Structural Heterogeneity Between EU 15 and 12 New EU Members - the Obstacle to Lisbon Strategy Implementation?

• Autorzy: Magdalena Olczyk
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The aim of this article is to identify diversity between the EU-15 and the New Members in their implementation of the Lisbon Strategy in the period 2000-2010. By analyzing a set of structural indicators, we aim to fill a gap in the literature: the lack of publications providing complex evaluation of the implementation of the Lisbon Strategy using measurable indicators. Given their suitability for international comparisons, we use two taxonomic methods: Ward's cluster analysis and the synthetic variable method proposed by Hellwig. The results of our analyses confirm the hypothesis of a large gap between the EU-15 countries and the 12 New Members in the key areas of the Lisbon Strategy. According to rankings given by our taxonomic analyses, a high level of the indicators selected is confirmed only for the EU-15 countries and only three New Members belong to a group presenting the average level of these indicators. This study demonstrates a need for a significant intensification of the EU cohesion policy, which is one of the main tools for achieving the Lisbon Strategy goals.(original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

International comparisons; Lisbon Strategy; Structural indicators; Multi-dimensional analysis

PL

Porównania międzynarodowe; Strategia lizbońska; Wskaźniki strukturalne; Analiza wielowymiarowa

• Czasopismo: Equilibrium
• Rocznik: 2014
• Tom: 9
• Numer: nr 4
• Strony: 21--43

Twórcy

autor

Magdalena Olczyk

• Gdansk University of Technology, Poland

Bibliografia

• Amstrong, K., Begg, I., & Zeitlin, J. (2008), JCMS Symposium: EU governance after Lisbon. Journal of Common Market Studies, 46(2).
• Arpaia, A., Hobza, A., & Mourre, G. (2007). Quantitative assessment of structuralreforms: Modelling the Lisbon strategy. European Economy - Economic Papers, No. 282.
• Balcerzak, A. ( 2011). Pozycja Polski w kontekście planu Europa 2020. Analiza z wykorzystaniem metod porządkowania liniowego. Studia Ekonomiczne / Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny w Katowicach, 81.
• Balcerzak, A., Górecka, D., & Rogalska, E. (2008). Taksonometryczna analiza realizacji strategii lizbońskiej w latach 2001-2005. Wiadomości Statystyczne, 6.
• Brauers, W., Balezentis, T. & Balezentis, A. (2011). Implementation of the Strategy Europe 2020 by the multi-objective evaluation method Multimoora. E&M Ekonomie a Management, 14.
• Brauers, W., Balezentis, A. & Balezentis T. (2012). European Union Members States preparing for Europe 2020. An application of the Multimoora method. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 18, http://dx.doi.org /10.3846/20294913.2012.734692.
• Blanke, J. & Kinnock, S. (2010). The Lisbon Review 2010: Towards a More Competitive Europe?. Retrieved from http://www.weforum.org/reports/lisbonrev iew-2010 (01.09.2013).
• Barbier, J-C. (2010). Strategie de Lisbonne: Les promesses sociales non tenues. CES Working papers, No18.
• Barbier, J-C. (2012). Tracing the fate of EU "social policy". Changes in political discourse from "Lisbon Strategy" to "Europe 2020". International Labour Review, 151.
• Barrel, R., & Kirby, S. (2007). Notes on the Lisbon process - An analysis of the impacts of reaching the Lisbon targets for skills, R&D and the administrative burden in the European Union. Industrial Policy and Economic Reform Papers, 7.
• Bertolini, P., & Pagliacci, F. (2010). Lisbon strategy and EU countries' performance: social inclusion and sustainability. Working Paper of Department of Economics of University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, No 0648.
• Borsi, B. (2009). What the future of the Lisbon Strategy. Acta Oeconomica, 58.
• Cantillon, B. (2010). Disambiguating Lisbon. Growth, Employment and Social Inclusion in the Investment state, CSB Working Paper, No 10/07.
• Codogno, L., Odinet, G., & Padrini, F. (2009). The Use of Targets In the Lisbon Strategy. Rivista Di Politica Economica, 99(1-3).
• Destefanis, S. & Mastromatteo, G. (2012). Assessing the reassessment: A panel analysis of the Lisbon Strategy. Economics Letters, 11(2).
• Ederer, S., Janger, J., Kaniovski, S., Kletzan-Slamanig, D., Berger, J., Fortin, I., Hofer, H., Paterson I., Skriner, E., Schonpflug, K., Schuh U., & Schwarzbauer W. (2010), The Lisbon Strategy 2005-2010 and Estimating Expected Effects from Reaching the EU 2020 Goals. WIFO, Wien.
• European Commission (2004). Delivering Lisbon. Reforms for the enlarged Union.European Commission COM 29. Retrieved from http://www.ihep.org/a ssets/files/gcfp-files/Deliveriing_Lisbon_Reforms_Enlarged_Unio n_2004.pdf (16.07.2013).
• European Commission (2005). Working Together For Growth and Jobs: A New Start for the Lisbon Strategy, European Commission COM, Retrieved from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/com/2005/com2005_0024en 01.pdf (16.07.2013).
• European Commission (2007). Proposal for a Community Lisbon Programme 2008-2010. COM 804 final. Retrieved from http://eurlex.europa.e u/LexUr iServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2007:0804:FIN:EN:PDF (16.07.2013).
• European Commission (2010a). Europe 2020. A Strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. 2, COM(2010). Retrieved from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2010:2020:FIN:EN:PDF (16.07.2013).
• European Commission (2010b). Lisbon Strategy: Evaluation Document. SEC 114 final. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/pdf/lisbon_strategy _evaluation_en.pdf (16.07.2013).
• European Commission (2010c). An Agenda for new skills and jobs: A European contribution towards full employment, Strasbourg, COM(2010) 682 final, Retrieved from http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2 010:0682:FIN:en:PDF (16.07.2013).
• European Commission (2010d). Macro structural bottlenecks to growth in EU Member States, Brussels, COM(2010), Occasional papers, nr 65, Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/occasional_paper/2010/pdf/ocp65_en.pdf (16.07.2013).
• European Commission (2011). Tackling early school leaving: A key contribution to the Europe 2020, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of Regions, Brussels, COM(2011) 18 final. Retrieved from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2011:0018:FI N:EN:PDF (16.07.2013).
• European Parliament (2000). Lisbon European Council 23 and 24 March Presidency Conclusion. Retrieved from http://www.europarl.europa.eu/summi ts/lis1_en.htm (06.07.2013).
• European Parliament (2010). The Lisbon Strategy 2000-2010. An analysis and evaluation of the methods used and results achieved. Report of Directorate General for Internal Policies: Employment and Social Affairs. Retrieved from http://www.europarl.europa.eu/document/activities/cont/201107/20110718ATT24270/20110718ATT24270EN.pdf (16.07.2013).
• Eurostat (2012). Online Statistics database, Retrieved from http://epp.eurosta t.ec.europa.eu.
• Everitt, B. S. (1993). Cluster Analysis. London: Edward Arnold Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470977811.
• Everitt, B. S., Landau S., & Leese M. (2001). Cluster Analysis. London: Edward Arnold Publishing.
• Fischer, S., Gran, S., Hacker, B., Jakobi, A. P., Petzold, S., Pusch, T., & Steinberg P. (2010). Europe 2020 - Proposals For the Post-Lisbon Strategy, Frankfurt: Friedrich Ebert Stiftung.
• Gordon, A. D. (1999). Classification. Boca Raton: Chapman and Hall. http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/9789812832153_0003.
• Grabiński, T. (1992). Metody taksonometrii. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Akademii Ekonomicznej w Krakowie.
• Grabiński, T., Wydmus, S., & Zeliaś, A. (1993). Metody prognozowania rozwoju społeczno-gospodarczego. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Akademii Ekonomicznej w Krakowie.
• Gros, D. (2012). Perspectives on the Lisbon Strategy: How to increase European competitiveness in Europe after enlargement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Hellwig, Z. (1968). Zastosowanie metody taksonomicznej do typologicznego podziału krajów ze względu na poziom rozwoju oraz zasady i strukturę wykwalifikowanych kadr. Przegląd Statystyczny, 4.
• Johansson, B., Karlsson, Ch., Backman, M., & Juusola, P. (2007). The Lisbon Agenda from 2000 to 2010, CESIS - Electronic Working Paper Series, No. 106.
• Johnson, R. A. & Wichern, D.W. (2007). Applied Multivariate Statistical Analysis. Pearson Publishing.
• Kaufman, L. & Rousseeuw, P. J. (1990). Finding Groups in Data. New York: John Wiley & Sons. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470316801.
• Kedaitiene, A., & Kedaitis, V. (2009). The Lisbon Strategy and Economic Growth. Ekonomika Ir Vadyba: Aktualijos Ir Perspektyvos, 2(15).
• Koczor, M., & Tokarski, P. (2011). From Lisbon to Europe 2020, Lisbon Strategy Implementation in 2010: Assessments and Prospects, Warsaw: The Polish Institute for International Affairs.
• Krings, T., Marlier, E., & Natali, D. (2012). Europe 2020. Towards a more social EU?. Journal of European Social Policy, 22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/09589 28712440376.
• Lenain, P., Bützow Mogensen, U., & Royela-Mora V. (2005). Strategia Lizbońska na półmetku: oczekiwania a rzeczywistość. Warszawa: CASE.
• Nowak, E. (1990). Metody taksonomiczne w klasyfikacji obiektów społeczno- gospodarczych. Warszawa: PWN.
• Moniz, A. (2011). From the Lisbon strategy to EU2020: illusion or progress for European economies? In: B.-J. Krings (Ed.). Brain Drain or Brain Gain? Changes of Work in Knowledge-based Societies. Berlin: Sigma Verlag.
• Mundschenk, S. (2006). Competitiveness and Growth in Europe Lessons and Policy Implications for the Lisbon Strategy. Edward Elgar Publishing.
• Panitsidou, E., Griva, E., & Chostelidou D. (2012). European Union Policies on Lifelong Learning: In-between Competitiveness Enhancement and Social Stability Reinforcement. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46.
• Papadimitriou, D., & Copeland, P. (2012). The EU's Lisbon Strategy. Evaluating Success, Understanding Failure. Palgrave Macmillan.
• Radło, M. J. (2006). Instruments to support structural reforms in Poland. In: M. Weresa Ed. Poland Competitiveness Report 2006, Warsaw: Warsaw School of Economics Publishing.
• Rodrigues, M. J. (2009). Europe, Globalization And The Lisbon Agenda, Edward Elgard Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.4337/9781848446083.
• Sojka, M. (2007). The Czech economy and the challenge of The Lisbon Strategy. Ekonoicky casopis, 55.
• Soriano, F., & Mulatero, F. (2010). Knowledge Policy in the EU: From Lisbon Strategy to Europe 2020. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 4.
• Strahl, D. (1978). Propozycja konstrukcji miary syntetycznej. Przegląd Statystyczny, 2.
• Tausch, A. (2009). Titanic 2010? The European Union and its failed Lisbon Strategy. Nova Science Publishers.
• Teichman, E., & Brocka-Palacz, B. (2009). Strategia Lizbońska z perspektywy wybranych krajów i regionów. Warszawa: Oficyna Wydawnicza SGH.
• Tilford, S., & Whyte, P. (2009). The Lisbon Scorecard IX. How to emerge from the wreckage, Centre for European Reform Publishing.
• Treidler, O. (2011). Evaluating the Lisbon Strategy, Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Beiträge des Lehrstuhls für Volkswirtschaftslehre, insbes. Wirtschaftsordnung und Sozialpolitik, 115.
• Ward, J. H., Jr. (1963). Hierarchical Grouping to Optimize an Objective Function. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 48. http://dx.doi.org/10.230 7/2282967.
• Vilpišauskas, R. (2012). Does Europe 2020 represent learning from the Lisbon strategy? In Europe and National Economic Transformation: the EU after the Lisbon Decade. Palgrave Macmillan.
• Zeliaś, A. (2002). Taksonomiczna analiza przestrzennego zróżnicowania poziomu życia w Polsce w ujęciu dynamicznym. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Akademii Ekonomicznej w Krakowie.
• Zgajewski, T., & Hajjar, K. (2005), The Lisbon Strategy: Which failure? Whose failure? And why?. Brussels Academia Press.
• ---

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.12775/EQUIL.2014.023