IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wiw/wiwrsa/ersa12p1000.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Multi-Level Government Of Cohesion Policy - Opportunities And Lessons Learned

Author

Listed:
  • VIT SUMPELA

Abstract

MULTI-LEVEL GOVERNMENT OF COHESION POLICY - OPPORTUNITIES AND LESSONS LEARNED JEL code – R50 Keywords: Multilevel government, Cohesion policy, regional policy, management and control system, trust Cohesion policy is regarded as one of the most complex systems of redistribution of public interventions. Financial intervention in the complex cross-cutting issues is implemented through a very complex administrative system by individual projects. Such a complex system is generally defined first by the EC rules, then the individual Member States in its legislative and institutional environment creates an environment for management and administration of this intervention that eventually could be attributed to a particular feature of the intervention of the relevant institutions, which form the implementation environment of current Member State. European Commission assumes that the institutional and legislative environment of a Member State is at a sufficient level to ensure proper financial and administrative process flows. Calculating the fact, that the legislative framework, enables realization of public procurement and others, ensuring controls of the system in order to identify problematic processes, there is a need to divide powers and responsibility for deciding vertically on appropriate level and transfer the responsibility for implementing the rules in order to comply with all legal framework of the Community and the Member State. In such a multi-level government, however, occurs more than one issue that may complicate the overall management system. The basic concept that it should be borne in mind is a trust. Within this complex system is necessary to build and maintain the long-term trust between institutions and the trust in the individual rules and their interpretation. With the trust in the system, of course, relates control issue. The control mechanisms, mainly control procedures should be set in the very beginning due to establishing of the basic principles of implementation and should not be changed during period markedly. The result of such behaving in the system is a high error rate and loss of confidence in setting the management and control system. It causes also a significant impact on the administrative burden and its cost. In all these areas there is need to handle with the appropriate level responsible approach to the competent officials that could be able to decide on their respective cases and should not remove the decision responsibility to a higher level in order to get rid of personal responsibility. All of these problematic areas of multi-level government need to be discussed on a basis of practical examples. Consequently, it is necessary to find approaches that will strengthen overall trust in the system and will enable focus on the achievement of policy objectives, not only to ensure administrative accuracy of financial flows. That should go in particular.

Suggested Citation

  • Vit Sumpela, 2012. "Multi-Level Government Of Cohesion Policy - Opportunities And Lessons Learned," ERSA conference papers ersa12p1000, European Regional Science Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa12p1000
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www-sre.wu.ac.at/ersa/ersaconfs/ersa12/e120821aFinal01002.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    multilevel government; cohesion policy; regional policy; management and control system; trust cohesion policy is regarded as one of the most complex systems of redistribution of public interventions. financial intervention in the complex cross-cutting issues is implemented through a very complex administrative system by individual projects. such a complex system is generally defined first by the ec rules; then the individual member states in its legislative and institutional environment creates an environment for management and administration of this intervention that eventually could be attributed to a particular feature of the intervention of the relevant institutions; which form the implementation environment of current member state. european commission assumes that the institutional and legislative environment of a member state is at a sufficient level to ensure proper financial and administrative process flows. calculating the fact; that the legislative framework; enables realization of public procurement and others; ensuring controls of the system in order to identify problematic processes; there is a need to divide powers and responsibility for deciding vertically on appropriate level and transfer the responsibility for implementing the rules in order to comply with all legal framework of the community and the member state. in such a multi-level government; however; occurs more than one issue that may complicate the overall management system. the basic concept that it should be borne in mind is a trust. within this complex system is necessary to build and maintain the long-term trust between institutions and the trust in the individual rules and their interpretation. with the trust in the system; of course; relates control issue. the control mechanisms; mainly control procedures should be set in the very beginning due to establishing of the basic principles of implementation and should not be changed during period markedly. the result of such behaving in the system is a high error rate and loss of confidence in setting the management and control system. it causes also a significant impact on the administrative burden and its cost. in all these areas there is need to handle with the appropriate level responsible approach to the competent officials that could be able to decide on their respective cases and should not remove the decision responsibility to a higher level in order to get rid of personal responsibility. all of these problematic areas of multi-level government need to be discussed on a basis of practical examples. consequently; it is necessary to find approaches that will strengthen overall trust in the system and will enable focus on the achievement of policy objectives; not only to ensure administrative accuracy of financial flows. that should go in particular.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • R50 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Regional Government Analysis - - - General

    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:ersa12p1000. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.