Governing cross-border regions: History, characteristics, and implications from the European Union

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1004-9479.2024.03.20222442

Abstract

Abstract:

The recent development of globalization and regionalization has witnessed the emergence of a new form of regional governance - cross-border cooperation. The European Union hosts some of the most representative cross-border regions and provides good examples of cross-border region-building. In this paper, we review the institutionalization process of cross-border cooperation in the EU (formerly European Community), focusing on how multilevel governance was structured and how relevant policy packages were formulated and played out on the ground. Based on key actors involved in and main characteristics of cross-border institutionalization, we divide the process of cross-border cooperation into four phases: initiation (characterized by cross-border spatial planning), growth (characterized by cross-border legal frameworks), expansion (characterized by INTERREG initiatives) and deepened cooperation (characterized by the EU Cohesion Policy and multilevel governance). Spatial, legal, and economic issues were the priorities of different phases, leaving national sovereignty as the main hurdle for further institutional integration. Drawing on the lessons from the EU and the observations in the Yangtze River Delta, we made several suggestions on how the Yangtze River Delta would build its own cross-boundary regions. Although regions in the Yangtze River Delta are not separated by hard borders and are thus free from most political issues faced by EU cross-border regions, they encountered many spatial, economic, and institutional issues in regional development that are similar to EU cross-border regions. We, therefore, suggest a couple of aspects that they can learn from the EU cross-border development, including the establishment of project-based cooperation platforms supported by stable funding, the inclusion of multiple stakeholders in multilevel governance, particularly grassroots governments and cross-boundary organizations, and the promotion of cooperation between adjacent regions. We hope these suggestions would further contribute to the development of regional cooperation in China, which may extend from cross-boundary cooperation between neighbors to multifaceted cooperation and multilevel governance.

Key words: cross-border regions, multi-level governance, policy implication, European Union, Yangtze River Delta

摘要：

在全球化与区域一体化的发展趋势下，跨界区域不断涌现，形成以合作互利为制度基础的区域治理新主体。作为全球发展最早、规模最大、行政边界层次最为丰富也是最具代表性的跨界区域之一，欧盟跨界区域为世界各地的跨界发展与治理提供了经验范本。本文在概述欧盟跨界区域研究背景的基础上，详细分析了其发展历程，指出欧盟的跨界区域发展与欧洲一体化的宏观趋势紧密相关，主要可以划分为四个阶段：空间导向的跨界发展萌芽期、法律导向的跨界发展成长期、经济导向的跨界发展拓展期以及制度导向的跨界发展深化期。在此基础上，本文分析了欧盟跨界可持续发展的制度特征，重点关注了其多层次的治理结构与稳定保障政策的形成过程与实施路径。以此为借鉴，结合笔者对长三角区域一体化的观察，本文对长三角区域跨界协同发展的政策实践进行了反思并提出了相应的建议，包括推动项目化的资金支持和运营制度的建立；丰富治理尺度，强化跨界组织和基层政府的治理参与；以及推动临界地区的合作发展。通过欧盟经验与长三角区域一体化实际行动的具体结合，笔者希望对长三角跨界区域发展提供理论与实践指导，以此对我国跨界区域发展的支持机制、治理逻辑及空间落点的制度化提升有所启发。

关键词: 跨界区域, 多层次治理, 政策启示, 欧盟, 长三角地区

Ying WANG, Wanyun YING, Xiaolong LUO. Governing cross-border regions: History, characteristics, and implications from the European Union[J]. World Regional Studies, 2024, 33(3): 56-69.

王盈, 应婉云, 罗小龙. 欧盟跨界区域发展的历程、制度特征与启示[J]. 世界地理研究, 2024, 33(3): 56-69.

Figures/Tables 4

References 55

1	DURÀ-GUIMERÀ A, GONZÁLEZ X O. Recent dynamics in European cross-border cooperation: Towards a new period?. Regional Studies Association Annual International Conference. 2010.
2	SCOTT J W. European and North American contexts for cross-border regionalism. Regional Studies, 1999, 33(7): 605-617.
3	朱惠斌. 联合跨界合作演进特征及驱动机制研究. 人文地理, 2014(2): 90-95.
	ZHU H. Cross-border cooperation evolution feature and driving mechanism research. Human Geography, 2014, 29(2):90-95.
4	CAVES R W. Encyclopedia of the City (1st edition). New York: Routedge, 2004.
5	SCOTT J W. Cross-border governance in the Baltic Sea Region. Regional and Federal Studies, 2002, 12(4): 135-153.
6	SPARROW G. San Diego-Tijuana: Not quite a binational city or region. GeoJournal, 2001, 54(1): 73-83.
7	罗小龙, 沈建法. 长江三角洲城市合作模式及其理论框架分析. 地理学报, 2007, 62(2): 115-126.
	LUO X, SHEN J. Analysis of urban cooperation models in the Yangtze River Delta and their theoretical frameworks. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2007, 62(2): 115-126.
8	LI Y, WU F. Understanding city-regionalism in China: regional cooperation in the Yangtze River Delta. Regional Studies, 2018, 52(3): 313-324.
9	LUO X, SHEN J, CHEN W. Urban networks and governance in city-region planning: State-led region building in nanjing city-region, china. Geografiska Annaler, Series B: Human Geography, 2010, 92(4): 311-326.
10	熊健, 孙娟, 王世营, 等. 长三角区域规划协同的上海实践与思考. 城市规划学刊, 2019(1): 50-59.
	XIONG J, SUN J, WANG S, et al. Shanghai practice and reflections on regional planning cooperation in the Yangtze River Delta region. Urban Planning Forum, 2019(1): 50-59.
11	王绍博, 罗小龙, 唐蜜, 等. 基于共生理论的临京临沪地区跨界融合发展对比研究. 地理科学, 2019, 39(11): 1681-1690.
	WANG S, LUO X, TANG M, et al. Development of Cross-border integration of Beijing and Shanghai based on symbiosis theory. Scientia Geographica Sinica,2019, 39(11): 1681-1690.
12	唐蜜, 罗小龙, 王绍博. 大都市区跨界地区空间演化及动力机制研究. 人文地理, 2022, 37(2): 103-111.
	TANG M, LUO X, WANG S. Study on the evolution and dynamic mechanism of cross-boundary regions' development in metropolitan regions. Human Geography, 2022, 37(2): 103-111.
13	曹卫东, 曾刚, 朱晟君, 等. 长三角区域一体化高质量发展:问题与出路. 自然资源学报, 2022, 37(6): 1385-1402.
	CAO W, ZENG G, ZHU S, et al. High-quality integrated development in the Yangtze River Delta region:Problems and solutions. Journal of Natural Resources, 2022, 37(6): 1385-1402.
14	罗小龙, 沈建法. 跨界的城市增长——以江阴经济开发区靖江园区为例. 地理学报, 2006, 61(4): 435-445.
	LUO X, SHEN J. Urban growth between cities: the case of Jiangyin economic development zone in Jingjiang. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2006, 61(4): 435-445.
15	王盈, 罗小龙, 许骁, 等. 双子城跨界融合研究——杭州临平与嘉兴海宁跨界发展的实证研究. 经济地理, 2015, 35(8): 89-97.
	WANG L, LUO X, XU X, et al. Cross-boundary integration of a twin city: A case study of Linping and Haining. Economic Geography, 2015, 35(8): 89-97.
16	CASTLES S. Migration and community formation under conditions of globalization. International Migration Review, 2002, 36(4): 1143-1168.
17	JESSOP B. Theories of New Regionalism//SÖDERBAUM F, SHAW T M. Theories of New Regionalism. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2003: 179-196.
18	CHAN R C K. Cross-border regional development in Southern China. GeoJournal, 1998, 44(3): 225-237.
19	PERKMANN M. Construction of new territorial scales: A framework and case study of the EUREGIO cross-border region. Regional Studies, 2007, 41(2): 253-266.
20	PERKMANN M. The rise of the Euroregion: A bird's eye perspective on European cross-border co-operation (2003-01-19)[2020-06-18]. .
21	刘小丽. 跨界合作下的欧盟空间规划实践经验及对珠三角规划整合的启示. 广州:华南理工大学, 2012.
	LIU X. The practice experience of European Union spatial planning under the cross-border cooperation and their inspiration to the Pearl River Delta integration planning. Guangzhou: South China University of Technology, 2012.
22	NOVOTNÝ LUKÁŠ. Effects of 'Covidfencing' on cross-border commuting: A case of Czech-German borderland. European Planning Studies, 2022, 30(4): 590-607.
23	NIENABER B, WILLE C. Cross-border cooperation in Europe: A relational perspective. European Planning Studies, 2020, 28(1): 1-7.
24	J.DOWLE LEWIS. Toward a (co)relational border? Order, care, and chaos at Nordic borders. Political Geography, 2021, 90: 102455.
25	DURAND F, DECOVILLE A. A multidimensional measurement of the integration between European border regions. Journal of European Integration, 2020, 42(2): 163-178.
26	王昱. 论当代欧洲一体化进程中的文化认同问题——兼评欧盟的文化政策及其意向. 国际观察, 2000, 37(6): 120-126.
	WANG Y. On the problem of cultural identity in the contemporary European integration process - With a critique of the European Union's cultural policy and its intentions. International Review, 2000, 37(6): 120-126.
27	佟家栋, 王芳. 欧盟经济一体化及其深化的动力探讨. 南开经济研究, 2000(1): 29-32.
	TONG J, WANG F. Exploring the dynamics of EU economic integration and its deepening. Nankai Economic Studies, 2000(1): 29-32.
28	金日. 欧洲一体化的政治分析. 上海: 复旦大学, 2004.
	JIN R. The political analysis of european integration. Shanghai: Fudan University, 2004.
29	吴志成, 李客循. 欧洲联盟的多层级治理:理论及其模式分析. 欧洲研究, 2003, 21(6): 100-113.
	WU Z, LI K. Multi-level governance in the European Union: An analysis of theories and their models. Chinese Journal of European Studies, 2003, 21(6): 100-113.
30	叶元. 欧盟促进区域经济协调发展对武汉城市圈的启示. 江汉大学学报(社会科学版), 2010, 27(1): 34-37.
	YE Y. Revelation EU in promoting regional economy co-development to the Wuhan Urban Cluster.J ournal of Jianghan University (Social Sciences), 2010, 27(1): 34-37.
31	孙友祥, 安家骏. 跨界治理视角下武汉城市圈区域合作制度的建构. 中国行政管理, 2008(8): 57-59.
	SUN Y, AN J. Construction of regional cooperation system in Wuhan Urban Circle with a view of transgovernment approach. Chinese Public Administration, 2008(8): 57-59.
32	陶希东. 中国跨界都市圈规划的体制重建与政策创新. 城市规划, 2008(8): 36-43.
	TAO X. Institutional reconstruction and policy innovation for cross-border metropolitan area planning in China. City Planning Review, 2008(8): 36-43.
33	王再文, 李刚. 区域合作的协调机制: 多层治理理论与欧盟经验. 当代经济管理, 2009, 31(9): 48-53.
	WANG Z, LI G. The coordination mechanism of regional cooperation: Theory of multi-level governance and EU experience. Contemporary Economic Management, 2009, 31(9): 48-53.
34	卓凯, 殷存毅. 区域合作的制度基础:跨界治理理论与欧盟经验. 财经研究, 2007(1): 55-65.
	ZHUO K, YIN C. The institutional infrastructure of regional cooperation: Theory of transborder governance and EU experiences. Journal of Finance and Economics, 2007(1): 55-65.
35	杨逢珉, 孙定东. 欧盟区域治理的制度安排——兼论对长三角区域合作的启示. 世界经济研究, 2007(5): 82-85.
	YANG F, SUN D. Institutional arrangements for regional governance in the European Union - An implication for regional cooperation in the Yangtze River Delta. World Economy Studies, 2007(5): 82-85.
36	王颖, 杨利花. 跨界治理与雾霾治理转型研究以京津冀区域为例. 东北大学学报(社会科学版),2016, 18(4): 388-393.
	WANG Y, YANG L. Study on cross-border governance and transformation of haze and fog governance - Based on Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region. Journal of Northeastern University (Social Science), 2016, 18(4): 388-393.
37	钱慧, 罗震东. 欧盟"空间规划"的兴起、理念及启示. 国际城市规划, 2011, 26(3): 66-71.
	QIAN H, LUO Z. Understanding the "spatial planning" approach in recent EU and the implications for China. Urban Planning International, 2011, 26(3): 66-71.
38	刘慧, 樊杰, 王传胜. 欧盟空间规划研究进展及启示. 地理研究, 2008, 27(6): 1381-1389.
	LIU H, FAN J, WANG C. Progress in the study of European spatial planning and the inspiration to China. Geographical Research, 2008, 27(6): 1381-1389.
39	谷海洪, 诸大建. 公共政策视角的欧洲空间一体化规划及其借鉴. 城市规划, 2006, 30(2): 60-63.
	GU H, ZHU D. Unified European spatial planning in perspective of public policy: introduction and implication. City Planning Review, 2006, 30(2): 60-63.
40	程遥. 欧盟跨境协作政策述要 —— 以 Interreg Ⅲ计划和 Centrope 项目为例. 国际城市规划, 2009, 24(5): 72-78.
	CHENG Y. Regional cross border cooperation policies in EU: the case of the Interreg III and Centrope Program. Urban Planning International, 2009, 24(5): 72-78.
41	施雯, 王勇. 欧洲空间规划实施机制及其启示. 规划师, 2013, 29(3): 98-102.
	SHI W, WANG Y. European spatial planning implementation mechanism. Planners, 2013, 29(3): 98-102.
42	WASSENBERG B, REITEL B, PEYRONY J. Territorial Cooperation in Europe - A Historical Perspective. Luxembourg: Publications office of the European Union, 2015.
43	McCORMICK J. Understanding the European Union: A concise introduction (7th edition). London: Red Globe Press, 2017.
44	AYKAÇ A. Transborder regionalisation: an analysis of transborder cooperation structures in Western Europe within the context of European integration and decentralisation towards regional and local governments. Sindelfingen: Libertas, 1994.
45	SCHMITT-EGNER P. 'Grenzüberschreitende Zusammenarbeit' in Europa als Gegenstand wissenschaftlicher Forschung und Strategie transnationaler Praxis. Anmerkungen zur Theorie, Empirie und Praxis des transnationalen Regionalismus//BRUNN G, SCHMITT- EGNER P. Grenzüberschreitende Zusammenarbeit in Europa: Theorie - Empirie - Praxis. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 1998.
46	HETTNE B. The New Regionalism Revisited//SODERBAUM F, SHAW T. Theories of New Regionalism: A palgrave reader. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003: 22-42.
47	TELO M. European Union and New Regionalism: Regional Actors and Global Governance in a Post-Hegemonic Era. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 2001.
48	COUNCIL of EUROPE. European Outline Convention on Transfrontier Co-operation between Territorial Communities or Authorities. Madrid: 1980.
49	GOLDSMITH M. The Europeanisation of Local Government. Urban Studies, 1993, 30(4-5): 683-699.
50	PERKMANN M. Cross-Border Regions in Europe. European Urban And Regional Studies, 2003, 10(2): 153-171.
51	DE SENARCLENS P. Governance and the crisis in the international mechanisms of regulation. International Social Science Journal, 1998, 50(155): 91-104.
52	PUCHER J, STUMM T, SCHNEIDEWIND P. Easing legal and administrative obstacles in EU border regions[R]. Luxembourg: 2017.
53	SCHARPF F. Governing in Europe: Effective and Democratic? Governing in Europe: Effective and Democratic? Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.
54	SCOTT J W, COLLINS K. Inducing transboundary regionalism in asymmetric situations: The case of the German‐Polish Border. Journal of Borderlands Studies, 1997, 12(1-2): 97-121.
55	KUROWSKA-PYSZ J, CARGNIN A P, DE OLIVEIRA LEMOS B, et al. The assessment of the INTERREG VA Program: Support for the Polish-Slovak Cross-Border Projects//CASTANHO R A. Cross-Border Cooperation (CBC) Strategies for Sustainable Development. Hershey: IGI Global, 2020: 43-69.

阶段	跨界发展萌芽期 (1958—1979)	跨界发展成长期 (1980—1989)	跨界发展拓展期 (1990—2006)	跨界发展深化期 (2007—2020)
发展背景	战后重建	全球化推动欧洲一体化	冷战结束，欧元区的建立	欧盟机构改革，深化区域整合
参与范围	主要强调国家政府	主要强调国家、区域与地方政府	主要强调区域与地方政府	国家、区域与地方政府，企业，NGO、研究机构、市民组织等
主要特征	空间导向，出台跨界空间规划等（主要涉及具体跨界基础设施），推动跨界功能区的形成	法律导向，出台跨界合作的法律框架	经济导向，建立跨界合作基金支持的项目平台，空间规划作为超国家层面的整体治理手段，涵盖基础设施、城乡发展、生态保护等诸多方面	制度导向，从跨界合作到领域合作，形成多层次治理体系
标志事件	1958年成立首个跨界区域EUREGIO	1980年签署马德里公约	1990年成立跨界合作基金；1999年出版《欧洲空间发展展望》	2007年签署里斯本条约，出台新一轮区域与社会凝聚政策
面临问题	国家主权原则与一体化发展的冲突	跨界合作法律框架未能调和国家主权原则与一体化发展的冲突	跨界合作项目以经济导向为主，制度建构不足	如何简化程序与机构设置，打破制度瓶颈

阶段	跨界发展萌芽期 (1958—1979)	跨界发展成长期 (1980—1989)	跨界发展拓展期 (1990—2006)	跨界发展深化期 (2007—2020)
发展背景	战后重建	全球化推动欧洲一体化	冷战结束，欧元区的建立	欧盟机构改革，深化区域整合
参与范围	主要强调国家政府	主要强调国家、区域与地方政府	主要强调区域与地方政府	国家、区域与地方政府，企业，NGO、研究机构、市民组织等
主要特征	空间导向，出台跨界空间规划等（主要涉及具体跨界基础设施），推动跨界功能区的形成	法律导向，出台跨界合作的法律框架	经济导向，建立跨界合作基金支持的项目平台，空间规划作为超国家层面的整体治理手段，涵盖基础设施、城乡发展、生态保护等诸多方面	制度导向，从跨界合作到领域合作，形成多层次治理体系
标志事件	1958年成立首个跨界区域EUREGIO	1980年签署马德里公约	1990年成立跨界合作基金；1999年出版《欧洲空间发展展望》	2007年签署里斯本条约，出台新一轮区域与社会凝聚政策
面临问题	国家主权原则与一体化发展的冲突	跨界合作法律框架未能调和国家主权原则与一体化发展的冲突	跨界合作项目以经济导向为主，制度建构不足	如何简化程序与机构设置，打破制度瓶颈

类型	Interreg I （1990—1993）	Interreg II （1994—1999）	Interreg III （2000—2006）	Interreg IV （2007—2013）	Interreg V （2014—2020）
法律地位	地方发展动议		欧盟结构基金（Structural fund）管理规章的一部分		单独的管理规章
成员国数量	11	11（后来发展到15）	15（后来发展到25）	27（后来发展到28）	28
跨界行动计划	31项	59项	79项	92项	100项
预算（欧元，按当前汇率）	11亿	38亿	58亿	87亿	101亿

类型	Interreg I （1990—1993）	Interreg II （1994—1999）	Interreg III （2000—2006）	Interreg IV （2007—2013）	Interreg V （2014—2020）
法律地位	地方发展动议		欧盟结构基金（Structural fund）管理规章的一部分		单独的管理规章
成员国数量	11	11（后来发展到15）	15（后来发展到25）	27（后来发展到28）	28
跨界行动计划	31项	59项	79项	92项	100项
预算（欧元，按当前汇率）	11亿	38亿	58亿	87亿	101亿

类型	Interreg A	Interreg B	Interreg C
空间范围	两国（或多国）边境区域	跨国区域	超国家大尺度区域
跨界行动计划（以Interreg V为例）	88项（其中合作项目60项，预备接纳援助项目12项，欧洲睦邻伙伴项目16项）	15项	4项
合作重点	空间邻近性（如通过跨界设施共享改善居民生活水平）	空间规划（通过空间协调手段，解决不同地区面临的共同空间挑战）	网络与交流（城市/区域之间的能力建设与合作，不强调空间性）
参与主体	地方与区域政府	超国家、国家、与区域政府	超国家、地方与区域政府