scholarly journals The EU cohesion policy and economic development of Poland

Equilibrium ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 31-48
Author(s):  
Tomasz Dorożyński
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Economic Development ◽  
Equal Opportunity ◽  
Social Economic ◽  
Added Value ◽  
Individual Member ◽  
Cohesion Policy ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Eu

In order to remove regional economic disparities, the EU realizes the cohesion policy. The evaluation of the cohesion policy from the point of view of experiences of individual member states and the EU is not explicit. What is especially controversial here, are unsuccessful attempts to reach the main goal, which is social, economic and territorial cohesion. It does not mean the negation of outcomes of numerous researches which confirm a positive influence of the cohesion policy on the economic growth. The subject for a discussion is the right balance between the equality and effectiveness. The key issue is an answer to the question who and how to support. The question is whether the aid should be directed at the areas which guarantee the highest added value? Should it be the priority to give equal opportunity to the poorest and to support them? At present the cohesion policy is trying to combine both those goals. However, with the limited measures and rising social, economic and territorial disparities, those actions are ineffective. The pace of economic growth in Poland in the recent years – bigger than the average in the EU – has contributed to the making up for part of a development distance towards the rest of the member states. The cohesion policy had some participation in this process. The evaluation of the influence of the cohesion policy is not easy, though. One has to, however, separate its influence from other factors affecting the social-economic situation of the regions. The main aim of the article is an evaluation of the role of the EU cohesion policy in the stimulation of social-economic development of Poland, in particular its impact on the economy of the regions. The research method is an analysis of the literature of the subject. The bases of the conducted research were: statistical data, program documents, reports, national and EU law, quantitative and qualitative research and secondary sources presented in various studies.

Cohesion Policy and European Union Politics

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simona Piattoni ◽  
Laura Polverari
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Economic Development ◽  
Added Value ◽  
Management Approach ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Cohesion Policy ◽  
Progressive Alignment ◽  
Member States ◽  
Over Time ◽  
The Eu

Cohesion policy is one of the longest-standing features of the European construction; its roots have been traced as far back as the Treaty of Rome. Over time, it has become one of the most politically salient and sizable policies of the European Union, absorbing approximately one-third of the EU budget. Given its principles and “shared management” approach, it mobilizes many different actors at multiple territorial scales, and by promoting “territorial cooperation” it has encouraged public authorities to work together, thus overcoming national borders. Furthermore, cohesion policy is commonly considered the most significant expression of solidarity between member states and the most tangible way in which EU citizens “experience” the European Union. While retaining its overarching mission of supporting lagging regions and encouraging the harmonious development of the Union, cohesion policy has steadily evolved and adapted in response to new internal and external challenges, such as those generated by subsequent rounds of enlargement, globalization, and shifting political preferences regarding what the EU should be about. Just as the policy has evolved over time in terms of its shape and priorities, so have the theoretical understandings of economic development that underpin its logic, the nature of intergovernmental relations, and the geographical and administrative space(s) within which the EU polity operates. For example, whereas overcoming the physical barriers to economic development were the initial targets in the 1960s and 1970s, and redesigning manufacturing clusters were those of the 1980s and 1990s, fostering advanced knowledge and technological progress became the focus of cohesion policy in the new century. At the same time, cohesion policy also inspired or even became a testing ground for new theories, such as multilevel governance, Europeanization, or smart specialization. Given its redistributive nature, debates have proliferated around its impact, added value, and administrative cost, as well as the institutional characteristics that it requires to function. These deliberations have, in turn, informed the policy in its periodic transformations. Political factors have also played a key role in shaping the evolution of the policy. Each reform has been closely linked to the debates on the European budget, where the net positions of member states have tended to dominate the agenda. An outcome of this process has been the progressive alignment with wider strategic goals beyond cohesion and convergence and the strengthening of linkages with the European Semester. However, some argue that policymakers have failed to properly consider the perverse effects of austerity on regional disparities. These unresolved tensions are particularly significant in a context denoted by a rise of populist and nativist movements, increasing social discontent, and strengthening Euroskepticism. As highlighted by research on its communication, cohesion policy may well be the answer for winning back the hearts and minds of European citizens. Whether and how this may be achieved will likely be the focus of research in the years ahead.

Determinants of socio-economic transformations of technological systems: theoretical and methodical aspects

2020 ◽  
pp. 102-111
Author(s):  
Svitlana Shults ◽  
Olena Lutskiv
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Economic Development ◽  
Structural Changes ◽  
Member States ◽  
Social Transformations ◽  
Technological Basis ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Technological Paradigm ◽  
Technological Paradigms ◽  
The Eu

Technological development of society is of unequal cyclic nature and is characterized by changing periods of economic growth, stagnation phases, and technological crises. The new wave of technological changes and new technological basis corresponding to the technological paradigm boost the role of innovations and displace the traditional factors of economic growth. Currently, intellectual and scientific-technical capacity are the main economic development resources. The use of innovation and new knowledge change the technological structure of the economy, increase the elements of the innovative economy, knowledge economy, and digital economy, i.e. the new technological paradigm is formed. The paper aims to research the basic determinants of technological paradigms’ forming and development, and determining their key features, as well as to analyze social transformations of the EU Member States and Ukraine. The paper focuses attention on the research of the features of social transformations. The structural transformations are analyzed based on the Bertelsmann Transformation Index that estimates the quality of democracy, market economy, and political governance. The transformation processes are assessed on the example of the EU Member States and Ukraine. The authors argue that social transformations and structural changes in the economy are related to the change of technological paradigms that boost the economic modernization and gradual progressive development of humanity in general. The nature and main determinants of 5 industrial and 2 post-industrial technological paradigms are outlined. Their general features and main areas of basic technologies implementation emerging in the realization of a certain technological paradigm are explained. The conclusions regarding the fact that innovative technologies and available scientific-technological resources define the main vector of economic development are made. The new emerging technological paradigm is of strategic importance for society development.

scholarly journals SMART GROWTH PROGRESS IN EUROPEAN UNION: A COHESION APPROACH

2019 ◽  
Vol 133 (2) ◽  
pp. 41-49
Author(s):  
Viktor Kozlovskij
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Economic Development ◽  
Tertiary Education ◽  
Smart Growth ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Countries ◽  
Development Level ◽  
Growth Indicators ◽  
The Eu

Economic development and socioeconomic cohesion have always been an object of scientific research. In particular, this issue had become a focus of attention after EU enlargement in 2004 and Great Recession in 2007–2009. The above changes have given way to a certain slowdown in economic growth in most EU countries along with triggering a range of divergence processes between EU countries and regions. As a response to situation, the EU offered a Europe 2020 strategy, in which smart growth was mentioned as one of critical instruments to deal with increasing menaces. The objective of the study is to evaluate the progress of the main smart growth indicators (investment in research and development (R&D), employment rate and share of population obtaining tertiary education) in the EU over the period 2001–2017 within the framework of the economic cohesion concept. The paper seeks to explore the EU from different perspectives. First, the EU new member states (EU-10) and the old ones (EU-14) were compared. Second, the EU countries were divided by economic development level (calculated by GDP per capita in PPP): highly developed (H-7), medium developed (M-7) and less developed (L-7) countries. Finally, aggregate cohesion indices of all three smart growth indicators were calculated for the entire EU (EU-28). The research findings have revealed some interesting trends. First, each smart growth indicator’s progress depends on countries’ economic development level. Aggregate values for more developed countries (EU-14, H-7 and G-3) are always higher than the EU average (EU-28) and aggregate values for less developed economies are basically lower. Second, cohesion progress of smart growth indicators was influenced by economic recession in 2007–2009. It is argued that cohesion is evident in times of economic growth, but its progress ceases or divergence might occur in case of economic hazards. However, despite the expanding cohesion between the new and the old member states, a gap between certain groups of countries is even growing. This is clearly evident when the EU member states are divided into groups subject to the level of their economic development.

Politics in the European Union

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Bache ◽  
Simon Bulmer ◽  
Stephen George ◽  
Owen Parker
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
International Politics ◽  
Individual Member ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Eurozone Crisis ◽  
Member States ◽  
Treaty Of Lisbon ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Eu

Politics in the European Union examines the theory, history, institutions, and policies of the European Union. The EU is a unique, complex, and ever-changing political entity which continues to shape both international politics and the politics of its individual member states. The text provides a clear analysis of the organization and presents a well-rounded introduction to the subject. Complete and detailed in its coverage, with a consolidated and updated history section, this text weaves together material on key contemporary concerns including the eurozone crisis and the implementation of the Treaty of Lisbon with a thorough consideration of the workings and remit of the EU.

scholarly journals Closing the NAFTA Gap

2007 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma Banks ◽  
Preeti Gill
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Economic Development ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
The United States ◽  
Single Market ◽  
Fine Tuning ◽  
Individual Member ◽  
Member States ◽  
Job Opportunities ◽  
The Eu

The accession of Ireland, Greece, Spain and Portugal into the European Community was a significant move towards manifesting everlasting peace by means of a single market. The incorporation of these four weaker countries into the European Union (EU) marked a break from the EU’s traditional purview. The paradigm shift of the EU’s approach to enlargement placed Member States onto a path that would harness the full capabilities of a common market in improving civilians quality of life while simultaneously achieving individual Member States’ objectives including growth, employment, and trade. The regional effects of the EU’s single market are drastically different from the effects of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). A much newer trading bloc (NAFTA came into effect on January 1, 1994), it lacks the wisdom and fine tuning of the EU. The governments of the United States, Mexico, and Canada signed the treaty1while hailing how it would “fuel economic growth and dynamic trade, stimulate investment while creating productive partnerships, work for small and medium sized businesses and provide fairness and certainty. NAFTA partners promote environmental protection, and provide greater job opportunities in North America”.2 Yet the effects seem to be the exact opposite. NAFTA has been called “one of the most innovative, astounding documents of the 20th century by the stoic…”3, but this so-called “innovative depth” has reduced barriers to trade and investment, without the necessary checks and balances. For Mexico, NAFTA merely expedited and formalized “the silent integration” that had been occurring since the Border Industrialization Project of 1965— without adding anything new to the table.4 Unlike the EU, NAFTA is a rigid document that has not reformed itself as needed to address issues of border control, immigration policies, and uneven socioeconomic development. In spite of sincere hopes for free trade and economic integration to raise living standards across the continent, the reality is that the unfettered markets have permitted NAFTA to persistently ignore the uneven economic development, and vulnerabilities each country faces. In so doing, the United States has been a quiet bystander to the inequalities proliferating from unchecked free trade. Both countries have been left vulnerable to NAFTA backlash. Mexico’s vulnerability stems from unsound economic development policies and overall slow growth. These factors have increased the US’ vulnerability, to migration. Fed up with uneven development, lack of job opportunities, poor working conditions, and low wages, many Mexicans are taking matters into their own hands and crossing the border, often illegally. Militaristic efforts to “defend” the border have done nothing but increase political tensions and migrant death tolls. NAFTA does not address the immigration problem and its root cause of unequal development. This paper begins with the European Union’s initial experience with enlargements and the experimentation process it underwent to reduce economic and social disparities between regions to further facilitate their single market objectives. After considering how the EU’s cohesion policy strengthened its own single market while simultaneously curbing migration, we present the NAFTA scenario, specifically against the backdrop of Mexico and the United States, in order to highlight the impotent mechanisms the United States relies upon to quiet the waves of economic migrants.

Industrial policy as a driver of economic growth: experience of European Union member states for Ukraine

2019 ◽  
pp. 56-64
Author(s):  
Iryna Pasinovych ◽  
Olha Sych
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Economic Development ◽  
Information And Communication Technologies ◽  
Industrial Policy ◽  
Industrial Production ◽  
Alternative Energy ◽  
Added Value ◽  
High Tech ◽  
Special Equipment ◽  
Member States

The article analyzes the experience of reforming of industrial policy of the EU member states on the way to sustainable economic development. Based on the conducted analysis the priority areas of high added value in Ukraine are outlined: transport, aerospace, energy engineering, production of equipment for alternative energy, including new materials and energy storage devices; production of weapons, military and special equipment; information and communication technologies. The development of the diversified and high-tech industries, especially the processing industry, is the key to ensuring the economic growth in Ukraine. The de-industrialization in Ukraine in recent years has been slowing down the movement towards the stable and sustained growth. To estimate trends in the structure of Ukraine’s GDP and their impact on economic growth, the taxonomic indicator of development level has been calculated. The units of the statistical aggregate (data from Germany, Poland and Ukraine) were mapped. The relative position of the state was determined as the distance from the statistical aggregate unit to the selected reference base (reference point). The smaller the value of the taxonomic indicator of development is, the closer the country is to the standard. The indicators of GDP, GDP growth rate and the share of industrial production belong to stimulants; the level of inflation and the share of agriculture in GDP - to disincentives. The corresponding calculations permit to draw the following conclusions: - Poland was the closest to the standard in 2000 (index 0.650), although Ukraine demonstrated at that time the highest growth rates and the biggest share of industry in GDP; - in 2017 the gap was increasing - Ukraine was inferior to both countries (with indicators 0.325 and 0.336), due to lower rates of economic growth and a decrease in the share of industrial production against the backdrop of inflationary phenomena. Ukraine should take into account that no country focused on agricultural development has succeeded in economic development. Progressive foreign experience can highlight the criterion of positive changes - an increase in the proportion of technologically complex productions with high added value in the structure of reproduction.

scholarly journals Sustainable Growth, Competitiveness and Employment

2007 ◽  
Vol 65 (4) ◽  
pp. 259-274 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Bachtler ◽  
Irene McMaster
Keyword(s):  
Economic Development ◽  
Sustainable Growth ◽  
Cohesion Policy ◽  
Member States ◽  
Structural Funds ◽  
Strategic Approach ◽  
Innovation Knowledge ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Lisbon Agenda

AbstractThe relaunched “growth and jobs” agenda of the EU is reflected in the Community Strategic Guidelines on Cohesion. These have influenced the content of the new Structural Funds programmes, with increased importance accorded to innovation, knowledge and entrepreneurship. There is evidence of a more strategic approach to economic development and a stronger prioritisation of support. Whether this makes a difference to the Lisbon agenda depends on how the programme objectives are implemented as well as the broader regulatory and other changes required in National Reform Programmes. Convincing Member States of the importance of Cohesion policy also depends on the impact of the Funds being identifiable.

Regional economic growth and human capital

2018 ◽  
Vol 63 (8) ◽  
pp. 65-78
Author(s):  
Grażyna Trzpiot
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Human Capital ◽  
Economic Development ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Regional Economic Growth ◽  
Cohesion Policy ◽  
Level Of Economic Development ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Linear Nature

The primary objective of cohesion policy is to reduce the differences in the economic development of the regions. The determinants of taken actions are the subject of research and discussion. An important factor in economic success is human capital. The article discusses the measurement of the relations between human capital resources and economic development in regions. Data of Statistics Poland for the years 2010—2015 were used. In the study, aimed at indicating the relationship between human capital and the level of economic development in the regions, a measure of human capital (HC) was applied. The established dependencies are of a non-linear nature.

scholarly journals Kompetencja instytucji Unii Europejskiej do ustanawiania i kształtowania norm prawa karnego materialnego

2018 ◽  
pp. 107-119
Author(s):  
Georgi Gruew
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
Individual Member ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Principle Of Proportionality ◽  
The Eu

The paper focuses on the competence of the European Parliament and the EU Council to adopt directives in the area of substantive criminal law provided in Articles 83 and 84 of the TFEU, which confirm the earlier ECJ rulings on the subject. The competence granted to those institutions also ensure greater effectives of the adopted directives in combating serious crimes within the European Union. The creation of certain ‘emergency brakes’ and application of the principle of proportionality taking into account the fundamental principles of criminal law systems of individual Member States, has enabled the EU institutions to establish common definitions of most serious crimes.

THE STANDARD OF LIVING OF HOUSEHOLDS IN POLAND COMPARED TO OTHER EU MEMBER STATES

2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 634-638
Author(s):  
Joanna Szwacka Mokrzycka
Keyword(s):  
Economic Development ◽  
Economic Condition ◽  
Standard Of Living ◽  
Consumption Expenditure ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Financial Condition ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Structure Of Consumption ◽  
The Eu

The objective of this article is to present the standard of living of households in Poland in comparison with other EU member states. The starting point for analysis was the economic condition of Poland against the background of other EU member states. The next step consisted of assessment of the standard of living of inhabitants of individual EU member states on the basis of financial condition of households and the structure of consumption expenditure. It was found that the differences within the EU in terms of economic development and the standard of living of households still remain substantial.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document