Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
European Urban and Regional Studies
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gripaios, P.
Right arrow Articles by McVittie, E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Conference

Euro-Commentary

UK Objective One Regions: A Suitable Case for Treatment?

Peter Gripaios

University of Plymouth, UK, p.gripaios{at}plymouth.ac.uk

Eric McVittie

University of Plymouth, UK

Around two-thirds of European Structural Funds are allocated to Objective One regions, classified as such because their level of GDP per head is less than 75 percent of the EU average. In the spending round 2000-2006, four UK areas qualified and, as a result, these areas combined could receive up to £3b from Brussels and also additional funding from the UK Treasury to maximize the `call down' of funds. This Euro-commentary questions whether all four areas should have qualified and also the criterion of qualification itself. One conclusion is that although all four technically qualify, it is only because of the way the area boundaries were drawn. This was rather more economically justified in the case of Merseyside and South Yorkshire than in West Wales and the Valleys and Cornwall. Redrawing boundaries in other areas could have resulted in a different set of qualifying areas. In any event, a second conclusion is that GDP per head is a rather poor indicator of economic performance at least on its own. A more sensible choice of indicators might have cast doubt on the inclusion of all four of the present set of UK Objective One regions and particularly those of Cornwall and Merseyside. These findings are of relevance to the wider European case.

Key Words: allocation of Structural Funds • Objective One regions • UK

European Urban and Regional Studies, Vol. 10, No. 4, 369-373 (2003)
DOI: 10.1177/09697764030104006


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?