Suchergebnisse

Croatia is geographically, historically and culturally a part of the European territory. Regions, as specific units within a national territory, are defined differently on EU level than in Croatia, where counties are far too small to be considered as regions in EU terms. The implementation of European regional policy requires "comparability" of territories, which is done on the basis of the Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics (NUTS). After long discussions with the European Commission and Eurostat, Croatia has three "new" NUTS II regions (March, 2007): Adriatic, North-Eastern (Pannonian) and North-Western Croatia including the capital city of Zagreb. These regions are now acceptable for EU regional policy and funds. Institutional structures for managing regional development on this new regional level does not exist, as well as legislative framework necessary to implement policies, strategies, plans or projects prepared at the respective levels, while at the same time very interesting developments from the bottom-up can be observed. Regional development agencies established have recently been nominated as regional coordinators for elaboration of planning documents at the County level initiating development processes, still at the county level and through informal mechanisms at the regional level. Territorial cohesion across Europe stands out as one of the top European priorities. Considerably large number of programmes, measures and priorities, aim at achievement of this goal. Croatia, as an acceding country, strives to harmonise numerous requirements prior to entering European union space in all aspects of entry, including territorial cohesion. Last decade was marked by a certain shift in shaping and implementing Croatian regional policy at programming and regulatory level towards that aim, among others. Many documents were produced – to serve national purpose, European and/or both. New policy, regulatory and programming environment imposed also creating of institutional set up (structure) that will enable successful implementation at all these fronts. However, regional development has to evolve from the bottom, but the initial push or supporting incentives have to come from above. This is a mutually enhancing development process, where efforts from above (EU and national level) and bellow (regions, counties, and local units) merge and contribute to overall development. This paper explores possibilities and obstacles in implementing of Croatian regional development policy at all levels, within a semi-European context and a given national framework.

Generated as a response to the requirements in managing European cross border cooperation programmes, Neighbourhood Programme Slovenia-Hungary-Croatia 2004-2006 (NP) in particular served as an impetus for establishment of new modes of governance in Croatia. Together with Hungary and Slovenia, Croatia participates in this trilateral Programme as an external EU border candidate state. The NP is implemented as a grant scheme in Croatia for the first time requiring many institutional changes for its implementation. On all levels of government, the NP contributed to the establishment of stronger relations among institutions, horizontally and vertically, and a transfer of know-how in preparation and implementation from experienced partners, Slovenia and Hungary. Such a complex programme generated also problems due to weak administrative capacity, different sources of financing and socio-economic discrepancies. On national level, weak capacity of the Croatian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integration (MFAEI) has directly influenced the initiation and implementation of NP and difficulties in the decision-making process occurred. The relationship between MFAEI and the Delegation of the European Commission was unclear and there were difficulties in developing new administrative procedures. Additionally, insufficiently transparent information dissemination mechanisms through different government levels influenced the quality and selection of project proposals in certain counties. Socio-cultural differences in Croatia were insufficiently considered while setting up the coordination system resulting in the extent and quality of submitted proposals and their success in the selection procedure. Some regions showed successful coordination on county level contributing to selection of greater number of proposals from those counties, while in others, there was a lack of capacity in preparing coherent project proposals. In accordance with the presented first Croatian experiences in the trilateral European cross-border programme, the following can be concluded: In terms of socio-developmental impacts, the joint-project proposal preparation process of the cross border partners created intensive inter-institutional cooperation and inter-institutional communication. However, only successful project proposals result in inter-institutional collaboration through joint implementation of projects, which is considered fundamental to the creation of a network society and building of social capital.

The economic crisis has affected the EU regions very differently over the last five years, depending on the region's strengths or weaknesses, its sectoral structure and the response of national and regional governments. In some countries, downturns can lead to narrower interregional disparities, while in some can trigger regional divergence. Previous empirical studies indicate that there is a tendency for regional disparities to grow during recessions, and diminish in the period of economic growth (Dunford and Parron, 1994; Evans and MacCormic, 1994, Audas and Mackay, 1997). Although the reduction of regional disparities represents one of the priorities of EU regional policy and of Croatian regional policy, regional disparities within the Croatia are still significant. The current economic crisis that has emerged in the Croatian economy has already an enormous negative effect on several national and regional development indicators like GDP per capita, unemployment, and productivity. Some areas are coping with structural changes such as de-industrialization. In line with that the main aim of the paper is to find out if regional imbalances within Croatia have been more exposed by the current crises? This paper analyses the disparities between economic developments of Croatian counties before the crisis (before 2009) in comparison with the recession period. The analysis focuses on regional development index and other available socio-economic indicators (GDP per capita, unemployment rate). Obtained results can serve as a ground for improvements in Croatian regional economic policy.