In the next planning period of the EU Cohesion Policy (2014-2020) a stronger emphases has been placed both on the importance of the Europe 2020 Strategy and the operational background of financial crisis and austerity that may influence the implementation of Cohesion Policy objectives in the rest of this decade. In particular, in the new period, Cohesion Policy is an integral part of the Europe 2020 strategy with a strong focus on employment, innovation, sustainability, as well as reducing poverty and social exclusion to which a third of the EU Budget will be invested under Cohesion Policy to help address disparities between regions while at the same time contributing to the achievement of the Europe 2020 goals. It should also strengthen the Union’s capacities to increase the competitiveness of European regions in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, and a means of sustaining the EU’s aspirations towards ‘smart, sustainable and inclusive growth’. At the same time, implementation of the EU Cohesion Policy agenda implies that regions will have key choices to make on where, when and how they will prioritize and translate the EU’s aspirations according to their own local contexts and conditions.

Drawing upon a major ongoing study of stable (Sweden) and unstable (Ukraine) regions and taking account of the differing choices for regions in the EU and its surrounding neighborhood, this paper examines and maps out the operating paradigms and logics that shape the EU’s policy priorities towards the EU’s Cohesion Policy. In particular, the paper addresses several aspects. First, the authors present current findings of research work, aimed at revealing the prevailing ‘logics’ of EU Cohesion Policy. Second, the paper maps out how these logics affect the implementation choices at the regional development level in view of the different interpretations of ‘smartness’ within regions. Preliminary investigation results will be presented suggesting the existence of several key logics, such as, the ‘competition’ and ‘innovation’ logics, the ‘development’ logic, the logic of Europeanisation and institutional capacity building as a background and a context for specialization. Third, further analysis is presented relating these preliminary findings to the respective operational capacities of specific policy tools applied via the implementation of ‘smartness’ by regions and regional actors; and thereby introduce the concept of ‘smart implementation’ in order to help analysts understand the application of EU Cohesion Policy in practice. More precisely, the work will provide conceptual reflections on how the ‘logics’ of ‘smartness’ are turned into ‘smart implementation’ which will inform future reviews of the EU’s smart, sustainable and inclusive growth agendas in the future.  

In the next planning period of the EU Cohesion Policy (2014-2020) a stronger emphases has been placed both on the importance of the Europe 2020 Strategy and the operational background of financial crisis and austerity that may influence the implementation of Cohesion Policy objectives in the rest of this decade. In particular, in the new period, Cohesion Policy is an integral part of the Europe 2020 strategy with a strong focus on employment, innovation, sustainability, as well as reducing poverty and social exclusion to which a third of the EU Budget will be invested under Cohesion Policy to help address disparities between regions while at the same time contributing to the achievement of the Europe 2020 goals. It should also

Strengthen the Union’s capacities to increase the competitiveness of European regions in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, and a means of sustaining the EU’s aspirations towards ‘smart, sustainable and inclusive growth’. At the same time, implementation of the EU Cohesion Policy agenda implies that regions will have key choices to make on where, when and how they will prioritize and translate the EU’s aspirations according to their own local contexts and conditions.

Drawing upon a major ongoing study of stable (Sweden) and unstable (Ukraine) regions and taking account of the differing choices for regions in the EU and its surrounding neighborhood, this paper examines and maps out the operating paradigms and logics that shape the EU’s policy priorities towards the EU’s Cohesion Policy. In particular, the paper addresses several aspects. First, the authors present current findings of research work, aimed at revealing the prevailing ‘logics’ of EU Cohesion Policy. Second, the paper maps out how these logics affect the implementation choices at the regional development level in view of the different interpretations of ‘smartness’ within regions. Preliminary investigation results will be presented suggesting the existence of several key logics, such as, the ‘competition’ and ‘innovation’ logics, the ‘development’ logic, the logic of Europeanisation and institutional capacity building as a background and a context for specialization. Third, further analysis is presented relating these preliminary findings to the respective operational capacities of specific policy tools applied via the implementation of ‘smartness’ by regions and regional actors; and thereby introduce the concept of ‘smart implementation’ in order to help analysts understand the application of EU Cohesion Policy in practice. More precisely, the work will provide conceptual reflections on how the ‘logics’ of ‘smartness’ are turned into ‘smart implementation’ which will inform future reviews of the EU’s smart, sustainable and inclusive growth agendas in the future.  

The given paper provides preliminary findings obtained in the ongoing work within the interdisciplinary research project focused on studying regional innovation policies and ‘smart specialization’ agendas for Swedish and Ukrainian regions.

The discussion on the EU-Ukraine cooperation in the field of innovations has obtained particular actuality and importance with the introduction of ‘Europe-2020’ agenda for ‘smart, sustainable and inclusive growth’ and elaboration of mechanisms for implementing the Horizon 2020 initiatives in the EU’s neighborhood. Given the recent developments in the process of European integration of Ukraine as well as further application of the European Neighborhood Instrument prioritizing bottom-up growth, boosting of entrepreneurship, strengthening social engagement, deeper economic integration and multi-level cooperation, the building of innovation strategies and their realization could play a favorable role in the process of Europeanizing Ukrainian regional policies and fostering reformation of the regional governance system.

However, whatever all-EU objectives are emphasized, the cases of the Baltic Rim states such as Sweden, as well as the members of the ‘younger’ EU family neighboring Ukraine, suggest that expected outcomes of the innovative policies’ implementation largely depend on the issues of interpretation of the innovation policies’ concepts which are generated in different conditions of the states’ economic and political development.