The Regional Policy
Regional Policy is one of the most controversial areas of European Union's communal programs. The aim of "economic and social cohesion" - as in the Treaty of European Union it is referred to - has been to bring the lagging regions closer to the average level of EU's economic performance. It is always difficult to appraise the achievements of any incentive scheme since it can be compared to nothing. We must make assumptions about what would have happened if it had been carried out instead of that... Therefore, this essay does not intend to announce the final judgment on Regional Policy rather tries to demonstrate its effects made to reduce the regional disparities in the European Union. I try to present as many facts and figures as is required for anyone to draw his/her final conclusion. The question is far more complex than to be simply summarized as a failure or success. Because of the above mentioned reasons it is impossible to tell where the regions would have arrived at without the undertaken actions. Hence, I feel my obligation to point out precisely the work and effort that have been done, so that critical analysis could be carried out.
I don't think we should start complaining about the result that have been achieved saying "disparities have not decreased significantly therefore Regional Policy is not efficient". In 1999, Greece, Spain, France, Italy and Finland had unemployment rates of more than 10%, at least twice the rate in Luxembourg, Netherlands, Austria and Portugal where the figure in each case was below 5%. I might say that even the fact that it has come into being can be measured as success over national egoism of Member States. While the Cohesion Fund contributes with E16. Lying 80 km south of Oporto, Aveiro has developed substantial fishing and commercial activity over the centuries. Economic activity is concentrated in a core part of the Union situated in the triangle extending from North Yorkshire in the UK to Franche-Comte in France and Hamburg in Germany. On the contrary, 20-25% of the population in Portugal and Greece had income below the poverty line. 35% of the funding for the Structural Funds on:· cross-border, transnational and interregional cooperation (Interreg III); · sustainable development of cities and declining urban areas (Urban II); · rural development through local initiatives (Leader +); · combating inequalities and discrimination in access to the labour market (Equal). In other comparable economies, like the US, the pattern of activity is more dispersed. By all means, progress has been experienced in all 4 countries though Ireland's growth exceeds all its fellow countries b far. The Community-wide scale of certain measures (Community Initiatives), partnership among the various parties involved, the attention paid to the environment and equal opportunities, cooperation, networking, exchange of experiences and experimentation with new approaches to development (Innovative Actions) are all new assets which help the regions to move forward and make full use of their potential. The key to European development is to link infrastructural improvement with new educational and reorienting schemes.
Common topics in this essay:
Regional Policy,
Former Objectives,
Structural Funds,
European Union,
Features Objective,
Cohesion Fund,
Hamburg Germany,
Austria Portugal,
Ireland Spain,
Population Objective,
objective 1,
regional policy,
0 0,
structural funds,
objective 3,
cohesion fund,
objective 2,
0 0 0,
spain -> lisbon,
regions development lagging,
covers former,
1 regions,
features objective,
objective 1 regions,
covers former objective,
|
Acceptance Essays
