The influence of the local context on the implementation and impact of EU Cohesion PolicyBachtrögler, Julia; Fratesi, Ugo; Perucca, Giovanni
doi: 10.1080/00343404.2018.1551615pmid: N/A
This paper analyzes the impact of the European Union's Cohesion Policy on firm growth in the programming period 2007–13 in seven European countries. Results show that Cohesion Policy support promotes firm growth in size (value added and employment) more than in productivity. However, even when the policy is the same and similar projects and beneficiaries are considered, its effectiveness varies across different territorial contexts, among but also within countries. In several cases, the impact of grants on firm growth is larger in regions with lower income or scant endowments of territorial assets, most likely because firms in those regions cannot rely on external assets.
Regional needs, regional targeting and regional growth: an assessment of EU Cohesion Policy in UK regionsDi Cataldo, Marco; Monastiriotis, Vassilis
doi: 10.1080/00343404.2018.1498073pmid: N/A
With the prospective exit of the UK from the European Union (EU), a crucial question is whether EU Structural Funds have been beneficial for the country and which aspects of Cohesion Policy should be maintained if EU funds are to be replaced. This paper addresses this question through a twofold investigation, assessing not only whether but also how EU funds have contributed to regional growth in the UK from 1994 to 2013. It documents a significant and robust effect of Cohesion Policy in the UK, with higher proportions of Structural Funds associated with higher economic growth both on the whole and particularly in the less developed regions of the country. In addition, it is shown that the strategic orientation of investments also plays a distinct role for regional growth. While concentration of investments on specific pillars seems to have no direct growth effects, unless regions can rely on pre-existing competitive advantages in key development areas, clear evidence is unveiled that targeting investments to specific areas of relative regional need has a significant and autonomous effect on growth. These findings have important implications for the design of regional policy interventions in Britain after Brexit.
Unpacking the growth impacts of European Union Cohesion Policy: transmission channels from Cohesion Policy into economic growthBerkowitz, Peter; Monfort, Philippe; Pieńkowski, Jerzy
doi: 10.1080/00343404.2019.1570491pmid: N/A
In the context of proposals for a stronger focus on results in Cohesion Policy post-2020, it is necessary to strengthen the link between interventions and evidence on effectiveness. This paper argues that growth regressions and regression discontinuity analysis focusing on regional growth do not provide sufficient detail to support policy-makers in intervention design. A more nuanced picture would be achieved by unpacking intervention in different policy areas at the micro-level and analyzing the channels through which policy contributes to economic growth. The paper reviews the main direct and indirect transmission channels in three areas: research and innovation; support to enterprises; and infrastructure. In this respect, impact evaluations at beneficiary and, in particular, firm level offer a rich potential source of evidence and need to be systematically built into data collection and evaluation of post-2020 Cohesion Policy.
Allocation of European Structural Funds, decentralization and strategic spatial interactionsVédrine, Lionel
doi: 10.1080/00343404.2018.1455000pmid: N/A
This paper analyzes the relationships between the degree of decentralization of a public policy and the emergence of horizontal strategic interactions. The Structural Fund allocation process is investigated by determining how the governance structure of the Cohesion Policy affects the development of strategic spatial interactions between regional governments. A political agency model was developed. The main proposition is that the appearance of spatial interactions increases with the degree of policy decentralization. From the empirical analysis, this theoretical proposition is confirmed by showing that spatial interactions are more intense when the policy governance is decentralized.