Article Sidebar

Studia z Polityki Publicznej
Download
PDF (Język Polski) EPUB (Język Polski) HTML (Język Polski)

Main Article Content

Abstract

The main goal of the EU regional policy is obtaining cohesion. However, development strategies differ in terms of investment concentration. The paper presents the theoretical models of the regional policy, illustrated with a case study of Polish strategies. Using the spatial interactions model, the range of the diffusion of economic incentives was estimated. A dynamic analysis of 1996–2017 NUTS4 panel data enabled the assessment of the results of development strategies. The outcome was confirmed with the L-moments analysis of entrepreneurship distribution over time. The method covered the period of the highest efficiency of the cohesion policy. The author also made an attempt to mark out factors responsible for the failure of the smart policy in Poland. 

Keywords

polityka spójności dyfuzja bodźców rdzeń–peryferia cohesion policy diffusion core-periphery

Article Details

License

The journal of “Studia z Polityki Publicznej/Public Policy Studies” provides access to the content of articles in the Open Access mode on the basis of the Creative Commons license Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).

License CC-BY

More information: Open Access Policy of the "Studia z Polityki Publicznej/Public Policy Studies"

How to Cite
Mikos, M. . (2019) “Spatial range of the diffusion of economic incentives: testing the core–pheriphery model in reference to the regional and local cohesion policy”, Public Policy Studies, 6(2(22), pp. 55–87. doi: 10.33119/KSzPP/2019.2.3.
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

Metrics

References

  1. Acemoglu, D. (2012). Introduction to economic growth. Journal of Economic Theory, 147.2:545–550.
  2. Audretsch, D.B., Thurik, A.R. (2000). Capitalism and democracy in the 21st century: from the managed to the entrepreneurial economy. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 10.1–2: 17–34.
  3. Azariadis, C. Drazen, A. (1990). Threshold externalities in economic development. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 105.2: 501–526.
  4. Bański, J. (2008). Polska i Europa Środkowo-Wschodnia w koncepcjach podziału Europy. Problematyka geopolityczna ziem polskich. Warszawa: Instytut Gospodarki i Przestrzennego Zagospodarowania PAN.
  5. Barry, F. Begg, I. (2003). EMU and cohesion: introduction. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 41.5: 781–796.
  6. Batóg, J. (2010). Konwergencja dochodowa w krajach Unii Europejskiej: analiza ekonometryczna. Rozprawy i Studia/Uniwersytet Szczeciński, 780.
  7. Begg, I. (2003). Complementing EMU: rethinking cohesion policy. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 19.1: 161–179.
  8. Blom-Hansen, J. (2005). Principals, agents, and the implementation of EU cohesion policy. Journal of European Public Policy, 12.4: 624–648.
  9. Bozdogan, H. (1987). Model selection and Akaike’s information criterion (AIC): The general theory and its analytical extensions. Psychometrika, 52.3: 345–370.
  10. Burger, M., Van Oort, F., Linders, G. (2009). On the specification of the gravity model of trade: zeros, excess zeros and zero-inflated estimation. Spatial Economic Analysis, 4.2: 167–190.
  11. Camagni, R., Capello, R. (2013). Regional innovation patterns and the EU regional policy reform: Toward smart innovation policies. Growth and Change, 44.2: 355–389.
  12. Can, A. (1990). The measurement of neighborhood dynamics in urban house prices. Economic Geography, 66.3: 254–272.
  13. Capello, R., Kroll, H. (2016). From theory to practice in smart specialization strategy: emerging limits and possible future trajectories. European Planning Studies, 24.8: 1393–1406.
  14. Cesarski, M. (2013). Infrastruktura osadnicza w gospodarce regionalnej–kwestie równoważenia rozwoju. Kwartalnik Kolegium Ekonomiczno-Społecznego. Studia i Prace, 3: 9–25.
  15. Combes, P. Overman, H. (2004). The spatial distribution of economic activities in the European Union. Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics. Elsevier: 2845–2909.
  16. Davoudi, S. (2005). Understanding territorial cohesion. Planning, Practice&Research, 20.4:433–441.
  17. Duranton, G., Puga, D. (2004). Micro-foundations of urban agglomeration economies. Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics. Elsevier: 2063–2117.
  18. Elamir, E., Seheult, A. (2003). Trimmed L-moments. Computational Statistics&Data Analysis, 43.3: 299–314.
  19. Fésüs, G., Roller E. (2011). Zmiana paradygmatu w polityce spójności, w: Nowy paradygmat rozwoju–najnowsze trendy i perspektywy polityki regionalnej. Warszawa: Ministerstwo Rozwoju Regionalnego.
  20. Foray, D. (2014). Smart specialisation: Opportunities and challenges for regional innovation policy. Routledge, 2014.
  21. Foray, D., et al. (2013). The goals of smart specialisation. S3 Policy Brief Series, 1: S3.
  22. Fotheringham, S., O’Kelly, M. (1989). Spatial interaction models: formulations and applications. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  23. Friedmann, J. (1967). A general theory of polarized development. Santo Domingo: The Ford Foundation.
  24. Fujita, M., Krugman, P., Venables, A. (2001). The spatial economy: Cities, regions, and international trade. MIT Press.
  25. Giddens, A. (2000). The third way and its critics. London: Polity Press.
  26. Gilowska, Z. et al. (1998). Kierunki polityki regionalnej Polski. Studia Regionalne i Lokalne, 24(57).
  27. Glasmeier, A. (2000). Economic geography in practice: local economic development policy. The Oxford Handbook of Economic Geography, 200: 559–579.
  28. Gorzelak, G. (2002). Polskie regiony w procesie integracji europejskiej. Studia Regionalne i Lokalne, 2–3(9): 55–73.
  29. Gorzelak, G., Jałowiecki, B. (2001). Strategie rozwoju regionalnego województw: próba oceny. Studia Regionalne i Lokalne, 1(5): 41–59.
  30. Gradstein, M., Justman, M. (2002). Education, social cohesion, and economic growth. American Economic Review, 92.4: 1192–1204.
  31. Greta, M., Tomczak-Woźniak, E. (2014). Problem spójności w nowej polityce regionalnej UE na lata 2014–2020. Optimum. Studia Ekonomiczne, 4.
  32. Grzeszczak, J. (1999). Bieguny wzrostu a formy przestrzeni spolaryzowanej. Warszawa: IGiPZ PAN.
  33. Harris, B. Batty, M. (1993). Locational models, geographic information and planning support systems. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 12.3: 184–198.
  34. Hausner, J. (2001). Modele polityki regionalnej w Polsce. Studia Regionalne i Lokalne, 1: 5–24.
  35. Herbst, M., Wójcik, P. (2013). Delimitacja dyfuzji rozwoju z miast metropolitalnych z wykorzystaniem korelacji przestrzennej. Studia Regionalne i Lokalne, 4(54): 5–21.
  36. Herbut, R. et al. (2007). Wymiary polityki regionalnej w aspekcie politycznym, społecznym i gospodarczym. Legnica: Państwowa Wyższa Szkoła Zawodowa im. Witelona, seria Wspólnota Akademicka.
  37. Hirschman, A. (1958). The strategy of economic development. New Haven–London: Yale University Press.
  38. Hodgson, J. (1990). A flow‐capturing location‐allocation model. Geographical Analysis, 22.3: 270–279.
  39. Holtz-Eakin, D. (2000). Public policy toward entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 15.4: 283–291.
  40. Hooghe, L. et al. (red.) (1996). Cohesion policy and European integration: building multi-level governance. Oxford University Press on Demand.
  41. Hosking, J. (1990). L‐moments: Analysis and estimation of distributions using linear combinations of order statistics. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological), 52.1: 105–124.
  42. Hryniewicz, J., Jałowiecki, B., Mync, A. (1997). Ruchliwość pracowników naukowych w latach 1994–1996. Studia Regionalne i Lokalne, 22(55).
  43. Jacobs J. (1969). Economy of cities. New York: Random House.
  44. Jałowiecki, B., Gorzelak, G. (2004). Brain drain, brain gain, and mobility: Theories and prospective methods. Higher Education in Europe, 29.3: 299–308.
  45. Jankowska, A. (2005). Fundusze Unii Europejskiej w okresie programowania 2007–2013. Warszawa: Polska Agencja Rozwoju Przedsiębiorczości.
  46. Kęska, J. (2007). Zasada subsydiarności a samodzielność organizacyjna jednostek samorządu terytorialnego. Rocznik Żyrardowski, 5.
  47. Kopczewska, K. (2011). Ekonometria i statystyka przestrzenna z wykorzystaniem programu R CRAN. Warszawa: CeDeWu Wydawnictwa Fachowe.
  48. Kopczewska, K. (2013). The spatial range of local governments: does geographical distance affect governance and public service? The Annals of Regional Science, 51.3: 793–810.
  49. Kopczewska, K. (2014). L‐moments skewness and kurtosis as measures of regional convergence and cohesion. Statistica Neerlandica, 68.4: 251–266.
  50. Lee, H., Ghosh, S.K. (2009). Performance of information criteria for spatial models. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation, 79.1: 93–106.
  51. LeSage, J., Pace, K. (2008). Spatial econometric modeling of origin‐destination flows. Journal of Regional Science, 48.5: 941–967.
  52. Lipshitz, G. (1992). Divergence versus convergence in regional development. Journal of Planning Literature, 7.2: 123–138.
  53. Littunen, H. (2000). Networks and local environmental characteristics in the survival of new firms. Small Business Economics, 15.1: 59–71.
  54. López, E., Gutiérrez, J., Gómez, G. (2008). Measuring regional cohesion effects of large-scale transport infrastructure investments: an accessibility approach. European Planning Studies, 16.2: 277–301.
  55. Lucas, R. Jr. (1988). On the mechanics of economic development. Journal of Monetary Economics, 22.1: 3–42.
  56. McCann, P., Ortega-Argilés, R. (2011). Smart specialisation, regional growth and applications to EU cohesion policy. EB Working Paper, 14.
  57. Molle, W. (2007). European cohesion policy. Routledge.
  58. Oldenburg, B., Glanz, K. (2008). Diffusion of innovations. Health Behavior and Health Education-Theory Research, and Practice, 313–330.
  59. Ottaviano, G., Thisse, J. (2004). Agglomeration and economic geography. Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics. Elsevier: 2563–2608.
  60. Pellegrini, G. et al. (2013). Measuring the effects of European Regional Policy on economic growth: A regression discontinuity approach. Papers in Regional Science, 92.1: 217–233.
  61. Perroux, F. (1964). La economía del siglo XX. Barcelona: Ariel.
  62. Pike, A., Rodríguez-Pose, A., Tomaney, J. (2016). Local and regional development. Routledge.
  63. Rapacki, R., Próchniak, M. (2014). Wpływ członkostwa w Unii Europejskiej na wzrost gospodarczy i realną konwergencję krajów Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej. Ekonomia, 39: 87–122.
  64. Rodrigue, J., Comtois, C., Slack, B. (2016). The geography of transport systems. Routledge.
  65. Rogers, R. (2010). Diffusion of innovations. Simon and Schuster.
  66. Rothschild, R. (1994). Adam Smith and the invisible hand. The American Economic Review, 84.2: 319–322.
  67. Steyaert, C., Katz, J. (2004). Reclaiming the space of entrepreneurship in society: geographical, discursive and social dimensions. Entrepreneurship&Regional Development, 16.3: 179–196.
  68. Strzelecki, Z. (2011). Strategiczne wyzwania Polski a polityka regionalna (wybrane problemy), w: Nowy paradygmat rozwoju–najnowsze trendy i perspektywy polityki regionalnej.
  69. Szlachta, J. (2011). Strategiczne programowanie rozwoju regionalnego, w kierunku krajowego systemu myśli strategicznej w sferze polityki regionalnej, w: Nowy paradygmat rozwoju–najnowsze trendy i perspektywy polityki regionalnej.
  70. Taylor, P., Openshaw, S. (1975). Distance decay in spatial interactions. Concepts and Techniques in Modern Geography.
  71. Van Dijk, J., Pellenbarg, P. (2000). Spatial perspectives on firm demography. Papers in Regional Science, 79.2: 107–110.
  72. Zioło, Z. (2006). Rola przedsiębiorczości w podnoszeniu konkurencyjności społeczeństwa i gospodarki. Przedsiębiorczość-Edukacja, 2: 10–17.