Suchergebnisse

After centuries of lack of contacts between Spain and Portugal, the democratization of both countries allowed for a rapprochement which today is becoming more intensive. The crucial factor of the growing integration of Spanish and Portuguese border regions into a cross-border region is naturally the INTERREG programme. Both regions are disadvantaged within the European Union and their respective countries as poor regions. They have the status of a 'double periphery'. In the 1980s and particularly 1990s actors on both sides of the border intensified their contacts in order to overcome their double peripherality. The growing number of projects, the improvement of infrastructures and the revival of associationism will certainly change the quality of life of these regions, which are still among the lowest in both countries. The continuation of the INTERREG programme after 2007-2013 will be an important consolidating tool for the further development of cross-border cooperation. ; Després de segles de falta de contactes entre Espanya i Portugal, la democratització dels dos països va permetre un acostament que avui dia és cada vegada més intens. El factor crucial de la creixent integració de les regions frontereres d'Espanya i Portugal en una regió transfronterera és, naturalment, el programa INTERREG. Ambdues regions es troben en desavantatge dins de la Unió Europea i els seus països respectius, com les regions pobres. Tenen la condició de «doble perifèria '. En els anys 1980 i 1990, en particular els actors d'ambdós costats de la frontera han intensificat els seus contactes per tal de superar la seva situació perifèrica doble. El nombre creixent de projectes, la millora de les infraestructures i el renaixement de l'associacionisme sens dubte canviarà la qualitat de vida d'aquestes regions, que segueixen estant entre els més baixos dels dos països. La continuació del programa INTERREG després de 2007-2013 serà un instrument important per consolidar el desenvolupament de la cooperació transfronterera.

29 cm ; This article seeks to trace the growing dissension over the logic of European cohesion policy. Two perspectives are fighting for dominance, the European and the national. Only the European Commission and the European Parliament are actively promoting the European logic, which has gained ground over time through the overarching strategization (or Lisbonization) of European policies. In contrast, the memberstates subscribe to a national logic concerning European cohesion policy. This outlook is particularly notable among the 'friends of cohesion policy', a group that includes the southern, central, and eastern European countries. The funding allocated through the EU is applied in individual national markets, not in the single European market. In this regard, the concept of European cohesion policy to adjust national markets towards the European level has been sidelined by the national logic. This contribution attempts to reconstruct the dispute over the purpose of European cohesion policy since the reform of structural funds in 1988, focusing primarily on the latest rounds of negotiations over the multiannual financial framework (in which cohesion policy funds are a central issue) and the emerging conflict between the core and the periphery in the political economy of the European Union. If the European logic regarding the single European market's construction does not prevail, European integration will stagnate or even reverse, and national compartmentalization of cohesion policy may become the dominant spatial model in Europe. ; 29 cm ; Każdy numer posiada własny tytuł. ; This article seeks to trace the growing dissension over the logic of European cohesion policy. Two perspectives are fighting for dominance, the European and the national. Only the European Commission and the European Parliament are actively promoting the European logic, which has gained ground over time through the overarching strategization (or Lisbonization) of European policies. In contrast, the memberstates subscribe to a national logic concerning European cohesion policy. This outlook is particularly notable among the 'friends of cohesion policy', a group that includes the southern, central, and eastern European countries. The funding allocated through the EU is applied in individual national markets, not in the single European market. In this regard, the concept of European cohesion policy to adjust national markets towards the European level has been sidelined by the national logic. This contribution attempts to reconstruct the dispute over the purpose of European cohesion policy since the reform of structural funds in 1988, focusing primarily on the latest rounds of negotiations over the multiannual financial framework (in which cohesion policy funds are a central issue) and the emerging conflict between the core and the periphery in the political economy of the European Union. If the European logic regarding the single European market's construction does not prevail, European integration will stagnate or even reverse, and national compartmentalization of cohesion policy may become the dominant spatial model in Europe.