COST Action IS0803
Working Paper
Twin cities: cooperation beyond walls. The case of crossborder cooperation between Italy and Slovenia.
Sigrid Lipott
Department of Political and Social Sciences
University of Trieste
[email protected]
This paper was first presented at:
Relocating Borders: a comparative approach
Second EastBordNet Conference
On:
11- 13 January 2013
Location:
Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany
Keywords:
cross –border cooperation, city- twinning, Italy,
Slovenia
Disciplines:
Sociology, international relations
1. Introduction
The present work will examine the case of cross- border cooperation (CBC) between Italy
and Slovenia, with particular regard to the construction of town twinning. The research will
try to answer the following questions: “What does CBC at the Italo – Slovene border
consist of?” “To what extent the model of CBC as formulated and adopted by the Italian –
Slovene borderland is effective?” “What is the degree of harmonization and
homogenization along this former East – West axis?” “Which are the opportunities and
obstacles at juridical, institutional and socio-cultural level”? The general hypothesis is that
the dichotomy East / West has become more and more fleeting: it serves more as a
‘mediation structure’ of possible territorial competition than as a filter between opposed
systems. Thus, in those areas where cross -border cooperation has shown particularly
successful, it is possible to detect the existence of some kind of zona franca, which denies
the very logic of the East / West divide and gives birth to a new polycentric identity. In this
sense, the membrane East / West is becoming more and more porous by inserting
synergies. The Upper Adriatic case, i.e. the Italo – Slovene borderland, is symptomatic of
this dynamic.
The second section presents some of the key issues related to the concept of border
evolution; the third one focus on the establishment of cross- border cooperation along the
former East- West divide; the fourth one starts to consider more specifically the situation
regarding the Italian – Slovene border, whereas the fifth one presents the most important
cross- border projects activated so far as well as the short- term prospects, first by
underlying the historical transboundary importance of this borderland and secondly, by
highlighting the most significant euroregional projects that have been activated. Special
1
attention will be dedicated to the establishment of contiguous cooperation, or participation,
through the cases of territorial integration of Gorizia- Nova Gorizia and Trieste- Koper.
Further on, the SWOT analysis (stenghts, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) will be
used in order to assess the state of art of CBC at the Italo – Slovene border.
The conclusions confirm the main hypothesis: not only the concept East / West in this
borderland has been to great extent overtaken, but the ‘precise’ boundary has also
transformed into what political geographers would call a ‘frontier’ as opposed to ‘border’,
i.e. an imprecise borderland characterised by mobility.
The research is based on the collection and analysis of data available within the existing
legal-institutional framework and will be based on the utilisation of a number of diverse
theoretic constructs. The research also makes use of different sets of documentary
sources. A content research was conducted on the various official documents and projects
documentation available and the results are presented based on a process of data
interpretation.
2. Europe changing borders
The nature of the border seems to be basically double: it can be conceived as a separation,
a dividing line, but also a door through which the meeting of diversities becomes central,
a line of people in movement but also of settled and indigenous people; therefore, it can
be seen as a place of profound segregation but also one of communicating interests and
cultures. Borders have served to separate people from others but sometimes borders have
also engendered cooperation (Gasparini 2004:1); in this sense, they can be seen as doors
2
(walls) or as bridges (Amendola 2004: 2). Boundaries can connect as well as separate and
both characteristics should be taken into consideration when dealing with trans-frontier
cooperation (Böttger 2006).
The modern nation - state introduced the concept of a ‘hard border’, seen mostly as a line
of containment for the centre, a cul de sac, and as a line of ethno-linguistic distinction.
The political border, i.e. the state border, became particularly rigid and selective because
of the elevation of the nation to an ideology and the birth of nationalism (Gasparini
2000:1). The border, in its state- political role, has undergone several genetic mutations, in
the development from feudal states to nations states to the form of an almost federal state
with the slogan ‘Europe of regions’.
Borders are regarded as the scars of history and as one of the chief characteristics of
Europe (Council of Europe 1987). Traditionally, they were meant to protect and project
national interests; though, only a few states experienced long – standing frontiers and
most of frontiers of European states have changed several times during the last centuries.
Nevertheless, during the last few decades, there has been a gradual transition from the
concept of border as a peripheral membrane to the one of ‘zonal border’ or ‘boundary
zone’. This means that, also thanks to the process of European integration, the border is
becoming more and more administrative in nature (Gasparini 2000:1) and lost its feature
of tangible line dividing two self- referential systems.
This has been possible due to three main factors: an atmosphere of mutual confidence at
European level started with the Helsinki Act in 1975, the processes of economic and
3
political integration within the European Communities and the European Union and a
large scale application of the principle of subsidiarity, attributing powers to the decision
level must closely linked with the interests that have to be pursued (Conetti, 2004:4).
As a consequence of rediscovering their sometimes substantive unity, sub-state entities are
looking for grounds where their legislative and administrative powers could be more
efficiently exercised through, or thanks to, transfrontier consultation and coordination.
This phenomenon has been largely of a spontaneous nature, not always encouraged by
central governments, sometimes even hindered. Transfrontier cooperation assumed a large
variety of forms derived from the different nature, size and aims of the entities involved
and the legal instruments at their disposal.
From a governmental standpoint, transborder cooperation symbolizes peace and close
relationships between two states. Cooperation can boost economic development and
overcome problems of peripheral location, particularly at the regional and local levels.
Problems of peripherality have often arisen when new borderlines were drawn, thus
cutting traditional co-operative networks. Cross- border cooperation is also a key political
task of the EU (Gabbe 2004: 32) and is intended as a touchstone for European unification,
reconciliation and equality, peaceful coexistence of people, including minorities.
3. Euroregions along the (former) East – West divide
In Europe the fall of the Iron Curtain, the great border, was certainly a decisive step
towards a rapprochement between the States, territories, peoples and ethnicities previously
isolated from each other. The sad legacy of closed frontiers and the sudden liberalisation
4
of movement across them imposed radical changes on the social and economic structures
of border communities (Zago 2000a: 20).
With regard to CBC, it is possible to identify two scenarios that refer roughly two large
parts of the European continent: on the one hand Western Europe, where States have
cooperated in concert in order to slaughter of the dividing function of borders and where
the meeting between the ethnic groups separated by these borders is more and more
highlighted; on the other Eastern Europe where, due to the dissolution of different national
entities, the idea of national State has earned national importance, thus the function of
borders to separation of territories, populations and ethnicities has been in various cases
strengthened.
Modern states emphasized the concept of state border as a line of containment and of
ethno-linguistic distinction; in the case of the traditional East / West axis, this line has
shown particularly ‘hard’, marking incompatible political systems and ways of life. In
Western Europe, since the 60’s, the process of integration favoured transfrontier
consultation and coordination among sub-state entities. Since the 90s, the process has
involved also the East- West border and this has fostered a process of ‘reshaping’ and
‘reframing’ the notion of ‘East’ as an area of marginality.
In regions along the East / West divide, however, the border was generally emphasized in
its negative features. In particular, it was perceived (1) as a barrier between blocks; (2) as
a physical – bureaucratic obstacle; (3) as a loss of capitals; (4) as a sign of impossibility of
free trade; (5) sometimes as a symbol of unresolved territorial claims (Gasparini 2011). In
sum, the border can be defined as a wall dividing two opposing systems.
5
After 1989, border issues became a top issue for many politicians, scholars and citizens of
Eastern European regions and the eastern enlargement of the European Union has given a
major incentive to the development of cross- border cooperation (Säre 2004: 21). The
motives for active development of transfrontier cooperation in the eastern European
countries were, however, slightly different from those in Western Europe: The former
communist bloc countries or countries belonging to former Yugoslavia mostly saw active
transboundary cooperation mostly as a way for transforming the border into a place for
communication between neighbours and integration in the EU; strengthening democracy
and the development of public administration structures; promoting economic growth and
improvement of living standards.
In general, we can state that while in Western European countries cross- border
cooperation started to develop by the desire to remove barriers and to overcome everyday
problems affecting the inhabitants of border regions (for example public administration
structures and planning, social security, training and education, road construction,
environmental issues), in Eastern European countries the process was massively fostered
only since the ‘90 as a model of multilevel institutionalization as a part of pre- integration
policy to combat regional marginalization (Scott 2001). Many studies on cross-border cooperation in Eastern European countries contrast that while cross-border co-operation
stemmed from the local and regional level bottom–up in Western countries, it was instead
top–down (European level) in Eastern European countries.
A special case is the one of cross- border collaboration between countries separated by the
former East – West divide: here, cross- border cooperation usually has a stronger
historical tradition than East – East cooperation. Despite of the lack of systematic
6
cooperation during the cold war, there is an increasing will to improve transboundary
contacts, especially in those border regions where a hard political border is a relatively
recent fact. One characteristic is that the first organized cross- border contacts started at an
informal level between community organizations and groups, based on kinship
relationships. A paradigmatic and successful case of euroregions along the former EastWest divide is the one involving the Italian –Slovene border. Researches carried out by
Isig during the 2000s show that the Italo- Slovene borderland is characterized by an
ambivalent self – perception – as centre and as periphery at the same time, which stem
from its historical evolution: populations have long traditions of trade and co – existence,
but the relatively recent establishment of the border stresses the feeling of marginalisation.
4. The centrality of the Italian – Slovene border
During the 2000s some of the regions along the former East – West divide -gained
momentum by fostering a process of cross – border cooperation in the effort to turn the
region into a ‘self centred area’. This is particularly true in the case of transboundary
regionalization between Italy (Autonomous Region Friuli Venezia Giulia) and Slovenia,
which has become an international model due to the comprehensive approach to cross border cooperation and to its quality within the process of re- positioning the area at the
centre of Mitteleuropa.
Transborder cooperation agreements between Italy and Slovenia have a long tradition and
have been established within different legal and political frameworks: at plurinational
level (Alpe Adria- Working Community, ‘pilot actions’), national level (bilateral and
multilateral agreements and Interreg bilateral programmes), at regional level (regional
7
cooperation agreements) and at local level (transfrontier territorial agreements,
transborder associations, joints ventures and meetings) (Zago 2000b). These forms of
cross-border cooperation have proved rather successful due to the involvement of three
types of actors; individuals (civil society); economic actors; European and local
institutions.
The Italo – Slovene borderland is also one of the few regions to be at the core of three
types of international cooperation including: (a) a macroregion of infrastructures, aiming
at a common economic development; (b) a euroregion of functional networks, based on
synergies among different types of economic, educational, social and cultural institutions;
(c) a euroregion of local transborder cooperation, with the example of Gorizia - Nova
Gorica / Trieste – Koper showing a willingness to build, respectively, one international
twin town and one transborder metropolitan city.
Generally, the aim of CBC is to create an integrated borderland, i.e. a frontier region
where stability is strong and permanent; economies of both countries are functionally
merged; there is unrestricted movement of people and goods across the border; the
borderlands perceive themselves as members of one social system (Lipott 2011).
This can be considered as a process in fieri along the Italo – Slovene border, where
cooperation is carried out on daily basis and involves different partnerships, with a
consequence that the concept of East has become more and more fleeting: the East / West
serves more as a ‘mediation structure’ of possible territorial competition than as a filter
between opposed systems.
Where cross -border cooperation has shown particularly successful, it is possible to detect
8
the emergence of some kind of zona franca, which denies the very logic of the East / West
divide and gives birth to a new, though polycentric, identity. As a consequence, the
membrane East / West is becoming more and more porous by inserting synergies, i.e.
transposing elements from one side into the other.
5. Euroregional prospects for the Italian – Slovene border
5.1 Historical focus
The transborder area between Italy and Slovenia shows the excessive vagueness of the
East – West geopolitical division. This territory oscillates between the two realities, not
only because of its geographical position in the centre of Europe, but also on the basis of
historical roots and of common problems.
Realizing that they all belong to a Mitteleuropean entity, which has acquired a new
emphasis in the wake of new subnational / transnational processes, these territories claim
a fundamental function of bridge between the Eastern and Western Europe and share
therefore both situations. The border areas of these territories have features of both
geopolitical parties, which perfectly suits their central position.
The academic literature and official documents agree that these territories constitute the
heart of the so called Alps Adriatic region. This is also the one point where three major
European culture areas the Latin, the Slavic, and the German one come together. As a
matter of fact, at least three ethnicities are present in this transborder area and they are not
9
confined to their respective national States: the whole territory is characterised by
considerable ethnic diversity and inter-coexistence.
Moreover, this territory can be intended as a “whole” because of at least two historical
focuses: one is the ancient unity in pre-roman times, when Carnuti, a celtic tribe, settled
this region, and left their name to Carnia (the Alpine part of Friuli) and to Kranj as well as
to Kärnten- Carinthia; the second focus is the litorale (primorije, Küstenland), i.e. the
administrative unity of Gorizia, Trieste and Istra, under the Habsburgs (Langer 2003: 17).
The Italian – Slovene border has an inherent transborder dimension which finds its roots
in a common Mitteleuropean ‘historical – institutional architecture’ (Langer 2003:18). As
a matter of fact, even during the years of the Iron Curtain, local private actors and sociocultural and institutional operators always sought concrete ways in order to concert a joint
development of the territory, within the institutional and legal framework of the respective
national systems. Nevertheless, for several decades the Italo – Slovene border represented
a wall for the populations.
The beginning of cross- border cooperation Italy- Slovenia dates back to the ‘60, when
Friuli Venezia Giulia, Slovenia and Kärnten established the Trigon, a pioneer project of
cooperation for territorial and touristic planning. The Trigon was later extended to Croatia
and changed its name into Quadrigon. A further important experience was that of the
Alpe- Adria Working Community, established in 1978 and intended as an agency of
territorial cooperation among institutional actors; its primary role was to foster cross –
border cooperation along the Iron Curtain.
10
However, both states had adopted a defence of national sovereignty strategy which used to
hinder the development of a systematic process of cross- border cooperation a) involving
all actors of civil society, b) conducted on a regular basis and c) following a bottom up
process. The model of socio – economic development emphasized the role of the border
and was based basically on transports stopped at the border; shipping agents; border
administrations and its civil servants; military presence; centralization (Gasparini 2011).
The Italian – Slovene border is relatively recent; until 1918 the area was largely
characterised by strict cultural boundaries (former Habsburg Empire) and interconnection,
i.e. there existed a sort of regional continuity. This border area thus has a long tradition of
‘self – centred area’.
The fall of the Berlin wall and the dismantling of Yugoslavia marked the beginning of a
new era towards a progressive integration of the transborder space, which was further
accelerated by the joint participation to INTERREG programmes and through the
membership of both Italy and Slovenia (since 2004) to the EU.
As we shall see, transboundary regionalization between Italy (Friuli Venezia Giulia) and
Slovenia has become an international model due to the comprehensive approach to cross border cooperation and to its quality within the process of re- positioning the area at the
centre of Mitteleuropa.
11
5.2 Transfrontier agreements
The Italian – Slovene border has been regulated by several international treaties and by a
great number of declarations, agreements and institutional types of collaboration. Since
1991, Italy and Slovenia took more than thirty formal diplomatic contacts, approximately
half of which concerned transfrontier questions. International agreements are certainly not
a sufficient means to foster cross- border cooperation, as they, to some extent, still reflect
a national interest brought forward by the respective capital towns.
Nevertheless, diplomatic exchanges are certainly a good basis upon which to build an
institutional framework of good neighbouring relationships, whose practices and details
are further demanded to the regional / local institutions. In this sense, it is necessary to
quote the Osimo Treaty, which – by re-defining the frontier between the two countries –
constituted the main legal international structure within which Italy and Slovenia could
start to cooperate. Other two important agreements favoured by the central powers were
the Udine Accords and the agreement on police transfrontier cooperation signed in 2007,
according to which both Italian and Slovene police have full powers up to 30 km across
the border.
5.3 Recent practices
During the last eight - ten years, the transborder area between Italy and Slovenia has
experienced a rapid growth of events and initiatives aiming to establish euroregional
projects in order to foster territorial cohesion and the economic and political weight of the
area within the EU. These projects are based on a model of development following four
12
principles: cooperation must involve the civil society; it must be based on partnership and
subsidiarity; it must possibly include all aspects of life; it must be independent of the
decisions taken in politics.
Three projects, both at micro and macro level, have attracted international attention:
EureGo first and EGTC GO later; the Alps – Adriatic euroregion; the Ionic - Adriatic
euroregion. In general, they aim to foster cross-border co-operation both as a tool for
European integration and for micro- regional / macro- regional socio-economic
development. These three projects differ to as regards their operative dimension, status,
scope, tasks and governance (Gasparini 2008).
Even though these different types of euroregional prospects are based on very different
presuppositions, objectives and actors, their role is not mutually exclusive: on the
contrary, in the development of Italian – Slovene cross – border cooperation, it is possible
to detect a sort of Matrioška model, where each level can activate and be supported by the
other. The Italian – Slovene border is one of the few to collocate itself at the centre, or
however in a strategic position, with regard to three types of euroregions.
These initiatives tend to overcome the past weights: in particular, the inheritance of a hard
boundary, and the clash between former localistic approach and the current cross –border
regional approach. Not only the nature of the borderland but also the type of euroregional
projects activated make it one of the few regions to be at the core of three forms of
international cooperation. Several studies (ISIG) have underlined the importance of
establishing concentric forms of euroregions in the Alpine- Adriatic area.
13
Figure 1: transborder, interregional and transnational cooperation involving
the Italo- Slovene border
Source: Del Bianco D., Welfare transfrontaliero per la vita quotidiana. Modello di sviluppo locale per le
regioni di confine. Il caso dell'area transfrontaliera italo-slovena, PhD thesis, Gorizia 2008.
The Italian – Slovene border area is currently the focus of three different functional types
14
of euroregions. These three euroregions correspond to three different types of
international cooperation: transnational, i.e. a euroregion of macro infrastructures,
promoting logistic and structural projects; interregional, i.e. a euroregion of functional
networks, based on the establishment of ties among companies, firms, associations, etc…;
and transborder, i.e. a euroregion of contiguous cooperation aiming at fostering
integration of civil societies and specialised economic sectors, with the successful
example of Gorizia – Nova Gorica and the potentially successful one of Trieste – Koper
showing willingness to build transborder cities.
The project EUREGO, completed in June 2005 with the support of the community
program Interreg IIIA Italy-Slovenia, offers useful guidance with regard to the
establishment of a euroregion of contiguous cooperation. It confirms the opportunity to
involve in the project the whole Isontine territory in its broader dimension comprising the
entire catchment area of the Soča river: in Slovenia, the statistical region Severna
Primorska, and in Italy, the Province of Gorizia and the areas bordering the Cervignano.
The study has also identified the legal instruments are better suited for the
institutionalisation of Europrovincia Goriziana, suggesting that in expectation of a
Community regulation that provides new tools for cross-border cooperation (European
Grouping of Territorial Cooperation, EGTC) is acting by means of associations of private
law constituted by the Municipalities of the territory. The study contains detailed guidance
on operational tools, and the strategic areas in cross-border cooperation in the near future.
The launch of these new instruments of cooperation is seen as the obligatory path for more
effective cooperation and optimize the development prospects of cross-border region in
the next programming period 2007-2013 of the EU (Provincia di Gorizia, 2005).
15
The borderland is also at the core of the planned Alpine- Adriatic euroregion, which
represents some sort of evolution of the long established institutional cooperation
established between Friuli Venezia Giulia, Veneto, Slovenia and Kärnten. To this regard,
a protocol for the institution of an EGTC was signed in 2006 by Friuli Venezia Giulia,
Veneto, Kärnten and Istria, which was in 2007 extended to Slovenia. The Alpine –
Adriatic euroregion can be seen as the heritage of the Alpe – Adria Community. The
initiative gained momentum in 2012 when a project of EGTC was presented at the
European Parliament with the name of ‘Euregio without borders’. The Statute was already
signed by Friuli Venezia Giulia, Veneto and Kärnten on 28.11.2012. The main focuses of
the EGTC are renewable energies, culture, education, transports and logistics (Il Piccolo).
The Ionic- Adriatic Initiative is another example of transfrontier agreement which was
signed between Italy, Slovenia and 6 other countries in 2000 in order to foster stability
and development in the area. On December 10th, 2012, The Council of Europe expressed
a positive opinion regarding the presentation of a “Strategy for the Ionic- Adriatic
Region”, to the European Commission during the 2014, which will include also the
establishment of a macro euroregion / EGTC.
6. The border twin towns of Gorizia- Nova Gorica
Border cities that are located within adjacent states may produce various kinds of cooperative networks. There are two main types of border cities. First, the “paired border
cities” are two border towns located in neighbouring countries in close proximity to one
another, with an international border separating them (Gasparini 2000: 3). Their
relationships can range from neutral to competitive. Second, actual Twin Cities refer to
16
two cross-border towns that are in close cooperation. In general, the forms and frequency
of border city cooperation vary according to the historical evolution of cities, to their
socio-economic and political positions in relation to other parts of the country and to their
ethnic composition. Twin Cities can comprehend two cities whose relationships are
characterized by close physical and functional proximity as well as clearly-defined
similarities in administration, education, sense of identity and economic functions.
A border town is by definition a point of connection, a door which has a basic function of
opening to the environment. The border town is not only the necessary point of meeting
with the outside of the state system but also the beginning of a new system of relations of
which it places itself at the centre. A twin town is a border town in which the political
border is a division but also a factor reinforcing identity. Twin towns, in general, can stem
from at least three situations: the border follows a natural barrier; the border passes
outside an existing town and generates a settlement which takes on the features of a town;
the border is drawn through a town in order to emphasize a political / ethnic/ ideological
division. The degree of interpenetration largely depends on the symmetry / asymmetry
between the towns, which is given by a series of factors which can be summarized as
follows: a homogeneous degree of socio – economic development; similar morphological
features; the age of the towns; juridical reciprocity (Gasparini 2000: 274).
An interesting example of cross – border cooperation between Italy and Slovenia and of a
town split by the boundary is to be found in the twin- town of Gorizia- Nova Gorizia.
Gorizia had never been a border town, since a line of international political division had
never run through it. Its position had always been a central one, thanks to the important
communication axes connecting Austria with the northern Adriatic (Zago 2000: 23). Until
17
the reunification of Italy in 1918, Gorizia had been home to three different communities –
German, Italian and Slovene. In 1947 Gorizia suddenly found itself deprived of much of
its natural surrounding lands of which it had been the local point and the town founded on
the other side of the border (Nova Gorica, i.e. New Gorizia) was for long time not a joint
town due to the belonging to a different ideological, political and economic system.
Nevertheless, by virtue of kinship relations and acquaintances, people soon began to
cooperate at various levels: first on legal questions and ownership, later also in the field of
culture and sport. Since 1962 the two towns have been collaborating under the Udine
Accords, and especially in the solution of practical problems such as the supply of
drinking water, urban planning, roads and local traffic, environmental protection and of
course, mutual information and consultation. Further on, the two towns placed a high
priority on the infrastructural development of the area around the border.
Since the collapse of Yugoslavia, Gorizia and Nova Gorica have always been the focus of
clearly defined policies aiming to contribute to the development of good neighbourhood
relationships among territorial communities and to the development of socio- cultural
daily aspects of the border life. Economic cooperation has old origins and it was carried
also during the times of Yugoslavia and it contributed to the development of a ‘border
economy’. It is possible to speak about a border model of development: as a matter of
fact, the borderland, until the fall of the socialist regime, enjoyed of the resources
provided by the border itself: the army, controllers, policemen contributed to create a sort
of wealth. But this model of development was based on division as resource, which would
be in any case insufficient in order to foster an actual development. Before the 1990s,
cooperation was based mainly on economic collaboration, especially under the forms of
18
indispensable joint services (water, rivers,…). At the same time, however, this economic
cooperation can be considered the basis of the new development model, as it could not be
completely distinguished by other forms of unofficial collaboration across the border.
Embryonic forms of transfrontier cooperation between Gorizia and Nova Gorica started
already during the ‘60: in 1964, following informal contacts, the first official meeting
between the two municipalities took place. Following these first attempts, various forms
of contacts were established, in particular city twinning between associations and later
between local communities.
More organized forms of collaboration can be traced back to the end of the ‘90, with the
Transfrontier Pact, later renamed Collaboration Protocol. In 2002, the mayors of Gorizia,
Nova Gorica and Šempeter – Vrtojba established the ‘three executive bodies’, i.e. tighter
forms of collaboration among administrations based on regular meeting during the year, in
order to discuss and solve on the most significant subjects of common interest. Slovenia’s
access to the EU, and its entry into Schengen area, certainly gave momentum to the crossborder integration process and marked the beginning of closer relationships. As a
consequence, mixed societies of collaboration were established. Consequently, a bus line
connecting the two towns was created and the municipalities of Gorizia, Nova Gorica and
Šempeter Vrtojba established the practice of regular meetings between their
administrations every three or four months.
On 27th July 2004 a symbolic meeting between the mayors of the two border towns took
place in Nova Gorica, which was organized in order to discuss the deepening along the
path of reconciliation, collaboration, peaceful coexistence and solidarity. The need to look
for common solutions to common problems, such as the use of the territory, the building
19
of infrastructures, the protection of water, the development of cultural activities (i.e.
universities, schools and research) was underlined.
One of the most significant and successful projects, and corresponding to the third type of
euroregion, was EureGo, elaborated in the light of INTERREG financing in order to
strengthen territorial and transborder collaboration in the areas of Gorizia and Nova
Gorica. EureGo was established as an association of private law composed of Italian and
Slovene local public bodies, involving 59 Italian municipalities and 13 Slovenian
municipalities.
In 2010, the municipalities of Gorizia, Nova Gorica and Sempeter- Vrtojba established the
first European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation in the borderland, on the basis of
Regulation (EC) No 1082/2006. The Regulation represents an important
progress towards the institutionalization of territorial trans-border
governance structures as it is understood as an example of multi-level
governance due to its capacity to create a web of transnational
jurisdictions involving regional government leaders, government leaders,
associations of local authorities, regional council representatives
which can work on similar competencies and resources (Nadalutti 2012:
6).
The main goals of the new EGTC, included in the Statute, provide the establishment of
such form of cross- border cooperation as a tool for: economic and social cohesion;
overcoming difficulties due to different national legislations; development of a body with
20
juridical personality; implementation of territorial cooperation programmes and projects in
all fields co –financed by the EU or by other financial mechanisms; better capability to
manage the implementation of joint projects and the development of new criteria of the
EU 2014 - 2020 financial programming.
Figure 2: the newly established EGTC between Gorizia and Nova Gorica
Source: Official site of Gorizia municipality, available at http://www.comune.gorizia.it
21
The main goals of the EGTC GO are: strategic coordination of the policies of
infrastructures and transports; intermodal logistic knots management; metropolitan energy
plan; energy management; joint intervention plans in other economic and social sectors
aiming to foster cohesion.
7. The Adriatic Euroregion and the role of the Italo – Slovene border
7.1 The Adriatic Euroregion
The Adriatic Euroregion, which was founded in 2006, is a non-profit association, a
private law subject, without separate legal personality from that of its members, which
includes Italian, Slovenian, Croatian, Bosnian, Montenegrin and Albanian territorial
bodies, as well as the Council of Europe and the European Parliament. The Adriatic
Euroregion is still at an initial stage, in which the partners are working at strengthening
the dialogue and at building an ‘Adriatic’ vision. The Euroregion should become the
forum in which policies and strategies are formulated, agreements and joint positions are
found and objectives are identified and translated into project proposals and concrete
actions.
EGTC prospects are still to be concretely developed and since the involvement of so
many partner – countries appear to be difficulty sustainable, some scenarios can be
hypothesized (Proto, 2008: 37). To this regard, the Italo- Slovene border appears to be at
the core of the establishment of a further North-Eastern EGTC. In the Upper Adriatic
there is a plan to implement a ‘local’ EGTC (north-eastern/micro- Euroregion also known
as the ‘Upper Manin Adriatic Euroregion’) which includes the Veneto and Friuli-Venezia-
22
Giulia regions, the Izola, Koper and Piran municipalities in Slovenia and the Istria and
Primorje-Gorski counties in Croatia (Nadalutti 2012: 18).
7.2 Cross – border cooperation Trieste- Koper
Cross- border cooperation between Trieste and Koper still constitutes a work in progress.
Along this border, the tradition of cooperation is less developed than the one occurring
between Gorizia and Nova Gorica or other municipalities. Despite the close proximity and
mixed population of the two cities, there has been little interest in the broader regional
economy until recently. There are few references to a Koper-Trieste region in official
documents other than those from EU programs. There are also few statistics available
based on the cross-border region.
The reasons are mainly three. The first one is geographical: Trieste and Koper lie within
30 kilometers of one another and the perception of being a twin town is rather weak.
Another important reason is that despite the close proximity of the two cities they have
been divided by constantly changing geopolitical boundaries since the beginning of the
20th century (TenBrink 2004: 2) This area has been contested and the geopolitical borders
have changed a number of times. In fact Trieste has changed hands five times in the 20th
century, going from Italian to Austro-Hungarian to German. At the end of WWII the city
was occupied by US and British forces with plans to make it a free city. Soon after the war
the iron curtain fell, creating a critical divide between the two cities and cutting off any
commerce connections as well as connections between the large minority populations in
each city with their respective homeland. A third reason must be sought in the competitive
attitude of the two towns especially regarding the respective ports, as well as tourism and
23
commerce. The ports were developed in isolation and competition of one another during
the period of the Cold War. Today, after Slovenia entered the European Union, interest in
the area has peaked. The European Union has identified the Bay of Trieste as an important
shipping node to service Southern and Central Europe. In preparation for Slovenia’s
accession, resources had been directed towards uniting the ports and improving ground
transport between the two cities. The Trieste-Koper region has the unique opportunity to
integrate economic development as a result of EU large-scale initiatives, first of all
Interreg programmes which were set up to improve cross-border economies. Second, the
European transportation corridor V is designed to include this area and so there is support
for improved land transportation.
The most significant challenges for the Trieste-Koper region in developing the
metropolitan economy are the centralized decision process of Slovenia and the lingering
nationalist feelings and mistrust from both sides of the border (TenBrink 2004). While
Italy has a regional level of governmental decision-makers, Slovenia does not have a
tradition of region-level government, which makes the decision-making process for
regional development much slower and more cumbersome on the Koper side of the
border. The mistrust and nationalism also slow the process of integration.
The greater Trieste-Koper metropolitan region does not have a single governing or
business organization. Nevertheless, there is great number of projects initiated under the
European Union’s Phare and Interreg programs which are providing the infrastructure for
large-scale economic growth. These projects focus on improving infrastructure, especially
for transportation, between the two cities and building cross-border relationships between
small and medium sized businesses. The other major opportunity lies in the unification of
24
the port system in the northern end of the Bay of Trieste. Greater integration of the
currently separate ports will lead to more efficient and productive shipping and hopefully
greatly expand the markets for shipping in the region. Margins for optimism derive mainly
from the institutional level: at the end of 2012, the mayors of the two towns met in order
to define a joint role of the two cities in the light of the structural funds 2014- 2020,
especially as regards the ports, but also collaboration in the field of culture and tourism.
The greatest opportunities presented to the Trieste-Koper region are a result of a greater
European interest in the area rather than the result of a bottom up process. However, a
number of programs have been initiated from the EU level to promote economic
development in the region has fostered several local initiatives, which are likely to create,
in the medium- long term, a sort of collective transborder consciousness.
At this point, one could wonder whether Trieste - Koper constitute – or could ever
constitute – an actual twin town. This hypothesis is not to be excluded, though, for time, it
cannot be defined as a proper twin town. Feasibility studies regarding the construction of a
transborder metropolitan city, or a transborder metropolitan twin town have been carried
out during the last few years. A research published by ISIG (2010) highlights the scarce
interest by the part of Italian and Slovene citizens living in the borderland in fostering
close collaboration. One reason can be sought in the fact that Trieste, and also Koper,
have always represented a point of reference for their hinterlands. In particular, Slovenian
citizens appear to be less favourable to the possibility of ‘devolving’ actual powers to the
transborder metropolitan city, for example in the field of tax control, external affairs,
control of joint police actions and control of educational institutions. Nevertheless, it is
underlined that a progressive integration stems from a high ‘internal consistence’, i.e. in
the development of the attracting capacity of Koper and of the expansive capacity of
25
Trieste. Transborder cooperation between Trieste and Koper, and their hinterlands,
remains though a slow process which encounters several difficulties in its implementation.
Figure 3: the border between Trieste and Koper
Source: TenBrink, (2004) “Trieste-Koper: Cross-Border Cooperation & Metropolitan
Economic Strategy”.
8. Internal and external factors for successful cooperation along the Italian – Slovene
border
The most useful method for evaluating the state of cross border cooperation between two
or more states is the so called SWOT analysis. This type of analysis aims to identify a
certain number of ‘dimensions’ and their respective ‘indicators’ in order to assess those
which configure themselves as strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats.
26
Usually, the significant dimensions for the analysis of borderlands are: the level of
propensity toward cross- border cooperation; level of coordination; level of cross- border
established relations; incisiveness of economic obstacles; incisiveness of socio-cultural
obstacles; institutional factors; administrative factors; economic factors; linguistic,
cultural and historical factors (including ratification of relevant treaties and conventions).
Each variable is given a value ranging from – 2 (maximum negative) to + 2 (maximum
positive).
In the following pages, we will briefly try to assess the main factors in favour and against
successful cross border cooperation in the analysed area. The results will be systematically
presented in a table.
8.1 Economy
An important pattern and at the same time strength of Slovenia’s socio-economic
development is its polycentric regional development. The gross value added per capita in
the Slovenia-Italian border regions is roughly at the country-average level. A crucial
weakness for economic and social development of Slovenian regions lies in the fact that
the institutional structure required is either poorly developed or does not exist at all.
Agriculture and forestry are the main means of existence in the mountainous parts in the
north of the Slovene part of the cross-border region. In the Province of Gorizia,
agriculture is relatively well developed. Starting in the 1980s, Gorizia has benefited from
growing international trade with Central and East European countries and a welldeveloped infrastructure. Trieste and Koper are also rather similar in that their economies,
which rely heavily on their respective ports, as a result of a shipping. Further development
27
of manufacturing, whole sale retail, and land transport are being oriented around the
European transportation corridor V, which is currently in development. Other major
economic sectors in the Trieste region include tourism, industry, construction, whole sale
and retail trade, and brokerage, information technology, and research (Trieste Chamber of
Commerce, 2011), whilst on the Slovenian coast around Koper important economic
sectors are commerce, tourism, and fisheries.
Projects and investments appear to be carried out mostly in a strictly economic logic,
aiming to maximize profits. Italian enterprises have always been a privileged partner, but
only few enterprises appear to be involved in an actual transfrontier relation (Del Bianco
2008a: 39).
It is also worth mentioning that the transborder area has low unemployment rates, if
compared with the national averages. The economic system is quite well developed; the
richness of natural resources and infrastructures is one of the key aspects for the
development of cross border cooperation. Moreover, they also foster tourism and common
initiatives in such field. The gap in the level of salaries offers good investment
opportunities in Slovenia, whereas the relatively high level of expense in research &
development creates new opportunities.
8.2 Infrastructures
Infrastructural facilities appear quite well developed, with 63 border crossings. Roads
networks are also well developed, though they are dishomogenously distributed on the
territory. A public service of transborder transport is almost totally lacking or insufficient
28
for the need of commuters or tourists. The railway system is well developed too but it is
not competitive in terms of costs and speed; an efficient transborder railway system for
passengers is also lacking. The potentiality is constituted by the macro –logistic strategies
which would put the transborder area at the core of the European network Corridor V.
Differences in the strength and performance of the enterprise sector across regions in
Slovenia has been accompanied with significant differences in their physical
infrastructure. Most traffic takes place by road. The region Obalno-Kraska has a road
network that is significantly above the national average. - Both border regions are better
endowed with telecommunication facilities than on average. Goriska is above average
endowed with environmental infrastructure, including water supply, wastewater treatment
and solid waste management. In spite of the peripheral location between Alps and
Adriatic, the Italian areas are generally expected to profit from the ongoing transitional
trends in Central and East European countries. The region already had close relations with
the states of the former Republic of Yugoslavia even before the dismantling of the Iron
Curtain and the splitting up of Yugoslavia.
From the early 1990s, and even more since 2004, the opening of the border to Slovenia
and Croatia has caused an increase in infrastructural demands by tourist, commute and
commercial traffic flows throughout the Region of Friuli-Venezia Giulia and the Italian –
Slovene borders.
29
8.3 Institutional level
From the institutional standpoint, the cross border area between Italy and Slovenia can be
deemed very active. Local authorities are generally available to cooperate with their
counterparts on the other side of the border. Institutional meeting are a regular occurrence
in the Italian – Slovene borderland and they take place both at official and unofficial level.
Regular meetings are held within different institutional frameworks: Interreg programmes,
mixed workgroups FVG /Slovenia which, since 2005, involve 8 roundtables on common
matters; meetings between the mayors; meetings between the administrations.
8.4 Structures of CBC
The cross-border structures exist within different legal and political frameworks. It is
possible to identify at least four types of structures: cross-border agreements or twinning
relationships between various local authorities which have been formed as a result of the
requirements of EU programmes; specialist committees or working groups established to
tackle common problems;
bilateral working groups; the Alpe-Adria working groups; the EGTC Gorizia – Nova
Gorica.
8.5 Level of transborder relations in the daily life
Ethnic relations in the borderland are often characterised by antagonism; nevertheless,
kinship and familiar ties constitute a strong basis for cross – border cooperation. Bad
memories stemming from the events of the WWII created prejudices from both sides of
30
the border. However, in general the populations living along the border keep daily
contacts with their counterparts, not only due to commercial reasons (shopping) but also
due to cultural reasons.
8.6 Tradition of cooperation
As we have seen, the long tradition of cooperation can be considered as one the main
strengths of the transborder area Gorizia- Nova Gorica. The establishment of euroregional
bodies can be based on a shared memory which constitutes the common denominator for
integration efforts both at cultural and commercial level.
8.8 Participation in Interreg programmes
Italy and Slovenia have activated several transborder projects, most of which in the light
of Interreg programmes. So far, three Interreg programming periods (1989–1993; 1994–
1999; 2000–2006) have been implemented by the Commission. Further to Interreg, the
Commission also created community financial instruments for cross-border co-operation
at external borders (starting with Phare cross-border co-operation in 1994 and Tacis
crossborder co-operation in 1996) (Nadalutti 2012, Interact, 2010). Interreg I and the
Interreg IIC represented an experimental ‘familiarization’ with cross-border co-operation
and transnational programmes that as such achieved few concrete results, especially in
relation to transnational cross-border projects (Interact, 2010).
The Italo-Slovene border was one of the first targets of the Interreg programme due to
Friuli-Venezia Giulia’s own regional developmental needs and the priority given by the
EU to politico-economic stabilisation alongside the former Yugoslavia (Faro 2002). The
31
first Interreg programming period saw little actual cross-border impact or participation
from the Slovenian side of the borderland. The EU’s Phare external assistance programme
began operating in Slovenia in 1992, and a cross-border cooperation (CBC) component
within it was formalised in 1994. Interreg II Italy-Slovenia was approved in 1997: its
interventions were divided into three ‘axes’: upgrading the region, local resources and
environmental protection; improvements in institutional cooperation and communication
and entrepreneurial cooperation (Ambrosi 2001).
As Phare’s programming was annual (unlike multi-annual Interreg), further CBC
programmes were begun each year beginning in 1995. In addition to land and maritime
border crossings, early initiatives focused on cross-border or frontier environmental
issues, which were coordinate insofar as possible with Interreg in Italy once the
programme got off the ground in 1997.
Interreg II and Phare CBC began in different years, and that lag had a significant impact
upon programming, institutional cooperation, local-partnership development, and project
implementation generally, as well as the overall programme’s ability to achieve its aims.
Meanwhile, the legal and administrative discrepancies between Interreg and Phare had
vast implications for level of cross-borderness in its interventions.
In Interreg Italy-Slovenia IIIA 2000-2006 the Italo-Slovene border was defined as both a
land and maritime one; it includes on the Italian side the provinces of Udine, Gorizia, and
Trieste (region of Friuli-Venezia Giulia), as well as the province of Venice (region of the
Veneto), and on the Slovenian side the statistical regions of Obalno-kraška and Goriška as
well as the municipality of Kranjska Gora. The Interreg IIIA Italy-Slovenia programme is
the first to have a truly joint programming document-created and approved through the
32
involvement of regional-policy actors and local experts from both sides of the border, as
well as from Brussels-as well as joint steering committee from the outset.
Interreg III 2000–2006 was an important step towards the creation of an integrated
transborder management with the set- up of the Joint Managing Authority (JMA) and the
Joint Technical Secretariat (JTS) during the period. To date, the new programme, Interreg
IV 2007–2013 organized around three objectives (convergence, competitiveness and
territorial co-operation), has ceased to be a separate Community Initiative and has grown
to become one of the mainstream objectives of ‘European territorial co-operation’
(Interact, 2010).
8.9 Historical ties and freedom of movement
The Italo-Slovene frontier-which, from its origin at the two nations’ mutual border with
Austria, describes what many have deemed the meeting-point of Europe’s three great,
historic civilisations and ethno-linguistic groups, the Romance, Germanic, and Slavonichas also been one of European history’s most violently fraught, most famously so in the
20th century. Yet, the degeneration of that frontier at the end of the Second World War
into a genocide area was not due to the region’s historic and enduring multicultural
composition, but rather the impossibility of dividing it along ethnic lines (Faro 2002).
The entry of Slovenia in Schengen area in December 2007 entails free movement of
people and goods. No restrictions exist.
33
8.10 Common language
The impact of language of transborder contacts in certainly an important factor. However,
still a small percentage of the population speak the language of the neighbour. Low status
is often attributed to Slovene by Italians and, conversely, Italian is often perceived as the
language of the ‘dominator’ by Slovenes living in the borderland. The point of connection
is though constituted by the Italian national minority in Slovenia and by the Slovene
national minority in Italy. In 1911 nearly thirty percent of the Trieste population and
almost 95% of the surrounding area was Slovene. Today those numbers have decreased
significantly with only a 20% Slovene minority in the region. In border areas, both
minorities have significant protection in the field of education and use of language, but
bilingualism is more developed on the Slovene side of the border than in the Italian.
8.11 Degree of trust and mutual knowledge
The degeneration of that frontier at the end of the Second World War into a genocide area
was not due to the region’s historic and enduring multicultural composition, but rather the
impossibility of dividing it along ethnic lines (Gross 1978). Accordingly, although the
level of mutual knowledge has improved year by year, the degree of trust remain still low
from both sides of the border.
8.12 Ratification of Madrid Convention
The Madrid Convention was signed and ratified both by Italy and Slovenia. Though, Italy
did condition its activation to the signature of an additional bilateral document with
34
neighbouring countries; this has not happened yet with Slovenia, therefore a metropolitan
city or a euroregional body could not have public juridical personality. Moreover, Italy did
not ratify the Additional Protocols to Madrid Convention (1995 and 1998). Nevertheless,
these shortcomings were overcome when both Slovenia and Italy gave application to the
Regulation (EC) No 1082/2006.
8.13 Ratification of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities
Both Italy and Slovenia ratified the Framework Convention for the Protection of National
Minorities. Friuli Venezia Giulia and Slovenia provide extensive minority rights to their
Slovene and Italian national minorities providing the right to bilingual education, the
right to use the minority language in the dealing with public administrations, the right to
political participation and representation, special funds for the maintenance of the
minority culture, the right to print and broadcast media and to transfrontier exchanges. In
both territories, in spite of the differences, the Italian and Slovene minorities are based on
a system of ‘ethnically mixed territory.
8.14 Obstacles to CBC
The strong points of the Italo – Slovene transborder area reside mainly in the strategic
position of the territory; the developed entrepreneurship, the availability of natural
resources, the relatively high number of investment in R&S and the number of transborder
projects at a micro- level.
35
By contrast, the main barriers to cross-border co-operation appear to be the difficulties in
the construction of a transnational governance. Slovenia has no division of its national
territory other than into municipalities and the regions have only statistical status.
Moreover, it has no great experience on strategy and programme development at subState level. At present, Slovenia is a unitary state with two administrative levels (the State
and about 210 municipalities): as such, the Slovenian state is the gate-keeper of crossborder co-operation activities and projects (Lindstrom 2005).
9. SWOT analysis
Figure 4: SWOT analysis for the Italian- Slovene border
Gorizia – Nova Gorica
W
O
T
Trieste - Koper
Internal factors
importance
S
S
level of propensity of economic
++++
X
X
X
X
+++
X
X
+++
X
Freedom of movement
++
X
Participation in Interreg
++
X
W
O
T
operators
level of propensity of institutional +++
operators
Level of transborder relations for
institutional relations
Level of transborder relations in
X
the daily life
X
X
programmes
36
Infrastructural conditions
++
X
Common language
+
Common historical background
+
X
Degree of trust and mutual
+
X
++
X
++
X
X
X
X
X
X
knowledge
Good border crossing
X
(geomorphology)
Tradition of cooperation
X
External factors
Fiscal asymmetry
+++
Centralization
++
Ratification of Madrid
+
X
X
X
X
X
X
Convention (1980)
Signature of the 1998 Protocol II
+
X
X
to the Madrid Convention 1995
Cold frontiers (border recognized
+
X
X
+
X
X
+
X
X
by the States)
Institutional and legal framework
for CBC
Ratification of the FCNM
Source: author’s elaboration
37
Conclusions
Transboundary regionalization between Italy (FVG) and Slovenia has become an
international model due to the comprehensive approach to CBC and to its quality within
the process of re- positioning the area at the centre of Mitteleuropa. The transborder
situation for CBC Slovenia / Italy appears to be clearly positive due to the presence of
numerous strengths and opportunities. In sum, the process of CBC has resulted effective
in dismantling walls and in creating some kind of zona franca which denies the very logic
of the East / West divide. Construction of city twinning between Gorizia and Nova Gorica
presents itself as a first step towards the establishment of broader euroregions, whilst the
establishment of a transborder metropolitan city Trieste- Koper remains a project.
38
Bibliography
Alpe Adria, Internet source:
https://wcd.coe.int/wcd/ViewDoc.jsp?id=901113&Site=COE&BackColorInternet=
DBDCF2&BackColorIntranet=FDC864&BackColorLogged=FDC864.
AEBR “LACE-Phare CBC Draft Assessment Report: Slovenia-Italy” Accessed on
10/09/2012 at http://www.aebr.net/publikationen/pdfs/AR_SLO-IT.en.pdf
http://www.aebr.eu/files/publications/AR_SLO-IT.en.pdf
AEBR “LACE-Phare CBC Draft Assessment Report: Slovenia-Italy” Accessed on
12/10/2012 at http://www.aebr.net/publikationen/pdfs/AR_SLO-IT.en.pdf
AEBR (2004) Towards a new community legal instrument facilitating public- law –
based transnational European cooperation among territorial authorities in the European
Union- Position Paper.
AEBR (2006) White paper on European border regions final version. Gronau: AEBR.
Ambrosi E. (2001) Interreg-una strada per il futuro: la cooperazione transfrontaliera e
transnazionale del Friuli-Venezia Giulia [Interreg-a way for the future: the cross-border
and transnational cooperation of Friuli-Venezia Giulia] (Trieste: Regione Autonoma
Friuli-Venezia Giulia).
Amendola G. “Border within cities” Isig magazine, n. 3 / 4, Isig, Gorizia.
Borza (Business Opportunities Exchange) Description. Accessed on 30/10/2012 at
http://www.borza.org/default.aspx?zahteva=Oborzi?Jezik=EN
Böttger K. (2006)“Grenzüberschreitende Zusammenarbeit in Europa, Erfolge und
Misserfolge der Kooperation am Beispiel der EUREGIO (Rhein-Ems-Ijssel), der Euregio
Maas-Rhein und der Euregion Neisse-Nisa-Nysa”. (Occasional Papers, 32) Stuttgart:
Europäisches Zentrum für Föderalismus-Forschung.
39
Broyde Z. S. (2004) “Peculiarities and challenges for euroregional collaboration on the
new EU eastern border in the context of the wider Europe and the Europe of regions”
Isig magazine n. 3/ 4, Isig, Gorizia.
Conetti, G. (2004), Transfrontier and international relations” Isig magazine, n. 3 /4, Isig,
Gorizia.
Council of Europe (1987), The Council of Europe and regionalism: The regional
dimension in the world of Clare, Strasbourg.
Del Bianco D. (2006), “Cross- border cooperation as a tool for transnational integration
and conflict resolution: the Upper Adriatic Euroregional experiences”, Narodna
umjetnost, Croatian Journal of Ethnology and Folklore Research, 43, I.
Del Bianco D. (2008), Welfare transfrontaliero per la vita quotidiana. Modello di
sviluppo locale per le regioni di confine. Il caso dell'area transfrontaliera italo-slovena,
PhD thesis, Gorizia.
Del Bianco D., Gasparini A. (2008) “Presente e futuro della cooperazione
transfrontaliera fra Italia, Austria e Slovenia” in Ritorno a Euradria, ISIG Journal, vol.
XVII, n. 1-2 – 2008.
EC Regulation, n. 1082/2006 http://eur- lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do
?uriOJ:L:2006:210:0019:0024:IT:PDF
Faro, J. (2003) Whither Italo-Slovene borderland integration? in: M. Andre´n (Ed.)
Whither Europe? Migration, Citizenship and Identity, pp. 119–151 (Gothenburg: Centre
for European Research at Göteborgs University).
Ferrara, W. (2001), “La cooperazione transfrontaliera e le Euroregioni: la normativa
europea”, Isig magazine, Isig, Gorizia.
40
Friuli-Venezia Giulia Regional Government: regional information
http://www.alpeadria.org/origini/geogra/019/019_i.htm
Gabbe, J. (2004) “The Euroregion as a place for transfrontier cooperation
implementation”, Isig magazine, n. 3 / 4, Isig, Gorizia.
Gasparini, A. (2000a) “European border towns as laboratories of differentiated
integration”, Isig magazine, 9(4), Isig, Gorizia.
Gasparini A. (2000b), “Borders dividing and borders uniting Europe”, Isig magazine n.
4/99, n.1/2000.
Gasparini A. (2003), “The institutionalization of cooperation. Vademecum for a good
Euroregion”, in A. Gasparini (ed.), Cross border cooperation in the Balkan- Danube
area, Council of Europe, Strasbourg.
Gasparini, A. (2004a) Presentation, ISIG Quarterly of International Sociology, 13(3/4).
Gasparini A. (2004b), “SWOT analysis: a method for measuring, evaluating and
designing crossborder cooperation”, Isig magazine, n 3/4 2004.
Gasparini A. (2008a), “Regionalismo e confine virtuali” in Ritorno a Euradria, Isig
Journal, Isig, Gorizia.
Gasparini A. (2008b) “Società di confine dal Mediterraneo al Baltico”, in Ritorno a
Euradria, Isig magazine, Isig, Gorizia.
Gasparini A. (2010), Città metropolitana di Trieste, città metropolitana transfrontaliera
di Trieste-Capodistria. Possibilità, probabilità, desiderabilità, (Metropolitan city of
Trieste, cross-border metropolitan city of Trieste-Capodistria. Possibility, probability,
desirability), Regione Autonoma Friuli Venezia Giulia, Isig, Gorizia.
Gasparini A. (2011) “The Socio- Economic development in CBC for Central Europe”,
Alps- Adriatic Working Community European Forum, Hungary.
41
Gross, F. (1978). Ethnics in a Borderland: an inquiry into the nature of ethnicity and
reduction of ethnic tensions in a one-time genocide area, London: Greenwood Press.
Jorgensen B. (2002), “Cross- border cooperation and the EU enlargement” in the Nebi
Yearbook 2001/2002.
Integrated Coastal Management- Slovenia. Accessed on 5/31/09 at
http://icm.noaa.gov/country/slovenia.html
Interact (2010) Territorial Cooperation in a Global Context, pp. 1–24, Interact Vienna.
ISIG (2010) Cooperazione transfrontaliera e interterritoriale in Europa, Isig, Gorizia.
“Intesa senza confini su trasporti e cultura”, Il Piccolo, 28.11.2012, Trieste.
“L’Euroregione debutta a Venezia”, Il Piccolo, 27.11.2012, Trieste.
Langer J. (2003) “le euro regioni tra nuovi orientamenti economici e vincoli storici:
Carinzia- Friuli Venezia Giulia- Slovenia”, n. 3 /4, Isig magazine, Isig, Gorizia.
Lepik K.L. (2009) “Euroregions as mechanisms for strengthening cross- border
cooperation in the Baltic Sea Region” Trames, 13(63/58), 3.
Lindstrom, N. (2005) Europeanization and sub-national governance in Slovenia, ECPR
Joint Sessions of Workshops, ‘Societal Regionalism in Western and Eastern Europe’,
Granada, 15–19 April.
Lipott S. (2011) “The model of cross – border cooperation in the Torne Valley Region”,
in Lex Localis – Journal of Local Self- Government, vol.9, no. 3, Maribor.
Nadalutti E. (2012): “Is Cross-Border Governance Emerging over the Border between
Italy and Slovenia?”, Journal of Contemporary European Studies, 20:2, 181-197.
OECD (2003) “Slovenia Cross-border cooperation” Accessed on 5/28/10 at
http://66.102.11.104/www.oecd.org/document/28/0,2340,en_2649_201185_2739036_70
717_119808_1_1,00.html
Official site of Gorizia municipality, available at http://www.comune.gorizia.it
42
Pavlovic, Zoran. “Legal Status of Italian Minority in Slovenia” Accessed on 5/31/10
http://lgi.osi.hu/publications/2000/26/06.PDF
Perkmann M. (2002) The rise of the Euroregion. A bird’s eye perspective on European
cross-border co-operation, published by the Department of Sociology, Lancaster
University, Lancaster LA1 4YN, UK, at
http://www.comp.lancs.ac.uk/sociology/papers/Perkmann-Rise-of-Euroregion.pdf
Pocecco A. (2004), “Requisites for an efficient crossborder cooperation in the BalkanDanube countries”, Isig magazine n. 3/ 4, Isg, Gorizia.
Pozun, Brian. (2001). “News from Slovenia” Central Europe Review. Accessed on
5/31/04 at http://www.ce-review.org/01/5/slovenianews5.html
Pozun, Brian. (2001). “Trieste’s Burden of History” Central Europe Review. Accessed
on 5/31/04 at http://www.ce-review.org/01/6/pozun6.html
Proto P.P. (2008) Survey on Euroregions and EGTC: what future for the Adriatic area?
Working Paper 45/2008/EN, Cespi, Rome.
Ratti R. (2004) “Does transfrontier cooperation exist in the electronic media field?
Theoretical reminders socio- cultural gaps. The case of the Swiss- Italian border”, Isig
magazine n.3 / 4, Isig, Gorizia.
Säre M. (2004) “The evolution of cross border cooperation in Western Europe and the
countries of Central and Eastern Europe. The case study of the Estonian- Russian border
region”, Isig magazine, n. 3 / 4, Isig, Gorizia.
Scott J. (2001) Transnational regionalism, strategic geopolitics and European
integration: The case of the Baltic Sea Region, Estonia.
Spinaci G. and Vara - Arribas G. (2009) The European Grouping of Territorial
Cooperation (EGTC): New Spaces and Contracts for European Integration. EIPAScope,
n. 2.
43
Statistical Office of the Republic of Slovenia at
http://www.stat.si/eng/tema_ekonomsko.asp
TenBrink S. (2004) “Trieste-Koper: Cross-Border Cooperation & Metropolitan
Economic Strategy”, at http://www.globalurban.org/GUD%20TriesteKoper%20MES%20Report.pdf
Toresini C. (2005) “The euroregion as an instrument of European cooperation: the
commitment of the ARFVG to overcoming the difficulties in building it”, Isig magazine
n. 2, Isig, Gorizia.
Trieste Chamber of Commerce. (2011) Trieste: Facts and Figures.
Vahtar, Marta. (2002) “Eurosion Case Study: Slovenian Coast” Institute for Integral
Development and Environment. Accessed on 20/11/2012 at
http://herakles.fzi.de/Eurosion/incoming/Slovenian%2520coast1.pdf
Zago M. (2000a) “Borders between Eastern and Western Europe: cooperation old and
new, cooperation with and without walls”, Isig magazine, n.1 , Isig, Gorizia.
Zago, M (2000b). La cooperazione transfrontaliera nel Friuli-Venezia Giulia [Crossborder cooperation in Friuli-Venezia Giulia] (Trieste: Regione Autonoma Friuli-Venezia
Giulia Direzione Regionale per gli Affari Europei).
Zardi A. (2004) “Existing obstacles to transfrontier cooperation and proposals for
eliminating them”, Isig magazine, n. 3 / 4, Isig, Gorizia.
Zardi A. (2003) “Cooperazione transfrontaliera e interterritoriale nel continente europeo:
il ruolo del Consiglio d’Europa”, Isig magazine, n 3 / 4, Isig, Gorizia.
44