IS THERE A RISE OF THE TERRITORIAL DIMENSION
IN THE EU COHESION POLICY?
edua do Medei os1
ABSTRACT – his pape examines he ole and impo ance o he e i o ial
dimension o eU Cohesion Policy, du ing i s i e p og amming phases (1989 ‑2020), by
ela ing his implemen a ion p ocess wi h se e al e i o ial elemen s, and by assessing
hei cons an changes, namely in h ee main componen s and ela ed elemen s: (i) he
‘policy s a egy’ designed o include an in eg a ed e i o ial pe spec i e; (ii) he ‘policy
impac s’ in e i o ial de elopmen and e i o ial cohesion, oge he wi h he use o
e i o ial impac assessmen p ocedu es; and (iii) he ocus on one o se e al ‘ e i‑
o ial scales’, speci ically h ough he suppo o mul ile el ‑go e nance, e i o ial
coope a ion, and place ‑based s a egies. Pa adoxically, despi e he con inuous a emp s
o de ach eU Cohesion Policy om i s ini ial goals o p omo ing a mo e cohesi e
eu ope in o a mo e neolibe alis pa adigm ype o ‘in es men Policy’, ou analysis
showed ha he e i o ial dimension is s ill e y much ancho ed wi h his Policy, and
e en gaining impo ance in se e al e i o ial ela ed elemen s, such as he suppo o
e i o ial coope a ion and go e nance p ocesses, and he use o e i o ial impac
assessmen p ocedu es.
Keywo ds: e i o ial dimension; eU cohesion policy; e i o ial de elopmen ; e i‑
o ial coope a ion; e i o ial impac assessmen ; e i o ial cohesion.
RESUMO – se á que se e i ica um inc emen o da dimensão e i o ial na
Polí ica de Coesão da Ue? es e a igo analisa o papel e a impo ância da dimensão
e i o ial da Polí ica de Coesão da Ue, ao longo das suas cinco ases de p og amação
(1989 ‑2020), ao elaciona es e p ocesso de implemen ação com á ios elemen os e i o‑
iais, e ao a alia as suas cons an es mudanças, nomeadamen e em ês componen es
p incipais: (i) a ‘es a égia polí ica’ desenhada de modo a inclui uma pe spec i a e i o‑
ial in eg ada; (ii) os ‘impac os da polí ica’ no desen ol imen o e i o ial e na coesão
e i o ial, conjun amen e com a u ilização de me odologias de a aliação de impac os
ecebido: Janei o 2016. acei e: Ou ub o 2016.
1 Uni e sidade de Lisboa, ins i u o de Geog a ia e O denamen o do e i ó io (iGO ), Cen o de es udos Geog á icos
(CeG), edi ício iGO – ua B anca edmée Ma ques, 1600 ‑276, Lisboa, Po ugal. e ‑mail: emedei [email protected]
Finis e a, LI, 103, 2016, pp. 89 ‑112
doi: 10.18055/ inis7940
a igo
90 Edua do Medei os
e i o iais; e (iii) o oco numa ou á ias ‘escalas e i o iais’ especi icamen e a a és do
apoio a p ocessos de go e nança mul iní el, coope ação e i o ial, e es a égias de ac ua‑
ção localizada. Pa adoxalmen e, e apesa das sucessi as en a i as de dissocia a Polí ica de
Coesão da Ue dos seus objec i os iniciais de p omoção de uma eu opa mais coesa, no
sen ido de implemen ação de um pa adigma neolibe al de uma ‘polí ica de in es imen o’, a
nossa análise concluiu que a dimensão e i o ial es á ainda mui o anco ada a es a Polí ica,
es ando mesmo a ganha uma impo ância c escen e em á ios elemen os ma cadamen e
e i o iais, ais como o apoio a p ocessos de coope ação e go e nança e i o ial, e o uso
de p ocedimen os de a aliação de impac os e i o iais.
Pala as ‑Cha e: Dimensão e i o ial; polí ica de coesão da Ue; desen ol imen o
e i o ial; coope ação e i o ial; a aliação de impac os e i o iais; coesão e i o ial.
RÉSUMÉ – La dimension e i o iale es ‑elle c oissan e dans la Poli ique
isan à plus de Cohésion eu opéenne. Ce a icle examine le ôle e l’impo ance de
la dimension e i o iale de la poli ique de cohésion de l’Union eu opéenne au cou s de
ses cinq phases de p og amma ion (1989 ‑2020). On appo e ce p ocessus de mise en
œu e à plusieu s élémen s e i o iaux, e on é alue leu s changemen s cons an s, dans
ses ois p incipaux composan s: (i) la «s a égie poli ique» isan à inclu e une pe spec i e
e i o iale in ég ée; (ii) les «impac s des poli iques» su le dé eloppemen e i o ial e la
cohésion e i o iale, ainsi que l’u ilisa ion des p océdu es d’é alua ion de l’impac e i‑
o ial; e (iii) l’accen mis su une ou plusieu s «échelles e i o iales», no ammen pa le
sou ien à plusieu s ni eaux de gou e nance, pa la coopé a ion e i o iale, e pa des
s a égies localisées. Pa adoxalemen , malg é les en a i es épé ées de dé ache la poli ique
de cohésion de l’Ue de ses objec i s ini iaux de p omo ion d’ une eu ope plus cohé en e,
dans un ype de pa adigme plus néolibé al de «Poli ique d’in es issemen », no e analyse
mon e que la dimension e i o iale es enco e ès anc ée dans ce e poli ique, e gagne
même en impo ance dans plusieu s élémen s e con ex es e i o iaux, els que le sou ien
à la coopé a ion e i o iale e de gou e nance, e à l’u ilisa ion de p océdu es d’é alua ion
de l’impac e i o ial.
Mo s clés: Dimension e i o iale; la poli ique de cohésion de l’Ue; le dé eloppemen
e i o ial; la coopé a ion e i o iale; é alua ion de l’impac e i o ial; la cohésion e i‑
o iale.
i. in ODUC iOn
The e is a la ge body o li e a u e which discusses and illus a es he ope a ionaliza‑
ion and e ec s o eU Cohesion Policy (eCP) as a mains eam eU Policy (Molle, 2007),
as i has become an inc easingly impo an inancial ool o ‘mainly’ help eU lagging
egions. as i s name indica es, his Policy was gi en bi h (1988) wi h he main goal o
p omo ing a mo e cohesi e eU e i o y om a socioeconomic pe spec i e, ollowing he
in en ions exp essed in he single eu opean ac . indeed, while i s ‘ e i o ial dimension’
was always p esen in se e al elemen s, like he de ini ion o speci ic objec i es de o ed
91is he e a ise o he e i o ial dimension in he eU Cohesion Policy?
o he eU lagging egions, i was only a e signing he Lisbon ea y (2009) ha i s scope
was o mally b oadened by he inclusion o he e i o ial dimension o cohesion, along‑
side he social and economic dimensions.
This ecogni ion o a need o go beyond he social and economic dimensions in
designing, implemen ing, and e alua ing eCP inanced p og ammes, by ollowing a
mo e e i o ial, in eg a ed, and holis ic pe spec i e, was o en ollowed by a misleading
no ion o wha is, in ac , his ‘new’ e i o ial dimension, bo h by he scien i ic, he ins i‑
u ional, and poli ical communi ies. o he mos pa , he e is a endency o add he
‘en i onmen al dimension’ o he ‘social’ and he ‘economic’ dimensions o de elopmen
when ‘ hese communi ies’ men ion and analyse his e i o ial dimension, while neglec‑
ing c ucial ‘ e i o ial’ dimensions such as ‘spa ial planning’ and ‘ e i o ial go e nance’.
in sum his a icle con ibu es o his concep ual discussion on he e i o ial dimension
o policies and i s main esea ch ques ions a e he ollowing:
– Wha componen s should be aken in o conside a ion when analysing he e i o‑
ial dimension o policies?
– Wha has been he ole and e olu ion o he e i o ial dimension in eCP om i s
beginnings o he p esen ime, in i s main componen s?
The analy ical amewo k guiding he in es iga ion is i s se ou in he second sec‑
ion o he pape , which iden i ies he main e i o ial componen s and ela ed elemen s
associa ed wi h eCP. The ollowing sec ion b ings o he discussion he i s analysed
componen : he Policy s a egy. He e, a concise o e iew o he in luence o he eU spa‑
ial planning mains eam documen s on eCP is p o ided, alongside he cons an changes
o hese main s a egic Policy goals, inspi ed by successi e eU agendas and ea ies. The
ollowing sec ion seeks o in es iga e a second e i o ial eCP componen : Policy impac s.
in essence, his opic explo es he deg ee o eCP impac s on e i o ial de elopmen and
e i o ial cohesion in he eU Membe ‑s a es, as well as i s ole in suppo ing he use o
e i o ial impac assessmen ( ia) e alua ion p ocedu es. The nex sec ion is dedica ed
o examine he las main componen o ou p oposed me hodology o assessing he
e i o ial dimensions o policies: e i o ial scales. Mo e p ecisely, his opic p o ides
e idence on he impo ance o eCP in p omo ing e i o ial coope a ion and go e nance
p ocesses, be ween all e i o ial le els. inally, he las sec ion applies he p oposed
me hodology o assessing he e i o ializa ion deg ee o eCP, mos ly based in he
p e ious sec ion discussion.
Me hodologically, he esea ch was ca ied ou employing a con en analysis
app oach o se e al eU documen s, such as he Cohesion epo s, epo s ocusing on
eU e i o ial ends (esDP, e i o ial agendas, and esPOn a las), o he ela ed docu‑
men s which e alua e he implemen a ion o eCP, and a wide pool o a ailable li e a u e
on his policy. in he end, a ypology is p oposed o measu e he e i o ialisa ion deg ee
o eCP.
92
ii. UnCOVe inG He MeaDinG O He ‘ e i O iaL DiMensiOn’ O
POLiCies
The e is some awa eness ha he wo d ‘ e i o ial’ is gaining unp eceden ed usage
and ecogni ion wi hin he eU ins i u ions’, poli ical agenda and discou se. Howe e , i s
meaning is o en a om being s aigh o wa d. o one, his e m is associa ed wi h a
my iad o exp essions associa ed wi h eU policy in e en ions, such as: (i) e i o ial
de elopmen ; (ii) e i o ial cohesion; (iii) e i o ial capi al; (i ) e i o ial impac asses‑
smen ; ( ) e i o ial coope a ion; and ( i) he e i o ial dimension o policies. secondly,
his no ion closely mi o s he ‘mo e anglo ‑saxon e m’: spa ial. inally, he likelihood o
con using ‘ e i o ial’ wi h ‘ egional’ e m is o he cha s.
in his con ex , we s a his analysis by p esen ing a necessa ily simpli ied o e iew
o he meaning o he e m ‘ e i o ial’. He e, he enca a dic iona y is qui e clea in ela‑
ing i o ‘land o wa e owned o claimed by an en i y, especially a go e nmen ’ (enca a,
2009). This goes along wi h he idea exp essed by Pe e Hagge (2001, p.16) ha , “ om
he geog aphe ’s iewpoin he mos e iden e i o ial uni on he wo ld’s landscape is
he mode n na ion ‑s a e”. also, i is e iden ha his no ion ( e i o ial) de i es om he
wo d ‘ e i o y’, which comes om he La in e m ‘ e i ō ium’. This, in u n, uses he
no ions o ‘ e i’ (ea h) and ‘ o ium’ (belonging o) (Mo eno, 2002).
in his ein, and as Delaney (2009, p. 196) pu s i , e i o y is, gene ically, “a bounded,
meaning ul social space he ‘meanings’ o which implica e he ope a ion o social ela io‑
nal powe ”. ne e heless, he same au ho ecognizes ha he e a e “innume able o he
gene ic o ms and exp essions o e i o y”, many o which implica e go e nance p oces‑
ses, in se e al e i o ial scales. Likewise, he ela ed e m ‘ e i o iali y’ “is used in a
numbe o senses”, whils i di e s om he no ion o ‘ e i o y’, as his “ e e s o beha‑
iou s ela ed o he es ablishmen and de ence o e i o ies” (Delaney, 2009, p. 196), o
signi ies an “a emp o a ec , in luence, o con ol ac ions, in e ac ions, o access by
asse ing and a emp ing o en o ce con ol o e a speci ic geog aphic a ea” (sack, 1983).
ano he signi icance ound o his e m is, o example, he sense o belonging o a gi en
e i o y ( igal, 2015, p. 586), amongs many o he s (Luukkonen & Moilanen, 2012;
Ma in, hys, & Michael, 2004).
ega ding he in e connec ion be ween he no ions o ‘ e i o y’ and ‘space’, igal
(2015) ad ances a possible dis inc ion whe e he o me emb aces a dimension wi h spe‑
ci ic conno a ions, ela ed wi h he sense o belonging and ans o ma ion (in a way in
which socie ies a e capable o o ganizing hemsel es), while he la e no ion can be asso‑
cia ed wi h p o iding an in e p e i e cohesion o he in eg a ed knowledge o he ele‑
men s in which socie ies a e o ganized. in u n, based on se e al eadings, Luukkonen &
Moilanen (2012, p. 485), sus ain ha he e m ‘space’ has a mo e gene al meaning, and is
mos ly in e wined wi h ‘ e i o ies’. Bu , mo e impo an ly, hey a gue ha e i o y
“di e s om a egion in ha i s bounda ies and he esou ces he ein a e unde he con‑
ol o people”. a mo e elabo a ed iew on he no ions o ‘ egion’ and ‘space’ can be ound
in Goodwin (2013), which launches a discussion on he no ion o ‘ ela ional egion’.
Edua do Medei os
93
aken oge he , and al hough hey migh ha e di e en concep ual in e p e a ions,
all he abo e discussed no ions ( e i o ial, e i o y, space, and egion) sha e a common
ai , in he sense ha hey a e s ongly associa ed wi h ‘geog aphical analysis’. in ou
unde s anding hough, he bulk o scien i ic li e a u e does no always make a dis inc i e
di e en ia ion om he concep s o ‘space’ and ‘place’, and ‘ e i o y’. o ins ance, he
no ion o ‘spa ial planning’ is used in e y much he same way as he no ion o ‘ e i o ial
planning’. again, he no ion o ‘spa ial impac s’ is used wi h simila meaning as he no ion
o ‘ e i o ial impac s’. The di e ence he e is he ac ha he anglo ‑saxon p e e ence o
he e m ‘spa ial’ has led o a consis en use o his e m in mos o he exis ing ‘ e i o ial
ela ed analysis’, un il some eu opean Commission (eC) epo s s a ed o make use o
he e m ‘ e i o ial’ in a mo e equen manne . This is iewed by obe o Camagnii, as
a conques o he sou h o eu ope in he adop ion o he e m e i o y by he eU ins i u‑
ions.
alongside, and in ou unde s anding, he only signi ican di e ence be ween he
e ms ‘ e i o y‘ and ‘ egion’ is he ac ha a egional pe spec i e is, as he no ion implies,
speci ically dedica ed o he analysis o a ce ain o se e al egions. in o he wo ds, e i‑
o y is a mo e gene al geog aphic e m, which can co e se e al scales o analysis, such as
he u ban, he local, he egional, he na ional, and he eu opean le els. Unde his iew,
we could claim ha he e i o ial dimension o a gi en policy is associa ed wi h i s s a‑
egic guidance and ope a ional capaci y o p oduce de elopmen /cohesion impac s in
ce ain e i o y in all dimensions o e i o ial de elopmen , be ha land o /and wa e ,
managed by one o se e al en i ies o /and adminis a ion le els.
as p e iously s a ed, he e m ‘ e i o iali y’ which, acco ding o Ke in Cox, “has
come o see as he e y co e concep o poli ical geog aphy – e sus he appa en ly
g owing impo ance o ne wo k connec ions” ( an de Wus en, 2009, p. 326), can ha e
di e en meanings, depending on he esea ch hema ic ocus ( able i). Mo e p ecisely, as
Wa wick (2009, p. 32) pu s i , “ e i o iali y has an ex emely b oad in e p e a ion, om
he concep o place a achmen o social commi men o loca ion, (…). simila ly, e i‑
o iali y can be applied a a ange o scales, ela ing o speci ic si es o wide neigh‑
bo hoods”. Mo eo e , Paasi (1999, p. 73) eminds us ha “i is po en ous o no e ha he
meanings o so e eign y and e i o iali y a e also pe pe ually changing, implying ha
e i o iali y is no jus a s a ic, unchanging o m o beha iou o a s a e”.
in i s u n, e i o ialisa ion e e s o a p ocess o p oducing e i o iali ies, while i s
opposi e (De e i o ialisa ion) signi ies “undoing and/o emaking o pa icula e i o‑
iali ies” (Coleman, 2009, p. 255). ega ding his concep , iguei edo (2010, p. 11) ela es
i o he “design and implemen a ion o p og ammes and p ojec s wi h signi ican e i‑
o ial impac , and whose p io i ies o in e en ion a e de ined acco ding o s a egic
amewo ks ha ha e been o mula ed o he a ge e i o y, wi h he o mal o in o ‑
mal pa icipa ion o ins i u ions and playe s iden i ied o ha e i o y”. u he , he
same au ho adds ha “i is no enough o conside ha he in es men s o ac ions which
embody i ha e a signi ican e i o ial impac .
is he e a ise o he e i o ial dimension in he eU Cohesion Policy?

94
able i – examples o he meaning o e i o iali y and e i o ialisa ion.
Quad o I – Exemplos do signi icado de e i o ialidade e e i o ialização.
Te i o iali y Meaning Field o esea ch Sou ce
I e e s o any o m o beha iou displayed by indi iduals and g oups
seeking o es ablish, main ain, o de end speci ic bounded po ions o
space
Beha iou al
Geog aphy
(Gold, 2009)
I desc ibes a socially cons uc ed di ision o space ha is con olled by
some o m o au ho i y. A pe son, g oup, local economy, o s a e can
occupy e i o ies
Bo de s udies
(Was l ‑Wal e , 2009)
A Geog aphic dispe sion o p oduc ion and ma ke ing ne wo ks a he
na ional, egional, and global le els, comp ised o di e en sizes and
ypes
Commodi y
Chains
(Hassle , 2009)
The eeling o owne ship o a space by i s occupan s, wi h an associa ed
sense ha s ange s a e unwelcome. The concep o de ensible space
iden i ies e i o iali y as he abili y o he physical en i onmen o
c ea e iden i iable zones o in luence
De ensible space (Wa wick, 2009)
In e ms o e i o iali y and globaliza ion his means ha an
in e p e a ion o he impac o globaliza ion as c ea ing a space economy
ha ex ends beyond he egula o y capaci y o a single s a e is only
hal he s o y; he o he hal is ha hese cen al unc ions a e
disp opo iona ely concen a ed in he na ional e i o ies o he highly
de eloped coun ies
Globaliza ion
(sassen, 2000)
Te i o iali y and bounda ies may be p esen in social and cul u al
p ac ices in which powe is i ually in isible. This is ob ious in cases
such as legisla ion, geog aphy and his o y ex books in educa ion a lases,
songs, hymns o pledges, alues, no ms and i uals o na u alised images
o ex e nal h ea s and in he meanings o hese o he espec i e
iden i ies
Bounda ies (Paasi, 1999)
Ideas abou human e i o iali y ha e long been linked wi h he idea o
possession o land
Land (Howi , 1999)
The a emp o in luence o con ol people, nonhumans, phenomena,
and ela ionships by delimi ing and asse ing con ol o e a geog aphic
a ea called a e i o y
na ion (Pen ose, 2009)
Te i o iali y A s a egy used by indi iduals, g oups, o o ganiza ions o
exe cise powe o e space
Policing ( y e, 2009)
Te i o y e e s o a bounded geog aphic space wi h e i o iali y
e e ing o he a emp s o con ol ha space
Poli ical
Geog aphy
(s o ey, 2009)
Mobili y and e i o iali y also in e sec in he complex spa iali y o
powe ela ions in ol ed in egional de elopmen
egional
De elopmen
(Bæ enhold , 2009)
S a egy o classi ying, communica ing, and en o cing con ol o e space
used by indi iduals, g oups, and o ganiza ions
so e eign y (Coleman, 2009)
Te i o ializa ion Meaning Field o esea ch Sou ce
A e m ha unde sco es he poli ical cu ency o e i o y. I e e s o he
ways in which e i o y is bo h in es ed wi h poli ical signi icance and
mobilized (de ended, dema ca ed, s aked ou , e c.) wi hin powe
s uggles
sense o Belonging ( aylo , 2009)
The de elopmen o a hie a chy o u al e i o ial uni s usually
e lec ing landholding his o ies, o adminis a i e e iciency in he
mode n e a
u al a eas (Du y, 2009)
Edua do Medei os
95
a speci ic s a egy mus be in place ha is designed acco ding o he e i o y o wi h
i s pa icipa ion. a he e y leas i should be p epa ed on he basis o a (g ea e o lesse )
pa icipa o y o ecas o ha e i o y”. Pu simple, his au ho ela es he e i o ialisa‑
ion o policies wi h i s capaci y o design ailo ‑made s a egies o speci ic needs o a
gi en e i o y while equi ing he pa icipa ion o his e i o ial en i y.
in ou iew, howe e , alongside he policy goals and ela ed s a egic execu ion, he
e i o ialisa ion o a gi en policy depends on i s e ec s in p omo ing e i o ial de elo‑
pmen and/o e i o ial cohesion. inally, his policy has o a ge a speci ic e i o ial
scale ( om u ban o eu opean). in mo e de ail, we de ine he e i o ialisa ion o a gi en
policy as i s ‘capaci y o: (i) encompass he main dimensions o e i o ial de elopmen
( ig. 1); (ii) e ec i ely p omo e e i o ial de elopmen o cohesion (Medei os, 2016a),
and; (iii) a ge a speci ic e i o ial scale in i s s a egic in e en ion’. in simple e ms, and
ollowing om his a ionale, we p opose h ee di e en le els o policy e i o ialisa ion;
om high e i o ialisa ion capaci y o a low e i o ialisa ion capaci y ( ig. 1).
Le el o Te i o ial Dimension in a gi en Policy
1 – High Te i o ialisa ion:
– Clea ly ex ends i s ac ion in o he h ee pilla s o e i o ial de elopmen
– Clea ly encompasses he i e dimensions o e i o ial de elopmen
– Clea ly co e s one o mo e e i o ial scales
2 – A e age Te i o ialisa ion:
– I has a mode a e associa ion wi h he h ee pilla s o e i o ial de elopmen
– I mode a ely encompasses he i e dimensions o e i o ial de elopmen
– I co e s one o mo e e i o ial scales
3 – Low Te i o ialisa ion:
– I shows a low con ibu ion o he h ee pilla s o e i o ial de elopmen
– I has a low con ibu ion o he i e dimensions o e i o ial de elopmen
– I co e s one o mo e e i o ial scales
ig. 1 – The analy ical model o he e i o ial dimension o policies.
Fig. 1 – O modelo analí ico da dimensão e i o ial das polí icas.
is he e a ise o he e i o ial dimension in he eU Cohesion Policy?
96
iii. He e i O iaL DiMensiOn in eU COHesiOn POLiCY s a eGies
1. The in luence o EU spa ial planning mains eam documen s
i we classi y he ‘mode n’ phase o eCP wi h he beginning o he mul iannual p o‑
g amming pe iods, om 1989 onwa ds (eC, 2008), i is cu ious, a minimum, ha i ook
mo e han wo decades o include he e i o ial dimension o cohesion in he eU ea y,
by exp essing he goal o “p omo e economic, social and e i o ial cohesion, and solida‑
i y among Membe s a es” (eC, 2010b, p. 17). in mo e de ail, he a icle 174 exp esses
he desi e o p omo e an ha monious de elopmen o he eU, by s eng hening i s econo‑
mic, social, and e i o ial cohesion, and by educing dispa i ies be ween he le els o
de elopmen o he a ious egions and he backwa dness o he leas a ou ed egions
( u al a eas, a eas a ec ed by indus ial ansi ion, and egions which su e om se e e
and pe manen na u al o demog aphic handicaps such as he no he nmos egions
wi h e y low popula ion densi y and island, c oss ‑bo de and moun ain egions).
This long in e egnum migh sugges ha he ‘ e i o ial dimension’ was la gely
neglec ed by he eU poli ical agenda, o a long ime. Bu ha was no necessa ily he
case. a leas , his dimension was no ully se ‑aside. indeed, i we ela e he conce n o
his e i o ial dimension wi h he se e al eU a emp s o implemen ‘spa ial planning’
s a egies, hen we can conclude ha his dimension has been in he eU poli ical agenda
since 1983, wi h he elease o he eu opean egional/spa ial Planning Cha e (eC,
1983), a he 6 h session o he CeMa , in o emolinos. in he ollowing, and un il he
elease o he esDP (eC, 1999), he e i o ial dimension was included as an impo an
coo dina ing ac o o he eU sec o ial policies du ing he Jacques Delo s P esidency
(1985 ‑1995) ( e ão, 2010).
since hen, many o he epo s ocusing on he eU e i o ial analyses we e eleased
( able ii), while he Commi ee o spa ial De elopmen (1991) and he Commi ee o he
egions (1992) we e es ablished (Medei os, 2014a). alongside, and a e being in he
making o a ound six yea s, he esDP was eleased ( aludi, 2006). inally, he wo e ‑
i o ial agendas ( a, 2007; a, 2011) and he G een Pape on e i o ial Cohesion (eC,
2008b), main ained he deba e a ound he need o p omo e a mo e balanced and ha mo‑
nious de elopmen o he eU e i o y.
in he mean ime, he esPOn (eu opean spa ial Planning Obse a ion ne wo k)
P og amme, es ablished in 2002, ga e a majo boos o he e i o ial analysis o se e al
eU policies. amongs i s main achie emen s a e he p oduc ion o me hods, ools, and
echniques wi h he goal o assess e i o ial impac s and e ec s o eU inanced policies
(Medei os 2013a; 2014b; 2014c). ollowing om he abo e, he esPOn a Las, eleased
in 2013, p oduced an o e iew o he e i o ial Dimensions o he eu ope 2020 s a egy
(eC, 2010c), and concluded ha i is “essen ial ha policy ‑make s ake in o accoun he
speci ici ies o hei place, hei egion o ci y in he implemen a ion o policies con ibu ing
o he eu ope 2020 s a egy. no only by looking a he gene al sco ing o anking o indi‑
idual egions ela ed o he issues emb aced by eu ope 2020, bu also by unde s anding he
combina ion o all o hese and possible mu ual suppo ” (esPOn a Las, 2013, p. 65).
Edua do Medei os
97
able ii – Ch onological lis o mains eam epo s on eU e i o y.
Quad o II – Lis a c onológica da publicação de ela ó ios sob e o e i ó io da UE.
Repo /S udy Yea Re e ence
eu opean egional/spa ial Planning Cha e 1983 (eC, 1983)
eu ope 2000 1991 (eC, 1991)
eu ope 2000+ 1994 (eC, 1994)
esDP 1991 (eC, 1999)
e i o ial agenda 2007 ( a, 2007)
G een Pape on e i o ial Cohesion 2008 (eC, 2008a)
e i o ial agenda 2020 2011 ( a, 2011)
esPOn a Las 2007, 2013, 2014 (esPOn, a Las, 2007, 2013, 2014)
in sho , he eading o he men ioned eU epo s, which ocus on e i o ial plan‑
ning and e i o ial cohesion, leads us o conclude ha all o hem make a clea di e‑
en ia ion be ween u ban and u al a eas ( able iii), and ha he e is an inc easing
ocus on ce ain ‘ e i o ial analysis ela ed elemen s’ in he mo e ecen ones, such as:
(i) e i o ial cohesion; (ii) e i o ial polycen ici y; and (iii) e i o ial go e nance.
also, in all o hem he e is always a clea e e ence o he need o p omo e a mo e
balanced and ha monious e i o y, ollowing om he idea exp essed in he ea y
es ablishing he eu opean economic Communi y ( ome – 1957).
again, he esPOn P og amme s eng hened he knowledge o many o hese ‘ e i‑
o ial analy ic componen s’, such as he: (i) e i o ial polycen ici y; (ii) e i o ial impac
assessmen ; (iii) u ban ‑ u al ela ionship; (i ) demog aphic ends; ( ) anspo
ne wo ks; ( i) na u al haza ds and isks; ( ii) na u al and cul u al he i age; ( iii) u ban
sys em; (ix) e i o ial go e nance; (x) en i onmen al ends; (xi) socioeconomic ends;
(xii) u al a eas; (xiii) ma i ime a eas; (xi ) u u e e i o ial scena ios; (x ) land use
pa e n; (x i) knowledge and inno a ion, and many o he s.
2. EU Cohesion Policy in e en ion s a egies owa ds a mo e e i o ial and
in eg a ed app oach?
Unde s andably, policies a e no p oduced in a poli ical acuum. indeed, eCP suc‑
cessi e in e en ion s a egies we e la gely in luenced by he ‘époque p e ailing poli ical
and economic con ex ’. in sho , he 1980s was ma ked by a se ies o e en s ( he single
eu opean ac , he eU accession o G eece, spain and Po ugal, and he adop ion o he
single Ma ke p og amme) which igge ed a policy change owa ds a he goal o socio‑
economic cohesion. in eali y, o he mos pa , he educ ion o egional dispa i ies in
de elopmen has been he guiding p inciple o eCP since he onse , and his is a clea
e i o ial ela ed objec i e. Howe e , he “ini ial ocus on unemploymen , indus ial
econ e sion and he mode nisa ion o ag icul u e has b oadened o include dispa i ies
in inno a ion, educa ion le els, en i onmen al quali y and po e y, as e lec ed in he
di ision o unding be ween policy a eas. The p ocess o ein e p e ing de elopmen
is he e a ise o he e i o ial dimension in he eU Cohesion Policy?
104
ces’ is a di ec esul o he eCP suppo o he esPOn P og amme. as a consequence,
eU bodies and he espec i e policy e alua ion uni s a e mo e and mo e closely aligned
wi h he need o use mo e holis ic me hods o Policy impac e alua ion, as hey ecognize
he limi a ions posed by he use o mac o ‑econome ic e alua ion ools. in sum, hese
ends p esen an addi ional con ibu ion o eCP o b ing o he o e a e i o ial dimen‑
sion in he ield o Policy impac e alua ion.
V. He e i O iaL DiMensiOn in eU COHesiOn POLiCY in
enCOMPassinG aLL e i O iaL LeVeLs
1. EU Cohesion Policy impac s on Te i o ial Coope a ion
One c ucial way o assess he deg ee o Policy e i o ialisa ion is he po en ial capa‑
ci y o a gi en policy o engage in all ( om u ban o con inen al), o in a speci ic e i o‑
ial scale. in his ega d, he implemen a ion o eCP ollows he eU p inciple o subsidia‑
i y, which aims a de e mining he e i o ial le el o in e en ion which is mos ele an
in he a eas o compe ences sha ed be ween he eU and he eU Membe ‑s a es. u he ‑
mo e, he suppo gi en by eCP o egional Ope a ional P og ammes is illus a i e o i s
e i o ial dimensional cha ac e .
in addi ion, eCP has been he main d i e in p omo ing he implemen a ion o
‘ e i o ial Coope a ion’ p ocesses in he eu opean e i o y. These e i o ial expe i‑
men s, which can be de ined as p ocesses “o collabo a ion be ween di e en e i o ies
o spa ial loca ions” (Medei os, 2016d, p. 10), a e p obably he mos ele an e i o ial
ela ed elemen s associa ed wi h he implemen a ion o eCP. This impo ance can ake
se e al pe spec i es. o one, e i o ial coope a ion in ol es he ull scope o he
eU e i o y, h ough he ansna ional coope a ion p ocess ( o me in e eG
s and B). Bu he c oss ‑bo de coope a ion (in e eG s and a) is, by a , he mos
signi ican e i o ial coope a ion p ocess wi hin he eU, as he eU bo de egions
co e 60% o he eU e i o y (nU s 3), and mo e ha 40% he o al inhabi an s
(Medei os, 2010). in addi ion, and mo e ecen ly, his e i o ial coope a ion p ocess
has been aken in o ano he le el ollowing he implemen a ion o mac o ‑ egional s a‑
egies (Bal ic ‑sea egion, Danube, ad ia ic and ionian, and he alpine ‑Mac o egions)
(eC, 2013a).
as men ioned in he p e ious sec ion, eCP had a c ucial ole in suppo ing egional
de elopmen p ocesses in he eU, namely by inancing eU egional Ope a ional
P og ammes. i also goes wi hou saying ha a la ge pa o he inancial aid gi en o he
objec i e o e i o ial coope a ion ( o me in e eG), in he h ee s ands (c oss ‑bo de ,
ansna ional and in e egional coope a ion), had no only a key ole in educing he
ba ie s posed by he p esence o bo de s (Medei os, 2011), bu has also p o ided a s able
a ena o he eme gence o eu o ‑ egional and mac o ‑ egional en i ies all o e eu ope
Edua do Medei os

105
(Medei os 2013b; Pe kmann, 2003; Pe in, 2010), and mo e ecen ly, p o ided a s able
g ound o he es ablishmen o eu opean G oupings o e i o ial Coope a ion (eG C)
(De sousa, 2013; C , 2014).
2. EU Cohesion Policy and he place ‑based app oach
ano he c i ical e i o ial elemen o eCP is i s po en ial con ibu ion o ins il a
place ‑base na a i e, in i s implemen a ion, ollowing he sugges ions p esen ed in he
‘Ba ca epo ’ (Ba ca, 2009). in simple e ms, his place ‑based ision e o mula es he
key objec i e o eCP in o apping he unde ‑u ilized po en ial o all eU places (Mendez,
2013). Unde s andably, his na a i e has a clea e i o ial pe spec i e, and ecognizes
ha econome ic s udies do no o e any conclusi e gene al answe s on policy impac .
a he same ime, his app oach in ends o make use o eCP po en ial o ein o ce he
mul i ‑le el go e nance p ocesses, o explo e eU ‑wide ne wo ks o coope a ion, and o
dissemina e ope a ional expe iences (Ba ca, 2009).
Mo e gene ally, when i comes o he eu opean e i o ial in eg a ion p ocess,
a ailable li e a u e holds ha he e is a ce ain ambigui y in i s e ec on he egional
powe , since some imes i has posi i ely a ec ed empowe men p ocesses in ce ain
eU egions, while in o he cases i has suppo ed disempowe men p ocesses
(Bou ne, 2003). in his line o easoning, and acco ding o Bache and Jones (2000),
aking he UK and spanish case, eCP in luence on egional empowe men depends
on h ee main hings. in he i s place, is he Policy implemen a ion amewo k.
He e, he in oduc ion o he pa ne ship p inciple changed he oppo uni y o s uc‑
u e he egional pa icipa ion wi hin eCP. in second place is he egional capaci y o
ake ad an age o a ailable suppo om Policies. Unde s andably, his capaci y
a ies om egion o egion ( od íguez ‑Pose & Ga cilazo, 2015). inally, in hi d
place is he ype o e i o ial s uc u e o he s a e, and in pa icula he ela ion
be ween he cen al s a e and he di e en pe iphe ies. again he e, he eU e i o y
encompasses a my iad o comple ely di e en si ua ion cases (a ibas 2012; esPOn
2.3.2, 2006).
in he eyes o some, howe e , he a chi ec u e o eCP, which a ou s he implemen‑
a ion o a mul ile el ype o go e nance, leads o a gaining in luence o sub ‑na ional
s akeholde s ( aludi, 2010, p. 173). Likewise, he di ec and indi ec e ec s o his Policy
in s eng hening he e i o ial coope a ion p ocess, and in p omo ing sound e i o ial
go e nance p ocesses (Luukkonen & Moilanen, 2012), can ac as a ool o p omo e local
and egional empowe men , despi e he ac ha he eU is a “highly he e ogeneous space
in e ms o ins i u ional and go e nance issues, and in e ms o bo h he di e en na io‑
nal and egional modes”. Con e sely, Zaucha e al. (2014, p. 249) a gue ha “almos 20
yea s o in e go e nmen al coope a ion on e i o ial de elopmen among eU Membe
s a es has ba ely ein o ced mul iannual p og amming in ela ion o eU de elopmen
(cohesion) policy”.
is he e a ise o he e i o ial dimension in he eU Cohesion Policy?
106
Vi. is eU COHesiOn POLiCY an inC easinG e i O iaLiseD POLiCY?
Based on he p e ious analysis, he e a e se e al e idences which poin o he con‑
clusion ha , despi e ecen a emp s o change he ini ial cohesion pa adigm in o an
in es men /g ow h epi ome, he e i o ial dimension o eCP has been gaining g ound
h oughou he las couple o decades (1989 ‑2020). such a conclusion is suppo ed by a
ple ho a o a gumen s. amongs hem, is he c ucial ole o eCP in suppo ing all dimen‑
sions and componen s o e i o ial de elopmen , al hough wi h di e en in ensi y le els. in
o he wo ds, eCP has been, and con inues o be much mo e han a simple in es men ool
o economic g ow h, and while i s in luence di e s om coun y o coun y, he con inuous
inc ease o i s inancial package adds o i s g owing e i o ialisa ion in luence. in a simila
way, eCP has backed he ise o ia p ocedu es in policy impac e alua ion and also he
e i o ial e idence analysis h ough he inancing o he esPOn P og amme.
u he mo e, eCP implemen a ion s a egies ocus on p omo ing in eg a ed e i‑
o ial/placed ‑based app oaches, and e i o ial coope a ion p ocesses, ha e inc eased
o e ime. all o hese can be seen in each Membe ‑s a es’ Common s a egic ame‑
wo ks, whe e in es men s om he es , e D , o Cohesion und, inance mo e han one
p io i y axis o one o mo e Ope a ional P og ammes. simply pu , a p esen , ac ions
inanced by eCP may be ca ied ou by means o an in eg a ed e i o ial in es men (an
‘i i’), o os e a simila policy goal, o ins ance.
again, eCP has a ma ked e i o ial dimension i iewed as a ehicle which p omo es
one o all e i o ial le els, ia he: (i) applica ion o he subsidia i y p inciple; (ii) suppo
o c oss ‑bo de coope a ion p ocesses; (iii) suppo o place ‑based de elopmen s a egies;
and (i ) suppo o mul i ‑le el go e nance p ocesses. also, in he p esen p og amming
pe iod, he e is a speci ic ins umen which p omo es communi y ‑led local de elopmen
p ojec s, and ano he o inancing in eg a ed ac ions o sus ainable u ban de elopmen ,
bo h o which wi h a clea e i o ial scale in mind.
in his con ex , and i we apply he p oposed me hodology o assess he gene al le el
o e i o ialisa ion o eCP (1989 ‑2020), we can assume ha i has had, along i s li e cycle,
a high deg ee e i o ialisa ion, based on he ollowing gene ic conclusions:
– i is clea ha he in e en ions inanced by means o his Policy ouched all pilla s
o e i o ial de elopmen , as i no only p o ided solid g ound o weal h gene a‑
ion (mode niza ion and building o new accessibili ies, socioeconomic, and en i‑
onmen al ela ed in as uc u es, and suppo o he human capi al alo isa ion),
bu was also pi o al in e aining and dis ibu ing weal h by suppo ing job c ea‑
ion. One can, ob iously, ques ion he deg ee o he long ‑ e m in luence on he las
pilla , as many o he jobs c ea ed we e empo a y and ha dly well ‑paid;
– i is mo e han clea ha his Policy inanced p ojec s which can be associa ed wi h
all he dimensions o e i o ial de elopmen , despi e he ac ha hey we e mo e
concen a ed in p o iding suppo o business de elopmen , human capi al, in as‑
uc u e, esea ch and inno a ion, and en i onmen p o ec ion. e en so, e i o ial
Edua do Medei os
107
coope a ion and e i o ial go e nance p ocesses we e also imp o ed wi h a sha e
o eCP in es men s, as well as spa ial planning ela ed componen s, such as he
imp o emen o e i o ial connec i i y and a icula ion. as aludi (2010, p. 183)
pu s i , sound spa ial planning is i al o his Policy o ake in o accoun he mos
adequa e loca ions o i s in e en ions and he ela ed oppo uni ies and cons‑
ain s.
– The posi i e ole o eCP is also e iden and ele an in co e ing and impac ing
se e al e i o ial scales, om he u ban o he eu opean le els. in his pa icula
analy ic componen , he a en ion gi en by his policy o he egional le el was
pa icula ly s ong, mainly h ough he egional Ope a ional P og ammes. Bu
he e, he local le el was also widely suppo ed by speci ic ini ia i es as he Leade
Communi y ini ia i e, o ins ance. Mo eo e , se e al la ge scale in as uc u al
p og ammes had a clea na ional pe spec i e, and some imes e en a eu opean
dimension ( ansna ional anspo , ene gy, and coope a ion ne wo ks).
Vii. COnCLUsiOns
The simple ac ha eCP aims a achie ing a mo e cohesi e eU e i o y connec s i
wi h a clea ‘ e i o ial dimension’. o s a e o he wise is, in ou iew, o hinge on a sim‑
plis ic and ung ounded pe spec i e, which igno es he impo an ole o his Policy in
ein o cing he pilla s and main dimensions o e i o ial de elopmen , in all he admi‑
nis a i e le els o he eU. alongside, his Policy has had, h oughou i s almos 30 yea s
o implemen a ion, a c ucial ole in p o iding inancial suppo o sec o al policies wi h
a s ong e i o ial dimension ( anspo s, en i onmen , u ban eno a ion, esea ch and
inno a ion, and social policies), and in suppo ing e i o ial coope a ion and mul i ‑le el
go e nance p ocesses. u he mo e, he elabo a ion o na ional and egional in e en‑
ion s a egies, which a e necessa y o ha e access o he a ailable eU unds, oge he
wi h he obliga ion o es ablish moni o ing and e alua ion p ac ices wi h a e i o ial
pe spec i e, has led o a ise o he awa eness o he need o make use o ia echniques
o assess eU policies main impac s.
Mo eo e , he mul iplie e ec s o eCP in ‘ ouching’ se e al elemen s o he e i o‑
ial dimension a e ex ensi e o he academic communi y, and o he my iad o s akehol‑
de s in ol ed in he ope a ionaliza ion o eCP (esPOn CaDeC, 2014). Mo e p ecisely,
he academic communi y has been in ol ed in p o iding sound e i o ial knowledge on
he e ec s and impac s o he in es men s associa ed wi h his policy, namely wi h he
elabo a ion o epo s and s udies unde he auspices o he esPOn P og amme, and he
p og amme’s e alua ion epo s. u he mo e, he elease o he men ioned e i o ial
agendas, he G een Pape on e i o ial Cohesion, he esDP, and he scena ios o in e‑
g a ed e i o ial in es men s (eC, 2015), a e p oo o he awa eness o he need o p o‑
ide a mo e holis ic, comple e, in eg a ed and e i o ial pe spec i e, when implemen ing
eCP ela ed p og ammes.
is he e a ise o he e i o ial dimension in he eU Cohesion Policy?
108
all in all, and by making use o a me hodology which akes in o accoun he p esence
o se e al e i o ial ela ed elemen s in a gi en Policy, and mo e p ecisely hei close
ela ion wi h he Policy s a egic e i o ial in e en ion, po en ial e i o ial impac s,
and he e i o ial ocus on one o mo e e i o ial scales, we can conclude ha he e is a
s ong case o a gue ha eCP has a high le el o e i o ializa ion. no less undamen al o
his analysis is he c i ical ole ha his Policy has had in suppo ing he de elopmen o
sub ‑na ional adminis a i e scales, and in pa icula he egional le el, a leas in less
de elopmen eU coun ies. in his ega d, he claims which equi e he need o a mo e
place ‑based app oach o his Policy also un eil i s subs an ial e i o ial dimension. addi‑
ionally, he inc easing impo ance o he suppo p o ided h ough he inancial suppo
gi en o he e i o ial coope a ion goal o his Policy un olds a key e i o ial dimension,
as he main s and o his goal (c oss ‑bo de coope a ion) inancially speaking co e s
mo e han 60% o he eU e i o y. also, he ise o he mac o ‑ egional s a egies ( ou in
la e 2015), alongside wi h he cons an es ablishmen o he eu opean G oupings o e ‑
i o ial Coope a ion (55 in la e 2015), p o ides u he impe us o he ein o cemen o
e i o ial coope a ion ne wo ks wi hin he eU.
inally, ou own de ailed analysis on he main e i o ial impac s o eCP in se e al
eU Membe ‑s a es and egions, has e ealed he pi o al ole o his Policy in suppo ing
se e al pilla s o he e i o ial cohesion concep , and mainly in imp o ing social, econo‑
mic, and en i onmen al ela ed componen s in he in e en ion e i o ies, wi h pa icu‑
la emphasis on imp o ing he in a ‑s uc u al and he human capi al domains. Howe‑
e , and despi e he mul iple posi i e di ec and indi ec impac s p o oked by he
p og ammes inanced unde he auspices o his Policy, he goal o achie ing a mo e
cohesi e and balanced e i o y a he na ional le el, has no been a ained. On he con‑
a y, despi e a wide canaliza ion o inancial suppo o he less de eloped egions, he
la ge eU me opoli an a eas con inue o gain in hei o e all ela i e posi ion, in e ms
o hei socioeconomic and demog aphic a ac i eness.
o conclude, and ollowing om he abo e, we could see ha , despi e he cons an
e o ms and eshapes, which ha e been a emp ing o push eCP u he away om i s
ini ial goals as a cohesi e policy, in o a an in es men policy, i s e i o ial dimension is
widesp ead and subs an ial in all he analysed componen s. agains his backg ound, we
can a gue ha , in o de o ein o ce his e i o ial dimension, his Policy needs u he
ac ion om bo h he academic communi y and he in ol ed poli ical ac o s. The o me
a e esponsible o he con inua ion o e o s o highligh he need o be e unde s an‑
ding he e i o ial impac s o his Policy, and o design be e spa ial de elopmen s a‑
egies, wi h an in eg a ed e i o ial app oach, and which launch conc e e measu es o
achie e a mo e balanced, ha monious, and polycen ic u ban sys em wi hin he eU e ‑
i o y.
On hei pa , he la e (policy ‑make s) should be p o ided wi h be e e i o ial
analyses, and e alua ion epo s o he main e i o ial impac s o he eU Cohesion
Policy, in o de o make mo e a ional and in elligen decisions on he necessa y hema ic
concen a ion o he a ailable in es men s. also, he eU policy make s should be awa e
Edua do Medei os
109
ha ele an e i o ial impac assessmen p ocedu es equi e mo e han a simple p ess‑
‑o ‑a ‑bu on ges u e, and ha he analysed e i o ial dimensions o policies ex end he
economy ‑socie y ‑en i onmen iangle. Consequen ly, he in es men in imp o ing
a ailable s a is ical da a collec ion is o c ucial impo ance o be e unde s and he policy
causali ies in all dimensions o e i o ial de elopmen .
in he end, he analysis p esen ed in ends o p o oke an accele a ed deba e on he
u u e ends o he eCP, and o highligh he need o ake in o accoun and ein o ce i s
e i o ial dimension, and he consequen need o implemen he p oposals exp essed in
he e i o ial agenda, as a means o complemen he ‘ e i o ialess eU 2020 s a egy’.
Mo eo e , we expec ha he academic and poli ical discussion on he ‘ e i o ial dimen‑
sion’ o he eU Cohesion Policy leads o a wide awa eness on he impo ance o he
geog aphical analysis o polices, in o de o be e unde s and hei e i o ial impac s in
all he dimensions o e i o ial de elopmen .
aCKOWnLeDGeMen s
The au ho wishes o hank G aça ønning o he english e ision o he ex , and wo anonymous
e iewe s o he ex emely use ul commen s leading o a be e o ganiza ion o he a icle.
e e enCes
is he e a ise o he e i o ial dimension in he eU Cohesion Policy?
a ibas, G.V. (Coo d.) (2012). Di ision o Powe s
be ween he Eu opean Union, he Membe S a es,
and he Regional and Local Au ho i ies. B ussels:
eu opean ins i u e o Public adminis a ion
(eiPa), Commi ee o he egions.
Bache, i., & Jones, . (2000). Has eU egional policy
empowe ed he egions? a s udy o spain and
he Uni ed Kingdom, Regional & Fede al S udies,
10(3), 1 ‑20.
Ba ca, . (2009). An agenda o a e o med cohesion
policy: a place ‑based app oach o mee ing Eu o‑
pean Union challenges and expec a ions. B ussels:
independen epo p epa ed a he eques o
Danu a Hübne , Commissione o egional
Policy, DG egional Policy.
Bou ne, a. K. (2003). The impac o eu opean in eg a‑
ion on egional Powe . Jou nal o Common
Ma ke S udies, 41(4), 597 ‑620.
Bæ enhold , J. O. (2009). egional De elopmen and
noneconomic ac o s. in n. Cas ee, M. C ang,
& M. Domoah (eds.), In e na ional Encyclopedia
o Human Geog aphy, Vol. 9 (pp. 181 ‑186). Con‑
en y: else ie .
Cli on, J., Díaz ‑ uen es, D., & e nández ‑Gu ié ez, M.
(2015). Public in as uc u e se ices in he
eu opean Union: Challenges o e i o ial
Cohesion, Regional S udies, 50(2), 358 ‑373.
Coleman, M. (2009). so e eign y. in n. Cas ee, M. C ang,
& M. Domoah (eds.), In e na ional Encyclopedia
o Human Geog aphy Vol. 9 (pp. 255 ‑261). Con‑
en y: else ie .
C . (2014). EGTC moni o ing epo 2014. Implemen‑
ing he S a egy Eu ope 2020. B ussels: Commi ‑
ee o he egions /Me is.
De sousa, L. (2013). Unde s anding eu opean C oss‑
‑bo de Coope a ion: a amewo k o analysis,
Jou nal o Eu opean In eg a ion, 35(6), 669 ‑687.
Delaney, D. (2009). e i o y and e i o iali y. in n.
Cas ee, M. C ang, & M. Domoah (eds.), In e na‑
ional Encyclopedia o Human Geog aphy Vol. 4
(pp. 136 ‑145). Con en y: else ie .
eC. (1983). Eu opean egional/spa ial planning Cha e .
To emolinos Cha e . s asbou g: eu opean
Con e ence o Minis e s esponsible o egio‑
nal Planning, adop ed on 20 May 1983 a o e‑
molinos (spain), eu opean Commission.

110
eC. (1991). Eu ope 2000: ou look o he de elopmen o
he communi y’s e i o y. Luxembou g: Commis‑
sion o he eu opean Communi ies, Di ec o a e‑
‑Gene al o egional Policy.
eC. (1994). Eu ope 2000+. Coope a ion o Eu opean e ‑
i o ial de elopmen . Luxembou g: eu opean
Commission.
eC (1996) Fi s epo on economic and social cohesion.
Luxembou g: eu opean Commission.
eC. (1999). Eu opean Spa ial De elopmen Pe spec i e:
Towa ds Balanced and Sus ainable De elopmen
o he Te i o y o he EU. Luxembou g: O ice
o O icial Publica ions o he eu opean Com‑
muni ies.
eC. (2001). Second Repo on Economic and Social Cohe‑
sion. Luxembou g: eu opean Commission.
eC. (2004). A new pa ne ship o cohesion – con e ‑
gence, compe i i eness, coope a ion, Thi d epo
on economic and social cohesion. Luxembou g:
eu opean Commission.
eC. (2007). G owing Regions, G owing Eu ope. Fou h
epo on economic and social cohesion. B ussels:
eu opean Commission.
eC. (2008a). EU Cohesion Policy 1988 ‑2008: In es ing in
Eu ope’s Fu u e. Luxembou g: in o egio Pano‑
ama 26, eu opean Commission.
eC. (2008b). G een Pape on Te i o ial Cohesion – u n‑
ing e i o ial di e si y in o s eng h. B ussels:
eu opean Commission.
eC. (2010a). In es ing in Eu ope’s u u e: Fi h epo on
economic, social and e i o ial cohesion. B us‑
sels: eu opean Commission.
eC. (2010b). Lisbon T ea y. B ussels: O icial Jou nal o
he eu opean Union C83, Volume 53, 30 Ma ch.
eC. (2010c). EUROPE 2020 – a s a egy o sma , sus‑
ainable and inclusi e g ow h. B ussels: Commu‑
nica ion om he commission, 3.3.2010, eu o‑
pean Commission.
eC. (2013a). Repo om he Commission o he Eu opean
Pa liamen , he Council, The Eu opean Economic
and Social Commi ee and he Commi ee o he
Regions conce ning he added alue o mac o‑
‑ egional s a egies. Luxembou g: sWD(2013) 233
inal, eu opean Commission.
eC. (2013b). Regula ion (EU) No 1303/2013 o he
Eu opean Pa liamen and o he Council.
Luxembou g: O icial Jou nal o he eu opean
Union, 20.12.2013, L 347/320, eu opean Com‑
mission.
eC. (2014). Six h Repo on Economic, Social and Te i‑
o ial Cohesion. In es men o jobs and g ow h:
P omo ing de elopmen and good go e nance in
EU egions and ci ies. B ussels: eu opean Com‑
mission.
eC. (2015). Scena ios o In eg a ed Te i o ial
In es men s. B ussels: Di ec o a e ‑Gene al o
egional and U ban Policy, eu opean Commis‑
sion.
elissalde, B., san ama ia, ., & Jeanne, . (2014). Ha ‑
mony and Melody in Discou se on eu opean
Cohesion, Eu opean Planning S udies, 22(3),
627 ‑647.
enca a (2009) Mic oso Enca a P emium, Mic oso
Co po a ion: edmond: DVD ‑ OM.
esPOn, 2.3.2. (2006). Go e nance o e i o ial and
u ban policies om EU o local le el. Luxem‑
bou g: inal epo (31s May 2006), eu opean
spa ial Planning Obse a ion ne wo k.
esPOn, a Las. (2006). Mapping he S uc u e o he
Eu opean e i o y. Luxembou g: eu opean spa‑
ial Planning Obse a ion ne wo k.
esPOn, a Las. (2013). Te i o ial Dimensions o he
Eu ope 2020 S a egy. Luxembou g: eu opean
spa ial Planning Obse a ion ne wo k.
esPOn, a Las. (2014). Mapping Eu opean Te i o ial
S uc u es. Luxembou g: eu opean spa ial Plan‑
ning Obse a ion ne wo k.
esPOn, CaDeC. (2014). Capi alisa ion and dissemina‑
ion o ESPON concep s. Luxembou g: inal
epo , 10 h Ma ch 2014, eu opean spa ial Plan‑
ning Obse a ion ne wo k.
aludi, a. (2006). om eu opean spa ial de elopmen
o e i o ial cohesion policy, Regional S udies,
40(6), 667 ‑678.
aludi, a. (2010). Cohesion, Cohe ence, Coope a ion:
Eu opean Spa ial Planning Coming o Age? Lon‑
don: ou ledge.
a inós, J. (2015). Cohesión e i o ial / coesão e i o‑
ial / e i o ial cohesion. in L. López igal
(Di .), J. a. . e nandes, e. s. sposi o, & D. .
ighe a (Coo d.), Dicciona io de Geog a ía apli‑
cada y p o esional: e minología de análisis, plani‑
icación y ges ión del e i ó io (pp. 105 ‑106).
León: Uni e sidad de León.
e ão, J. (2010). O denamen o do e i ó io: 25 anos de
ap endizagem? in eu ocid (ed.), Eu opa No as
F on ei as, Po ugal – 25 anos de In eg ação Eu o‑
peia. 26/27 (pp. 77 ‑84). Pa ede: P incípia.
Edua do Medei os
111
iguei edo, a. . (Coo d.) (2010). Te i o ial Su ey in
Po ugal. Lisboa: ins i u o inancei o pa a o
Desen ol imen o egional, iP.
y e, n. . (2009). Policing. in n. Cas ee, M. C ang, &
M. Domoah (eds.), In e na ional Encyclopedia o
Human Geog aphy Vol. 8 (pp. 212 ‑216). Con en‑
y: else ie .
Gold, J. . (2009). Beha io al Geog aphy. in n. Cas ee,
M. C ang, & M. Domoah (eds.), In e na ional
Encyclopedia o Human Geog aphy Vol. 6 (pp. 282‑
‑293). Con en y: else ie .
Goodwin, M. (2013). egions, e i o ies and ela iona‑
li y: explo ing he egional Dimensions o Poli‑
ical P ac ice. Regional S udies, 47(8), 1181 ‑1190.
Hagge , P. (2001). Geog aphy. A global syn hesis. Lon‑
don: P en ice Hall.
Hassle , M. (2009). Commodi y Chains. in n. Cas ee,
M. C ang, & M. Domoah (eds.), In e na ional
Encyclopedia o Human Geog aphy Vol. 2 (pp. 202‑
‑208). Con en y: else ie .
Howi , e. (2009). Land igh s. in n. Cas ee, M. C ang,
& M. Domoah (eds.), In e na ional Encyclopedia
o Human Geog aphy Vol. 5 (pp. 118 ‑123). Con‑
en y: else ie .
Leona di, . (2005). Cohesion Policy in he Eu opean
Union – The Building o Eu ope. new Yo k: Pal‑
g a e Macmillan.
Luukkonen, J., & Moilanen, H. (2012). e i o iali y in
he s a egies and P ac ices o he e i o ial
Cohesion Policy o he eu opean Union: e i o‑
ial Challenges in implemen ing “so Planning”.
Eu opean Planning S udies, 20(3), 481 ‑500.
Ma in, J., hys, J., & Michael e. (eds.) (2004). An in o‑
duc ion o poli ical geog aphy. Space, place and
poli ics. London: ou ledge.
Medei os, e. (2010). Old s ecen C oss ‑Bo de Coop‑
e a ion: Po ugal ‑spain and sweden ‑no way,
AREA, 42(4): 434 ‑443.
Medei os, e. (2011). ( e)de ining he concep o eu o e‑
gion. Eu opean Planning S udies, 19(1), 141 ‑158.
Medei os, e. (2013). assessing e i o ial impac s o he
eU Cohesion Policy: he Po uguese case. Eu o‑
pean Planning S udies, 22(9), 1960 ‑1988.
Medei os, e. (2013b). eu o ‑Meso ‑Mac o: The new
egions in ibe ian and eu opean space. Regional
S udies, 47(8), 249 ‑1266.
Medei os, e. (2014a). The eu opeaniza ion o spa ial
Planning p ocesses in Po ugal wi hin he eU
Cohesion policy s a egies (1989 ‑2013). Geog a‑
phy and Spa ial Planning Jou nal, 6, 201 ‑222.
Medei os, e. (2014b). assessing e i o ial impac s o
he eU Cohesion Policy a he egional Le el:
he Case o alga e. Impac Assessmen and P o‑
jec App aisal, 32(3), 198 ‑212.
Medei os, e. (2014c). Te i o ial Impac Assessmen
(TIA). The p ocess, Me hods and Techniques. Lis‑
boa: Cen o de es udos Geog á icos.
Medei os, e. (2014d). e i o ial cohesion ends in
inne scandina ia: he ole o c oss ‑bo de
coope a ion (in e eG ‑a 1994 ‑2010). No sk
Geog a isk Tidssk i , 68(5), 310 ‑317.
Medei os, e. (2016a). e i o ial Cohesion: an eu opean
Concep . Eu opean Jou nal o Spa ial De elop‑
men , 60. e ie ed om: h p://www.no d egio.
se/Global/eJsD/ e e eed a icles/ e e eed60.pd
Medei os, e. (2016b). eU Cohesion Policy in spain.
Regional S udies. Published online: h p://dx.doi.
o g/10.1080/00343404.2016.1187719
Medei os, e. (2016c). eU Cohesion Policy in sweden
(1995 ‑2003). a e i o ial impac assessmen .
Eu opean S uc u al and In es men Funds jou ‑
nal, 3(4), 209 ‑230.
Medei os, e. (2016d). e i o ial impac assessmen
and C oss ‑Bo de Coope a ion. Regional S u‑
dies, Regional Science, 2(1), 95 ‑115.
Mendez, C. (2013). The Pos ‑2013 e o m o he eU
Cohesion Policy and he Place ‑Based na a i e.
Jou nal o Eu opean Public Policy, 20(5), 660 ‑660.
Molle, W. (2007). Eu opean Cohesion Policy. London:
ou ledge.
Mo eno, L. (2002). Desen ol imen o Local em Meio
Ru al. Caminhos e Caminhan es. (Disse ação de
Dou o amen o). Disponí el em: h p://ceg.ulis‑
boa.p /wpcon en /uploads/2016/04/LMo eno_
Desen e i u al07.pd
Pen ose, J. (2009). na ion. in n. Cas ee, M. C ang, &
M. Domoah (eds.), In e na ional Encyclopedia o
Human Geog aphy Vol. 7 (pp. 223 ‑228). Con en‑
y: else ie .
Paasi, a. (1999). Bounda ies as social p ac ice: e i o‑
iali y in he wo ld o lows. in D. newman
(ed.) Bounda ies, e i o ies and pos mode ni y
(pp. 69 ‑88). London: ank Cass.
Pe kmann, M. (2003). C oss ‑bo de egions in eu ope
– signi icance and d i e s o egional c oss‑
‑bo de co ‑ope a ion. Eu opean U ban and
Regional S udies, 10(2), 153 ‑171.
Pe in, . (2010). in e ‑ e i o iali y as a new end in
cul u al policy? The case o eu o egions. Cul‑
u al T ends, 19(1 ‑2), 125 ‑139.
is he e a ise o he e i o ial dimension in he eU Cohesion Policy?
112
Po luka, O. (2010). Impac o EU Cohesion Policy in Cen‑
al Eu ope. Leipzig: Leipzige Uni e si ä s e lag.
od íguez ‑Pose, a., & Ga cilazo, e. (2015). Quali y o
Go e nmen and he e u ns o in es men :
examining he impac o Cohesion expendi u e
in eu opean egions. Regional S udies, 49(8),
1274 ‑1290.
sack, . (1983). Human e i o iali y: a Theo y. Annals
o he Associa ion o Ame ican Geog aphe s,
73(1), 55 ‑74.
sassen, s. (2000). e i o y and e i o iali y in he
Global economy. In e na ional Sociology, 15(2),
372 ‑393.
s o ey, D. (2009). Poli ical Geog aphy. in n. Cas ee, M.
C ang, & M. Domoah (eds.), In e na ional Ency‑
clopedia o Human Geog aphy Vol. 3 (pp. 243‑
‑253). Con en y: else ie .
aylo , D. (2009). Belonging. in n. Cas ee, M. C ang, &
M. Domoah (eds.), In e na ional Encyclopedia o
Human Geog aphy Vol. 1 (pp. 294 ‑300). Con en‑
y: else ie .
a. (2007). Te i o ial Agenda o he Eu opean Union:
Towa ds a Mo e Compe i i e and Sus ainable
Eu ope o Di e se Regions, ag eed a he Occa‑
sion o he in o mal Minis e ial Mee ing on
U ban De elopmen and e i o ial Cohesion on
24/25 May, Leipzig, ede al epublic o Ge ‑
many. e ie ed om: h p://www.eu ‑ e i o ial
agenda.eu/ e e ence%20Documen s/ e i o ial
‑agenda ‑o he ‑eu opean ‑Union ‑ag eed ‑on ‑25
‑May ‑2007.pd
a, 2020. (2011). Te i o ial Agenda o he Eu opean
Union 2020 – Towa ds an Inclusi e, Sma and
Sus ainable Eu ope o Di e se Regions, ag eed a
he in o mal Minis e ial Mee ing o Minis e s
esponsible o spa ial Planning and e i o ial
De elopmen on 19 h May, Hunga y: Gödöllő.
e ie ed om: h p://www.eu e i o ialagenda.
eu/ e e ence%20Documen s/ e i o ial‑
‑agenda ‑o ‑ he ‑eu opean ‑Union ‑ag eed ‑on‑
‑25 ‑May ‑2007.pd
López igal, L. (ed.) (2015). Dicciona io de Geog a ía
Aplicada Y P odesional. Te minología de análisis,
plani icación y ges ión del e i ó io. León: Uni‑
e sidad de León.
Zaucha, J., Komo nicki, ., Böhme, K., Świą ek, D., &
Żube , P. (2014). e i o ial Keys o B inging
Close he e i o ial agenda o he eU and
eu ope 2020, Eu opean Planning S udies. 22(2),
246 ‑267.
an de Wus en, H. (2009). Cox, K. in n. Cas ee, M.
C ang, & M. Domoah (eds.), In e na ional Ency‑
clopedia o Human Geog aphy Vol. 2 (pp. 325‑
‑326). Con en y: else ie .
Wa wick, e. (2009). De ensible space. in n. Cas ee, M.
C ang, & M. Domoah (eds.), In e na ional Ency‑
clopedia o Human Geog aphy Vol. 3 (pp. 31 ‑38).
Con en y: else ie .
Was l ‑Wal e , D. (2009). Bo de lands. in n. Cas ee, M.
C ang, & M. Domoah (eds.), In e na ional Ency‑
clopedia o Human Geog aphy Vol. 1 (pp. 332‑
‑339). Con en y: else ie .
i Con e ence: The eU Cohesion Policy in Po ugal – Con ibu ions o he e i o ial De elopmen – 28 ‑01 ‑2013.
ii accessibili y: anspo accessibili y, accessibili y o ene gy ne wo ks and e ‑connec i i y.
Edua do Medei os