Explaining differences in regional performance: administrative capacity and political factors. The case of Structural Funds implementation in Italian Objective 1 regions

This thesis starts from the following question: Why, after 16 years of receiving Structural Funds, do some regions still have difficulties in spending their allocated resources? Empirical evidence shows that Funds implementation rates have varied widely among European Union Objective 1 regions. The overall performance of Italian regions, in particular, has consistently lagged behind other countries. However, an investigation into individual Italian Objective 1 regions reveals that not all follow this general trend. Indeed, some regions have outperformed others remarkably. Why is this the case? I explore these differences and identify potential variables that may account for such regional variation. My central hypothesis is that differences in implementation are strongly dependent on the degree of administrative capacity that exists in the recipient regional government. Due to the deficiency in the existing literature of a clear definition of administrative capacity, I attempt to fill this gap by introducing a novel characterization that allows me to operationalize and measure the concept. The core of the methodology is an in-depth case study supported by field research based on personal interviews and documented questionnaires. I investigate two contrasting southern Italian regions, Sicily and Basilicata, measure their respective degrees of administrative capacity and provide evidence to suggest that this latter variable is positively correlated to Structural Funds implementation. Answering my first query has prompted a further question: if it is trite that the variation in implementation of resources between regions can be explained by different degrees of regional administrative capacity, then what is it that determines the degree of administrative capacity at the regional level? In studying this second question I further test the hypothesis that the level of administrative capacity is influenced by three key political factors: namely, political interference, government stability and political accountability

Croatia should draw on universities to build its capacity for evaluating the use of EU funds.

Croatia is due to become the 28th member state of the European Union on the 1st of July. Ahead of the country’s accession, Simona Milio writes on efforts to build Croatia’s capacity for evaluating its use of EU funds. All EU member states that receive Cohesion Policy funding are required to have a strong evaluation system in place, yet the Croatian system is still a work in progress. She argues that Croatia should make greater use of universities to help set up systems capable of improving the country’s evaluation capacities

Beyond the nation state: how European cities and regions responded to the financial crisis

The financial crisis affected European countries in radically different ways, with some countries emerging relatively unscathed, while others suffered extreme economic problems that still persist today. But as Riccardo Crescenzi, Davide Luca and Simona Milio outline, the effects were also substantially different between individual cities and regions. Based on recent research, they demonstrate which regions were best placed to weather the crisis and suggest that the presence of a skilled labour force was one of the key factors allowing certain areas to recover more quickly than others

Social Policy Reforms in the EU: A Cross-national Comparison. Social Inclusion Monitor Europe (SIM) – Reform Barometer. Pilot Study

European countries are losing momentum for social policy reforms: The results of the SIM Europe Index report on social justice, published in September 2014, suggested a growing social divide among the member states. Assessing six policy areas of social inclusion, the data revealed the deteriorating social situation since 2009 across the EU. The report stressed, in particular, the difficulties southern EU member states were having in coping with the effects of the financial and economic crisis. This second report, the SIM Europe Reform Barometer, takes up these results and delivers two tasks: to impartially assess the extent of problem awareness of governments, and to ask whether they have enacted concrete social policy initiatives to tackle these challenges and to counterbalance the growing divide. Southern European member states, especially, did not or have not been able to pursue reforms to limit their withering levels of a socially inclusive society. In almost all key dimensions of social inclusion, those member states most affected by the implications of the protracted economic and fiscal crisis in the EU have been least able to confine the ongoing ‘internal devaluation’ in terms of socially balanced governmental activity. By contrast, some northern member states have legislated acts which seem well-suited to at least stabilise or even increase their level of social inclusion

The geography of the economic crisis in Europe: national macroeconomic conditions, regional structural factors and short-term economic performance.

This paper explores the linkages between pre-2008 crisis national macro-economic conditions, regional resistance factors and depth of the crisis in the regions of the EU27. The results suggest that only a limited set of macro-economic factors shape the regional reaction to the crisis. A healthy current account surplus is associated with stronger economic performance during the post-2008 recession. Conversely, high public debt countries are more successful in sheltering their regional economies in the short-run. When looking at regional-level resistance, human capital is the single most important positive factor. Conversely, research and development-intensive regions are more exposed to negative shocks

The investment in innovation and technology needed to combat the economic crisis may be the main casualties of the EU’s budget squeeze

The EU’s budgetary framework works in seven year cycles with negotiations now on-going for the upcoming 2014-2020 spending programme. Ahead of a special summit on the EU’s budget next month, Giacomo Benedetto and Simona Milio write that while the budget is relatively small compared to the EU’s gross national income, expected cuts mean that investment programmes which can make a difference in light of the eurozone crisis may be under threat

From policy to implementation in the European Union: the challenge of a multi-level governance system

Is the EU multi-level governance system weakening the implementation of policies at a state level? It does appear that a clear gap exists between European Union level policy-making and Member State implementation. All too often, EU public policy content and planning are little more than statements of intent without successful adoption. Policy implementation processes are the key follow-up of policy cycles, as they turn ideas into social output. Simona Milio argues that implementation deficiencies are a direct result of the multi-level structure of European governance. Italy, Spain and Poland are studied in order to identify the main factors undermining implementation process. The findings will help guide future strategies to improve implementation processes both within old and new Member States, thus minimising past mistakes in the multi-level system of EU governance