Resolution on cross-border and inter-regional cooperation
Date: 1997-05-16
Institutions: Committee on Regional Development, European Parliament
Subjects: Arctic Ocean, Baltic States, EU programme, Mediterranean region (EU), associated country, cross-border cooperation, regional cooperation













EUR-Lex - 51997IP0161 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



51997IP0161

Resolution on cross-border and inter-regional cooperation  


Official Journal C 167 , 02/06/1997 P. 0245 





A4-0161/97Resolution on cross-border and inter-regional cooperationThe European Parliament,- having regard to Article B of the Treaty on European Union, which lays down that promoting economic and social cohesion is an objective of the Union,- having regard to the proposals made by the European Parliament, the Committee of the Regions, the Assembly of the Regions of Europe and the Council of European Municipalities and Regions for amendments to be made to the Treaty on European Union in connection with the Intergovernmental Conference in 1997 (Conference 'For a Europe based on Democracy and Solidarity', Brussels, 1-3 October 1996) and the European Charter of Frontier and Transfrontier Regions adopted by the Association of European Border Regions (AEBR),- having regard to the Green Paper on Innovation (COM(95)0688 - C4-0609/95) and its resolution of 6 June 1996 ((OJ C 181, 24.6.1996, p. 35.)) thereon,- having regard to the Commission's First Report on Economic and Social Cohesion (COM(96)0542 - C4-0016/97),- having regard to the Commission report on the implementation of cross-border cooperation between the Community and the countries of Central and Eastern Europe in 1994 (COM(95)0662 - C4-0142/96),- having regard to the hearing of the Committee on Regional Policy concerning cross-border cooperation on 21-22 November 1995 in Luxembourg,- having regard to Rule 148 of its Rules of Procedure,- having regard to the report of the Committee on Regional Policy (A4-0161/97),A. whereas a fundamental objective of the European Union's internal and external cooperation is to safeguard peace, freedom and human rights,B. having regard to the objective of cohesion,C. having regard to the institutional and economic significance of cross-border and inter-regional cooperation for the integration of Europe and its contribution to peace, security and respect for the rights of minorities,D. having regard to the decisions taken to delegate the coordination of regional cooperation to the regions or regional associations,E. whereas the development of the economy, promoting employment and social, cultural and environmental cooperation are key objectives of cross-border and inter-regional cooperation within the European Union and with third countries and whereas the development and strengthening of democracy is a central element in cooperation,F. whereas cooperation between border regions can improve the opportunities for many European linguistic minorities to preserve and develop their culture, by helping to build structures which support the minority,G. whereas regional cooperation should enjoy the confidence of the public and should receive sufficient political backing and resources,1. Considers that the EU's cross-border cooperation requires concrete additional resources to develop cooperation and safeguard stability in regions close to the EU's borders; stresses that the EU's future regional policy should increasingly stress cross-border cooperation in all border areas and at the same time improve the associated countries' readiness for membership of the Community; stresses the significance of a regional-policy strategy prior to accession;2. Stresses that clear guidelines should be adopted for cross-border and inter- regional cooperation policy as an element in the deepening of cooperation between EU Member States and third countries and in reducing regional inequalities;3. Considers that inter-regional cooperation in border regions promotes economic cooperation and helps resolve environmental problems and create local infrastructure links, with the objective of bringing people in both border regions into contact with one another, not merely in the interest of long-range links between major centres of population in Europe;4. Considers that there is still little genuine cross-border cooperation, as many Interreg II A programmes are implemented in the form of separate projects on either side of borders, and that it has not proved possible to establish effective cross-border cooperation between the EU and third countries; suggests that consideration be given to setting up a single common fund to support the systematic and long-term development of cross-border cooperation between the EU and third countries;5. Stresses that the cultural needs of linguistic minorities should be taken into account in allocating resources for cross-border cooperation;6. Observes that the role of border regions within Europe in analysing the development of integration should be strengthened; considers that a joint initiative by a number of border regions should be taken into account in regular analyses of integration and accordingly that national and European initiatives and programmes should be better coordinated;7. Observes that, in future Interreg programmes, it is essential that, when the operational programmes are adopted, account should be taken of the financing plans and the criteria for cross-border cooperation; in the case of cooperation with third countries, in particular, the Interreg and Phare-CBC programmes should be coordinated;8. Considers that inter-regional cooperation in its present form lacks an adequate strategy and that the funding instruments are scattered and fragmentary; suggests that consideration be given to setting up a single fund specifically to support inter-regional multiannual cooperation based on strategic thinking and exchanges of knowledge and experience, in which all regions should have the opportunity to participate;9. Observes that, of all instruments, interregional cooperation is of outstanding importance to all coastal and island regions of the European Union, enabling them to proceed with the innovative further development of their endogenous potential and actively engage in the 'Europe of the regions and municipalities'; calls on the Commission, therefore, to devote particular attention to this aspect in its various other sectoral policies and in revising its measures to support interregional cooperation;10. Considers that all regions of the EU should have the opportunity to participate in interregional or cross-border cooperation, although the level of support provided should be based on regions' needs; this financing should be guaranteed in order to encourage national co-financing;11. Considers that cooperation should also be able to enhance economic and social development in border regions in practical ways; considers it important that the two sides of industry should have the opportunity to participate in the planning, administration and implementation of programmes; takes the view that the CBC element should be reinforced, the funding available for it increased and procedures simplified; considers that, for example, the financial and economic administration of the Interreg programmes should be simplified; is of the opinion that the Interreg programmes should exploit the advantages of synergy with other programmes in the Community area;12. Notes with satisfaction that, in comparison with the first period, Interreg II A now comprises significantly more programmes to support cross-border cooperation along the internal and external maritime borders of the European Union; calls on the Commission to pursue this development further in the future and in particular to devote special attention to such topics as maritime transport, the implementation of a maritime information society, protection of the marine environment and the development of horizontal land- use planning approaches;13. Considers that, both at Community level and regionally, information about all regional programmes should be obtainable from a single source; considers it important to confer greater responsibility on regional and local participants at every level of participation in planning, administering and implementing programmes, including their funding; considers that regional action locations should be sufficiently dispersed and local in relation to programmes and projects, but also takes the view that final responsibility and control over actual implementation should rest with democratically legitimized bodies;14. Considers that CBC programmes should encourage communities in the countries concerned to seek greater synergy with the Community's research projects; greater efforts should be made to rationalize the profusion of regional and research policy programmes and coordinate measures so as to maximize their effectiveness;15. Considers that cross-border and inter-regional cooperation in the Mediterranean region should be developed; considers that the cross-border dimension of the Meda programme should be enhanced; urges the Commission to promote the inclusion of the Mediterranean region as an Interreg II C target region and to ensure appropriate funding to facilitate genuine regional planning work with third countries in the region; the continuation of Atlantic cooperation as an element in the Interreg II C programme should also be ensured;16. Recalls that there is a long tradition of multilateral cooperation in the Baltic region, combining cross-border and inter-regional activities; considers it important that, by coordinating these instruments (Phare, Tacis, their CBC sections, Interreg, inter-regional cooperation), a single common Baltic programme, based on the work already initiated by the Council of the Baltic Sea States, should be adopted; considers it important also to develop regional cooperation in Europe's Arctic regions and to reinforce it in the Barents Sea region, so that the enormous environmental problems which exist in the region (Kola Peninsula) can be tackled effectively enough and the region's rich natural resources can be exploited in a sustainable manner and in such a way as to benefit the region's inhabitants;17. Urges the Commission to ensure that joint development projects can be funded both from Interreg II C funds and from the Phare and Tacis programmes as far as the associated countries are concerned; considers that this would make it possible not only to anticipate a number of structural policy measures related to accession but also to introduce uniform standards between the Member States and associated countries;18. Considers that the Tacis programme should facilitate significant investment in the same way as the Phare programme, as the significance of infrastructure projects is more marked in weakly developed regions; in order for resources to be used rationally and effectively in cross-border cooperation between the EU and third countries, it is necessary, inter alia, that the CBC sections of the Interreg II, Tacis and Phare programmes should be coordinated so as to ensure genuine project-centred cooperation and cooperation between citizens; Tacis-CBC should provide for multiannual projects to facilitate the consolidation of Interreg; considers it regrettable that Tacis programmes, in particular, are administered centrally in capitals; considers that adequate resources should be allocated to regional Tacis offices to enable the programmes which are carried out to take better account of aspects which are important to the regions; further notes that some of the expenditure for human resources can be decentralized, thus also permitting a reduction both in geographical concentration and in expenditure on buildings and other ancillary costs;19. Considers it essential to alter the allocation of resources within the Commission so as to allocate adequate resources to regional units for regional information and coordination; considers that the Commission should rationalize its administrative culture so as to meet the needs of regional agents better; believes that it is necessary to simplify the existing system; urges the Commission to provide prompt advice and guidance for the setting of priorities and objectives; considers it essential that cooperation among the Commission's Directorates-General should be improved, particularly with regard to cooperation programmes with third countries;20. Stresses the potential of communication, education and culture and the significance of multilingualism and multiculturalism for the purpose of improving mutual understanding; urges the Member States and regional communities to promote understanding of different cultures in basic and further education;21. Considers that cross-border cooperation at the internal borders should ensure that people do not encounter any problems in going about their everyday business, in such a way that special attention is devoted to basic rights, in the case of workers, and to social and health insurance provisions and freedom of movement, as well as to common services and to cooperation between authorities in the fields of the economy, environment and land-use planning; considers that the objective is a Europe without borders in which common services can be obtained from the nearest point and the internal borders do not present any obstacle to the free movement of people within the Union, as provided for by the Single European Act and the Treaty on European Union and in which areas can develop where physical, social or economic conditions are homogeneous on either side of the border;22. Encourages the regions of the EU to find ways of cooperating which exploit the resources of the internal market better and meet global challenges more effectively; considers that forms of cooperation should be supported which will be viable even after Community co-financing has ceased; considers that networking of border regions and the regions in general should be regarded as part of a strategy for enabling peripheral regions to survive;23. Considers that financial involvement of regional and local players and greater participation by the private sector are essential, as only these can ensure the survival of the projects and jobs once EU co-financing ceases;24. Stresses that, particularly in cross-border and inter-regional cooperation, more attention should be devoted to the requirements of the information society and regional policy should be geared more to innovation by seeking practical means of promoting the innovation culture; considers that, in inter-regional and cross-border cooperation, there should be more stress on developing the preconditions for small and medium-sized enterprises to operate;25. Regards the information society as an opportunity for targeted assistance to rural areas close to borders, as the examples of Risi and Wolf show, and advocates that assistance to the networking of border regions, as currently provided under the LACE programme, continue;26. Calls for:- the creation of legal and fiscal preconditions for the operation of cross-border business areas;- coordination of instruments of regional and economic policy on both sides of borders;- cross-border social cooperation to ensure that facilities can be used optimally and duplication of investment avoided;27. Stresses that in order for EU programmes to be evaluated properly, independent assessors and adequate feedback systems must be used, participants in the programme must contribute to assessments, clear and rapid assessment methods must be used and assessments must be carried out both before a programme is implemented and while it is in progress, thereby making it possible to check and, if necessary, alter the objectives, content and timetable; considers it necessary to develop comprehensive qualitative and quantitative indicators for the broader assessment of regional-policy measures and that programmes should comprise clear ex ante criteria from the start; urges the Commission to forward all follow-up reports on cross-border and inter-regional cooperation to the European Parliament;28. Considers that the EU-funded LACE observation unit of the Association of European Border Regions, whose task is to monitor the development of cooperation in border regions, has proved a successful experiment in its first five-year period and that its activities should be further developed;29. Stresses that participants in Interreg II must help to establish cross-border organizations and structures, particularly Euroregions, which contribute to the development of cross-border cooperation programmes; emphasizes that under no circumstances may Euroregions create new tiers of administration;30. Considers that programmes funded by the EU should continue to concentrate on the objective of cohesion, i.e. supporting less developed regions and those seriously affected by industrial decline, combating unemployment and promoting rural development, but that Community support is also required for cooperation of the Four Motors for Europe type; considers that networking of the developed 'locomotives' of the economy should be encouraged in order to preserve Europe's competitiveness in world markets; stresses furthermore the growing importance of and need for cooperation between and networking of towns with a view to setting clearer priorities for this activity in inter- regional cooperation;31. Urges the Member States to promote cooperation and take measures to eliminate national, administrative and emotional obstacles to cross-border and inter- regional cooperation, particularly those enshrined in bilateral or multilateral agreements, by establishing a binding joint cooperation framework for the States of the European Union; considers that care should be taken to ensure that cooperation is improved and that it is also developed to meet the needs of the future;32. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Committee of the Regions and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.