Search results

“It should also be noted that the objective of convergence and equal distribution, including across under-performing areas, can hinder efforts to generate growth. Contrariwise, the objective of competitiveness can exacerbate regional and social inequalities, by targeting efforts on zones of excellence where projects achieve greater returns (dynamic major cities, higher levels of general education, the most advanced projects, infrastructures with the heaviest traffic, and so on). If cohesion policy and the Lisbon Strategy come into conflict, it must be borne in mind that the former, for the moment, is founded on a rather more solid legal foundation than the latter” European Commission (2005, p. 9)Adaptation of Cohesion Policy to the Enlarged Europe and the Lisbon and Gothenburg Objectives.

The unequal distribution of economic activities, transposed in economic, social and territorial disparities is the general characteristic of the European economy. Gaps increased in the context of European Union (EU) enlargement towards Eastern and Central Europe and of the economic crisis, thus bringing new differentiations among member states’ economies. The main aim of the chapter is to emphasise the centre-periphery differentiations in the European economy, by using a composite index of peripherality, in order to better understand the determinants of growth and convergence in Central and Eastern European countries and to reach normative conclusions for increasing Cohesion Policy (CP) effectiveness. The first part of the chapter provides a short overview of the main theories and models of the peripherality analysis and the relationships between the centre and the periphery, in order to find out how this analysis relates to the research in the field. The second part provides a comparative analysis of the evolution of European economies during 2003–2014, in order to find out whether the EU enlargement process stabilised the EU core-periphery pattern or, on the contrary, the process of core-periphery structural convergence occurred. The third part includes the suggested model of analysis (methodology, data, and main results) from a multidisciplinary perspective, underlining the centre-periphery differentiations on the two axes, North–South and West–East. The results have been interpreted in conclusions, with a focus on their relevance for the European CP challenges.

EU countries, including those in Central and Eastern Europe, seem to have increasingly similar economies, allowing for the study of real convergence as a process of equalising income levels (measured by GDP per capita). Studies of income convergence in the European Union also have a regional dimension and often focus on convergence at the NUTS2 or NUTS3 regional level. The level of development and income in Polish regions differ significantly. The regional policy implemented at the national and EU level focuses on reducing these differences.

The main aim of the chapter is to analyse the income convergence process among regions in Poland and verify the effectiveness of regional policy implemented at the national and EU level.

The study uses Barro type regression for panel data, log t convergence test, and club clustering algorithm introduced by Phillips and Sul to identify patterns of club convergence in Polish regions. The data used for the study is the Local Data Bank provided by Statistics Poland, which includes gross domestic product per capita at the NUTS-3 level for 73 Polish regions over the period of 2000–2020.

The results of the study indicate a very weak convergence process for all Polish NUTS-3 regions and suggest a club convergence. The club convergence is characterised by regions with similar income levels clustering together. The regional distribution of clubs is similar to the regional distribution of income. The study's findings provide important insights into the effectiveness of regional policy in Poland and suggest that policymakers need to focus on policies that promote catch-up growth in less developed regions. The study also highlights the importance of supporting the most developed regions in the country as they can play a crucial role in driving the country's economic growth and prosperity.

The purpose of the chapter is to study the European experience of formation of information economy.

The methodology of this chapter is based on the method of statistical analysis, which is used for calculation of direct average of the values of the indicators of European countries for each indicator of information economy, scatter (variation), and deviation of the average value of European countries from the average value among the leading countries of the world (average global value). The objects of research of the European experience of information economy’s formation are the leading countries of Europe that have the largest potential and achieved the largest progress, setting the tone for other members of the European region. The leading countries are UK, Germany, and France. The data of 2017 are used.

The results substantiate that modern Europe achieved sufficient progress in information economy’s formation, and differentiation of the level of informatization of economic systems is expressed vividly, but only in certain aspects. In general, it is possible to determine common tendencies and peculiarities based on offered conceptual model of establishment and development of information economy in European countries. This new conceptual model takes into account and reflects the existing disproportions, of which the most vivid is overestimated massive technosphere, which is not implemented to the full potential due to social problems. Against its background, sociosphere and economic sphere that are standard for modern leading countries seem to diminish. At the same time, due to the strong role of the state in economy of European countries, high effectiveness of state regulation in the process of information economy’s formation is achieved if high share of high-tech export is expressed with smaller expenditures for innovations in the ICT spheres.

It is recommended to use the offered conceptual model to study the process of formation of information economy in European countries and comparing the effectiveness of this process in other regions of the world.

Higher education institutions (HEIs) have multiple roles including teaching, research and more recently projects for the benefit of local communities. From a management and leadership perspective, the formation and implementation of strategic plans and the collaboration with stakeholders have traditionally been based on formal agreements based on existing operational organizations and structures. Their strategic plans and collaborations with stakeholders are now evolving to become more organic and collaborative. They have become essential participants of the innovation and learning ecosystems and knowledge intensive communities as shown here in the case of Finland and Australia. New businesses and regions, especially in Europe and non-European Union countries such as Australia, are encouraged to identify and develop their own competitive advantages by analyzing their strengths and strategic potential growth areas.

This so-called Smart Specialization (RIS3) strategy brings HEIs together with the local authorities, business companies and civil society to co-operate in order to prioritize research and development (R&D) investment in the region. The need for Smart Specialization also challenges HEIs to rethink their visions and renew the present siloed and closed-ended practices.

This chapter examines and compares the management and leadership of the HEIs as actions are undertaken to effectively lead the Finnish and Australian HEIs toward their visions. These case studies demonstrate approaches which influence good institutional governance and management. It describes how LAB-ammattikorkeakoulu (LAB University of Applied Sciences) in Finland, and Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology in Australia have implemented a RIS3 strategy, notably in health and well-being and agricultural (R&D) projects. These enhance the scope of accountability and participation of stakeholders. The chapter provides practice-based evidence to policy makers in higher education regarding HEIs’ responsible contribution to society.

The European Union (EU) faces numerous political and socio-economic challenges, both of an external and domestic nature, which must be tackled by this international organization. Universities also have to respond to these challenges by proposing new curricula, including ones related to EU subjects, and new ways of transferring knowledge. This also means that the adopted approach toward teaching about the EU should be modernized and go beyond simple and straightforward teaching about EU institutions and policies. The objective of this chapter is to present an approach toward teaching EU-related subjects concerning entrepreneurship and management of EU funds in Poland based on the example of the University of Economics in Katowice. The following research questions were elaborated: How to boost the acquisition of skills related to entrepreneurship? What are the best practices that can be promoted? How can the discussed university expands its educational offer? Also with the use of EU funds that can be adjusted to the needs of the region and the expectations of the young people.