Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

GI2010 symposium-belof (reflections)


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

GI2010 symposium-belof (reflections)

  1. 1. REFLECTIONS ON SDI FOR SPATIAL PLANNING COOPERATIONAND SUPPORT PROGRAMMES ACROSS THE BORDERS OF EUROREGIONS Magdalena Belof Regional Bureau of Spatial Planning in Wroclaw Lower Silesian Voivodeship GI2010-Symposium – Dresden 14/15 Mai 2010
  2. 2. Issues to be discussed:The basic challange for co-operation intransborder spatial planningThe level of involvement – who shouldplan?EU support programms – practicaldimensionConlusions GI2010-Symposium – Dresden 14/15 Mai 2010
  3. 3. Do we really need cooperation? Spatial problems do not respect administration borders Free movement of people is already a fact For successful territorial competition the common vision is a MUST: divided territories cannot reach the critical mass to successfully compete on European level divided territories compete for EU money instead of better utilising the external help Territorial Cohesion includes spatial cohesion – divided Europe cannot compete on global market. GI2010-Symposium – Dresden 14/15 Mai 2010
  4. 4. The basic challenges for co-operation in transborder spatial planning Unclear competences Autonomous systems of planning law Different tools (statistical data, methodologies, approaches) Lack of instruments/regulations for free spatial data exchange GI2010-Symposium – Dresden 14/15 Mai 2010
  5. 5. Solutions ?The unified Spatial Data Infrastructure cangive practical basis for transnational spatialmonitoring and integrated planning: Common „language” Acess to information Faster and more democratic process of decission making GI2010-Symposium – Dresden 14/15 Mai 2010
  6. 6. The level of involvement – who should build the system?Involvement of local level is crucialbut…only regional (subregional) level posses the technical capability, know how and human capital to create and maintain the systembut…The regional level will not be able to do so without the green light from national/EU level. GI2010-Symposium – Dresden 14/15 Mai 2010
  7. 7. EU support programms – practical dimension Bilateral transborder cooperation PL - DE No chance to support the project larger than one program area Only local (subregional) level involved Mecklenburg-Vorpommern Zachodniopomorskie (PL) Mecklenburg-Vorpommern Zachodniopomorskie (PL) Brandenburg (D) Brandenburg (D) Brandenburg (D) Lubuskie (PL) Brandenburg (D) Lubuskie (PL) Saxony (D) Lower Silesia (PL) Saxony (D) Lower Silesia (PL)Before accession Transborder programs GI2010-Symposium – Dresden 14/15 Mai 2010
  8. 8. EU support programms – practical dimensionTrilateral transborder cooperation PL – DE - CZInterreg III C didn’t take into account trilateral cooperation for 2007-13! No better opportunities for trilateral cross border cooperation need IIIA INTERREG IV A DE -- PL D PL D PLINTERREG IV AINTERREG IIIA INTERREG IV INTERREG IIIA CZ - DE CZ - D PL A CZ - CZ - PL CZ GI2010-Symposium – Dresden 14/15 Mai 2010
  9. 9. EU support programms – practical dimension Trilateral transborder cooperation PL – DE - CZ European Territorial Co-operation in 2007-13Sachsen – Sachsen – Poland -Czech Republic Poland Czech Republic€ 207 million € 105 million € 220 million ERDFERFD ERFD GI2010-Symposium – Dresden 14/15 Mai 2010
  10. 10. Other solutions: EUROREGIONS ? They wrere established in a up-bottom political process to support integration Have they really established long-term co-operation networks of various partners? From 2004 (Interreg III) they lost substantial influence on managing financial support for transborder cooperation process. What area their actual strength and role today in influencing the transborder national and regional policies? Before 2004 the membership was a precondition to get access to the funds. What means the euroregional partnership today – what is a role in formation of a real strategic frameworks?ARE EUROREGIONS CAPABLE TO FORM THE STRUCTURES FOR BUILDING TRANSBORDED SPATIAL DATA INFRASTRUCTURE? GI2010-Symposium – Dresden 14/15 Mai 2010
  11. 11. Other solutions - EUROREGIONS ? NISSE – NISA - NYSABERLIN WROCŁAW DREZDEN PRAGUE GI2010-Symposium – Dresden 14/15 Mai 2010
  12. 12. Other solutions:Europaen Grouping for Territorial Cooperation? EGTC – status for 2008 Polish Parliament adopted the EGTC Act on the 7th of November 2008 No EGTC exists yet in Poland GI2010-Symposium – Dresden 14/15 Mai 2010
  13. 13. Other solutions: Regional & institutional initiativesEU – supported (Interreg /Territorialcooperation, e-Content, others) Oderregio Plan 4 All …Self – supported DP – PLIS Lower Silesian – Saxon – Northern Czech Working Group Academic initiative for Atlas on Polish-Czech transborder area GI2010-Symposium – Dresden 14/15 Mai 2010
  14. 14. Other solutions:National & Regional - National InitiativesBilateral Committees and Working Groupsresponsible for transborder cooperation (inc.Committees & Groups for Spatial Development) Spatial Development Study for Polish-Czech Border Area Infrastructure investment map for Polish – German Border Area Odra PartnershipVysehrad Group Common Document on Spatial Development of V4+2 countries (Vysehrad Group + Romania and Bulgaria) GI2010-Symposium – Dresden 14/15 Mai 2010
  16. 16. CONCLUSIONS: Transnational SDI intergation WE ARE IN EXPERIMENTAL PHASE! We have to:Form ad hock alliances and test themInvent and test new cooperation modelsInvent tools (legal, financial, technical wealready have!)Lobby at regional, national and EU level GI2010-Symposium – Dresden 14/15 Mai 2010
  17. 17. Thank you for your attention! GI2010-Symposium – Dresden 14/15 Mai 2010