Cross-Border Networks in Informal and Formal Cooperation in the Border Regions Andalusia–Algarve–Alentejo and South Finland–Estonia

Abstract

Fostering border relations among the people in border regions seems a precondition for the future envisagement and success of cross-border regions and European Integration. Related studies to border relations observe the weakness of these informal border contacts and relations. However, weak ties represent an opportunity for interaction, and little has been said about how they might play in the construction and performance of institutional crossborder cooperation. In this work, we examine the nature of personal border networks of professionals working in cross-border cooperation and how they are interconnected with the institutional cross-border cooperation. This paper is based on a qualitative research of two different border regions: Andalusia, Algarve and Alentejo (AAA), and South Finland and Estonia (SFE). The methodology is multimethod, using semi-structured interviews, with specific questions for applying social network analysis (SNA). A total of 43 interviews were conducted with experts who worked in different institutions involved in cross-border projects. 34 out of 43 also completed a section in the questionnaire to apply SNA. Conclusions point out different patterns of border relations in both border regions. In AAA, most of the cross-border relations are weak and related to their involvement in institutional cross-border cooperation. In SFE, border relations also rely on personal reasons. Nevertheless, they all imply a significant value as opportunities for greater interaction.

Estonia-Southern Finland Cross-Border Region:what Kind of Cross-Border Integration Is Taking Place? An Analysis From Experts in Cross-Border Cooperation

“…For the purposes of this study we defined an 'expert' as a professional working in public and/or private institutions who had or had had professional experience in the cross-border projects of Interreg A and/or other cross-border initiatives on the frontiers of European Territorial Cooperation. Similar expert profiles are found in other studies (Grix and Knowles 2002, Grix and Houzvicka 2002, Pikner 2008, Lepik 2009, González-Gómez and Gualda 2014. In our case, most respondents worked in public institutions which were partners in or beneficiaries of Interreg A cross-border projects.…”

A Policy Network Approach to Cross-Border Metropolitan Governance: The Cases of Vienna and Bratislava

“…The studies by John (1998) on a selection of French and British cities and by Gissendanner (2004) on German and US cities are prominent examples of this approach. More recently, and directly relevant to the present work, policy networks have also been assessed in European CBC (Dörry & Decoville, 2013;González-Gómez & Gualda, 2013;Walther & Reitel, 2013). In the face of the fragmented territorial settings, diverging interests and dispersed resources that characterize crossborder regional initiatives, policy network analysis provides a highly relevant way of studying the forms and processes of governance.…”

Kinship of bidayuh dayak ethnic at the border of Entikong-Indonesia and Tebedu-Malaysia

“…Persamaan identitas dan bahasa di perbatasan Slovakia-Hongoria menjadi modal integrasi pembangunan terutama karena dilibatkannya politik lokal dalam kebijakan pemerintah (Balogh & Pete, 2018). Integrasi antara masyarakat perbatasan menjadi suatu modal sosial dalam keberhasilan pembangunan kawasan perbatasan (González-gómez & Gualda, 2013). Diantaranya, strategi perencanaan lintas batas Swedia-Norwegia yang memberikan ruang kepada penduduk lokal (Braunerhielm, Alfredsson Olsson, & Medeiros, 2019); pelibatan lembaga dan aktor lokal di perbatasan negara uni Eropa dalam jaringan sosial pembangunan kawasan perbatasan (González-gómez & Gualda, 2018;Pipkin & Pipkin, 2018).…”