EU Single Market

The present Report offers ideas on how to shape the forthcoming period of Community support beyond the year 2020. The analysis builds on the report “The future of Cohesion policy – Report I” which reflected on the challenges and developments at the local and regional level, focusing mainly on the efficiency and effectiveness of implementing Cohesion Policy (CP). The present Report looks at concepts and models of CP (mainly its territorial dimension) and points out the main current challenges that are most likely to shape the future economic, social and territorial structures.

This second Report in the study series offers ideas on the future of CP. It is structured around two main parts, the first on models of growth, cohesion and well-being, and the second on new ideas and choices for EU CP. Thus projections and assumptions – in particular in the third section of the Report – are of a long-term nature. The present Report largely builds on an extensive desk research including a comparative literature review as well as relevant analyses and reports carried out by the authors of this paper. In addition, the analysis is fed by the results of an online survey carried out with stakeholders who took part in the seminars on the future of CP. Finally, independent interviews were carried out with relevant stakeholders with deep insight and considerable experience in the field of CP.

The new EU leadership – the president of the European Commission and his team of commissioners, and the presidents of the European Council and of the European Parliament – will have to address pressing challenges. Despite the significant steps taken by Europe – among them the creation of a European Stability Mechanism, the start of a banking union, the strengthening of fiscal rules and substantial structural reforms in crisis countries – results for citizens are still unsatisfactory. It is impossible to summarise all the memos in this volume but a common theme is the need to focus on pro-growth policies, on a deepening of the single market, on better and more global trade integration. Reverting to national protectionism, more state aid for national or European champions – as frequently argued for by national politicians – will not be the right way out of the crisis. On the contrary, more Europe and deeper economic integration in some crucial areas, such as energy, capital markets and the digital economy, would greatly support the feeble recovery. But in other areas, less Europe would also be a highly welcome signal that the new European leadership is serious about subsidiarity. Internal re-organisation of the European Commission to ensure that it better delivers would also be welcome.