Abstract
This chapter investigates how cohesion funds were spent and how these funds impacted economic developments in the Visegrád countries (Czechia, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia) on short, medium and long terms. Czechia has been the most developed country in the region, Poland and Slovakia were dynamically converging to the European average while the latter also joined the euro-zone and Hungary has significantly improved its external and internal imbalances.
The analysis shows that the sizable spending from cohesion funds had a major impact on growth, investment, external and fiscal conditions. Cohesion funds generally have their primary economic impact throughout investments (both public and private). Funds aim to increase the country’s growth potential in the long run. Spending on competitiveness (R&D, education, health, etc.) might have smaller impact on short term but can have significant long-term effect because it provides more attractive conditions for private investments. While on the other hand, financing private projects can generate significant impact on the short term but the additional impact dissipates quickly. The increased growth potential can generate additional tax revenues in the long term.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The V4 group is a loose alliance of Czechia, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia. It aims to advance military, cultural, economic and energy cooperation within the group. All four countries are also NATO members. The idea of creating such an alliance originates from a summit of political leaders from Czechoslovakia, Hungary and Poland that was held in the Hungarian town of Visegrád in 1991. Visegrád was chosen to establish a historical link with a similar meeting in 1335.
- 2.
The authors of this paper were members of the research team.
- 3.
In fact, because of the n+2 year rule of the EU, the time horizon of the report is 2007–2015.
- 4.
Financial sector is based on Gertler-Karadi (2011).
References
Allard, C., Choueiri, N., Schadler, S., & van Elkan, R. (2008). Macroeconomic Effects of EU Transfers in New Member States (IMF Working paper 08/223).
Baksa, D., & Czelleng, A. (2019). Jegybanki hitelprogramok értékelése Magyarországon egy pénzügyi szektorral bővített DSGE modellben (Working Paper).
Banai, Á., Lang, P., Nagy, G., & Stancsics, M. (2017). Impact Evaluation of EU Subsidies for Economic Development on the Hungarian SME Sector (MNB Working Papers 8).
Cappelen, A., Castellacci, F., Fagerberg, J., & Verspagen, B. (2013). The Impact of EU Regional Support on Growth and Convergence in the European Union. Journal of Common Market Studies, 41(4), 621–644.
Czelleng, A. (2019). A visegrádi országok pénzügyi integrációja: a részvény- és kötvénypiaci hozamok, valamint a volatilitás együttmozgásának vizsgálata wavelet és kopula tesztekkel. Statisztikai Szemle, 97(4), pp. 347–363.
European Commission. (2013). Evaluation Sourcebook – Methods and Techniques. Available: https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/evaluation/guide/evaluation_sourcebook.pdf
Everdeen, S., Gorter, J., & Mooij, R. (2003). Funds and Games. ENEPRI Occasional Paper No. 3.
Fayolle, J., & Lecuyer, A. (2000). Regional Growth, National Membership and European Structural Funds: An Empirical Appraisal. Revue de l’OFCE (73).
Gertler, M., & Karadi, P. (2011). A Model of Unconventional Monetary Policy. Journal of Monetary Economics, 58(2011), 17–34.
GKI-KPMG (2016). A magyarországi európai uniós források felhasználásának és hatásainak elemzése 2007–2013-as programozási időszak vonatkozásában (Working Paper).
In ’t Veld, J. (2013). Fiscal Consolidations and Spillovers in the Euro Area Periphery and Core. European Economic Papers no. 506.
Karsai, G. (2006). Ciklus és trend a magyar gazdaságban 1990–2005. In Közgazdasági Szemle, LIII. évf.
Pereira, A. M., & Gaspar, V. (1999). An Intertemporal Analysis of Development Policies in the EU. Journal of Policy Modeling, 21(7), 799–822.
Varga, J., & in ’t Veld, J. (2011). Cohesion Policy Spending in the New Member States of the EU in an Endogenous Growth Model. Eastern European Economics, 49(5), 29–54.
Vértes, A. (2014). Tíz év az EU-ban, felzárkózás nélkül; In A. Ágh, A. Vértes, & Z. Fleck (Eds.), Tíz év az Európai Unióban – Felzárkózázs vagy lecsúszás. Kossuth kiadó. Budapest, Hungary
Vértes, A. (2015). The Hungarian Economy, On the Wrong Trajectory. In A. Inotai (Ed.), Hungary’s Path Toward an Illiberal System (Vol. 63, p. no. 2). Südost-Europa.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendix A: Summary of Model
Appendix A: Summary of Model
Households
Capital producers
Banks
Intermediate firms
Retailer firms j ∈ {C, INv, Gov, X}:
Government
Monetary policy
Foreign trade
Equilibrium conditions
Parameters
-
B∗—Foreign bond
-
Kt—Capital
-
MPCt—Marginal propensity to consume
-
REERt—Real effective exchange rate
-
W—Nominal wage
-
it—Nominal interest rate
-
r∗—Foreign interest rate
-
h—Technical parameter for households’ behaviour (habit parameter)
-
p—Nominal prices
-
B—Domestic bond
-
C—Consumption
-
Debt—Government debt
-
E—Expectations
-
EUFt—EU funds
-
Exp—Expenditures of the government
-
G—Adjustment function
-
GB—Balance for the government budget
-
Inc—Total income for households
-
Inv—Investments
-
L—Labour force
-
M—Import
-
N—Net value
-
Profit—Profit for final producer
-
Q—Tobin’s Q
-
R—Rotemberg’s cost function
-
Rev—Revenues of the government
-
T—Taxes
-
TB—Trade Balance
-
TC—Total cost
-
TR—Transfers
-
X—Export
-
Y—Total output
-
g—Growth rate
-
mct—Marginal cost
-
r—Interest rate
-
ret—Return
-
v—Technical parameter for financial sector
-
α—Technical parameter for production
-
β—Technical parameter for households’ behaviour
-
δ—Amortization rate
-
η—Technical parameter for financial sector
-
θ—Technical parameter for financial sector
-
λ—Technical parameter for financial sector
-
μ—Import share in production (technical parameter)
-
ξ—Yield spread between risk-free (government bond) and risky (corporate bond)
-
π—Inflation
-
τ—Taxation rate
-
φ—Technical parameter for pricing
-
ψ—Technical parameter for households
-
ω—Technical parameter for household
-
ϕ—Technical parameter for monetary policy
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Czelleng, A., Vertes, A. (2021). The Impact of EU Cohesion Funds on Macroeconomic Developments in the Visegrád Countries After the 2008–2009 Financial Crisis. In: Landesmann, M., Székely, I.P. (eds) Does EU Membership Facilitate Convergence? The Experience of the EU's Eastern Enlargement - Volume II. Studies in Economic Transition. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57702-5_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57702-5_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-57701-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-57702-5
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)