Recently, the notion of spatial justice has been discussed as a possible conceptual foundation for rethinking EU Cohesion Policy. While scholars have adopted a dual distributive and procedural understanding of spatial justice, the paper argues that, applied to cross-border areas, such a conceptualisation is challenged to explain how the border contributes to disparities. We argue that actively questioning the role of law is paramount for better examination of the dynamics within border areas. An understanding of spatial justice informed by legal geography allows examination of how law fosters and impedes movement across borders. The paper presents three recent examples where policy representatives from affected communities have fought to adapt legal provisions to cross-border spatiality. Whether such initiatives increased border communities' capacities to shape their own development (i.e. European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation) or not yet (i.e. co-development at the Lorraine-Luxembourg border; European Cross-Border Mechanism), these examples show that analysing EUropean borderlands as a spatiolegal category helps understanding of how space and law constantly struggle with one another, and how spatial justice emerges from a movement out of this conflict. The paper concludes by discussing the practical and conceptual implications of combining legal geography and spatial justice for analysing EU Borderlands.
Border areas are peripheries whose functions have been transformed under the impetus of the European integration process. From former frontlines, they have become interfaces, so that they are often portrayed as "laboratories of European integration". Yet, as their spatiality is shaped by sometimes two contradictory forms of territorialities; that of Member States and of the European Union (EU), they are unequally able to shape their own future. This contribution uses legal geography and spatial justice to discuss three main manifestations of this situation. Firstly, as Member States use the border as a resource and a marker of sovereignty, EUropean borderlands' own interests are often given lesser priority. Secondly, as demonstrated by the Cross-Border Review (EC, 2017), they face a number of legal obstacles hindering their effective access to EU law. Thirdly, multi-level mismatch limits borderlands' effective capacity to steer their own development. This contribution outlines the extent to which the EGTC instrument partially tackles these challenges and enhances procedural justice for EUropean borderlands; also shedding light on the interrelations between law and space in EUropean borderlands. It reveals that law dedicated to EUropean borderlands is paramount for them to have effective capacity to shape their own future and for the EU to develop an integration process that is more just towards EUropean borderlands.
Les espaces frontaliers sont souvent présentés comme les « laboratoires de l'intégration européenne ». Au-delà des discours et des symboles, quelle signification peut recouvrir la notion de région transfrontalière ? En définissant la région comme une construction identitaire, territoriale et institutionnelle se perpétuant dans le temps, cet ouvrage identifie et questionne les spécificités de ce processus dans le contexte transfrontalier. Pour ce faire, il distingue entre coopération inter- et suprarégionale interrogeant ainsi la capacité d'un espace frontalier à construire une coopération transfrontalière ad-hoc se distinguant de l'addition des membres à son origine. Cette étude est étayée par une analyse du discours, une opérationnalisation des concepts de territorialité transfrontalière et d'institution suprarégionale. Est à cet égard analysée la signification du GECT (Groupement européen de coopération territoriale), instrument européen offrant un cadre légal à la coopération. Cette problématique est explorée à partir du cas emblématique de la Grande Région qui a initié une stratégie de long terme visant à créer une « Région métropolitaine polycentrique transfrontalière » en 2008. Associant la Lorraine, le Luxembourg, la Rhénanie-Palatinat, la Sarre et la Wallonie, la Grande Région est un des espaces frontaliers les plus anciens (1971) concentrant le plus grand nombre de travailleurs frontaliers en Europe. ; The Greater Region Saar-Lor-Lux : Towards cross-border supraregionalisation ? Border areas are often portrayed as 'laboratories of European integration'. Beyond the discourses and symbols, what does the concept of cross-border region actually entail? By characterising the region as the construction of an identity, a territoriality and a governance system perpetuated over time, this publication identifies and questions the specificities of these processes in the cross-border context. It distinguishes between inter- and supraregional cooperation thus questioning a border area's capacity to develop an ad hoc cross-border cooperation whose raison d'être consists in strengthening the commitments pertaining to the border area's interests. This study is underpinned by a discourse analysis and a conceptualisation of cross-border territoriality and supraregional institution. In this respect, the significance of the EGTC (European Grouping for Territorial Cooperation), a European instrument providing a legal framework for cooperation, is analysed. This issue is explored in depth using the emblematic case of the Greater Region, a border area that launched in 2008 a long-term strategy to develop a 'cross-border polycentric metropolitan region'. Composed of Lorraine (France), Luxembourg, Wallonia (Belgium), Rhineland-Palatinate and Saarland (Germany), the Greater Region constitutes one of the oldest border areas (1971) and presents the highest concentration of cross-border workers in Europe. ; Die Großregion Saar-Lor-Lux: Auf dem Weg zu einer grenzüberschreitenden Supraregionalisierung? Grenzgebiete werden oft als "Labor Europäischer Integration" dargestellt. Welche Bedeutung, jenseits der produzierten vielfältigen Diskurse und Symbole, kann der Begriff grenzüberschreitende Region umfassen? Dieses Buch definiert die Region als eine identitäre, territoriale und institutionelle Konstruktion, die sich über die Zeit hinweg aufrechterhält. Dabei werden die Besonderheiten dieses Prozesses für den grenzüberschreitenden Kontext identifiziert und hinterfragt. Das Unterscheiden zwischen inter- und supraregionaler Kooperation erlaubt es, die Kapazitäten des Grenzgebiets zur Entwicklung einer grenzüberschreitenden Ad-hoc-Kooperation, deren Daseinsberechtigung in der Bekräftigung der hinsichtlich den Interessen des Grenzraumes eingegangen Verpflichtungen besteht, zu hinterfragen. Die Studie wird durch die Analyse des grenzüberschreitenden Diskurses, der Territorialität und der (supraregionalen) Governance unterstützt. Dabei wird insbesondere der Europäische Verbund für territoriale Zusammenarbeit (EVTZ) - ein europäisches Instrument, das den Rechtsrahmen für territoriale Kooperation vorgibt - untersucht. Diese Fragestellungen werden im Hinblick auf die Großregion analysiert. Die Kooperation innerhalb der Großregion, bestehend aus Lothringen, Luxembourg, Rheinland-Pfalz, Saarland und Wallonien, wurde 1971 eingeführt. Die Großregion zählt somit zu einem der ältesten Kooperationsräume in Europa. 2008 wurde die langfristige Strategie der "grenzüberschreitenden polyzentrischen Metropolregion" ins Leben gerufen.
All over Europe, EGTCs (European Grouping for Territorial Cooperation) are mushrooming. Between 2006, when the EU regulation entered into force, and 2014, 51 EGTCs have been established. Conceived as a legal tool to facilitate cross-border, interregional or transnational cooperation, the EGTC was established after years of lobbying from cross-border organisations. Apart from practical guidelines mostly dedicated to the legal possibilities and limitations of this tool, few academic studies examine the significance of this tool for cross-border governance as such. This paper develops such a perspective, using the case study of the Greater Region SaarLorLux, (Lorraine, Luxembourg, Rhineland-Palatinate, Saarland and Wallonia), where two existing EGTCs are operating. The EGTC INTERREG IV A Greater Region is the only EGTC managing an EU programme; the EGTC Secretariat of the Summit supports the main political organisation in this area. This contribution argues that the EGTC tool can facilitate the emergence of a supraregional scale of governance. This paper examines how this instrument allows the institutionalisation of a cross border entity in terms of its capacity to embody and perpetuate the cross-border region, and to implement its strategy. It then applies this conceptualisation to the specific context of the Greater Region. The empirical analysis shows that although the two EGTCs institutionalise the cooperation, they are rather conceived as administrative and operational tools. The paper concludes with possible explanations of such a mismatch between the potential of this tool and the effective use of it.
European Union integration policy has challenged traditional border functions resulting in regionalisation processes and policy makers facing diverse functional interdependencies across multiple scales and territories. Local and regional authorities participate in a European multi-level governance system. Within regions, cross-border cooperation institutionalises distinct forms of governance. This thesis investigates the regionalisation process launched across borders at a subnational level using the case study of the Greater Region Saar-Lor-Lux. Conceptually, this study defines regionalization as construction of a region. This analysis of cross-border cooperation in the Greater Region explains "cross-border supraregionalisation" through three processes. First, the discursive construction of a cross-border strategy illustrates the complexity of joint positioning. The metropolitan impetus advocated in the Greater Region reveals the ambivalent objectives of the partners and the dominance of the metropolitan discourse at the national and European level. Second, beyond the institutional cooperation space ("Vertragraum"), the space of the mandate ("Mandatsraum") serves as a medium to territorialise the joint strategy. It results from the ideal projection of the strategy in space and thus, evokes a bordering process. This "soft space" is constantly negotiated between the partners and illustrates patterns of cross-border spatial empowerment. Third, the study analyses the extent to which cross-border partners delegate responsibilities and legitimacy to joint cross-border institutions, especially through the innovative legal instrument European Grouping for Territorial Cooperation.
The notion of autonomy has become central for considering the articulation between democracy, public policies and local development. The present report questions the possible link between local autonomy and spatial justice. It synthesises the research conducted in the framework of RELOCAL Work Package (WP) 7, investigating "how different degrees of regional autonomy can affect the outcomes and future perspectives of spatial justice as a cohesion objective" (Grant Agreement RELOCAL, p. 23). Our understanding of autonomy takes its roots in the reference definition provided by Clark (1984): the conjugation of two specific powers: "initiation and immunity" in local stakeholders' hands. Adapted to the RELOCAL research interests, autonomy is the combination of the power of initiative, i.e. capacity of the locality to accomplish tasks serving its own interests and that of its population, and the power of immunity, i.e. the effective possibility for a local authority, to act without oversight by higher levels. These two faces of autonomy refer to the "two faces of democratic self-determination" as defined by Scharpf (1999): "government by the people" and "government for the people". This definition of autonomy is operational and fruitful for exploring the power within the locality to initiate and to "immunise" actions pursuing greater spatial justice. In that sense, WP7's understanding of autonomy is also critical, questioning whether autonomy allows localities to tackle spatial injustice. Firstly, our understanding of autonomy allowed us to investigate a paradox: even though local autonomy has increased all over Europe, local democracy (i.e. effective involvement of the local population in decision-making) has not increased. More locally driven forms of government of the (local development) action do not automatically produce more inclusive forms of participation in taking action and making decisions. Local development actions are structurally shaped by a dual project-based approach and a problem-solving approach. That ...
In France, spatial injustice is usually described as disadvantages related to place that result in the feeling that the local population is left out or unable to shape the locality's own future. It contrasts with a strong tradition of "égalité des territoires" ("equality between territories") which shapes the spatial planning policy. Two contrasted case studies have been selected for the RELOCAL project in France. Located in peri-urban post-industrial contexts, they both need to reopen the path towards local development. The EPA Alzette-Belval (Lorraine) is a top-down initiative established through an on-site technical implementation, while Euralens is a more bottom-up, autonomous association in the Nord mining basin. Spatial injustices existed in both localities, and there were a number of similarities (e.g. access to and financing of public services, fair and equitable access to decision-making processes). The national context goes beyond the individual findings for each case, to reflect on their significance in a national context shaped by successive waves of decentralisation and the recent launch of nationally led thematic initiatives to support local development. We found that Euralens and the EPA Alzette-Belval make a direct contribution to greater spatial justice. The EPA Alzette-Belval specifically targets distributive justice, while Euralens targets procedural justice more. These two actions demonstrate that despite decentralisation, the state remains crucial in France. Like the place-based approach promoted at the EU level, France encourages localities to build up their own initiatives to foster local development, while the state provides timely support through dedicated schemes (e.g. ERBM, ÉcoCité, EPA à la française). In this context, regions facing steep challenges (e.g. economic regeneration following the fall of single industries, asymmetric border exchanges and interdependencies) are overwhelmed by the task of effectively mobilising the national tools at their disposal and initiating local development on their own. Nationally led instruments therefore need to be adapted to local geographic, political and social specificities in order to be capable of deploying their full impact. It therefore seems important – especially in a unitary country like France – to keep monitoring spatial disparities and social inequalities, have dedicated channels for territories to bring forward their respective problems, and as a consequence to keep redistributive measures that can be mobilised to address the deepest territorial divides. Too often, potential beneficiaries of EU funding do not apply (i.e. due to the administrative burden, lack of information). Access to EU regional policy should be more open, simpler and based more on impact (including qualitative and quantitative indicators). Open European satellites with dedicated agents in territories facing structural challenges could contribute by enabling these regions and giving "Brussels" a more human and less bureaucratic face.
À l'instar des stratégies nationales de métropolisation, certains espaces de coopération transfrontalière affichent des ambitions similaires. La Région métropolitaine polycentrique transfrontalière (RMPT) dans la Grande Région (SaarLorLux+) a pour objectif de renforcer son positionnement européen mais aussi sa gouvernance interne. Ce texte analyse cette ambition politique en tant que construction d'une « nouvelle » région, impliquant la définition de nouvelles frontières. Les représentations spatiales de cette région sont mises en évidence à travers trois dimensions : le territoire, les institutions et la dimension métropolitaine de ce projet. Ce dernier se révèle être davantage un label en vogue permettant de mobiliser les acteurs qu'une stratégie de métropolisation. L'importante adhésion des acteurs témoigne toutefois d'une forte énergie politique souhaitant donner une nouvelle impulsion à un espace transfrontalier en structuration. L'analyse empirique de ces représentations spatiales se base sur les résultats d'une étude Delphi conduite auprès d'environ 300 experts de la Grande Région. Celle-ci a eu lieu dans le cadre du projet européen ESPON/Metroborder.
It is a key aim of the EU2020 strategy and of the Luxembourg government to promote research and innovation ("smart growth"). The 2014-2020 programming period of the Structural Funds offers an opportunity to support projects in this field at national, cross-border and transnational levels. This leaflet synthesises the results of a consultation process organised by the ESPON Contact Point of Luxembourg in summer and autumn 2013 in the framework of the USESPON project. First, it aimed at analysing the relevance of ESPON results in the field of research, development and innovation (RDI) in Luxembourg. Second, this process reflected on possible priorities for the future operational programmes of the structural funds. This process involved either experts in the field of RDI or those responsible for drafting operational programmes. The consultation process has been framed by a Delphi technique. First, participants received "support material" presenting the situation of Luxembourg according to the ESPON results. Second, they participated in a workshop on 11th July 2013. Third, a synthesis based on the results of the workshop was provided together with a questionnaire giving the experts the opportunity to deepen and concretise their contribution. By summarising this consultation process, this leaflet aims at 1) working out a profile of Luxembourg on the basis of ESPON results in the field of RDI and 2) developing recommendations of how future-oriented innovation strategies can be implemented in the context of European Territorial Cooperation. The final version of this document was published on the ECP Luxembourg website in autumn 2013.
