Skip to content
  • «
  • 1
  • »

The search returned 6 results.

EU Cohesion Policy in the Iberian Peninsula: journal article

Main Territorial Impacts (1986-2013) and Challenges for a More Efficient New Programming Period (2014-2020)

Eduardo Medeiros

European Structural and Investment Funds Journal, Volume 6 (2018), Issue 4, Page 284 - 295

This paper identifies the main territorial impacts of EU Cohesion Policy in the Iberian Peninsula, in the first four programming periods (1989-2013). Moreover, it discusses the relevance of the strategy associated with this Policy, the role of EU funds in promoting a more cohesive territory, and suggests alternative paths to improving its effectiveness and efficiency. In short, our analysis concludes that, despite high levels of inefficiency, and lack of an adequate medium-longer term strategic vision to make the most out of the Iberian Peninsula’s territorial capital, the large volumes of funding were crucial in modernizing many territorial infrastructures, and in improving the human capital of both Iberian countries. However, in overall terms, the territorial cohesion goal was not achieved during the last couple of decades, at the national level. Worse still, the continuous negative commercial trade balance, which has been characterising both Iberian economies for a long time, associated with low levels of productivity increase, is illustrative of the existing and persistent structural territorial development constraints in both Iberian Countries. Hence, these need to be tackled in a more effective manner during the post-2020 phases of EU Cohesion Policy, in order to put the Iberian Peninsula in track with the most developed territories in Europe.

European Transnational Cooperation in the Making journal article

The Added-Value of INTERREG-B

Eduardo Medeiros, Guus Muijzers, Rudolf (Ruut) Louwers, Isabelle Roger, Sandra Tavares da Silva

European Structural and Investment Funds Journal, Volume 7 (2019), Issue 3, Page 155 - 172

The European transnational cooperation process, implemented via the ongoing 15 EU INTERREG-B programmes, is integrated in the second objective of EU Cohesion Policy: European Territorial Cooperation. Aiming to promote better cooperation and regional development processes within the European Union by a joint approach to tackle common issues, the EU transnational cooperation programmes are key to tackling transnational development bottlenecks and to better exploring transnational territorial capitals. Currently, there are ongoing discussions within the European Commission to delimit the new EU Cohesion Policy post-2020 INTERREG-B programmes. In this context, this article summarises the main conclusions of four invited speakers of an international conference which took place on 21 June 2019 at the Instituto Universitário de Lisboa. The conference aimed to present some of the key contributions towards territorial development of the EU of EU Cohesion Policy and, in particular, of three INTERREG-B programmes: North West Europe (NWE), South West Europe (SUDOE), and the Atlantic Area.

Territorial Development Strategies and EU Cohesion Policy journal article

Evidence from the Portuguese Case (1989-2013)

Eduardo Medeiros

European Structural and Investment Funds Journal, Volume 6 (2018), Issue 1, Page 68 - 85

This paper addresses EU Cohesion Policy and its contribution to supporting territorial development strategies in Portugal in the last couple of decades. Based on the identification of the main drivers of territorial development, and on the use of a wide range of data, it shows the positive and the negative effects of EU Structural and Cohesion Funds in supporting national and regional development. In sum, it concludes that these effects were more on the positive side, and contributed to promoting territorial development trends in all Portuguese regions. Nevertheless, the lack of a strategic territorial development vision from the national authorities prevented a more effective and efficient use of available EU cohesion, structural and investment funds. At the same time, the ultimate goal of territorial cohesion was not achieved at national level, and the approximation to EU averages in most territorial development indicators is still a far cry from the reality.

Placing European Territorial Cooperation Post-2020 at the Heart of EU Cohesion Policy journal article

Eduardo Medeiros

European Structural and Investment Funds Journal, Volume 5 (2017), Issue 3, Page 245 - 262

In 2007, European Territorial Cooperation became one of the major goals of EU Cohesion Policy, building on the successful experiences from the INTERREG Community Initiative in supporting cross-border, transnational, and interregional cooperation processes across the EU territory since 1989. Yet, financially, this goal has never received more than 3 % of the total budget of EU Cohesion Policy. This article discusses the crucial role of European Territorial Cooperation for implementing the goals of EU Cohesion Policy, and debates several arguments suggesting its future (re)positioned at the heart of Cohesion Policy. More pointedly, the article sets out several advantages in adopting a transnational approach to the development of the EU territory, by exploiting transnational potentials, and tackling transnational needs in all domains of territorial development. Furthermore, we highlight the need to place the goals of reducing persistent barriers and implementing cross-border planning strategies at the core of cross-border cooperation programmes. Finally, it is concluded that there is a need to shift the ongoing ‘nationally driven EU Cohesion Policy’ design and implementation rationale into a ‘transnational driven’ rationale, and thus places European Territorial Cooperation at the heart EU policy making.

EU Cohesion Policy in Sweden (1995-2013) – A Territorial Impact Assessment journal article

Eduardo Medeiros

European Structural and Investment Funds Journal, Volume 3 (2015), Issue 4, Page 254 - 275

By making use of a territorial impact assessment procedure (TARGET_TIA), this paper evaluates the main territorial impacts of the implementation of the EU Cohesion Policy in Sweden since it entered in the European Union (1995) until 2013. The main findings can be summarised as follows: overall, the general potential impact was low positive (0.129 in 4), and was slightly higher in the Territorial Governance/Cooperation and on the Socioeconomic Cohesion, than on the Environmental Sustainability and Morphologic Polycentricity dimension of Territorial Cohesion. Hence, the question remains, does one of the most developed countries in the world need a cohesion policy to improve its territorial development and cohesion? In this regard, our research concluded that, despite the reduced impacts of the EU Cohesion Policy in promoting territorial development and in achieving the goal of territorial cohesion in Sweden, it was a pivotal vehicle in supporting and enhancing: (i) territorial cooperation processes; (ii) policy monitoring and evaluation practices; (iii) multi-level governance practices; and (iv) mitigating the socioeconomic disadvantages from less developed regions.

The EU Cohesion Fund and Spatial Planning Strategies in Transport and Risk Prevention: Portugal (1995-2013) journal article

Eduardo Medeiros, José Luís Zêzere, Nuno Costa

European Structural and Investment Funds Journal, Volume 4 (2016), Issue 2, Page 87 - 99

As the name suggests, the Cohesion Fund is an EU redistributive instrument whose main goal is to promote territorial cohesion by financing projects in the Transport and Environmental territorial development components. This paper discusses its main effects in reducing regional disparities by increasing the territorial connectivity and in supporting risk prevention measures in Portugal throughout the last few decades. Furthermore, it presents the Cohesion Fund’s main interventions and the existing spatial planning guidelines in these domains. In this context, it argues that, overall, the Cohesion Fund had a positive role in improving the Portuguese territorial connectivity and was instrumental in supporting some key goals of the Portuguese Transport Strategic Plan. In the environmental domain, however, the risk prevention goal was largely underfinanced, and the investments in this area were essentially devoted to coastal erosion prevention measures.

  • «
  • 1
  • »