focalinterest.com

AI Summary of Peer-Reviewed Research

This page presents an AI-generated summary of a published research paper. The original authors did not write or review this article. [See full disclosure ↓]

Publishing process signals: MODERATE — reflects the venue and review process. — venue and review process.

EU CLLD funding often excludes marginalised communities

—

in
A diverse group of approximately fifteen people gathered outdoors in a residential backyard under an umbrella, standing around a table with food and documents, appearing to be engaged in casual discussion.
Research area:Public administrationPolitical Science and International RelationsLocal Economic Development and Planning

What the study found

The study found that, despite an inclusive discourse, EU Community-Led Local Development (CLLD) funding frameworks often privilege resource-rich organisations and further marginalise those most in need. The authors say these exclusions are linked to structural barriers in governance, not isolated administrative problems.

Why the authors say this matters

The authors argue that these limits matter because EU urban policy is meant to support inclusion and reduce inequality. They conclude that, without a shift toward co-creation and more shared decision-making, EU Cohesion Policy risks perpetuating the exclusions it aims to resolve.

What the researchers tested

The researchers used qualitative research from seven European cities to examine how urban development policies and CLLD funding operate in practice. They focused on barriers such as bureaucracy, short project cycles, and the lack of genuine co-production, and related these to broader governance logics described as neoliberal and economised.

What worked and what didn't

The abstract says CLLD is presented as a way to empower local actors and foster inclusive growth, but in practice it often did not reach the most marginalised communities. Excessive bureaucracy, short-term project cycles, and limited co-production were associated with exclusion, while organisations with more resources were better able to access funds.

What to keep in mind

The abstract does not provide detailed information about the specific cities, data collection procedures, or sample size within each city. It also does not describe limitations beyond noting that the findings come from qualitative research in seven European cities.

Key points

  • EU Community-Led Local Development is intended to support inclusive local growth.
  • The study found that funding frameworks often favour resource-rich organisations.
  • Bureaucracy, short-term project cycles, and weak co-production were identified as barriers.
  • The authors link these problems to broader governance structures that prioritise quick, quantifiable outcomes.
  • The paper calls for more co-creation and redistributed decision-making power.

Disclosure

Research title:
EU CLLD funding often excludes marginalised communities
Authors:
Jekatyerina Dunajeva, Joanna Kostka, Iselin Mulvik, Hanna Siarova
Institutions:
Corvinus University of Budapest, Lancaster University, Public Policy Institute of California, Public Policy Institute of California
Publication date:
2026-03-09
DOI:
10.1080/17535069.2026.2641611
OpenAlex record:
View
AI provenance: This post was generated by gpt-5.4-mini (OpenAI). The original authors did not write or review this post.