The Europeanization of territoriality and its limits: the territorial dimension of EU cohesion policy and its varying implementation

References

• Agnew, J. 1994. “The Territorial Trap: The Geographical Assumptions of International Relations Theory.” Review of International Political Economy 1 (1): 53–80.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Agnew, J. 2015. “Revisiting the Territorial Trap.” Nordia Geographical Publications 44 (4): 43–48.
   Google Scholar
• Allmendinger, P., T. Chilla, and F. Sielker. 2014. “Europeanizing Territoriality—Towards Soft Spaces?” Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space 46 (11): 2703–2717. doi:10.1068/a130037p
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, K. M., and M. Kaeding. 2015. “European Integration and Pension Policy Change: Variable Patterns of Europeanization in Italy, the Netherlands and Belgium.” British Journal of Industrial Relations 53 (2): 231–253. doi:10.1111/bjir.12030
   Google Scholar
• Bachtler, J., and I. McMaster. 2008. “EU Cohesion Policy and the Role of the Regions: Investigating the Influence of Structural Funds in the New Member States.” Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 26 (2): 398–427. doi:10.1068/c0662
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bachtrögler, J., U. Fratesi, and G. Perucca. 2020. “The Influence of the Local Context on the Implementation and Impact of EU Cohesion Policy.” Regional Studies 54 (1): 21–34. doi:10.1080/00343404.2018.1551615
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barca, F. 2009. Agenda for a Reformed Cohesion Policy. Brussels: European Communities.
   Google Scholar
• Baun, M. J., and D. Marek. 2002. “Příprava České republiky na regionální politiku Evropské unie-regionalismus versus centralizace.” Czech Journal of International Relations 37 (4): 68–86.
   Google Scholar
• Beach, D., and R. B. Pedersen. 2013. Process-tracing Methods: Foundations and Guidelines. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Benz, A. 2000. “Two Types of Multi-level Governance: Intergovernmental Relations in German and EU Regional Policy.” Regional & Federal Studies 10 (3): 21–44. doi:10.1080/13597560008421130
   Google Scholar
• Boggero, G. 2016. “The Establishment of Metropolitan Cities in Italy: An Advance or a Setback for Italian Regionalism?” Perspectives on Federalism 8: E-1–E-22. doi:10.1515/pof-2016-0014
   Google Scholar
• Börzel, T. A., and T. Risse. 2003. “Conceptualizing the Domestic Impact of Europe.” In The Politics of Europeanization, edited by T. Börzel et al., 57–80. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brenner, N. 2009. “Open Questions on State Rescaling.” Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society 2 (1): 123–139. doi:10.1093/cjres/rsp002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brusis, M. 2005. “The Instrumental use of European Union Conditionality: Regionalization in the Czech Republic and Slovakia.” East European Politics and Societies: And Cultures 19 (2): 291–316. doi:10.1177/0888325404272063
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bucek, M. 1999. “Regional Disparities in Transition in the Slovak Republic.” European Urban and Regional Studies 6 (4): 360–364. doi:10.1177/096977649900600411
   Google Scholar
• Capello, R., A. Caragliu, and U. Fratesi. 2015. “Spatial Heterogeneity in the Costs of the Economic Crisis in Europe: Are Cities Sources of Regional Resilience?” Journal of Economic Geography 15 (5): 951–972. doi:10.1093/jeg/lbu053
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Charles, D. (2016). Cohesion Policy in the Service Economies of the North. In Handbook on Cohesion Policy in the EU, edited by S. Piattoni and L. Polverari, 250–267. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Clark, J., and A. Jones. 2008. “The Spatialities of Europeanisation: Territory, Government and Power in ‘EUrope’.” Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 33 (3): 300–318. doi:10.1111/j.1475-5661.2008.00309.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, J. R., and A. R. Jones. 2009. “Europeanisation and its Discontents.” Space and Polity 13 (3): 193–212. doi:10.1080/13562570903454291
   Google Scholar
• Crivello, S., and L. Staricco. 2017. “Institutionalizing Metropolitan Cities in Italy. Success and Limits of a Centralistic, Simplifying Approach.” Urban Research & Practice 10 (2): 228–238.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dąbrowski, M. 2012. “Shallow or Deep Europeanisation? The Uneven Impact of EU Cohesion Policy on the Regional and Local Authorities in Poland.” Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 30 (4): 730–745. doi:10.1068/c1164r
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dallhammer, E., R. Gaugitsch, W. Neugebauer, and K. Böhme. 2018. Spatial Planning and governance within EU policies and legislation and their relevance to the New Urban Agenda. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10. 2863/0251.
   Google Scholar
• Deas, L., and A. Lord. 2006. “From a new Regionalism to an Unusual Regionalism? The Emergence of Non-standard Regional Spaces and Lessons for the Territorial Reorganisation of the State.” Urban Studies 43 (10): 1847–1877. doi:10.1080/00420980600838143
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Della Porta, D. 2008. “Comparative Analysis: Case-Oriented Versus Variable-Oriented Research.” In Approaches and Methodologies in the Social Sciences, edited by D. Della Porta and M. Keating, 198–222. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Deutsch-Österreichisches Urban Netzwerk. 2017. Die Förderung von Stadt-Umland-Partnerschaften durch die Europäischen Strukturfonds Halbzeitbilanz und Perspektiven der EU-Förderung nach 2020. https://www.deutscher-verband.org/fileadmin/user_upload/documents/Netzwerke/</objidref>URBAN/Netzwerktagungen/. 67._UNT_Luckenwalde/Dokumentation_67.UNT_Luckenwalde.pdf»
   Google Scholar
• Dočkal, V., and M. Kozlová. 2006. “Regionální politika v České republice.” In Regionální politika EU a naplňování principu partnerství. Případové studie České republiky, Německa a Slovinska, edited by V. Dočkal, 17–55. Brno: Masarykova univerzita.
   Google Scholar
• Doucet, P. 2006. “Territorial Cohesion of Tomorrow: A Path to Cooperation or Competition?” European Planning Studies 14 (10): 1473–1485. doi:10.1080/09654310600852449
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elden, S. 2010. “Land, Terrain, Territory.” Progress in Human Geography 34 (6): 799–817. doi:10.1177/0309132510362603
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2012. Stanovisko útvarů Komise k vývoji v oblasti Dohody o partnerství a programů v České republice pro období 2014–2020. https://www.mmr.cz/getmedia/85e80a88-140a-4b78-b2b7-73dbefd0c8e7/Pozicni-dokument-FINAL.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Faludi, A. 2016. “The Territoriality of Cohesion Policy.” In Handbook on Cohesion Policy in the EU, edited by S. Piattoni and L. Polverari, 491–505. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer, M., and P. Sciarini. 2013. “Europeanization and the Inclusive Strategies of Executive Actors.” Journal of European Public Policy 20 (10): 1482–1498. doi:10.1080/13501763.2013.781800
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Formánková, H. 2018. “Die tschechische Regionalpolitik.” In Das politische System Tschechiens, edited by A. Lorenz and H. Formánková, 223–243. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.
   Google Scholar
• Graziano, P. R. 2010. “From Local Partnerships to Regional Spaces for Politics? Europeanization and EU Cohesion Policy in Southern Italy.” Regional & Federal Studies 20 (3): 315–333. doi:10.1080/13597566.2010.484568
   Google Scholar
• Havlík, V. 2018. “Competing Discourses of Territorial Development: Tensions Between Cities and Regions as a Result of the New Regionalism.” European Planning Studies 26 (10): 1999–2014. doi:10.1080/09654313.2018.1504894
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Havlík, V. 2020. “Europeanization as the Reterritorialization of the State: Towards Conceptual Clarification.” JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies 58 (5): 1288–1306. doi:10.1111/jcms.13031
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knieling, J. 2016. Climate Adaptation Governance in Cities and Regions: Theoretical Fundamentals and Practical Evidence. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Lang, T., and I. Török. 2017. “Metropolitan Region Policies in the European Union: Following National, European or Neoliberal Agendas?” International Planning Studies 22 (1): 1–13. doi:10.1080/13563475.2017.1310652
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leipzig Charter. 2007. LEIPZIG CHARTER on Sustainable European Cities. https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/archive/themes/urban/leipzig_charter.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Longo, E., and G. Mobilio. 2016. “Territorial Government Reforms at the Time of Financial Crisis: The Dawn of Metropolitan Cities in Italy.” Regional & Federal Studies 26 (4): 509–530. doi:10.1080/13597566.2016.1210603
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luukkonen, J., and H. Moilanen. 2012. “Territoriality in the Strategies and Practices of the Territorial Cohesion Policy of the European Union: Territorial Challenges in Implementing “Soft Planning”.” European Planning Studies 20 (3): 481–500. doi:10.1080/09654313.2012.651806
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mazák, J. 2017. “Process Tracing: zkoumání kauzality v případových studiích.” Sociológia-Slovak Sociological Review 49 (1): 55–80.
   Google Scholar
• Medeiros, E. 2016. “Territorial Cohesion: An EU Concept.” European Journal of Spatial Development 60: 1–30.
   Google Scholar
• Mendez, C. 2013. “The Post-2013 Reform of EU Cohesion Policy and the Place-based Narrative.” Journal of European Public Policy 20 (5): 639–659. doi:10.1080/13501763.2012.736733
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ministero dell’Economia e delle Finanze. 2013. Economic and financial document 2013. Section III – National reform programme. Abridged version. https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/file_import/nrp2013_italy_en_0.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Ministerstvo pro místní rozvoj (MMR). 2006. Strategie regionálního rozvoje ČR (2007–2013).
   Google Scholar
• Murphy, A. B. 2008. “Rethinking Multi-level Governance in a Changing European Union: Why Metageography and Territoriality Matter.” GeoJournal 72 (1-2): 7–18. doi:10.1007/s10708-008-9161-9
   Google Scholar
• Murphy, A. B. 2013. “Territory's Continuing Allure.” Annals of the Association of American Geographers 103 (5): 1212–1226. doi:10.1080/00045608.2012.696232
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polverari, L. 2016. “Cohesion Policy in the Southern Periphery.” In Handbook on Cohesion Policy in the EU, edited by S. Piattoni and L. Polverari, 231–249. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Pon metro. 2019. National Operational Programme “Metropolitan Cities 2014/2020”. http://www.ponmetro.it/eng/.
   Google Scholar
• Purkarthofer, E. 2018. “Diminishing Borders and Conflating Spaces: A Storyline to Promote Soft Planning Scales.” European Planning Studies 26 (5): 1008–1027. doi:10.1080/09654313.2018.1430750
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Radaelli, C. M. 2000. “Whither Europeanization? Concept Stretching and Substantive Change.” European Integration Online Papers (EIoP) 4: 8.
   Google Scholar
• Risse, T., M. G. Cowles and J. Caporaso. 2001. “Europeanization and Domestic Change: Introduction.” In Transforming Europe: Europeanization and Domestic Change, edited by M. G. Cowles, J. Caporaso and T. Risse, 1–20. Ithaca: Cornell Univesity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Scherpereel, J. A. 2010. “EU Cohesion Policy and the Europeanization of Central and East European Regions.” Regional & Federal Studies 20 (1): 45–62. doi:10.1080/13597560903174899
   Google Scholar
• Stead, D. 2014. “The Rise of Territorial Governance in European Policy.” European Planning Studies 22 (7): 1368–1383. doi:10.1080/09654313.2013.786684
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Territorial Agenda 2020. 2011. Territorial Agenda of the European Union 2020. Towards an Inclusive, Smart and Sustainable Europe of Diverse Regions. https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/policy/what/territorial-cohesion/territorial_agenda_2020.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Territorial Agenda 2030. 2021. Territorial Agenda 2030, https://territorialagenda.eu/wp-content/uploads/TA2030_jun2021_en.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Úrad podpredsedu Vlády SR pre investície a informatizáciu. 2018. Národný investičný plán SR na roky 2018-2030. https://www.vicepremier.gov.sk/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/03-NIP-SR-Vlastny-material-2018-04-25.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Vinci, I. 2021. “How the EU Regional Policy Can Shape Urban Change in Southern Europe: Learning from Different Planning Processes in Palermo.” Urban Research & Practice 14 (4): 445–470. doi:10.1080/17535069.2019.1672083
   Google Scholar
• Walsh, C. 2014. “Rethinking the Spatiality of Spatial Planning: Methodological Territorialism and Metageographies.” European Planning Studies 22 (2): 306–322. doi:10.1080/09654313.2012.741568
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yoder, J. A. 2007. “Leading the Way to Regionalization in Post-communist Europe: An Examination of the Process and Outcomes of Regional Reform in Poland.” East European Politics and Societies: And Cultures 21 (03): 424–446. doi:10.1177/0888325407303786
   Google Scholar