DOCSLIB.ORG

Regional GDP Per Capita Ranged from 31% to 626% of the EU

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

34/2019 - 26 February 2019 GDP per capita in 281 EU regions Regional GDP per capita ranged from 31% to 626% of the EU average in 2017 Three quarters of the EU population live in regions where regional GDP per capita is above 75% of the EU average In 2017, regional GDP per capita, expressed in terms of purchasing power standards, ranged from 31% of the European Union (EU) average in the Bulgarian region of North-West, to 626% of the average in Inner London - West in the United Kingdom. As the graph below shows, there is a considerable variation both in the EU and within the Member States. This information is taken from data released by Eurostat, the statistical office of the European Union. Variation of regional GDP per capita within EU Member States in 2017 in PPS, EU28 = 100 400650 National average EU28=100 550350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Italy Malta Spain Latvia Ireland France Poland Greece Cyprus Austria Croatia Finland Estonia Sweden Czechia Belgium Bulgaria Portugal Hungary Slovakia Slovenia Romania Denmark Germany Lithuania Netherlands Luxembourg United Kingdom United The bar shows for each Member State the range from the region with the lowest value to that with the highest value. The leading regions in the ranking of regional GDP per capita in 2017, after Inner London - West in the United Kingdom (626% of the average), were Luxembourg (253%), Southern in Ireland (220%), Hamburg in Germany (202%), Brussels Region in Belgium (196%), Eastern & Midland in Ireland (189%) and Prague in Czechia (187%). There were 21 regions with GDP per capita 50% or more above the EU average in 2017: five were in Germany, two each in Ireland, Austria, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom and one each in Belgium, Czechia, Denmark, France, Slovakia, Poland and Sweden as well as Luxembourg. Population living in these 21 regions is 52.3 million persons. In all Member States where there are more than one region at NUTS2 level, the highest GDP per capita is in the capital region, except Berlin in Germany, Eastern & Midland in Ireland and Lazio in Italy. After North-West in Bulgaria (31% of the average), the lowest regions in the ranking were Mayotte in France and North-Central in Bulgaria (both 34%) and another region in Bulgaria: South-Central (35%). Among the 20 regions with GDP per capita below 50% of the EU average, five were in Bulgaria, four each in Greece and Hungary, three in Poland, two each in France and Romania. Population in these 20 regions is 22.9 million persons. It should be noted, however, that in some regions the GDP per capita figures can be significantly influenced by commuter flows. Net commuter inflows in these regions push up production to a level that could not be achieved by the resident active population on its own. There is a corresponding effect in regions with commuter outflows. Regional GDP per capita in the EU in 2017 (in PPS, EU28 = 100) The highest: The lowest: 1 Inner London - West (UK)* 626 1 North-West (BG) 31 2 Luxembourg (LU)* 253 2 North-Central (BG) 34 3 Southern (IE) 220 - Mayotte (FR) 34 4 Hamburg (DE) 202 4 South-Central (BG) 35 5 Brussels Region (BE)* 196 5 North-East (BG) 39 6 Eastern & Midland (IE)* 189 - North-East (RO) 39 7 Prague (CZ)* 187 7 South-East (BG) 43 8 Bratislava (SK)* 179 - North Great Plain (HU) 43 9 Upper Bavaria (DE) 177 9 South Transdanubia (HU) 45 - Île-de-France (FR)* 177 - South-West Oltenia (RO) 45 11 Inner London - East (UK)* 168 11 East Macedonia, Thrace (EL) 46 12 North Holland (NL)* 167 - North Hungary (HU) 46 13 Capital (region) (DK)* 166 13 Epirus (EL) 48 - Stockholm (SE)* 166 - North Aegean (EL) 48 15 Stuttgart (DE) 159 - South Great Plain (HU) 48 16 Darmstadt (DE) 157 - Lubelskie (PL) 48 17 Bremen (DE) 155 17 Western Greece (EL) 49 - Utrecht (NL) 155 - French Guiana (FR) 49 19 Warsaw-Capital (PL)* 152 - Warmińsko-Mazurskie (PL) 49 20 Vienna (AT)* 151 - Podkarpackie (PL) 49 - Salzburg (AT) 151 * Capital region Geographical information These data are based on the Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics (NUTS 2016) as set out in the amending Regulation (EU) 2017/2391 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2017. NUTS 2016 (valid from 1 January 2018) provides an uniform, consistent breakdown of territorial units for the production of regional statistics for the EU and lists 104 regions at NUTS 1, 281 regions at NUTS 2 and 1348 regions at NUTS 3 level. Methods and definitions GDP, and thus GDP per capita, provides a measure of the total economic activity in a region. It may be used to compare the degree of economic development of regions. GDP does not measure the income ultimately available to private households in a region. The PPS (purchasing power standard) is an artificial currency that takes into account differences in national price levels. This unit allows meaningful volume comparisons of economic indicators over countries. Aggregates expressed in PPS are derived by dividing aggregates in current prices and national currency by the respective Purchasing Power Parity (PPP). More detailed data for other variables and by NUTS 3 area is available up to the year 2016 at Eurostat's database. In the text of this News Release, the names of the regions are in English, while the tables in the annex list regions in the national language as set out in the NUTS. For more information Overview of NUTS Eurostat manual on regional accounts methods Eurostat website section dedicated to regional statistics Eurostat database on regional statistics by NUTS classification Eurostat Regions and Cities Illustrated Eurostat "My region" app Issued by: Eurostat Press Office Production of data: Renata PALEN Luis BIEDMA Tel: +352-4301-33 444 Tel: +352-4301-34 728 [email protected] [email protected] EurostatStatistics ec.europa.eu/eurostat @EU_Eurostat Media requests: Eurostat media support / Tel: +352-4301-33 408 / [email protected] Regional GDP in the European Union, 2017 Share in national GDP per GDP per GDP GDP per capita Region (NUTS 2016) GDP capita capita € million % € PPS PPS, EU28=100 EU 15 383 066 - 30 000 30 000 100 BELGIUM 439 052 2.9 38 700 35 000 116 Brussels Region 77 694 17.7 65 000 58 700 196 Vlaams Gewest 259 786 59.2 39 800 35 900 120 Prov. Antwerpen 85 753 19.5 46 600 42 100 140 Prov. Limburg (BE) 27 810 6.3 32 000 28 900 96 Prov. Oost-Vlaanderen 53 855 12.3 35 900 32 400 108 Prov. Vlaams Brabant 47 104 10.7 41 500 37 500 125 Prov. West-Vlaanderen 45 263 10.3 38 100 34 400 115 Région Wallonne 101 378 23.1 28 000 25 300 84 Prov. Brabant Wallon 17 477 4.0 43 700 39 500 131 Prov. Hainaut 33 202 7.6 24 800 22 400 75 Prov. Liège 30 812 7.0 27 900 25 200 84 Prov. Luxembourg (BE) 6 880 1.6 24 300 22 000 73 Prov. Namur 13 008 3.0 26 400 23 900 80 Extra-regio* 193 0.0 BULGARIA 51 663 0.3 7 300 14 800 49 Severna i Yugoiztochna Bulgaria 19 646 38.0 5 500 11 200 37 Severozapaden 3 486 6.7 4 600 9 300 31 Severen tsentralen 4 017 7.8 5 000 10 200 34 Severoiztochen 5 457 10.6 5 800 11 800 39 Yugoiztochen 6 685 12.9 6 400 13 000 43 Yugozapadna i Yuzhna Tsentralna 32 017 62.0 9 100 18 400 61 Bulgaria Yugozapaden 24 742 47.9 11 700 23 700 79 Yuzhen tsentralen 7 276 14.1 5 100 10 400 35 CZECHIA 191 722 1.2 18 100 26 900 89 Praha 48 751 25.4 37 900 56 200 187 Střední Čechy 22 784 11.9 16 900 25 100 84 Jihozápad 19 090 10.0 15 700 23 300 77 Severozápad 14 315 7.5 12 800 19 000 63 Severovýchod 22 981 12.0 15 200 22 600 75 Jihovýchod 27 760 14.5 16 400 24 400 81 Střední Morava 18 024 9.4 14 800 22 000 73 Moravskoslezsko 18 017 9.4 14 900 22 100 74 DENMARK 292 806 1.9 50 800 38 400 128 Hovedstaden 119 567 40.8 65 900 49 800 166 Sjaelland 29 060 9.9 34 800 26 300 88 Syddanmark 55 282 18.9 45 300 34 300 114 Midtjylland 59 585 20.3 45 500 34 400 114 Nordjylland 25 537 8.7 43 400 32 800 109 Extra-regio* 3 776 1.3 * Extra-regio: The extra-regio territory is made up of parts of the economic territory of a country which cannot be assigned to a single region. It consists of the national air-space, territorial waters and the continental shelf lying in international waters over which the country enjoys exclusive rights, territorial exclaves, deposits of oil, natural gas etc. worked by resident units. Until 2011, the gross value added (GVA) produced in the extra-regio was allocated pro-rata to the inhabited regions of the country concerned. The order of magnitude of the extra-regio GVA depends in particular on the resource endowment in terms of natural gas and oil. For EU Member States the share of extra-regio GVA varies typically from almost zero to about 1.3% of total GVA at national level.
Recommended publications
  • Showcasing Innovative Greece

    Showcasing Innovative Greece

    Showcasing Innovative Greece Edited by Christos Bezirtzoglou Foreword The first experimental activities to support innovation in relation to regional and social policy, effectively pi- oneering the development of the knowledge-based economy at regional level, were launched by the Commis- sion in 1993-94. Today, nearly one in three regional authorities across the EU-15 have formulated a Regional Innovation Strategy or a Regional Innovation Society Initiative, aimed at developing effective innovation sys- tems and spreading Information & Communication Technologies related know-how at regional level. A new system for European Regional Development Fund regional programmes of innovative actions was in- troduced in 2001 to underpin the Community priorities to increase regional competitiveness, technology and innovation by applying new forms of IT and promoting sustainable development. For first time, in 2002 the Region of Peloponnesus was actively involved into initiatives preparing the ground and paving the way for the promotion of innovation with the development of a Regional Innovation Strategy (RIPE programme). The strategic approach has been based on a widespread public debate that facilitates and promotes consensus and encourages a shared strategic view of the Region’s economy through the develop- ment of long term plans by businesses. The scheme has been fully endorsed and agreed upon by the relevant support agencies. In particularly, the project has provided an impulse for the region to tackle the issue of in- novation. In the case of the Information Society, for less information society mature prefectures of the region For prefectures with a lower level of awareness and maturity regarding the Information Society and what it entails, the RIPE programme promotion has proved crucial.
  • The Outermost Regions European Lands in the World

    The Outermost Regions European Lands in the World

    THE OUTERMOST REGIONS EUROPEAN LANDS IN THE WORLD Açores Madeira Saint-Martin Canarias Guadeloupe Martinique Guyane Mayotte La Réunion Regional and Urban Policy Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union. Freephone number (*): 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (*) Certain mobile telephone operators do not allow access to 00 800 numbers or these calls may be billed. European Commission, Directorate-General for Regional and Urban Policy Communication Agnès Monfret Avenue de Beaulieu 1 – 1160 Bruxelles Email: [email protected] Internet: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/index_en.htm This publication is printed in English, French, Spanish and Portuguese and is available at: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/activity/outermost/index_en.cfm © Copyrights: Cover: iStockphoto – Shutterstock; page 6: iStockphoto; page 8: EC; page 9: EC; page 11: iStockphoto; EC; page 13: EC; page 14: EC; page 15: EC; page 17: iStockphoto; page 18: EC; page 19: EC; page 21: iStockphoto; page 22: EC; page 23: EC; page 27: iStockphoto; page 28: EC; page 29: EC; page 30: EC; page 32: iStockphoto; page 33: iStockphoto; page 34: iStockphoto; page 35: EC; page 37: iStockphoto; page 38: EC; page 39: EC; page 41: iStockphoto; page 42: EC; page 43: EC; page 45: iStockphoto; page 46: EC; page 47: EC. Source of statistics: Eurostat 2014 The contents of this publication do not necessarily reflect the position or opinion of the European Commission. More information on the European Union is available on the internet (http://europa.eu). Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication.
  • The Role of Innovation in Regional Development in Greece

    The Role of Innovation in Regional Development in Greece

    MASTER THESIS THE ROLE OF INNOVATION IN REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN GREECE POSING A GREEK CASE STUDY BETWEEN THE DEBATE OF PLACE- BASED VS SPATIAL BLIND POLICIES BY THEODOROS SOUKOS SUPERVISOR PHILIP MCCANN UNIVERSITY OF GRONINGEN FACULTY OF SPATIAL SCIENCES RESEARCH MASTER IN REGIONAL STUDIES: SPACES AND PLACES, ANALYSIS AND INTERVENTION MASTER THESIS THE ROLE OF INNOVATION IN REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN GREECE POSING A GREEK CASE STUDY BETWEEN THE DEBATE OF PLACE-BASED VS SPATIAL BLIND POLICIES BY THEODOROS SOUKOS ST. NUMBER: 2351366 SUPERVISOR PHILIP MCCANN GRONINGEN, AUGUST 2014 2 ABSTRACT The role of innovation in regional economic development attracts increasingly the interest of public policies. Especially among the regions of the EU, the innovation policy and its relation to the cohesion policy framework gather much of this interest. This master thesis examines the role of innovation policy in regional development of a particular case study region in Greece. In order to investigate this role, the master thesis draws a special attention into the debate between the spatial blind policy argument (World Bank) and the place-based policy argument (OECD) and their policy implications. The review of the theory and the policy debate provides the most important insights for guidance of this research. In the first stage of this research, the investigation of prominent documents and studies on innovation performance of Greece, Greek regions and the region of Attica in particular highlights some key policy areas for consideration. The second stage of this research is devoted to interviews with policy experts with respect to innovation. The results of the interviews were extracted through the framework analysis approach to qualitative research.
  • RIS3 Regional Assessment: Central Greece

    RIS3 Regional Assessment: Central Greece

    Smart Specialisation Strategies in Greece – expert team review for DG REGIO RIS3 Regional Assessment: Central Greece A report to the European Commission, Directorate General for Regional Policy, Unit I3 - Greece & Cyprus December 2012 (final version) Alasdair Reid, Nicos Komninos, Jorge-A. Sanchez-P., Panayiotis Tsanakas Table of Contents 1. Executive summary: Overall conclusions and recommendations 1 2. Regional Innovation Performance and potential 3 2.1 Regional profile and specialisation 3 2.2 The strengths and weaknesses of the regional innovation system 5 3. Stakeholder involvement and governance of research and innovation policies 6 3.1 Stakeholder involvement in strategy design and implementation 6 3.2 Multi-level governance and synergies between policies and funds 7 3.3 Vision for the Region 8 4. Towards a regional smart specialisation strategy 8 4.1 The regional research and innovation policy 8 4.2 Cluster and entrepreneurship policies 9 4.3 Digital economy and ICT policies 11 5. Monitoring and evaluation 13 Appendix A List of people attending regional workshop 14 Appendix B List of key documents and reference materials 14 Appendix C Key Actors in the regional innovation system 14 Appendix D Regional RTDI funding under the OP Competitiveness and Innovation 16 Appendix E Total Gross value added at basic prices – Central Greece 17 Appendix F Relative regional specialisation in 20 industries – Central Greece 18 Figures Figure 1 Summary benchmark of regional innovation performance ...............................3 Figure 2 : SWOT of
  • Why Regional Development Matters for Europe’S Economic Future 1

    Why Regional Development Matters for Europe’S Economic Future 1

    Working Papers A series of short papers on regional Why Regional research and indicators produced by the Directorate-General for Regional and Urban Policy Development WP 07/2017 matters for Europe's Economic Future Simona Iammarino, Andrés Rodríguez-Pose, Michael Storper London School of Economics and Political Science, Department of Geography & Environment Regional and Urban Policy > ABSTRACT Regional economic divergence has become a threat to economic progress, social cohesion and political stability in Europe. Market processes and policies that are supposed to spread prosperity and opportunity are no longer sufficiently effective. The evidence points to the existence of several different economic clubs of regions in Europe, each with different development challenges and opportunities. Both mainstream and heterodox theories have gaps in their ability to explain the existence of these different clubs and the weakness of the convergence processes among them. Therefore, a different approach is required, one that would strengthen Europe’s strongest regions but would develop new approaches to the weaker clubs. There is ample new theory and evidence to support such an approach, which we have labelled “place-sensitive distributed development policy” (PSDDP). > Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 1. THE CHALLENGE 4 2. THE CURRENT PATTERN AND ITS CHALLENGES: THE ECONOMIC CLUBS OF EUROPE’S REGIONS 5 3. THEORY OFFERS NO CLEAR GUIDE ON HOW TO OVERCOME REGIONAL DIVERGENCE 21 3.1 SHOULD WE FOCUS ON EFFICIENCY FIRST?: AGGLOMERATION ECONOMIES, INNOVA- TION AND COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE 21 3.2 SHOULD WE FOCUS ON EQUITY INSTEAD? 25 3.3 DISTRIBUTED DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES: ENHANCING CAPABILITIES 25 3.4 A KEY OBSTACLE TO DISTRIBUTED DEVELOPMENT: INSTITUTIONS 26 4.
  • Country Compendium

    Country Compendium

    Country Compendium A companion to the English Style Guide July 2021 Translation © European Union, 2011, 2021. The reproduction and reuse of this document is authorised, provided the sources and authors are acknowledged and the original meaning or message of the texts are not distorted. The right holders and authors shall not be liable for any consequences stemming from the reuse. CONTENTS Introduction ...............................................................................1 Austria ......................................................................................3 Geography ................................................................................................................... 3 Judicial bodies ............................................................................................................ 4 Legal instruments ........................................................................................................ 5 Government bodies and administrative divisions ....................................................... 6 Law gazettes, official gazettes and official journals ................................................... 6 Belgium .....................................................................................9 Geography ................................................................................................................... 9 Judicial bodies .......................................................................................................... 10 Legal instruments .....................................................................................................
  • Notio Aigaio

    Notio Aigaio

    The added value of regional programmes of innovative actions stems from the lessons that can be drawn from these innovative approaches, which allow for experimentation with new ideas and the demonstration of new hypotheses. This ranges from the possibilities of identification of good practice, to the exchange of knowledge and experience that can be trans- ferred to the Community Support Framework mainstream programmes. This publication takes a closer look both at the first and second genera- tion of the Greek regional programmes of innovative actions. Based on their implementation experiences, it illustrates their individual actions in addition to attempting to produce diverse classification typologies of these Greek "innovative actions". Europe is more than a bloc of nations. It is also a collection of regions. But regional wealth variations remain high and in most Member States it is the regions with the capital cities that have the highest per capita GDP. It is widely accepted that each region needs to brand her global (global and local) image according to its unique physical and intangible assets. Practical activities need to be designed, implemented and monitored on the spot. I hope that this book will help policy makers and other regional innova- Showcasing Innovative Greece Innovative Showcasing tion policy practitioners to make more informed choices towards this goal. Anna ANDRICOPOULOU Project Manager Net Force 2006 ISBN: 960-89350-0-8 Edited by Christos Bezirtzoglou by Christos Edited Co-financed by the ERDF Showcasing Innovative Greece EU Region of Peloponnesus Showcasing Innovative Greece Edited by Christos Bezirtzoglou Foreword The first experimental activities to support innovation in relation to regional and social policy, effectively pi- oneering the development of the knowledge-based economy at regional level, were launched by the Commis- sion in 1993-94.
  • Transition to First Birth During the Great Recession: the Case of Greece Charalampos Dantis and Ester Lucia Rizzi*

    Transition to First Birth During the Great Recession: the Case of Greece Charalampos Dantis and Ester Lucia Rizzi*

    Dantis and Rizzi Genus (2020) 76:1 https://doi.org/10.1186/s41118-019-0070-1 Genus ORIGINAL ARTICLE Open Access Transition to first birth during the Great Recession: the case of Greece Charalampos Dantis and Ester Lucia Rizzi* * Correspondence: ester.rizzi@ uclouvain.be Abstract: In this study, we examine the effects of the economic uncertainty of Center for Demographic Research partners on the transition to first birth in Greece before and after the onset of the (DEMO), Université Catholique de recent economic crisis. After selecting a sample of childless couples, we applied a Louvain, Place Montesquieu, 1 / – L2.08.03, 1348 Louvain-la-Neuve, random effects model to EU-SILC data for the period 2005 2013. Few studies have Belgium focused on the association between economic uncertainty and fertility in Greece considering characteristics of both partners. Even fewer studies have examined panel data in the context of the recent crisis. Our findings show that Greek couples in which both partners are employed, have a high income, or are highly educated are in a more favourable position to have a first child. During the Greek Great Recession, corresponding in our study to the period 2010–2013, the odds of having a first child decreased to half the odds in the 2005–2009 period. The recession period also modified the effect of couples’ characteristics on first childbearing. During the economic crisis, male breadwinner couples were particularly penalized in their transition to have a first child. Surprisingly, couples with at least one temporary worker, usually the woman, were encouraged to have their first child.
  • RIS3 Review Report Epirus

    RIS3 Review Report Epirus

    Smart Specialisation Strategies in Greece – expert team review for DG REGIO RIS3 Regional Assessment: Epirus A report to the European Commission, Directorate General for Regional Policy, Unit I3 - Greece & Cyprus December 2012 (final version) Alasdair Reid, Nicos Komninos, Jorge-A. Sanchez-P., Panayiotis Tsanakas Table of Contents 1. Executive summary: Overall conclusions and recommendations 1 2. Regional Innovation Performance and potential 3 2.1 Regional profile and specialisation 3 2.2 The strengths and weaknesses of the regional innovation system 6 3. Stakeholder involvement and governance of research and innovation policies 8 3.1 Stakeholder involvement in strategy design and implementation 8 3.2 Multi-level governance and synergies between policies and funds 10 3.3 Vision for the region 10 4. Towards a regional smart specialisation strategy 11 4.1 Regional research and innovation policies 11 4.2 Cluster and entrepreneurship policies 13 4.3 Digital economy and ICT policies 15 5. Monitoring and evaluation 16 Appendix A List of people attending the workshop 17 Appendix B List of key documents and reference materials 17 Appendix C Key actors in the regional innovation system 17 Appendix D Regional RTDI funding under the OP Competitiveness and Innovation 19 Appendix E Gross value added by sector in Epirus (% of total value added) 20 Figures Figure 1 Summary benchmark of regional innovation performance, Epirus .................. 3 Figure 2 Relative regional specialisation in 20 industries – Epirus ................................ 4 Figure 3: SWOT of regional innovation potential and specialisation .............................. 5 Figure 4 : Current and future regional R&I priorities ......................................................11 Smart Specialisation Strategies in Greece – expert team review for DG REGIO 1.
  • Press Release Survey on the Use of Information and Communication Technologies by Households and Individuals: 2016

    Press Release Survey on the Use of Information and Communication Technologies by Households and Individuals: 2016

    HELLENIC REPUBLIC HELLENIC STATISTICAL AUTHORITY Piraeus, 14 December 2016 PRESS RELEASE SURVEY ON THE USE OF INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES BY HOUSEHOLDS AND INDIVIDUALS: 2016 E-COMMERCE – PRIVACY AND PROTECTION OF PERSONAL DATA The Hellenic Statistical Authority announces data on the use of information and communication technologies by households and their members and more specifically on e-commerce and privacy and protection of personal data of users. The data derive from the sample Survey on the Use of Information and Communication Technologies by households and individuals, conducted for 2016. The survey was conducted on 4,774 private households and equal number of household members, throughout Greece, with the only prerequisite the existence in the household of, at least, one member aged 16 – 74 years old. BACKGROUNG AND PURPOSE OF THE SURVEY The survey collects data on the access of households to selected information and communication technologies. More specifically, data are collected on internet access and ubiquitous internet access, transactions with public authorities via the internet (e-government), e-commerce, etc. The survey was first conducted in Greece in 2002 and it is fully harmonized with the corresponding surveys conducted by the other EU Member States. The survey data are collected via telephone by means of questions answered by one only member of the household that is randomly selected, with the only prerequisite that he/she is 16-74 years old. The questionnaire helps collecting data with regard to the household, in general, as well as individual information concerning the selected household member. E-COMMERCE 3 out of 10 persons (32.8%) aged 16-74 years old, having E-commerce, 2010-2016 ever accessed the internet, purchased or ordered goods or % 40 services over the internet for 33,8 32,8 29,5 private use, during the 1st 26,9 27,0 quarter of 2016.
  • RIS3 Review Report Western Greece

    RIS3 Review Report Western Greece

    Smart Specialisation Strategies in Greece – expert team review for DG REGIO RIS3 Regional Assessment: West- ern Greece A report to the European Commission, Directorate General for Regional Policy, Unit I3 - Greece & Cyprus December 2012 (final version) Alasdair Reid, Nicos Komninos, Jorge-A. Sanchez-P., Panayiotis Tsanakas Contents 1. Executive summary 1 2. Regional Innovation System - performance and potential 3 2.1 Regional innovation performance and specialisation profile 3 2.2 The strengths and weaknesses of the regional innovation system 6 3. Stakeholder involvement and governance of research and innovation policies 7 3.1 Stakeholder involvement in strategy design and implementation 7 3.2 Multi-level governance and synergies between policies and funding sources 9 3.3 Vision for the region 9 4. Towards a regional innovation and smart specialisation strategy 10 4.1 Regional research and innovation policy 10 4.2 Cluster and entrepreneurship policies 12 4.3 Digital economy and ICT policies 14 4.3.1 Broadband infrastructure and NGA networks 15 4.3.2 E-services 15 4.3.3 Ensuring investments in e-government 16 5. Monitoring and evaluation 19 Appendix A List of people interviewed 20 Appendix B Key documents and references 21 Appendix C Estimated Structural Fund allocation for RTDI per Greek region 22 Appendix D Regional RTDI funding under the OP Competitiveness and Innovation 23 Appendix E Total Gross value added at basic prices – Western Greece 24 Appendix F Relative regional specialisation in 20 industries – Western Greece 25 Figures Figure 1 Summary benchmark of regional innovation performance ............................... 4 Figure 2 : SWOT of regional innovation potential and specialisation ............................
  • "Europe 2020" and the Greek Regions

    "Europe 2020" and the Greek Regions

    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Saratsis, Yiannis; Kotios, Angelos Conference Paper Europe 2020 Strategy, Cohesion Policy and Greek Regions: Are we "smart" enough? 51st Congress of the European Regional Science Association: "New Challenges for European Regions and Urban Areas in a Globalised World", 30 August - 3 September 2011, Barcelona, Spain Provided in Cooperation with: European Regional Science Association (ERSA) Suggested Citation: Saratsis, Yiannis; Kotios, Angelos (2011) : Europe 2020 Strategy, Cohesion Policy and Greek Regions: Are we "smart" enough?, 51st Congress of the European Regional Science Association: "New Challenges for European Regions and Urban Areas in a Globalised World", 30 August - 3 September 2011, Barcelona, Spain, European Regional Science Association (ERSA), Louvain-la-Neuve This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/120131 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte.