Limitations of coordinative Europeanisation in the Just Transition Mechanism in Romania

Clara Volintiru, Sanda Nicola
{"title":"Limitations of coordinative Europeanisation in the Just Transition Mechanism in Romania","authors":"Clara Volintiru, Sanda Nicola","doi":"10.1177/10245294241242256","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The EU currently promotes a radical transition towards a green, digital and more inclusive economy, which for its realization relies on the European Investor State’s financial architecture. As the transition generates losers, not only winners, instruments like the Just Transition Mechanism (JTM) are designed to provide a compensatory function. However, our research shows that it might miss its mark of ‘leaving no one behind’. JTM is a fascinating extension of European Investor State as it seeks to service the losers through investments rather than compensations. Firstly, JTM mirrors the vision of the InvestEU program and doubles down on industrial transformation and strategic investments that rely substantially on private sector involvement. Secondly, as a process, the JTM requires local stakeholder coordination and national institutional capacity – both of which can pose additional challenges to newer member states without enhancing local capabilities. Thirdly, based on the process design, much like other EU programs, JTM has a level of complexity that leaves beneficiaries highly reliant on technical assistance. As such, investment gaps in the newer member states might be extended, and not compressed by the current compensatory financial tools of the EU. Using an in-depth case study method, we develop a multi-dimensional evaluation of the Just Transition process in the most affected region of the Jiu Valley in Romania. Through an original local stakeholder mapping, we find that while the local and national authorities have the highest influence in determining the Just Transition process in Romania, they are also very much distrusted by other local actors. Our findings reveal that it is not just the often-cited weakness in institutional capacity, but also that of poor stakeholder consensus that impede the strategic planning and implementation of new EU investment tools at the level of targeted beneficiaries.","PeriodicalId":207354,"journal":{"name":"Competition & Change","volume":"99 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Competition & Change","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10245294241242256","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The EU currently promotes a radical transition towards a green, digital and more inclusive economy, which for its realization relies on the European Investor State’s financial architecture. As the transition generates losers, not only winners, instruments like the Just Transition Mechanism (JTM) are designed to provide a compensatory function. However, our research shows that it might miss its mark of ‘leaving no one behind’. JTM is a fascinating extension of European Investor State as it seeks to service the losers through investments rather than compensations. Firstly, JTM mirrors the vision of the InvestEU program and doubles down on industrial transformation and strategic investments that rely substantially on private sector involvement. Secondly, as a process, the JTM requires local stakeholder coordination and national institutional capacity – both of which can pose additional challenges to newer member states without enhancing local capabilities. Thirdly, based on the process design, much like other EU programs, JTM has a level of complexity that leaves beneficiaries highly reliant on technical assistance. As such, investment gaps in the newer member states might be extended, and not compressed by the current compensatory financial tools of the EU. Using an in-depth case study method, we develop a multi-dimensional evaluation of the Just Transition process in the most affected region of the Jiu Valley in Romania. Through an original local stakeholder mapping, we find that while the local and national authorities have the highest influence in determining the Just Transition process in Romania, they are also very much distrusted by other local actors. Our findings reveal that it is not just the often-cited weakness in institutional capacity, but also that of poor stakeholder consensus that impede the strategic planning and implementation of new EU investment tools at the level of targeted beneficiaries.
罗马尼亚公正过渡机制中协调性欧洲化的局限性
欧盟目前正在推动向绿色、数字和更具包容性的经济彻底转型,而这一转型的实现有赖于欧洲投资国的金融架构。由于转型不仅会产生赢家,也会产生输家,因此公正转型机制(JTM)等工具旨在提供补偿功能。然而,我们的研究表明,该机制可能无法实现 "不遗漏任何人 "的目标。公正过渡机制是欧洲投资国的一个引人入胜的延伸,因为它寻求通过投资而不是补偿来为失败者提供服务。首先,JTM 反映了投资欧盟计划的愿景,并加倍重视在很大程度上依赖私营部门参与的产业转型和战略投资。其次,作为一个过程,联合技术转移需要当地利益相关方的协调和国家机构的能力--这两者在不提高当地能力的情况下会给新成员国带来额外的挑战。第三,根据流程设计,与其他欧盟项目一样,联合技术转移的复杂程度使受益方高度依赖技术援助。因此,新成员国的投资缺口可能会扩大,而不是通过欧盟目前的补偿性金融工具来压缩。我们采用深入案例研究的方法,对罗马尼亚受影响最严重的九谷地区的 "公正过渡 "进程进行了多维度评估。通过对当地利益相关者进行独创性的摸底调查,我们发现,虽然地方和国家当局在决定罗马尼亚的 "公正过渡 "进程中具有最大的影响力,但他们也深受其他地方参与者的不信任。我们的研究结果表明,阻碍欧盟新投资工具在目标受益人层面进行战略规划和实施的,不仅仅是人们经常提到的机构能力薄弱问题,还有利益相关者缺乏共识的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信