Since the referendum to leave the EU, a (slightly) higher focus has been placed on the parts of the country that have benefited from EU funding and support, with various tools allowing you to learn about the EU projects that have taken place where you live.  Despite this, there has been an ongoing concern that the EU has been unable to help people and communities that have suffered since 2008.

A recent study explored this issue through the lens of EU structural funds, which aim to specifically target parts of Europe with intense economic challenges.  The study examined the parts of the UK that were regarded as high need, and whether this greater EU involvement influenced how those regions voted in the EU referendum.

Logically, if economic factors underpin voters electoral preferences, then areas in receipt of EU financial support should have favorable impressions of EU integration.  Interestingly however, this doesn’t appear to be the case, with no real evidence that areas that had received a high proportion of EU funding responded differently in the referendum than areas that didn’t.

Labor market improvements

What did appear to influence how people voted was when EU funding was coupled with real and tangible improvements to the local labor market.  When funds corresponded with lower unemployment, then this tended to see greater support for remain in the referendum.

It’s a logical finding as it provides tangible evidence that being in the EU makes a positive difference, in contrast to areas that received EU funding that didn’t appear to help people’s employment prospects.  Funding for projects seen as wasteful therefore were not found to shift support towards remain at all, and quite possibly the opposite.

This should come as no surprise to the EU, as the structural funds directly aim to bolster employment opportunities in these kind of struggling areas, so their effectiveness is on the line with each investment.

A further boost to the remain vote occurred when not only were investments helpful to the labor market, but there was a clear link between the EU investment and this improvement.

The findings are a timely reminder that EU Cohesion funds can most definitely help to bolster support for the EU, but only if citizens see clear improvements in their living standard as a result of the investment, and are aware of the role the investment played in this improvement.

So while money doesn’t appear to be able to buy love in and of itself, the effective deployment of that money to address local needs most certainly can.