![Sample our Social Sciences journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110822/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Social-Sciences.jpg"})
Abstract
The aim of this article is to reassess the effectiveness of Cohesion policy. It examines the evidence for the performance of the policy since 1988, with a view to testing four main assumptions: that convergence is taking place at national and regional levels; that Cohesion policy has made a durable contribution to convergence and regional restructuring, in terms of GDP and employment; that Cohesion policy funds have been spent in the most effective way; and that there is a wider added value from Cohesion policy spending. The article goes on to consider issues for the budget review and how the effectiveness of Cohesion policy at the European level might be improved.
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful to two anonymous referees for their helpful comments on an earlier version of the article. The usual disclaimer applies.
Notes
1. Parts of this article draw on an EPRC research project and report on the European added value of Cohesion policy (see Bachtler et al., Citation2007).
2. The model analyses three types of expenditure: on physical infrastructure, human capital and support to enterprises. In the short term, such outlays tend to stimulate demand which, in Keynesian theory, will lead to the emergence of multiplier effects. In the medium and long run, such outlays should generate supply effects owing to increased effectiveness of the production factors, and will also foster the inflow of exogenous capital, attracted by better conditions for business. The intensity of such processes is determined by elasticities, ‘inserted’ into the model on the basis of external evaluation.
3. The notion of territorial cohesion only recently added joined economic and social cohesion in the official EU language, and has not as yet been approved in treaty form.