METHODOLOGICAL BASIS FOR ASSESSING TERRITORIAL COHESION: EU EXPERIENCE AND PRIORITIES FOR UKRAINE IN THE CONTEXT OF EUROPEAN INTEGRATION
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35774/jee2025.02.227Keywords:
cohesion policy, EU, European integration, evaluation, methodology, methods, regional development, state regional policy, territorial cohesion, Ukraine.Abstract
The article is devoted to analyzing the tools and methodological approaches used to assess the impact of territorial cohesion policy on reducing interregional disparities across regions within EU countries. A content analysis of territorial cohesion assessment tools—as applied in various programs and projects of the European Observation Network for Territorial Development and Cohesion, originally known as the European Spatial Planning Observation Network (ESPON)—was conducted to trace the evolution of methods for assessing territorial disparities between regions in EU countries. Based on a comparative analysis of the methodological frameworks used for territorial cohesion assessments in the EU, the author identifies the main obstacles to applying EU methodologies in evaluating territorial development policy in Ukraine and outlines key directions for improving Ukraine’s system of statistical observation for territorial development.
JEL: J18, D63, D69, I30.
References
Ali, M. I., Gao, F., & Mileo, A. (2015). CityBench: A configurable benchmark to evaluate RSP engines using smart city datasets. In M. Arenas et al. (Eds.), The Semantic Web – ISWC 2015. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Vol. 9367, pp. 374–389). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25010-6_25
Bartosiewicz, B. (2012). Spójność terytorialna Łódzkiego Obszaru Metropolitalnego – pomiar zjawiska [Territorial cohesion of Lodz Metropolitan Area – A measurement of the phenomenon]. Studia komitetu przestrzennego zagospodarowania kraju PAN, 147, 155–168. https://cejsh.icm.edu.pl/cejsh/ element/bwmeta1.element.ojs-issn-0079-3507-year-2012-issue-147-articlebwmeta1_element_oai-journals-pan-pl-96895?q=bwmeta1.element.ojsissn-0079-3507-year-2012-issue-147;5&qt=CHILDREN-STATELESS
Camagni, R. (2017). Territorial Impact Assessment (TIA): A methodological proposal. In R. Capello (Ed.), Seminal studies in regional and urban economics (pp. 399–410). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57807-1_20
Camagni, R. (2020). The pioneering quantitative model for TIA: TEQUILA. In E. Medeiros (Ed.), Territorial Impact Assessment. Advances in spatial science (pp. 27–54). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-54502-4_3
Commission of the European Communities. (2004, February 20). Delivering Lisbon: Reforms for the enlarged Union (COM(2004) 29 final). https://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2004:0029:FIN:EN:PDF
Davymuka, S. A., Kuybida, V. S., & Fedulova, L. I. (2019). Trends of new regional policy development in EU member states [in Ukrainian]. Rehional’na Ekonomika, 91(1), 76–87. https://doi.org/10.36818/1562-0905-2019-1-9
ESPON. (2006, December 15). ESPON Project 3.3.: Territorial dimension of the Lisbon Gothenburg strategy: Final Report Revisited – Part One. https://archive.espon.eu/sites/default/files/attachments/fr-3.3_final_rev25- 01-2007.pdf
ESPON. (2012). Assessment of regional and territorial sensitivity (ARTS) (Applied Research 2013/1/17, Final Report, Version 30/07/2012). https://archive.espon.eu/ sites/default/files/attachments/ESPON-Arts_Final_ reports_60.pdf
ESPON. (2013a). CityBench: ESPON CityBench for benchmarking European urban zones (Scientific Platform/Tools 2013/3/10, Inception Report, Version 15/March/2013). https://archive.espon.eu/sites/default/files/attachments/CB02_ Inception_report_v1x0.pdf
ESPON. (2013b). INTERCO: Indicators of territorial cohesion (Scientific Platform and Tools Project 2013/3/2, (Draft) Final Report, Part C/ Scientific Report). https://archive.espon.eu/sites/default/files/attachments/INTERCO_DFR_Sci entific-Report.pdf
ESPON. (2021). ESPON REGICO – Comparing regions in multiple contexts (Final report, March 2021). https://archive.espon.eu/sites/default/files/attachments/ 7.Final-Report-on-REGICO-tool.pdf
ESPON. (n.d.). ESPON TIA Tool. https://archive.espon.eu/tools-maps/espon-tia-tool
ESPON, & National University of Ireland, Maynooth. (2013). KITCASP – Key indicators for territorial cohesion and spatial planning.
ESPON, & University of Geneva. (2012). INTERCO – Indicators of territorial cohesion (Final report, Part B).
European Commission. (2010). Fifth report on economic, social and territorial cohesion: Investing in Europe’s future. Publications Office of the European Union. https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/information/publications/reports/2010/fifth -report-on-economic-social-and-territorial-cohesion-investing-in-europe-s-future
European Commission. (2014). Sixth report on economic, social and territorial cohesion: Investment for jobs and growth. Publications Office of the European Union. https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/information/publications/reports/2014/ 6th-report-on-economic-social-and-territorial-cohesion
European Commission. (2017). Seventh report on economic, social and territorial cohesion: My region, my Europe, our future. Publications Office of the European Union. https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/information/publications/reports/2017/7threport-on-economic-social-and-territorial-cohesion
European Commission. (n.d.). LUISA – Technical description. The Joint Research Centre: EU Science Hub. https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/luisa/technical-description
European Commission. (2022). Eighth report on economic, social and territorial cohesion: Cohesion in Europe towards 2050. Publications Office of the European Union. https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/information-sources/ publications/reports/2022/eighth-report-on-economic-social-and-territorialcohesion_en
European Commission, Directorate-General for Regional and Urban Policy. (2001). Unity, solidarity, diversity for Europe, its people and its territory: Second report on economic and social cohesion. Vol. 2: Statistical annex. Publications Office. https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/ b42c35d0-a739-455a-bbe1-a06872820806/language-en
European Parliament, & Council of the European Union. (2013, June 26). Regulation (EU) No 549/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on the European system of national and regional accounts in the European Union. Official Journal of the European Union, L 174, 1–727. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32013R0549
European Committee of the Regions, Commission for Territorial Cohesion Policy and EU Budget, Mrcit, Spatial Foresight, ÖIR, Gaugitsch, R., Dallhammer, E., Hsiung, C.-H., Holstein, F., Besana, F., Zillmer, S., Kruljac, D., & Ulied, A. (2020). State of the art and challenges ahead for territorial impact assessments. Publications Office of the European Union. https://data.europa.eu/ doi/10.2863/797486
European Union. (n.d.). Summaries of legislation: Acquis. EUR-Lex. https://eurlex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=legissum:acquis
Eurostat. (2024, August). Cohesion policy indicators 2021–2027 [Dataset]. Statistics Explained. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php? title=Cohesion_policy_indicators
Fedulova, L. I., & Yemelianenko, L. M. (2020). Adaptation of new regional policy principles of EU in strategic course of regional development of Ukraine [in Ukrainian]. Efektyvna Ekonomika, 11. https://doi.org/10.32702/2307-2105- 2020.11.13
Fischer, T. B., Sykes, O., Gore, T., Marot, N., Golobič, M., Pinho, P., Waterhout, B., & Perdicoulis, A. (2014). Territorial Impact Assessment of European draft directives—The emergence of a new policy assessment instrument. European Planning Studies, 23(3), 433–451. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 09654313.2013.868292
González, A., Daly, G., Pinch, P., Adams, N., Valtenbergs, V., Burns, M. C., & Johannesson, H. (2015). Indicators for spatial planning and territorial cohesion: Stakeholder-driven selection approach for improving usability at regional and local levels. Regional Studies, 49(9), 1588–1602. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/00343404.2015.1018883
Jouen, M. (2008). Territorial cohesion: From theory to practice (Notre Europe Policy Paper No. 35). https://relocal.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/ territorialcohesionjouennejune08-1.pdf
Kalinaki, E., Oortwijn, R., Sanchis Huertas, A., Dias, E., Diaz, L., Ottens, S., Blankert, A., Gould, M., & Scholten, H. (2014). CityBench: A geospatial exploration of comparable cities. In J. Huerta, S. Schade, & C. Granell (Eds.), Connecting a digital Europe through location and place (pp. 363-382). Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography. Springer. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/978-3-319-03611-3_21
Laiko, O. I., & Tsynalievska, I. A. (2022). Genesis and conceptual foundations of the territorial cohesion policy of regions in Ukraine (problems of definition of the concept and essence) [in Ukrainian]. Economic Journal of Odessa Polytechnic University, 2(20). https://doi.org/10.15276/EJ.02.2022.5
Lishchynskyy, I. (2019). Territorial cohesion policy in the context of EU regional security. Journal of European Economy, 18(4), 439–453. https://doi.org/ 10.35774/jee2019.04.439
Medeiros, E. (2014a). Assessing territorial impacts of the EU cohesion policy at the regional level: The case of Algarve. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 32(3), 198–212. https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2014.915134
Medeiros, E. (2014b). Territorial impact assessment (TIA). The process, methods and techniques. Centro de Estudos Geográficos – ZOE. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/302580924_Territorial_Impact_As sessment_TIA_The_Process_Methods_Techniques
Medeiros, E. (2016). Territorial impact assessment and public policies: The case of Portugal and the EU. Public Policy Portuguese Journal, 1(1), 68–76. https://www.umpp.uevora.pt/publicacoes/Public-Policy-Portuguese-Journal
Medeiros, E. (2017). European Union cohesion policy and Spain: A territorial impact assessment. Regional Studies, 51(8), 1259–1269. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/00343404.2016.1187719
Prokopchuk, O. A., Kovalchuk, O. D., & Usiuk, T. V. (2021). European cohesion policy: Conceptual principles, imperatives for Ukraine [in Ukrainian]. Economy and Society, 26. https://doi.org/10.32782/2524-0072/2021-26-13
Schout, J. A., & Jordan, A. J. (2007). From cohesion to territorial policy integration (TPI): Exploring the governance challenges in the European Union. European Planning Studies, 15(6), 835–851. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 09654310701220280
State Statistics Service of Ukraine. (2020). Methodological provisions on the organization of state statistical observation «regional accounts» [In Ukrainian]. https://ukrstat.gov.ua/norm_doc/2020/210/MP_210.pdf
United Nations Statistics Division. (n.d.). System of national accounts 2008. https://unstats.un.org/unsd/nationalaccount/sna2008.asp
Zakharchenko, V. I. (2020). Genesis and main directions of the new EU regional policy (in the context of experience for Ukraine) [in Ukrainian]. Economic Journal of Odessa Polytechnic University, 1, 11, 11–20. https://doi.org/1 0.5281/zenodo.3974862
Zaucha, J., Komornicki, T., Böhme, K., Świątek, D., & Zuber, P. (2014). Territorial keys for bringing closer the territorial agenda of the EU and Europe 2020. European Planning Studies, 22(2), 246–267. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 09654313.2012.722976
Zhalilo, Y., Zhuk, V., Shevchenko, O., Snihova, O., & Filipenko, A. (2017). New regional policy for renewed Ukraine: Analytical report. Institute for Social and Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.25600.97287
Received: May 1, 2025.
Reviewed: May 26, 2025.
Accepted: June 12, 2025.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
