scholarly journals EU cohesion policy as a requirement to voivodeship development pathways

2017 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 68-72 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacek Szlachta
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Purchasing Power Parity ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Power Parity ◽  
Cohesion Policy ◽  
Investment Funds ◽  
Support For Innovation ◽  
Europe 2020 ◽  
Europe 2020 Strategy ◽  
Partnership Agreement

AbstractPoland joined the European Union on 1 May 2004. By 2007, this had resulted in Poland being the greatest beneficiary of the European cohesion policy due to its low per capita GDP by purchasing power parity at the voivodeship level. The scale of European Structural and Investment Funds brought the possibility for a fundamental acceleration of socio-economic growth in Polish regions. The European Union gradually modified the directions of intervention under the framework of the European cohesion policy, initially orienting this activity principally towards cohesion, but from 2010 directing it mainly towards competitiveness. Of particular significance was the Europe 2020 strategy (2010). In Poland its arrangements were deferred until the signing of the Partnership Agreement for the period 2014-2020, which established extensive support for innovation, competitiveness and the R&D sector. In the final part of the paper, conclusions and recommendations for regional policy are elaborated.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of the Portugal 2020 Programme: A Study from the Citizens’ Perspective

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (11) ◽  
pp. 5799
Author(s):  
Adriana Nishimura ◽  
Ana Moreira ◽  
Manuel Au-Yong-Oliveira ◽  
Maria José Sousa
Keyword(s):  
The European Union ◽  
Cohesion Policy ◽  
Investment Funds ◽  
Europe 2020 ◽  
Europe 2020 Strategy ◽  
Partnership Agreement ◽  
Programming Period ◽  
Main Instrument ◽  
Probabilistic Sample ◽  
The Eu

The European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) are the main instrument of the European Union (EU) Cohesion Policy to promote convergence, economic growth and reduce imbalances between EU members. The objectives of the 2014–2020 programming period follow the agenda of the Europe 2020 Strategy to promote smart, sustainable and inclusive growth of EU members. Since before joining the EU, in 1986, until the end of the Portugal 2020 Partnership Agreement (PT2020), Portugal will have received more than EUR 130 billion. Have the subsidies that Portugal has received been well applied? Our study fills a gap in the literature by portraying citizens’ perceptions about the effectiveness of EU funds for the development of the country and its regions. The study is quantitative in nature, and a non-probabilistic sample of 1119 participants answered our survey. A high proportion (76%) of the respondents considered that EU funds contributed to the development of the region where they live, although a significant percentage of the respondents (more than half) considered that there may be corruption in Portugal. The Portuguese also mentioned the existence of practices such as favouritism and lobbying regarding the approval of projects. Our findings are supported by the literature, which refers to “lost opportunities” in the inefficient application of ESIF, while recognising that EU funds have played a significant role in Portugal’s development over the last three decades.

scholarly journals Competitiveness, Emu and Cohesion Experiences in the Past (2000–2013); Assessment of the Present (2014–2020) and Lessons for the Future (2020 and Beyond)

2014 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-50
Author(s):  
Willem Molle
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Inclusive Growth ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Cohesion Policy ◽  
The Past ◽  
Europe 2020 ◽  
Europe 2020 Strategy ◽  
Eu Policies ◽  
Policy Fields

Abstract The European Union has adopted several strategies to cope with a set of inter-related problems. The best known is the Europe 2020 strategy with its focus on smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. Another is fostering balanced macro growth via a strengthening of the EMU. Finally the cohesion policy has to cope with spatial unbalances. The objective of this paper is to highlight the main issues in three policy fields: competitiveness, EMU and cohesion.1 Two scenarios for post 2020 development are described, which show the need for further strengthening of EU policies and of the quality of government at all levels.

scholarly journals Assessment of Research and Development Financing Based on the Strategies in EU: Case of Sweden, Slovakia and Romania

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (15) ◽  
pp. 8628
Author(s):  
Emília Duľová Spišáková ◽  
Barbora Gontkovičová ◽  
Emil Spišák
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Research And Development ◽  
Economic Reform ◽  
The European Union ◽  
2030 Agenda ◽  
Processing Data ◽  
Europe 2020 ◽  
Europe 2020 Strategy ◽  
Long Time ◽  
The Given

Research and development have been of interest to the European Union for a long time. This topic is also underlined in economic reform agendas and plans that have the form of strategies with clearly set targets. The article deals with the issue of financing R&D activities from the perspective of the share of expenditure to GDP, the total amount of funds spent on R&D, the share of expenditure per capita, and the structure of expenditure. The aim is to analyze and compare development in the field of R&D financing in selected countries of the European Union with emphasis on achieving the Europe 2020 target and to point out the expected development of the indicator for the first years of the validity of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. During the processing of the article, mathematical and statistical methods (regression and correlation analysis) were used in addition to standard logic methods intended for processing data and drawing conclusions (synthesis, induction). The final evaluates the achievement of the target in the field of R&D financing in accordance with the target of the Europe 2020 strategy and, using regression, predicts the development of the given indicator for coming years.

scholarly journals Can the implementation of the Europe 2020 Strategy goals be efficient? The challenge for achieving social equality in the European Union

Equilibrium ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michaela Stanickova
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Income Inequality ◽  
Labour Market ◽  
Social Inequality ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Social Equality ◽  
Europe 2020 ◽  
Europe 2020 Strategy ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

Research background: Economic crisis hit all the European Union Member States hard, with the impact of crisis varying considerably. The low growth performance in the EU has increased concerns regarding an increasing wage dispersion, income inequality at large, and social exclusion in line with poverty. Inequality should be seen as a cornerstone of both sustainable and inclusive growth under the Europe 2020 Strategy. Social inequality in the EU is a real problem, which hampers sustainable economic growth. Purpose of the article: The purpose of this study is to introduce evaluation of social development convergence and divergence trends between the EU Member States in the context of the Europe 2020 Strategy. The study gives an outline of the issues of the labour market and income disparities and poverty. Policymakers must be clear about what social objectives they are aiming to achieve, therefore special attention is paid to headline national goals of the Europe 2020 Strategy. Methods: The main task of this study is to assess social dimension and inequalities problems in the EU27 by applying Data Envelopment Analysis method, resp. time-series dynamic efficiency analysis in the form of output-oriented Malmquist Productivity Index. This study contains changes of key social equality indicators related to the Europe 2020 Strategy and compares objectives and general outlines of period 2010-2015, as well as the impact on national economics and living conditions. Findings & value added: Results contain elements of typology premises of the EU28 and point to a large diversity in inequality patterns, as the Author observes both increases and decreases in inequality at the EU level. Recent changes in social inequality have been associated with the business cycle, particularly with the accessibility of the labour market and, of course, with income inequality. Additionally, the development challenges are discussed for improvement of the socioeconomic well-being of the EU and to avoid social disparities.

The effects of the economic crisis on income convergence in the European Union

2012 ◽  
Vol 62 (2) ◽  
pp. 161-182 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nenad Stanišić
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Economic Crisis ◽  
Purchasing Power Parity ◽  
Gdp Per Capita ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Income Convergence ◽  
Power Parity ◽  
Trade Theory ◽  
Per Capita

This paper evaluates income convergence in the European Union, between “old” (EU15) and “new” member states from Central and East Europe (CEE10), and among the countries within these two groups. The GDP per capita convergence should be expected according to the exogenous economic growth model and neoclassical trade theory. The presence of σ-convergence and both absolute and conditional β-convergence is tested for on a sample of 25 European Union countries (EU25). Results confirm the existence of β-convergence of GDP per capita at purchasing power parity among EU25, but not among EU15 and CEE10 countries. σ-convergence has been confirmed among EU25 and CEE10 countries, while GDP per capita has been diverging in the EU15 group of countries. Moreover, the results reveal that recent economic crisis has reversed long-term tendencies and led to income convergence within EU15 and divergence within CEE10. During the crisis, the income differences among the EU25 countries have increased, but the scope and duration of this effect has been limited and has not affected the long term convergence path. However, the obtained long term speed of convergence is significantly lower compared with the previous researches.

European Union-28: An annualised cost-of-illness model for venous thromboembolism

2016 ◽  
Vol 115 (04) ◽  
pp. 800-808 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefano Barco ◽  
Alex L. Woersching ◽  
Alex C. Spyropoulos ◽  
Franco Piovella ◽  
Charles E. Mahan
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Purchasing Power Parity ◽  
Indirect Costs ◽  
The United States ◽  
Cost Models ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Power Parity ◽  
Total Hospital ◽  
Illness Model

SummaryAnnual costs for venous thromboembolism (VTE) have been defined within the United States (US) demonstrating a large opportunity for cost savings. Costs for the European Union-28 (EU-28) have never been defined. A literature search was conducted to evaluate EU-28 cost sources. Median costs were defined for each cost input and costs were inflated to 2014 Euros (€) in the study country and adjusted for Purchasing Power Parity between EU countries. Adjusted costs were used to populate previously published cost-models based on adult incidence-based events. In the base model, annual expenditures for total, hospital-associated, preventable, and indirect costs were €1.5–2.2 billion, €1.0–1.5 billion, €0.5–1.1 billion and €0.2–0.3 billion, respectively (indirect costs: 12 % of expenditures). In the long-term attack rate model, total, hospital-associated, preventable, and indirect costs were €1.8–3.3 billion, €1.2–2.4 billion, €0.6–1.8 billion and €0.2–0.7 billion (indirect costs: 13 % of expenditures). In the multiway sensitivity analysis, annual expenditures for total, hospital-associated, preventable, and indirect costs were €3.0–8.5 billion, €2.2–6.2 billion, €1.1–4.6 billion and €0.5–1.4 billion (indirect costs: 22 % of expenditures). When the value of a premature life-lost increased slightly, aggregate costs rose considerably since these costs are higher than the direct medical costs. When evaluating the models aggregately for costs, the results suggests total, hospital-associated, preventable, and indirect costs ranging from €1.5–13.2 billion, €1.0–9.7 billion, €0.5–7.3 billion and €0.2–6.1 billion, respectively. Our study demonstrates that VTE costs have a large financial impact upon the EU-28’s healthcare systems and that significant savings could be realised if better preventive measures are applied.

scholarly journals Rural Development in Romania – A Few Considerations

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 165-174
Author(s):  
Lucian Paul
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Rural Development ◽  
Agricultural Policy ◽  
Rural Areas ◽  
Development Program ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Europe 2020 ◽  
The Government ◽  
Partnership Agreement ◽  
Agenda 2000

AbstractThe ‘Agenda 2000’ introduces the Rural Development Policy, as part of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), as a complex policy that can ensure a stable income and a reasonable standard of living for the rural population. Rural development is a major CAP objective since over 50% of the population lives in rural areas and accounts for 80% of E.U. Territories. As a concept, the ‘rural area’ is defined both at a national and European level following specific criteria; however, these criteria differ from one country to another. A complete definition can be found in the European Charter of Rural Areas. Between 2014-2020, the development of rural areas in Romania is supported by the National Rural Development Program. It provides non-reimbursable funds from the European Union and funding from the Government of Romania. Convergence with the Europe 2020 Strategy is ensured through the Partnership Agreement with the European Union, which covers a number of challenges and thematic objectives. In order to achieve them, well-founded investment programs are needed. These programs must have a direct impact on increasing the living standards of the population residing within rural areas. Over 19 billion euros were allocated to Romania for the 2014-2020 period; these funds were used for agricultural policy and rural development. The total budget of the NRDP (2014-2020) is 9.4 billion euros, of which 1.3 billion euros comes from national funding. We believe the achievements recorded in rural areas, up to 2020, are modest and do not reflect the proposed objectives. Thus, projects were drawn up at national and local levels seldom support rural development and do not reflect development needs; sadly, these projects are often drawn up without focusing on efficiency.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document