Since the reform of the Structural Funds in 1988 resulting from the Single European Act, Spain has been a net beneficiary of structural resources from the EU budget (which includes the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund). This situation has changed in the period 2007–2013, when significantly less EU funds will be allocated to Spain. The country will need to adapt to a changeover from being a net beneficiary of EU funds to becoming a net contributor.
Authors:Wojciech Kisiała, Artur Bajerski, and Bartosz Stępiński
This article seeks to assess how the absorption of European the Union funds by the Polish voivodeships reflects two basic types of strategy in their allocation, i.e. the polarising and the equalising model. The analysis embraced 16 regional operational programmes (ROPs) between 2007–2013. The frame of reference adopted in the research was the centre-periphery model. Classes of peripherality were distinguished for each voivodeship, and absorption profiles of EU funds were determined for areas differing in their levels of peripherality. The goal of the article was achieved in a multi-stage research procedure ending in the construction of a synthetic index of the spatial orientation of support within the ROPs. The analysis demonstrated that the features of the polarising model tended to predominate in intra-regional policy. In most cases, however, the distribution of EU support represented a mixed model, with a shift towards the polarising one.
The EU is confronted with a series of important problems. The two that interest us most in the present paper are the lack of competitiveness on international markets and the considerable internal (regional) imbalances. Since quite some time the EU has put policies in practice to address both problems: the Lisbon Strategy for the former and Cohesion Policy for the latter.In our paper we describe the rather independent development of both policies in terms of objectives, instruments, delivery system, etc. We highlight that the main inadequacy of the Lisbon Strategy is its lack of funds. The solution that has been found to this problem is to reorient these funds originally destined to address cohesion problems to the aims of competitiveness, notably innovation. This has been done maintaining the Cohesion Policy delivery system. Although this somewhat distorted solution has proven workable, quite a few inadequacies in matters of effectiveness have emerged. We conclude the paper with some recommendations to improve that situation by the use of better coordination methods.
Efficiency or effectiveness? It not just the matter of definition. Experts and researchers have to make a difference between the qualitative and quantitative approach. The efficiency of EU subsidies means the ratio of the committed and disposable amount of EU subsidies can be measured, which was used and paid out within the given timeframe and along the legal regulations. The effectiveness of EU subsidies needs a much more complicated and complex approach than efficiency. The effectiveness of usage on a project level can be measured by the ‘added value’ of the project; and on the programme level by the added GDP growth or employment rate. The following research essentially analyses the project level or micro-effectiveness, however, it discusses the results of some macro-analyses as well (qualitative approach).
Authors:Horst Hanusch, Andreas Riedl, and Florian Wackermann
Since it is crucial for public institutions to spend the taxpayers’ money effectively and efficiently, we have analysed the methods used to check for these two criteria in the European Union’s ‘YOUTH’ Programme. We find that the currently applied method is not theoretically sound and also hardly justifiable politically. Therefore, we present a new approach which includes the important aspects that a public organisation needs to respect: it is theoretically correct and fulfils economic standards; it is valid in political standards; it is feasible; and it is easily understandable for a large public. We singled out two factors which are readily observable and are good proxies for the decision if a project is worth supporting by public funds: the number of people reached and the quality of the programme proposed. We also show why our method is better suited to measuring the effectiveness and the efficiency of spending public funds, and judge the new approach in the modified framework for 2007–2013.
A tanulmány az uniós források felhasználásának eredményességét vizsgálja a magyar
közoktatás terén, és annak okát kutatja, hogy mi állhat a kudarcok mögött. A
külföldi és hazai fejlesztéspolitikai szakirodalom alapján sorra veszi a
lehetséges okokat, valamint a tipikus hibákat. A tanulmány végeredményben arra a
következtetésre jut, hogy nem pusztán a nem megfelelő célkitűzésekkel, eszközök
kiválasztásával, az implementáció nehézségeivel és az értékelés elmaradásával
magyarázhatjuk az eredmények elmaradását. Eleve a kiindulás tűnik elhibázottnak,
hiszen a közoktatás, ami egy diszkrecionális döntésekkel teli,
tranzakcióintenzív terület, eredendően nem illik bele a nagy
volumenű, rutinizált adminisztratív úton ellenőrzött projektek logikájába. Az
Európai Unió fejlesztéspolitikáját újra kellene gombolni.
Magyarország integrációs érdekeinek egyik legfontosabb oldalát a magyar-EU csatlakozási szerződésből és az EU strukturális és kohéziós politikájából fakadó pénzügyi lehetőségek adják. A szerződésben szereplőalapvetőpénzügyi adatokhoz képest bizonyos tényezők módosít(hat)ják az EU-magyar költségvetési egyenleget. E tanulmány megkísérli összefoglalni a pozitív (áfa- és egyéb adózási hatások) és negatív (vámok, Schengen-kompatibilis határok, KAP-társfinanszírozás, EU-intézmények, valamint új hazai és külföldi intézmények finanszírozása) költségvetési hatásokat, és felvázol forgatókönyveket a 2004-2006-os periódusra vonatkozóan.</o:p>
Authors:Balázs H. Váradi, Tímea Várnai, and Barnabás Virág
Globalisation and the loosening of credit conditions have led to an increase in income and wealth inequalities in the developed economies. The 2008–2009 crisis has forced a deleveraging process, leading to a prolonged recovery due to further demand cuts. The protracted economic problems and the inadequate management of economic policy in the EU increased social discontent that may have eventually contributed to Brexit. The short- and long-run impacts of the decision are difficult to judge, given that the details of the exit process cannot yet be known. Currently, there is a consensus among analysts that the negative economic effects could be greater in the UK in the short term. However, in the longer term, the UK may benefit from a potentially more flexible economic policy framework, while socio-political and economic risks are imposed on the European economy by the secondary effects due to its structural problems and the uncertain future of its institutional system.
As a small open economy, Hungary highly depends on the economic performance of its foreign trade partners. We have found that the economic impact of Brexit on Hungary remains moderate. Among the direct channels, the foreign trade channel may be the dominant. Meanwhile, the reduction of EU funds and remittances will affect the Hungarian growth only modestly. Hungary’s vulnerability has improved substantially since the 2008–2009 crisis. Accordingly, potential secondround effects of Brexit may remain subdued and be mitigated through substantial room for manoeuvre for economic policies.