European Regions - Enrichment of the Integration Process

1 Introduction

The speech of German foreign minister Josef Fischer from May 12th in Berlin¹ ignited a discussion about the further integration of the European Union. His main issue was turning the present Union into an European Federation. In his speech he also mentioned regions should play a stronger role in the integration process and the future institutional arrangement. Hereby a high ranking politician admits to the process of regionalisation of the EU member states This development challenges the sovereignty of the existing nation states, which have to give up powers to supra- and to sub-national levels. A continuation of these processes, further integration and further decentralisation can in the very end lead to the political project of an "Europe of the Regions" instead of an "Europe of the Nation-states or Fatherlands". The motives for this model and its possible implementation in the European integration will be discussed in this paper.

In the first part of this paper the term region will be introduced and the history of "institutional regionalisation" in the member states described and compared. In the second part the core values of an United Europe with the advantages of regionalisation are compared. In the following part the driving forces and motivations of regionalisation are critically analysed and their weakness pointed out. Finally the attention is drawn to models and principles of state structure, combining strengths of supra-national, national and sub-national levels.

1.1 Definition of Regions

Several definitions are offered for the term regions. These definitions differ in the aspect used to draw their borders. Due to these different aspects one space can belong to several regions.

1. Administrative regions - established within nations to promote decentralisation
2. Economic regions - may be territorially sub- or supranational, these are areas describing a special kind of economic structure (Zag³êbie in Poland, "Blue Banana", Silicon Glenn in Scotland)² or an area designed for a special economic development.
3. Historical and geographical regions - are marked by societies, which share common cultural, social and linguistic values or physical geographic features. These features can differ a lot from the main culture of the nation state. These regions can territorially sub- or supranational (Galicia, Silesia or Alpine region)
4. Political regions - they possess democratically elected parliaments and governments. They have some sovereignty and therefore are self-governed.³

Following these definitions is clear that there are different opinions what are regions and what are the features describing them. Regions can overlap each other and regions can contain sub- regions with significantly different features. Many regions fulfil as well the administrative as well the political representing function, this means that they execute central tasks at the same time as they function as self-government. Their borders (and names) often derive from historic and geographic regions but take also special economic needs into account.⁴ A clear distinction between local and regional level is difficult and in many cases impossible. In this paper region will be used for all political and administrative territories on sub-national level.

1.2 History of European regionalisation

The six countries signing the Treaty of Paris in 1951 with the exception of Federal Republic of Germany were all centralised states. Their administrative system was oriented on the French model with a strong central government and representatives/prefects of the central state in the bigger cities and towns, which are the executor of the central power. Municipalities had very limited power and self-government based on honorary mayors and councillors.⁵

In the 60's these centralised states were confronted with regional movements motivated by different goals. Regions with different ethnical or language patterns demanded cultural and political autonomy and citizens in municipalities demanded more possibilities to take influence in their government. From the 1970's on nearly all member states introduced regional authorities and decentralised their governments. Italy gave up the state-founding idea of national unity (risorigimento) and introduced self-governed regions and it granted its ethnic minorities cultural and political autonomy.⁶ In Belgium the ethnic difference between Walloons and Flamonds lead further and further weakening of the central government and the forming of three regions. These regions have a high degree of sovereignty and their relation towards the central government is non-hierarchical.⁷ A case of "asymmetric" decentralisation is the case of the Scottish and Welsh devolution. Whereas Scotland and Wales have own parliaments and governments, England is still centrally governed by the British government.⁸ These three examples show that the regionalisation changed even the character of the state. If we take the present internal structure inside the European Union and we group the countries in which extend they introduced sub-national bodies and in which extend they have sovereignty we discover interesting similar patterns⁹. In present Western Europe¹⁰ we can find three federate states: Belgium, Switzerland and Germany. These three countries are characterised by different denominations and/or different languages, where no group has a dominating position. The federate state is a tool to equal the different interests of these groups out. Unitarian but decentralised states, have sovereignty is transferred to regional authorities, but these have no influence on national issues. These states like Austria¹¹, Italy, Spain, Portugal and in lesser extend France and Ireland have a strong Catholic culture in common. The first three are also characterised by strong Christian Democratic traditions. In this case it is interesting the Christian Democracy was always a strong supporter for regionalisation. The case of asymmetric decentralisation can be found in the UK in the case of the Scotland and Wales home rule. In this case ethnic, linguistic or cultural minorities are the majority in their area, but England is dominating politics and culture of the United Kingdom.¹² In the countries of Scandinavia and the Netherlands regional bodies are absent or have only administrative character. In these cases the municipalities have sovereignty in many fields of live, like in the extensive welfare state. More and more sub-municipal levels of self-government are established. This mirrors the strong position of the parish in the Lutheran or Calvinist Church. That England does neither fit into the pattern of the Protestant nor the Catholic countries could be explained with nature of the Anglican Church. It would be oversimplified to explain the lacking of decentralisation in Greece with their Orthodox denomination. The upper categorisation is less based on active religious belief in these countries, rather on the political and social culture determined by these religious traditions.¹³

Already in 1951 European municipalities and regions formed an organisation (CEMR) that should represent their interest towards the supra-national bodies. They used this organisation to force the nation states to guarantee the right of self-government on local and regional level.¹⁴ The regions and their associations representing their interests started in the 1970s to establish offices in Brussels and today over 80 such offices represent sub-national bodies towards the EU organs. Not only toward the central organisations they established permanent links also interregional organisations were formed in the 1970's. These were spatial co- operations like, the transborder EUROREGIOs or sectoral co-operation frameworks of specific industrial areas.¹⁵ Also the European Community respectively Union bodies admitted and even encouraged regional commitment to the decision-making process. The milestone was the founding of the "Committee of the Regions (CoR)" by the Treaty of Maastricht in 1993. The CoR is now the official mouthpiece of the regions and takes part as a consulting body in the co-decision process of the Union in specific fields. The Treaty of Amsterdam extended its rights in 1999.¹⁶ It gave the regions the position as partner of the Commission in the proposal of projects, the implementation and monitoring of Structural policy, since the 5th reform of the Structural Funds in 1999.¹⁷ European regionalisation happened in two different directions. One the one side top-down: The decentralisation or devolution of central tasks and sovereignty as well as the recognition of regions from the supra-national level. Regional co- operation and representation at the supra-national level is an example for bottom-up regionalisation. Also regionalisation had backlashes and reached different levels it is general trend of decentralisation and a strengthening of supra- and sub-national direct connections is obvious. This process also accelerated in recent years.

2 Regionalism as a European Value?

2.1 European Core Values

To make clear what "Europe of the Regions" means, it must be clear what kind of Europe or better EU this should be. This vision of an United Europe changed during the integration process. In the years after the war peace and democracy were the main goals of European integration. The present vision of the future European Union can be derived from the "Treaty establishing the European Union" (TEU) from 1992 and its amendments in the "Treaty of Amsterdam" from 1997. To define the core values only the preamble will be considered. (TEA see page 12)¹⁸ The European Union envisaged shall be an area of freedom, democracy, social rights and security (§ 3 and 9). Solidarity should be a main principle between the peoples of Europe, this is expressed in respect for the others history, culture and traditions ("diversity") and also in economic solidarity expressed by a policy of economic cohesion, sustainable development, social progress and environmental protection (§ 4 and 7). The European Union shall be competitive and internal convergent in economic terms. (§ 6). The European Union shall be a ever closer Union of its peoples. The principle of subsidarity guarantees that the Union is close to its peoples and citizens (§ 8 and 11). The European Union will be united ("further integration") in a single institutional framework, working efficient and democratic (§ 5 and 12).

Looking at this ambitious agenda set in 1992 and at the present situation the development is discouraging. Cohesion policy and economic solidarity is endangered by neo-liberal argumentation.¹⁹ The European Union is neither closer to its citizens nor subsidarity is implemented consequently in the decision-making process. The undertakings to ensure a democratic and efficient working institutional framework for the time after the Eastern enlargement were not reached in the summit of Amsterdam and the results of the summit of Nice are not satisfactory. The reasons for this deadlock are national egoism (the approach to nationalise profit and to Europeanise the costs²⁰ ) and the question how much sovereignty the nation states want to give up to the super-national institutions.²¹

2.2 Regionalism and the Core Values of an United Europe

In the following chapter it will be shown that an United Europe based on regions can fulfil the upper criterion. This is statement will be based on the general nature of regions and not on existing examples of European political regions. Generally it is interesting that in the Treaty of Amsterdam the nation-states are not mentioned at all. The treaty refers to the "peoples of Europe". In this part the arguments of supporters of an "Europe of the Regions" are taken against the agenda of the future EU.

Europe's wealth in culture, traditions and history is based on the variety between nation states but also on the variety inside of the states. The innovative and creative power of Europe is depends on the possibility that these differences can develop. The level of creativity of a county is very strong influenced in how much the culture in it self is diversified. A strong and distinguish regional cultural tradition makes it more likely to create outstanding works of art. A high level of creativity implies a high level of political and cultural fragmentation.²² This diversity needs an institutional framework offering these possibilities and protects the cultural differences in time of increasing globalisation. Also the tendency of nation-states to enforce a national culture on their whole territory has to be ended. In times when ethnic revival and religious conflicts endanger the peace in Europe this will rather destabilise the state than creating Unitarian stability. The process of regionalisation can help to overcome the ethnic and cultural rifts in a society. Like it was possible in the case of the peace process of Northern Ireland or the Belgium language quarrels. For ethnic minorities which are a majority or a significant minority in a region is this the only possibility to have their interest represented, their demands heard and their culture represented. Examples for this are the Sorbs in the German Länder Brandenburg and Saxonia or the Slovenians in Carinthia.²³

The economic disparities among the regions of Europe are one of the main problems endangering the European integration process. This is expressed in the Treaty of Amsterdam were reinforced cohesion was taken on the agenda of political action. The disparities of living standard between regions is now much bigger than those between the Member Countries. The economic integration process leads to quicker convergence between the states than between the regions.²⁴ The reason for this is on the one hand is that the restructuring process hits regions in the same state in different extent and on the other hand the reluctance of many states to undertake active and effective measures to overcome these.²⁵ To overcome these disparities it is necessary that the regions are given more political responsibilities and also means to take actions. The present Cohesion Funds of the European Union are already a good example leading into this direction.²⁶ In a time of increasing economic globalisation the possibilities of a state to take influence on the competitiveness of its economy are diminishing. Economic policy is increasingly an issue of the European Union and its institutions, but competition between the nations is necessary to keep the competitiveness of the whole Union on a high level. The elbowroom of active economic policy now changed from macro-economic factors like taxation, monetary and trade policy to the "mezzo" and "mikro level". Competitveness can improved on the "mezzo-level" by infastructure measures, support of R&D and education. These are areas in which many regions are already active and can undertake measures more effective. On the "micro-level" the creation of a positive business environment becomes more and more important especially the support of small and medium sized enterprises. This includes technological integration into networks, improvement of logistics between companies and the co-operation between administration and industry.²⁷ The competition between regions and the creation of new regional locomotives of development in Europe is essential for the competitiveness in a global sense. Regions like Baden-Württemberg, Emilia-Romagna or Rhône-Alpe are the best examples of successful regional development policy.²⁸

A Europe closer to the citizens does not only mean that the European institutions communicate more with the people and the European Parliament's position is strengthened. This means also that following the principle of subsidarity decisions are taken as close to the people of Europe as possible. For the creation and the continuation of a civil society participatory democracy is essential and self-government plays a crucial role. As the Council of Municipalities and Regions in Europe expresses: "... self-government as an area of expressing personal freedom, a freedom of self-government being endangered by the nation state, ... and ... local and regional representatives are the constructors af a free, united and diverse Europe due to their closeness to the people". ²⁹ In many fields of public concern self- governed local or regional authorities work much more efficient than centralised systems. This is an experience of the introduction of self-government in the former centralised communist states in Central Europe, because elected local representatives show a higher responsibility for their inhabitants than delegated prefects.³⁰ Many new political movements are able to take first political responsibility on local or regional level, like the Green Party in Germany in the early 1980's. The elections for sub-national bodies give the population the possibility not only to decide on regional issues but also to express their opinion on the central government. Therefore regionalisation is an important contribution to the guarantee of democracy in Europe.³¹

The upper argumentation showed that the European integration process can gain a lot and a United Europe can be reached easier when the regions will take a play a stronger role. Or as the Bavarian Minister for Federal and European Affairs Bocklet expressed it in plain words: "A strong Europe needs strong regions" ³² This should not mean that the existing nation states should be dissolved. Despite all support for regionalism and self-government the European citizens still perceive themselves rather as citizens of their nation than of the European Union feel very strong attached to their nation-states.³³

3 Conclusion: Multi-level governance based on dual networks

The upper statement rises the question how can the values and qualities of regionalism be included in the framework of European political integration. The goal is to integrate the advantages of supra-national, national and sub-national structures efficient working political system. General there are two ways how to organise these systems of multi-level governance as it is already practised in federal states. The first model is practised in the USA were the tasks of the federal and the state level are clearly divided and where either one or the other level is responsible. In the German model this clear division exists only in some fields whereas in other areas some areas both levels act in co-operative power sharing. For the further explanations the German model will be used. This model showed that the internal federalism of Germany rather strengthened the nation state than weakened it.³⁴ A guideline of where to allocate functions on the different levels is necessary. This principle express that the decisions and responsibilities should be on the level were they are practised in the most effective.

"The Community shall act within the limits of the powers conferred upon it by this Treaty and of the objectives assigned to it therein. In areas which do not fall within its exclusive competence, the Community shall take action, in accordance with the principle of subsidarity, only if and in so far as the objectives of the proposed action cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States and can therefore, by reason of the scale or effects of the proposed action, be better achieved by the Community. Any action by the Community shall not go beyond what is necessary to achieve the objectives of this Treaty." (Article 5 of the Treaty of Amsterdam). At the Edinburgh Summit in 1992 the Commission stated that subsidarity should "help to assure the citizen that decisions will be taken as closely as possible to the citizen himself, without damaging the advantages which he gains from common action at the level of the whole community and without changing the institutional balance". ³⁵ The differences of understanding the principle of subsidarity among scholars and politicians are a main problem of implementing it into law and political actions. In European law subsidarity is not directly effective, this means it is only to define the power sharing between the national and the supra- national level.³⁶ Already in 1991 Delors stated that it should go further and be "a real equilibrium between the Community level, the national level and the local level" ³⁷ Subsidarity understood as a solely legal and political principle ignores the fact that it has a deeper socio-philosophical dimension. It is based on the autonomous individual that transfers its sovereignty to representatives and authorities. Therefore it is also an alternative model of democracy to the present one, which is based on the decisions of the majority (or as Ko³akowski states: "The tyranny of the majority". The interaction between the bodies should be based on mutual help (subsidy) respectively on consensus and solidarity.³⁸ Therefore subsidarity challenges the understanding of a supra-national, national and sub-national interaction as a hierarchical one and leads to the idea of networking. This means in establishing direct channels between the institutions of the EU and the sub-national actors. This is already practised by the regional representations in which exchange information between Brussels and regional authorities. This bypassing of the state was institutionalised by the establishment of the Committee of the Regions. If this process is continued consequently this would lead to a strengthening of the bodies role in the co-decision process.³⁹

The establishment of links between supra-national and sub-national actors has several effects. For Brussels this means a strengthening of their position by getting further information from the bodies implementing common policy. They also can get further supporter for the future integration project. Also a reduction of the democratic deficit of the Union, can be reached hereby, because the sub-national units are closer to the citizens. The regional organisations can inform them about future politics and can prepare themselves earlier than this would be via national authorities. They also can lobby for their interests and use financial opportunities offered by the Commission's initiatives.⁴⁰ This does not mean, that the establishing of the links will weaken the position of the nation state. Usual the interactions between the sub- national and national bodies are more intensive than those bypassing the state. Also their interests are usual not in contradiction, so that national interests can be lobbied by more channels. The integration of sub-national actors in Council of Ministers meetings already showed positive effects⁴¹.

The suggested integration of regions into the political on European level would lead to a "Europe with the Regions", not opposing the present role of the nation-states. The change to a less hierarchical political system makes a change in the political culture necessary. It is also important that the process of regionalisation is not imposed from above, but developing from below. Continuing the started process will lead to another dimension of deepening the European Union. Regional policy will become more and more European and European matters more regional. Sub-national bodies as representatives of the European Union towards the citizens and sub-national bodies as representatives of the citizens of the European Union can lead to an ever closer union of the peoples of Europe.

4 Annex

Treaty of Amsterdam

RESOLVED to mark a new stage in the process of European integration undertaken with the establishment of the European Communities,

RECALLING the historic importance of the ending of the division of the European continent and the need to create firm bases for the construction of the future Europe,

CONFIRMING their attachment to the principles of liberty, democracy and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms and of the rule of law,

CONFIRMING their attachment to fundamental social rights as defined in the European Social Charter signed at Turin on 18 October 1961 and in the 1989 Community Charter of the Fundamental Social Rights of Workers,

DESIRING to deepen the solidarity between their peoples while respecting their history, their culture and their traditions,

DESIRING to enhance further the democratic and efficient functioning of the institutions so as to enable them better to carry out, within a single institutional framework, the tasks entrusted to them,

RESOLVED to achieve the strengthening and the convergence of their economies and to establish an economic and monetary union including, in accordance with the provisions of this Treaty, a single and stable currency,

DETERMINED to promote economic and social progress for their peoples, taking into account the principle of sustainable development and within the context of the accomplishment of the internal market and of reinforced cohesion and environmental protection, and to implement policies ensuring that advances in economic integration are accompanied by parallel progress in other fields,

RESOLVED to establish a citizenship common to nationals of their countries,

RESOLVED to implement a common foreign and security policy including the progressive framing of a common defence policy, which might lead to a common defence in accordance with the provisions of Article 17, thereby reinforcing the European identity and its independence in order to promote peace, security and progress in Europe and in the world, RESOLVED to facilitate the free movement of persons, while ensuring the safety and security of their peoples, by establishing an area of freedom, security and justice, in accordance with the provisions of this Treaty,

RESOLVED to continue the process of creating an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe, in which decisions are taken as closely as possible to the citizen in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity,

IN VIEW of further steps to be taken in order to advance European integration,...

Bibliography

Altmann Frank, v. Baratta Mario, Brander Sybille, ..., Der Fischer Weltalmanach 2000, 1999,Frankfurt/Main

Amin A., Tomaney J., The challange of cohesion, in: Amin A., Tomaney J. (eds.) Behind the myth of European Union, 1994, London

Ansell Christopfher, Parson Craig, Darden Keith, Dual Networks in European Regional Development Policy,in Journal of Common Market Studies, September 1997,Oxford Bocklet Reiner., Können die Regionen den europäischen Integrationsprozeßunterstützen?, Lecture at the Jagiellonian University, 13.11.2000,Kraków

Boesby Dorte, The Principle of Subsidiarity in EU Law, paper handed in at Uniwersitet Jagiellonski, Kathedra Europejstika, 2000,Kraków

Bongers Paul and Chatfield John, Regions and Local Authorities in the Governance of Europe, in Andrew Duff (eds): Subsidarity within the European Community, 1993,London Buczkowski P., Civil Society and self-government in Poland, Tadeusz Skoczny (eds.) Yearbook of Polish European Studies, Volume 1/1997,Warszawa

Budge I., Newton K., McKinley R., ..., The Politics of the New Europe -Atlantic to Uralss, 1988,London

Budge Ian, Newton Kenneth, The Politics of the new Europe, 1997,London

Bull Anna, Regionalism in Italy, in EUROPA, ( http://www.intellectbooks.com /europa/number2/bull.htm), Number 2 Article 4 - 1996,Exeter, UK

Committee of the Regions, Major steps towards a Europe of the Regions and Cities in an integrated continent, www.cor.eu.int/coratwork/studies/StudieUnit /DemocarcyProgress/Europe-cdv.pdf

Czubiñski Z., The Status of Region in European Law, http://www.ces.uj.edu.pl/download/czu_f_3.doc , 2000, Kraków

Duff Andrew, Towards a definition of subsidarity, in. Andrew Duff(eds.): Subsidarity within the European Community, 1993,London

European Commission, European Citizenship - rights and freedom, in: Eurobarometer, Report 47, October 1997,Brussels

European Commission, The Regions and a Federal Structure for Europe ,in: Eurobarometer, Report 44, April 1996,Brussels

European Commission Directorate-General XVI, Sixth Periodic Reprot on the social and economic situation and development of the regions of the European Union, ( http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/regional_policy/radi/radi_en.htm , 1998,Brussels

Green Stephen, The Position of Regions in EU Law, Scotland: a Case Study, paper handed in at Uniwersitet Jagiellonski, Kathedra Europejstika, 2000,Kraków

Groewe Monika, Der Ausschuß der Regionen (AdR) als ,jüngstes" Kind im institutionellen

Gefüge der EU: Entwicklung, Struktur, Aufgaben, Befugnisse, paper handed in at Freie Univeristät Berlin ( www.grin.de ), 2000,Berlin

Grzegorczyk Andrzej, Subsidarity in the Philosophical Vision of Social Actions, Tadeusz Skoczny (eds.) Yearbook of Polish European Studies , Volume 1/1997,Warszawa

Henrad Frédéric, More Competencies for the Regions? The Case of Belgium, presentation at University Giessen at ( http://www.uni- giessen.de/fb03/seminar/online/europa99/d_5.htm), 12/05/1999,Giessen

Hix Simon, T he political system of the European Union, 1999,Houndmills/ England

Hooghe Liesbet, EU Cohesion Policy and Competing Models of European Capitalism, in Journal of Common Market Studies, December 1998,Oxford

Huegelin Thomas, Federalism, subsidarity and the European tradition, Paper prepared for the European Community studies association ( http://www.ecsanet.org/conferences/1to.htm )

K. Esser, W. Hillebrand, D. Messner, J. Meyer-Stammer, Systemic Competitiveness, New Challange, 1999,Tübingen, p. 60

Komlosy Andrea, Wood Gerald, Die Wiederkehr der Region und ihre Hintergründe,in: Beiträge zur historischen Sozialkunde http://www.univie.ac.at/Wirtschaftsgeschichte/VGS/b972lp.html , Nr. 2/97, 27. Jg.,Wien

Kukliñski Antoni, The Role of Regions in Federal Europe of the 21st Century, Tadeusz Skoczny (eds.) Yearbook of Polish European Studies, Volume 2/1998,Warszawa Makarovic J., Political sovereignty and creativity: Implications for Eastern Europe" , in: ?ubomir Fal_an (eds.) Regions - Self Government - European Integration, 1995, Bratis?ava

Marks G., Hooghe L., Blank K., European Integration from the 1980s: State-Centric vs. Multi-Level Governance,in: Nielsen B., Stubb A. (eds.) The European Union, 1998, London

Milinar Zdravko, Europe of Regions: "Closer to both citizen and global society", in: ?ubomir Fal_an (eds.) Regions - Self Government - European Integration, 1995, Bratis?ava

Molle Willem, The Economics of European Integration , 1994, Aldershot

Neyts-Uytterbroeck Annemie, Subsidarity in Belgium ,in eds. Andrew Duff: Subsidarity within the European Community, 1993, London

Office for official publications of the European Communities, Consolidated version of the treaty establishing the European Community (Treaty of Amsterdam, signed on 2 October 1997), http://www.europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/treaties ,

Office for official publications of the European Communities, Treaty on European Union, in: Treaty on European Union - Treaty Establishing the European Community, 1993, Brussels, Luxembourg

Office for official publications of the European Communities, Treaty of Amsterdam, 1997, Luxembourg

Pollack M. A., Representing Diffuse Interests in EC Policy-Making, in: Journal of European Public Policy, vol. 4, no 4,

Porter M., What Forces Drive Competition in an Industry? excerpt from: "The Competitive Advantage of Nations",in: Ewa Miklaszewska (eds.) Competitive Banking in Central and Eastern Europe, 1995, Kraków

Rat der Gemeinden und Regionen Europas, Präambel der Satzung des Rates der Gemeinden und Regionen Europas, amendet version of 2. September 1997, Strasbourg

Schmuck Otto, The German Federal Experiance, in. Andrew Duff (eds.): Subsidarity within the European Community, 1993, London

Shepley S., Wilmot J. , Core vs. Periphery,in: Amin A., Tomaney J. (eds.) Behind the myth of European Union, 1994, London

Sinnott Richard, Integration theory, subsidarity and the internationalisation of issues: The implication for legitimacy, Paper prepared for a Plenary meeting of the European Science Foundation, Beliefs in Government Project., 2-6 June 1993,Strasbourg

Staatskanzlei Bayern, Europaminister Bocklet: Bayerns Handschrift im Amsterdamer Vertrag deutlich erkennbar,in: Bayern in Europa ( http://www.bayern.de/Europa/EuropaAktuell/1999/159-1.html ), The Committee of the Regions, The Regions and a Federal Structure for Europe, http://www.cor.eu.int/coratwork/studies/StudieUnit/DemocracyProgress/Europe- cdr.pdf

Voigt Rüdiger, "European Union, Nation-States and Regions towards a new European State Order",in: Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte, 2/94,Baden-Baden

Ward Stephen, William Richad s, From Hierarchy to Networks? Sub-central Government and EU Urban Enviroment Policy, in Journal of Common Market Studies, September 1997,Oxford

Föderalismus und Dezentralisierung in Europa: Ein Zukunftskonzept auch für die EUBeitrittskandidatien,in: Deutschland, Nr 4 / 2000,Frankfurt / Main Treaty Establishing the European Economic Community,in: Harryvan A. G., Harst, van der J., 1997, London

[...]

---

¹ Kalbfleisch-Kottsieper Ulla; Föderalismus und Dezentralisierung in Europa: Ein Zukunftskonzept auch für die EU-Beitrittskandidatien; in: Deutschland; Nr 4 / 2000; Frankfurt / Main, pp. 30-31

² Zag³êbie is a heavy industrial area close to Katowice; "Blue Banana" the centre of innovative industry in Europe from Hamburg along the Rhine to North Italy; Silicon Glenn: Glasgow and Edinburgh, characterised by high-tech industry.

³ Czubin'ski Z.; The Status of Region in European Law; http://www.ces.uj.edu.pl/download/czu_f_3.doc; 2000; Kraków, pp. 3-4 .

⁴ A good example for this is the Polish vojvodship Silesia, which has a prefect (Wojewoda) as representative of the central government and a president (Marsza³ek wojewódski) who is the head of the self-government. The name of the region derives from the historic region, extending from Eastern Saxony covering South-East Poland to the Czech Republic (Ostráva). For economic reasons the heavy industry Zag³êbie was added, never being Silesian in the history.

⁵ from Budge I., Newton K., McKinley R., The Politics of the New Europe -Atlantic to Urals; 1988; London, pp. 91- 93

⁶ for Italy see Bull Anna; Regionalism in Italy; in EUROPA,(http://www.intellectbooks.com/europa/number2/bull.htm); Number 2 Article 4 - 1996; Exeter, UK

⁷ beside the Wallonie and Flandres there is the bilingual city-region of Brussels: from Neyts- Uytterbroeck Annemie; Subsidarity in Belgium; in eds. Andrew Duff: Subsidarity within the European Community; 1993; London, pp. 67 - 68 and Henrad Frédéric; More Competencies for the Regions? The Case of Belgium; presentation at University Giessen at (http://www.uni- giessen.de/fb03/seminar/online/europa99/d_5.htm); 12/05/1999; Giessen

⁸ the Scottish Devolution from Green, Stephen; The Position of Regions in EU Law, Scotland: a Case Study; paper handed in at Uniwersitet Jagiellonski, Kathedra Europejstika; 2000; Kraków, pp. 4-6 and for an overview of decentralisation in the memberstates: Duff Andrew; Towards a definition of subsidarity; in eds. Andrew Duff: Subsidarity within the European Community; 1993; London, p. 19

⁹ "In this paper sovereignty is defined as: A sovereign body is the highest authority in a given territory. The state has sovereignty over its citizens. (Monopoly of force). In Unitarian states the central government has oll sovereignty in its hand. (it only delegates sovereignty to sublevels) A federal state has shared sovereignty the sovereignty of the sub-levels are granted by constitution." see: Budge I., Newton K., McKinley R., ..., The Politics of the New Europe - Atlantic to Uralss,, 1988,Londonp. 296

¹⁰ Western Europe is in this case defined as the EU and the EFTA states, also Greece is Eastern of many "Eastern" countries.

¹¹ The Bundesrat (Federal Assembly) of the Federal Republic of Austria is in reality a rather weak organ compared with the Nationalversammlung.

¹² Green, Stephen, The Position of Regions in EU Law, Scotland: a Case Study, paper handed in at Uniwersitet Jagiellonski, Kathedra Europejistika,2000,Kraków, pp. 6

¹³ Could the future decentralisation of the Central- and Eastern Countries be predicted by the upper patterns?

¹⁴ It is interesting to see that the Council of Europe already in 1957 formed an consultative organ of regional and local representative and in 1997 concluded over the Charter of Regional Self-Government. from Committee of the Regions (XXX)

¹⁵ from Ansell Christopfher, Parson Craig and Darden Keith; Dual Networks in European Regional Development Policy; in Journal of Common Market Studies; September 1997; Oxford, pp. 359-361 also Ward Stephen and William Richard; From Hierarchy to Networks? Sub-central Government and EU Urban Environment Policy; in Journal of Common Market Studies; September 1997; Oxford; p. 441

¹⁶ CoR participation in following fields (selection): transport policy (Article 71);guidelines of employment policy (Article 128);social provisions (Article 137); support measures in the cultural field (Article 151); support measures in the health sector (Article 152); trans- European networks (Article 156); environment policy (Article 175) from The Committee of the Regions; Five Questions, five answers; http://www.cor.eu.int/5q5a/5q_en_intro.html

¹⁷ ; for Cohesion Policy see: Hix Simon; The political system of the European Union; ; 1999; Houndmills/ England, pp. 262 - 263 and for CoR Groewe Monika; Der Ausschuß der Regionen (AdR) als ,,jüngstes" Kind im institutionellen Gefüge der EU: Entwicklung, Struktur, Aufgaben, Befugnisse; paper handed in at Freie Univeristät Berlin (http//www.hausarbeiten.de); 2000; Berlin

¹⁸ Office for official publications of the European Communities (1); Treaty on European Union; in: Treaty on European Union - Treaty Establishing the European Community; 1993; Brussels, Luxembourg, pp. 230-231 and Office for official publications of the European Communities (2); Treaty of Amsterdam 1997; Luxembourg, pp. 5-6

¹⁹ for neo-liberal argumentation against Cohesion policy: Kukliñski Antoni; The Role of Regions in Federal Europe of the 21st Century; Tadeusz Skoczny (eds.) Yearbook of Polish European Studies ; Volume 2/1998; Warszawa, pp. 15-18

²⁰ from Huegelin Thomas; Federalism, subsidarity and the European tradition; Paper prepared for the European Community studies association http://www.ecsanet.org/conferences/1to.htm

²¹ see: Bocklet Reiner.; Können die Regionen den eurpäischen Integrationsprozeß unterstützen?; Lecture at the Jagiellonian University; 13.11.2000; Kraków and for Nice:

²² this statement is based on a empirical comparison between several nation-states by Makarovic J.,Political sovereignity and creativity: Implications for Eastern Europe",in:?ubomir Fal_an (eds.) Regions - Self Government - European Integration,1995,Bratis?ava, pg. 104

²³ for regional cultural policy see: Zdravko Milinar,Europe of Regions: "Closer to both citizen and global society",in: ?ubomir Fal_an (eds.) Regions - Self Government - European Integration,1995,Bratis?ava,, pg. 98 and for the importance of regionalism overcoming conflicts: Budge I.,..., pg. 308 and Henrad Frédéric,More Competencies for the Regions? The Case of Belgium, presentation at University Giessen at (http://www.uni- giessen.de/fb03/seminar/online/europa99/d_5.htm),12/05/1999,Giessen

²⁴ seeWillem Molle,The Economics of European Integration ,,1994,Aldershot, pp. 428-429 and European Commission Directorate-General XVI, Sixth Periodic Reprot on the social and economic situation and development of the regions of the European Union,(http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/regional_policy/radi/radi_en.htm,1998,Brussels, pg. 13

²⁵ see Shepley S., Wilmot J. ,Core vs. Periphery,in: Amin A., Tomaney J. (eds.) Behind the myth of European Union,1994,London ;pp. 51-52

²⁶ see Hix Simon,The political system of the European Union,1999,Houndmills/ England, pg. 262

²⁷ Michal Porter, What Forces Drive Competition in an Industry? excerpt from: "The Competitive Advantage of Nations", in: Ewa Miklaszewska (eds.) Competitive Banking in Central and Eastern Europe,1995,Kraków, pp. 12-13 and K. Esser, W. Hillebrand, D. Messner, J. Meyer-Stammer,Systemic Competitiveness, New Challange,1999,Tübingen, p. 60

²⁸ Kukliñski Antoni, pg. 20

²⁹ quoted from: Rat der Gemeinden und Regionen Europas, Präambel der Satzung des Rates der Gemeinden und Regionen Europas,, amendet version of 2. September 1997,Strasbourg, pg. 1

³⁰ Buczkowski, P., Civil Society and self-government in Poland, Tadeusz Skoczny (eds.) Yearbook of Polish European Studies, Volume 1/1997,Warszawa, pp. 28-29

³¹ see Budge I., Newton K., McKinley R., ..., pp. 922-923

³² from Bocklet Reiner.,Können die Regionen den eurpäischen Integrationsprozeß unterstützen?,Lecture at the Jagiellonian University,13.11.2000,Kraków

³³ in a survey of Eurostat citizens of the 15 Member-States of the EU expressed their attachment to different regional entities: town/village 87%, region 90%, country 89%, European Union: 43%, Europe as a whole 42%, from: European Commission, The Regions and a Federal Structure for Europe, in: Eurobarometer, Report 44,April 1996,Brussels, pg. 86 asked about "as what in the near future, do you see yourself as?" people answered: nationality only: 45%, nationality and European: 40%, European and nationality: 6% and European only: 5%, from: European Commission, European Citizenship - rights and freedom, in: Eurobarometer, Report 47,October 1997,Brussels, pg. 55

³⁴ Schmuck Otto, The German Federal Experiance, in eds. Andrew Duff: Subsidarity within the European Community,1993,London, pg. 75

³⁵ Duff Andrew, Towards a definition of subsidarity,in eds. Andrew Duff: Subsidarity within the European Community,1993,London pp. 12-13

³⁶ Boesby Dorte, The Principle of Subsidiarity in EU Law, paper handed in at Uniwersitet Jagiellonski, Kathedra Europejstika,2000,Kraków, pg. 11

³⁷ Sinnott Richard, Integration theory, subsidarity and the internationalisation of issues: The implication for legitimacy, Paper prepared for a Plenary meeting of the European Science Foundation, Beliefs in Government Project.,2-6 June 1993,Strasbourg, pg. 7

³⁸ Buczkowski, P. pp. 24-25 and pg. 30

³⁹ Ansell Christopfher, Parson Craig and Darden Keith, Dual Networks in European Regional Development Policy, in Journal of Common Market Studies, September 1997,Oxford, pp. 359-361 and Marks G., Hooghe L., Blank K., European Integration from the 1980s: State- Centric vs. Multi-Level Governance,in: Nielsen B., Stubb A. (eds.) The European Union,1998,London

⁴⁰ Stephen Ward, Richards William,pp. 444-445

⁴¹ Staatskanzlei Bayern, Europaminister Bocklet: Bayerns Handschrift im Amsterdamer Vertrag deutlich erkennbar, in: Bayern in Europa (http://www.bayern.de/Europa/EuropaAktuell/1999/159-1.html) ,,