What explains national variation in the implementation of EU Cohesion Policy, in particular when it comes to the role of regions in Structural Funds management? This is an important question because, as some scholars have claimed, Cohesion Policy has the potential to empower regions and promote regionalization in Europe. Particularly in the new CEE member states, where relations between central and subnational authorities often remain unsettled or in a state of flux, the ability of regional authorities to exercise a substantial role in Cohesion Policy implementation could significantly impact intergovernmental relations and the balance of power between the central state and regions. This article examines this question in the case of one CEE member state, the Czech Republic, where the role of regions in Structural Funds management has been a particularly contentious issue over the course of three programming periods beginning in 2004. The article argues that the standard explanation in the literature for variation in Cohesion Policy implementation—national constitutional arrangements and governmental traditions—cannot explain the change of implementation systems in the Czech Republic because these remained constant over the three programming periods under investigation. Instead, the Czech case suggests the primary importance of regional administrative capacity and performance as a factor affecting Cohesion Policy implementation, while domestic politics and EU-level influences play important though secondary roles.
Hands-off or Hands-on Governance for Public Innovation? A Comparative Case Study in the EU Cohesion Policy Implementation in Finland