Synthesis Report - European Commission - Europa

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Synthesis Report Ex-post Evaluation of the ERDF 2000-2006 • Much of the remaining part of funding was allocated to protecting and improving the natural and physical environment, which contributed to the sustainability of economic development as well as to social cohesion and territorial balance, as indicated below. The simulation results of macroeconomic models • The two macroeconomic models used both estimate that the expenditure financed from the Structural Funds is likely to have had a substantial effect on economic growth in the countries receiving more from the Funds than they contributed to their financing. This is the case, in the EU15, in Greece, Portugal, Spain and, to a lesser extent, Ireland, as well as in Southern Italy and Eastern Germany and all of the EU10 countries. • In Portugal, GDP is estimated to have been around 16% higher in 2009 as a result of support from the Funds, turning a possible decline in GDP into growth, even if at a low rate. For Greece, GDP is estimated to have been 13-16% higher in 2009 as a result of funding and in Spain, 10-17% higher 49 . • In the EU10 countries taken together, GDP in 2009 is estimated to have been almost 5% higher than it would have been without Structural Fund support, despite the short time this was available. • According to the model designed to estimate the combined effect of levying the taxes to raise the necessary revenue as well as of the expenditure, the Structural Funds are estimated to have increased economic growth across the EU25 as a whole over the period. The boost to growth in lagging economies, therefore, outweighed any adverse effects in the countries which were net contributors to funding. The growth performance in regions assisted by the ERDF • Growth of GDP per head in Objective 1 regions in the EU15 was higher on average over the 2000-2006 period than in other regions (around 2% a year as opposed to 1.4%). • Growth in Objective 1 regions in all EU15 countries apart from Belgium was higher than in non-assisted regions, and in all countries apart from Belgium, Italy and Portugal, higher than the EU25 average. • Growth in GDP per head in all regions in EU10 countries, except Malta, was above the EU25 average over the period 2000-2006, in the run-up to their entry into the Union and, even more so, after it. • Growth in regions receiving a significant amount of Objective 2 funding was either higher than that in non-assisted regions or much the same. • Regional disparities in GDP per head, one of the main targets of cohesion policy, narrowed slightly in the EU15 as a whole over the 2000-2006 period having widened in the preceding 5 years. They also narrowed in most EU15 Member States. This is all the more the case if the effect of commuting on GDP per head is taken into account. Evidence of the results of ERDF support Tangible evidence of the positive effects of ERDF support in policy areas which represent key drivers of economic growth was compiled for all countries from the administrative data available 49 The ranges refer to the estimates of the two models. 156
Ex-post Evaluation of the ERDF 2000-2006 Synthesis Report and from the many case studies carried out in the various Work Packages as well as from the national reports. To select just a few examples from Chapter 3: Transport • the ERDF co-financed around 26% of the 7.734 kms of motorway constructed in the EU15 over the 2000-2006 period, around the same proportion of new high-speed railway lines in Spain and Italy and the modernisation or upgrading of over 3,000 kms of standard railway lines across the EU; • In Spain, Greece and Ireland, in particular, the support provided by the ERDF to investment in transport led to significant improvements in the links between major centres both between and within regions and to substantial savings in travel time. • In Spain, the new motorways constructed, especially in the lagging regions of Andalucía and Galicia, resulted in overall time savings of 3.5 millions hours a year. In. Greece, the construction of the Egnatia Odos motorway which extends 680 kms from the West coast to the Turkish border reduced travel time by almost a half. In Ireland, the completion of 5 major roads between Dublin and other main towns and cities in the country led to journey time savings of over 40%. • In a number of cities, Athens, Oporto, Lisbon and Dublin, especially, the expansion of public transport systems reduced congestion significantly below what it otherwise would have been, so cutting travel time as well emissions. Enterprise support • Almost 640,000 new jobs were reported to have been created as a result of enterprise support in programmes accounting for some 60% of total funding on such support, implying the creation of over 1 million new jobs overall across the EU.. • In Eastern Germany, detailed statistical analysis demonstrated that investment per worker in firms receiving aid was substantially larger than in firms not receiving aid, the extent of the difference being significantly greater than the amount of aid given. • In Thüringen, similar analysis demonstrated that R&D expenditure per worker was also significantly larger in firms receiving aid for this than in those not doing so, with again the difference exceeding the amount of support given. In brief, therefore, there is sufficient evidence available from the evaluation to conclude that, overall, the ERDF had a significant effect on the economic growth of the regions assisted, especially regions assisted under Objective 1. 5.1.3 Effects of the ERDF on social, territorial and environmental cohesion As emphasised throughout this report, the ERDF was not only deployed to stimulate economic growth. It had wider objectives. • The evaluation revealed that the objectives of social and territorial cohesion were not only important throughout the EU, but that, in many regions, they had a similar level of priority as growth and in some cases a higher level, reflecting the characteristics and needs of the regions in question as well as the political choices made. • A large part of the financing provided by the ERDF, therefore, went to projects directly aimed at social objectives combined with territorial balance rather than economic growth as such. These projects include various kinds of social infrastructure and those covered 157
Page 1:
Cohesion Policy Ex-Post Evaluation
Page 4 and 5:
Synthesis Report Ex-post Evaluation
Page 6 and 7:
Page 8 and 9:
Page 10 and 11:
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109: Synthesis Report Ex-post Evaluation
Page 176: Consult this website for further in
show all

Synthesis Report - European Commission - Europa

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?