The presentation highlights the contribution of European Regional Policy to e-services development and diffusion across EU27. A principal component analysis is carried out in order to explore the different strategies adopted by European Regions in funding ICT and Information Society projects.

1. Technology Adoption and Innovation in Public Services(TAIPS)
A project funded by Eiburs –European Investment Bank, University Research Sponsorship Programme
Department of Economics and Quantitative Methods (DEQM), Università di URBINO
p Q ( Q ),
Dec 9 2010
EU Cohesion Policy 2007‐13 and
public e‐services development
Luigi Reggi* and Sergio Scicchitano*
*University "La Sapienza", Department of Public Economics and Ministry for Economic Development, Department for the
Development and the Economic Cohesion.
The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and, in particular, do not necessarily reflect those of the Ministry of Economic
Development.
1

2. Outline
• Regional policy and e‐services: institutional
literature
• The resources for e‐services and information
society
• Empirical analysis: preliminary results
– at national level
– at regional level (cluster and factor analysis)
at regional (cluster and factor
2

3. Cohesion Policy and ICT (1)
Policy and ICT (1)
COUNCIL DECISION of 6 October 2006 on Community strategic
COUNCIL DECISION of 6 October 2006 on Comm nit strategic
guidelines on cohesion:
...
“Guideline: Improving knowledge and innovation for growth
The guidelines for action are as follow:
The guidelines for action are as follow:
— Ensuring uptake of ICTs by firms and households and promoting
development through balanced support for the supply and demand of
ICT products and both public and private services, as well as through
ICT products and both public and private services as well as through
increased investment in human capital…
— Ensuring availability of ICT infrastructure and related services where
the market fails to provide it at an affordable cost and to an
the market fails to provide it at an affordable cost and to an
adequate level to support the required services, especially in remote
and rural areas and in new Member States”.
3

4. Cohesion Policy and ICT (2)
Policy and ICT (2)
• “Th
“Thus, resources are focused on all the regions coping with
f d ll th i i ith
structural adjustment and on investment with a particular emphasis
on the cluster of activities around research, innovation, and the
information society”, p XV
EC (2007), Fourth report on economic and social cohesion
• “Digital agenda: Member states should consider how to better use
the European Regional Development fund (ERDF ) to accelerate
achievement of the EU 2020 objectives for broadband access
including total coverage, making use of the different technologies
(fibre, adsl, wireless, satellite) available to suit the diverse
geographical needs and challenges of different regions across the
EU”
EC (2010), Regional Policy contributing to smart growth in Europe
EC (2010) Regional Policy contributing to smart growth in Europe
2020, SEC(553)Final
4

5. Lisbon Strategy and Cohesion Policy
“…Europe must renew the basis of its competitiveness, increase its growth potential and its productivity
and strengthen social cohesion, placing the main emphasis on knowledge, innovation and the
optimization of human capital To achieve these objectives, the Union must mobilize all appropriate
national and Community resources – including the cohesion policy”.
(European Spring Council 2005).
“…In line with the re‐launch of the Lisbon strategy for Growth and Jobs, cohesion policy should focus on
knowledge, research and innovation and human capital. Accordingly, the global financial effort in
support of these fields of action should be significantly increased”.
(E.C. 2005 Cohesion policy in support of growth and jobs. Community strategic guidelines, 2007‐2013 )
“In the 2007‐2013 planning period the share of Structural Funds of the European
Union allocated to Research and Innovation (the Lisbon Agenda ) received the
Union allocated to Research and Innovation (the “Lisbon Agenda”) received the
largest increase, in absolute and relative terms. It is no exaggeration to claim that,
for many countries, the entire Lisbon Agenda rests on Structural Funds.”
(Bonaccorsi A., 2010, Towards better use of conditionality in policies for research and innovation under
(Bonaccorsi A 2010 Towards better use of conditionality in policies for research and innovation under
Structural Funds: The intelligent policy challenge, working paper underlying Barca Report “An agenda for
the reformed Cohesion Policy.) 5

6. Categories of expenditure
• How to calculate the contribution of structural Funds
to each priority/sector?
• COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 1083/2006 general:
86 categories of expenditure
86 categories of expenditure
– Of which 6 are dedicated to the information Society
• Of which 1 is dedicated to public E‐services
Of which 1 is dedicated to public E services
6

7. 6 categories of expenditure for
Information Society (IS)
10. Broadband networks
11. Information and communication technologies: access, g ,
security, interoperability, risk‐prevention, research,
innovation, e‐content, etc.
12.
12 Information and communication technologies (TEN ICT)
(TEN‐ICT)
13. Services and applications for the citizen (e‐health, e‐
government, e‐learning, e‐inclusion, etc.)
e learning, e inclusion,
14. Services and applications for SMEs: e‐commerce, education
and training, networking, etc.
15. Other measures for improving access to and efficient use of
ICT by SMEs
7

8. What do structural funds co‐finance?
European Regional Development fund (ERDF)
European Regional Development fund (ERDF)
Structural funds for e‐services are much more relevant in the
CONVERGENCE (CONV) Regions
REGULATION (EC) No 1080/2006 (ERDF)
CONV
“…information society, including development of electronic communications infrastructure, local content,
services and applications, improvement of secure access to and development of on‐line public services; aid
and services to SMEs to adopt and effectively use information and communication technologies (ICTs) or to
exploit new ideas;”
ideas;
COMPETITIVE (COMP)
“…
“ promoting access to take up and efficient use of ICTs by SMEs by supporting access to networks the
to, up, networks,
establishment of public Internet access points, equipment, and the development of services and
applications, including, in particular, the development of action plans for very small and craft enterprises.”
8

9. What do structural funds co‐finance?
EUROPEAN SOCIAL FUND (ESF)
EUROPEAN SOCIAL FUND (ESF)
ERDF exibits
ERDF ibi a more important role compared to
i l d
the ESF in financing e‐services
REGULATION (EC) No 1081/2006 (ESF)
/
“…the dissemination of information and communication
technologies, e‐learning, eco‐friendly technologies and management
skills, and the promotion of entrepreneurship and innovation and
, p f p p
business start‐ups”;
9

10. EU Cohesion policy: 2007‐13
EU Cohesion policy: 2007 13
• 27 Member states
• Almost 344 billion Euros:
– 281 CONV, 56 COMP, 7 COOP
– 278 ERDF 76 ESF
278 ERDF, 76 ESF
– Almost 28 to ITALY
• 21 CONV 6 2 COMP 0 8 COOP
21 CONV, 6.2 COMP, 0.8 COOP
• 21 FESR, 7 SFE
• M
More than 15 billi E
th 15 billion Euros t I f
to Information Society
ti S i t
• More than 5 billion Euros to e‐Services
10

11. EU Cohesion policy 2007‐13:
p y
Categories of expenditure dedicated to Information
society
society
10 Telephone infrastructures (including broadband networks) 2,257,722,464 15%
11 + 12 Information and communication technologies (including TEN)
Information and communication T N) 4,
4,121,115,554
, 5,554 27%
7%
13 Services and applications for citizens (e‐health, e‐ 5,225,072,351 34%
government, e‐learning, e‐inclusion, etc.)
14 Services and applications for SMEs (e‐commerce, education
pp ( 2,144,358,160 14%
and training, networking, etc.)
15 Other measures for improving access to and efficient use of 1,537,162,147 10%
ICT by SMEs
15,285,430,676 100%
11

12. Member States:
the national level
12

13. Resources allocated by Member State: absolute values (MEuro)
3,714
1,800
1,621
1,600
1,400
1,200
,
1,000
800
600
400
200
0
Note. Authors’ calculations on EC – DG Regio data
Cat.13 (a.v)
Cat 13 (a v) Tot IS (a.v.)
Tot IS (a v )
13

14. Resources allocated by Member State: % values
10.00 %
8.00 %
6.00 %
4.00 %
2.00 %
0.00 %
SK
MA
KR
RM
DK
EE
FR
COOP
IT
BG
AT
HU
FI
SL
LU
GR
CK
ES
PO
EU (Mean)
ND
UK
LV
IR
LT
PT
SE
DE
BE
% cat 13 over tot SF % IS over tot. SF
Note. Authors’ calculations on EC – DG Regio data
14

15. Correlation between Inf. soc. and E‐services: abs. values
Correlation between Inf soc and E‐services: abs values
4,000,000,000
PO
3,500,000,000
3,000,000,000
R² = 0.800
2,500,000,000
t. Inf. soc.
2,000,000,000 IT
GR
Tot
1,500,000,000
ES
1,000,000,000 FR SK
CK
DE HU
500,000,000
RM
0
0 200,000,000 400,000,000 600,000,000 800,000,000 1,000,000,000
Cat. 13 E‐services
Total Structural Funds
Note. Authors’ calculations on EC – DG Regio data
15

16. RESOURCES ALLOCATED BY FUND (ERDF and ESF) AND OBJECTIVE
(CONV, COMP, COOP)
Resources allocated by Fund (Meuro) Resources allocated by Objective (Meuro)
7,000 2.00 % 2.00 %
1.91 %
12,000 1.80 %
6,000 12,419
15,158
15 158 1.50 %
1 50 % 10,000 1.56 %
1 56 % 1.60 %
1 60 %
5,000
4,000 8,000 1.26 % 1.20 %
1.00 %
3,000 6,000
5,135
5 135 0.80 %
0 80 %
2,000 0.50 % 4,000
0.12 % 4,388
1,000 696 141 0.40 %
128 2,000
90 2,312 554
0 0.00 % 0 0.00 %
0 00 %
ERDF ESF CONV COMP COOP
I.S. CAT 13 CAT 13 / S.F. I.S. CAT 13 CAT 13 / S.F.
Note. Authors’ calculations on EC – DG Regio data
g Note. Authors’ calculations on EC – DG Regio data
g
16

17. Structural Funds regional
allocation across EU27
Cluster analysis
Cluster analysis
17

18. CLUSTER ANALYSIS ON ALL EUROPEAN REGIONS: TOTAL INFORMATION SOCIETY (CAT. 10‐15)
Cluster 1 Cluster 2 Cluster 3 Cluster 4 Cluster 5
ITF3 Italia GR11 CZ02 CZ01 Rep. Cec AT11 DEF0 Germania MT00 Malta
Grecia
PL12 GR30 CZ03 DEG0 Germania AT12 DK01 NL11
Polonia
PL22 ITF4 CZ04 EE00 Estonia AT21 DK02 NL12
Italia
SK02 ITG1 CZ05 Rep. Cec ES12 AT22 Austria DK03 Danimarca NL13
SK03 Rep. Slovac LT00 Lituania CZ06 ES30 AT31 DK04 NL21
SK04 LV00 Lettonia CZ07 ES41 AT33 DK05 NL22
PL11 CZ08 ES42 Spagna AT34 ES13 NL23 Olanda
PL21 ES11 ES43 BE10 ES21 NL31
PL31 ES52 ES62 BE21 ES22 NL32
Spagna
PL32 ES61 ES63 BE22 ES23 Spagna NL33
PL33 ES70 ES64 BE23 ES24 NL34
Polonia
PL34 GR14 FI13 BE24 ES51 NL41
Finlandia
PL41 GR21 FI19 BE25 Belgio ES53 NL42
PL51 GR22 FR30 BE31 FI18 PT15
PL61 GR23 Grecia FR61 BE32 FI1A Finlandia PT17
Francia Portogallo
PL62 GR25 FR71 BE33 FI20 PT20
PT11 GR41 FR91 BE34 FR10 PT30
Portogallo
PT16 GR43 GR12 BE35 FR21 SE12
Grecia
HU21 GR13 BG31 FR22 SE21
HU22 HU10 Ungheria BG32 FR23 SE22 Svezia
HU23 ITF5 Italia BG33 FR24 SE32
Ungheria Bulgaria
HU31 RO11 BG34 FR25 SE33
HU32 RO12 BG41 FR26 UKC1
HU33 RO21 BG42 FR41 UKC2
ITF6 RO22 CY00 Cipro FR42 UKD1
Italia Romania
ITG2 RO31 DE21 FR43 UKD2
PL42 RO32 DE22 FR51 UKD3
Francia
PL43 RO41 DE23 FR52 UKD4
Polonia
PL52 RO42 DE24 FR53 UKD5
PL63 SE31 Svezia DE25 FR62 UKE1
PT18 Portogallo SI01 DE26 FR63 UKE2
Slovenia
SI02 DE27 FR72 UKE3
SK01 Rep.Slov. DE30 FR81 UKE4
UKK3 DE41 FR82 UKF1
Gran Bret.
UKL1 DE42 FR83 UKF2
DE50 FR92 UKF3
DE60 FR93 UKG1
DE71 FR94 UKG2
DE72 GR24 UKG3
Grecia
DE73 GR42 UKH1 Gran Bret.
DE80 IE01 UKH2
Irlanda
DE91 Germania IE02 UKH3
DE92 ITC1 UKI1
DE93 ITC2 UKI2
DE94 ITC3 UKJ1
DEA1 ITC4 UKJ2
DEA2 ITD1 UKJ3
DEA3 ITD2 UKJ4
DEA4 ITD3 UKK1
DEA5 ITD4 Italia UKK2
DEB1 ITD5 UKK4
DEB2 ITE1 UKL2
DEB3 ITE2 UKM2
DEC0 ITE3 UKM3
DED1 ITE4 UKM5
DED2 ITF1 UKM6 18
DED3 ITF2 UKN0
DEE0 LU00 Lussemb.

19. CLUSTER ANALYSIS ON ALL EUROPEAN REGIONS: TOTAL INFORMATION SOCIETY (CAT. 10‐15)
19

20. Information society (cat. 10‐15): first evidence
from cluster analysis
• Campania shows the largest amount of
Investments in Information Society (almost 535
Investments in Information Society (almost 535
milions of euros)
• In the cluster 1: Západné Slovensko Stredné
In the cluster 1: Západné Slovensko, Stredné
Slovensko e Východné Slovensko (Slovack
Republick – 367 milions of euros each),
p
Mazowieckie (341) e Slaskie (337) in Poland.
• Cluster 2: Puglia (305), Sicily (258), Attiki and
Anatoliki Makedonia (Greece), Latvia, Lithuania,
Centro and Norte (Portugal), 10 Regions in
Poland.
Poland
20

21. CLUSTER ANALYSIS ON ALL EUROPEAN REGIONS: CAT. 13 “E‐SERVICES”
Cluster 1 Cluster 2 Cluster 3 Cluster 4 Cluster 5
ES61 Spagna
S ES12 CY00 Cipro
Ci CZ01 BE33 Belgio
B l i FR41 PT30 Portogallo
P t ll
GR30 Grecia ES43 Spagna DE93 CZ02 BG31 FR42 SE21
Germania
ITF3 Italia ES62 DEG0 CZ03 BG32 FR43 SE22
Svezia
SK02 FR30 Francia ES24 CZ04 BG33 FR51 SE31
Rep. Ceca Bulgaria
SK03 Rep. Slov. GR12 ES30 CZ05 BG34 FR52 SE32
SK04 GR13 ES41 CZ06 BG41 FR53 UKC1
GR22 ES42 Spagna CZ07 BG42 FR62 UKC2
GR23 Grecia ES63 CZ08 DE21 FR63 UKD1
GR25 ES64 EE00 Estonia DE22 FR71 Francia UKD2
GR41 FR61 Francia ES11 DE23 FR72 UKD3
GR43 GR24 Grecia ES52 Spagna DE24 FR81 UKD4
HU31 Ungheria HU10 ES70 DE25 FR82 UKD5
ITG2 Italia HU21 GR11 DE26 FR91 UKE1
PL11 HU22 GR14 Grecia DE27 FR92 UKE2
Ungheria
PL31 HU23 GR21 DE41 FR93 UKE3
PL33 HU32 LT00 Lituania DE42 Germania FR94 UKE4
PL34 HU33 PL12 DE50 GR42 Grecia UKF1
PL42 ITF4 PL21 DE60 ITC1 UKF2
Polonia
PL43 ITF6 Italia PL22 DE91 ITC2 UKF3
Polonia
PL52 ITG1 PL32 DE92 ITC3 UKG1
PL61 MT00 Malta PL41 DE94 ITD2 UKG2
Italia
PL62 RO11 PL51 DEC0 ITE4 UKG3
PL63 RO12 PT11 DEE0 ITF1 UKH1
Gran Bret.
RO21 PT16 Portogallo DEF0 ITF2 UKH2
RO22 PT18 ES13 ITF5 UKH3
Romania
R i
RO31 ES21 LV00 Lettonia UKI1
RO32 ES22 NL11 UKI2
Spagna
RO41 ES23 NL12 UKJ1
RO42 ES51 NL13 UKJ2
SI01 ES53 NL21 UKJ3
Slovenia
SI02 FI13 NL22 UKJ4
UKL1 Gran Bret. FI18 NL23 UKK1
Olanda
FI19 Finlandia NL31 UKK2
FI1A NL32 UKK3
FI20 NL33 UKK4
FR10 NL34 UKL2
FR21 NL41 UKM2
FR22 NL42 UKM3
FR23 Francia PT15 UKM5
FR24 PT17 Portogallo UKM6
FR25 PT20 UKN0 21
FR26

22. CLUSTER ANALYSIS ON ALL EUROPEAN REGIONS: CAT. 13 “E‐SERVICES”
22

23. E‐services: first evidence
E services: first evidence from cluster analysis
cluster analysis
• All the regions in Slovack Republic except
ll h i i Sl k bli
Bratislavsky have planned high investments in e‐
services (more than 189 milion of euros)
i ( th 189 ili f )
• Campania (147,5 milion of euros), Andalucia (Spain)
and Attiki (Greece) also belong to the first cluster
• In the 2nd cluster: Sardinia in Italy, 3 Spanish, 7
Greek and 10 Polack Regions, Pas‐de‐Calais
(France), Észak‐Magyarország (Hungary)
• A number of COMP regions decided not to use
structural funds to co‐finance e‐services
development
23

24. Resources for e‐services and information
society
i
an exploratory factor analysis
p y y
• What is the “allocation strategy” of EU
Regions?
• What is the relationship between the
resources for e services and the rest of the
resources for e‐services and the rest of the
money allocated to “Information Society”?
• Is there any difference between CONV and
Is there any difference between CONV and
COMP Regions?
24

25. Principal component analysis: all regions
Variable cat. n. average min max
p_broadband (%) 10 263 14.134 0.000 100.000 Descriptive
p_ICT (%) 11+12 263 27.831 0.000 100.000
statistics
p_e-services (%) 13 263 23.763 0.000 100.000
p_SME1 (%) 14 263 19.218 0.000 100.000
p_SME2 (%) 15 263 15.055 0.000 100.000
Correlation matrix
p_broadb
Variable p_ICT p_e-gov p_SME1 p_SME2
and
p_broadband 1.00 Correlation matrix
p_ICT -0.37 1.00
p_e-services
p e ser ices -0.16
0 16 -0.30
0 30 1.00
1 00
p_SME1 -0.17 -0.32 -0.30 1.00
p_SME2 -0.22 -0.33 -0.28 0.02 1.00
N. Eigenvalues
g % Cum %
1 1.5061 30.12 30.12
2 1.3866 27.73 57.85 Eigenvalues table
3 1.1330 22.66 80.51
4 0.9744 19.49 100.00
5 0.0000
0 0000 0.00 100.00
0 00 100 00
distance
Var n dim1 dim2
from origin Coordinates of
Objective illustrative variables:
C3= CONVERGENCE 99 0.28386 0.28 0.41
C3= COMPETITIVENESS 164 0.10344 -0.17 -0.25
CONV & COMP
25

26. ALL REGIONS (CONV AND COMP)
e‐services
26

27. ALL REGIONS (CONV AND COMP)
Convergence obj.
Competitiveness obj
obj.
e‐services
CONV
Regions
COMP
Regions
27

28. Principal component analysis: CONV regions
Variable cat. n. average min max
p_broadband (%) 10 263 15.049 0.000 100.000 Descriptive
i i
p_ICT (%) 11+12 263 25.452 0.000 100.000
statistics
p_e-services (%) 13 263 33.058 0.000 100.000
p_SME1 (%) 14 263 16.466 0.000 100.000
p_SME2 (%) 15 263 9.975 0.000 100.000
Correlation matrix
p_broadb
Variable p_ICT p_e-gov p_SME1 p_SME2
and
p_broadband 1.00 Correlation matrix
p_ICT -0.43 1.00
p_e-services -0.23 -0.44 1.00
p_SME1 -0.03 -0.41 -0.32 1.00
p_SME2 -0.02 -0.44 -0.02 0.29 1.00
N. Eigenvalues % Cum %
1 1.8448 36.90 36.90
2 1.3606 27.21 64.11 Eigenvalues table
3 1.1293
1 1293 22.59 86.70
22 59 86 70
4 0.6652 13.30 100.00
5 0.0000 0.00 100.00
28

29. ONLY CONV. REGIONS
Facteur 2
3.0
p e‐services
p_e-gov
e go i
1.5
0
p_SME2
p_broadband
p_ICT
p ICT
p_SME1
-1.5
Example:
Sicily has programmed a single
action for both e‐business and
-3.0 -1.5 0 broadband 1.5
Facteur 1
29

30. Factor analysis: preliminary evidence
analysis: preliminary
• Low correlation between e‐services and the other
categories of expenditure => Regions investing in
e‐services made a “clear choice”
• CONV Regions tend to choose the “e‐services
CONV Regions tend to choose the e services
strategy” more frequently than COMP regions
• I CONV R i
In CONV Regions – where structural funds are the
h t t lf d th
main source of funding for information society –
the measures aimed at promoting e‐business are
h i d i b i
often accompanied by the development of
broadband networks (see Sicily strategy)
30

31. Conclusion (1)
1. Stylized f
li d fatcs: European Cohesion Policy 2007‐
h i li
13 is a really ( in many cases, probably the
most) important source for financing e‐services
in the CONV Regions.
2. Cluster analysis: As to the allocated resources
of Structural funds for e‐services:
a) Significant heterogeneity across Member States
b) Significant heterogeneity within Member States
and across European Regions
31

32. Conclusion (2)
3. Factor analysis:
a) Allocated resources for e‐services stands alone:
)
an “e‐services strategy” could be identified.
b) CONV Regions are more likely to adopt such a “e‐
CONV Regions are more likely a e
services strategy”.
32

33. Further research
• What does determine the allocation of
resources?
• Which regional characteristics influence
funding allocation?
allocation?
• Is there a significant difference between
national and regional level among Member
State
33