IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The EU Structural Funds as a Means to hamper Migration


  • Peter Schmidt



Comparing the economic development and current situation of the internal markets of the U.S. and the EU, two things are noticeable. On the one hand, the EU is conducting massive regional policy programmes (notably the Structural Funds) to foster economic cohesion among the 27 nations belonging to the Single European Market while in the U.S. with its 50 federal states such policies play a rather subordinate role. At the first glance, this seems to be consistent with the situation in this two markets because in the U.S. only 2% of the total population lives in regions with less than 75% of the US-average GDP per capita while in the EU approximately 31% of the total population lives in such regions eligible for structural funds support. In other words, regional policies in the U.S. would be redundant. But taking a closer look, on the other hand, reveals that the internal mobility of U.S. citizens is significantly higher than that of EU citizens. According to the neoclassical economic theory migration, besides the free flow of goods, services and capital, plays an important role in assuring convergence or economic cohesion, respectively. Following this strand of theory no regional policy is needed to achieve convergence among the regions or nations of a common market. Thus, comparing the two internal markets, the question comes up if the lower degree of economic cohesion in the EU has something to do with the lower internal market mobility of EU citizens and a higher degree of structural intervention of the EU regional policy? To answer this question, the paper consists of three parts. First, the theoretical background concerning migration and the potential need for regional policy is presented, to find out if one of them is a better instrument to achieve a balanced economic development within an internal market. In the second part, we discuss the actual situation of internal migration and examine why migration rates are comparatively low in the EU. In the last part, the interrelation between the EU regional policy and (internal) migration are analysed. Besides other things like language, culture or institutions this paper is going to argue that structural funds are inhibiting internal migration, which is one of the key measures in achieving convergence among the nations in the Single European market. It becomes clear, that the European regional policy aiming at economic cohesion among the 27 member states is inconsistent if the structural funds hamper instead of promoting migration. JEL-Classification: E62, F15, F22 Keywords: Migration, Structural Funds, European Integration Other chosen themes: N. Regional strategies and policies E. Finance and regional development

Suggested Citation

  • Peter Schmidt, 2012. "The EU Structural Funds as a Means to hamper Migration," ERSA conference papers ersa12p383, European Regional Science Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa12p383

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Schmidt, Peter, 2010. "Zu Migration und Strukturfonds im Binnenmarkt der EU
      [Migration and the Structural Funds in the Single European Market]
      ," MPRA Paper 23740, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Puga, Diego, 1999. "The rise and fall of regional inequalities," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 303-334, February.
    3. Bernard G. Funck & Lodovico Pizzati, 2003. "European Integration, Regional Policy, and Growth," World Bank Publications, The World Bank, number 15144.
    4. Martin, Ron, 1999. "The New 'Geographical Turn' in Economics: Some Critical Reflections," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(1), pages 65-91, January.
    5. Gianmarco I. P. Ottaviano & Diego Puga, 1998. "Agglomeration in the Global Economy: A Survey of the 'New Economic Geography'," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(6), pages 707-731, August.
    6. Krugman, Paul, 1991. "Increasing Returns and Economic Geography," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 99(3), pages 483-499, June.
    7. Kessler, Anke & Lessmann, Christian, 2010. "Interregional Redistribution and Regional Disparities: How Equalization Does (Not) Work," CEPR Discussion Papers 8133, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    8. Diego Puga, 2002. "European regional policies in light of recent location theories," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 2(4), pages 373-406, October.
    9. Tobias Hagen & Philipp Mohl, 2011. "Econometric Evaluation of EU Cohesion Policy: A Survey," Chapters,in: International Handbook on the Economics of Integration, Volume III, chapter 16 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Lammers, Konrad & Stiller, Silvia, 2000. "Regionalpolitische Implikationen der neuen ökonomischen Geographie," HWWA Discussion Papers 85, Hamburg Institute of International Economics (HWWA).
    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. Peter Schmidt, 2016. "Internal migration and EU regional policy transfer payments: A panel data analysis for the EU-28 member countries," ERSA conference papers ersa16p172, European Regional Science Association.
    2. Timo Mitze & Torben Schmidt, 2015. "Internal migration, regional labor markets and the role of agglomeration economies," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 55(1), pages 61-101, October.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • E62 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Macroeconomic Policy, Macroeconomic Aspects of Public Finance, and General Outlook - - - Fiscal Policy
    • F15 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Economic Integration
    • F22 - International Economics - - International Factor Movements and International Business - - - International Migration

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    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:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa12p383. 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). 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.