Rethinking structural aids!

Making city centers more attractive has long been on the agenda of almost every small, medium-sized and large city. Numerous vacancies have been looming, and not just since the coronavirus pandemic. In addition to small store operators, large corporations and well-known brands are increasingly clearing their shelves and closing branches. Many cities now have their own working groups or even departments tasked with this topic, with the aim of making “their city” more liveable. But what is needed to get people to spend more time in the city center again? So that large and small businesses and stores retain their locations? And above all: who is actually responsible for this? Is it the companies themselves? Is it the respective city, the federal states, the federal government or the EU? This is where subsidies and structural aid come into play.

I am critical of the current approach to the disbursement of structural aid, because even outside of pandemic times and the financial support of economically weak regions, the EU and the federal government provide funding for various projects and programs for regional and urban development. The aim of these projects is to equalize living conditions. In order to make this adjustment, individual sectors of the economy are supported, such as the transformation process in the automotive industry or the expansion of various technologies. The selection of which region receives funding is therefore primarily made by the federal government. In addition, the selection is often determined by the question of where the respective companies are located and have their branches. Unfortunately, there is all too often a lack of focus on the big picture or the wider needs of the respective municipality and local people.

I see the coronavirus pandemic as an opportunity to take a fresh look at the issue of structural aid and move forward boldly. For example, it is unacceptable for employees of the Federal Office of Economics and Export Control to commute daily between their home in Berlin and their workplace in Weißwasser in Upper Lusatia in order to be able to keep their center of life in the capital because the cultural offerings, infrastructure and educational opportunities for children are better and more diverse there. It would make sense here to distribute responsibility even more to the municipalities and to encourage them to confidently perform their duties of local self-government. This includes the economic well-being of residents as well as the establishment of businesses, the expansion and promotion of cultural offerings and the provision of medical care. Rural regions in particular are struggling with the exodus of companies, branches and residents and are concerned about the increasing desolation of municipalities and towns.