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 chapter provides a radiography of the 2014–2020 Cohesion Policy, focusing on both main continuity and innovation elements (in terms of objectives, implementation rules and financial allocations) and on some of the likely effects of the current rules on the new European Union (EU) non-euro member countries. The closer link between EU funds and EU economic governance, which has been introduced in the current financial period, has the potential to influence negatively the evolution of the EU regional development disparities, especially in the EU eastern periphery. These new conditionalities (ex-ante and macroeconomic), whose main effects, in the case of non-compliance, would be the suspension of EU funds, might deteriorate even more the economic situation, particularly in those regions with the greatest needs in terms of infrastructure or administrative capacity. The Romanian case is particularly relevant for this debate.

This chapter in its first part analyzes the Leader approach in terms of concept, constituent elements, application, and its contribution to rural development and rural entrepreneurship. In the continuation of the text, authors analyze the application of this approach in Serbia, looking at the activities of the ministry in charge and the views of local action groups (LAGs)’ managers on this matter. The aim of this chapter is to present the results and problems Serbia has seen so far in the implementation of the Leader approach for development of rural areas on a local level. The results indicate that the lack of systemic and continuous state support resulting, among other things, in the lack of a financial portfolio for the LAGs, is the main cause of low local entrepreneurial initiatives and projects implemented within the Leader approach. Future steps in the implementation of this approach in Serbia will depend on financial support for the LAGs from all levels of government, as well as from the possibility of using funds within the EU pre-accession assistance for rural development. Also, it will be necessary to launch larger innovative and entrepreneurial initiatives both by LAGs’ managers and all stakeholders involved in local rural development.

The concept of smart village emerged in the European Union (EU) level policy debates on rural development in 2016, following the stakeholder-driven Cork 2.0 Declaration. It was developed through a pilot project initiative on ‘Smart, Eco, Social Villages’ and spelled out in the ‘EU Action for Smart Villages’ initiative.

While the concept of smart villages remains unclear for many, substantial work has been carried out to develop the concept and to prepare the underlying supporting instruments at the EU level over the last three years.

The aim of this chapter is to give an overview of how the concept of smart villages has evolved at the EU level and to draw some recommendations for future policy work. The chapter reveals difficulties in the utilization efficiency of the EU funds in rural areas and shows a patched landscape of fragmented policy instruments. The key arguments are that while the mixture of these tools is important, the glue that binds them together is still missing, and that the general utilization efficiency is not sufficient. The authors offer a set of five recommendations for the short to medium term, which is needed for the successful implementation of the smart approach: integration, simplification, communication, innovation, and ‘rural proofing.’

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.

The European Union (EU) is providing a wide range of instruments to its members in implementing a green, resilient economy. These instruments are not designed only for governments and state representatives but also for small businesses and entrepreneurs. The ability of those two-targeted audiences to understand and adopt these instruments, as well as their way to react and profit from the EU-stated drives, determines one’s country capacity to absorb European funding and create economic growth. The present chapter proposes a presentation of the new European model for economic growth and of the advantages proposed with the European Green Deal, the European proposal to the world for a resilient, adaptable, and environmentally friendly economy.

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.

This chapter summarises the role of EU actions in supporting healthcare policies in the EU Member States, both looking at implemented actions and describing current priorities for the future. It argues that these coordinated actions can be beneficial for EU Member States by helping them to avoid duplication of effort and to attain economies of scale. Moreover, data sharing with proper safeguards can unleash vast amount of ‘learning what works’ both for medical treatments and for healthcare sustainability measures. The need for this common learning appears ever more urgent while facing the health and economic consequences of the present pandemic.