Between policy and perception: Stakeholder views on addressing territorial inequality in Europe
Authors/Creators
- 1. Departament d'Antropologia Social, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
- 2. Centre for Social Policy, Belgrade, Serbia
Description
Long-standing differences between regions have led to new forms of inequality, worsened by declining protections and support for citizens. Territorial inequality isn't just about differences in income or wealth; it also includes unequal access to basic services, infrastructure, and education, which affect overall development and opportunities.
This paper, part of a larger research project on "left-behind" areas, examines how local and regional stakeholders perceive the causes of territorial inequalities. It also looks at the policies and governance systems designed to reduce these inequalities. The study is based on 20 focus groups with stakeholders from seven European countries: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Greece, Italy, Serbia, and Spain.
The findings reveal a significant gap between national-level discussions on territorial inequalities and the priorities of local and regional stakeholders. While policy agendas acknowledge these differences, progress is often slowed by governance issues, such as tensions between centralized and decentralized decision-making, poor coordination, and a lack of cooperation between different levels of government.
The research highlights the need for policies that are tailored to local challenges. Solutions must consider demographic changes, geographic isolation, and unfair funding practices, especially in regions that lack essential resources. Overall, the study emphasizes the importance of aligning policies with the specific needs of areas often described as "left-behind."
Files
openreseurope-5-21853.pdf
Files
(685.0 kB)
| Name | Size | Download all |
|---|---|---|
|
md5:9e393d3776ebf21f6c742d6bf642fae4
|
685.0 kB | Preview Download |
Additional details
References
- Alvaredo F, Chancel L, Piketty T (2018). World inequality report 2018.
- Becker SO (2020). EU structural funds: do they generate more growth?. Econ J.
- Crescenzi R, Di Cataldo M, Giua M (2020). It's not about the money: EU funds, local opportunities, and regional development. J Econ Geogr.
- Dijkstra L, Poelman H, Rodríguez-Pose A (2020). The geography of EU discontent. Reg Stud. doi:10.1080/00343404.2019.1654603
- Ezcurra R (2019). Regional disparities and within-country inequality in the European Union. Revista de economia mundial. doi:10.33776/rem.v0i51.3907
- Gordon IR (2018). In what sense left behind by globalisation? Looking for a less reductionist geography of the populist surge in Europe/UK and its relation to uneven development. Camb J Reg Econ Soc. doi:10.1093/cjres/rsx028
- Görmar F, Lang T, Nagy E (2019). Re-thinking regional and local policies in times of polarisation: an introduction. Space and Polity.
- Guest G, Namey EE, Mitchell ML (2017). Collecting qualitative data: a field manual for applied research. (2nd ed.). doi:10.4135/9781506374680
- Hadjimichalis C, Hudson R (2014). Contemporary crisis across Europe and the crisis of regional development theories. Reg Stud. doi:10.1080/00343404.2013.834044
- Hennink MM, Kaiser BN, Weber MB (2019). What influences saturation? Estimating sample sizes in focus group research. Qual Health Res. doi:10.1177/1049732318821692
- Herbert S (2000). For ethnography. Prog Hum Geogr. doi:10.1191/030913200100189102
- Isakjee A, Lorne C (2019). The violence of displacement: a place-based critique of "left-behind" geographies. Polit Geogr.
- Kölling M (2021). The European Union cohesion policy: reassessing territorial inequality. J Eur Integr.
- Krueger RA, Casey MA (2014). Focus groups: a practical guide for applied research (5th ed.).
- Lang T, Görmar F (2019). Regional and local development in times of polarization: re-thinking spatial policies in Europe. doi:10.1007/978-981-13-1190-1
- MacKinnon D, Kempton L, O'Brien P (2022). Reframing urban and regional 'development' for 'left behind' places. Camb J Reg Econ Soc. doi:10.1093/cjres/rsab034
- Mehlbye P, Atkinson R, van den Berg L (2019). Territorial cohesion policies: building bridges or walls?.
- Pike A, Rodríguez-Pose A, Tomaney J (2023). Addressing 'left-behind' places: place-based economic policy and the future of regional development. Progress in Planning.
- Rodríguez-Pose A (2018). The revenge of the places that don't matter (and what to do about it). Camb J Reg Econ Soc. doi:10.1093/cjres/rsx024
- Rodríguez-Pose A (2020). The rise of populism and the revenge of the places that don't matter. LSE Public Policy Rev. doi:10.31389/lseppr.4
- Tallon A (2021). Urban regeneration in the UK: theory and practice (3rd ed.).
- (2025). Zenodo.
- (2024). Zenodo.
- Wuthnow R (2018). The left behind: decline and rage in small-town America.