Valoración de atributos básicos del TRC a escala local

Map 2.3 shows the extent to which per capita GDP changed between 1999 and 2003 by com- parison with the EU-25 average (expressed in percentage points of the EU-25 average). Eco- nomically dynamic regions, whose per capita GDP increased by more than one percentage point compared to the EU average, are shown in green. Less dynamic regions (those with a fall of more than one percentage point in per capita GDP compared to the EU-25 average) are shown in orange and red. The values range from +18.1 percentage points for Groningen (Netherlands) to -11.7 percentage points for Trento in Italy. The map shows that economic dynamism is well above average in the peripheral areas of the EU, not only in the EU-15 countries but also in the new Member States and accession countries. Among the EU-15 Member States, strong growth can be seen in Greece, Spain, Ireland and the United Kingdom, in particular. On the other hand, a trend revealed by earlier data has contin- ued, with persistent low growth in a few key re- gions of the EU founding Member States, and in Portugal. Italy, where not a single region achieved the average growth of the EU-25 between 1999 and 2003, and Portugal, where only Madeira was able to make progress vis-à-vis the EU-25, were

hit particularly hard by this unwelcome develop- ment. Most of the regions in Germany and France also fell short of the EU average.

Of the new Member States and the accession countries, where the capital regions are very dynamic, the Baltic countries, Hungary and Slov- enia, in particular, have experienced above-aver- age growth. Recent developments in Bulgaria and Romania are also encouraging, with only one region in each country falling below the EU-25 average. However, the increases in GDP values in Poland since 1999 have been only slightly above the EU-25 average, which is disappointing in view of the low level of GDP overall.

On closer analysis, it is immediately apparent that 12 regions increased by at least 10 percent- age points compared to the EU average, while only eight fell by at least 10 percentage points. Of the regions which are particularly dynamic, three are in Greece, two in the United King- dom and four in the new Member States/acces- sion countries. The fastest growing regions are therefore scattered relatively widely across the countries examined here. However, eight of these 12 regions are capital regions, which continue to have an above-average rate of growth not only in the EU-15 countries but also in the new Member States and accession countries.

The EU-15 countries which have particularly poor growth are concentrated at the lower end of the distribution curve. Of the eight regions which fell by more than 10 percentage points in com- parison with the EU average, four are in Italy, three in Germany and one in Portugal.

A more diverse picture emerges by including re- gions which either gained or lost at least five per- centage points against the EU average between 1999 and 2003.

It can be seen from the upper end of the distribu- tion curve that the 56 most successful regions include 11 out of 13 regions in Greece. These are joined by 16 out of 37 regions in the UK and nine out of 19 regions in Spain. This means that 36 of the 56 most successful regions are located in these three countries. In total, 43 regions from this group are in the EU-15 countries.

This shows that 13 regions in the new Member States and accession countries have gained at least 5 percentage points compared to the EU average. The capital regions in Romania and Hungary (both + 16.2 percentage points), Slova-

REGIONAL GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT

2

kia (+ 13.9) and the Czech Republic (+ 10.9) were particularly successful. The non-capital region with the strongest growth among the regions in the new Member States and accession countries was Nord-Est in Romania, the per capita GDP (in PPS) of which increased by 6.7 percentage points between 1999 and 2003 from 22.4% to 29.1% of the EU-25 average.

A clear concentration of regions is also appar- ent at the lower end of the distribution curve: of

the 42 regions which fell by at least 5 percentage points, 20 are in Germany, ten in Italy, five in France and three in Portugal. A large number of German and Italian regions in this group have an above-average level of GDP, thus making the dis- appointing trend of recent years less unsatisfac- tory than in Portugal. The Portuguese regions of Norte (-8.2 percentage points) and Centro (-6.4), which had a GDP of less than 70% of the EU- 25 average at the end of the 1990s, have fallen

AÇORES P 0 100 MADEIRA P 0 25 CANARIAS E 0 100 GUADELOUPE F 0 25 MARTINIQUE F 0 20 RÉUNION F 0 20 GUYANE F 0 100 0 100 500 km > + 5 + 1 − + 5 − 1 − + 1 − 5 − − 1 <= − 5 Data not available

0 50

CYPRUS

0 10

MALTA

EU−25 = 0

Change of GDP per inhabitant (in PPS) in percentage points of the average EU−25

2003 as compared with 1999 − NUTS 2

Statistical data: Eurostat − Database: REGIO © EuroGeographics, for the administrative boundaries Cartography: Eurostat − GISCO, 08/2006

R e g i o n s : S t a t i s t i c a l y e a r b o o k 2 0 0 6 33

further behind to a worrying degree. This makes the region of Norte the least prosperous region in the EU-15; in 2003, its GDP was 57.4% of the EU average, i.e. the same as that of the Romanian capital, Bucharest.

The new Member States and accession countries are catching up with the EU-25 average at a rate of 0.8 percentage points every year, which at first glance appears to be encouraging. On closer inspection, however, it is clear that not all coun- tries and regions were able to benefit from this: in particular, Poland, Cyprus and Malta, and, to some extent, the Czech Republic and Bulgaria. 24 of the 55 regions in the new Member States and accession countries gained fewer than three percentage points, which was below the aver- age; of those 24 regions, 12 are in Poland, six in the Czech Republic and three in Bulgaria. Eight regions fell even further behind: four in Poland, one in Bulgaria and one in Romania. The strong- est downturns were seen in Malta, with a drop of – 4.1 percentage points.

Different trends even