The EU’s Cohesion Strategy within Regional Policy: An Investment with Bullish Returns?

Pop quiz: How do you close the economic and cultural disparities of 27 countries?  For the EU, the answer lies in focusing largely on regional policy to achieve economic and social solidarity among its member states.  If the EU’s cohesion strategy turns out to be successful, Europa may be riding a new ‘bull’ – all the way to the bank.

Look out Zeus - There may be a new bull in town...

The EU’s cohesion policy, the keystone of EU regional policy, consists of three separate – yet related – objectives: convergence, competiveness, and cooperation.   Put succinctly, the main goal of EU cohesion policy is to limit the wide inequality among the EU’s 271 regions.  The labor productivity of inner London, for example, rests at 296% of the EU average, whereas the Northeast region of Poland has only 44.5% the EU productivity average. [1]

The EU’s regional policy website cites possible causes of such lagging regions as “longstanding handicaps imposed by geographic remoteness or by more recent social and economic change, or a combination of both.”[2] The consequences of these factors can seriously inhibit the quality of life in poorer regions, as evidenced by “social deprivation, poor quality schools, higher joblessness and inadequate infrastructures.”[3] The goal of the EU’s regional policy, then, is to bolster growth and innovation in suffering regions by revamping infrastructure, creating jobs, and providing economic incentives for entrepreneurs.

The strategy employed by the EU’s regional policy is two-fold.  Economically, regional policy aims to bolster growth in laggard regions through revamping infrastructure, creating jobs, and providing incentive for innovation and entrepreneurship.  Socially, regional policy provides funding for programs such as bettering schools or re-introducing criminals into society.

The price tag for this goal is hefty at €350 billion (from 2007-2013), but the fact that regional policy consists of 36% of the EU’s total budget highlights the important role regional policy plays in achieving European solidarity.[4] Thus far, the results have been positive. Since 2007, regional policy has contributed to a 10% gain in employment and has created 1.4 million jobs.  Johannes Hahn, the European Commissioner for Regional Policy, has stated in a press conference in January that “regional policy has been an absolute success story for European integration…I’m saying [this] with clear words and I have no doubt about it.”[5]

Skeptics, however, point out that the structural funds that grant regional policy funds lack transparency and are overly complex.  Marian Harkin, an MEP from Ireland, has noted that there is “a strong argument for greater visibility of these funds, and an urgent need for simplification.”[6] She goes on to say that bureaucracy and red tape limit the availability and swift deliverance of regional policy monies.

Still, regional policy overall has seemed to be quite effective in facilitating European solidarity despite numerous obstacles to integration.  One such obstacle is labor mobility within the EU.  In 2008, only 1.2% of total working age population changed their residence within the EU, compared to 2.8% in the US.[7] This could pose a real threat to future economic stability of the EU as the baby-boom generation retires.

There is a beacon of hope,  contingent upon the outcome of regional policy itself.  The European Commission cites “significant differences between countries in the extent of regional movements, with a clear distinction between the countries in the Eastern and Western part”[8] as one explanation of the lack of inter-EU mobility.  If regional policy continues to be successful in facilitating European integration, perhaps the cultural differences among EU member states may be diluted enough to encourage more inter-EU mobility.  If this becomes the scenario (certainly the hope of EU regional policy advocates), Europe will open the floodgates for unimaginable economic prosperity – and the billions of Euros pumped into cohesion policy will be returned tenfold.

However, even if regional policy fails in accomplishing its goal of social solidarity across Europe, it will remain hard for Europeans to argue that granting funding to socially and economically disadvantaged regions was a mistake – especially when viewed against the backdrop of normative EU social values.

- Michael Bossetta 

---

[1]“Investing in Europe’s Future” (Video) http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docoffic/official/reports/cohesion5/index_en.cfm

[2] http://europa.eu/pol/reg/index_en.htm

[3] Ibid

[4] Ibid

[5] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQUY1ch-20k

[6] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhcrzV6B8F4

[7] European Commission. Investing in Europe’s Future: Fifth report on economic, social and territorial cohesion. Pg 9

http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docoffic/official/reports/cohesion5/index_en.cfm

[8] Ibid, Pg. 10

Creating a common identity based on multiculturalism

In the article “ Is identity a useful cross-cultural concept?”, the author Richard Handler holds the view that the conception of identity is not useful as a scholarly branch and also thinks that support without criticism will lead identity claims to aid the reproduction of an ideology that is both hegemonic and oppressive. He also suggests that identity is not a useful concept when dealing with the cross-cultural issues. He bases his thoughts on the idea that identity is a modern, western concept and that it is not a useful tool when studying other cultures and time periods, and also because identity is something that can be created by authorities for political purposes.

We do not agree with Handler in the aspect that it’s pointless to conduct studies on identity; we think that nowadays the concept of identity still plays a vital role when dealing with the cross-cultural issues. As globalization deepens, people from different cultures are increasingly and frequently exchanging communication and identity construction and identity become increasingly prominent. How are we to deal with cross-cultural communication and cross-cultural identity? In the process of integration, can the mainstream culture be equivalent with minority cultures? Is the multiculturalism possible in Europe? Is it possible to create a European identity that does not harm the cultural diversity? How can the immigrants be integrated by heart in the European society, not to mention how to integrate the other candidate countries?

With the enlargement of the European Union that is expanding towards countries that do not base their identity on the same experience of history, culture and religiosity and with the immigrants that have settled in the countries within the European Union, it would be impossible to force everyone to adapt to one homogenous identity based on political views, culture and religion. The solution according to us would therefore be to merely seek to find a political unity, by trying to pose an offer to the “non-Europeans” by giving them the opportunity to accept some common political values like democracy, free speech, human rights, and so on. To strengthen citizenship is the first step to create a sense of identity, to allow cultural diversity of all members of society and political integration of identity. By adapting to these values, they can still keep their culture and religion and be European in that sense that they will strive after the same goals as the rest of Europe does, and that they will want to protect their political values, because it benefits them. It should be a voluntary act coming from a bottom-up movement and not be forced on the immigrants from a top-down movement. And there should be an attraction in the European citizenship, which will create a want and a need from the not already integrated, to want to become integrated.

Our conclusion is therefore that the concept of identity today is important, but that we should only strive to create a common political identity, and let the many different cultural identities stay on a personal and private sphere. This way we can find a unity, but still not harm the multiculturalism.

Fatemeh, Marija and Jing

Cultural exchange in Europe: No more obstacles by visa obligations

In the article from The New Federalist, Lea Sarah argues that Non European students have troubles getting their VISA in order to study in Europe. In the case of European Studies it is much bigger problem. She is arguing that students coming from different parts of Europe, and out of Europe would create liberal exchange environment and it will create an interaction. She concludes that European Union should be more welcoming to the students out of Europe.

Our Comment——–

We believe you are right. We are Master students of European Studies in Lund University, and we have the same problem that you have mentioned in your article. We have some colleagues as well who had the same problem and some of them could only get a visa for one year for a two year masters program and we find this unfair especially in the case of European Studies. We believe that European Studies master programs will be much better if people with different backgrounds and who are from different parts of Europe could participate as well. This would bring diversity and a different point of view to the subjects in the masters and the students can share their experiences and their knowledge of Europe to their home countries. With that, the idea of Europe will be promoted as well and it will grow not only in the political point of view, also with the cultural and integration point of view. Also it would be really useful to have educated and qualified people outside of the Europe in case of a future enlargement those people would help in the process of their integration to the EU.

For example, Sweden was one of the last countries that didn’t have fees for education regardless of their nationality (even higher studies). But for the next year, Sweden has changed the law, and now the Non-European students will pay a huge fee to study in a Swedish university. It for sure will be another obstacle in addition to the VISA problem. Until now, one could see a town full of students from everywhere around the world, and it makes education much rich and better. For the next year, Swedish education will have less diversity than previous years, and Sweden will lose one of the best points it has in education.

As Flingstein points out more interaction would promote further integration of the European citizens so EU should lay the grounds for people so that they can interact more easily and freely, if it wants to create a common European identity and promote interaction.

Can Olgu ERDEREN

Javier RUIZ

Your apathy elected the Sweden Democrats

In The Local’s article ‘Your apathy elected the Sweden Democrats’, US-born contributor Naomi Olofsson ponders why the very  same “immigrant-friendly” Swedes who have never bothered to help immigrants adjust to life in Sweden suddenly seem so outraged at the success of the Sweden Democrats.  Olofsson asks these newly passionate, active Swedes “Where were you?” before this, when marginalized immigrants needed members of their community to reach out on a more personal level, welcome them, and help them to integrate into Sweden culture.

Our comment:

Despite some impassioned exaggerations and contradictions (including implying that race is not a factor in the opening paragraph only to later speak about suffering from prejudice herself in relation to her own mixed heritage), Naomi Olofsson’s words bring up some very intriguing questions:

Firstly, in Sweden (or any nation for that matter), do you truly become a citizen (in terms of how you view yourself and how others view you) once you marry a national and gain citizenship or should you be expected to?

Secondly, if you see citizens’ apathy with regards to issues of immigration, integration, and racism as a persistent problem throughout history (as Olofsson seems to do when she relates Sweden’s situation today to Martin Niemöller’s verse), then shouldn’t the question be why is this the case and to what extent is the integration of immigrants within a nation the responsibility of the nation itself or the citizens of a nation?

In response to Olofsson’s question “where were you?”:

Perhaps one of the implications in the case of Sweden, with its reasonably positive global reputation as a model welfare state and relatively high taxes, is that its citizens are socialized to understand integration and supporting the immigrant as solely a responsibility of the state. Therefore, it is not until the state itself is directly involved in something that seemed uncharacteristically anti-immigrant (as is the case in the 2010 elections to Parliament) that Sweden saw such an active reaction from its citizens.

Marjorie Spangler and Maija Komonen

A fragmented Europe?

 

      The vision of a united Europe is often contradicted by various approaches and through different perspectives. In a similar way do we believe that the picture represents the numerous attitudes and concepts that consist of the challenges that Europe faces in the 21stcentury.  First and foremost do we believe that the picture, like Europe, can be interpreted in numerous ways!

      While various transnational European Institutions such as the EU, the CoE etc. over the recent decades have sought to create a common European framework does it appear that the advancement of the Europeanization in recent years has been a setback rather than a continuous progress.

      On one hand has there been numerous attempts to create a common European framework and on the other it appears that the EU member states permanently are trying to obstruct the common vision of an inclusive EU. The recent example is when the states decided to “take ownership” of the EU’s foreign policy at a summit designated to set the EU’s strategic priorities.

      Particularly interesting, is it that unlike the discussions of the Lisbon Treaty, where European citizens to a large extent rejected the Treaty. This time is it the decision makers that actively oppose the progress of the vision of the EU – in ensuring that the states will maintain their sovereignity in regard to questions on foreign policy.  The picture can be perceived as a symbol of this political fragmentation.

      Another way of interpreting the picture is through the puzzle of Europe on the desk, in front of a computer and the globe in the back. Is this a symbol of the increasing significance of the EU in the global order? Or is it a symbol of the emergence of the globalization where the EU plays a major role in developing new forms of communication? 

      The mess of the puzzle on the desk poses some of the more difficult questions! Who is going to put the pieces together? in which order? Politicans? EU-crats? People that only work from a top-down approach while neglecting the reality and the societies they influence? Which kind of Europe are we facing in the future with this type of integration? Europe, and European identity should not be constructed in an office rather it should be a joint project of the EU in conjunction with the European citizens. 

      European identity and European integration have to be built from the streets, from the people in every city if the European vision of unity in diversity needs to become a success. Is it possible to build a house starting with the roof? or is there a danger that it might collapse before the dream will become a reality? Like any other top-down approach is there a strong need for a civil society and a bottom-up approach that reflects the facts on ground!.

      This puzzle is not only about fitting the right pieces and nation states together but more importantly how we can live together and embrace European diversity! It is a puzzle that no one expects will be easy and it’s a task where the EU institutions, nation states and citizens need to go hand in hand in order to shape the future! The main question is not how and why, but rather if the European citizens are interested in the Europeanization project and EU’s vision of unity in diversity?

     These are just a few examples on how the picture can be interpreted – we would like to include other questions such as the emergence of a European power-state, and of course the question of the European enlargement but most importantly we would like to hear your perspective on the picture!

 

Jonas Herzberg Karpantschof

Javier Ruiz Soler