By Andrej Horvat, Ruslan Popiuk

Regional policy is becoming increasingly linked to Ukraine’s post-war reconstruction and future EU funding, making a coherent and inclusive coordination framework essential.

Ukraine´s Government authorities are preparing for the next step on the way to the EU membership. The steps to be taken in order for the accession negotiations to start in each area of the EU legislation is called “bilateral screening”. In this technical process, the Ukrainian representatives need to present to the European Commission how state regional development policy is being coordinated, planned, how public investments are being prepared and implemented, what are institutions that are in charge of monitoring and evaluating regional development policies in different sectors, how are projects being financed, what are the measures to enable transparent and accountable spending of public funds dedicated for development of the country, and much more.

This negotiation area is not just about presenting Ukrainian legislation and comparing it with the legal acts of the EU acquis, but it is about a well-functioning system of rules, institutions and administrative capabilities of a candidate country and a future EU member state to manage public investments in accordance with the EU rules and standards.

Yes, we are speaking here about the development policies and public investments of the Ukrainian state, which is to be covered by the EU accession negotiation Chapter 22 Regional Development and Coordination of Structural Instruments.

In this area of negotiations with the EU, a well-organised coordination is conditio-sine-qua-non and of crucial importance when preparing for bilateral screening in September this year. Here, Ukraine as an EU candidate country needs to present how development policies are being planned and implemented with involvement of all layers of multi-level governance. In other words, it needs to show the key successes of the ongoing decentralisation reform at all levels: national, regional and local. Here subsidiarity principle, bottom-up involvement and partnership approach are to be taken into account and compared with the EU standards

The success of the development policies in EU member states always relies on capable and well-trained people and well-functioning institutions. They are the key to the absorption of public funds and decreasing of social and economic disparities are being targeted.

In this context, we would like to draw attention to two recent publications prepared by the experts of U-LEAD with Europe Programme for the purpose of supporting Ukraine in the preparation of State Regional Development Strategy and Action Plan. Namely, preparations for State Regional Development Strategy and Action Plan were, and still are, dealing with exactly the same topics that are relevant for the EU accession negotiations: it is about priorities, programmes, projects, institutions and public finances. And all these “people and institutions” are to take into account the EU standards in the field of regional development policy. Of course, there are certain gaps, it is a hard work to build and manage a system that will meet the EU standards, but we are on our way, and we are not starting from scratch.

These analytical documents offer a structured perspective on how Ukraine could gradually align its regional development coordination architecture with the principles and requirements of the EU cohesion policy – while also responding to the realities of recovery in wartime.

The first one – a Concept Paper titled “Coordination and Allocation of Functions for Regional Development Policy Implementation and Future Utilization of EU Structural Instruments in Ukraine” – outlines three coordination scenarios and advocates for a decentralized, place-sensitive model. This scenario reflects the principles of subsidiarity, partnership, and bottom-up approach, which are among the guiding principles underpinning the current EU cohesion policy and Ukraine’s accession preparations under Chapter 22.

Importantly, the paper proposes practical steps for reform: strengthening the coordinating role of the Ministry for Development of Communities and Territories of Ukraine, modernizing the State Fund for Regional Development, establishing a permanent secretariat for the Interagency Coordination Commission, and introducing territorial impact assessments for national policies and programmes.

The second one – Case studies from Italy, Ireland, and Croatia “Coordination of Regional Development Policy in selected EU Member States” – serves as a valuable extension of the above mentioned Concept Paper. Rather than promoting a one-size-fits-all solution, it offers comparative insights into how different EU Member States organize coordination between levels of government and manage cohesion policy instruments. The Italian model of institutional “conferences”, Ireland’s one of integrated national planning framework, and Croatia’s example of centrally managed but territorially targeted approach are especially noteworthy for Ukraine’s ongoing reforms.

These papers do not prescribe and approach Ukraine should take, they rather serve as a basis for reflection, discussion, and design – helping Ukrainian institutions and partners navigate a complex but necessary transition. As regional policy becomes increasingly linked to Ukraine’s post-war reconstruction and future EU funding, having a coherent and inclusive coordination framework is essential.