The economic differences across the EU-15 became moderate in the long term; the performance of less developed countries and regions levelled up to the EU average. The enlargements in 2004 and 2007 although increased the development imbalance, from 1.7 times in 2000 to 4.1 times in 2007; while the development gap between least and best developed regions increased to 9 times from 4.4 times. The poorest regions of the EU are found in the central-eastern countries. In 2000 only Bulgarian, Romanian and Polish regions belonged to the poorest 15 regions of the EU, in 2007 Northern Great Plain and Northern Hungary appeared on this list, too. Each of the least developed regions is situated in the CEEC countries and along the eastern border of the EU. The study examines and compares the development of regions in European Union and Central-Eastern Europe. In the latter country group case's, it presents the development of regions inside single countries, so inside special economic places. The EU-wide studies show, that the four least-developped EU-countries (Greece, Portugal, Spain, Ireland) had lower per capita GDP in 1960 than EU-15 average: Portugal 40, Greece 43, Spain 57, Ireland 61 per cent level reached. By 2000 Portugal and Greece 68, Spain 82, Ireland 115 per cent level reached. If we ignore Luxemburg, because of its small size, the developmental differences is 3,1 fold in 1960, and 1,7 fold in 2000, between the most- and least-advanced EU-15 countries. The developmental defferences beetwen EU-15 countries has moderated in the longer term, so performance of the less developed countries has approached the EU average. On 1 Maj, 2004 was the most important enlargement of Euroepan Union. The developmental differences between the most- and least-advanced countries increased (calculated 134% in Ireland and 43% in Latvia) from 1,7- to 3,1 fold, because of accession of Cyprus and Malta, 2000 per year by 2004. The developmental differences further increased in 2007 because of accession of Bulgaria and Romania. Per capita GDP of Bulgaria and Romania was 38 or 40% of average of EU-25 in the year of accession, so the developmental differences between the most- and least advanced countries increased (calculated 148% in Ireland and 38% in Bulgaria) from 3,1- to 4,1 fold, 2004 per year by 2007. The differences in territorial development are even greater in all of EU regions. The developmental differences measured by GDP was 5,2 fold between the most- advanced Inner London and the least-advanced Iperios in 2000. This difference increased to 8,4 fold at expansion of the EU-25, and to 13 fold at expansion of the EU-27 (calculated Inner London 334 and North-West Bulgaria 26%). Spatial policy also pay a particular attention to the exploration of regional differences within single countries. The performance of the most advanced region was twice as big as the least advanced ones in 2000 and 2007, meanwhile this difference increased from 2 to 2,5 fold in the recently joined Central-Eastern European countries. Considoring the second most advanced and the least developed region, it may be concluded, that the regional differences are less in the Central-Eastern Europe. The regions are more homogeneous, so the level of development is closer together than in Western Europe. The Central-Eastern Europe wide studies show, the former socialist countries' economic performance declined in the millenium. The highest level of development has been reached by Czech Republik and Slovenia. The two countries, mentioned about it was the most advanced Central-Eastern European countries in 2007 at the recent accession. Contrast, per capita GDP of Romania and Bulgaria has been only 38 or 42 per cent of average of EU-27. This rate was 63% in Hungary. Czech, Slovak, Hungarian and Polish regions were on the top list of Central-Eastern European countries in 2000. Between above regions, only the development of Prague has been higher than average of EU. All the NUTS-2 regions of Central and Eastern countries were on the 2007th year's top list and performance of four regions (Prague, Bratislava, Central Hungarian, Zahodna Slovenija) has been higher than the average of EU. Between the 15 poorest regions only Romanian, Bulgars and Polish region were in 2000, however, Northern Plains and Northern Hungary also appeared on the list in 2007. There were seven-fold differences, betwen the regions with extreme (highest and lowest) value (North-East in Romania, Severozapaden in Bulgaria and Prague) in 2000 and 2007. The reachest regions are usually located in the area with capital (Prague, area of Bratislava, Central Hubgary, Mazowieckie), or near the capital (Stredni Cechy, Jihovichod, Jihozapad in Czech Republik) or rather by the borders of states accessioned previously to EU. This is the caracteristics of economic structure in Central-Eastern Europe. The poorest regions are located along the eastern borders of EU (5 in Bulgaria, 5 in Romania, 3 in Poland and 2 in Hungary). On the basis of regional performance, Prague stands out (the capital is autonomous, NUTS-2 level, territorial units) which was the 5th - with 42,800 euroes per capita GDP - in the development order in 2007. In Hungary, three regions - Central Hungary, Western Transdanubia, Central Transdanubia - are permanently on the top of the list. Southern Transdanubia and Southern Great Plains are in the middle of the list, lagging significantly behind the leading group. Nothern Hungary and Northern Great Plains are at the end of the list, with slightly worsening position. The development of the Hungarian regions - with the exception of Central Hungarian including the capital city - is significantly below the average of the EU-27. GDP per capita of Hungary was 37% less than the average of the EU in 2007. Before the accesion, a moderate economic performance was showed by the regions of Central-Eastern Europe. Most of the regions (46 of 53) have not accomplished even the half of the average of the EU. The measure of the regional differences - depending on the pace of the economic development - has been different in the single member states, but it has increased totally. In the millenium, between the performance difference of the most advanced and most backward region was the lowest rate in Bulgaria and Romania. In the other countries the differences were more than twice. By 2007, the differences of regional development were the lowest in Bulgaria and Poland. Under seven years, the economic inequality between the regions has increased not only in the single countries, but in all the analysed member states.
