The Process Architecture of EU Territorial Cohesion Policy

When preparing the European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP), Member States were supported by the European Commission but denied the EU a competence in the matter. Currently, the Treaty of Lisbon identifies territorial cohesion as a competence shared between the Union and the Member States. Th...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal:	Andreas Faludi
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Politecnico di Torino 2010
Materias:	Urban groups. The city. Urban sociology HT101-395
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/242149fd0a584ec8aa1893f10412bf66
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:242149fd0a584ec8aa1893f10412bf66
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:242149fd0a584ec8aa1893f10412bf662021-12-02T02:40:14ZThe Process Architecture of EU Territorial Cohesion Policy1650-9544https://doaj.org/article/242149fd0a584ec8aa1893f10412bf662010-08-01T00:00:00Zhttp://www.nordregio.se/Global/EJSD/Refereed%20articles/refereed39.pdfhttps://doaj.org/toc/1650-9544When preparing the European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP), Member States were supported by the European Commission but denied the EU a competence in the matter. Currently, the Treaty of Lisbon identifies territorial cohesion as a competence shared between the Union and the Member States. This paper is about the process architecture of territorial cohesion policy. In the past, this architecture resembled the Open Method of Coordination (OMC) which the White Paper on European Governance praised, but only in areas where there was no EU competence. This reflected zero-sum thinking which may continue even under the Lisbon Treaty. After all, for as long as territorial cohesion was not a competence, voluntary cooperation as practiced in the ESDP process was pursued in this way. However, the practice of EU policies, even in areas where there is an EU competence, often exhibits features of the OMC. Surprisingly effective innovations hold the promise of rendering institutions of decision making comprehensible and democratically accountable. In the EU as a functioning polity decision making is thus at least part deliberative so that actors’ preferences are transformed by the force of the better argument. This brings into focus the socialisation of the deliberators into epistemic communities. Largely an informal process, this is reminiscent of European spatial planning having been characterised as a learning process.Andreas FaludiPolitecnico di TorinoarticleUrban groups. The city. Urban sociologyHT101-395ENEuropean Journal of Spatial Development, Vol August, Iss 39 (2010)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Urban groups. The city. Urban sociology HT101-395
spellingShingle	Urban groups. The city. Urban sociology HT101-395 Andreas Faludi The Process Architecture of EU Territorial Cohesion Policy
description	When preparing the European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP), Member States were supported by the European Commission but denied the EU a competence in the matter. Currently, the Treaty of Lisbon identifies territorial cohesion as a competence shared between the Union and the Member States. This paper is about the process architecture of territorial cohesion policy. In the past, this architecture resembled the Open Method of Coordination (OMC) which the White Paper on European Governance praised, but only in areas where there was no EU competence. This reflected zero-sum thinking which may continue even under the Lisbon Treaty. After all, for as long as territorial cohesion was not a competence, voluntary cooperation as practiced in the ESDP process was pursued in this way. However, the practice of EU policies, even in areas where there is an EU competence, often exhibits features of the OMC. Surprisingly effective innovations hold the promise of rendering institutions of decision making comprehensible and democratically accountable. In the EU as a functioning polity decision making is thus at least part deliberative so that actors’ preferences are transformed by the force of the better argument. This brings into focus the socialisation of the deliberators into epistemic communities. Largely an informal process, this is reminiscent of European spatial planning having been characterised as a learning process.
format	article
author	Andreas Faludi
author_facet	Andreas Faludi
author_sort	Andreas Faludi
title	The Process Architecture of EU Territorial Cohesion Policy
title_short	The Process Architecture of EU Territorial Cohesion Policy
title_full	The Process Architecture of EU Territorial Cohesion Policy
title_fullStr	The Process Architecture of EU Territorial Cohesion Policy
title_full_unstemmed	The Process Architecture of EU Territorial Cohesion Policy
title_sort	process architecture of eu territorial cohesion policy
publisher	Politecnico di Torino
publishDate	2010
url	https://doaj.org/article/242149fd0a584ec8aa1893f10412bf66
work_keys_str_mv	AT andreasfaludi theprocessarchitectureofeuterritorialcohesionpolicy AT andreasfaludi processarchitectureofeuterritorialcohesionpolicy
_version_	1718402274982625280

The Process Architecture of EU Territorial Cohesion Policy

Ejemplares similares