Suchergebnisse

The European Union is changing significantly. It has recently been enlarged by 10 new Member States, decision-making about the European Constitution is going on, and it has set itself the target of becoming the most competitive economy in the world (Lisbon Strategy). The scenarios explore in an integrated way the territorial impacts of future changes in the economy, transport, rural development, environment, and other policy fields. They do not only concentrate on the territorial impacts of the trends and driving forces but also of the relevant EU Policies. The scenarios throw a light on the effectiveness of EU Policies and the synergies as well as conflicts they generate. By doing this they provide important insights in the conditions under which these trends, driving forces and policies will favour a balanced and polycentric territory and territorial cohesion within the enlarging European Union. These insights are relevant for recommendations on possible adjustments and/or changes of EU Policies.

The paper investigates the interdependence of the Lisbon strategy and Copenhagen criteria in the process of European Union enlargement and a candidate's ability to catch up with new member states. It aims to deepen the understanding of the nature and dynamics of the Lisbon policy mix and implementation instruments. It concludes that convergence with Lisbon goals is relevant for a country in the preaccession stage. Since the timeframe for implementation of the strategy and Croatia's expected accession are almost the same, approaching Lisbon goals is extremely important for the country. Experience of member states in strategy implementation and evaluation of Croatia's starting position vis-à-vis Lisbon targets are used to identify policy recommendations.

Papers of the International Conference "Reforms in Lisbon Strategy Implementation: Economic and Social Dimensions", was held on 3 May 2006 in Zagreb. Contents: Samardzija, V.: The Lisbon strategy in the wider European context; Randzio-Plath, Ch.: The Lisbon strategy: Framework for social reform agenda in the EU; Zgajewski, T.: The Lisbon strategy: What is wrong? Radlo, M.: The Lisbon Process inthe EU: Kesson for Croatia; Hribernik, M.: Lisgon Agenda implementation: The exemple of Slovenia; Szemler, T.; Reform programmes in Hungary: Lisbon matters? Potucek, M.: Does the Lisbon strategy matter? The Czech experience. Mimica, N.: The Lisbon agenda and the relocation of economic activites abroad: Services and the labour market.

In this paper, we develop an analysis of the reasons for the apparent failure of the "Lisbon strategy" (2000) so far. After having made the general case for a comprehensive "institutionalist perspective" on the European economy, we first try to formalise the objectives of "Lisbon" in order to present a mid-term review of the results attained. Since we find, like many others, that too little has been achieved, we then offer some possible explanations. Apart from an inconsistency problem between the different objectives set, we argue that the major reason for this failure appears to lie in the contradiction between the EU macroeconomic policy framework, based on the logic of delegation of power and control to independent authorities with conservative objectives, and the proactive policies required by the "Lisbon strategy", which objectives the EU member states eventually find themselves accountable for (not) achieving individually.

In this paper, we develop an analysis of the reasons for the apparent failure of the "Lisbon strategy" (2000) so far. After having made the general case for a comprehensive "institutionalist perspective" on the European economy, we first try to formalise the objectives of "Lisbon" in order to present a mid-term review of the results attained. Since we find, like many others, that too little has been achieved, we then offer some possible explanations. Apart from an inconsistency problem between the different objectives set, we argue that the major reason for this failure appears to lie in the contradiction between the EU macroeconomic policy framework, based on the logic of delegation of power and control to independent authorities with conservative objectives, and the proactive policies required by the "Lisbon strategy", which objectives the EU member states eventually find themselves accountable for (not) achieving individually.

Pessimistic comments are crowding the medias about the failure of the Lisbon strategy. At the end of 2004, the latest Kok group's report has emphasized "the failure of the Lisbon strategy." There is now a debate about the remodeling or the rationalization of the strategy. Before taking decisions, it would be opportune to organize a reflection about the extent of the failure & its causes. Otherwise any reform runs the risk of being not adapted or even counterproductive. Different questions must be examined: what is the real competitiveness problem?; is there a real need of an EU initiative?; do the different characteristics of the approach chosen in 2000 make sense? Adapted from the source document.

This article considers the relationship between financial and technological integration in Europe. It finds that market-based financial systems support output growth, investment and total factor productivity (TFP) more than bank-based ones. It identifies three groups of countries and estimates the probability of transition between the groups. It finds that financial integration might be a necessary but not sufficient condition for moving towards the 'Lisbon benchmark'.

This article considers the relationship between financial and technological integration in Europe. It finds that market-based financial systems support output growth, investment and total factor productivity (TFP) more than bank-based ones. It identifies three groups of countries and estimates the probability of transition between the groups. It finds that financial integration might be a necessary but not sufficient condition for moving towards the 'Lisbon benchmark'.