IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eur/ejserj/153.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of EU Cohesion Policies within the scope of Lisbon and Europe 2020 Strategies

Author

Listed:
  • Ä°clal Kaya Altay

    (MSGSÜ Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Turkey)

Abstract

In order to increase the level of integration and development at the scale of the Union and to raise the conditions of competition on a global scale, EU has announced two basic development strategies within the process: Lisbon Strategy (2000) and the Europe 2020 Strategy (2010). Though the EU 2000-2006 Cohesion Policies corresponding to the 2000-2006 fiscal period and 2007-2013 Cohesion Policy Program that was reformed in comparison to the previous program were prepared within the scope of the Lisbon Strategy, 2014-2020 financial program and Cohesion Policies have been produced within the context of EUROPE 2020 Strategy. During the said process, the objectives and priorities as well as the budgets of the EU structural funds have changed. In March 2000, the European Council meeting in Lisbon set the strategic goal of transforming the EU into ‘the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world’ within a decade. Among the jointly agreed goals to be attained by 2010 were raising investment in research and development to three per cent of gross domestic product (GDP) and increasing the rate of employment within the EU from 61 to 70 per cent of the working-age population (Teasdale, 2012). Based on the interim evaluations of Lisbon Strategy, EU Commission stated that the required specific objectives could not be achieved because the financial crisis and planned reforms could not be implemented. At the same time, the major expansion in 2004 made the existing inter-regional disparities more evident. Published on 2010 by EC, Europe 2020 Strategy (which is considered to be a reviewed and updated Lisbon Strategy) brought in a new expansion in terms of achieving the initial objectives. The strategy in question focuses not only on the economic – social cohesion but also on spatial cohesion. However, the statistics within the process reveal that the economic, social and territorial cohesion could not be achieved at the scale of EU yet, even it has been asserted in a report, which was prepared by the Secretariat of the Conference of Peripheral Maritime Regions (CPMR) in 2015 that besides the disparities between the Member States, disparities between regions within countries increased, as well. Within the scope of this study, it will be discussed how much the cohesion target, given in the founding treaty of EU is reflected on the development strategies; the role and accomplishments of these strategies and funds in achieving that target. While the role and accomplishments of the Europe 2020 Strategy, which is still in effect today, are questioned in terms of ensuring particularly the territorial cohesion, also the importance and the priority granted to urban spaces in order to achieve the objectives of strategies - as well as objectives of the founding agreement – will be discussed. The Method of the Study can be summarized as the literature survey based on the Lisbon and Europe 2020 Strategies of European Commission, the EU Financial Period Programs and observations and critics prepared by a variety of institutions as well as the evaluation of the findings based on statistical datas.

Suggested Citation

  • Ä°clal Kaya Altay, 2021. "Evaluation of EU Cohesion Policies within the scope of Lisbon and Europe 2020 Strategies," European Journal of Social Sciences Education and Research Articles, Revistia Research and Publishing, vol. 5, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:eur:ejserj:153
    DOI: 10.26417/ejser.v10i2.p79-93
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://revistia.com/index.php/ejser/article/view/417
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://revistia.com/files/articles/ejser_v5_i3_18/Altay.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.26417/ejser.v10i2.p79-93?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robinson, Timothy J., 2008. "The R Book," The American Statistician, American Statistical Association, vol. 62, pages 272-273, August.
    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. Canh, Nguyen Phuc & Schinckus, Christophe & Thanh, Su Dinh & Hui Ling, Felicia Chong, 2020. "Effects of the internet, mobile, and land phones on income inequality and The Kuznets curve: Cross country analysis," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(10).
    2. Heard, Claire Louise & Rakow, Tim, 2022. "Examining insensitivity to probability in evidence‐based communication of relative risks: the role of affect and communication format," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 113810, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Bin Gu & Jaehong Park & Prabhudev Konana, 2012. "Research Note ---The Impact of External Word-of-Mouth Sources on Retailer Sales of High-Involvement Products," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 182-196, March.
    4. Jain, Manisha & Korzhenevych, Artem & Pallagst, Karina, 2019. "Assessing growth management strategy: A case study of the largest rural-urban region in India," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 1-12.

    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:eur:ejserj:153. 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: Revistia Research and Publishing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://revistia.com/index.php/ejser .

    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.