The Euroregion, which puts into practice the determination for active cooperation, has led to concrete actions such as:

Similar documents
Population. Date established: 29 October EGTC: Established on 25 August 2009 The Euroregion s legal and administrative arm

COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Brussels, 2 May /14 CULT 68

OPINION. Results of EU Structural Policy in NSPA

Third Cohesion report February 2004

Shetland Islands Council

The view of Europaforum Northern Sweden concerning the future of EU cohesion policy

MR. George ALEXAKIS, parallel session 3. "Mediterranean Sea Region. laying the conditions. for sustainable growth and jobs"

Highlands and Islands European Partnership Response to the Green Paper on Territorial Cohesion

PART A Project summary

CONFERENCE STATEMENT

Agenzia per la coesione Territoriale. Obstacles on maritime borders

Policy framework The Netherlands and the Polar Regions, Summary and priorities

EUSAIR on sea topics from Slovenian perspective

Implementation of the ESPON 2020 cooperation program. 16 January 2017 Anneloes van Noordt

MODELS AND TOOLS FOR GOVERNANCE OF

Strengthening the cooperation in the region: Carpathian, Tisa,, Danube and Black Sea areas

Launch of the ESPON 2013 Programme. European observation network on territorial development and cohesion

Alps Results from the ESPON Project. Common spatial perspectives for the Alpine area. Towards a common vision

Galicia Norte Portugal

Land Use in the context of sustainable, smart and inclusive growth

The Swedish National Geodata Strategy and the Geodata Project

European Economic and Social Committee OPINION. European Economic and Social Committee

Territorial Cohesion Current Views of the Commission and the Member States of the European Union

2. Defining fisheries areas

Central Baltic Programme

CCDR-N A SMART INSTITUTION

SPLAN-Natura Towards an integrated spatial planning approach for Natura th January, 2017 Brussels. Commissioned by DG Environment

I. INTRODUCTION. 1 Regulation EU No 1303/2013 on the Common Provisions on the ESI Funds.

SPATIAL STRATEGIES ON THE ISLAND OF IRELAND: FRAMEWORK FOR COLLABORATION

Duarte Rodrigues. Portugal 2020: Result-orientation and territorial information. Vice-President Lisbon, 1 st of July 2016

Chapter 10: Location effects, economic geography and regional policy

Mediterranean Sea and Territorial Development, Opportunities and Risks

Governance and Functional Urban Areas CEMAT Conference

The European territory: Strategic developmentd

16540/14 EE/cm 1 DG E 1A

Maritime Spatial Planning in the Baltic Sea Region

CONFERENCE STATEMENT

Territorial Cooperation within the Northern Periphery and the Arctic

European Regional and Urban Statistics

Annual Ministerial Meeting of Foreign Ministers of Landlocked Developing Countries

Towards coherent maritime spatial planning in the Baltic Sea Region, transnational and project perspective Talis Linkaits Head of VASAB Secretariat

8 th November 2013 in Gozo, Malta. Grand Hotel St. Anthony Street, Ghajnsielem GSM 9026

Experience and perspectives of using EU funds and other funding for the implementation of district renovation projects

Figure 10. Travel time accessibility for heavy trucks

PROTOCOL ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ALPINE CONVENTION OF 1991 RELATING TO SPATIAL PLANNING AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

The Atlantic Arc: New Translations for an Old Identity

Earth Observation and GEOSS in Horizon Copernicus for Raw Material Workshop 5 th September 2016

Stepping into the sea - New evidence on territorial development and the opportunities and risks for European seas and maritime regions

The National Spatial Strategy

First Findings of Alpine Space Stress Testing Approaches conducive to Implement Smart Specialisation Strategies through Clusters Policy Memo

Coastal Mapping Follow on? Bruno Frachon Corine Lochet Gaël Morvan

Workshop B Spatial positioning and definition of characteristics

Resolution adopted by the General Assembly. [on the report of the Second Committee (A/67/440/Add.2)]

PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOCIATION OF AUSTRALIA Strategic Plan

NSPA Forum. Presentation of the Study findings Dr Benito Giordano. Sundsvall, 19th April 2012

General considerations of regional policy

Copernicus Academy. Roles and responsibilities of the Copernicus Academy. user uptake. Focus Data uptake, capacity building and skills development

Country Fiche Lithuania

GRISI: Geomatic Regional Information Society Initiative M. Cabello 1, A. Valentín 2. 2

ESPON support for Targeted Analyses Ilona Raugze Director

Vincent Goodstadt. Head of European Affairs METREX European Network

Council conclusions on Arctic issues. 2985th FOREIGN AFFAIRS Council meeting Brussels, 8 December 2009

Natura 2000 and spatial planning. Executive summary

Mediteranean sea issues in the view of ESPON ESaTDOR project and Marine Spatial Planning in Slovenia

AMS E-GOS Local governance and performance of open data policies at municipal level

The Strategy of Regional Development of the Carpathians Carpathian Horizon 2020

EA SEA-WAY Project. 7 th Coordination Meeting. WP5 Development of sustainable passenger transport models for the Adriatic basin and capacity building

National Perspectives - Portugal. Margarida Almodovar

SWEDISH SDI DEVELOPMENT & IMPLEMENTATION OF INSPIRE

THE SEVILLE STRATEGY ON BIOSPHERE RESERVES

THE ROLE OF SPATIAL PLANNING IN INTEGRATED COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE INTERREG III B BALTCOAST PROJECT

Multinational Spatial Planning Experience

STRATEGY FOR SPATIAL PLANNING AND RENEWAL OF URBAN POLICY: THE SOFA OF CENTRAL METROPOLITAN AREA

Regional cooperation: evidence from European cooperative innovation networks

Interregional Cooperation in the Apennines

National planning report for Denmark

The ESPON Programme. Goals Main Results Future

INSPIRE in Sweden - an Important Part of the National Geodata Strategy

Declaration Population and culture

Patterns and Strategies for Spatial Development in Germany

How to strengthen the territorial dimension of Europe 2020 and the EU Cohesion Policy

Integrated Territorial Development Strategies in Greece under economic crisis

Poland, European Territory, ESPON Programme Warsaw, 2 July 2007 STRATEGY OF THE ESPON 2013 PROGRAMME

SIZE AND ROLE OF MICRO-ENTERPRISES IN THE MAJOR EU ISLANDS

Network of European Regions Using Space Technologies

Regional planning and Geopolitics

SPIMA Spatial dynamics and strategic planning in metropolitan areas

Territorial Intelligence and Innovation for the Socio-Ecological Transition

The Governance of Land Use

PAN AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF GEOGRAPHY AND HISTORY Specialized Organization of the OAS

Governance in Metropolitan Regions in Germany

INSPIRE Monitoring and Reporting Implementing Rule Draft v2.1

COUNCIL OF EUROPE S SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT POLICY

DELIVERING ECOSYSTEM- BASED MARINE SPATIAL PLANNING IN PRACTICE

SPATIAL PLANNING AND REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT OF GREECE

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

TERRITORIAL COHESION MEASUREMENT AT THE REGIONAL SCALE. A METHODOLOGICAL PROPOSAL AND APPLICATION IN ANDALUSIA

Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning Andrej Abramić

PROGRAM OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION CHAIRMANSHIP OF THE ARCTIC COUNCIL IN

Dr. Biliana Cicin-Sain 8 April th Meeting of the UN Open-ended Informal Consultative Process on Oceans and the Law of the Sea

Transcription:

Contribution of the Euroregion Pyrenees-Mediterranean to the conclusions of the 5th report on economic, social and territorial cohesion: the future of the cohesion policy A. Introduction The Euroregion Pyrenees-Mediterranean, founded in 2004, is a political cooperation project between the French regions of Languedoc-Roussillon and Midi-Pyrénées, and the Spanish autonomous communities of Catalonia and the Balearic Islands. The Euroregion, which puts into practice the determination for active cooperation, has led to concrete actions such as: Starting, in 2006, a call for applications for cultural projects Preparing a guidebook on food quality in the Euroregion Setting up a network of chambers of commerce This authentic territorial development strategy has now the support of a common legal structure. In operation since April 2010, the European Grouping for Territorial Cooperation (EGTC) Pyrenees-Mediterranean has its headquarters in Toulouse, a Secretariat General in Barcelona and an office in Brussels. It was the third European Grouping to be established and the first which is entirely composed of regions. The EGTC Pyrenees-Mediterranean is the translation into practice of the political will to cooperate of the Euroregion member regions. It allows the Euroregion to pursue its goals in numerous spheres, such as:

Higher education and research The EGTC Pyrenees-Mediterranean is the driving force of the Euroregional strategy of developing a Eurocampus, which is the biggest European campus in what concerns the number of students. The Eurocampus Pyrenees-Mediterranean gathers higher education institutions with the aim of improving their competitiveness and favouring the mobility of students, teaching staff and researchers. Culture Since 2010, the EGTC Pyrenees-Mediterranean has administered a call for applications for cultural projects funded by the four regions. This mechanism will be renewed in 2011. Economic development Since December 2010, the EGTC Pyrenees-Mediterranean has become the first EGTC composed exclusively of regional governments to benefit from European co-funding. What is more, the EGTC is leading a project within the framework of the SUDOE transnational programme that seeks to federate the initiatives of the four regions in support of start-ups by means of business incubators. Strengthened by this experience of integrated transnational cooperation, the Euroregion Pyrenees-Mediterranean welcomes with satisfaction the publication of the 5th cohesion report and reaffirms the need for a strong cohesion policy for all regions.

B. Our contribution 1. A strong cohesion policy for all the European regions, endowed with an ambitious budget In a difficult economic context, economic, social and territorial cohesion policy reflects the spirit of solidarity which is at the very heart of the European construction and that needs to be reinforced in these times of crisis. Cooperation between European regions is a good example of this spirit. We are convinced that cohesion policy must be sustained and endowed with a budget that enables it to produce a multiplier effect on our territories, our fellow citizens and our companies. The cohesion policy must have an ambitious budget so that it can make a significant contribution to meeting the aims of the Europe 2020 Strategy. 2. Strengthening governance a) Macroregional strategies The Euroregion Pyrenees-Mediterranean will closely follow the European reflection on macroregions. At the present time, it is weighing up the added value of this initiative, which comes from the Council and which, for the moment, only affects Member States (the strategies for the Baltic Sea and the Danube are a good example of that).

b) The emergence of cross-border cooperation between regions We would like to draw attention to the importance of the Euroregional level. Many regions in Europe have decided to cooperate and to structure this cooperation around the EGTC instrument. This is true, particularly in the case of border regions. Indeed, by becoming actual project territories, these areas of cooperation have an important role to play in straightening ties between local partners belonging to different Member States and that face common challenges. These areas are indispensable intermediaries of regional policy. Persuaded of the role that the groups of regions have to play, Euroregions structure themselves around the legal instrument available to them: the European Grouping for Territorial Cooperation, which is a tool for implementing European and Euroregional political strategies. The Euroregions (or equivalent structures) are, therefore, an important level of governance and their EGTCs are tools at the service of regional policy, especially of the goal of territorial cooperation. Euroregions represent structured territories of projects, particularly if a Grouping for Territorial Cooperation has been constituted. EGTCs also have the legitimacy to become structures of governance and management of European cohesion policy funds: Through part of the Competitiveness Objective of the operational programmes The Competitiveness Objective regions seek ways of coordinating their actions, and the interest aroused by the creation of the EGTC instrument is a good example of this intention. These regions make an effort to think and act in a European manner. The ability to mobilise part of the operational programmes ERDF funds

will allow them to make progress in regard to territorial cooperation and, therefore, move towards greater territorial cohesion. Within the Competitiveness Objective framework, article 37-6-b of the ERDF regulation allows part of the funds of the regional operational programmes to be allocated to European territorial cooperation. We think that the Commission could, in the name of a positive conditionality, foster the use of this mechanism, in particular for the regions that have structured their cooperation in a EGTC. The Commission could also support this possibility for cooperation by drawing up guidelines based on the priorities of the Europe 2020 Strategy. In the framework of the European Territorial Cooperation Objective (see point 5.b. below) c) EGTCs, legitimate governance tools As a cooperation instrument, the EGTC is a real multilevel governance tool that goes beyond the classical EU - Member State pair and enables the different institutions to work together in order to cope adequately with contemporary global challenges. The EGTC creates multilevel governance by formalising the commitment of its members to projects that structure cooperation and thus adds stability, transparency and clarity to common cooperation activities. d) Territorial pacts We consider it essential to reaffirm the Euroregions (or equivalent structures) as an important level of governance and their EGTCs as a tool at the service of regional

policy. Consolidating the links between the NUTS 2 institutional levels can only contribute favourably to the construction of a solidarity-based Europe in accordance with local reality and the Europe 2020 Strategy. The groupings of cross-border regions, such as the Euroregions, want, on the one hand, to find specific solutions to the problems associated to their geographical situation and, on the other, to benefit from the synergies arising from the potential for development generated by proximity and the exchange of ideas, means, actors, etc. With this strategy, which identifies cooperation goals to be achieved, the conclusion of a contract between the European Commission and a Euroregion structured as an EGTC could bring the Union closer to the citizens and provide a framework for the intervention of European and national funds. This contract, or pact, which would cover a Euroregional territory of projects, could become a framework for territorial cooperation experiments in managing European funds specifically earmarked for joint projects. The driving effect the European funds have on cooperation will be greater if they are the result of first level integrated cooperation within a strategic framework. This strategic framework would be structured around the Europe 2020 Strategy priorities for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. 3. Broadening the admissibility criteria based on GDP per capita In the context of the current regional policy programming, GDP per capita is used as the only indicator for a regions eligibility. Nevertheless, this indicator, on its own, cannot reflect the complexity of the concept of cohesion, which is much broader. New indicators territorialised statistics - are needed to give a true picture of a regions level of development.

In view of this, the Europe 2020 Strategy goals should be included as a point of reference, in accordance with the Union s general policy framework.

4. The need to simplify the EGTC regulation While it is true that EGTCs have the capacity to help take better advantage of the resources of a particular territory by means of the interaction of different institutional levels, the regulation governing them still contains numerous references to national law that delay or prevent a homogeneous application to all European territories. The Euroregion Pyrenees-Mediterranean is in favour of simplifying the EGTC regulation so as to support their development. This simplification must necessarily involve: the laws governing the EGTCs personnel and tax regime a reduction in the time taken by current procedures. Moreover, we call for the EGTC regulation to facilitate direct implementation, less subject to the contingencies of national interpretations, which on certain occasions go against the objectives being pursued. 5. The architecture of cohesion policy a) The Territorial Cooperation Objective The Euroregion Pyrenees-Mediterranean welcomes with satisfaction the reference to territorial cooperation, which maintains its present structure along three lines. Nevertheless, it expresses its concern regarding the concrete forms of this structure and the way the budget is broken down between these three lines. b) Cross-border cooperation In regard to cross-border cooperation, the Euroregion Pyrenees-Mediterranean calls for:

A shift from NUTS 3 to NUTS 2 It would be advisable for NUTS 2 zones to be taken into account in cross-border cooperation programmes instead of NUTS 3 zones, as it happens at the moment. Many cooperation areas are launched and structured around the EGTC legal instrument. Nevertheless, these border areas consisting in NUTS 2 zones (which are smaller than the SUDOE or North-west Europe interregional areas) go beyond the classical limits of the current programmes based on NUTS 3 zones. The changeover to NUTS 2 would allow the integration of areas which are part of a project focusing on cooperation, such as a Euroregion. In this way, these cross-border project territories would be able to participate fully in cross-border cooperation programmes. Application, in the case of island regions, of cross-border territory status to the maritime basin In the case of island areas, the rule according to which the maritime borders must be separated by less than 150 kilometres limits the insular regions possibilities of participating in regional organisations such as the Euroregions, of which they are in fact a part.

Moreover, it should be remembered that: Article 174 of the Lisbon Treaty states that, among the regions concerned by the economic, social and territorial cohesion policy, particular attention shall be paid to regions which suffer from severe and permanent natural or demographic handicaps such as the northernmost regions with very low population density and island, cross-border and mountain regions. The European Parliament, in a resolution of 22 September 2010, called for the dropping of the distance-related criterion (150 km) used for the purpose of classifying islands as border regions eligible for financing under cross-border cooperation programmes coming under the cohesion policy Territorial Cooperation Objective or the European Neighbourhood Policy; [and claimed for it to be considered] that, if it is necessary to establish some kind of limit, it would be more appropriate, in the case of island regions, for the cross-border territory condition to be applied at maritime basin level. Taking into account the arguments set out here, we call for the elimination of this 150 km rule for island regions. Therefore, in the next programming period, the wording of the European Funds regulations should exclude the application of the geographical limit on cross-border cooperation and apply, in the case of the island regions, cross-border territory condition to the maritime basin. Also available in: Spanish: http://www.euroregio.eu/eu/images/cohesion_es_tcm329-140788.pdf Catalan: http://www.euroregio.eu/eu/images/cohesion_cat2_tcm329-140789.pdf French: http://www.euroregio.eu/eu/images/cohesion_fr_tcm329-140787.pdf