1 / 18

PORTUGAL

III COMMUNITY SUPPORT FRAMEWORK Some achievements. PORTUGAL. 2000-2006. June, 2006. NUT II. 3.472.715. 3.711.797. + 239.082 +6,9 %. 2.258.768. 2.366.691. + 107.923 +4,8 %. 237.795. 782.331. 240.024. 767.549. + 2.229 + 0,9 %. - 14.782 -1,9 %. 253.426. 243.007. - 10.419

rasia
Download Presentation

PORTUGAL

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. IIICOMMUNITY SUPPORT FRAMEWORK Some achievements PORTUGAL 2000-2006 June, 2006

  2. NUT II 3.472.715 3.711.797 + 239.082 +6,9 % 2.258.768 2.366.691 + 107.923 +4,8 % 237.795 782.331 240.024 767.549 + 2.229 + 0,9 % - 14.782 -1,9 % 253.426 243.007 - 10.419 - 4,1 % 341.404 405.380 + 63.976 +18,7 % 2.520.708 2.740.237 + 219.529 +8,7 % 0 50km POPULATION 1991 and 2003 PORTUGAL 1991:9.867.147 inh. 2003:10.474.685 inh. 1991  2003: + 607.538 inh + 6,2 %

  3. NUT II  174,4  84,0  956,6   24,4 103,4  293,5  81,2 0 50km Population Density 2003 PORTUGAL 2003:113,9 inh./km2 inhabitants per km2  Increase from 1990  Decrease from 1990

  4. Urban Centres The population is concentrated on the littoral

  5. % of population for education level PORTUGAL 1991 2001 44.5 35.1 16.3 15.7 14.3 12.9 12.6 11.5 11.1 10.9 8.8 6.4 3th cycle 1st cycle 2d cycle Médium superior Without Secondary 0 50km EDUCATION Level - PORTUGAL PORTUGAL

  6. NUT II GDP in Euros per inhabitant (pps) 1995:11.138 € 2002: 16.248€ 1995 2002 13.017 9.479 23.665 16.004 14.084 13.343 9.465 9.087 18.968 17.170 13.365 10.613 11.184 0 50km 8.322 GDP per INHABITANT- Regional Distribution PORTUGAL

  7. NUT II GVA - % per sectors of activity Primary 3,7 27,9 Secondary Tertiary 68,4 % 3,1 37,1 59,8 5,5 35,0 59,5 0,6 20,2 15,0 79,2 57,5 27,5 2,9 8,6 0 50km 20,3 16,9 8,1 14,1 74,5 76,9 77,9 GVA per SECTORS of ACTIVITY 2001 PORTUGAL

  8. 1.793,8 NUT II 12,4 45,7 Total Employment (thousand)=5,118 41,8 Primary 1.289,9 12,5 Tertiary Secondary 24,1 55,2 32,3 44,6 % 31,3 1.289,5 1,4 24,1 339,2 74,6 14,4 102,1 112,3 25,9 59,6 9,5 12,8 26,6 28,2 59,0 63,8 9,2 191,2 21,5 69,3 0 50km EMPlOYMENT per SECTORS of ACTIVITY 2003 PORTUGAL

  9. 6,8 2003:6,3 % % of unemployed population 3,6 8,1 8,2 2,9 6,1 3,4 0 50km Unemployment rate 2003 PORTUGAL

  10. THE EUROPEAN CONTEXT The European Union Treatry intitutes the economic and social cohesion principle, whish aims to ensure an harmonious development of the European Space by reducing inequalities between different areas and the underdevelopment of the poorer ones.

  11. Since its accession to E.C., in January 1986, Portugal has applied, just like the other country members, to this co-financing instrument which, together with national and private investments, has become a decisive support to several development actions that otherwise would never have been possible. Previous Regulations– 1986-1988 Community Support Framework I– 1989-1993 Community Support Framework II– 1994-1999 Community Support Framework III– 2000-2006

  12. Structural Funds 20.528 14.589 5.721 CSF I CSF II CSF III (Millions of Euros)

  13. E R D F E S F E A G G P F I F G In order to achieve those goals, 4 structural funds have been created: European Regional Development Fund European Social Fund European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund-Guidance Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance These are co-financing instruments to which member countries can apply in order to assist, over multi-annual periods, all national efforts towards the development and full achievement of the desired cohesion.

  14. CohesionPolicyin Portugal 20 years after Portuguese EU adhesion. 50 billion Euros from Cohesion Policy have been used. Remarkable achievements have been implemented. Nevertheless, persistent structural problems affect our economy, our society and our territory. These persistent structural difficulties occur in the central themes of present growth and employment paradigm. That have territorially differentiated natures and intensities.

  15. LENGH OF MOTORWAY NETWORK INFANT MORTALITY 1800 25 1600 20 1400 PORTUGAL 1200 PORTUGAL 15 1000 800 10 600 400 5 200 0 0 1980 1990 1995 2000 2001 2002 2003 2002 2003 2004 1999 2000 2001 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 LIFE EXPECTANCY AT BIRTH SECONDARY ENROLMENT 78 65 77 55 76 PORTUGAL PORTUGAL 45 75 74 35 73 25 72 15 71 1985 1990 2000 1995 1980 1990 1995 2000 2001 2002 2003 Remarkable Achievements:

  16. 130 GDP per HOUR WORKED - Annual Increase Rate GDP pc PPS - EU15=100 120 IRELAND 110 100 SPAIN 90 12 EU15 80 10 PORTUGAL 70 8 GREECE 60 6 PORTUGAL 50 4 2 1989 2001 2003 1987 2000 2002 1986 1996 1985 1988 1991 1994 1995 1997 2004 1993 1999 1990 1992 1998 1991 1994 1997 2000 1990 1992 1993 1995 1996 1998 1999 2001 2002 2003 2004 0 -2 -4 R&D INVESTMENT - %GDP LONG -TERM UNEMPLOYMENT 2,0 60 EU15 1,6 55 1,2 50 EU15 0,8 45 PORTUGAL 40 0,4 PORTUGAL 35 0 30 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 Persistent Structural Problems:

  17. National Cohesion Policy is not the only responsible for successes neither for insufficiencies: > Globalisation developments > Trade agreements > Unfavourable EU policies > National public policy formulation and implementation quality > Governance efficiency and effectiveness > …

  18. But, in what regards National Cohesion Policy, explanations include: > Identification of policy priorities > Dispersion of Operational Programs > Insufficient selectivity of investments > Average dimension of interventions > Effectiveness of interventions on human resources and economic activities > Governance efficiency > …

More Related