PL
Zdefiniowano regiony (NUTS 2) jako beneficjentów „pierwotnych” oraz „wtórnych”, czyli korzystających bezpośrednio lub pośrednio z unijnych środków pomocowych. Określono zróżnicowanie polskich województw ich obciążenia pod względem wiejskich obszarów problemowych oraz absorpcji funduszy w ramach wybranych działań SPO Rolnictwo i PROW. Zbadano także zależność pomiędzy charakterem regionów a wskaźnikami absorpcji ww. funduszy.
EN
The author defines Polish regions (NUTS 2) as „primary” and „secondary” beneficiaries of EU funds, depending if they take advantage of those funds directly or indirectly. Polish regions were also analized in the aspect of the share made by problematic rural areas in their structure and in the aspect of selected EU funds absorption. Further on, the paper presents relation between the character of regions and funds absorption indexes. Absorption of selected EU funds (within selected actions of Sectoral Operational Program „Agriculture” and Development Plan for Rural Areas 2004-2006) by Polish regions, considered as secondary beneficiaries, was considerably differentiated: from barely 278 zl per capita in ląskie Voivodship up to 2807 zł per capita in Podlaskie. Perasons linear correlation index proves that there is a significant relation between the character of regions and selected funds absorption: the bigger the share of problematic rural areas in the region the more funds the region absorbed. Character of regions in the aspect of problematic rural areas share clearly divides Poland into a less problematic western part and more problematic eastern part; while funds absorption index for regions divides the country into a more-fund-absorbing north-central part and less-absorbing southern part.