natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
This is partially explained by the specificity of the EU’s territory, which presents great geographical and cultural diversity within a restricted area, and a historical specificity which is linked to the division of the continent following the two world wars.
This is partially explained by the specificity of the EU’s territory, which presents great geographical and cultural diversity within a restricted area, and a historical specificity which is linked to the division of the continent following the two world wars.
In China, on the other hand, per-capita GDP barely reaches one fifth of the Community average, and in India one eighth.
In China, on the other hand, per-capita GDP barely reaches one fifth of the Community average, and in India one eighth.
Steering 2007-2013 funds towards the Lisbon Strategy
Steering 2007-2013 funds towards the Lisbon Strategy
The new programming of the structural funds for 2007-2013 was officially launched in a Europe enlarged to include 27 Member States on 1 January 2007.
The new programming of the structural funds for 2007-2013 was officially launched in a Europe enlarged to include 27 Member States on 1 January 2007.
While the budget is still substantial (308 billion euros for the whole Union), the needs of the new Member States call for major investment, which means, for the old Member States, a refocusing of funding priorities to cope with reduced budgets.
While the budget is still substantial (308 billion euros for the whole Union), the needs of the new Member States call for major investment, which means, for the old Member States, a refocusing of funding priorities to cope with reduced budgets.
Above and beyond integration objectives, the 2007-2013 programming is firmly centred around the promotion of innovation and competitiveness policies, the European Union having declared its desire to catch up with the other great powers (the United States and Japan) and to devote 3% of its GDP to research and development.
Above and beyond integration objectives, the 2007-2013 programming is firmly centred around the promotion of innovation and competitiveness policies, the European Union having declared its desire to catch up with the other great powers (the United States and Japan) and to devote 3% of its GDP to research and development.
The 4 th cohesion report shows up enormous disparities in research and development investment: while 27 regions exceeded the Barcelona objective of spending more than 3% of GDP on research and development, in more than 100 regions expenditure on research and development did not even reach the level of 1%.
The 4 th cohesion report shows up enormous disparities in research and development investment: while 27 regions exceeded the Barcelona objective of spending more than 3% of GDP on research and development, in more than 100 regions expenditure on research and development did not even reach the level of 1%.
We also note that research and development activities are concentrated mainly in the metropolises, although some high‑performing regions without major cities show that a high level of investment and employment in research and development does not necessarily go hand in hand with a major urban population concentration.
We also note that research and development activities are concentrated mainly in the metropolises, although some high‑performing regions without major cities show that a high level of investment and employment in research and development does not necessarily go hand in hand with a major urban population concentration.
In the framework of the revised Lisbon Strategy, an earmarking system has therefore been introduced in order to steer appropriations towards expenditure in this area.
In the framework of the revised Lisbon Strategy, an earmarking system has therefore been introduced in order to steer appropriations towards expenditure in this area.
On the basis of the operational programmes already received, the report indicates that on average 64% of convergence objective resources and 80% of competitiveness objective resources will be allocated to investment in Lisbon objectives, which corresponds to some 210 billion euros, representing 55 billion euros more than in the previous period.
On the basis of the operational programmes already received, the report indicates that on average 64% of convergence objective resources and 80% of competitiveness objective resources will be allocated to investment in Lisbon objectives, which corresponds to some 210 billion euros, representing 55 billion euros more than in the previous period.
There is no doubt that the cohesion policy has a real leverage effect on the competitiveness and growth of an area, with, inter alia, the development of public-private partnerships and territorial synergies in favour of employment, innovation and research, within which SMEs can easily cooperate with universities and local development structures.
There is no doubt that the cohesion policy has a real leverage effect on the competitiveness and growth of an area, with, inter alia, the development of public-private partnerships and territorial synergies in favour of employment, innovation and research, within which SMEs can easily cooperate with universities and local development structures.
But, while cohesion policy must make its contribution to innovation and research in the framework of the Lisbon Strategy, a flexible approach to earmarking funds is needed in order to ensure balanced development of territories.
But, while cohesion policy must make its contribution to innovation and research in the framework of the Lisbon Strategy, a flexible approach to earmarking funds is needed in order to ensure balanced development of territories.
This because to regard cohesion policy as a financial instrument of the Lisbon Strategy would mean that neither the objectives of cohesion policy nor those of the Lisbon Strategy were achieved.
This because to regard cohesion policy as a financial instrument of the Lisbon Strategy would mean that neither the objectives of cohesion policy nor those of the Lisbon Strategy were achieved.
Cohesion policy cannot be seen as a mere tool for achieving the objectives of other sectoral policies; rather, it is a Community policy of high European added value with its own raison d’être – cohesion.
Cohesion policy cannot be seen as a mere tool for achieving the objectives of other sectoral policies; rather, it is a Community policy of high European added value with its own raison d’être – cohesion.
Given the weak results brought to light by the mid-term review, but also because it is subjected to serious constraints under the European budget in a Europe of 27, the cohesion policy does not have as its first objective the goal of making Europe the most competitive knowledge-based economy in the world.
Given the weak results brought to light by the mid-term review, but also because it is subjected to serious constraints under the European budget in a Europe of 27, the cohesion policy does not have as its first objective the goal of making Europe the most competitive knowledge-based economy in the world.
This is one of the reasons why structural policies must not be situated within a perspective that is compartmentalised by topic, but rather within an approach that is integrated with the other policies of the Union and the public policies pursued by the Member States.
This is one of the reasons why structural policies must not be situated within a perspective that is compartmentalised by topic, but rather within an approach that is integrated with the other policies of the Union and the public policies pursued by the Member States.
The adoption of the European Territorial Agenda (ETA) and the Leipzig Charter on Sustainable European Cities at the ministerial meeting in Leipzig on 24 and 25 May 2007 was an important step in promoting the integrated approach.
The adoption of the European Territorial Agenda (ETA) and the Leipzig Charter on Sustainable European Cities at the ministerial meeting in Leipzig on 24 and 25 May 2007 was an important step in promoting the integrated approach.
Their objectives should be achieved through the adoption of a programme of concrete action and implementation, such that the territorial dimension will be better integrated into all public policies, both Community and national.
Their objectives should be achieved through the adoption of a programme of concrete action and implementation, such that the territorial dimension will be better integrated into all public policies, both Community and national.
Continuing to steer towards territorial cohesion
Continuing to steer towards territorial cohesion
Cohesion policy must concentrate on the fundamental objective of territorial cohesion, and cannot be centred (as it would be if appropriations were strictly earmarked) on the regions with the greatest potential for rising productivity and employment, which would risk marginalising regions with a limited potential for growth but not, on the other hand, eligible for the convergence objective.
Cohesion policy must concentrate on the fundamental objective of territorial cohesion, and cannot be centred (as it would be if appropriations were strictly earmarked) on the regions with the greatest potential for rising productivity and employment, which would risk marginalising regions with a limited potential for growth but not, on the other hand, eligible for the convergence objective.
The fourth report gives a snapshot of territorial cohesion in the EU of 27, and notes a strong concentration of economic activity in the capitals.
The fourth report gives a snapshot of territorial cohesion in the EU of 27, and notes a strong concentration of economic activity in the capitals.
In 2004, for example, the capital-city regions generated an average of 32% of their countries’ GDP, while representing 22% of the population.
In 2004, for example, the capital-city regions generated an average of 32% of their countries’ GDP, while representing 22% of the population.
This is a very noticeable phenomenon, and is most marked in the new Member States.
This is a very noticeable phenomenon, and is most marked in the new Member States.
The report analyses territorial developments at local level, where the acceleration of urbanisation is upsetting demographic balances, with a strong tendency to suburbanisation in Europe’s cities and to depopulation of rural areas.
The report analyses territorial developments at local level, where the acceleration of urbanisation is upsetting demographic balances, with a strong tendency to suburbanisation in Europe’s cities and to depopulation of rural areas.
If public policies remain unchanged, these territorial disparities can only become still more marked in the future.
If public policies remain unchanged, these territorial disparities can only become still more marked in the future.
The ESPON report ‘Scenarios on the Territorial Future of Europe (Territorial Futures)’
The ESPON report ‘Scenarios on the Territorial Future of Europe (Territorial Futures)’
‘Scenarios on the Territorial Future of Europe (Territorial Futures)’, ESPON 2006. is highly relevant in this connection.
‘Scenarios on the Territorial Future of Europe (Territorial Futures)’, ESPON 2006. is highly relevant in this connection.
It compares two long-term territorial development scenarios.
It compares two long-term territorial development scenarios.
One of the scenarios, which is geared to competitiveness alone, would be likely to engender stronger economic growth and the emergence of new technologies, but would bring with it higher environmental and social costs that would, in the long term, have unfavourable economic and social effects.
One of the scenarios, which is geared to competitiveness alone, would be likely to engender stronger economic growth and the emergence of new technologies, but would bring with it higher environmental and social costs that would, in the long term, have unfavourable economic and social effects.
On the other hand, a scenario geared towards cohesion gives rise to a more diffuse model as far as the attraction and polarisation potentials of metropolitan areas are concerned.
On the other hand, a scenario geared towards cohesion gives rise to a more diffuse model as far as the attraction and polarisation potentials of metropolitan areas are concerned.
Several high-performing zones of integration could emerge, both in the heart of Europe and in the more outlying regions.
Several high-performing zones of integration could emerge, both in the heart of Europe and in the more outlying regions.
This polycentric-development model, while yielding weaker economic growth than the first scenario, is better distributed geographically, thus avoiding a polarisation within a restricted area of population conflicts and social and environmental pressures.
This polycentric-development model, while yielding weaker economic growth than the first scenario, is better distributed geographically, thus avoiding a polarisation within a restricted area of population conflicts and social and environmental pressures.
It is for this reason that expenditure needs to be steered even more effectively towards projects geared towards enhancing the attractiveness of all territories.
It is for this reason that expenditure needs to be steered even more effectively towards projects geared towards enhancing the attractiveness of all territories.
We must not forget that one of Europe’s great advantages in terms of competitiveness is its diversity.
We must not forget that one of Europe’s great advantages in terms of competitiveness is its diversity.
Balanced, sustainable development which takes account of properly identified territorial needs must not ignore this fact.
Balanced, sustainable development which takes account of properly identified territorial needs must not ignore this fact.
The Union’s regional policy must therefore be pursued in close partnership with the regional players and in coordination with other national and European policies.
The Union’s regional policy must therefore be pursued in close partnership with the regional players and in coordination with other national and European policies.
In this context, it would be useful to see whether the architecture put in place by the Commission: Community strategic guidelines – national strategic framework of reference – operational programmes – represents the best possible way to achieve genuinely multi-level governance and proper identification of territorial needs.
In this context, it would be useful to see whether the architecture put in place by the Commission: Community strategic guidelines – national strategic framework of reference – operational programmes – represents the best possible way to achieve genuinely multi-level governance and proper identification of territorial needs.
New territorial challenges and the EU budget
New territorial challenges and the EU budget
The fourth report demonstrates that regional and interregional disparities are much more marked in the EU than in the United States or Japan.
The fourth report demonstrates that regional and interregional disparities are much more marked in the EU than in the United States or Japan.
Even though the virtually simultaneous arrival of 12 new Member States caused some turmoil in the statistics, there is no doubt that the territorial challenges to be met are formidable, whether in terms of economic and technological development, accessibility or quality of life.
Even though the virtually simultaneous arrival of 12 new Member States caused some turmoil in the statistics, there is no doubt that the territorial challenges to be met are formidable, whether in terms of economic and technological development, accessibility or quality of life.
Into this situation have come new factors, which will loom larger still in the years to come: urban concentration, bringing problems of congestion and issues of sociocultural integration in the cities; changing demographics, taking the form above all of an ageing population; migratory movements; continuing globalisation and increasing demand for agricultural products; climate change, leading to greater vulnerability to natural disasters for some regions, as well as rising energy prices.
Into this situation have come new factors, which will loom larger still in the years to come: urban concentration, bringing problems of congestion and issues of sociocultural integration in the cities; changing demographics, taking the form above all of an ageing population; migratory movements; continuing globalisation and increasing demand for agricultural products; climate change, leading to greater vulnerability to natural disasters for some regions, as well as rising energy prices.
These new challenges bring a new dimension to territorial development, making it essential that structural policies are maintained after 2013.
These new challenges bring a new dimension to territorial development, making it essential that structural policies are maintained after 2013.
It is necessary, therefore, not to focus exclusively on the new Member States, since these challenges are also very important for the EU of 15 and call for a broader approach than that of the Lisbon Strategy.
It is necessary, therefore, not to focus exclusively on the new Member States, since these challenges are also very important for the EU of 15 and call for a broader approach than that of the Lisbon Strategy.
Furthermore, the fourth report’s conclusions on future challenges to be faced by cohesion policy prove that new indicators supplementing per-capita GDP must be devised, which will be better able to depict the territorial realities of each region and the degree of cohesion already in existence on the ground.
Furthermore, the fourth report’s conclusions on future challenges to be faced by cohesion policy prove that new indicators supplementing per-capita GDP must be devised, which will be better able to depict the territorial realities of each region and the degree of cohesion already in existence on the ground.
It is essential that the structural policies should incorporate the new factors and allocate the necessary resources to them, since the level of territorial cohesion will depend increasingly on their territorial impact and on the way in which they are taken into account by public policy.
It is essential that the structural policies should incorporate the new factors and allocate the necessary resources to them, since the level of territorial cohesion will depend increasingly on their territorial impact and on the way in which they are taken into account by public policy.
It is interesting to note the new and growing attention being shown by countries such as China and Russia to the EU’s cohesion policy as a means of achieving balanced regional development.
It is interesting to note the new and growing attention being shown by countries such as China and Russia to the EU’s cohesion policy as a means of achieving balanced regional development.
The cohesion policy currently accounts for about one third of expenditure within the EU budget and, in 2008, it will become the largest item of budgetary expenditure.
The cohesion policy currently accounts for about one third of expenditure within the EU budget and, in 2008, it will become the largest item of budgetary expenditure.
Nonetheless, despite enlargement and the new territorial challenges, the volume of funds is decreasing in relation to the EU’s GDP.
Nonetheless, despite enlargement and the new territorial challenges, the volume of funds is decreasing in relation to the EU’s GDP.
According to the Commission’s estimates, by 2013 the expenditure linked to cohesion will represent only 0.35% of GDP, which would correspond to the level at the beginning of the 1990s.
According to the Commission’s estimates, by 2013 the expenditure linked to cohesion will represent only 0.35% of GDP, which would correspond to the level at the beginning of the 1990s.
We know, of course, that cohesion policy is exposed to the temptations of renationalisation, to which some Member States seem particularly susceptible, in direct ratio to an attitude which views Community policies primarily in accounting terms.
We know, of course, that cohesion policy is exposed to the temptations of renationalisation, to which some Member States seem particularly susceptible, in direct ratio to an attitude which views Community policies primarily in accounting terms.
And yet, as the fourth report on cohesion shows, the added value of the structural programmes cannot be seen in terms of figures alone.
And yet, as the fourth report on cohesion shows, the added value of the structural programmes cannot be seen in terms of figures alone.
When the EU budget’s health check is carried out in 2008-2009, the cohesion policy must be perceived first and foremost in terms of its contribution to European integration, and not simply as a redistribution tool.
When the EU budget’s health check is carried out in 2008-2009, the cohesion policy must be perceived first and foremost in terms of its contribution to European integration, and not simply as a redistribution tool.
Failing this, there is a great risk that the European project itself will be put in danger.
Failing this, there is a great risk that the European project itself will be put in danger.
Against this background, the rapporteur welcomes the adoption in May 2007 of the European Territorial Agenda, which provides an indispensable road-map for the emergence of a realisation, at the level of the Council and of every EU Presidency, of territorial cohesion as a political priority.
Against this background, the rapporteur welcomes the adoption in May 2007 of the European Territorial Agenda, which provides an indispensable road-map for the emergence of a realisation, at the level of the Council and of every EU Presidency, of territorial cohesion as a political priority.
For the future, before and, above all, after 2013, a durable, dynamic regional policy is needed in the European Union:
For the future, before and, above all, after 2013, a durable, dynamic regional policy is needed in the European Union:
– in order to achieve convergence of the new Member States, while guaranteeing territorial balance throughout Europe
– in order to achieve convergence of the new Member States, while guaranteeing territorial balance throughout Europe
– in order to accompany the Lisbon (and Göteborg) Strategy effectively, but also to counterbalance any excessive ‘lisbonisation’, which would be a factor of new disparities
– in order to accompany the Lisbon (and Göteborg) Strategy effectively, but also to counterbalance any excessive ‘lisbonisation’, which would be a factor of new disparities
– in order to support sectoral policies, but, first and foremost, guarantee an integrated approach in the Union’s policies
– in order to support sectoral policies, but, first and foremost, guarantee an integrated approach in the Union’s policies
– in order to encourage Europeans to stand behind the construction of the European Union and also to enable Europe to prevent, or help deal with, crisis situations
– in order to encourage Europeans to stand behind the construction of the European Union and also to enable Europe to prevent, or help deal with, crisis situations
– in order to remedy the most serious structural handicaps within the Union (very remote regions, mountainous areas, most northerly regions, etc.) and to meet major new challenges: climate change, energy and sustainable development, demography, urban development, etc.
– in order to remedy the most serious structural handicaps within the Union (very remote regions, mountainous areas, most northerly regions, etc.) and to meet major new challenges: climate change, energy and sustainable development, demography, urban development, etc.
– in order to promote multi-level governance, of Europe and the regions, and to develop interregional, transnational and cross-border forms of cooperation, and make territorial cohesion a high-priority Community objective.
– in order to promote multi-level governance, of Europe and the regions, and to develop interregional, transnational and cross-border forms of cooperation, and make territorial cohesion a high-priority Community objective.