Brownfield regeneration has become an important component of regional development policy in Czechia, yet little is known about how financing structures shape the outcomes of such investments. This study examines how project costs, end uses and regional conditions influence the distribution of EU co-financing across Czech NUTS3 regions. Drawing on project-level data from two programming periods (2014–2020 and 2021–2027), we analyse patterns in public and private participation and the fiscal role of EU funds. The results show that public actors consistently secure higher EU contributions, while total project costs do not systematically differ from those of private beneficiaries. We also find that higher project costs are associated with lower EU co-financing in 2014–2020, suggesting a disciplining effect of grant rules, although this pattern has not yet emerged in the current period. Disadvantaged regions tend to rely more heavily on EU transfers, whereas stronger regions mobilise greater private resources. These findings highlight the role of EU cohesion policy as both an investment instrument and a fiscal governance mechanism with implications for long-term regional sustainability.
Aguirre-TorresLLeichenkoRAustermanM, et al. (2024) New York state climate impacts assessment chapter 08: society and economy. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences1542(1): 446–500. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.15199
2.
AndyAIdrisAAyavooR (2024) Location attractiveness in the new norm: a systematic review. Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation in Emerging Economies10(1): 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440241281036
3.
BagaeenSG (2006) Redeveloping former military sites: competitiveness, urban sustainability and public participation. Cities23(5): 339–352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2006.05.002
4.
BertacchiniEFrontutoV (2024) Economic valuation of industrial heritage: a choice experiment on Shanghai baosteel industrial site. Journal of Cultural Heritage66: 215–228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.culher.2023.11.016
FischerLMullerJSpengelC (2023) The distorting effects of imputation systems on tax competition in the EU. Intertax51(3): 196–218.
10.
FlogelFLetonjaMMeyerK, et al. (2024) Beyond start-up formation: effects of entrepreneurial ecosystem support activities for developing lagging regions. Local Economy39(3–4): 127–146. https://doi.org/10.1177/02690942241311805
11.
FrantalBPasqualettiMJBrisudovaL (2024) Challenges, dilemmas and success criteria of recycling coal mining landscapes. Moravian Geographical Reports32(4): 216–232. https://doi.org/10.2478/mgr-2024-0018
12.
GallagherRSiglerTJLiuY (2024) Character contradiction: the exclusionary nature of preservationist planning restrictions. Urban Studies61(6): 1013–1030. https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980231195218
13.
HammondEBCoulonFHallettSH, et al. (2023) From data to decisions: empowering brownfield redevelopment with a novel decision support system. Journal of Environmental Management347: 119145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.119145
14.
HammondEBCoulonFHallettSH, et al. (2024) The development of a novel decision support system for regional land use planning for brownfield land. Journal of Environmental Management349: 119466. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.119466
15.
HeDZainolRAzaliNS (2024) Navigating challenges in the sustainable development of urban brownfields: a PLS path modeling perspective. Ain Shams Engineering Journal15: 103002. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2024.103002
16.
HolmesH (2024) Territorial stigma and rent gap production: the logics of gentrification in Gresham and middlehaven, middlesbrough. Antipode57(1): 238–258. https://doi.org/10.1111/anti.13102
17.
HoweLB (2022) Towards a cooperative urbanism? An alternative conceptualization of urban development for Johannesburg’s mining belt. Environment and Urbanization34(2): 391–412. https://doi.org/10.1177/09562478221112032
18.
HudsonPRaskaPMachacJ, et al. (2022) Balancing the interaction between urban regeneration and flood risk management: a cost benefit approach in Usti nad Labem. Land Use Policy120: 106276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106276
19.
JonesJSerwickaIWrenC (2020) Motives for foreign direct investment location in Europe and EU enlargement. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space52(8): 1681–1699. https://doi.org/10.1177/0308518x20916503
20.
KlusacekPAlexandrescuFOsmanR, et al. (2018) Good governance as a strategic choice in brownfield regeneration: regional dynamics from the Czech Republic. Land Use Policy73: 29–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.01.007
21.
KnoxSFarooqiSOziriV (2025) More than just co-working? How co-working spaces frame their role and impact in entrepreneurial ecosystems. Local Economy39(5–6): 253–276. https://doi.org/10.1177/02690942251334593
22.
KuiperNMvan DuijnMvan der VlistAJ (2025) Do urban redevelopment projects attract jobs? Evidence from the Dutch national restoration fund. Regional Science and Urban Economics114: 104130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2025.104130
23.
LeeRJNewmanGVan ZandtS (2023) Using neighborhood characteristics to predict vacancy types: comparing multi-scale conditions surrounding existing vacant lots. Urban Analytics and City Science50(9): 2594–2609. https://doi.org/10.1177/23998083231160542
24.
LeowKLindenthalT (2025) Enhancing real estate investment trust return forecasts using machine learning. Real Estate Economics53(3): 574–606. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-6229.12527
MartinatSNavratilJHollanderJB, et al. (2018) Re-reuse of regenerated brownfields: lessons from an eastern European post-industrial city. Journal of Cleaner Production188: 536–545. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.03.313
27.
MoldoveanuMFrancVI (2014) Urban regeneration and more opportunities for artistic expression and cultural consumption. Procedia Economics and Finance8: 490–496. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2212-5671(14)00118-x
28.
MorphetJDenhamJ (2023) Trailblazer devolution deals: the next oxymoron in the policy litany of sub-national governance in England?Local Economy38(8): 755–772. https://doi.org/10.1177/02690942241270570
29.
NavratilJKrejciTMartinatS, et al. (2021) Variation in brownfield reuse of derelict agricultural premises in diverse rural spaces. Journal of Rural Studies87: 124–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.09.004
30.
NavratilJMartinatSHewittRJ, et al. (2023) Community landscape preferences for reuse of Soviet-era post-agricultural brownfields – what’s the difference?Rural Sociology88(2): 362–391. https://doi.org/10.1111/ruso.12479
31.
O'CallaghanC (2023) Vacancy as precarious property in Dublin’s temporary urbanism moment. Antipode56(4): 1399–1418. https://doi.org/10.1111/anti.13017
32.
O'ConnorP (2024) Conceptualising grey spaces in skateboarding: generating theory and method for use beyond the board. International Review for the Sociology of Sport59(7): 977–994.
33.
PericAMiljusM (2021) The regeneration of military brownfields in Serbia: moving towards deliberative planning practice?Land Use Policy102: 105222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.105222
34.
PopaNPopAMMarian-PotraAC (2025) Culture-led urban regeneration in post-socialist cities: from decadent spaces towards creative initiatives. Cities158: 105707. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2025.105707
35.
R Core Team (2025) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Available at: https://www.r-project.org/ (accessed 15 December 2025).
36.
RavazBBombengerPHCapezzaliM, et al. (2024) Reviewing 20 years of redevelopment trajectories of industrial sites literature and highlighting new research perspectives. Land Use Policy146: 107326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2024.107326
37.
RedwoodMESmithAMJSteinerA, et al. (2023) Community wealth building or local authority rhetoric?Local Economy37(7): 602–621. https://doi.org/10.1177/02690942231171657
38.
RizzoEPesceMPizzolL, et al. (2015) Brownfield regeneration in Europe: identifying stakeholder perceptions, concerns, attitudes and information needs. Land Use Policy48: 437–453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.06.012
39.
SeitsI (2024) Noblessner district in Tallinn: recycling the pasts to discover the futures. Journal of Eurasian Studies15(2): 213–226. https://doi.org/10.1177/18793665241267951
40.
SessaMRRussoASicaF (2022) Opinion paper on green deal for the urban regeneration of industrial brownfield land in Europe. Land Use Policy119: 106198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106198
41.
SkrabalJVybiralM (2025) Analysis of factors influencing brownfield redevelopment in the context of regional development. In: Building a Green Future Through Essential decision-Making Competencies. IGI Global Scientific Publishing, pp. 437–470.
42.
SkrabalJ (2020) What can we learn from brownfield databases? Exploring specifics of the location of brownfields in the Czech Republic. Geographia Technica15(2): 191–201. Available at: https://doi.org/10.21163/GT_2020.152.18
43.
SkrabalJChmielovaPTureckovaK, et al. (2021) Applicability of tools for brownfield regeneration in the Czech Republic: a regional perspective. Geographia Technica16(2): 132–148. https://doi.org/10.21163/gt_2021.162.11
44.
SunYLiHLeiS, et al. (2022) Redevelopment of urban brownfield sites in China: Motivation, history, policies and improved management. Eco-Environment & Health1: 63–72.
45.
ThorntonGFranzMEdwardsD, et al. (2007) The challenge of sustainability: incentives for brownfield regeneration in Europe. Environmental Science & Policy10(2): 116–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2006.08.008
46.
ToninSBonifaciP (2020) Assessment of brownfield redevelopment opportunities using a multi-tiered approach: a case in Italy. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences71: 100812. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2020.100812
47.
TvrdonMChmielovaP (2021) Interlinkages between strategic, financial and regional frameworks of brownfield regenerations: the case of the Czech Republic. Geographia Technica16(1): 113–127. https://doi.org/10.21163/gt_2021.161.10
48.
van den HurkMTasan-KokT (2020) Contractual arrangements and entrepreneurial governance: flexibility and leeway in urban regeneration projects. Urban Studies57(16): 3217–3235. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098019894277
49.
WhileAPendleburyJ (2025) Heritage protection as progressive urbanism? Modernist social housing in England. Antipode57(2): 734–757. https://doi.org/10.1111/anti.13127
50.
WillettJWilliamsMAkermanL, et al. (2025) Peripheralization and economic development: a multi-causal approach. European Planning Studies33(4): 471–490. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2025.2492180
ZhangYZhongYZhangG (2025) The correlation mechanism and transmission path of green regeneration of urban industrial brownfields from the perspective of social-ecological system resilience. Ecological Indicators177: 113753. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2025.113753
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
