Cohesion policies are a mean to support European integration. This esay indicates the main financial instruments which are to achieve cohesion.
It identifies crucial factors leading to successful implementation of European funding programmes.
The essay addresses the following issues:
1. Analysis of the relationship between the two objectives of the cohesion policies, growth and reduction of disparities.
Are there any contradictions or tension between these objectives or do they just complement each other?
2. Analysis and comparison of the priorities of the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and the European Social Fund (ESF) in the light of the overall objectives for
the cohesion policies. What are their differences in scope? Where are similarities? Where are potential synergies?
3. For the funding period 2007-2013 the budget of the European Structural Funds is dedicated
to certain objectives and financial instruments. How is the present distribution of the financial means of the Structural Funds? What are the main reasons and criteria having guided the decision for this distribution? Assessment of the adequacy of the existing distribution and reasons for the conception.
4. Besides the European Structural Funds there are a large number of European funding
programmes covering a broad range of thematic subjects. Systematical differentiation between sources of European funding.
5. According to a commonly agreed Operational Programme the means of the European
Structural Funds are implemented decentralized by the Member States or the regions. Based
on this framework, it is up the national and regional governments to make the best use of
European money. How can the quality of regional public administration services contribute to an effective and efficient implementation of the European Structural Funds?
Table of Contents
1. Traditionally cohesion policies are to reduce disparities in social and economic welfare between different regions and/or groups within the EU. With the renewed Lisbon strategy, sustainable growth for the entire EU has become the most important objective and following a guiding principle for European cohesion policies, too. Analyze the relationship between these two objectives of the cohesion policies, growth and reduction of disparities. Do you discern any contradictions or tension between these objectives or do they just complement each other?
A) THE RELEVANCE OF THE LISBON STRATEGY
B) CONFLICTING OR COMPLEMENTING INTERESTS IN EU POLICIES
2. In the regulation for the European Regional Development Fund (EC) No. 1080/2006 and in the regulation for the European Social Fund (EC) 1081/2006 you will find that assistance granted to Member States is focussed on certain thematic priorities. You are asked to analyse and to compare the priorities of both Funds in the light of the overall objectives for the cohesion policies. What are their differences in scope? Where are similarities? Where are potential synergies?
A) STRUCTURAL FUNDS
B) THE CONVERGENCE OBJECTIVE
C) THE REGIONAL COMPETITIVENESS AND EMPLOYMENT OBJECTIVE
D) DIFFERENCES AND SIMILARITIES
3. For the funding period 2007-2013 the budget of the European Structural Funds is dedicated to certain objectives and financial instruments. How is the present distribution of the financial means of the Structural Funds? What are the main reasons and criteria having guided the decision for this distribution? Please assess the adequacy of the existing distribution and give reasons for your conception.
A) DISTRIBUTION OF THE FINANCIAL MEANS OF THE STRUCTURAL FUNDS
B) MAIN REASONS AND CRITERIA FOR THE DECISION FOR THE FUNDING DISTRIBUTION
C) ASSESSMENT OF THE ADEQUACY OF THE EXISTING DISTRIBUTION
4. Besides the European Structural Funds there is a large number of European funding programmes covering a broad range of thematic subjects. According to self-developed criteria you are asked to differentiate systematically between these two sources of European funding.
5. According to a commonly agreed Operational Programme the means of the European Structural Funds are implemented decentralized by the Member States or the regions. Based on this framework, it is up the national and regional governments to make the best use of European money. You are asked to demonstrate how the quality of regional public administration services can contribute to an effective and efficient implementation of the European Structural Funds. In your argumentation you should make reference to empirical examples.
Objectives and Topics
This paper examines European cohesion policies and their interaction with the renewed Lisbon strategy, focusing on the allocation of structural funds, their thematic priorities, and their implementation at regional levels. It explores whether these policies complement each other or face inherent contradictions, while assessing the efficiency of their financial distribution and the critical role of public administration quality.
- The relationship between the Lisbon strategy's growth objectives and cohesion policy goals.
- Comparative analysis of the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and the European Social Fund (ESF).
- Evaluation of financial distribution criteria for the 2007-2013 budget period.
- Systematic differentiation between structural funds and general European funding programmes.
- The impact of public administration quality on the effective implementation of European structural funding.
Excerpt from the book
b) Conflicting or complementing interests in EU policies
Areas of Complementary Economic growth, high employment and low unemployment are objectives shared by the Structural Funds and the Lisbon Strategy. They both also share the premise that growth and development should not be achieved at the cost of environmental degradation: Economic development should be environmentally sustainable. Social inclusion is to a great extent also a shared objective for the Structural Funds and the Lisbon Strategy2.
Areas of Conflict While the Lisbon Strategy’s vision is ”a dynamic, competitive and knowledge-based economy”, the fundamental vision of the Structural Funds is “an economically and socially cohesive Community”, pointing to a concern for regional economic disparities.3 In terms of available funding, the Structural Funds have an explicit spatial dimension to their objectives. Development is to be supported in specific Member States, regions, or areas, either being defined by relative poverty, low population densities, remoteness, or structural economic weaknesses4. On the other hand, the spatial dimension plays a very minor role in the Lisbon Strategy. The strategy and it´s objectives are defined as a strategy for the European Union as such, not for specific regions, states, or territories within the Union.5 “The Community Lisbon Programme sets out the EU-level priorities for the next three years.”6
Summary of Chapters
1. Traditionally cohesion policies are to reduce disparities...: This chapter analyzes the tension and complementarity between the Lisbon Strategy's focus on aggregate growth and the Cohesion Policy's goal of reducing regional economic disparities.
2. In the regulation for the European Regional Development Fund (EC) No. 1080/2006 and in the regulation for the European Social Fund (EC) 1081/2006...: This section compares the thematic priorities, scope, and synergies of the ERDF and ESF, specifically within the Convergence and Regional Competitiveness and Employment objectives.
3. For the funding period 2007-2013 the budget of the European Structural Funds is dedicated to certain objectives and financial instruments...: This chapter reviews the financial distribution of structural funds, examines the criteria behind these decisions, and critically assesses whether the current distribution successfully fosters convergence.
4. Besides the European Structural Funds there is a large number of European funding programmes covering a broad range of thematic subjects...: This chapter establishes criteria to differentiate between European structural funds and other community funding programmes, highlighting differences in management, strategy, and implementation.
5. According to a commonly agreed Operational Programme the means of the European Structural Funds are implemented decentralized by the Member States or the regions...: This final chapter demonstrates how the institutional quality and administrative performance of national and regional governments are essential prerequisites for the effective implementation of structural funds.
Keywords
European Union, Cohesion Policy, Structural Funds, Lisbon Strategy, ERDF, ESF, Regional Development, Economic Growth, Financial Distribution, Public Administration, Institutional Capacity, Convergence Objective, Sustainability, Policy Implementation, EU Budget.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the central focus of this work?
This work examines the relationship between European cohesion policies and the Lisbon strategy, analyzing how these frameworks interact to promote economic growth and reduce regional disparities within the EU.
What are the primary thematic areas covered?
The main themes include the structural funds (ERDF/ESF), the financial distribution for the 2007-2013 period, the distinction between structural and community funding, and the role of administrative efficiency.
What is the primary research goal?
The primary goal is to assess the synergy and potential contradictions between the Lisbon strategy's economic objectives and the cohesion policy's social and regional development targets.
Which scientific methods are employed?
The author uses a comparative analytical approach, examining regulatory frameworks, budget allocations, and empirical evidence to evaluate the effectiveness of policy implementation.
What does the main body address?
The main body details the operational differences between the ERDF and ESF, the criteria for budget distribution, and the impact of public administration quality on achieving regional cohesion.
Which keywords characterize this study?
Key terms include European Structural Funds, Lisbon Strategy, regional convergence, institutional capacity, and cohesion policy.
How does the author view the 'spatial dimension' in EU policies?
The author highlights that while structural funds have an explicit spatial focus on specific regions, the Lisbon Strategy is defined for the European Union as a whole, focusing on broader economic goals.
What empirical examples does the author provide for administrative capacity?
The author references administrative capacity measures in Estonia and Hungary, as well as comparisons of structural policy effects between Ireland and East Germany.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Claudia Harms (Autor:in), 2008, European Cohesion Policies, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/121319
