Skip to main content

Territorial Cooperation for European Cohesion (In What Measure Can ETC Contribute to Achieving the EU Goal of Territorial Cohesion?)

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Public Policies for Territorial Cohesion

Part of the book series: The Urban Book Series ((UBS))

  • 155 Accesses

Abstract

Although the single market is at the core of the European Union, borders keep on causing friction to the freedoms of movement and everyday interaction. Most public policies, including economic ones, are designed and implemented within a national framework and end, therefore, at the national boundaries. However, when the citizens’ daily life embraces a cross-border territory, they are confronted with fragmented national policies instead of a cohesive and integrative common framework. There have been significant achievements for border regions within an integrated EU, with milestones like Schengen or territorial cooperation and cohesion, but there is a long way to go. Still, the COVID-19 pandemic has also shown how weak these achievements could be towards the free will of nation-states. To be “natural” laboratories of European cohesion and integration, and they have shown they can, cross-border regions need a different approach, being considered functional areas and guaranteed a minimum operativity for daily cross-border activities even in emergency situations. Interreg, the funding arm of European Territorial Cooperation, celebrated its 30th anniversary in 2020. Hundreds of programmes and projects have significantly triggered territorial cohesion across the continent over three decades. Cross-border structures and their networks have made this possible. Other EU instruments like the EGTCs have amplified the opportunities already opened by pioneer Euroregions well before the first earmarking of European funds for territorial cooperation. In particular, border regions today are starting to be seen as laboratories where innovative solutions for cohesion are developed and piloted. In no other territory like a (cross-)border region do citizens daily feel the benefits and the challenges of the European single market, still a utopia in many fields. But its perception in cross-border territories would mean effective cohesion. This chapter discusses how European territorial cooperation (ETC) has managed to be a key factor for territorial cohesion, a crucial but relatively recent component of European cohesion. And how it has overcome many difficulties to progress while notoriously drawing the attention of policymakers (and scholars) as a very genuine, valuable and promising cohesion tool. It also discusses the interference with national sovereignty conceptions and how going beyond financial support in search of trust across borders could be a tool of evermore importance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    Modellvorhaben der Raumordnung in German can be translated as Spatial Planning Demonstration Projects.

  2. 2.

    The European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP), adopted by the Informal Council of Ministers responsible for Spatial Planning in Potsdam in May 1999 (Council 1999), was the genesis of the first European Territorial Agenda, adopted at the Informal Council of Ministers of Urban Development and Cohesion in Leipzig in May 2007 (Council 2007b). And the new Territorial Agenda 2030 was adopted at an (online) Informal Ministerial Meeting in December 2020 (planed in Leipzig) (Council, 2020). These achievements happened during German Presidencies of the Council of the EU (the European Territorial Agenda 2020 was adopted in Gödöllő in May 2011, during a Hungarian Presidency) (Council 2011).

  3. 3.

    The media echoed on 15 November 2022 the birth of Damián, a Dominican baby who symbolically broke the barrier of 8 Billion inhabitants on Earth (El País 2022). 9.7 billion humans are foreseen in 2050 and around 11 billion by the end of this century, according to the projections of the UN Population Division (UN DESA’s Population Division 2022). And in its World Cities Report 2022, UN Habitat expects the world will continue to urbanise over the next three decades, from 56% of the total population in 2021 to 68% in 2050 (UN Habitat 2022).

  4. 4.

    This EGTC has set interculturality and bilingualism as the key to uniting citizens in the cross-border region. Therefore they have started, coordinated or taken part in various projects and actions in this field: https://www.saarmoselle.org/fr/interculturalite-et-bilinguisme.html (last retrieved on 28 November 2022).

  5. 5.

    The Euregio Egrensis has developed for more than 15 years a Sprachoffensive, raising public awareness and promoting language competences in the DE/CZ cross-border area: https://www.euregio-egrensis.de/sprachoffensive.htm (last retrieved on 28 November 2022).

  6. 6.

    The Portugal Plan of the regional government of Extremadura (ES), aimed to facilitate the teaching of Portuguese language in Primary Education, is operational since the school year 2010–2011.

  7. 7.

    J’ai toujours pensé que l’Europe se ferait dans les crises, et qu’elle serait la somme des solutions apportées à ces crises. Encore fallait-il proposer ces solutions et les faire appliquer (Monnet 1976).

  8. 8.

    Official list of registered EGTCs at the EGTCs Platform in the European Committee of the Regions: https://portal.cor.europa.eu/egtc/CoRActivities/Documents/Official%20List%20of%20the%20EGTCs.pdf (last retrieved on 29 November 2022).

  9. 9.

    Official Journal of the European Union (2020/C 86 I/01–04), 16 March 2020.

  10. 10.

    Official Journal of the European Union (2020/C 96 I/01–07), 24 March 2020.

  11. 11.

    Official Journal of the European Union (2020/C 102 I/12–14), 30 March 2020.

  12. 12.

    Official Journal of the European Union (2020/C 111 I/01–05), 3 April 2020.

  13. 13.

    Official Journal of the European Union (2020/C 89 I/01–08), 18 March 2020.

  14. 14.

    Council Regulation (EU) 2020/2094 of 14 December 2020 establishing a European Union Recovery Instrument to support the recovery in the aftermath of the COVID-19 crisis, Official Journal of the European Union (2020/L 433 I/23–27), 22 December 2020.

  15. 15.

    The COFE was a citizen-led series of debates from April 2021 to May 2022 that enabled people from across the continent to share their ideas about our common future through a Multilingual Digital Platform. Its conclusions are presented in a final report. More information: https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/new-push-european-democracy/conference-future-europe_en.

References

  • Abrahams G (2014) What “is” territorial cohesion? What does it “do”? Essentialist versus pragmatic approaches to using concepts. Eur Plan Stud 22(10):2134–2155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • AEBR (2004) Towards a new Community legal instrument facilitating public law-based transeuropean cooperation among territorial authorities in the European Union. Position paper, Gronau, October 2004

    Google Scholar 

  • AEBR (2006) Comments of the AEBR to the Report of the EP’s REGI Committee on the role of territorial cohesion in regional development. Gronau, February 2006

    Google Scholar 

  • AEBR (2007a) Coherence and complementarity—optimal allocation of all EU funds. Consolidated version of AEBR Executive Committee’s 2005 Report by Viktor Frhr. Von Malchus. Gronau, October 2007

    Google Scholar 

  • AEBR (2007b) The added value of cross-border cooperation (brochure). Association of European Border Regions, Gronau

    Google Scholar 

  • AEBR (ed.) (2008a) Cooperation between European Border Regions. Review and Perspectives. Nomos, Baden-Baden

    Google Scholar 

  • AEBR (2008b) Statement of the AEBR to the Draft Green Paper on Territorial Cohesion. Gronau, June 2008

    Google Scholar 

  • AEBR (2009a) Statement of the AEBR to the Green Paper on Territorial Cohesion. Gronau, February 2009

    Google Scholar 

  • AEBR (2009b) Comments to the Barca Report. Gronau, September 2009b

    Google Scholar 

  • AEBR (2016) The importance of Cohesion Policy for the future of the EU and the Cross-border Cooperation, Position Paper, Gronau

    Google Scholar 

  • AEBR–EC (2020a) b-solutions: solving border obstacles—a compendium of 43 cases. European Union Publications Office, Luxemburg, Berlin and Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • AEBR–EC (2020b) b-solutions: solving border obstacles—annex to the compendium. European Union Publications Office, Luxemburg, Berlin and Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • AEBR–EC (2021a) b-solutions: solving border obstacles. A Compendium 2020–2021a, Berlin and Brussels, European Union Publications Office, Luxemburg

    Google Scholar 

  • AEBR–EC (2021b) Living in a cross-border region—seven stories of obstacles to a more integrated Europe, Berlin and Brussels, European Union Publications Office, Luxemburg

    Google Scholar 

  • AER (1995) Regions and territories in Europe: the regions’ view of European policies, AER (Assembly of European Regions), Commission V, Infrastructure and Regional Development, (n.d.), Strasbourg 1995 (mentioned by Faludi, 2007)

    Google Scholar 

  • Barca F (2009) An agenda for a reformed cohesion policy. A place-based approach to meeting European Union challenges and expectations. Independent Report prepared at the request of Danuta Hübner, Commissioner for Regional Policy. Rome, April 2009

    Google Scholar 

  • BBSR (2022) MORO—Modellvorhaben der Raumordnung. Bundesinstitut für Bau-, Stadt- und Raumforschung (BBSR), website of the Bundesamt für Bauwesen und Raumordnung (BBR), Bundesministerium für Wohnen, Stadtentwicklung und Bauwesen (BMWSB), Berlin, 2022: https://www.bbsr.bund.de/BBSR/DE/forschung/programme/moro/moro-node.html (retrieved on 21/11/2022)

  • Begg I (2010) Cohesion or confusion: a policy searching for objectives. J Eur Integr 32(1):77–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/07036330903375115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berzi M, Durà Guimerà A (2017) Evidences of Cross-Border health governance in the EU: the case of the Hospital de la Cerdanya revisited (French-Spanish Border). Colloque international: Frontières, territoires de santé et réseaux de soins, University of Artois, Arras, June 2017. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.14230.14407

  • Berzi M, Durà Guimerà A (2020) The Hospital of Cerdanya (HC). In: Wassenberg B, Reitel B (eds) Critical dictionary on borders, cross-border cooperation and European Integration. Peter Lang

    Google Scholar 

  • Berzi M, Durà Guimerà A (2021) La coopération transfrontalière en matière sanitaire dans l’Union européenne à travers le cas emblématique de l’Hôpital de Cerdagne (Pyrénées). In: Moullé F, Reitel B (eds) Maillages, interfaces, réseaux transfrontaliers, de nouveaux enjeux territoriaux de la santé. Presses universitaires de Bordeaux

    Google Scholar 

  • BFP (2021) EGTC GO and ITI –A combined approach to boost border regions. Border Focal Point’s register of good practices, 5 February 2021: https://futurium.ec.europa.eu/en/border-focal-point-network/good-practices/egtc-go-and-iti-combined-approach-boost-border-regions?language=en (last retrieved on 29 November 2022)

  • Böhm H (2021) The influence of the Covid-19 pandemic on Czech-Polish cross-border cooperation: From debordering to re-bordering? Moravian Geographical Reports 29(2):137–148. https://doi.org/10.2478/mgr-2021-0007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Böhm H, Pysz JK (2019) Can cross-border healthcare be sustainable? An example from the Czech-Austrian Borderland. Sustainability 11(6980):1–14. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11246980

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chamusca P, Marques J, Pires, S, Teles F (2022) Territorial cohesion: discussing the mismatch between conceptual definitions and the understanding of local and intra-regional public decision-makers. Territory, Politics, Governance. https://doi.org/10.1080/21622671.2022.2044899

  • Cohesion Alliance (2017) #CohesionAlliance for a strong EU cohesion policy beyond 2020, European Committee of the Regions and leading European associations, Brussels, November 2017

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohesion Alliance (2020) #CohesionAlliance for a cohesive, sustainable and resilient Europe, European Committee of the Regions and leading European associations, Brussels, June 2020

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohesion Alliance (2022) The debate on the Future of Cohesion Policy starts now! A joint call from the #CohesionAlliance for a strong EU cohesion policy beyond 2020, European Committee of the Regions and leading European associations, Brussels, October 2022

    Google Scholar 

  • CoR (2017) The future of Cohesion Policy beyond 2020 - For a strong and effective European cohesion policy beyond 2020, Own opinion, 123rd plenary session, 11–12 May 2017

    Google Scholar 

  • CoR (2018) The cost and risk of non-cohesion: The strategic value of cohesion policy for pursuing the Treaty objectives and facing new challenges for European regions, Own opinion, 128th plenary session, Brussels, 22 and 23 March 2018

    Google Scholar 

  • CoR (2021) Resolution on the Vision for Europe: the Future of Cross-Border Cooperation. European Committee of the Regions, 145th plenary session, Brussels, 30 June-1 July 2021

    Google Scholar 

  • CoR (2022a) Cohesion alliance, website of the European Committee of the Regions, Brussels: https://cor.europa.eu/en/engage/Pages/cohesion-alliance.aspx (retrieved on 13/11/2022a)

  • CoR (2022b) European Alliance of Cities and Regions for the Reconstruction of Ukraine, website of the European Committee of the Regions, Brussels: https://cor.europa.eu/en/engage/Pages/european-alliance-of-cities-and-regions-for-the-reconstruction-of-ukraine.aspx (retrieved on 13/11/2022b)

  • Council (1999) ESDP—European Spatial Development Perspective. Towards balanced and sustainable development of the territory of the European Union. Agreed at the Informal Council of Ministers responsible for Spatial Planning in Potsdam, May 1999. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities

    Google Scholar 

  • Council (2007a) Final act of the intergovernmental conference which adopted the Treaty of Lisbon. Lisbon, 13 December 2007

    Google Scholar 

  • Council (2007b) Territorial agenda of the European Union—towards a more competitive and sustainable Europe of diverse regions. Agreed on the occasion of the Informal Ministerial Meeting on Urban Development and Territorial Cohesion in Leipzig on 24 / 25 May 2007

    Google Scholar 

  • Council (2011) Territorial agenda 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 in Gödöllő (Hungary) on 19 May 2011

    Google Scholar 

  • Council (2020) Territorial agenda 2030—a future for all places. Agreed at the Informal Ministerial Meeting of Ministers responsible for Spatial Planning, Territorial Development and/or Territorial Cohesion (planned in Leipzig, finally online due to COVID-19) on 1 December 2020

    Google Scholar 

  • Crescenzi R, Fratesi U, Monastiriotis V (2020) Back to the member states? Cohesion Policy and the National Challenges to the European Union. Reg Stud 54(1):5–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2019.1662895

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dao H, Cantoreggi PP, Rousseaux V (2017) Operationalizing a contested concept: indicators of territorial cohesion. Eur Plan Stud 25(4):638–660. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2017.1281230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Decoville A, Sohn C (2010) Cartographie de l’expansion de l’aire métropolitaine transfrontalière de Luxembourg. Les cahiers du CEPS/INSTEAD No. 2010-20. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.1621.3842

  • Molino D (2016) La España vacía. Alfaguara, Madrid

    Google Scholar 

  • Durà A, Camonita F, Berzi M, Noferini A (2018) Euroregions, Excellence and Innovation across EU borders. A Catalogue of Good Practices. RECOT European Network, Department of Geography, Autonomous University of Barcelona http://blogs.uab.cat/recot/crii-catalogue/

  • EC (2008) 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, COM(2008) 616 final, European Commission, Brussels (6/10/2008)

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (2018) Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a mechanism to resolve legal and administrative obstacles in a cross-border context. COM(2018) 373 final

    Google Scholar 

  • ELARD (2022) Cross-border Community Led Local Development: the success of territorial living labs in Interreg Italy-Austria. Online workshop on 12 October 2022, European Leader Association for Rural Development, Wemmel: http://elard.eu/cross-border-community-led-local-development-the-success-of-territorial-living-labs-in-interreg-italy-austria/ (last retrieved on 29 November 2022)

  • El País (2022) La humanidad supera los 8.000 millones de personas. Article in El País’ Planeta Futuro by Alejandra Agudo, 15 November 2022: https://elpais.com/planeta-futuro/2022-11-15/la-humanidad-supera-los-8000-millones-de-personas.html (last retrieved on 28 November 2022).

  • Engl A, Evrard E (2020) (2020) Agenda-setting dynamics in the post-2020 cohesion policy reform: the pathway towards the European cross-border mechanism as possible policy change. J Eur Integr 42(7):917–935. https://doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2019.1689969

  • EP (2006) Territorial cohesion in regional development—European Parliament Resolution on the role of territorial cohesion in regional development. Rapporteur: MEP Ambroise Guellec (EVP-ED/FR) P6_TA(2005)0358. Off J Eur Union C 277 E, 21/09/2006, pp 509–511

    Google Scholar 

  • EP Council (2006) Regulation (EC) No. 1082/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on a European grouping of territorial cooperation (EGTC). Off J Eur Union L 210/19, 31 July 2006

    Google Scholar 

  • EP Council (2013) Regulation (EC) No. 1302/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 amending Regulation (EC) No. 1082/2006 on a European grouping of territorial cooperation (EGTC) as regards the clarification, simplification and improvement of the establishment and functioning of such groupings. Off J Eur Union L 347/303, 20 December 2013

    Google Scholar 

  • ESPON (2019) Policy brief: Cross-border public services in Europe. Website of ESPON, Luxembourg: https://www.espon.eu/cps-brief (retrieved on 13/11/2022)

  • ESPON (2022) Cross-border Public Services 2.0 (CPS 2.0) Upgrade and update of the European-wide inventory on Cross-border public Services (CPS)—final report, Luxembourg

    Google Scholar 

  • Euractiv (2021) Santé sans frontières : l’hôpital franco-espagnol de Puigcerdà. Euractiv.fr, 12/3/2021 : https://www.euractiv.fr/section/politique/news/sante-sans-frontieres-lhopital-franco-espagnol-de-puigcerda/ (last retrieved on 29 November 2022)

  • Faludi A (2007) La dimension territoriale de l’intégration européenne. L’Information géographique 2007/4, vol 71, pp 27–42. https://doi.org/10.3917/lig.714.0027

  • Faludi A (2016) EU territorial cohesion, a contradiction in terms. Plan Theory Pract 17(2):302–313. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2016.1154657

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faludi A, Peyrony J (2011) Cohesion policy contributing to territorial cohesion—scenarios. In: Bailey D (ed) What Future for Cohesion Policy? An Academic and Policy Debate. Regional Studies Association, pp 1–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Gruszczak A (2022) Internal Rebordering in the European Union: Postfunctionalism Revisited. Polit Gov 10(2):246–255. https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v10i2.5165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guillermo Ramírez M (2011) Cross-border lobbying. The Association of European Border Regions (AEBR) activities with the European Union. In: Wassenberg B, Beck J (dirs) Living and researching cross-border cooperation: The European dimension (studies on the history of European Integration, Volume 3). Franz Steiner Verlag, Stuttgart, pp 283–295

    Google Scholar 

  • Jakubowski A, Miszzuk A, Kawałko B, Komornicki T, Szul R (2017) The EU's New Borderland—cross-border relations and regional development. Routledge, London New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Jakubowski A, Skibińska K, Studzieniecki T, Skibiński J (2021) Identifying cross-border functional areas: conceptual background and empirical findings from Polish borderlands. Eur Plan Stud, Published online: 26 Jul 2021. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2021.1958760

  • Jones R, Kalervo Weckroth MT, Moisio S, Luukkonen J (2018) Re-conceptualising territorial cohesion through the prism of spatial justice: critical perspectives on academic and policy discourses. In: Lang T, Görmar F (eds) Regional and local development in times of polarisation. New Geographies of Europe. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1190-1_5

  • Lara F, Laine J (2022) The Covid-19 Pandemic: territorial, political and governance dimensions of bordering. J Borderl Stud 37(4):1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/08865655.2022.2109501

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marques, T.S.; Santinha, G.; Saraiva, M. Guerra, P. (2018) Re‐Thinking Territorial Cohesion in the European Planning Context. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, April 2018, 547–572, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12608

  • Martín Galindo JL (1999) A Fala de Xálima. O falar fronteirizo de Eljas, San Martín de Trevejo y Valverde. Estudios y documentos sobre la Fala, Tomo II. Portuguese Studies Series, Gabinete de Iniciativas Transfronterizas, Mérida

    Google Scholar 

  • Medeiros E (2017a) From smart growth to European spatial planning: a new paradigm for EU cohesion policy post-2020. Eur Plan Stud 25(10):1856–1875. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2017.1337729

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Medeiros E (2017b) Placing European Territorial Cooperation Post-2020 at the Heart of EU Cohesion Policy. Eur Struct Invest Funds J Year 5(3):245–262

    Google Scholar 

  • Medeiros E (ed) (2017c) Uncovering the territorial dimension of European Union Cohesion Policy. Cohesion, Development, Impact Assessment and Cooperation. Routledge, London New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Medeiros E (ed) (2018) European territorial cooperation. Theoretical and empirical approaches to the process and impacts of cross-border and transnational cooperation in Europe. The Urban Book Series, Springer International Publishing AG, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74887-0

  • Medeiros E (ed) (2020) Territorial impact assessment. Advances in Spatial Science (The Regional Science Series). Springer, Cham

    Google Scholar 

  • Medeiros E, Guillermo Ramírez M, Dellagiacoma AC, Brustia G (2021a) Will reducing border barriers via the EU’s b-solutions lead towards greater European territorial integration? Reg Stud 56 (2022) Issue 3:504–517 (published online on 17/5/2021). https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2021.1912724

  • Medeiros E, Guillermo Ramírez M, Ocskay J, Peyrony J (2021b) Covidfencing effects on cross-border deterritorialism: the case of Europe, European Planning Studies, 29:5, 962–982. Published online on 8 September 2020. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2020.1818185

  • Medeiros E, Guillermo Ramírez M, Brustia G, Dellagiacoma AC, Mullan C (2022) Reducing border barriers for cross-border commuters in Europe via the EU b-solutions initiative, European Planning Studies (published online on, 27/6/2022). https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2022.2093606

  • Monnet J (1976) Mémoires. Fayard, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Moodie J, Salenius V, Meijer MW (2021) Why territory matters for implementing active subsidiarity in EU regional policy. Reg Stud. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2021.1966404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ocskay G (2020) Cross-border territorial impact assessment. In: Ocskay G (ed) Territorial impact assessment. Central European Service for Cross-border Initiatives (CESCI), Budapest. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-54502-4_7

  • OFBS (2022) Zones Organisées d’Accès aux soins Transfrontaliers (ZOAST). Website of the Observatoire Franco-Belge de la Santé : https://www.ofbs.org/cooperation-franco-belge/zoast/ (retrieved on 13/11/2022)

  • Politecnico di Milano EC (2017) Quantification of the effects of legal and administrative border obstacles in land border regions. Final Report of a study contracted by the European Commission’s DG REGIO. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg

    Google Scholar 

  • Schout JA, Jordan AJ (2007) From cohesion to territorial policy integration (TPI): exploring the governance challenges in the European Union. Eur Plan Stud 15(6):835–851. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654310701220280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shiraef MA, Friesen P, Feddern L, Weiss MA, COBAP Team (2022) Did border closures slow SARS-CoV-2? Nat Sci Rep 12:1709 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-05482-7

  • Sohn C, Walter O (2009) Métropolisation et intégration transfrontalière: le paradoxe luxembourgeois. Espaces Et Sociétés. 138:51–67. https://doi.org/10.3917/esp.138.0051

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sohn C (2012) La frontière comme ressource dans l'espace urbain globalisé. Une contribution à l'hypothèse de la métropole transfrontalière. CEPS Working Paper 2012–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trillo Santamaría JM, Paül V, Vila-Lage R (2021) Two generations of Eurocities along the northern section of the Spanish-Portuguese border. In: Mikhailova E, Garrard J (eds) Twin cities across five continents. Interactions and tensions on urban borders. Routledge, London New York

    Google Scholar 

  • UN DESA’s Population Division (2022) World population prospects 2022: summary of Results. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division UN DESA/POP/2022/TR/NO. 3

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Habitat (2022) World Cities report 2022—envisaging the future of cities. United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat), Nairobi

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Kersbergen K, Verbeek B (2004) Subsidiarity as a principle of governance in the European Union. Comp Eur Polit 2(2):142–162. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.cep.6110033

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zaucha J, Böhme K (2020) Measuring territorial cohesion is not a mission impossible. Eur Plan Stud 28(3):627–649. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2019.1607827

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martín Guillermo-Ramírez .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Guillermo-Ramírez, M. (2023). Territorial Cooperation for European Cohesion (In What Measure Can ETC Contribute to Achieving the EU Goal of Territorial Cohesion?). In: Medeiros, E. (eds) Public Policies for Territorial Cohesion. The Urban Book Series. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-26228-9_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics