Die gesamtwirtschaftlichen Wirkungen der EU-Strukturpolitik in den Konvergenzregionen: Methodische Anmerkungen und empirische Ergebnisse für die Förderperiode 2007–2013

John Bradley; John Bradley; Gerhard Untiedt

doi:10.1007/BF03183018

Authors

John Bradley EMDS — Economic Modelling and Development Systems, 14 Bloomfield Avenue, Dublin 8, Ireland
John Bradley EMDS — Economic Modelling and Development Systems, 14 Bloomfield Avenue, Dublin 8, Ireland
Gerhard Untiedt GEFRA — Gesellschaft für Finanz- und Regionalanalysen, Ludgeristraße 56, 48143, Münster, Germany

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03183018

Abstract

The reform of the European structural policy in the late eighties confronted the European Commission and the national policy-makers with new tasks. In contrast to many other political interventions the measures of the European Structural Funds go out explicitly over short-term stabilisation and are supposed primarily to contribute to improve the supply-side conditions in the supported national economies. The promotion scheme has the target to improve of the production conditions and to contribute for the convergence of the incomes within Europe. For the analysis of the effects are applicable a multiplicity of methods, which differ according to the economical range of the effects. In this contribution we deal with some methodical aspects in particular the overall economic effects and for the Structural Fund period 2007 to 2013. We present some selected results for the recipient countries, which come from the HERMIN models. Altogether significantly positive effects show up both for the growth of the national product and employment, whereby there are significant differences across the recipient countries, which can be traced backt to the different structural conditions within these economies.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Aghion, P.; Howitt, P.:Appropriate Growth Policy: A Unifying Framework (2005; www.economics.harvard.edu/faculty/aghion/papers. html)

Beutel, J.: The Economic Impacts of the Community Support Frameworks of the Objective 1 Regions 1989–1993. Report to DG for Regional Policies. — Brussels 1993

Beutel, J.: The economic impact of Objective 1 interventions for the period 2000–2006. Report to EU DG XVI. — Brussels 2002 (www.dgfc.sgpg.meh.es/aplweb/pdf/DescargasFondosComunitarios/ImpactoFFEEObjlBeutel2000_06.pdf)

Bradley, J.; Whelan, K.; Wright, J.: The HERMIN project. Economic Modelling 12 (1995) 3, S. 249–274

Bradley, J.; Morgenroth, A.; Untiedt, G.: Macro-regional evaluation of the Structural Funds using the HERMIN modelling framework. Scienze regionalilltalian Journ. of Regional Science (2003) 3

Bradley, J.; Gács, J.; Morgenroth, A.; Untiedt, G.: A Study of the Macro-economic Impact of the Reform of EU Cohesion Policy. Report submitted to the European Commission, Directorate-General for Regional Policy. — Brussels 2004 (http://europa.eu.int/comm/regional_policy/sources/docgener/studies/pdf/3cr/macro_impact.pdf)

Bradley, J.; Mitze, T.; Morgenroth, A.; Untiedt, G.: How can we know if EU Cohesion Policy is successful? Integrating micro and macro approaches to the evaluation of Structural Funds. — Munster 2006. = GEFRA Working Paper (www.gefra-muenster.org/deutsch/publikationen/abstract.php?pub_id=96)

Bradley, J.; Untiedt, G.: The COHESION system of HERMIN country and regional models: Description and operating manual. Draft Report for DG Regional Policy. — Brussels 2007 (a)

Bradley, J.; Untiedt, G.: Do economic models tell us anything useful about Cohesion Policy impacts? — Münster 2007 (b). = GEFRA Working Paper No. 3 (www.gefra-muenster.org/index.php#)

Bradley, J.; Untiedt G.; Mitze X: Analysis of the Impact of Cohesion Policy. A note explaining the HERMIN-based simulations. Draft Report for DG Regional Policy. — Brussels 2007 (c)

Congressional Budget Office: R&D and Productivity Growth. Congressional Budget Office, The Congress of the United States, June 2005

de la Fuente, A.: Human capital in growth regressions: how much difference does data quality make? Journ. of the European Economic association 4 (2006) 1, S. 1–36

Ederveen, S.; de Groot, H.; Nahuis, R.: Fertile soil for structural funds?: A panel data analysis of the conditional effectiveness of European cohesion policy. — The Hague: CPB 2002 (also available as discussion paper of the Tinbergen Institute: www.tinbergen.nl/discussionpapers/02096.pdf)

Eggert, W., Ehrlich, M. v.; Fenge, R.; König, G.: Konvergenz- und Wachstumseffekte der europäischen Regionalpolitik in Deutschland. Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik 8 (2007) 2, S. 130–46

European Commission: Annex to the Fourth progress report on Cohesion: Growth and jobs and the Reform of European cohesion policy. COM(2006) 281 final, June 2006

Fan, W; Treyz, F.; Treyz, G.: An evolutionary new economic geography model. Journ. of Regional Science 40 (2000) 4, S. 671–695

Honohan, P.: EU structural funds in Ireland: a mid-term evaluation of the CSF 1994–99. — Dublin: ESRI 1997. = Policy research series 31

Rodrik, D.: Why we learn nothing from regressing Economic Growth on Policies (2005; http://ksghome.harvard.edu/∼drodrik/papers.html)

Roeger, W.; in’t Veld, J.: QUEST II. A Multy Country Business Cycle and Growth Model. — Brussels 1996. = Economic Papers from Commission of the EC No. 123

Tinbergen, J.: A method and its application to investment activity. — Geneva: League of Nations 1939. = Statistical Testing of Business-Cycle Theories 1

Tondl, G.: What determined the uneven growth of Europe’s Southern regions?: An empirical study with panel data. — Wien 1999. = IEF working paper 30

Treyz, G.: Regional economic modeling: a systematic approach to economic forecasting and policy analysis. — Boston 1993. = Kluwer Acad. Publ.