Prof. Tomáš Výrost (p), Eva Výrostová

EU cohesion policy represents one of the largest regional development interventions globally, yet our understanding of project performance remains predominantly binary - projects either succeed or fail. This research challenges this simplification by examining the full range of project outcomes in Slovakia's 2014-2020 programming period, focusing specifically on the degree to which projects achieve their measurable indicators. Drawing on a comprehensive dataset of over 16,000 EU-funded projects across multiple operational programs, this study investigates why some projects fully achieve their targets while others experience partial or complete failure in meeting stated objectives. The research scope encompasses projects funded through various EU structural and investment funds, capturing the full spectrum of regional development interventions from infrastructure to innovation and social inclusion.

The primary aim is to identify the structural and institutional determinants of measurable indicator achievement. We examine how project complexity, implementation setting and beneficiary characteristics shape project outcomes. Particular attention is paid to the phenomenon of boundary inflation - the substantial proportion of projects achieving either complete success or complete failure - and what distinguishes these outcomes from partial achievement.

A key motivation for this research is the observation that traditional evaluation approaches, which focus on financial absorption or simple completion rates, miss crucial variation in quality. Projects may complete on budget and on time yet deliver substantially less than promised in terms of measurable results. By focusing on the achievement rate of pre-defined measurable indicators, this study provides a more nuanced assessment of cohesion policy effectiveness. The research examines the drivers of policy implementation success at the project level.

Dr. Lubica Stiblarova (p)

This paper examines the causal effect of European Cohesion Policy (ECP) transfers on the risk of European Union (EU) regions falling into a regional development trap, with a specific focus on how research and development (R&D) intensity shapes this relationship. While earlier evaluations of the ECP have predominantly concentrated on economic growth outcomes, this study employs a multidimensional perspective that aligns with the newly developed regional development trap framework by Diemer et al. (2022). The analysis covers NUTS 2 regions across three programming periods (2000–2006, 2007–2013, and 2014–2020) and applies a fuzzy regression discontinuity design with heterogeneous local average treatment effects (HLATE). This approach exploits the 75% GDP per capita eligibility threshold for Objective 1/Convergence Objective support and allows the causal impact of the policy to vary systematically with R&D intensity.

The results do not provide robust evidence of a uniform direct effect of ECP transfers on reducing trap risk. Although a negative treatment effect appears in several specifications, it is not consistently significant, suggesting that ECP support alone is insufficient to significantly mitigate the structural conditions underlying development entrapment. By contrast, the heterogeneous component of the treatment effect is strong and robust across all model specifications. Regions with higher R&D intensity benefit markedly more from ECP support, exhibiting a significantly lower risk of development entrapment. This finding confirms that the effectiveness of cohesion spending is conditional on regional innovation capacity and supports the broader view that escaping structural stagnation requires innovation driven upgrading.

The study also highlights a persistent innovation paradox: a majority of treated regions, particularly in Central and Eastern Europe, display low levels of R&D expenditure, limiting the ECP’s capacity to reduce entrapment risk. These results underscore the need for a reevaluation of the current fund allocation architecture, calling for stronger emphasis on building regional innovation systems, absorptive capacity, and human capital. By demonstrating that R&D intensity critically shapes the multidimensional effectiveness of cohesion policy, the paper provides key insights for designing more effective, place sensitive EU development strategies.

Acknowledgments: This work was supported by the Scientific Grant Agency VEGA under Grant No. 1/0154/24 and by the Slovak Research and Development Agency under the Contract No. VV-MVP-24-0240.

Ms Greta Mockevičienė (p)

This study examines income convergence among EU NUTS-2 regions
from 2000 to 2023 using a combination of PS club convergence methodology, β-convergence and spatial econometric models. The results reveal
that regional convergence in Europe is heterogeneous and nonlinear: four
stable convergence clubs emerge, while overall convergence is rejected.
Convergence was faster before 2012 and weakened afterward. A single
income threshold and two structural breaks (2005 and 2012) mark shifts
in growth dynamics. Spatial models reveal that neighbouring regions affect each other’s growth, indicating that regional development in Europe
depends on both local conditions and interactions across regions.

Ms. Dimitra Kardakou, Prof. Nikolaos Kalyviotis (p), Prof. Spyros Niavis, Prof. Dimitris Kallioras

The effective absorption of European Structural and Investment Funds remains a critical determinant of regional development performance, particularly in cohesion countries where public investment heavily relies on EU co-financing. Despite the availability of substantial resources under the 2021–2027 programming period, implementation delays, partial fund absorption, and limited developmental impact persist. This paper investigates whether and to what extent the managerial capacity of implementing bodies influences the effectiveness of co-financed projects under the Partnership Agreement framework (ESPA).
Departing from purely procedural or bureaucratic explanations, the study conceptualizes fund absorption as a process of strategic and organizational change. Drawing on theories of organizational transformation (Lewin; Schein; Burnes; Balogun & Hope Hailey), absorption capacity is interpreted not merely as administrative compliance but as a multidimensional capability involving structure, leadership, human resources, institutional learning, and organizational culture.
Methodologically, uggests the employment of Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) to assess the relative efficiency of Decision Making Units (DMUs) responsible for project implementation. Efficiency scores can be calculated using multiple inputs (administrative capacity, human capital characteristics, procedural complexity, governance structure) and outputs (absorption rates, timeliness, financial execution, and developmental impact indicators). DEA results can be complemented by regression analysis and a hierarchical logit model to capture interdependencies among institutional variables. Furthermore, an extended mathematical depiction model incorporating weighted sectoral effects can be developed to explore optimization scenarios and identify critical combinations of managerial factors that maximize performance.
The findings are expected to contribute to regional science by bridging quantitative efficiency measurement with institutional and organizational change theory. The study proposes a multi-level reform framework linking strategic prioritization, structural redesign, skill development, cultural transformation, and transition management. By identifying the structural determinants of absorption performance, the paper provides policy-relevant insights for improving the effectiveness of EU Cohesion Policy implementation at regional and national levels.
The contribution is particularly relevant for regions facing persistent absorption challenges and offers a transferable analytical framework for evaluating institutional performance in non-profit-oriented public organizations.

Dr. Bartosz Stępiński (p), Dr. Wojciech Kisiała, Prof. Robert Kudłak

The study examines the effectiveness of European Union Cohesion Policy in fostering regional economic growth across two programming periods, 2007-2013 and 2014-2020. Despite substantial financial transfers under Cohesion Policy, existing empirical evidence on their growth effects remains inconclusive, particularly with respect to temporal variation and spatial interdependencies among regions. Addressing this gap, the study aims to quantify the impact of Cohesion Policy expenditure while explicitly accounting for spatial spillover mechanisms and differences between successive programming periods.
The empirical analysis is based on a sample of 226 NUTS-2 regions from 27 European Union Member States, excluding regions of the United Kingdom. The Spatial Durbin Models (SDM) are estimated separately for each programming period and jointly for the entire 2007-2020 horizon. This approach allows for the identification of time-varying policy effectiveness as well as cross-regional interaction effects.
The results indicate heterogeneity in Cohesion Policy outcomes over time. For the 2007-2013 programming period, Cohesion Policy expenditure does not exhibit a statistically significant effect on regional economic growth. In contrast, estimations for the 2014-2020 period reveal a positive and statistically significant growth impact, which remains robust when the full study period is considered. Across all model specifications, evidence supporting β-convergence among European regions is found, alongside positive spatial spillover effects in regional growth dynamics. At the same time, the analysis identifies small but negative spatial effects associated with cohesion policy expenditure in the later programming period and in the pooled model, while such effects are statistically insignificant in the earlier period.
The findings suggest that the growth effectiveness of EU cohesion policy has strengthened over time, potentially reflecting institutional learning, improved allocation mechanisms, and enhanced policy implementation capacity. Overall, the results contribute to the ongoing debate on the economic effectiveness of Cohesion Policy by highlighting the importance of temporal comparison and spatial interactions in evaluating regional development policies.