Fig. 1
Model of the first edition of the province contract in Poland.
Source: own study on the basis of Kawałko (2009).
Table 1
Means spent under province contracts in the pre-accession period (in million PLN4).
| Voivodeship | Province contracts 2001–2003 | Province contracts 2004 |
|---|---|---|
| Dolnośląskie | 397.33 | 86.13 |
| Kujawsko-pomorskie | 264.48 | 47.48 |
| Lubelskie | 299.57 | 70.80 |
| Lubuskie | 39.30 | 33.92 |
| Łódzkie | 241.45 | 59.87 |
| Małopolskie | 464.19 | 110.34 |
| Mazowieckie | 1,528.16 | 333.64 |
| Opolskie | 120.04 | 46.04 |
| Podkarpackie | 428.67 | 111.10 |
| Podlaskie | 189.02 | 56.23 |
| Pomorskie | 318.22 | 90.95 |
| Śląskie | 431.22 | 103.35 |
| Świętokrzyskie | 285.41 | 47.14 |
| Warmińsko-mazurskie | 243.01 | 73.13 |
| Wielkopolskie | 385.73 | 65.58 |
| Zachodniopomorskie | 110.92 | 41.27 |
| Total | 5,746.73 | 1,376.96 |
Source: own study on the basis of Report on the development and regional policy (2007).
Table 2
Means spent under province contracts in the first years of the Polish membership in the European Union (2004–2006) (in million PLN).
| Voivodeship | European means for implementation of IRDOP (European part) | 2005–2006 province contracts (national part) |
|---|---|---|
| Dolnośląskie | 961.64 | 111.33 |
| Kujawsko-pomorskie | 610.23 | 66.78 |
| Lubelskie | 864.29 | 54.44 |
| Lubuskie | 354.98 | 29.09 |
| Łódzkie | 675.52 | 82.88 |
| Małopolskie | 796.62 | 87.97 |
| Mazowieckie | 1,289.31 | 336.50 |
| Opolskie | 330.04 | 51.89 |
| Podkarpackie | 826.30 | 79.97 |
| Podlaskie | 472.51 | 38.82 |
| Pomorskie | 686.21 | 89.51 |
| Śląskie | 1,203.83 | 121.66 |
| Świętokrzyskie | 572.24 | 41.97 |
| Warmińsko-mazurskie | 782.37 | 74.41 |
| Wielkopolskie | 842.92 | 71.76 |
| Zachodniopomorskie | 601.85 | 67.30 |
| Total | 11,870.86 | 1,406.28 |
[i] Source: own study on the basis of unpublished data of regional self-government and Report on development and a regional policy (2007).
Table 3
Means spent in province contracts in the period 2007–2013 (in million PLN).
| Voivodeship | European means for implementation of ROPs (European part) | Co-financing of ROPs from state budget means (national part) |
|---|---|---|
| Dolnośląskie | 5,332.79 | 170.77 |
| Kujawsko-pomorskie | 4,283.03 | 231.50 |
| Lubelskie | 5,129.22 | 264.06 |
| Lubuskie | 2,125.73 | 109.61 |
| Łódzkie | 4,497.90 | 320.63 |
| Małopolskie | 5,830.21 | 396.76 |
| Mazowieckie | 8,034.99 | 487.10 |
| Opolskie | 2,113.22 | 124.40 |
| Podkarpackie | 5,154.78 | 349.46 |
| Podlaskie | 2,891.93 | 323.64 |
| Pomorskie | 4,035.03 | 147.70 |
| Śląskie | 7,512.55 | 245.71 |
| Świętokrzyskie | 3,308.97 | 126.58 |
| Warmińsko-mazurskie | 4,603.37 | 247.70 |
| Wielkopolskie | 5,730.07 | 299.41 |
| Zachodniopomorskie | 3,710.07 | 274.43 |
| Total | 74,293.87 | 4,119.44 |
[i] Source: own study on the basis of unpublished data of Ministry of Development.
Fig. 2
Operating model of territorial contracts in Poland.
Source: own study.
Table 4
Indicative budget of territorial contracts in 2014–2020 (in million PLN).
| Voivodeship | European means for implementation of ROPs (European part) | Co-financing of ROPs from state budget means (national part) |
|---|---|---|
| Dolnośląskie | 9,685.95 | 307.07 |
| Kujawsko-pomorskie | 8,185.22 | 246.98 |
| Lubelskie | 9,593.12 | 348.17 |
| Lubuskie | 3,899.80 | 121.75 |
| Łódzkie | 9,701.01 | 371.52 |
| Małopolskie | 12,376.33 | 479.23 |
| Mazowieckie | 8,986.31 | 362.90 |
| Opolskie | 4,063.36 | 141.42 |
| Podkarpackie | 9,091.25 | 317.27 |
| Podlaskie | 5,218.46 | 166.10 |
| Pomorskie | 8,018.69 | 276.41 |
| Śląskie | 14,950.83 | 514.56 |
| Świętokrzyskie | 5,867.54 | 196.87 |
| Warmińsko-mazurskie | 7,431.57 | 259.98 |
| Wielkopolskie | 10,535.89 | 375.05 |
| Zachodniopomorskie | 6,885.33 | 211.24 |
| Total | 134,490.66 | 4,696.52 |
[i] Source: own study on the basis of unpublished data of Ministry of Development.
Appendix. 1
Regional differences in the allocation of province and territorial contracts in the years 2001–2020.
Source: own study on the basis of unpublished data of Ministry of Development and regional self-govermment.