ESPON SeminarKrakow, Poland

29-30/11/2011

METROBORDER Cross-border polycentric metropolitan regions

Tobias Chilla, University of Luxembourg

CU Coordination Unit

MC Monitoring Committee

ARE Bundesamt für Raumentwicklung (Leadpartner)

MAT Ministère de l’Intérieur et de l’Aménagement du territoire du Grand Duché du Luxembourg

DIACTDélégation interministérielle à l'aménagement et à la compétitivité des territoires

BMVBS Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung der Bundesrepublik Deutschland

DGATLPMinistère der Région Wallone, Direction générale de l'Aménagement du territoire, du Logement et du Patrimoine

UL Université du Luxembourg (Leadpartner)

CEGUM Centre de Recherches en Géographie - Université de Metz

CEPS Centre d'Etudes de Populations, Pauvreté et Politiques Socio-Ec.

ETHZ Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich

IGEAT Université Libre de Bruxelles

RegBas Regio Basiliensis

UHA Université de Haute Alsace

USB Universität des Saarlandes

Researcher Stakeholder

ESPON programme

1. Metroborder – the project background

Cities / city networks, regions, ….

‘unofficial stakeholder’

2. The spatial setting

Cross-Border Polycentric Metropolitan Regions‘ (CBPMR) • Where are they? • What is their position? • How can their governance be

improved? • ...

(Project lifetime: 2009-2010)

2. The spatial setting

2. The spatial setting

Metropolitan quality: • Cross-border location does

not hinder metropolitan quality • Some cross-border

metropolitan regions are comparable to domestic metropolises

3. Cross-border governance

3. Cross-border governance

Multi-level challenges: - Whom to involve

and how - If and how to

delegate competences to cross-border institutions (e.g. EGTC)

- Multi-level mismatch

- Perimeter

right: core spaces for increased cross-border cooperation (Delphi study, differentiated for the national backgrounds of the responding experts)

left: cross-border institutions and their perimeter within the Greater Region

D

F

BB

L

F

3. Cross-border governance

The five most important barriers for an enhanced cross-border cooperation in both case study regions (Delphi study)

3. Cross-border governance

The most relevant policies for increased cross-border cooperation (Delphi Study)

3. Cross-border governance

4. Political conclusions? Bruxelles

Lille Aachen-Liège-

Maastricht

Rhein/Main

Lux.

Strasbourg

Nancy

Kaiserslautern

Arlon

Lux.Core FUA

Neighbouring domestic metropolises

Main Institutional focus CBPMR

Neighbouring CBPMRs

Central CBPMR Cities

Metropolitan Corridors

Neighbouring FUA

Surrounding FUA

Functional Urban Areas

Saarbrücken

Thionville

Metz

Trier

© University of Luxembourg, Project Metroborder, 2010Level: FUA

Source: ESPON Data Base, IGEAT, FOCI, 2010Origin of Data: ESPON Data Base, IGEAT, FOCI, 2010

© EuroGeographics Association for administrative boundaries

B

F

D

L

4. Political follow-up

Developing an EGTC within the Greater Region – development options

- “Economic metropolis”

- “Laboratory of Europe”

- “Mobile and accessible region”

e.g. Joint presentation of Upper Rhine and Greater Region on the Open Days (BXL, October 2010)

Source: http://www.oberrheinkonferenz.org/fr/actualites/2010/, modified

4. Political activity and follow-up

e.g. Joint Declaration of the Summit of the Greater Region July 2011

4. Political activity and follow-up

ESPON SeminarKrakow, Poland

29-30/11/2011

METROBORDER Cross-border polycentric metropolitan regions

Tobias Chilla, University of Luxembourg