In response to the present experienced downturn on the global economy, it becomes more difficult for the Commission to manage major players’ submission and proposition for policy review. Most of these policy proposals according to the commission president are described as “unrealizable and selfish”. The Commission would have suggested a workable gradual increase in EU Funding to eight members with the lowest per capital GDP of 42% at the expense of old members.
This policy is subjected to be reviewed by 2013 after assessment of progress and success result of the proposal. Despite this, the need still arises to mediate, persuade and protect the larger share of the income from the major players (donors to the European Union fund pool). With the European Union Commission projection seven years ago, aids to the poorest nation in the current Union will amount to 50% of the total annual budget. Presently, over 50 regions are beneficiaries of structural aid because their GDP drops below 75% of the Members average.
United Kingdom position proposed a proposal that stream lined the larger share of Funding to more limited nations order than the Commission’s policy. Furthermore, Europe’s population is projected to start declining by around 2020. Between 2000 and 2005, the total population growth rate was 0. 4% and 86% of that growth was due to migration. Already today, 85 regions of the Union – mainly in the new member states – are experiencing absolute population decline, and another 76 maintain population growth only thanks to migration.
These trends will limit the scope for future employment growth (Danuta H. 2007). In view of various propositions and disagreements, expert suggestion would promote policies that capitalize on maximizing the potentials of individual members with the aim of national revitalization of policies such as Common Agricultural Policy and reshuffling of regional funding to project management by the Commission. The review of current policy needs engulf areas of concern by majority players for future sustainability and to ensure a better developmental integration.
Other alternatives towards reforming regional policy includes strengthening the assessment and control of both the Cohesion and Structural Funds by the European Commission, the replacement of cohesion policy with public system of treasure transfer between two governments (i. e. from wealthier to poorer nations). In the face of Current Economic Downturn The penultimate accession of 10 new member nations has caused a wider disparities or inequalities in the regional demand for development and growth to meet the standard status of a globalized nation.
More member nations suffer decrease direct trading and investment flow owing to increase competitiveness without a perfect policy to harness burning issues. The recovering stage or economic balance is certain though delayed by the ongoing recession. The task still lies ahead of the Commission with the cooperation of members in constructing a unified and best suiting policy. The adherence of members to regional economic policies needs to be further monitored since most likely the Commission will keep coming up with regional policy to cushion the effect of economic downturn on member states.
Countries with no bilateral trading exchange between most members are at the risk if policy does not favor the shedding of any spillover aspect of the economy for a more productive sector. To prevent a future costly repair, there is a need to increase funding of poorer state with regional policy enhancing simplification of procedures. This can only be achieved by budget increase even beyond the proposed 50% projection between the years 2007 to 2013 (i. e. above 50 billion per annum). There is the need to improve on energy efficiency by decreasing local consumption.
Also, skill acquisition through tertiary training will leverage poor members’ competitive edge among globalized, knowledge-oriented world economy; all these would strengthen the Union development. In summary, European regional policy development has become an icon to reckon with among other nations of the world. It has since form the template for strategic development in China, Russia et cetera.
Diane Stone. “The ‘Knowledge Bank’ and The Global Development Network. ” Global Governance 9. 1 (2003): 43-61. European Commission Directorate-General for Regional Policy (2004) (pdf format). Working for the regions.
Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. http://ec. europa. eu/publications/booklets/move/27/working2004_en. pdf. Retrieved on 2009-27-03. European Union Regional Policy after enlargement | EU – European Information on Enlargement & Neighbors. Available at: www. euractiv. com Retrieved on 2009-27-03 Hoskyns, Catherine (2000). Democratizing the European Union: Issues for the twenty-first Century (Perspectives on Democratization. Manchester University Press. pp. 106–7. http://www. economicshelp. org/2008/08/euro-economy-first-into-recession. html http://news. bbc. co. uk/1/world/europe/7452171. stm