Territorial Impact Assessment and Cross-Border Cooperation

References

• AEBR . (2004). European charter for border and cross-border regions . Gronau: AEBR – Draft New Version.
   Google Scholar
• AEBR . (2008). Cooperation between European border regions . Baden-Baden: AEBR - NOMOS.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, J. , O’Dowd, L. , & Wilson, T. (2005). New borders for a changing Europe – Cross-border cooperation and governance. The case studies in regional and federal studies . London: Frank Cass.
   Google Scholar
• Barca, F. (2009). An agenda for a reformed cohesion policy. A placed-based approach to meeting European Union challenges and expectations . Independent Report prepared at the request of Danuta Hübner, Commissioner for Regional Policy. Brussels.
   Google Scholar
• Brenner, N. (2000). Building Euro-regions, locational politics and the political geography of neoliberalism in post-unification Germany. European Urban and Regional Studies , 7 , 319–345.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chilla, T. , Evrard, E. , & Schulz, C. (2012). On the territoriality of cross-border cooperation: “Institutional Mapping” in a multi-level context. European Planning Studies , 20 , 961–980.10.1080/09654313.2012.673563
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Church, A. , & Reid, P. (1996). Urban power, international networks and competition: The example of cross-border cooperation. Urban Studies , 33 , 1297–1318.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delaney, D. (2009). Territory and territoriality. In R. Kitchin and N. Thrift (Eds.), International encyclopedia of human geography (pp. 196–208). Oxford: Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Dicken, P. (2011). Global shift. Mapping the changing contours of the world economy (6th ed.). London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Dühr, S. , Colomb, C. , & Vincent, N. (Eds.). (2010). European spatial planning and territorial cooperation . London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• EC . (1999). MEANS – Evaluation socio-economic programmes – Evaluating design and management (Vol. 1). Luxembourg: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• EC . (2005). Impact assessment guidelines . Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• EC . (2007, May 24/25). Territorial agenda of the European Union. Towards a more competitive and sustainable Europe of diverse regions . Leipzig: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• EC . (2008a, October). Green paper on territorial cohesion. Turning territorial diversity into strength . Communication from the Commission to the Council, The European Parliament, The Committee of the Regions and the European Economic and Social Committee. Brussels.
   Google Scholar
• EC . (2008b). EVALSED – The resource for the evaluation for socio-economic development . Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• EC . (2009, January 15). Impact assessment guidelines . Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• EC . (2010a, November). Investing in Europe’s future: Fifth report on economic, social and territorial cohesion . Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• EC . (2010b, March 30). Lisbon treaty . Official Journal of the European Union C83 (Vol. 53). Brussels.
   Google Scholar
• EC . (2010c). Evaluation regional policy. Insights and results , Panorama 33. European Commission, Directorate-general for Regional Policy.
   Google Scholar
• EC . (2011). Territorial agenda of the European Union 2020. Towards an inclusive, smart and sustainable Europe of diverse regions , agreed at the Informal Ministerial Meeting of Ministers responsible for Spatial Planning and Territorial Development on 19th May 2011, Gödöllő.
   Google Scholar
• EC . (2013, January 17). Assessing territorial impacts: Operational guidance on how to assess regional and local impacts within the commission impact assessment system . SWD(2013) 3 final. Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• EC . (2014, July). Sixth report on economic, social and territorial cohesion. investment for jobs and growth: Promoting development and good governance in EU regions and cities . Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• ESPON . (2007). Cross-border cooperation – Cross thematic study of INTERREG and ESPON activities . Luxembourg: ESPON, Interact.
   Google Scholar
• ESPON . (2013). Territorial impact assessment of policies and EU directives , A practical guidance on contributions from ESPON projects and the European Commission. Luxembourg: ESPON.
   Google Scholar
• ESPON 3.2 . (2006). Spatial scenarios and orientations in relation to the ESDP and cohesion Policy , Final Report. Luxemburg: ESPON.
   Google Scholar
• ESPON ARTS . (2012). Assessment of regional and territorial sensitivity , Applied Research 2013/1/17. Final Report, Version 29/06/2012, Luxemburg.
   Google Scholar
• ESPON EATIA . (2013). ESPON and territorial impact assessment . Targeted Analysis, Final Report, Version 2012, June 29. Luxemburg.
   Google Scholar
• ESPON TIPTAP . (2010). Territorial impact package for transport and agricultural policies . Applied Research Project 2013/1/6 Final Report – Part A and B. The ESPON 2013 Programme, Luxemburg.
   Google Scholar
• Faludi, A. (2004). Territorial cohesion: Old (French) Wine in new bottles? Urban Studies , 41 , 1349–1365.10.1080/0042098042000214833
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faludi, A. (2010). Cohesion, coherence, cooperation: European spatial planning coming of age? London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Fricke, C. (2014, November 4). Spatial governance across borders revisited: Organizational forms and spatial planning in metropolitan cross-border regions. European Planning Studies . Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2014.887661
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graute, U. (2007). European territorial co-operation to improve competitiveness of the union. In J. Ulijn , D. Drílon and F. Lasch (Eds.), Entrepreneurship, cooperation and the firm: The emergence and survival of high-technology ventures in Europe (pp. 287–315). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, ISBN 9781845427092.
   Google Scholar
• Gualini, E. (2008, March). Territorial cohesion as a category of agency: The missing dimension in the EU spatial policy debate, Refereed Articles. European Journal of Spatial Development . Retrieved from http://www.nordregio.se/EJSD/refereed28.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, C. (2009). Cross-border regions and territorial restructuring in central Europe: Room for more transboundary space. European Urban and Regional Studies , 16 , 177–191.10.1177/0969776409102190
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knippschil, R. (2011). Cross-border spatial planning: Understanding, designing and managing cooperation processes in the German–Polish–Czech Borderland. European Planning Studies , 19 , 629–645.10.1080/09654313.2011.548464
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krätke, S. (1998). Problems of cross-border regional integration: The case of the German-Polish border area. European Urban and Regional Studies , 5 , 249–262.10.1177/096977649800500304
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawrence, R. (2011). Deriving collaborative aims and outcomes: A case-study of cross-border cooperation in central and eastern Europe. Evaluation , 17 , 365–382.10.1177/1356389011421927
   Google Scholar
• Mackinnon, D. , & Cumbers, A. (2011). Introduction to economic geography – Globalization, uneven development and place . Essex: Pearson Education Limited.
   Google Scholar
• Medeiros, E. (2010). Old vs Recent Cross-Border Cooperation: Portugal-Spain and Sweden-Norway. AREA , 42 (4), 434–443.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Medeiros, E. (2011). (Re)defining the concept of Euroregion. European Planning Studies , 19 (1), 141–158.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Medeiros, E. (2012). A Coesão Territorial. O Conceito e o seu significado na Política de Coesão da EU, Núcleo de Estratégias Territoriais . Centro de Estudos Geográficos, IGOT, Lisbon University, Lisbon.
   Google Scholar
• Medeiros, E. (2013a). Assessing Territorial Impacts of the EU Cohesion Policy: The Portuguese Case. European Planning Studies , 22 (9), 1960–1988.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Medeiros, E. (2013b). Euro-Meso-Macro. The new regions in Iberian and European space. Regional Studies , 47 (8), 1249–1266.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Molle, W. (2007). European cohesion policy . Oxon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Niebuhr, A. (2004). Spatial effects of European integration: Do border regions benefit above average? (HWWA Discussion Paper No. 307), 1–26.
   Google Scholar
• O’Dowd, L. (2002). The changing significance of European borders. Regional & Federal Studies , 12 (4), 13–36.
   Google Scholar
• Perkmann, M. (1999). Building governance institutions across European borders. Regional Studies , 33 , 657–667.10.1080/00343409950078693
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perkmann, M. (2007a). Construction of new territorial scales: A framework and case study of the EUREGIO cross-border region. Regional Studies , 41 , 253–266.10.1080/00343400600990517
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perkmann, M. (2007b). Policy entrepreneurship and multilevel governance: A comparative study of European cross-border regions. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy , 25 , 861–879.10.1068/c60m
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peyrony, J. , & Denert, O. (2012). Planning for cross-border territories: The role played by spatial information. Raumforschung und Raumordnung , 70 , 229–240.10.1007/s13147-012-0156-0
   Google Scholar
• Popescu, G. (2008). The conflicting logics of cross-border reterritorialization: Geopolitics of Euroregions in Eastern Europe. Political Geography , 27 , 418–438.10.1016/j.polgeo.2008.03.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodríguez-Pose, A. (2009). The European Union – Economy society, and policy . London: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Strihan, A. (2008). A Network-based approach to regional borders: The case of Belgium. Regional Studies , 42 , 539–554.10.1080/00343400701541813
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tscherning K. , König H. , Birthe S. , Helming K. , & Sieber, S. (2007). Ex-ante impact assessments (IA) in the European Commission – An overview. In K. Helming , M. Pérez-Soba and P. Tabbush (Eds.), Sustainability impact assessment of land use changes . (pp. 17–33). New York, NY : Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Valls, l. (2004). EU Cross-border cooperation policy in Spain: A comparison of Interreg III A in the two frontiers. Ritsumeikan International Affairs , 2 , 115–139.
   Google Scholar
• Van Houtum, H. (1999). Internationalization and mental borders. Tijdsrift voor Economiche en Sociale Geografie , 90 , 329–335.10.1111/tesg.1999.90.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Houtum, H. (2001). Re-imagining spaces of (in)difference: Contextualising and reflecting on the intertwining of cities across borders. GeoJournal , 54 , 101–105.10.1023/A:1021148918220
   Google Scholar
• Van Well, L. , Ballerino, C. , & Sterling (coord.) . (2007). Cross-border cooperation – Cross-thematic study of INTERREG and ESPON activities . Viborg: INTERACT and ESPON.
   Google Scholar
• Zonneveld, W. , De Vries, J. , & Janssen-Jansen, L. (Eds.). (2012). European territorial governance, housing and urban policy studies (Vol. 35). Amsterdam: Delft University Press, IOS, Press, BV.
   Google Scholar