IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Proposal of a new design of the future EU Cohesion Policy

Listed author(s):
  • Jiří Blažek |

Th e aim of this article is to present a proposal for a new EU Cohesion policy design for the next programming period (i.e. 2014-2020). Th e proposal presented is in line with a debate proceeding on a European level on the following key conceptual dilemmas of this policy: 1) relation of EU cohesion policy and Lisbon strategy, 2) relation of EU cohesion policy and so called ?new challenges? (demographic changes, sustainable and secure energy, climatic changes, globalization, and security issues), 3) question, if EU cohesion policy should support all European regions or only selected ? most needy ? regions. With those conceptual dilemmas in mind, a concrete proposal for a new design of a future EU Cohesion policy is submitted to debate of both experts and decision-makers. Namely, incorporation of ?new challenges? into cohesion policy is proposed. In case of Objective 1 regions, these regions would be eligible not only for traditional activities/projects supported within this policy but also for activities responding to new challenges according to their own preferences. Objective 2 would be reoriented exclusively towards the new challenges and would be opened to all European regions with the exception of those with Objective 1 status. To achieve a suffi cient concentration of resources and eff ort each region/country would make their own selection of new challenges they consider as a priority. Extending the EU support to all European regions would have obvious fi nancial consequences. Namely, it is proposed that fi nancial resources needed for implementation of new Objective 2 would be reallocated from Common Agriculture Policy. Th e GDP is proposed to remain a single criterion for eligibility under Objective 1, while per capita fl at rate is proposed to be an allocation criterion for Objective 2 regions. Th is fl at rate would involve a convergence mechanism as in less developed countries for the same amount of money can be achieved more due to their lower price level. Introduction of new additional criteria for both Objective 1 and 2 is discouraged both due to limited comparability of data on international level and due to the fact that each country would be tempted to propose such indicators that would be advantageous for them resulting in never ending debate.

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:
Download Restriction: free of charge

File URL:
Download Restriction: free of charge

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by University of Economics, Prague in its journal Regionální studia.

Volume (Year): 2008 (2008)
Issue (Month): 2 ()
Pages: 29-33

in new window

Handle: RePEc:prg:jnlrst:v:2008:y:2008:i:2:id:55:p:29-33
Contact details of provider: Postal:
nam. W. Churchilla 4, 130 67 Praha 3

Phone: (02) 24 09 51 11
Fax: (02) 24 22 06 57
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

Order Information: Postal: Vysoká škola ekonomická v Praze, Katedra regionálních studií, nám. W. Churchilla 4, 130 67 Praha 3
Web: Email:

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

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

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:prg:jnlrst:v:2008:y:2008:i:2:id:55:p:29-33. 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: (Frantisek Sokolovsky)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.