programming period 2014–2020; in particular, the rationale, economic justification, conditionality, process design and delivery style of Regional Policy itself are discussed, supplying wide material for institutional and political decisions.

  • Regional innovation patterns and the EU Regional Policy reform towards smart innovation policies
    Growth and Change, 2013
    Co-Authors: Roberto Camagni, Roberta Capello
    Abstract:

    In the recent EU Regional Policy debate, two main documents captured the interest of experts: the EU Report EUrope 2020 (EUropean Commission 2010a), which presents the general context in which EUrope will act in the next decade, and the Barca Report to Commissioner for Regional Policies, Danuta Hubner (Barca 2009), paving the way towards a reformed Regional Policy. The first Report proposes a strategy based on three pillars—namely, smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. The second report discusses and proposes a new process of EU Regional Policy Reform, launched in preparation of the new programming period 2014–2020; in particular, the rationale, economic justification, conditionality, process design and delivery style of Regional Policy itself are discussed, supplying wide material for institutional and political decisions.

Monika Mura - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Who is the Culprit for EU Regional Policy
    International Studies Review, 2008
    Co-Authors: Monika Mura
    Abstract:

    Conditional Leadership: The EUropean Commission and EUropean Regional Policy. By Jennifer R. Wozniak Boyle Lexington Books, 2006. 304 pp., $99.00 cloth (0-7391-1480-8), $34.95 (ISBN: 0-7391-1481-6). Jennifer Boyle's Conditional Leadership: The EUropean Commission and the EUropean Regional Policy is a contribution to the literature on EU Policymaking and the theory of EUropean integration. Boyle's basic thesis is that the EU Commission has played a leading role in shaping EU Regional Policy, ensuring, to the extent possible, that it corresponds to its desires. The rationale for the book rests on Boyle's desire to dispel the existing misunderstandings of the functions of the Commission, which she calls “the most vilified” of EU institutions (p. 2) because of its clashes with national governments (particularly the UK, France, and Italy), and the common belief that the Commission has no voice in shaping EU policies. Boyle's analysis demonstrates that the image of a powerless Commission is not valid. In fact, because of its agenda-setting role and through its use of various tactics (including package deals), the Commission has been able to play a significant role in defining the content of the Union's socioeconomic cohesion Policy and the instruments through which that Policy is pursued. Boyle concentrates in particular on the design and subsequent reforms of the EUropean Fund for Regional Development (ERDF), in part because the ERDF reflects the degree of integration among member states …

Michael Baun - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • EU Regional Policy and the Candidate States: Poland and the Czech Republic
    Journal of European Integration, 2002
    Co-Authors: Michael Baun
    Abstract:

    As relatively poor countries, the candidate states from Central and Eastern EUrope will be major recipients of structural funds assistance once they join the EU. This prospect raises important questions about the impact of Regional Policy on the territorial politics of candidate states. Chief among these is whether EU Regional Policy will promote the same trends towards political decentralisation and Regionalism in the Central and Eastern EUrope Countries (CEECs) that it is claimed to have promoted in current member states. To answer this question, this article compares preparations for accession by two candidate states, the Czech Republic and Poland. It finds that preparations for EU Regional Policy have indeed been an important factor promoting administrative decentralisation in these new democracies, but the longer-term impact of EU Regional Policy on the territorial politics of these countries, and by implication other candidate states, remains difficult to assess.

  • The EU as a Regional Actor: The Case of the Czech Republic
    JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 2002
    Co-Authors: Dan Marek, Michael Baun
    Abstract:

    This article examines the impact of EU enlargement on Regionalization in the Czech Republic. It asks whether pre-accession preparations for EU Regional Policy have promoted Regionalization and governmental decentralization in the Czech Republic, a question prompted by the debate about EU Regional Policy and Regionalization in the current Member States. After reviewing Czech preparations for EU Regional Policy and the administration of pre-accession structural aid programmes, it concludes that the EU’s impact on Regionalization in the Czech Republic has been both limited and highly ambivalent. The article thus confirms the findings of previous research on EU enlargement and Regionalization in the candidate countries.