Political Economy of the Single European Market - Essay Example

Running Head: EU Structural Funds EU Structural Funds s EU Structural Funds Introduction Two related purposes are aimed by the European Union, which allocates funds that are referred as Structural Funds and Cohesion Funds. In this regard, poorer regions of the Europe are supported by these funds, which play a vital role in developing and enhancing the European continent in various perspectives. Secondly, European infrastructure is integrated and supported by these structural funds. In addition, the transport sector is especially supported by these structural funds from the European Union. In this regard, budgeting is done by the European Union concerning the abovementioned funds, which play a crucial role in distributing the European Union's budget in needed and essential sectors of the continent. 195 billion budget was prepared by the European Union for the purpose of Structural Funds from the period of January 01, 2000 to December 21, 2006. This allocation of the budget was used in different sectors, especially the transport sector, and poorer regions of the continent were supported and integrated with different developing schemes of these structural funds. On the other hand, the budget for the Cohesion Fund was allocated to the amount of 18 billion, which was also used for different schemes and allocations in the European Union. (Halkier, 2004) In this regard, the major amount of the European Union's funding is spent on the Structural Funds, and the bulk of European Union's funding is made up these structural and cohesion funds. In addition, the Common Agricultural Policy is also included in the bulk of European Union's funding along with the abovementioned funds. (Artis, 2006) Objectives The areas and regions of the European continent, which are under the pressure of various difficulties are helped and supported by the European Union's Structural Funds. The decline of the local European industry could be the reason of these difficulties. Else, reduction of farm incomes due to the reduction in commodity prices could also be responsible for the lacking of resources to these regions. (Evans, 1999) In the result, sponsor projects are helped and supported by these structural funds, by which, locally identified needs would be addressed directly by it. Some of the sponsor projects that are fun by the structural funds are credited to train local people with different skills, which may help them in building their careers, or help them in setting-up their new businesses. Mainly, there are two objectives of the European Union's Structural Funds. Firstly, the regions with lack of development are enhanced and advanced by the adjustment of structural funds, which help in promoting development in these areas. Mostly, the lagging-behind areas are supported in the first objective of the European Union's Structural Funds. Secondly, local areas that are found to be facing structural difficulties are converted socially and economically by the support of these structural funds. The social and economic conversion is done in such a way that areas are provided with different developing opportunities, which help them in developing and advancing themselves and their areas. (Evans, 1999) Another objective was regarded in the structural funds of the European Union. In this regard, education, employment, as well as, the training systems and policies of the European regions are adapted and modernized by the support and coordination of the structural funds and their different planning and implementation of different projects in these areas. In all these three objectives, the transport sector has been specifically given a significant importance in the funding of these structural funds by the European Union. However, outside the specific areas of the first objective of the structural funds, the fisheries sector is also being restructured by the implementation of a special scheme. In addition, the European Union is witnessing the implementation of different and various rural development projects, which will change the lives of thousands of Europeans and various European sectors in the continent. The structural funds or the Common Agricultural Policy is responsible for the financing and implementation of all the abovementioned and other related projects in the European Union. First Objective From the year 2000 to 2006, running and implementation of the first objective of the structural funds was done by the European Union. The European Union's cohesion policy has given the main priority to the first objective of the structural funds. Harmonious development is promoted by the promotion and implementation of different projects and programs under the first objective of the structural funds. Particularly, the gap of the development levels of the various regions of the European Union is being tried to narrow through the first objective. (Evans, 1999) That is the reason that the Structural funds have allocated more than seventy-five percent of its appropriations for its first objective, by which, development and help is given to the areas that are lagged-behind in the European Union. However, there are some specifications and particulars for the implementation of the first objective of the structural funds. In this regard, the below average of seventy-five percent has been provided as the standard of the gross domestic product of a region, which is developed by the funding of the Structural funds. In England, the support of the first objective has been designated in three specific areas. Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly, Merseyside, and South Yorkshire are these three domestic areas, which have been selected based on the abovementioned standard of the first objective of the structural funds. A number of economic signals and indicators are found to be in all these regions. Low level of investment is one of the significant issues and reasons behind the lagging of these local areas. (Evans, 1999) Secondly, unemployment rate is found higher than the average, as compared with the other regions of the European Union. In these areas, businesses and individuals are provided with lack of services, which discourage their investment and projects in these areas. Lastly, basic infrastructure of these local areas is graded as of the developing regions, and is found in very poor condition. (Taylor & Francis Group, 1999) In the period of 2000-2006, twenty-two percent of the total population of the European region was covered by the structural funds. The level of trained human resources was risen up and adapted by the advancement and development in the basic infrastructure of these areas. Investment in these areas was encouraged, which changed different perspectives and solve many difficulties of these regions. The specified regions were provided with new challenges and opportunities by the programming of the first objective. National and regional authorities formulated approximately one hundred and fourteen programs for the selected regions with the help of the European Commission. A process of sustained endogenous growth was generated by three categories of these programs. In this regard, twenty-eight percent of the funds were used in the development of infrastructure, especially the transport infrastructure. Secondly, thirty percent of the funds were utilized in the training of the human resources with relation to the education systems, as well as, the employment policies. Thirdly, forty-two percent of the funds were used for the production sectors and their aid. (Taylor & Francis Group, 1999) Second Objective All the local areas, by which, structural difficulties were being faced, were revitalized during the second objective of the structural funds. Different types of social and economic difficulties were identified and selected for the implementation of the programs of the second objective. Industrial or service sector evolution was included in the causes of high rate of unemployment in these regions. In addition, rural areas were observed to be lacking traditional activities, and urban areas were facing a crisis. In this regard, fisheries activities were affected by various difficulties, which were solved during the second objective of the structural funds. (Van Der Hoek, 2005) The second objective of the structural funds covered eighteen percent of the population in the European continent, which was less than the first objective. Different criteria were formulated, which were must to follow by different areas as per their category. For instance, the industrial areas were required to provide the unemployment rate, which would come above the average of the communities. In addition, the industrial employment was also required to be declining in the areas, which were selected in the second objective. The national and regional authorities formulated approximately ninety-six programs under the second objective of the structural funds. This objective was able to affect twelve member states of the European Union. The European Commission was also supportive, as it was in the first objective of the structural funds. (Van Der Hoek, 2005) The GDP was found less than the standard of ninety percent of the average of Community in the areas, which were assisted by the projects of the Cohesion Fund. Some of these areas were Spain, Ireland, Greece, and Portugal. However, the first objective was able to cover the majority of their territory during its projects. (Taylor & Francis Group, 1999) Results The first objective was able to reduce the lagging of income per head by a sixth in its regions. An increment of seven percent was observed in the GDP per head in these areas. However, great regional differences were disguised by the first objective. Significant progress was showed by some regions. Ireland and German Lander were the most progressive ones during the first objective. The second objective was able to formulate different policies that increased the employment rate visibly. However, infrastructure was assisted at a lesser extent as compared with the first objective. Uneven results were achieved regarding the programs of creating a productive environment and restructuring serious problems of the specified areas. The setting up of technology transfer centres were done, which provided and predicted long-term effects and positive behavior in these areas. (Van Der Hoek, 2005) Conclusion Approximately one third of the European Union's budget was absorbed by the Structural Funds. The solidarity between the European people was put into practice by implementation of regional policies during the implementation of different projects of the structural funds. One of the fundamental objectives of the Treaty on European Union was achieved by these funds. Conclusively, competitiveness of the designated regions had a significant impact due to these implementations. We hope that the future structural funds for the period of 2007-2013 will provide better and long-term positive results in the needed areas, as approximately 336 billion of a global budget has been allocated for it. References Andrew Evans. (1999). the EU. Structural Funds. Oxford University Press. Henrik Halkier. (2004). the Nordic Regions and the European Union Ashgate Publishing Limited. J. F. Bachtler. (1997). the Coherence of EU Regional Policy. Routledge. Juliet Love. (2003). Western Europe 2003. Routledge. Keith J. E. Clement. (2000). Economic Development and Environmental Gain. James & James / Earthscan. M. Peter Van Der Hoek. (2005). Handbook of Public Administration and Policy in the European Union. CRC Press. Michael J. Artis. (2006). the Central and Eastern European Countries and the European Union. Cambridge University Press. Michael W. Bauer. (2001). A Creeping Transformation Springer. Ronald L. Hall. (2001). Competitiveness and Cohesion in EU Policies. Oxford University Press. Ronald van Kempen. (2005). Urban Issues and Urban Policies in the New EU Countries. Ashgate Publishing Limited. Taylor & Francis Group. (1999). the European Union Encyclopedia and Directory 1999. Routledge. Read More