Cohesion policy is essential for the common market and European economy. It mitigates the negative effects of integration. However, the tendencies from the previous legislative cycle show that there is a tendency of fewer resource being allocated for cohesion and the introduction of objectives of other policy fields into cohesion policy undermine its original purpose.

Cohesion policy has always been the center of attention for potential economic reforms. As the next MFF negotiations are taking place, it is once again an important item on the European economic agenda. However, much has changed in the field of cohesion policy since its establishment.

There are institutional changes, like the role of the European Parliament changing when it comes to cohesion policy. At earlier stages of the European integration, the European Parliamentary Assembly had consultative rights, today, the European Parliament has a greater role during the adoption of MFF. Although the member states agree within the Council about the MFF, the European Parliament is increasingly involved in the procedure and participates in the adoption of cohesion legislation.

The original purpose of cohesion policy was to support the development of underdeveloped regions, contributing to the European economy as a whole. However, the goal of the European legislators seem to be shifting, general policy objectives are appearing within cohesion policy and the list of recipients changed as well. This can be shown through an analysis of the cohesion regulations adopted during the last legislative cycle.

The EU faced many challenges during the past years and decades, the United Kingdom left the EU, migration crisis, climate change, rule of law debates, Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, etc. The argument that cohesion policy should also include changes that reflect these issues appeared. According to some of the authors, the reform of Cohesion Policy opens the possibility for radical change, there is pressure to reform it due to new mechanisms from RRF. Others argue that crises of the last decades have already shifted the direction of cohesion policy, which could already be observed during the economic crisis in the second part of the 2000s.

Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission stated in their political guidelines that the EU needs to reach climate neutrality by 2050. Regulation (EU) 2021/1056 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2021 introduced the goal of supporting regions in the transition towards climate neutrality. Regulation  (EU)  2022/562  of  the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 April 2022 makes the use of ERDF, ESF and FEAD more flexible, reacting to the urgencies of crises. The regulation regarding the ERDF now includes improving the quality of the environment, migration dynamics, and other policy goals as well. These tendencies show that the original purpose of developing economically underdeveloped regions has shifted towards other policy goals.

These tendencies show that there is a fundamental change currently going on within the field of cohesion policy. The main problem with this issue is that while new goals from other policy fields appear within cohesion policy, the original goals are watered down significantly. The scope of cohesion policy was changed to include developed regions as well during the 2007-2013 cycle. This could influence the support of the European integration in general as well, as economic development is important for European citizens. By shifting some of the resources to developed regions and to policy objectives that are not of economic nature, cohesion policy might lose its original purpose.

The Draghi report on EU competitiveness stated that if Europe cannot become more productive, it has to scale back on some of its ambitions. There is a need for action to reignite growth and it generally sounds the alarm regarding the worrying economic trends the EU is facing. The report also reflects on the role of cohesion policy in economic development: new types of investments in cohesion and reforms at the subnational level are needed, the focus of cohesion policy should reflect education, transport, housing, digital connectivity, etc. in interested cities and regions. Transport should be one of the key areas for development. It also states that the EU’s annual budget is too small from an investment perspective and that funds allocated for cohesion should be significantly larger.

Cohesion policy is one of the key areas of European integration and an important tool that is closely connected to the single market. By changing the fundamental purposes of cohesion, the roots of the economic integration can become endangered. Therefore, the focus needs to be re-shifted towards developing underdeveloped regions, investing in these areas and serving the overall competitiveness of Europe. This is one of the key areas where the EU could take action against negative economic trends. It is also essential from the perspective of maintaining trust in the European project.

Árpád Lapu is an assistant research fellow at the Károli Gáspár University of the Reformed Church in Hungary. He was a policy adviser on constitutional issues at the European Parliament between 2019-2024. He worked as an adviser at the Ministry of Justice of Hungary (2017-2019) and the Ministry of European Union Affairs (2024-2026), conducting EU law, international law and comparative constitutional analyses. He has earned his JD at the Pázmány Péter Catholic University in Hungary, has a BA in international relations from the University of Szeged, and an MA in European and international administration from Andrássy Gyula German Speaking University in Budapest. He has completed an LLM in international law at the Catholic University of Louvain (UCLouvain).