Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Evaluating EU Regional Policy: Many Empirical Specifications, One (Unpleasant) Result

Contents:

Author Info

  • Philipp Breidenbach

    ()

  • Timo Mitze

    ()

  • Christoph Schmidt

Abstract

Numerous studies have focused on the role of EU regional policy in fostering growth and convergence among European regions, why conducting another one? We argue that two facts are still lacking in the actual academic debate in order to get a sound empirical identification strategy and reliable results: First, one should take the theoretical underpinnings of regional growth models more serious, and second, a likewise careful account of the role of spatial dependence in the underlying data is needed. Though research has increasingly become aware of the latter point as important control factor for regional heterogeneity and omitted variables, in empirical operationalization still the ad-hoc inclusion of a hardly interpretable ‘catch-all’ spatial lag term of the endogenous variable is the first choice. We rather follow the lines of new theoretical and empirical approaches aiming at directly quantifying interregional spillovers associated with the amount of funds granted to lagging regions and their neighborhood. The dataset includes 127 NUTS1/-2 regions within the EU15 over the decade 1997-2007. In the spotlight of the investigation are the Objective 1 payments which are provided for lagging regions with a GDP p.c. of less than 75% of the EU average. These payments shall represent the main instrument to fulfill the central aim of European regional policy, the boost of convergence and harmonic growth over the EU. They represent about two third of the whole European cohesion policy. In our estimations we run a neoclassical convergence model in mainly four different specifications. On the one hand we separate in the aspatial and spatial models. On the other hand we run additive and multiplicative applications in order to consider the right coefficient interpretations. We estimate the model in various econometric specifications to point out the effectiveness of these funding. Our results all hint to the unpleasant result that EU structural funds objective 1 funding has a remarkably little or even negative direct impact on regional growth within the EU15. The spatial funding effects turn into negative significance in the most model specifications.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://www-sre.wu.ac.at/ersa/ersaconfs/ersa11/e110830aFinal01144.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by European Regional Science Association in its series ERSA conference papers with number ersa11p1144.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: Sep 2011
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa11p1144

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Welthandelsplatz 1, 1020 Vienna, Austria
Web page: http://www.ersa.org

Related research

Keywords:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Richard Blundell & Steve Bond, 1995. "Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models," IFS Working Papers W95/17, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
  2. David Roodman, 2009. "A Note on the Theme of Too Many Instruments," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 71(1), pages 135-158, 02.
  3. John Bradley, 2006. "Evaluating the impact of European Union Cohesion policy in less-developed countries and regions," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(2), pages 189-200.
  4. Ramon Moreno & Bharat Trehan, 1997. "Location and the growth of nations," Working Papers in Applied Economic Theory 97-02, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
  5. de la Fuente, A, 1996. "On the Sources of Convergence : A Close Look at the Spanish Regions," UFAE and IAE Working Papers 362.96, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC).
  6. Alecke, Björn & Mitze, Timo & Untiedt, Gerhard, 2010. "Regionale Wachstumseffekte der GRW-Förderung?: Eine räumlich-ökonometrische Analyse auf Basis deutscher Arbeitsmarktregionen
    [Regional Growth Effects of Private Sector Investment Grants in Germa
    ," MPRA Paper 22643, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  7. Manfred Fischer, 2011. "A spatial Mankiw–Romer–Weil model: theory and evidence," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 419-436, October.
  8. Ramajo, Julián & Márquez, Miguel A. & Hewings, Geoffrey J.D. & Salinas, María M., 2008. "Spatial heterogeneity and interregional spillovers in the European Union: Do cohesion policies encourage convergence across regions?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 551-567, April.
  9. Becker, Sascha O. & Egger, Peter & von Ehrlich, Maximilian, 2010. "Too much of a good thing? On the growth effects of the EU's regional policy," CEPR Discussion Papers 8043, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  10. Sandy Dall'erba & Julie Le Gallo, 2008. "Regional convergence and the impact of European structural funds over 1989-1999: A spatial econometric analysis," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 87(2), pages 219-244, 06.
  11. Bernard Fingleton, 2001. "Equilibrium and Economic Growth: Spatial Econometric Models and Simulations," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(1), pages 117-147.
  12. Cem Ertur & Wilfried Koch, 2007. "Growth, technological interdependence and spatial externalities: theory and evidence," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(6), pages 1033-1062.
  13. N. Gregory Mankiw & David Romer & David N. Weil, 1990. "A Contribution to the Empirics of Economic Growth," NBER Working Papers 3541, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  14. Becker, Sascha & Egger, Peter H & Fenge, Robert & von, Ehrlich Maximilian, 2008. "Going NUTS: The Effect of EU Structural Funds on Regional Performance," Stirling Economics Discussion Papers 2008-27, University of Stirling, Division of Economics.
  15. Islam, Nazrul, 1995. "Growth Empirics: A Panel Data Approach," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 110(4), pages 1127-70, November.
  16. Mohl, Philipp & Hagen, Tobias, 2008. "Which is the Right Dose of EU Cohesion Policy for Economic Growth?," ZEW Discussion Papers 08-104, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
  17. Dan S. Rickman, 2010. "Modern Macroeconomics And Regional Economic Modeling," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(1), pages 23-41.
  18. Durlauf, Steven N., 2001. "Manifesto for a growth econometrics," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 100(1), pages 65-69, January.
  19. Bowsher, Clive G., 2002. "On testing overidentifying restrictions in dynamic panel data models," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 77(2), pages 211-220, October.
  20. Thomas J. Holmes, 2010. "Structural, Experimentalist, And Descriptive Approaches To Empirical Work In Regional Economics," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(1), pages 5-22.
  21. Mohl, P. & Hagen, T., 2010. "Do EU structural funds promote regional growth? New evidence from various panel data approaches," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 353-365, September.
  22. Michael Pfaffermayr, 2007. "Conditional Beta- and Sigma-Convergence in Space: A Maximum Likelihood Approach," Working Papers 2007-17, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, University of Innsbruck.
  23. repec:kas:wpaper:2004-55 is not listed on IDEAS
  24. Parent, Olivier & LeSage, James P., 2012. "Spatial dynamic panel data models with random effects," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 727-738.
  25. Giuseppe Arbia & Julie Le Gallo & Gianfranco Piras, 2008. "Does Evidence on Regional Economic Convergence Depend on the Estimation Strategy? Outcomes from Analysis of a Set of NUTS2 EU Regions," Spatial Economic Analysis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(2), pages 209-224.
  26. Peter Egger & Michael Pfaffermayr, 2006. "Spatial convergence," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 85(2), pages 199-215, 06.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa11p1144. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Gunther Maier).

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.