The Spatial Pattern of the Absorption of Cohesion Policy Funds in Polish Rural Areas

Abstract

This paper determines the extent to which rural areas in Poland have been beneficiaries of the EU’s Cohesion Policy (CP). The amount of funds allocated to rural areas at the local (gmina/commune) level as part of the total CP obtained by Poland from 2007 to 2018 was estimated. The spatial distribution of that allocation was then determined. Whether the level of absorption is linked to the separately computed rural development level in communes was examined. This then made it possible not just to determine the spatial pattern of the absorption of CP funds but also to identify the main social and economic correlates of their high levels of absorption. It was found that nearly 40% of CP funds for Poland were allocated to rural areas, inhabited by 40% of the country’s population. However, this seemingly balanced allocation was somewhat undermined by its spatial distribution: the highest absorption was reported in over a third of communes with a high level of development while it was also found in less than a fifth of communes with a low level of development. Communes with higher levels of absorption have a more favourable local budget situation and a high degree of deagrarianisation of their local economies. The absorption level is more highly correlated with the variables characterising the extent to which an agricultural area has turned into a multifunctional area than with a commune’s absorptive capacity.

What Makes the Difference Is the Size and Proximity to the Centre: A Research Approach and Results of Territorial Cohesion Assessment at the Local Level

“…The observation of socio-economic phenomena in 2005-2017 confirms that specific groups of municipalities require a separate cohesion policy, which would create conditions for better use of existing and potential local resources in accordance with the strategic objectives of the region [33]. The implementation of the current 'polarisation-diffusion' model carries the risk of deepening disparities in terms of economic and social cohesion [63]. Differences between municipalities or regions are the result of many socio-economic factors and relations between them.…”

Polarization of Living Standards among Administrative Units Engaged in Cross-Border Cooperation—The Example of Polish Municipalities of Euroregion Baltic

“…This group showed a high proportion of municipalities situated along the border with the Kaliningrad Oblast [95] (p. 220), [98] (p. 54). Despite efforts towards stimulating the economy and standard of living within these territories [99][100][101] (p. 575), it seems that mostly larger urban centers (Figures 5a and 6a) have benefited from advantages such as the "local border traffic regime" [102,103] (p. 1422). The municipality of Lelkowo suffered the greatest drop in the rank list among the units (Table 2).…”

Complementarity of the Measures of the Common Agricultural Policy and the Cohesion Policy for Rural Development Between 2021 and 2027 in the Light of Programing Documents

“…At the same time, it is necessary to point out the threats related to the sectoral approach to solving rural problems, especially in the field of infrastructure investment which will not be implemented under the CAP but under the instruments of the Cohesion Policy and the NRP. The studies conducted so far indicate that these funds have supported the development of socio-economic infrastructure in relatively well-developed territorial units, creating a threat in terms of exacerbating the development differences between rich municipalities, including those in the vicinity of large agglomerations, and peripheral areas struggling with the greatest problems in this regard (Komorowski, Mróz, and Stanny, 2021;Sánchez-Zamora and Gallardo-Cobos, 2020).…”

“…This approach proves that strengthening local communities as a multi-sector cooperation has measurable results, indicating the need to strengthen this direction of intervention under the RDP 2021-2027. It should be noted here that both policies in this area refer to the modern concept of Community-Led Local Development (CLLD) which, based on the LEADER approach, indicates the potential for adapting the CAP initiatives in the broadly understood development policy of the EU and the country (Komorowski, Mróz, and Stanny, 2021). In line with the implementation of the territorial approach in the Cohesion Policy, and in particular within the scope of activities under the priority objective 5 ('A Europe closer to citizens'), appropriate activities at the local and supra-local level were planned.…”