Territorial Cohesion and Subsidiarity under the European Union Treaties: A Critique of the ‘Territorialism’ Underlying

2013 ◽  
Vol 47 (9) ◽  
pp. 1594-1606 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas Faludi
2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (Vol 18, No 4 (2019)) ◽  
pp. 439-453
Author(s):  
Ihor LISHCHYNSKYY

The article is devoted to the study of the implementation of territorial cohesion policy in the European Union in order to achieve a secure regional coexistence. In particular, the regulatory and institutional origins of territorial cohesion policy in the EU are considered. The evolution of ontological models of cohesion policy has been outlined. Specifically, the emphasis is placed on the key objective of political geography – effectively combining the need for "territorialization" and the growing importance of networking. The role of urbanization processes in the context of cohesion policy is highlighted. Cross-border dimensions of cohesion policy in the context of interregional cooperation are explored. Particular emphasis is placed on the features of integrated sustainable development strategies.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 183-193 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mikko Weckroth ◽  
Sami Moisio

Over the past two decades, both academics and policy makers have discussed the meaning of territorial cohesion in the context of the European Union (EU). This debate on the meaning and content of territorial cohesion is becoming increasingly important in a Europe that is facing multiple crises. This article contributes to the literature on EU’s territorial cohesion policies by tracing the ways in which territorial cohesion has been defined, framed and justified as an EU policy. We analyse public speeches made by the acting commissioners for Regional Policy and inquire into the Cohesion Reports from 2004 to 2017 produced by the European Commission. In particular, we interrogate both the meaning of the concept of territorial cohesion and the justifications for pursuing territorial cohesion. We conclude with some critical remarks on the relevance of economic production-based definitions and justifications for territorial cohesion policies. Accordingly, we argue that treating macroeconomic production as an indicator of territorial cohesion harmfully consolidates a narrow understanding of societal wellbeing and development and imposes on all regions a one-dimensional economic scale to indicate their level of development.


2015 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 358-373 ◽  
Author(s):  
Judith Clifton ◽  
Daniel Díaz-Fuentes ◽  
Marcos Fernández-Gutiérrez

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 265-276 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rob Atkinson ◽  
Carolina Pacchi

Territorial cohesion has figured in the lexicon of the European Union for some years. However, there has never been a clear definition of the notion, not even after its inclusion in the Lisbon Treaty. Moreover, within the European Union Cohesion Reports and, more generally, within European Union documents, along with the other two dimensions of cohesion (economic and social) it has been treated separately without any serious attempts to reconcile them and develop a coherent interpretation of cohesion—the result being the creation of a contested and ill-defined understanding of territorial cohesion and its relationship to the other two dimensions of Cohesion Policy. Given that the approach advocated by Directorate-General for Regional and Urban Policy aims to embed the different dimensions and how they interact in specific spatial configurations (created by the confluence of a range of different ‘flows’ that can create multiple overlapping assemblages with ‘fuzzy’ boundaries), this raises important questions about how we understand these relationships. Moreover, the policy discourses in which each dimension of cohesion is situated create their own frameworks that are conducive to developing the conditions, including appropriate policy strategies, to supporting these individual cohesion formations. The rather arbitrary separation of these approaches in ‘official discourse’ impedes addressing cohesion in a coherent and integrated manner. Thus, after reviewing the relevant key policy literature, the article will seek to consider how territorial cohesion relates to the other two dimensions of cohesion taking into account the role of the place-based approach. However, it is argued that the search for territorial (social and economic) cohesion has been subordinated to neoliberal notions such as competitiveness and economic growth.


Author(s):  
Stefan Greiving ◽  
Philipp Schmidt-Thomé ◽  
Simin Davoudi ◽  
Lasse Peltonen ◽  
Teresa Sprague

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Irina SAGHIN ◽  
Gabriel PASCARIU ◽  
Daniela Rodica STOIAN ◽  
Ilinca-Valentina STOICA ◽  
Daniela ZAMFIR

The authors argue through this paper, the importance of rethinking the recently abandoned tools that can be reactivated in times of crisis. EU 2020 Strategy and other EU documents create a favorable frame in order to achieve the priorities set by reconsidering the territorial pact concept. Recent documents define the partnership agreement concept, which seems to be more rigid and less flexible than the territorial pact. Having as a starter point Romania’s specifics, there are individualized 10 thematic territorial pacts and 8 global pacts. They must generate territorial synergies capable of ensuring the coherence between regions, states and the European Union as a whole.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document