scholarly journals Border Regions and Infrastructure Networks in the European Integration Process

1993 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 431-446 ◽  
Author(s):  
P Nijkamp
Keyword(s):  
European Integration ◽  
Development Strategies ◽  
Integration Process ◽  
Infrastructure Networks ◽  
Indigenous Development ◽  
Border Regions ◽  
Development Scenarios ◽  
Border Areas ◽  
Peripheral Areas

This paper is focused on development strategies of peripheral areas. In particular, the issue of integration effects on (internal) border regions after the completion of the internal European market is addressed. After a review of recent EC policies, it is claimed that there is an urgent need for the design and evaluation of active development strategies for former internal border areas. A case study on two Dutch (peripheral) border provinces is described to see how the indigenous development potential of such areas can be exploited as a strategic vehicle for enhancing their international competitiveness. A multiple criteria analysis is used to identify the most plausible and desirable development scenarios for these regions.

scholarly journals Stakeholders’ Perspectives on Border Region Development: West Southeast Maluku, Indonesia

2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-80
Author(s):  
Nuzula Anggeraini ◽  
Yeremias T. Keban ◽  
Jun Matsunami
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Method ◽  
Local Level ◽  
State Level ◽  
Economic Benefits ◽  
Border Region ◽  
Border Regions ◽  
International Borders ◽  
Border Areas ◽  
Depth Interviews

Border regions are geographically presented with potential economic benefits. However, some of these areas have not been able to take advantage of their strategic geographic locality. This is also the case for border areas in Indonesia. There is a spectrum of perceptions by stakeholders on how border regions, particularly international borders, should be developed. This study sought to capture the perspectives of Indonesian stakeholders on border region development, and the extent of influence such perspectives have in the policy of border areas development with a case study in West Southeast Maluku The research was conducted using qualitative method with in-depth interviews as the primary collecting data technique. The results show that despite perceptions of stakeholders who view West Southeast Maluku as an area of insecurity, they also see the potential of the area to be developed as a gateway, area of opportunity, zone of contacts and zone of cooperation. However, the current policies and strategies of the development of border areas do not exemplify such perceptions, and the formulation of such policies is likely to be dominated by state-level stakeholders, despite the fact that local level stakeholders have a more comprehensive understanding of the needs of their areas.

scholarly journals A Struggle over Recognition and Nonrecognition: The Internationalization of the Abkhaz State University

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-22
Author(s):  
Bruno Coppieters
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Educational Programs ◽  
Institutional Autonomy ◽  
State University ◽  
Nonstate Actors ◽  
Integration Process ◽  
The Way

Abstract The Abkhaz State University (ASU) is internationally isolated, despite its cooperation with universities in Russia. Georgia combines its refusal to recognize Abkhaz statehood with a policy of nonrecognition of its university, which sets the direction for other countries. But the Abkhaz policies of nonrecognition are also to be taken into account. Abkhazia opposes any form of internationalization of the ASU generating closer ties with Georgia. The article examines how the Georgian and Abkhaz policies of nonrecognition hamper the internationalization of the ASU within the European educational space. It explores a conflict on recognition and nonrecognition of status and identity, where status does not refer exclusively to statehood. In the field of higher education, European integration involves a large number of state and nonstate actors in 49 countries and a wide variety of forms of recognition and nonrecognition, ranging from the certification of individual qualifications and the publication of lists of unrecognized universities, to the setting up of joint educational programs. This integration process is largely state driven but based on the principle of the institutional autonomy of universities. Using the ASU as a case study, the way that policies on nonrecognition affect status in the field of higher education is examined.

Modern challenges of border areas development in the context of decentralization reform

2019 ◽  
pp. 79-89
Author(s):  
Khrystyna Prytula ◽  
Yaroslava Kalat ◽  
Iryna Kyryk
Keyword(s):  
Ethnic Minorities ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Local Development ◽  
Economic Security ◽  
Uneven Development ◽  
Scientific Article ◽  
Border Regions ◽  
Border Areas ◽  
Decentralization Reform

An integral part of the implementation of any reform is the emergence of the risks of its negative impact on one or another area of region development. The decentralization reform in Ukraine is not an exception. In its the context the most probable occurrence of negative phenomena is in the border regions, which could be prevented by first detecting them. In the scientific article, the authors focus on the analysis of a number of challenges for the development of border regions in the context of decentralization reform. Given the territorial remoteness of the central regions of the country and the capital, which today serve as areas of concentration of investment and economic activity, the border regions traditionally (this is typical for the border areas of the EU member states) lag behind the rest of the regions by the main socio-economic indicators of development. Among the main challenges facing the border regions of Ukraine today are the following: the provision of competitiveness in the context of European integration processes and reduction of the border barrier function; low level of economic security; the outflow of human capital and the issue of ethnic minorities. Based on an expert survey of representatives of the fifteen united territorial communities (UTCs), the possibility of such risks of decentralization in the border regions were defined as following: groundless use of local budget funds; emergence of significant imbalances between delegated new authority and available financial resources of the community; increasing uneven development of territories within the community; increasing uneven development of communities within the country; deterioration of the availability and quality of providing educational and medical services; deterioration of the quality of local government; reducing of the state influence on the management of local development processes; radicalization of political unions representing the interests of ethnic minorities in places of their compact residence; further economic decline of the territory of communities and so on.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document