kathimerini.gr
Greece Urges EU to Maintain Cohesion Funding Post-2027
The Greek government is advocating for continued EU cohesion funding post-2027, amid concerns about the Commission's potential shift towards horizontal policies, while currently ranking 4th in absorption of €26.2 billion in EU funds.
- What strategies can Greece employ to secure continued EU funding for cohesion policy and mitigate the potential negative effects of reduced funding post-2027?
- The upcoming mid-term evaluation of the 2021-2027 cohesion policy and preparations for the post-2027 Multiannual Financial Framework are critical. Greece's future access to EU funding for regional development is uncertain, depending on the EU's evolving priorities. Maintaining cohesion funding is vital for Greece's economic competitiveness and structural reforms.
- How will the EU's potential shift in budgetary priorities from cohesion policies to horizontal policies impact Greece's economic development and regional growth?
- The European Commission is considering shifting the EU budget toward horizontal policies like competitiveness and defense, potentially reducing funding for cohesion policies that benefit Greece. This has prompted discussions between the Italian Executive Vice-President of the Commission and Greek officials, highlighting Greece's strong advocacy for continued cohesion funding.
- What are the underlying factors driving the European Commission's consideration of reallocating funds from traditional cohesion policies to areas like competitiveness and defense?
- Greece's government emphasizes cohesion policy's contribution to economic transformation and competitiveness, aligning with the EU's focus on productivity gains. The Commission's shift in priorities is influenced by reports advocating for Europe's technological leadership, creating pressure for structural economic changes. Greece, currently 4th in absorption of EU funds (36.9% of €26.2 billion), actively seeks to maintain this funding.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The framing emphasizes the Greek government's concerns about the potential reduction of cohesion funds. The headline (if one existed) and introduction likely highlight the threat to Greek interests, setting the stage for a narrative that portrays the EU's potential shift in priorities as a negative development for Greece. This focus shapes the reader's perception of the issue.
Language Bias
The language used is largely neutral, although phrases such as "καυτό θέμα" (hot topic) could be considered slightly loaded. The overall tone is factual and informative, avoiding overtly emotional or judgmental language.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the Greek government's perspective and the meeting between Greek officials and the EU representative. Counterarguments or perspectives from other EU members or organizations regarding the future of cohesion policy are absent. While space constraints may limit comprehensive coverage, the lack of diverse viewpoints could leave the reader with a skewed understanding of the debate.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat simplified dichotomy between prioritizing traditional cohesion policies versus focusing on competitiveness and defense. While these are significant areas, the narrative doesn't explore potential synergies or alternative approaches that could balance both goals. The implication is that a choice must be made between one or the other, which may not fully reflect the complexity of the situation.
Sustainable Development Goals
EU cohesion policy funding aims to reduce economic disparities between regions. The article highlights Greece's efforts to utilize these funds (ESPA) to boost competitiveness and contribute to economic growth, thereby lessening inequality within the country and between Greece and wealthier EU members. Continued funding is crucial for maintaining this positive impact.