Diversity and Development: Policy Entrepreneurship of Euroregional Initiatives in Central and Eastern Europe

Abstract

The article builds on the authors' research into the formation of Euroregions in Central and Eastern Europe, addressing questions that may also be relevant on a broader European scale. Based on our empirical findings, in previous research we demonstrated why some local governments join Euroregions while others abstain. This article takes a further step and aims to discuss what happens once local governments become involved in them. How do motivations and expectations of local governments, as well as the power asymmetries between them, determine the capacity of these small-scale local cross-border collaborative initiatives to act as policy entrepreneurs? We take the three different Euroregional initiatives present in the Komárom–Esztergom region at the Hungarian–Slovakian border as illustrative examples. The empirical data were collected through personal interviews with the representatives of the Euroregions and with the highest political representatives of all local governments that are members on the Hungarian side. We find that differences in membership structure and in the motivational background influence their capacity to act as policy entrepreneurs operationalized as organizational development, diversification of resource base and appropriation of cross-border cooperation activities. We thus rely on a modified version of Markus Perkmann's theoretical framework built around the concept of policy entrepreneurship, but apply it to cases where we are able to control for variations in underlying macro-level conditions, such as politico-administrative or ethno-linguistic settings. The paper, therefore, highlights the differences in the internal dynamics of these initiatives and also challenges the perception of Euroregions as homogeneous institutions.

Notes

The first article in the Journal of Borderlands Studies on cross-border cooperation in Europe (Scott 1993) dealt exclusively with Western Europe and saw developments primarily in the light of the introduction of the Single European Market and changing European regional policy. Special issues of the journal paid more attention to the developments in CEE (JBS 15 (1) 2000 and 20 (2) 2005).

The definition builds on Perkmann's description of Euroregions as “more or less institutionalized collaboration between contiguous subnational authorities across national borders” (Perkmann 2002, 104).

Celata and Coletti (2008) build their analysis on documents related to the 2000–2006, and 2007–2013 programming period of the European Union. The quote is from an English version published online. An extended version was published in Italian in 2011.

NUTS (“Nomenclature of Units for Territorial Statistics”) is the territorial statistical system of the European Union. In this paper we deal with the NUTS 3 level regions and with local governments as the lowest level of state administration, represented by the NUTS 5 or LAU 2 (Local Administrative Unit) level.

Source: http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/nuts_nomenclature/local_administrative_units (accessed February 1, 2013).

In 2009 tensions centered around a controversial Slovak language law that, among other things, aimed at enforcing increased use of Slovak geographic names. For somewhat longer reflection on the issue, see: http://www.spectator.sk/articles/view/36140/2/hungary_continues_to_criticise_slovak_language_law.html (accessed September 8, 2009).

Information provided by the German and Slovak National Self-governments (2010).

The Vág-Duna-Ipoly Euroregion (established in 1999), which was a cooperation at the regional level (between Nitra county in Slovakia and Komárom-Esztergom and Fejér counties in Hungary) without involving local governments, has long ago terminated its activity. An overly optimistic scholarly assessment of this Euroregion in this journal (Dancs et al. 2000) shows the perils of making too early evaluations about the functioning of cross-border initiatives.

As it is the case with numerous Euroregions, a Latin name was chosen to avoid giving preference to the Hungarian or the Slovak language. In this case Ister refers to the Danube, and Granum to the Garam river.

Three on the Hungarian side (Komárom, Kisbér and Tata), and three on the Slovak side: Kolárovo (Gúta), Komárno (Révkomárom) and Hurbanovo (Ógyalla).

While Pons-Danubii fulfils our definition of a Euroregion (a formalized cooperation initiative between subnational authorities in adjacent European countries), it does not form a geographically cohesive territory due to the deliberate exclusion of smaller settlements located in the neighborhood of the six towns. For a discussion at length on the crucial issue of whom to include (and exclude) in the formation process of the Euroregion, see Medve-Bálint and Svensson (2012).

http://portal.cor.europa.eu/egtc/en-US/news/Pages/PonsDanubii.aspx (accessed April 2, 2011).

Answers subsequently approved by the mayor after an interview with an administrative official on the indicated date at the premises of the local government.