Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Cohesion as a Multi-Scalar Challenge: The EU-Wide Perspective

  • Chapter
Understanding Geographies of Polarization and Peripheralization

Part of the book series: New Geographies of Europe ((NGE))

  • 209 Accesses

Abstract

This volume covers the topic of cohesion in Central and Eastern Europe. This issue is part of a wider debate, as cohesion is an ongoing challenge throughout the history of European integration. In this context, cohesion is predominantly understood as a form of socio-economically positive trend that has — implicitly or explicitly — a spatial dimension. A fixed definition is still lacking; rather, cohesion appears to be a ‘moving target’ — politically, spatially and statistically. The most prominent idea is to achieve convergence between the EU member states and their regions (see Bachtler et al. 2013), aiming to reduce socio-economic differences between regions or states. From a more institutional perspective, cohesion policy is a redistribution-based instrument that aims to achieve convergence (Baun and Marek 2008). The notion of territorial cohesion goes back to debates on spatial development within European multi-level governance: in this much broader context, cohesion comprises a more instrumental debate on how territorial potential on the regional level can be explored and how to reorganize political mandates, including the supranational level (Faludi 2009, 2010).

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
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

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Armstrong, H. and de Kervenoal, R. (1997), Regional economic change in the European Union, in Bachtler, J. and Turok, I. (eds.), The Coherence of Regional Policy. Contrasting Perspectives on the Structural Funds ( New York: Oxon ), 39–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bachtler, J., Mendez, C. and Wishlade, F. (2013), EU Cohesion Policy and European Integration: The Dynamics of EU Budget and Regional Policy Reform ( Farnham: Ashgate).

    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 ( Brussels: Commissioner for Regional Policy).

    Google Scholar 

  • Baun, M. and Marek, D. (2008), EU Cohesion Policy after Enlargement ( New York: Palgrave Macmillan).

    Google Scholar 

  • Camagni, R. (2008), Towards a concept of territorial capital, in R. Capello, R. Camagni, B. Chizzolini and U. Fratesi (eds.), Modelling Regional Scenarios for the Enlarged Europe ( Berlin: Springer ), 33–47.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Chilla, T. (2012), Germany in the European Union: The perspectives for territorial cohesion. Geographische Rundschau, 64/IGC Edition, 54–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • COM (2010), Fifth report on economic, social and territorial cohesion, Brussels, http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docoffic/official/reports/cohesion5/pdf/5cr_en.pdf (accessed 3 July 2014).

    Google Scholar 

  • Dammers, E. and Evers, D. (2008), Beyond heuristics: Applying scenarios to European territorial development. TESG, 99 (5): 629–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davoudi, S. (2005), Understanding territorial cohesion. Planning Practice and Research 20 (4): 433–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duclos, J.-Y., Esteban, J. and Ray, D. (2004), Polarization: Concepts, measurement, estimation. Econometrica 72 (6): 1737–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dühr, S., Colomb, C. and Nadin, V. (2010), European Spatial Planning and Territorial Cooperation (London, New York: Routledge).

    Google Scholar 

  • ECB (European Central Bank) (2013), Convergence report June 2013, Frankfurt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eser, T. (2009), From disparities to diversity–Territorial cohesion in the European Union, in H. Kilper (ed.), New Disparities in Spatial Development in Europe ( Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer ), 19–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • ESPON (2006a), Project 2.4.2–Integrated Analysis of Transnational and National Territories Based on ESPON Results. Luxemburg, www.espon.eu.

    Google Scholar 

  • ESPON (2006b), Project 3.2.–Spatial Scenarios and Orientations in relation to the ESDP and Cohesion Policy. Luxemburg, www.espon.eu.

    Google Scholar 

  • ESPON (2012), SIESTA Spatial Indicators for a ‘Europe 2020 Strategy’ Territorial Analysis. Santiago de Compostela, Luxemburg, www.espon.eu.

    Google Scholar 

  • Esteban, J.-M. and Ray, D. (1994), On the Measurement of Polarization. Econometrica 62 (4): 819–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Union (1957), Treaty Establishing the European Community (Consolidated Version), Rome Treaty, 25 March 1957, http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b39c0.html (accessed 12 June 2014).

    Google Scholar 

  • European Union (2008), Consolidated version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, 13 December 2007. Official Journal of the European Union, C 115/47, http://www.refworld.org/docid/4b17a07e2.html (accessed 12 June 2014).

    Google Scholar 

  • Eurostat (2010), The Eurostat Regional Yearbook 2010 (Luxemburg).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ezcurra, R., Pascual, P. and Rapún, M. (2007), The dynamics of regional disparities in Central and Eastern Europe during transition. European Planning Studies 15 (10): 1397–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faludi, A. (2009), A turning point in the development of European spatial planning? The ‘Territorial Agenda of the European Union’ and the First Action Programme. Progress in Planning 71 (1): 1–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faludi, A. (2010), Cohesion, Coherence, Cooperation: European Spatial Planning Coming of Age? (London, New York: Routledge).

    Google Scholar 

  • Faludi, A. and Peyrony, J. (2011), Cohesion policy contributing to territorial cohesion–Future scenarios. European Journal of Spatial Development, 43, 2–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, M. and Stirbiick, C. (2006), Pan-European income growth and club convergence. Insights from a spatial econometric perspective. The Annals ofRegional Science 40 (4): 693–721.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foster, J. E. and Wolfson, M. C. (2010), Polarization and the decline of the middle class: Canada and the U.S. The Journal of Economic Inequality 8 (2): 247–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldsmith, M. (2003), Variable geometry, multilevel governance: European integration and subnational government in the new millennium, in K. Featherstone and C. Radaelli (eds.), The Politics of Europeanization ( Oxford: Oxford University Press ), 112–33.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Grasland, C. and Hamez, G. (2005), Vers la construction d’un indicateur de cohésion territoriale européen? L’espace géographique 34 (2): 97–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heizer-Susa, E. (2001), Die ökonomische Dimension der EU-Osterweiterung: Eine Analyse spezifischer Einflußkanäle zur Ermittlung von Chancen und Risiken in ausgewählten Regionen der EU ( Baden-Baden: Nomos).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooghe, L. and Marks, G. (2001), Multi-Level Governance and European Integration ( Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield).

    Google Scholar 

  • Janikas, M. and Rey, S. (2005), Regional convergence, inequality, and space. Journal of Economic Geography 5 (2): 155–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jessop, B. (2004), Multi-level governance and multi-level metagovernance changes in the European Union as integral moments in the transformation and reorientation of contemporary statehood, in I. Bache and M. Flinders (eds.), Multi-Level Governance ( Oxford: Oxford University Press ), 49–74.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, C. I. (1997), On the evolution of the world income distribution. Journal of Economic Perspectives 11: 19–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krueger, A. (2012), Regional Gross Domestic Product dropped sharply in 2009, but not all Regions were hit in the same way, Eurostat statistics in focus 41 /2012.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, R. (2001), EMU versus the regions? Regional convergence and divergence in Euroland. Journal of Economic Geography 1 (1): 51–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michie, R. and Fitzgerald, R. (1997), The evolution of the structural funds, in J. Bachtler and I. Turok (eds.), The Coherence ofRegional Policy. Contrasting Perspectives on the Structural Funds ( New York: Oxon ), 14–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moisio, S. (2011), Geographies of Europeanization, the EU’s spatial planning as a politics of scale, in L. Bialasiewicz (ed.), Europe in the World, EU Geopolitics and the Transformation of European Space ( Farnham: Ashgate ), 19–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Molle, W. (2007), European Cohesion Policy ( London: Routledge).

    Google Scholar 

  • Montfort, P. (2008), Convergence of EU regions. Measures and evolution. European Union Regional Policy Working papers No 01/2008.

    Google Scholar 

  • Musil, R. (2013), Das regionale Dilemma der Europäischen Union: Räumliche Ungleichgewichte in der Europäischen Union. Mitteilungen der Österreichischen Geographischen Gesellschaft 155: 61–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pellegrini, G. (2002), Proximity, polarization, and local labor market performances. Networks and Spatial Economics 2 (2): 151–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quah, D. T. (1997), Empirics for growth and distribution: Stratification, polarization, and convergence clubs. Journal of Economic Growth 2: 27–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez-Pose, A. (1999), Convergence or divergence? Types of regional responses to socioeconomic change in Europe. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie 90 (4): 363–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosamond, B. (2000), Theories of European Integration ( New York: Palgrave).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stead, D. (2013), Convergence, divergence or constancy of spatial planning? Connecting theoretical concepts with empirical evidence from Europe. Journal of Planning Literature 28 (1): 19–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waterhout, B. (2008), The Institutionalization of European Spatial Planning ( Delft: Delft University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Waterhout, B., Mourato, J. M. and Böhme, K. (2009), The impact of Europeanisation on planning cultures, in J. Knieling and F. Othengrafen (eds.), Planning Cultures in Europe ( Farnham: Ashgate ), 239–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zonneveld, W. (2012), The long and winding road to EU territorial governance, in W. Zonneveld, J. de Vries and L. Janssen-Jansen (eds.), European Territorial Governance ( Delft: Delft University Press ), 57–83.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Tobias Chilla
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Markus Neufeld
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Leibniz Institute for Regional Geography, Germany

    Thilo Lang , Wladimir Sgibnev  & Kornelia Ehrlich ,  & 

  2. University of Jena, Germany

    Sebastian Henn

Copyright information

© 2015 Tobias Chilla and Markus Neufeld

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Chilla, T., Neufeld, M. (2015). Cohesion as a Multi-Scalar Challenge: The EU-Wide Perspective. In: Lang, T., Henn, S., Sgibnev, W., Ehrlich, K. (eds) Understanding Geographies of Polarization and Peripheralization. New Geographies of Europe. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137415080_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation