Konvergenz- und Wachstumseffekte der europ�ischen Regionalpolitik in Deutschland

Eggert, Wolfgang; Ehrlich, Maximilian von; Fenge, Robert; König, Günther

doi:10.1111/j.1468-2516.2007.00237.x

Cited by 36 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The conclusions are based on different sample sizes: Bussoletti and Esposti (2004) use an EU-15 sample, whereas smaller samples are used by Cappelen, Castellacci, Fagerberg, and Verspagen (2003) or Bouvet (2005) . Some studies even concentrate on single country studies such as Eggert, von Ehrlich, Fenge, and König (2007) (Germany) or Antunes and Soukiazis (2005) (Portugal). Furthermore, some authors do not find a statistically significant impact of structural funds on the regional growth rates (García-Milá and McGuire, 2001;Dall'erba and Le Gallo, 2007).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nevertheless, the empirical evidence has provided mixed, if not to say, contradictory results. While some authors do find evidence of a positive impact of structural funds on economic growth (Eggert, von Ehrlich, Fenge, and König, 2007;Bouvet, 2005;Cappelen, Castellacci, Fagerberg, and Verspagen, 2003), others find weak (Percoco, 2005;Bussoletti and Esposti, 2004) or even no impact at all (Dall'erba and Le Gallo, 2007;de Freitag, Pereira, and Torres, 2003;García-Milá and McGuire, 2001). There are many reasons for these mixed results, among others, the low quality of structural funds data at the regional level and a number of methodological problems.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Does EU Cohesion Policy Promote Growth? Evidence from Regional Data and Alternative Econometric Approaches

Mohl

Hagen

2008

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Die Dis cus si on Pape rs die nen einer mög lichst schnel len Ver brei tung von neue ren For schungs arbei ten des ZEW. Die Bei trä ge lie gen in allei ni ger Ver ant wor tung der Auto ren und stel len nicht not wen di ger wei se die Mei nung des ZEW dar.Dis cus si on Papers are inten ded to make results of ZEW research prompt ly avai la ble to other eco no mists in order to encou ra ge dis cus si on and sug gesti ons for revi si ons. The aut hors are sole ly respon si ble for the con tents which do not neces sa ri ly repre sent the opi ni on of the ZEW.Download this ZEW Discussion Paper from our ftp server:ftp://ftp.zew.de/pub/zew-docs/dp/dp08086.pdf Non-technical summaryThe investigation of the impact of European regional policy on economic growth and convergence has been intensified over the last decade. However, the results are not clear-cut. While some authors do find evidence of a significant positive impact of structural funds on economic growth, others find weak or even no impact at all. There are many reasons for these mixed results, among others, the low quality of structural funds data at the regional level and a number of methodological problems. Against this background, this paper analyses the growth effects of EU structural funds using a new panel dataset of 124 NUTS-1 / NUTS-2 regions over the time period [1995][1996][1997][1998][1999][2000][2001][2002][2003][2004][2005]. We extend the current literature with regard to at least three aspects: First of all, we extend the time period of investigation using structural funds payments of the last Financial Perspective 2000-2006 that have not been analysed before. Second, we use more precise measures of structural funds by distinguishing between Objective 1, 2 and 3 payments and by investigating the impact of time lags more carefully. Third, we examine the robustness of our results by comparing different econometric approaches highlighting specific methodological problems. Apart from "classical" panel data methods (like system GMM), we apply spatial panel econometric techniques.The empirical evidence indicates that the Objective 1 payments in particular have a positive and significant impact on growth. In contrast, both Objective 2 and Objective 3 payments negatively affect the regions' growth rates. Moreover, the results show that the time lag plays a key role in affecting the results. We find that the growth impact does not appear immediately. Instead, our results indicate that it occurs with a time lag of approximately two to three years. Abstract This paper analyses the growth effects of EU structural funds using a new panel dataset of 124 NUTS-1 / NUTS-2 regions over the time period [1995][1996][1997][1998][1999][2000][2001][2002][2003][2004][2005]. We extend the current literature with regard to at least three aspects: First of all, we extend the time period of investigation, using structural funds payments of the last Financial Perspective 2000-2006 that have not been analysed before. Second, we use more precise measures of structural funds by di...

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does EU Cohesion Policy Promote Growth? Evidence from Regional Data and Alternative Econometric Approaches

Mohl

Hagen

2008

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies focused on the efficiency of the impact of structural funds have not provided conclusive findings so far (e.g., Garcia-Milà and McGuire, 2001;Rodríguez-Pose and Fratesi, 2004;Dall'erba and Le Gallo, 2008;Lima and Cardenete, 2008;Ionescu and Tudor, 2011;Aiello and Pupo, 2012). The short-run positive relationship between subsidies from EU Structural Funds and regional economic growth report is reported by, for instance, Eggert et al (2007). One of the possible explanations for the positive impact, besides the entrepreneurial activity (Dvouletý, 2017b;2017c;Dvouletý andLukeš, 2016 or Dvouletý andMareš, 2016), is also the multiplier effect that the implemented projects can bring.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Economic performance of the NUTS III Regions in the Czech Republic in the context of entrepreneurship subsidies from the EU Structural Funds

Kolaříková¹,

Dvouletý²,

Kolařík³

2018

Zb. rad. Ekon. fak. Rij.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Entrepreneurship is considered to be one of the essential factors of economic growth and entrepreneurship policy is considered to be a significant contributor to the regional economic development. The aim of the present paper is to determine whether the unemployment rate and the GDP per capita of the NUTS III regions in the Czech Republic are influenced by the amount of financial subsidies paid to businesses from the Operational Programme Enterprise and Innovation (OPEI). We employed regression analysis and Granger Causality testing in order to

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, the results are not clear-cut: While some authors find evidence for a positive relation (Beugelsdijk and Eijffinger, 2005), others find no evidence (Dall'erba and Le Gallo, 2007) or even negative support for this (Eggert, von Ehrlich, Fenge and König, 2007). All in all, the discussion might be summarised by stating that the EU CP is only conditionally effective.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

How Does EU Cohesion Policy Work? Evaluating its Effects on Fiscal Outcome Variables

Mohl

Hagen

2009

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Die Dis cus si on Pape rs die nen einer mög lichst schnel len Ver brei tung von neue ren For schungs arbei ten des ZEW. Die Bei trä ge lie gen in allei ni ger Ver ant wor tung der Auto ren und stel len nicht not wen di ger wei se die Mei nung des ZEW dar.Dis cus si on Papers are inten ded to make results of ZEW research prompt ly avai la ble to other eco no mists in order to encou ra ge dis cus si on and sug gesti ons for revi si ons. The aut hors are sole ly respon si ble for the con tents which do not neces sa ri ly repre sent the opi ni on of the ZEW.Download this ZEW Discussion Paper from our ftp server:ftp://ftp.zew.de/pub/zew-docs/dp/dp09051.pdf Non-technical summaryThe impact of the EU Cohesion Policy has mainly been evaluated by analysing its growth effects. However, this perspective neglects that the EU support might affect other policy fields as well. There are at least two reasons why the impact on public investment should be of special interest. First of all, according to the principle of additionality the Member States have to co-finance EU-funded projects but must not crowd out spending for national public investments elsewhere. Second, since a major part of Cohesion Policy payments is spent on government investments, virtually all empirical studies on the investigation of the growth effects assume that the Cohesion Policy increases investments leading to a higher steady-state capital stock per capita, which, in turn, increases the GDP growth rate. Hence, an essential condition for the effectiveness of EU transfers is the degree to which they affect overall national public investments. However, the impact of Cohesion Policy payments on national public investments has not yet been evaluated.Furthermore, instead of increasing future-orientated spending, EU Cohesion Policy payments may (indirectly) be used to reduce public deficits. This is possible if EU regional policy crowds out national spending, which is most likely to occur in poorer countries. To the best of our knowledge, there has been no paper investigating the effects on public deficits.Against this background, the paper at hand examines through which channels this policy field works by analysing the impact of EU Cohesion Policy payments on national public investments and primary budget balances. In doing so, we use a comprehensive dataset of 27 EU countries, extend the time period of investigation to 1982-2006 and apply advanced panel econometric methods.Our results indicate that EU Cohesion Policy payments do not significantly increase national public investments, thus pointing to a crowding out of national spending. Moreover, the hypothesis that EU funds are used for the consolidation of public budgets cannot be rejected in all econometric specifications. AbstractThe impact of EU Cohesion Policy has mainly been evaluated with regard to its growth effects. We extend the perspective by investigating the impact of EU Cohesion Policy on public investments and budget deficits in order to learn more about the channels through which this polic...

show abstract

Konvergenz- und Wachstumseffekte der europ�ischen Regionalpolitik in Deutschland

Cited by 36 publications

References 21 publications

Does EU Cohesion Policy Promote Growth? Evidence from Regional Data and Alternative Econometric Approaches

Does EU Cohesion Policy Promote Growth? Evidence from Regional Data and Alternative Econometric Approaches

Economic performance of the NUTS III Regions in the Czech Republic in the context of entrepreneurship subsidies from the EU Structural Funds

How Does EU Cohesion Policy Work? Evaluating its Effects on Fiscal Outcome Variables

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About