Cross-border cooperation in the EU: Euroregions amid multilevel governance and re-territorialization

ABSTRACT

Today, cross-border cooperation promoted by Euroregions all over the European Union is a consolidating reality. The article focuses on Euroregions as formal organizations in the field of cross-border cooperation. By using a data set of 61 Euroregions considered to be particularly active, the study investigates the characteristics of cross-border cooperation agreements. For each Euroregion, cross-country comparisons take into account the following essential parameters: the number of actors involved in the agreement, their administrative and political nature, as well as the official goals pursued. From a descriptive perspective, the study aims to provide some useful classifications regarding the wide variety of cross-border experiences that have developed in Europe in recent decades. From the analytical perspective, the paper challenges enthusiastic claims that interpret Euroregions as effective political instruments for re-territorialization or new modes of cross-border multilevel governance.

KEYWORDS:

• Euroregion
• cross-border cooperation
• multilevel governance
• re-territorialization
• comparative analysis

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

ORCID

Matteo Berzi http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3669-9397

Notes

1 For a review of multilevel governance, see Stephenson (2013).

2 For D. North, institutions are ‘the rules of the game’. In general terms, institutions reduce uncertainty and information costs by enhancing in this way the possibility of developing some collective action. Transaction costs refer to any cost actors incur when they make a transaction.

3 Due to the documented difficulties in applying transnational regulations to cross-border cooperation practices (MOT, 2017), it is important to point out that each of these instruments is usually subjected to the domestic law of the state where the Euroregion was legally established.

4 EEIG and ECGs, in this sense, strongly resemble the functional logic of the EGTC. The first instrument is usually used for cross-border economic activities that involve private actors and for which a legal personality is also required. However, the main limitation of EEIGs lies in the restricted scope of the intervention, which should pertain to the economic activity of its members, and therefore excludes any additional cross-border cooperation features. Even more similar to the EGTC, the ECG also facilitates the creation of a legal personality that manages the cross-border initiative on behalf of its members.

5 For a more detailed methodological explanation, see Durà et al. (2018).

6 Furthermore, a geographical consideration criterion was applied when collecting relevant cases from all over the EU. After identifying a solid nucleus of best practices in the central and northern part of the European continent, we still wanted to achieve a degree of equal representation across all the EU borders.

7 Apart from multilevel Euroregions, there has been a certain amount of cross-border experience at equivalent levels of government (exclusively between local entities or between supra-local and supra-local, etc.). However, the latter model is the one that is least employed for cooperation.

8 Duero-Douro, EUREGIO (Gronau Euroregion), Glacensis Euroregion, Inn-Salzach Euregio, Pomerania Euroregio, Praded Euroregion, Salzburg - Berchtesgardener Land - Traunstein Euregio, Strasbourg-Ortenau Eurodistrict, Tatry Euroregion, Via Salina Euregio.

9 Such is the case of the Strasbourg-Ortenau Eurodistrict and its cross-border cooperation project for creating a ‘Cross-Border Medical Cabinet for the Treatment of Addiction’. In the context of this initiative, a joint medical institution was created for drug addiction treatments for both French and German citizens in the Euroregional territory. Clearly, the project represented a clear example of social innovation promoted by public administrations on both sides of the border.

10 The CAWT Region (Co-Operation and Working Together) of cross-border health cooperation between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland and the FinEst Link Helsinki-Tallinn (former Helsinki-Tallinn Euroregion). The latter case is even more interesting because of the operational choice to shift from a multi-sectorial Euroregion to an organization entirely focused on cross-border transport and the construction of road infrastructure (hence a large-scale project), easing mobility between the two cities.

Additional information

Funding

This research was conducted in the framework of the research project CS02013-45257-P funded by Spanish Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad (MINECO) called ‘Territorial Cooperation in Spain and the EU: A selection of guiding experiences for Excellency and Innovation in the 2014–2020 period’ (COOP-RECOT II).