Rationale and Design of EU Cohesion Policies in a Period of Crisis

Abstract:

Article Preview

The aim of the paper is to reflect on the justifications and design of cohesion policies in a period of deep economic recession. In particular, the paper tackles two important topics. The first topic deals with the justification for structural policies like cohesion policies in a period of economic downturn, since they look less urgent and appropriate than short term demand policies. In this case, cohesion policies are called to rebalance the effects that the ongoing crisis has on the convergence trends of the last two decades. The second topic relates to the most appropriate design that cohesion policies should have. The message that the paper provides from a conceptual point of view, corroborated by empirical results, is that the winning strategy is neither to focus on champions, calling for competitiveness, nor on lagging areas, in favor of cohesion; policies targeted to each regions’ needs are the right policies, able to enlarge and embrace all possible excellences. This strategy demonstrates that the traditional trade-off between efficiency and equity goals may be overcome.

Info:

Periodical:

Edited by:

Carmelina Bevilacqua, Francesco Calabrò and Lucia Della Spina

Pages:

11-19

DOI:

10.4028/www.scientific.net/AEF.11.11

Citation:

R. Camagni and R. Capello, "Rationale and Design of EU Cohesion Policies in a Period of Crisis", Advanced Engineering Forum, Vol. 11, pp. 11-19, 2014

Online since:

June 2014

Export:

* - Corresponding Author

[1] F. Barca: An agenda for a reformed cohesion policy. Report to Commissioner for Regional Policy, Brussels, April (2009).

[2] Ph. McCann, R. Ortega Argilés: The role of the Smart Specialization Agenda in a reformed EU cohesion policy. In: Scienze Regionali – Italian Journal of Regional Science, Special Issue on Smart specialization and the new EU cohesion policy reform, vol. 13, n. 1, (2014).

DOI: 10.3280/scre2014-001002

[3] R. Capello: Regional Economics, Routledge, New York (2007).

[4] R. Camagni: On the concept of territorial competitiveness: sound or misleading?. In: Urban Studies, n. 13, (2002), pp.2395-2412.

DOI: 10.1080/0042098022000027022

[5] OECD (2001), OECD Territorial Outlook, Paris.

[6] R. Camagni: Policies for spatial development. In: OECD Territorial Outlook, Ch. 6, Paris, (2001), pp.147-169.

[7] R. Camagni: Technological change, uncertainty and innovation networks: towards a dynamic theory of economic space, in R. Camagni (ed. ): Innovation networks: spatial perspectives, Belhaven-Pinter, London, (1991), pp.121-144.

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-76311-3_10

[8] R. Camagni, D. Maillat (eds. ): Milieux Innovateurs: théorie et politiques, Paris, Economica (2006).

[9] H. Armstrong., J. Taylor: Regional economics and policy, Blackwell, Oxford (2000).

[10] World Bank (2009), World Development Report, Washington.

[11] R. Capello, R. Camagni, B. Chizzolini, U. Fratesi: Modelling regional scenarios for the enlarged Europe, Springer, Berlin (2009).

DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9787.2009.00620_14.x

[12] R. Capello, U. Fratesi, L. Resmini: Globalization and regional growth in Europe, Springer, Heidelberg (2011).

[13] R. Capello, A. Caragliu, U. Fratesi: Forecasting Regional Growth between Competitiveness and Austerity Measures: the MASST3 Model, paper presented at the 53rd ERSA Conference, held in Palermo, Italy, 27-31 August (2013).

DOI: 10.1177/0160017614543850

[14] Sapir A. (2003), An agenda for a growing Europe, The Sapir Report to the EU, Brussels, July.

[15] European Commission (2005), Territorial State and Perspectives of the European Union, Scoping Document and Summary of Political Messages, Brussels, May.

[16] European Commission (2008), Turning territorial diversity intro strength – Green Paper on territorial cohesion, Communication from the Commission, Brussels, October.

[19] European Commission (2009), Sixth Progress Report on economic and social cohesion, Report to the Parliament and the Council, Brussels.

[20] M. Coffano, D. Foray: The centralità of entrepreneurial discovery in building and implementing a Smart Specialization Strategy. In: Scienze Regionali – Italian Journal of Regional Science, Special Issue on Smart specialization and the new EU cohesion policy reform, vol. 13, n. 1, (2014).

DOI: 10.3280/scre2014-001003

[21] R. Capello, C. Lenzi (eds. ): Territorial patterns of innovation: an inquiry on the knowledge economy in European regions, Routledge, London (2013).

[22] R. Camagni, R. Capello: Towards a conclusion: smart innovation policies, in R. Capello, C. Lenzi (eds. ), (2013), pp.301-26.

[23] R. Camagni, R. Capello, C. Lenzi: A territorial taxonomy of innovative regions and the European regional policy reform: smart innovation policies. In: Scienze Regionali – Italian Journal of Regional Science, Special Issue on Smart specialization and the new EU cohesion policy reform, vol. 13, n. 1, (2014).

DOI: 10.3280/scre2014-001005

[24] R. Camagni: Territorial capital and regional development. In: R. Capello, P. Nijkamp (eds. ): Handbook of regional growth and development theories, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham (2009).

DOI: 10.4337/9781848445987.00014

[25] R. Camagni: Policy options for the Latin Arc. In: R. Camagni, R. Capello (eds. ): Spatial scenarios in a global perspective: Europe and the Latin Arc Countries, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, (2011), pp.175-185.

DOI: 10.4337/9780857935625.00017

[26] F. A. von Hayek: Competition as a Discovery Procedure. In: F. Hayek: New Studies in Philosophy, Politics, Economics and the History of Ideas, University of Chicago Press, (1978), pp.179-190.

In order to see related information, you need to Login.