A Comparative Analysis Of LFA Measure(s) In EU And China: From A Cost-Effective Perspective

The purpose of this paper is to compare measure(s) taken by both EU and China to solve their problems in areas with certain disadvantages or handicaps (LFA measure for EU and poverty alleviation measures for China) and see whether there are places where China could learn from the EU so as to provide suggestions for policy makers. After making a careful comparison of the aim, eligibility criteria, organization, implementation and effects (evaluated with a goal-attainment model) of their measure(s), we could see that although there are quite some similarities between them as regards to their measure making and implementation process as well as the specific form of some of their measures, EU does have done a better job in some aspects, such as the effort they have made to simplify their measure eligibility criteria, the prudence they have shown in their measure making process (the consultation they would conduct before making any changes to their measures), their bottom-up approach and their almost perfect evaluation and reporting system, which have made their LFA measure quite cost-effective and of course China could draw lessons from. As to the part of work that China has already done very well, or even creatively well, such as the prioritized attitude it has taken towards its poverty-alleviation work, its diversified forms of subsidies, the cooperative help pattern among relatively prosperous areas in the east and poverty-stricken areas in the middle and west and the voluntary relocation of people from areas of extreme difficulties, it sure should hold on to.