Seminar 5: International lessons in crossborder

Transcription

1 ESRC seminar series Close Friends? Assessing the Impact of Greater Scottish Autonomy on the North of England Seminar 5: International lessons in crossborder cooperation 5 th December 2014 University College London Convenors: Prof. John Tomaney and Dr Claire Colomb, The Bartlett School of Planning, UCL

2 Welcome and introduction Keith Shaw, Northumbria University - overview of the ESRC seminar series Close Friends? Introduction to today s seminar - John Tomaney and Claire Colomb, UCL Bartlett School of Planning: Cross-border cooperation in Europe past and present. Setting the context The need for trans-boundary cooperation between and within states History, EU initiatives and typology of trans-boundary cooperation initiatives The impacts of trans-boundary cooperation Some guiding questions for today s discussion

3

4

5

6

7 The need for trans-boundary cooperation More or less institutionalized forms of cooperation between (sub-central) authorities from different states, aimed at the coordination and elaboration of common actions, policies or strategies. Necessary across national borders between different states and across regional borders within decentralized/federal states to overcome the consequences of the continuous borders which demarcate different legal and administrative systems

8 The need for trans-boundary cooperation in decentralised/federal countries Similar reasons as cooperation across national borders The question of political and policy divergence between devolved nations or regions In the UK: devolution and the emergence of new subnational planning spaces has generated a variety of spatial planning between and within the nations of the UK (Haughton et al., 2009). Scotland had a distinct planning system before devolution Similarity of spatial planning approaches between England and Scotland (Allmendinger 2006) or divergence (Lloyd and Peel 2009)? More interventionist, more pluralistic and corporatist? Sharpening of divergence with UK central government after 2010 (Tomaney and Colomb 2013) Policy divergence in various fields?

9 Source: National Planning Framework For Scotland, 2009 National Planning Framework for Scotland

10 Metropolregion Hamburg

11 The need for trans-boundary cooperation the EU perspective Border effects Cross border mobility of people and goods Wide differences in levels of economic development between border regions: territorial cooperation as a tool for the EU cohesion objective - help regions which are lagging behind Common policy issues Soft Europeanisation : exchange of good practices ( supranational idea hopper, Bomberg & Peterson 2000)

12 Cross-border / transnational policy issues affect a transnational zone beyond national borders cannot be appropriately tackled by local, regional or national action only require cooperation between actors of several countries.

13 Management of natural risks: flood, fire, avalanches, storms

14 The Öresund Bridge between Denmark and Sweden: major transport infrastructure supporting the development of a joint labour market

15 Common policy issues are faced by different cities and regions in various parts of the European territory, not necessarily geographically contiguous could be addressed at local, regional or national level but benefit from exchanges of experience and transfers of know-how between networks of actors at European level for more innovative and efficient solutions Lyon Glasgow Berlin

16 History of trans-boundary cooperation Trans-boundary cooperation: preserve of central state actors until the 1980s (sub-central levels of government not legal subjects according to international law / not allowed to conclude international treaties with foreign authorities) 1960s-1970s: bi- or multilateral governmental commissions for inter-state cooperation (Benelux, Nordic Council or International Commission of the Pyrenees) - not open to local authorities

17 History of trans-boundary cooperation First Euroregion created in 1958 at the German-Dutch border, followed by others alongside the borders between France, Germany, Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. 1971: Association of European Border Regions (AEBR) 1980: Madrid Convention (Council of Europe) allowed subcentral state actors to enter into cross-border cooperation agreements. 1980s: Strengthening of the role of local and regional authorities in Europe (devolution and decentralisation) Reform and expansion of EU Regional Policy - creation of INTERREG programmes in Major impetus for transboundary cooperation initiatives.

18 EU-funded programmes for trans-boundary cooperation since 1990: : INTERREG I : INTERREG II : INTERREG III : European Territorial Cooperation (INTERREG IV) : European Territorial Cooperation Cross-border cooperation (bottom-up initiatives without EC/EU support) Transnational cooperation I (31 programm es) Energy networks IIA (59 programmes) IIB Inter-regional cooperation IIC (7 progra mmes ) IIIA (64 programmes) IIIB (13 programmes) IIIC European territorial cooperation (IVA) (52 programmes) European territorial cooperation (IVB) (13 programmes) European territorial cooperation (IVC) Financed by European Regional Development Fund : 8.7 billion (2,5% of EU Cohesion policy budget) : 10,2 billion (out of 352 billion total budget for EU Cohesion policy) Horizontal support programmes ECU 1.1bn ECU 3.5bn SP ES P ESPON 2006 INTERAC T EUR 4.9bn ESPON 2013 INTERACT EUR 8.7bn

19 European territorial cooperation Part of EU Cohesion Policy now called European Territorial Cooperation. 3 strands: Cross-border Transnational Interregional Budget for : 10.2bn (2.9% of EU Cohesion Policy budget). ssborder/index_en.cfm

20 Cross-border Cooperation (INTERREG A) 53 programmes along internal EU borders

21 The UK is part of 4 cross-border programmes

22 Transnational Cooperation (INTERREG B) 15 programmes

23 North West Europe North Sea Atlantic Area Northern Periphery The UK is part of 4 transnational programmes

24 Inter-regional cooperation To improve the effectiveness of policies and instruments for regional development and cohesion through networking, transfer of know-how and good practice. One programme of interregional cooperation (which covers the whole of the EU territory), INTERREG C 3 networking programmes (ESPON, Urbact, Interact)

25 Cooperation programmes alongside the EU s external borders Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA) Partnerships with EU candidate countries and potential candidate countries. Include cross-border cooperation strand. European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI) Co-operation programmes between EU and partner countries (East / South). Include cross-border cooperation strand. Managed by DG EuropeAid:

26 Other forms of trans-boundary cooperation between sub-central actors in the EU Inter-city networks (Eurocities, Neighbourhoods in Crisis etc ) Local or regional governments associations (Conference of Peripheral and Maritime Regions) Euroregions / Eurodistricts Emerging macro-regions with EU backing = A complex landscape / mosaic of different scales and forms of transboundary cooperation in Europe

27

28 Cross-border cooperation initiatives in the EU those whose main protagonists are public subnational authorities in different countries, concerned with practical problem-solving in a broad range of fields of everyday administrative life, and which involve a certain stabilization of cross-border contacts, i.e. institution-building, over time (Perkman 2003, Oliveras González et al. 2010) Euroregions, Eurodistricts, Working Communities Mid-1980s: 20; 2003: 73; 2007: 133 Virtually all border regions in Europe are now involved in some form of cooperation, but the type and intensity of cooperation varies enormously between them.

29 Typology of forms of trans-boundary cooperation: key variables (i) Key actors/tiers of government Topics and objectives of trans-boundary cooperation Geographical scope: the extent to which cooperation is based on geographical contiguity between actors across one (or several) national border(s) or based on networking between non-contiguous cities and regions Scale: In case of geographical contiguity: various scales of cooperation micro-cooperation involving actors located immediately alongside a national border (e.g. in a km wide strip) meso-level cooperation emerging European macro-regional strategies at the EU level

30 Typology of forms of trans-boundary cooperation: key variables (ii) Institutionalisation: existence of formal institutional structures with legal status vs cooperation based on individual, time-limited projects or informal networks formation of a new permanent structure composed of regional and local authorities on either side of a border, which can take various forms in legal and organizational terms 2006: EU regulation on European Groupings of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC) new instrument with legal status made up of national, regional, local authorities and/or bodies governed by public law from two or more member states. 2013: 45 EGTCs in the EU, which included about 750 national, local and regional authorities from 20 different EU Member States (CoR, 2014).

31 Typology of forms of trans-boundary cooperation: key variables (iii) Cooperation intensity: even when a formal cross-border structure is in place the actual success of the cooperation relies on the active engagement of various policy entrepreneurs, policy networks and public and private actors who play a key role as inceptors or facilitators of concrete projects. Oliveras González et al. (2010): the strategic capacity gained by the cross-border body and its degree of autonomy vis-à-vis the central state and other authorities

32 Colomb, 2007

33 The impacts of trans-boundary cooperation A vast amount of research in geography, regional studies, political science, border studies, planning and sociology (Institutionalized) trans-boundary cooperation: producing another soft, but institutionalized, comprehensive, stable and territorially-defined layer in the European multi-levelsystem (Blatter, 2004)? Cautious assessments of the long-term structural impacts of such forms of collaboration in terms of policy change and rescaling of public policies, strategic planning and territorial development strategies (Dühr and Nadin, 2007: Dühr et al., 2010).

34 The impacts of trans-boundary cooperation That trans-boundary cooperation and the dissemination of best practice can lead to policy change has become an accepted wisdom within national policies and programmes, as well as in international arenas and networks (Bulkeley, 2006: 1030). Cross-border and transnational programmes have often helped to overcome institutional inertia, mobilising financial resources, stimulating economic, social and cultural exchanges and new relationships. Second, they have facilitated policy transfer and institutional adaptation through networks (Barca 2009: 97-98).

35 New macro-regional strategies? EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region the Danube Region the Adriatic & Ionian Region (proposed by the EC in June 2014).

36 Today s seminar: looking at some European case-studies in cross-border cooperation Republic of Ireland / Northern Ireland Overall perspective on CBC and innovation (OECD) France/Belgium: Lille - Kortrijk Tournai Internal cooperation between regions in Belgium Spain/Portugal & Spain/France (Galicia, Catalonia, Basque Country)

37 Guiding questions To what extent have past cross-border cooperation experiments and practices successfully addressed pressing territorial, economic and social development issues, and led to innovative forms of collaboration between public, private and civil society actors across borders? What are the main challenges present in such forms of cooperation? How is cross-border cooperation mobilized within the wider politics of territorial governance, regional/national identity building and nationalist politics? What lessons can be learned for Scotland and the North- East of England?

38 Guiding questions - the local politics of crossborder governance Gualini (2003: 4): Are the incentives for cross-border co-operation sufficient for promoting innovative forms of collective action and for realising an effective concurrence of resources? Are the incentives for cross-border co-operation sufficient for building new coalitions and governance regimes? Finally, are cross-border coalitions and governance regimes stable enough to address forms of institutionalization that may grant them both autonomy and accountability?