Finally, a Cohesion Policy that (truly) leaves no one behind?

Two years after the process was launched by European Commissioner for Regional Development Elisa Ferreira, and a year-long series of meetings and exchanges with academics and experts, the Group of High-Level Specialists on Future of Cohesion Policy has released their long-awaited report “Forging a sustainable future together: cohesion for a competitive and inclusive Europe”.

Marine Gaudron is a CEMR Advisor specialising in Economic, Social and Territorial Cohesion, Local Finances.

The fifty plus page-long document is a reflection on what has been Cohesion Policy so far, why is it needed at all and how it should improve in the next programming period – according to the experts.

This is an important report on the road to post-2027 and at a moment when Commission services are already starting internal reflection on what should the Cohesion Policy look like in the future, and its funds (European Regional Development Fund; Cohesion Fund; European Social Fund Plus and Just Transition Fund) should evolve. It starts with a useful reminder: Why is Cohesion important in the first place?

Sari Rautio, CEMR spokesperson on environment and member of the High-Level Specialists that worked on the report said “Cohesion policy is changing the world of tomorrow – it will be a recipe for Europe’s sustainable growth, if we have the courage to rethink it, but save the essential: Cohesion is about equal opportunities of all people, no matter their place of origin or any individual qualities”. As one of the major development instruments of the EU (representing almost one third of the Union’s budget), Cohesion Policy has also earned its share of criticisms: too complicated, not efficient enough compared to more direct and centralised policies. The report released by the High-Level Specialist Group reminds us that no other policies is designed to address the increasing disparities across the Union. The raison d’être of Cohesion Policy is probably truer now than ever when looking at the poor resilience of European economies facing a global pandemic or the impact of the war in Ukraine. The EU needs a pro-active policy that strengthens the resilience of economic, social, and institutional ecosystems in EU regions instead of a plaster policy, conveniently tapped into when a new crisis or political priority arise. 

But in this year of European elections, it is also important to be aware of the political impact of disparities, unequal quality of life and unequal opportunities for individual European citizens. The feeling of being left behind – or “geography of discontent” has had clear repercussions on electoral maps and the increased disengagement with the European project. In this regard the future Cohesion Policy should invest even more in these territories: not only invest in poorest regions or in advanced innovation centres, but also look at the places in between: intermediate cities, towns, rural areas, and ensure all European territories will be equipped to tap into their own assets and economic potential. 

The essential role of local and regional governments

As the authors adopted a more macro-economic perspective of the added value of Cohesion policy, you will have to dig further in the report to find a few mentions of the beneficiaries of Cohesion policy: citizens, local communities, municipalities, cities, and regions, SMEs. While the report recommends that the Partnership Principles becomes mandatory and insist on institutional capacity building at all levels, the critical role played by subnational governments seems missing. Local and regional governments as essential service providers, ensuring not only investments in infrastructure (they are responsible for 55% of public investments in OECD countries in 2020) but also the maintenance of this infrastructure, as well as providers of social services such as education, life-long learning, social inclusion, upskilling, etc.

It is only logical that in several Member States, it is the regional government (or even cities) that are the Managing Authorities for Cohesion policy funds: this policy has to be place-based and adapt to the local challenges and needs. Also, when the report suggests Cohesion as a European objective should be pursued throughout the whole of European policies spectrum, and embedded within the European Semester, it will be important not to lose sight of one of the Partnership Principle and the real added value of involving local stakeholders for better policies and achieve most optimal investments at the local and regional levels. 

“The new recipe comes when blending the territorial dimension into a performance-based approach. I am very proud of our work, and I wish many readers and a lot of discussions after it. And then the robust decisions towards fairer future.” adds Rautio. The (next) Commission would be wise to embrace the recommendations and conclusions of this report as it starts working on regulations proposals for the next programming period. And to go further, the members of the Council of European Municipalities and Regions – a founding member of the #CohesionAlliance, have already agreed on common vision for the future of Cohesion policy:

• Cohesion Policy is part of the DNA of European projects, it should remain a long-term policy, essential to ensure resilience in view of future shocks and evolutions of the Union. This should be reflected throughout EU policies and with a budget that meets the ambitions.  
• Partnership principle, multi-level governance, integrated and place-based development are essential principles ensuring that money invested actually answers the most pressing needs of European regions. should be strengthened and embedded into other EU policies.  
• The Partnership Principle in particular, should be strengthened and extended to other EU policies, particularly the EU Semester. 
• Cohesion Policy 2028-2034 should provide a simpler framework with fewer different initiatives and funds, greater local flexibility, and a single set of rules for beneficiaries. 
• Cohesion Policy should strengthen local and regional public services and investments through a mandatory thematic concentration and earmark dedicated to local and regional governments.