European Regions and Their Interests

Abstract

Trobbiani provides a concise overview of regional lobbying vis-à-vis EU institutions, analysing the nature of regional interest in Brussels, its organizational modes and channels of expression. Based on a brief assessment of the rationale and evolution of the phenomenon, the author focuses on recent developments, underlining two interrelated aspects: first, the double, complementary, nature of regions as public authorities as well as intermediaries and coordinators for economic, social and cultural actors based in their territory and second, the fundamentally cooperative nature of regional lobbying which, through an increasing use of thematic and policy-oriented networks, creates inclusive alliances and progressively learns to play by the same rules of broad civil society actors—providing specialized knowledge in exchange for inclusion in the policy-making process.

Annex: Questionnaire and Results

Part 1: You and your office
Q 1. How long have you been working in positions dealing with regional and local interest representation vis-à-vis EU institutions?	Choice			Percentage		Responses
	Less than 5 years			17.9%		7
	Between 5 and 10 years			28.2%		11
	More than 10 years			53.8%		21
	Total					39
Q 2. Rank the following activities according to what best characterizes your tasks:	Choice			Rank	Score	Responses
	Gathering information on EU policies/policy analysis			1	269	36
	Gathering information on EU funding opportunities			2	243	34
	Institutional representation			3	229	34
	Lobbying			4	227	34
	Networking			5	197	33
	Receiving in Brussels other actors based in the region			6	118	30
	Receiving in Brussels economic and social actors based in the region			7	110	28
	Project management			8	85	24
	Other			9	47	13
Other: Branding my region; Meeting with people from our region living in Brussels; Promotion; Receiving in Brussels political actors based in region; Secretariat Committee of the Regions members; Capacity building activities for public officers on EU-related topics; From time to time promotional events, but it is not the core task of the representation of the region to the EU; Informing about European awards of significance and promoting taking part; Infringement cases, awards, acting as part of existing regional networks; Pursue of public interests
Q 3. Select the three policy fields on which your office works the most	Choice					Responses
	Science, research and innovation, H2020					22
	Environment and energy					17
	Structural and cohesion policy/funds					15
	Transport					10
	Business, competition, trade, enterprise/industry					7
	Culture, education and youth					7
	Employment and social affairs					6
	Agriculture, fisheries and food					4
	Economy and finance, financial instruments					4
	Health					4
	Digital, ICT					3
	Other					3
	Democracy, citizenship and enlargement					2
	Development, humanitarian aid, external relations and migration issues					1
	Tourism					0
Q 4. What is the employment status of people working in your office? (approximate number)	Choice			Avg	StdDev	Responses
	Civil servants (regional authority)			5.0	5.6	26
	Experts (hired in Brussels)			2.6	2.1	18
	Other			2.8	4.5	10
	Employees from development agency or other in-house regional agency			0.8	1.0	10
	Employees from public institution, hosted by the regional office in Brussels			5.1	9.1	8
	Civil servants (local authority)			0.6	0.9	7
	Employees from private institution, hosted by the regional office in Brussels			2.0	3.7	6
Q 5. How large is the region you represent?	Choice			Percentage		Responses
	Less than 2 million inhabitants			41.0%		16
	Between 2 and 5 million inhabitants			28.2%		11
	More than 5 million inhabitants			30.8%		12
	Total					39
Part 2: Representing regional interest in Brussels
Q 6. When trying to have a voice in EU policy-making, how does your region usually represent its positions and interests? Rank the following options (1, least often; 10, most often)	Choice			Avg	StDev	Responses
	Through interregional networks working on specific policy areas (e.g. EUREGHA, ECRN, ERRIN, AREPO...)			8.22	1.84	32
	Through large interregional networks working on multiple policy areas (e.g. AER, CEMR)			7.16	2.38	32
	Through networks comprising regions from the same country			6.88	2.36	33
	Through networks including other actors, not necessarily regions, with similar or complementary interests on specific issues			6.78	2.54	32
	By acting alone			5.58	2.90	31
	Other			3	2.94	10
Q 7. What is the most important principle that aggregates regions in Brussels for joint lobbying efforts?	Choice			Percentage		Responses
	Similar economic structures (e.g. similar key industrial sectors, agricultural products)			41.4%		12
	Geographical position (Northern/Southern Europe, Eastern/ Southern Europe, etc.)			20.7%		6
	Economic and demographic size			13.8%		4
	Other			10.3%		3
	Similar territorial features (maritime and insular regions, mountains, etc.)			6.9%		2
	Wealth pro capita (rich regions work with each other; less developed regions work with each other)			6.9%		2
	Total					29
Other: It depends somewhat on the issue, but our natural allies are large and/or capital cities; It depends on the subject; Same threat or same interest
Q 8. Name the three interregional networks your region works the most with	Choice	Answers	Other: 4 Motors; AEBR; Arbeitskreise der Deutschen Bundesländer; AREPO; ARFE; Balticsea; C40; Capital Cities and Regions Network; Covenant of Mayors; Czech regions; EAI; ELISAN; Ensa; ERNACT; Europe; Großregion Saar-Lor-Lux; Informal network of capital cities; Necstour; Nereus; Non-formal regional groups; Northsea; Oberrhein-Pamina; Our own regional network for the prolongation of EU cohesion policy; PURPLE; Reset; Swedish Regions; Urban regions; Vierernetzwerk Burgund, Böhmen, Oppeln
	ERRIN	20
	CPMR	10
	Eurocities	5
	AER	4
	Vanguard Initiative	4
	CEMR	3
	EURADA	3
	EUREGHA	2
	Polis	2
Q 9. Which channels is your region most likely to use (both individually and through the work of associations/networks) when trying to influence EU policy-making? Rank the following options (1, least likely to use; 10, most likely to use)	Choice			Avg	StDev	Responses
	Informal meetings with EU policy-makers, based on Brussels-based networks			7.94	2.24	31
	Presenting and circulating position papers			7.59	1.74	32
	Organizing events with the participation of EU policy-makers			7.56	2.06	32
	Informal meetings with EU policy-makers based on nationality			6.90	2.81	30
	Open consultations			6.84	2.45	32
	Informal meeting with EU policy-makers based on nationality and party politics			6.56	2.75	32
	European Commission’s expert groups			6.52	1.88	31
	Through your Committee of the Regions representatives			6.31	3.02	32
	European Parliament intergroups			5.94	1.76	32
	Council preparatory bodies through PermRep			5.88	2.50	32
	European Parliament fora			5.34	1.93	32
	Commission comitology			4.67	2.56	30
	Other			3.80	3.82	10
Other: Media; Cross-border cooperation with regions and member states; We arrange meetings with the Commission and MEPs when we think it is necessary to do so. Sometimes we do this alone, other times with a delegation of cities from a network or with other stakeholders; Own interregional networks; Created own interregional Networks for a specific purpose
Part 3: Institutional vs. non-institutional actors
Q 10. Compared to most actors lobbying in Brussels, regions have an institutional status and are mostly democratically elected bodies. Does this institutional status put them in an advantaged position in terms of influence on the EU policy-making process?			Choice	Percentage		Responses
			Yes, it has always been the case	18.5%		5
			Yes, particularly in recent years	55.6%		15
			No, it has never been the case	11.1%		3
			Other	14.8%		4
			Total			27
Other: Not in our case. Possibly other regions see it as an advantage, but I doubt it; Sometimes an advantage depending on the issue; To some extent, yes, depends on the subject
Q 11. Official channels granted to regional representation within the EU are often perceived as ineffective (e.g. CoR, Council of the EU). Do you think that, as a response to this, regions have started to play by the same rules of non-institutional actors in Brussels (i.e. offering expertise and sectoral knowledge to the Commission in exchange for inclusion in the policy-making process)?			Choice	Percentage		Responses
			Yes, I strongly agree	25.8%		8
			Yes, I agree	38.7%		12
			No, I disagree	12.9%		4
			No, I strongly disagree	6.5%		2
			Other	16.1%		5
			Total			31
Other: Half way true; We play almost no part in Council processes and the CoR has limited influence, even if we used it (which we don’t often.). Other regions may have a slightly different perspective. We therefore take part in EU decision-making processes like any other stakeholder; Don’t know; Regions are offering more and more expertise, and the quality of it is improving, however they are not treated as equal players in the game sometimes
Q 12. Do you think that the inclusion of economic, social and cultural actors from your region in your advocacy and lobbying activities is an important factor in order to provide EU policy-makers with expert knowledge and first-hand experience on the policy fields at stake?			Choice	Percentage		Responses
			Yes, I strongly agree	35.5%		11
			Yes, I agree	54.8%		17
			No, I disagree	3.2%		1
			No, I strongly disagree	0%		0
			Other	6.5%		2
			Total			31
Other: Our principal role is to represent city/regional government, and therefore we involve political representatives or expert officials in our advocacy activities. Occasionally we may cooperate with other local actors from our city/region; It depends on the topic(s)
Q 13. Do you think that the inclusion of economic, social and cultural actors from your region in your advocacy and lobbying activities is an important factor in order to gain credibility and influence EU policy-making?			Choice	Percentage		Responses
			Yes, I strongly agree	29.0%		9
			Yes, I agree	58.1%		18
			No, I disagree	9.7%		3
			No, I strongly disagree	0%		0
			Other	3.2%		1
			Total			31