Anabela Marques-Santos (p), Andrea Conte

Sébastien Bourdin

The transition to a competitive and sustainable economy is central to achieving the European Union’s (EU) long-term environmental and socio-economic goals. The EU’s cohesion policy plays a key role in fostering such transitions by supporting regional development while addressing regional disparities. The evaluation of the cohesion policy requires innovative approaches to address the evolving socio-economic and environmental challenges that shape regional disparities.

This paper contributes to this debate by introducing a novel indicator that measures regional progress towards a competitive and sustainable economy. Based on previous work by Santos et al. (2023), the indicator captures the share of employment in sectors that are both more competitive and greener, but instead of classifying sector-regions using only an absolute threshold, we also include an additional sector specific criterion. In this way, the indicator captures a region’s economic performance and environmental sustainability in both absolute and relative terms.

Using NUTS 2-level regional data from 2008 to 2022, we apply this indicator to assess patterns of industrial transition across EU regions. A novel sectoral-regional dataset combining data from Eurostat and Orbis is used to measure competitiveness (productivity measured by gross value added per employee) and sustainability (greenhouse gas emissions relative to gross value added).
The analysis highlights regional heterogeneity in transitioning pathways, emphasizing the influence of sectoral specialization. The indicator provides policymakers with useful insights for targeted support under cohesion policy. The findings underline the heterogeneity in regional transitions, emphasizing the need for tailored strategies to maximize the policy’s impact in fostering a just and sustainable transition. This contribution also addresses key challenges in policy evaluation by proposing a multifaceted approach that combines sustainability and competitiveness metrics.

Sebastien Bourdin (p), Francesco Molica, Anabela Santos Marques

Anabela Santos

The paper examines the dual nature of green discontent, which manifests as dissatisfaction with insufficient climate action and opposition to policies perceived as overly restrictive or economically disruptive. The analysis focuses on the spatial dimensions of this phenomenon, assessing how socio-economic, climatic, and institutional factors influence public attitudes toward environmental policies. The study relies on Eurobarometer survey data and voting patterns at the NUTS2 level to capture regional variations in green discontent across Europe. The results reveal clear contrasts between urban areas exposed to climate risks, rural regions dependent on carbon-intensive industries, and economically stable territories. These findings emphasize the importance of adopting place-based approaches to design climate policies that are both equitable and effective. The paper concludes with recommendations on how to integrate territorial environmental justice into climate strategies to address regional vulnerabilities and strengthen public support for ecological transition.

Andrés Rodríguez Pose (p), Anabela Marques-Santos, Andrea Conte, Francesco Molica

Ugo Fratesi

Discontent can arise either from the direct effects of climate change or from the implementation of climate policies. Measuring the socio-economic impacts of climate change is inherently complex and requires a comprehensive, multi-dimensional approach. Climate policies, even if applied uniformly across a country or the EU, may have different impacts in different regions due to sectoral and economic differences. This paper presents a novel measure of climate discontent and assesses its relationship with climate effects and climate policy effects. Combining data from the Chapel Hill Expert Survey and Schraff et al. (2022), we develop a novel regional voting index to assess the position and salience of political parties on environmental sustainability. We examine the relationship between voting patterns and climate effects using a fractional probit model and data from three European election periods covering 2009-2024. The results show that regions experiencing stronger climate impacts (e.g., more frequent extreme weather events, rising temperatures, or economic losses due to climate change) have a higher vote share index for parties prioritizing green policies. This is consistent with the idea that people directly affected by climate change are more likely to support policies that address environmental issues. Regions that are more vulnerable to climate policies (i.e., those with high employment in fossil fuel industries, high emissions, or high dependence on sectors affected by decarbonization) show lower support for parties that prioritize green policies. This is because green policies may be perceived as a threat to local economic structures and jobs.

Ugo Fratesi (p), Andrea Conte, Anabela Marques Santos, Francesco Molica

Francesco Molica

Regional policies have always been concerned with the environment. Indeed, since at least the 1970s, environmental protection has been one of the four main objectives, along with spatial equity/reduction of disparities, efficiency/growth and regional well-being. However, the way in which this objective has been interpreted has changed over time: previously, the rationale for this objective came from local problems and externalities, since too much agglomeration and congestion can lead to environmental degradation and pollution.
Today, however, the issues to be addressed have taken on a global dimension, with climate change playing a prominent role. For this reason, the regions are called upon to intervene in these aspects, as several problems can only be addressed with local solutions, thinking of adaptation measures or several mitigation measures. The problem is that less developed regions are not only on average more vulnerable to climate change, they are also less able to afford adaptation measures and, due to their specialisation, are more affected by the counter-effects of mitigation measures. This can lead to discontent in the regions, which regional policies can reduce or increase depending on the local situation and the policies implemented.
For this reason, this paper analyses the relationship between regional policies and two types of green discontent: 'we are doing too much' versus 'we are not doing enough'. To do this, the regions are classified according to the level and type of green policies implemented, and a multivariate analysis is then carried out to see which are the factors that influence the relationship between the two main variables and, in particular, whether there are some conditioning factors on them, including regional vulnerability to climate change and the presence in the region of important socio-economic issues that also need to be addressed.
The conclusions are that places that are more economically deprived are more likely to have 'too much' discontent, while places that are better off are more likely to have 'not enough' discontent; that there is no clear relationship between green policies and green discontent, as the sign depends on which type of policy and which type of discontent; that contextual factors are important and affect the relationship; that people's response to the same regional policy initiatives seems to depend on the most pressing issues in their region.