Impact assessement: the case
of cross-border cooperation
Dr. Joachim Beck
beck@euroinstitut.org
Regions in Europe
Typology of cross-border territories (K.H.
Lambertz)
A. Dimension
-Big (e.g. Balic Sea/Danube) -> „Macro“
-Middle (e.g. Upper-Rhine, Lake of Constance) -> „Meso“
-Small (e.g. Euregio/Eurodistrict) -> „Micro“
B. Complexity
-Simple: two countries, one common language, one functional territory
-Complex: Diverging systems, partners, cultures, languages…
C. Nature of the border
-Natural limit/boundary
-Historically and politically sensible border
D. The European perception
-“old“ internal borders
-“new“ internal borders since 2004
-External borders of the EU
-No direct contact with EU -> Council of Europe/Neighbourhood-policy
(e.g. black sea)
Cross-border territories:
the horizontal dimension of European integration
• Border regions represent 40% of EU territory and
30% of the EU’s population
• Cross-border territories represent key areas, where
both the positive effects of European integration as
well as the remaining obstacles to integration can
best be studied
• Cross-border territories are regions of potential and
thus important catalysts for European Territorial
Cohesion
The border : a multidimensional
phenomen…
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Political borders
Economic borders
Legal borders
Administrative borders
Language borders
Cultural borders
Sociological borders
Mental borders
Natural borders
…
… that still creates a lot of
territorial problems
European support (INTERREG, EGTC,…) brought much progress
Concrete projects instead of nice ideas…
Real partnerships with shared co-financing instead of nice meetings…
Integrated programmes instead of stand-alone approaches…
Innovative structures instead of institutional sclerosis…
CBC territories seen under a
360° perspective: From selective
problem perception to a joint
development of integrated
potentials
Key-challenges of CBC policy-making still
unresolved
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
How to find the functional equivalence between different
politico-administrative systems?
How to base future action on a sound knowledge
of the cross-border territory and its specific needs?
How to act without substantial competences with
New quality of
most legal areas remaining with member states?
CBC needs
How to turn cultural and linguistic differences into
systemic
a productive interaction?
capacity-building
How to find the right level of institutionalization,
how to integrate new actors from the non-public sector?
How to define and measure the added-value of the
integrated cross-border action?
How to overcome a limited project-approach and
develop sustainable policy approaches for the
cross-border territory ?
Two examples of how Impact assessment
can help to improve CBC-policy making
1. The Impact assessment toolkit for CBC
2. Joint participation of CBC-territories in the
Commissions IA work
Optimizing project selection and using
impact information at programme level
Background to the Toolkit & Context
EU 5th Cohesion Report
 EU Commission Impact Assessment
System
 EU Sustainable Development Policy
 EU Territorial Co-operation
Programmes
(INTERREG & PEACE)
 Good Friday/Belfast Agreement

Background to the Toolkit project & context
EU Commission interest = territorial cohesion + visible
results
 No back to back development
 Preventing funding fragmentation
 Using synergy effects
 Thematic concentration
 Evidence based territorial policy-making
TOOLKIT FOR CROSS BORDER COOPERATION
 developing precise interventions to ensure maximum impact
on the basis of regional knowledge with respect of specific
regional characteristics and challenges, including local factors and
attitudes
Why do you need
to do something
and what are you
going
to do?
(STEP 1; 2; 3)
What do you want to
CHANGE?
Define Objectives:
• General Objective(s)
• Specific Objectives
Baseline
doublecheck!
Identify Policy
Approaches
Choose the most effective
and efficient cross border
action for your project!
A good Baseline helps you to
quantify your Impacts! Especially
‘soft’ impacts can be made
measurable if there are considered
right from the beginning!
What is the
evidence for it?
How do you want to
measure it?
(STEP 4; 5; 6)
Designing a
Monitoring
and Evaluation
Framework
Who?
When?
Develop
Appropriate
Indicators
Identify and choose Policy
Actions:
• Concrete Action 1
• Concrete Action 2
• Concrete Action 3
Identify Expected Impacts
Think across
all
four pillars !
Preparing a good BASELINE/ SITUATION ANALYSIS
– how can you give evidence for the problem?
Identified &
acknowledged
Problems and
Needs
current state of
discussion/art:
- Operational
Programmes
- SWOT Analysis,
- Macro analysis,
- Studies,
- Reports, - Evaluations
- etc....
Look for:
- Benchmarks
- Good Practice
examples
Your own: SMART ASSESSMENT
- inform your project
- enable yourself to give evidence
- closing information gaps
e.g.:
questionnaire, survey,
ask for special statistic
data, measure attitudinal change, etc.
BASELINE
proof &
understand the
entire Situation i.e.
PROBLEM / NEED
Stakeholder
Consultation
Get a feedback
from
Stakeholders!
Mirror your
project idea!
GET OUT of the
BLACK-BOX!
Reality Check!
Sensitivity
Analysis
Existing risk
analysis
© Euro-Institut
Relevance of the Toolkit Method
for the new INTERREG IVA Call
The second perspective:
Joint participation in the IA
work of the EU Commission ?
On the one hand…
• CBC is limited to the European cohesion policy perspective (-> the
INTERREG community).
• The 5th cohesion report: A new policy approach with many good ideas but only few pages explicitly on CBC and still perception as
disadvantaged regions !
• Hundreds of Directives, Regulations, Communications, Action Plans etc.
at EU-level per year – 99% without consideration of possible impacts on
cross-border territories !
• CBC territories not yet considered as real players at the EU-level
(fragmentation of lobbying between MS, regions, CoR, EP and AEBR)
• Main policy-competences and priorities remain with member states: but
70% of local and regional activities are directly impacted by EU law !
On the other hand…
• CBC is more and more „in the air“: the „30/40“ argument is known in
the Brussels institutions (30% of population/40% of the territory)
• The value for money – argument becomes more important in the
future: rethinking given CBC–approaches is necessary and welcome
• The Commission has developed the EGCT, redesigns the cohesion
policy and is more and more open for „the case of CBC“
• The concept of macro-regions (Baltic Sea, Danube, Mediteranean)
refers explicitly to CBC
• Intention to better coordinate EU sectoral policy-interventions at the
territorial level
• EU Commission is very open: need for territorial impact informations
(especially on admin burden!) , transparency : roadmaps and
consultations -> new opportunities for territorial actors !
The challenges from the CBC
point of view
• Different politico-administrative systems: regions
with and without legislative power
• Different approaches and structures of territorial
interest representation in Brussels
• Different capacities to carry out analytical work
in an ex ante perspective
• Lack of joint awareness for the cross-border
territory
• „Kill the bill“ approach (ex post is more
efficient…) at national level…
Good practice from the
Upper-Rhine region
• Participation in the consultation for the „Greenbook on
territorial cohesion“ : one written statement based on a
cross-border consultation of over 100 stakeholders from D /
F / CH
• Reform of the CMO of the wine sector: Joint interest
representation of stakeholders from the upper-Rhine (D / F /
CH) in Brussels
• Participation of the District of Freiburg in the revision of the
EU Waste-Management Directive: Assessment of possible
territorial impacts -> informing the official statement of the
Land Government for the EU-consultation
• „Under construction“: a more systemic monitoring and
participation on a multi-level basis (vertical and horizontal)
Thank you !
Contact
Dr. Joachim Beck
Director
Euro-Institut
Rehfusplatz 11
D-77694 Kehl
Tel. +49-7851-7407-27
Fax. +49-7851-7407-33
Mail: beck@euroinstitut.org
www.euroinstitut.org