IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Structural Heterogeneity Between Eu 15 And 12 New Eu Members – The Obstacle To Lisbon Strategy Implementation?


  • Magdalena Olczyk

    () (Gdansk University of Technology, Poland)


The aim of this article is to identify diversity between the EU-15 and the New Members in their implementation of the Lisbon Strategy in the period 2000-2010. By analyzing a set of structural indicators, we aim to fill a gap in the literature: the lack of publications providing complex evaluation of the implementation of the Lisbon Strategy using measurable indicators. Given their suitability for international comparisons, we use two taxonomic methods: Ward’s cluster analysis and the synthetic variable method proposed by Hellwig. The results of our analyses confirm the hypothesis of a large gap between the EU-15 countries and the 12 New Members in the key areas of the Lisbon Strategy. According to rankings given by our taxonomic analyses, a high level of the indicators selected is confirmed only for the EU-15 countries and only three New Members belong to a group presenting the average level of these indicators. This study demonstrates a need for a significant intensification of the EU cohesion policy, which is one of the main tools for achieving the Lisbon Strategy goals.

Suggested Citation

  • Magdalena Olczyk, 2014. "Structural Heterogeneity Between Eu 15 And 12 New Eu Members – The Obstacle To Lisbon Strategy Implementation?," Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, Institute of Economic Research, vol. 9(4), pages 21-43, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:pes:ierequ:v:9:y:2014:i:4:p:21-43

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Destefanis, Sergio & Mastromatteo, Giuseppe, 2012. "Assessing the reassessment: A panel analysis of the Lisbon Strategy," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 115(2), pages 148-151.
    2. Arno Tausch, 2010. "The European Union’s failed “Lisbon strategy”," Society and Economy, Akadémiai Kiadó, Hungary, vol. 32(1), pages 103-121, June.
    3. Kenneth Armstrong & Iain Begg & Jonathan Zeitlin, 2008. "JCMS Symposium: EU Governance After Lisbon," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46, pages 413-450, March.
    4. Lorenzo Codogno & Guillaume Odinet & Flavio Padrini, 2009. "The Use of Targets in the Lisbon Strategy," Rivista di Politica Economica, SIPI Spa, issue 1, pages 3-21, January-M.
    5. Jean-Claude Barbier, 2010. ""Stratégie de Lisbonne" : les promesses sociales non tenues," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00462456, HAL.
    6. Jean-Claude Barbier, 2010. ""Stratégie de Lisbonne" : les promesses sociales non tenues," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 10018, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    7. António Brandão Moniz, 2011. "From the Lisbon strategy to EU2020: illusion or progress for european economies?," IET Working Papers Series 01/2011, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, IET/CICS.NOVA-Interdisciplinary Centre on Social Sciences, Faculty of Science and Technology.
    8. Fernando Hervás Soriano & Fulvio Mulatero, 2010. "Knowledge Policy in the EU: From the Lisbon Strategy to Europe 2020," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 1(4), pages 289-302, December.
    9. Jean-Claude BARBIER, 2012. "Tracing the fate of EU “social policy”: Changes in political discourse from the “Lisbon Strategy” to “Europe 2020”," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 151(4), pages 377-399, December.
    10. Johansson, Börje & Karlsson, Charlie & Backman, Mikaela & Juusola, Pia, 2007. "The Lisbon Agenda From 2000 To 2010," Working Paper Series in Economics and Institutions of Innovation 106, Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies.
    11. Alfonso Arpaia & Werner Roeger & Janos Varga & Jan in 't Veld & Alexandr Hobza & Isabel Grilo & Peter Wobst, 2007. "Quantitative assessment of Structural Reforms: Modelling the Lisbon Strategy," European Economy - Economic Papers 2008 - 2015 282, Directorate General Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN), European Commission.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Adam P. Balcerzak & Michal Bernard Pietrzak, 2015. "Research and development expenditures and quality of life in European Union countries," Ekonomia i Prawo, Uniwersytet Mikolaja Kopernika, vol. 14(3), pages 285-302, September.
    2. Adam P. Balcerzak & Michał Bernard Pietrzak, 2015. "Quality of Institutions for Global Knowledge-based Economy and Convergence Process in the European Union," Ekonomia journal, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw, vol. 42.
    3. Barbara Fura & Qingfang Wang, 2017. "The level of socioeconomic development of EU countries and the state of ISO 14001 certification," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 51(1), pages 103-119, January.

    More about this item


    Lisbon targets; European Union; multivariate analysis; structural indicators;

    JEL classification:

    • C00 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - General - - - General
    • E60 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Macroeconomic Policy, Macroeconomic Aspects of Public Finance, and General Outlook - - - General
    • O52 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economywide Country Studies - - - Europe
    • P11 - Economic Systems - - Capitalist Systems - - - Planning, Coordination, and Reform


    Access and download statistics


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pes:ierequ:v:9:y:2014:i:4:p:21-43. 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: (Adam P. Balcerzak). General contact details of provider: .

    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 CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.