IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wiw/wiwrsa/ersa03p215.html

Evaluation of the geographical scope of the Norwegian regional policy

Author

Listed:
  • Jan Mønnesland

  • Jon Inge Lian

  • Dag Juvkam

Abstract

The Norwegian regional policy is a national policy designed in order to support industrial activity in the non-central areas. The underlying logic of the policy is that the non-central areas have a disadvantage compared to the central areas due to the low market density in the home region and longer distances to the central markets. By such a focus, central regions facing structural or business cycle problems are not addressed by this type of regional policy. On the other hand, the peripheral status is assumed to generate observable problems of production and income development. The evaluation of the geographical scope of the regional policy target area will then have to look at geographical indicators measuring periphery disadvantages, as well as direct problem indicators connected to employment, income and population development. The paper develops a set of indicators for designating a target area, and makes a weighting of the indicators according to the aim of the regional policy. The paper generates maps showing the new “optimal” target area, given the new indicators and the limits set by the EEA rules on regional policy motivated state aid. In addition to the ordinary regional support area, Norway also operates regional support through the differentiated labour poll tax. The zone map for this instrument deviates somewhat from the ordinary regional policy target area. In the EEA context, the differentiated labour poll tax is designated according to the scheme allowing for transport cost support in low density areas. To be accepted, an area should then both be eligible for ordinary regional support, and in addition have transport costs which are higher than the support received through the differentiated labour poll tax. The paper presents methods used to define the relevant cost parameters, and how these methods may be applied on the municipal level. Based on these estimates, the paper generates maps which would give the best regional policy effect given the EEA constraints. The constructed maps is then related to the designated area of today, to draw some conclusions about the quality of the designated target areas in the operating schemes.

Suggested Citation

  • Jan Mønnesland & Jon Inge Lian & Dag Juvkam, 2003. "Evaluation of the geographical scope of the Norwegian regional policy," ERSA conference papers ersa03p215, European Regional Science Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa03p215
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www-sre.wu.ac.at/ersa/ersaconfs/ersa03/cdrom/papers/215.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Aadne Cappelen & Fulvio Castellacci & Jan Fagerberg & Bart Verspagen, 2003. "The Impact of EU Regional Support on Growth and Convergence in the European Union," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(4), pages 621-644, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andrés Rodríguez-Pose & Yannis Psycharis & Vassilis Tselios, 2012. "Public investment and regional growth and convergence: Evidence from Greece," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 91(3), pages 543-568, August.
    2. Alessandro STERLACCHINI, 2006. "Innovation, Knowledge and Regional Economic Performances: Regularities and Differences in the EU," Working Papers 260, Universita' Politecnica delle Marche (I), Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche e Sociali.
    3. Andrzej Cieślik & Bartłomiej Rokicki, 2013. "Wpływ unijnej polityki spójności na wielkość produktu i zatrudnienia w polskich regionach," Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, issue 3, pages 57-77.
    4. Andrés Maroto Sánchez & Juan Ramón Cuadrado Roura, 2008. "New Regional convergence in productivity and productive structure. Application to European Southern countries," Working Papers 11/08, Instituto Universitario de Análisis Económico y Social.
    5. Filip Hruza & Stanislav Volcík & Jan Žácek, 2019. "The Impact of EU Funds on Regional Economic Growth of the Czech Republic," Czech Journal of Economics and Finance (Finance a uver), Charles University Prague, Faculty of Social Sciences, vol. 69(1), pages 76-94, February.
    6. Dicharry, Benoit & Nguyen-Van, Phu & Pham, Thi Kim Cuong, 2019. "“The winner takes it all” or a story of the optimal allocation of the European Cohesion Fund," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 385-399.
    7. Mazzeo Rinaldi, Francesco, 2016. "From local development policies to strategic planning—Assessing continuity in institutional coalitions," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 76-87.
    8. Fusaro, Stefano & Scandurra, Rosario, 2023. "The impact of the European social fund on youth education and employment," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    9. Wolfgang Polasek & Richard Sellner, 2013. "The Does Globalization Affect Regional Growth? Evidence for NUTS-2 Regions in EU-27," DANUBE: Law and Economics Review, European Association Comenius - EACO, issue 1, pages 23-65, March.
    10. Tomáš Oleš & Martin Hudcovský, 2024. "Impact of Cohesion Funds on Convergence Club's Economic Growth," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(4), December.
    11. SAHIBI, Youness & HAMZAOUI, Moustapha, 2017. "Spatial Inequality of Growth between Morocco Regions," MPRA Paper 84564, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. LSE Enterprise,, 2011. "Study on the impact of the single market on cohesion: implications for cohesion policy, growth and competitiveness," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 42840, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    13. Daniele Archibugi & Rinaldo Evangelista & Antonio Vezzani, 2021. "Centripetal and centrifugal forces in technological activities: linking regional innovation performances to EU Science & Technology policies," Working Papers 47, Birkbeck Centre for Innovation Management Research, revised Jan 2021.
    14. Francesco Foglia, 2025. "The impact of EU Cohesion policy funds for Smart Specialisation in a lagging region: evidence from RDD approach," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 74(3), pages 1-23, September.
    15. Mohl, Philipp & Hagen, Tobias, 2008. "Does EU Cohesion Policy Promote Growth? Evidence from Regional Data and Alternative Econometric Approaches," ZEW Discussion Papers 08-086, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    16. Mindaugas Butkus & Alma Maciulyte-Sniukiene & Kristina Matuzeviciute, 2020. "Heterogeneous growth outcomes of the EU’s regional financial support mediated by institutions with some empirical evidences at NUTS 3 level," Review of Regional Research: Jahrbuch für Regionalwissenschaft, Springer;Gesellschaft für Regionalforschung (GfR), vol. 40(1), pages 33-66, April.
    17. Łukasz Komorowski & Agata Mróz & Monika Stanny, 2020. "The Spatial Pattern of the Absorption of Cohesion Policy Funds in Polish Rural Areas," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-16, December.
    18. Mindaugas Butkus & Diana Cibulskiene & Alma Maciulyte-Sniukiene & Kristina Matuzeviciute, 2018. "What Is the Evolution of Convergence in the EU? Decomposing EU Disparities up to NUTS 3 Level," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-37, May.
    19. Sarantis Lolos, 2009. "The effect of EU structural funds on regional growth: assessing the evidence from Greece, 1990–2005," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 211-228, August.
    20. Marta Simões & João Andrade & Adelaide Duarte, 2013. "A regional perspective on inequality and growth in Portugal using panel cointegration analysis," International Economics and Economic Policy, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 427-451, September.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    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:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa03p215. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Gunther Maier (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.ersa.org .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.