the regionalisation of albania

2

The Regionalisation of Albania – The Governance, Administrative and Territorial Reform that Albania needs on a Regional Level

Authors of the Proposal: Rudina Toto, Anila Gjika, Dritan Shutina, Besnik AliajAdvisors: Sotir Dhamo, Olaf Haub, Sherif LushajCartographic Design (GIS): Besmira Dyca, Zenel Bajrami, Gerti Delli, Fiona Imami

This publication, including images and text, cannot be reproduced in part or in full without the prior consent of the authors. All rights reserved to:Co-PLAN, Institute for Habitat Development, www.co-plan.orgPOLIS University, www.universitetipolis.edu.al.Swiss Agency for Development and CooperationAustrian Development Agency

Address:Co-PLAN/POLIS University, Rruga Bylis, no. 12, Kashar, Tirana, Albania.Proofreading: Zamira DevoleGraphic Design: Aida Ciro, Kejt Dhrami, Sonia JojicPublished by: Publishing House “Pegi”Publication Year: 2014

Supported by the “Regional Development Program in Northern Albania”, financed by the Aus-trian Development Agency (ADA) and the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC).

Embassy of Switzerland in Albania

3

“The Regionalisation of Albania – The Governance, Administrative and Territorial Re-form that Albania needs on a Regional Level” was prepared by Co-PLAN, Institute for Habitat Development, based on the analytical work conducted in years - at least since 2005. This proposal builds up considerably on the role of Co-PLAN in the frame of the “Regional Development Pro-gram in Northern Albania” project, financed by the Donor Agencies of Austria and Switzerland.

This publication reflects the proposal as presented by Co-PLAN in the national table on March 11, 2014, and has been processed so to be complemented with all the analytical ele-ments and necessary arguments of the proposal. In the reviewed proposal we tried to reflect the comments addressed by local and foreign experts, during the various discussions conducted in the frame of the Administrative and Territorial Reform, with the purpose to improve and further contribute to our proposal. Thus, we think that this document, if taken in consideration for imple-mentation, will strongly contribute in the modernization and democratization of governance in Albania.

Preface. .

Tirana, December 10th, 2014

4

Table of Contents

TablesTable 1: The work progress on the Qark and Regional Development expressed chronologically Table 2: Local and intermediate governance in EuropeTable 3: Functions, fields and modes of financing

1. Initiatives for the Regional Decentralization and Regional Development 1998-2014 2. The concept of the ‘region’ as an intermediate governance tier and the need for it 3. The proposed model for the region 4. Implications for the continuity of the regionalization process 5. References

. .

Tables and Figures. .

Figures Figure 1: Social and cultural contrastsFigure 2: Concept of decentralisation and deconcentrationFigure 3: NUTS Regions in EU-countriesFigure 4: Distribution of IPA funding in the territory (2007-2014)Figure 5: Distribution of funds of foreign help in the territory (1999 - onwards)Figure 6: Distribution of IPA funding in the territory, by sectorFigure 7: Distribution and organization of deconcentrated agencies and central institutions in regional levelFigure 8: Valbona, 2012Figure 9: Trip across Albania, 2012Figure 10: Former proposals on the regionalisation processFigure 11: Economy of scale for the solid waste treatment in landfills, district levelFigure 12: Economy of scale for the solid waste treatment in landfills, qark levelFigure 13: Number of businesses / 1000 inhabitants Figure 14: Economic Potentials - Industrial InfrastructureFigure 15: Tirana, orthophoto 2007Figure 16: The environmental impact on the territory: Agricultural land, ecosystems and protected areasFigure 17: The Environment and its inter-relation with the territory: Ecosystems, agriculture and protected areasFigure 18: Tourism and its inter-relation with the territory: The Government’s programs for tourism (coastal, alpine, cultural, and eco)

5

Figure 19: The distribution of agricultural and pastoral activity by QarksFigure 20: Razëm, 2014Figure 21: Razëm, 2014Figure 22: Historical divisions. Provinces in antiquity, c. VII-II BCFigure 23: Principates c. XIV-XV AC Figure 24: Administrative division, year 1927Figure 25: Prefectures 1927 and Qarks 2014 Figure 26: Access. Time distance from the center of the QarkFigure 27: Access. Time distance from the center of the districtFigure 28: AccessibilityFigure 29: Polycentrism. The demographic movement during the last 10 yearsFigure 30: Polycentrism. Travelling time from the airportFigure 31: Hubs and NetworksFigure 32: Models and regional tendencies based on polycentrismFigure 33: Durrësi Harbor, 2015- HUBFigure 34: Distribution of LGUs population per Qark, as a percentage to Albania, by altitudeFigure 35: Gross Domestic Product (INSTAT) in nominal terms, year 2012Figure 36: Gross Domestic Product (INSTAT) per capita, year 2012Figure 37: Spatial Typologies - QarksFigure 38: Development Typologies - QarksFigure 39: Tirana River, Laknas, 2012Figure 40: Tirana, 2009Figure 41: Durrës, 2011Figure 42: The local election results of 2007, Local Councils Figure 43: The local election results of 2007, MayorsFigure 44: The local election results of 2011, Local Councils Figure 45: The local election results of 2011, MayorsFigure 46: Parliamentary elections results, 2009Figure 47: Parliamentary elections results, 2013Figure 48: Summary of the three main conceptsFigure 49: Agriculture land, CORINE land coverFigure 50: Version 1. Territorial division in 4 regions Figure 51: Version 2. Territorial division in 6 regions Figure 52: Strategic European CorridorsFigure 53: IPA Crossborder, Protected areas and BasinsFigure 54: IPA Crossborder, 4 RegionsFigure 55: Vlora BayFigure 56: Balkans without borders

7Figure 1: Social and cultural contrasts

8

Presently, the Government of Albania is committed to the accomplishment of two im-portant governance related reforms also closely related to one-another, namely: the governance decentralization reform and the territorial - administrative reform. The second reform, namely that of the administrative division, has captured public interest and lies at the heart of the po-litical debate. Yet, the public debate on this particular reform refers mainly to the first tier of governance, although the second tier of governance is also a constituent part of this reform. Little has been said concerning the second tier, and the government is currently working on pre-senting the form/shape the reform will on this level. That said, the reform of the decentralization of governance, although finally accepted as the preceding reform to any administrative division, stands at technical levels, yet to be confronted with the heated political debate.

Co-PLAN offers an analysis and proposal precisely for the administrative reform of the second tier of governance, or as it will be later referred to, the reform of the intermediate tier of governance. There is a very important reason why this will be referred to as the intermediate tier of governance. For a better understanding and elaboration of this reason however, it is cru-cial that we understand what has happened in Albania as far as the second/intermediate tier of governance is concerned, from both a realistic and historical perspective, and before the present government undertook a concrete reforming commitment.

In 1998 Albania signed, and further ratified (2000) the European Council Charter for Local Autonomy – namely for local self-governance. This historical fact marked the beginning of a multi-actor, institutional and political process on governance decentralization, leading to the drafting of the Decentralization Strategy in 1999 as a result. Based on the Decentralization Strategy, the Law for the Functioning and Organization of Local Governments was then approved (8652/2000), which in compliance with the Constitution, defines the role and functions (the Council) of the Qark, as a unit of second tier of local governance. Along with the decentralisation process, governance in Albania was also characterised by deconcentration, through the institu-tion of the prefect and the regional directories (Figure 2). At this historical moment, the approach of the interested parties was that the role and functions of the Qark were to happen at a later point in time, building on the success and the necessary experience with the decentralization processes of the first tier of governance. The lack of resources and capacities back at the time, were seen as one of the main arguments not in favor of the process of decentralization on a Qark level being furthered, calling it premature. As a result, since 2000, the role of the Qark, in addi-

1. Initiatives for the regional decentralization and regional development 1998-2014

9

Table 1: The work progress on the Qark and Regional Development expressed chronologically

Over the past 14 years, there have been numerous developments concerning what could happen on a second tier, the nature of which could be described as follows:

•In year 2000, the focus is placed on governance, decentralization of the first tier of governance and territorial reform, without completely explaining the role of the Qark;

•For nearly 12 years the focus is mainly on regional development, but these initiatives never man-aged to successfully materialize, or accomplish the final result. Two key moments of this period are: (i) the drafting of the ISRD (Inter-sectoral Strategy for Regional Development), which fol-lowed mainly on the Croatian experience (as a result of the experts involved), although the Croats themselves quickly changed their approach to RD; (ii) the efforts of the ISD program (financed by EU and UNDP, and implemented by UNDP) to connect the domestic regional development with the EU Directive for this purpose. The Government of Albania seriously took such efforts into account, because they constituted a concrete step towards the process of obtaining the candidate status. Because Albania was not granted the candidate country status, in 2010 and later in 2011, the work of ISD in this regard was not properly finalized;

• In year 2012 there are notable efforts (of the government, donor driven through the RDP proj-ect) to connect regional development with the governing institutions (the Qark) and other insti-tutional actors. Such efforts continue to this day, as the RDP project is still under the process of implementation. Through a mindful analysis of the RDP work, one can understand the weak and

tion to the delegated functions, has legally been to ensure the coordination of the development strategies on a regional level.

The discussion on the second tier of governance reached its peak in 2000, after which point, any work conducted vis-à-vis the intermediate territorial level (the Qark) was focused on matters of regional development. Such work has been conducted by the governments in close cooperation with (and often with the incentive of) the donors.

10

strong points of the Qark as an institution, and of the opportunities that exist in Albania when it comes to partnerships for regional development. A first important conclusion clearly shows a reality of lacking institutional capacities on a Qark and central government level for the imple-mentation of projects of such nature;

• In year 2013 the government presented the ‘Regionalisation and the Qarks reform’, as a dedicat-ed chapter in its governing program. Following is a brief reference to the program:

o The creation of regions and the reconfiguration of the qarks as per the models of European self-governing regions. o A new approach for the national and regional development policies; o The expansion of functions and competences of the government agencies on a regional level o An increase of financial resources and assets for the regions o A new, more efficient model of central and local authorities on a regional level; o A necessary reform for the inclusion of Albania as a candidate country in EU o The possibility for the regions to benefit technical assistance and funding from the EU instruments

Clearly, the government program implies the possibility for the creation of regions with a certain autonomy as per the European Charter principles; it allows for, and even orients the re-gions to focus on matters of regional development, for which they could benefit financially not only from domestic resources, but also from EU funds directly; it also leaves open the possibility for the reviewing to an certain extent of the deconcentrated institutions on a regional level, and of their respective competences. This particular part of the government program, dedicated to the “Regionalisation and the Qarks Reform”, can be interpreted accurately only if it is read in an integral manner together with the sectoral programs. The latter would help to understand the government intentions and the extent and type of the decentralization or deconcentration of functions of the lower tiers of governance. It is based on this integral reading that the following chapters propose the functions that could be vested in the regions or regional governance.

11

Figure 2: The concepts of decentralisation and deconcentration

Source: B.Aliaj, Misteri i Gjashtë

DECENTRALISATION DECONCENTRATION

12

Figure 3: NUTS Regions in EU-countriesSource: EC, EurostatPrepared by: Co-PLAN

NUTS 0 NUTS 1

2. The concept of the ‘region’ as an intermediate governance tier and the need for it

Prior to proceeding with the proposal for a reform on the intermediate tier of gover-nance, namely that of a regional level, it is important to establish a common understanding of this level when it comes to the: its form, aim and role. In fact, it should be noted from the start that, it is not a proposal for the second tier of governance, but for the interme-diate level/regional governance. These two levels have substantial conceptual differences. The second tier of local governance, that “should/could have been” the Qark as we know it, aims to offer those particular public services which impact directly the quality of life of its citizens, and which do not manage to create economy of scale on the first tier. These are basic services such as urban transport, potable water supply, solid waste management, etc.

In principle, the intermediate governance, or the region, does not focus (directly) on such basic services. The region offers functions, which in essence accomplish a management of the territory and the resources aiming for growth of economic development in a sustainable manner, that is to say protecting the natural resources. Surely, the region can offer some delegat-

13NUTS 2 NUTS 3

ed service, or one that would require the territorial scale for it to be more efficient. A point in case would be the final treatment of waste (e.g. landfills), and regional/inter-urban transport.

Based on the picture presented thus far, the starting point for the regional governance form, would be the Helsinki principles, which were accepted by Albania since 1998, as the Euro-pean Charter of Local Autonomy was adopted. Based on these principles, the Regional Authori-ties are those territorial authorities between the central and the local government. “[…] Region-al self-governance shows the legal competences and the capacities of the regional authorities, within the constitutional and legislative frame, to regulate and administer public matters that fall under its own responsibility, and that are in the interest of the people in full compliance with the subsidiary principle (MCL-13, 2002)”. This paragraph is sourced from the European Council Charter of regionial self-governance, which although has not been legally adopted by the mem-ber countries, serves as a guideline document, followed by all member countries.

Further, studies conducted by EU institutions and notable authors on matters of the region and regionalization, show that as far as the aim and role is concerned, the region as a concept does not seem to have a unique definition. Different countries use the concept in dif-ferent ways, applying to territories of varying scales, and materialize it in different institutions or institutional and governing relations, depending on the needs, and the institutional, terri-torial and development context. Thus, the regions can be administrative, governing, planning, statistical (Figure 3), sectorial, etc. Generally, all seem to accept the region as an intermediate territorial and governing level, where despite the naming, the following aspects are included: geography, economic cohesion, cultural and historical identity, administra-tive structures, people’s identity, political and territorial mobilization, etc. (Keating 1998). Based on this, we in Albania also have to find our form of the Region and Regionalisation, which in compliance with our context, will/can be different to the regions of the other countries with regards to: (i) scale; (ii) population number; (iii) aim, and; (iv) responsibilities.

14

In order to strengthen the argument of the region as an entity and dynamic, changing concept, we have presented in the following table very succinctly, what the intermediate level is in each of the EU member countries, and pre-accession countries. Similarly to the source , the member countries are presented in two groups – those where the intermediate level (region) has legislative power, and those where this level has no such power. The main conclusions to be drawn from this table are:

1. All countries in Europe have some institutional or governing form or other, which address-es matters of the region, regional development or the intermediate level. , In fact, even those 5 coun-tries, which do not report any intermediate governing form (Kosovo, Macedonia, Island, Lithuania, and Montenegro), do in fact have an institution (development agency, planning or statistical region, or metropolitan municipality) which covers matters of planning or regional development on a re-gional level. Such a situation could in fact be explained by the very nature of certain functions, which in any case would have to be addressed on an intermediate territorial level.

2. All European models are different, because they have been determined/conditioned by unique situations and contexts. In fact, any analysis we could conduct on the European models, would lead to simply orienting results. That is to say that, if something has not worked in Europe, it does not necessarily mean that it will not work in Albania. This means that Albania cannot and should not copy a model (which could even be the most successful one of all) even if this model has been developed in a similar, neighbouring, or former communist country. Albania needs to develop its own model.

Table 2: Local and Intermediate Governance in Europe (Source: Division of Powers Official Website)

16

For the regions of Albania to be established, we will have to go through a process of regionalization, through which REGIONS are granted certain levels of autonomy, and politi-cal authority, both governing and economic (Plurel, 2010; FP6). So, if by Region we mean the level of governance and the territory where this is taking place, through Regionalisation we mean the process of establishing the Region. Yet, it is important to note that, the Regionalisation is not merely a matter of setting up new institutions. The Regionalisation is part of the reformat-ting of governance in Albania. This can be understood as follows:

First, since during the regionalisation process responsibilities are delegated from the higher level of governance to the intermediate one, we are dealing with decentralization on a regional level. That is to say that Regionlisation is closely and interchangeably related to decen-tralization. As a result, regionalisation cannot happen separately form the decentralization of government, and without being affected by the delegation of the competences from the central government to the first tier of local governance. This serves to highlight even further the fact that the current reforms concerning the territory and the decentralization, including regionalisation, are part of a bigger whole.

Second, the establishment of the regions is only by the start of the regionalisation process. Further, the Regions would have to function, offer functions and provide revenue for these func-tions. It is precisely the functioning process of the region that is closely related to the challenge of the government and the political forces to accept that more responsibilities will be grouped/shared from some deconcentrated institutions to a regional government, and more power will be shared among the central level and the other levels (local, intermediate, etc.).

And lastly, before we move on to the proposed model of the Regions in Albania, we need to address one very important question: Why have the Region as the intermediate level/tier of governance? Are the respective reasons valid even for the case of Albania? We have identified 6 such reasons, explained as follows:

The First Reason: European Integration The European Union does not force us to establish regional authorities or governance, same as it does not oblige/condition us in the way we govern, for as long as Albania follows the principles of democracy and the rule of law. Yet, the trajectory and the European Integration moment do entail a number of obligations, in addition to the benefits. The experience of the former communist countries has shown that if the government and the institutions are not pre-pared well ahead of time, “the integration costs” are well higher than the “integration benefits”. For some of the countries, it has been admitted that the EU membership was allowed despite insufficient preparedness, well below the necessary standard, and combined with a rather weak performance in terms of “good governance”. Such experience has raised the bar for the member-ships to come, serving as an alarm bell for Albania.

.

3. On the other side, the fact that there are many different models, is a positive thing as it creates an archive rich in cases that can be thoroughly studied, in order to better understand and learn from them, even though at a theoretical level.

17

One of the expected benefits of the integration will be the impact of the implementa-tion of the cohesion policy and that of the Directive for Regional Development, preceded by the implementation of the pre-accession instruments (IPA). In fact, many of the terms under the co-hesion policy (economic, environment, transport, water, employment, etc.) feature the regional dimension as an innate trait, which ought to be taken into account in implementation, and that requires structural regional (responsible) institutions.

At present, the Cohesion Policy 2014-2020, is based on the priorities of the Strategy “Europe 2020” for smart, sustainable, inclusive (economic) growth (where cohesion is one of the objectives), and it is an investment policy consisting of 5 funds (among which is regional devel-opment, which the European Commission has singled out as a crucial element of the financial package for the implementation of the strategy “Europe 2020”). In the candidate or pre-can-didate countries (potential candidates), the pre-accession funds are an important investment which helps the beneficiary (including Albania) to accomplish economic and political reforms necessary for the preparation of the obligations and rights that come with the membership1. Yet, the implementation of these policies and instruments requires for capable governmental structures (responsible for the sectors which cover the aforementioned policies) in all levels, and above all, it requires implementing capacities on the regional level (unconditional of the gov-erning form). The existence of such capacities together with their quality defines the ability of the country to employ the EU funds in most efficient and effective manner, thus defining the absorbing capacity of Albania.

The experiences of the other countries (particularly those of the eastern block) regarding the absorbing capacity of the EU funds, are different and bear no direct connections with the form and level of decentralization and of the governance regionalisation. For instance, Poland, Lithuania and Estonia can be referred to as successful cases (with an absorbing capacity of over 60%), whilst Bulgaria and Rumania, two of the recent additions, can be mentioned as the non successful cases (with a capacity less 40%). If we were to study the five cases, we note that: Estonia does not have regional self-governance, but it does have regional, deconcentrated agencies; in Lithuania the regions are statistical territorial units; in Poland, decentralization has been accomplished significantly not only on the first tier (munic-ipalities), but also on a regional level. The region has competences and executive power with a significant scope, where among other things, it manages directly a part of the funds provided by EU. In Bulgaria, the regions have administrative functions and are deconcentrated; whilst in Rumania, the functions of the intermediate tier/level are limited, the respective institution is deconcentrated, and the development regions are not regional governing authorities2.

Meanwhile, again through the study of similar cases, it has been reached to the conclusion that the effectivity in the absorbing capacity of the EU funds is a direct attribute of the institutional capacity of the administration of a country. The high ef-ficiency in the absorbing of the structural funds is conditioned by the quality of governance in general, and the public administration institutions in particular3 . Effectiveness (the absorbing

1 http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/instruments/overview/index_en.htm#ipa2, accessed on 5.05.2014.2 http://extranet.cor.europa.eu/divisionpowers/countries/Pages/default.aspx, accessed on 1.05.2014. 3 http://www.ipe.ro/rjef/rjef2_11/rjef2_2011p84-105.pdf

18

Legend (million)

National level

1-10

10-20

20-40

40-60more than 60

Legend (million)

National level

1-50

50-100

100-150

150-200more than 200

Figure 4: Distribution of IPA funding in the territory (2007-2014)

Prepared by: Co-PLANSource: Ministry of Finance

Figure 5: Distribution of external aid funds in the territory (1999 - onwards)


19

of funds) and the efficiency (their appropriate use) are conditioned simultaneously by the in-stitutions that administer the funds and the institutions that receive them through projects of implementation (in the case of Albania – the central administration institutions) and from the institutions that will be using them through projects (in the case of Albania – local authorities which will work in partnership for projects of a small scale, and any authority on a regional level which is naturally in a better position for projects of regional scale and impact).

On a last note, as a member country of the Council of Europe, our obligation to abide by the shared European principles for local and regional governance, still holds true.

The Second Reason: Efficiency of functions, economy of scale and multi-tier governance

Based on the studies of the countries, some of the main functions that require economy of scale and that manage to achieve this only on a bigger scale – the region, than that of the first tier, are presented featuring a strong territorial dimension, and they are: • Territorial Planning and Tourism• Environmental Protection• Economic Development• Protection of arable land • Regional transport and roads• Final treatment of solid, liquid and dangerous waste • Education and Healthcare• Social welfare

IPA Funds distribution according to budget/sector

Agricultural and Rural Devel.38,4 M Euro (8)

Consumer Protection10,5 M Euro (3)

Environment12 M Euro (4)

Justice69,7 M Euro (9)

PAR18,4 M Euro (10)

Public Finance16,2 M Euro (7)

Statistics9,6 M Euro (2)

Transport100,8 M Euro (12)

Water & Sew.112,1 M Euro (6)

23sectors

Figure 6: Distribution of IPA funding in the territory by sector

.


20

Some good examples regarding efficiency are such as: regional transport and treat-ment of waste through landfills or incinerators. Please note that the case of landfills will be pre-sented in a quantifiable manner in chapter 3 of this document.

For now, we will focus on two other fields/realms, to which efficiency and the terri-torial scale is very important. The EU does not have a specific directive for spatial planning (of the territory). Yet, although it does not regulate planning through some legislative framework, it is only fair note that planning is indeed the inter-disciplinary field which impacts all sectors, and that lies at the very base of the EU approach when it comes to development sector policies. Until 1999, time when the European Ministers of Planning approved the European Perspective on Spatial Planning (a guiding document – ESDP), the approach of the EU development policies was vertical/sectoral. That said, the implementation of such sector policies happens on the same territory, leading to parallel sectoral works, with poorly coordinated effects. Taking into account that the EU territories are characterized by a great cultural and social diversity (Albania making no exception to this), the impact of a vertical implementation was not positive and did not help in the lowering of inequalities or the strengthening of the socio-economic cohesion.

Although a guiding document, the ESDP, sets the foundation for a horizontal territorial approach of the EU, in connection to the sectoral/vertical development policies, and makes for an important first step towards the multi-tier governance. The generation of statistics on a region level has been structured based on this approach (NUTS – Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics), the investment policies were reevaluated and are being implemented (including the funds for regional development), and the European Spatial Planning Observation Network (ES-PON) was set up, which is reviewed in various periods (2006, 2013, 2020), and aims at feeding the sectoral policies with comparative, scientific (concerning the territory) facts. To conclude, whilst the territory (in our case the region) is not an aim in itself for sustainable development in the EU, it is a strong conditioning element upon which investment policies are model ed. The same is valid also for the pre-accession policies and instru-ments.

Based on the OECD studies (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) successful regional development calls for multi-tier governance, since the main driving principle of regional development is networking and partnership. Multi-tier governance aims disrupting from vertical governance, strengthening horizontal cooperation, based on the respective terri-tory. In practice, this makes governance very complex as it gives it the shape of a network of relations which should overcome 5 barriers, two of which are the administrative and political barriers. The administrative barrier/obstacle happens when the administrative boundary does not converge with that of the functional urban economic area. As a result of this lack of conver-gence, it is not possible to achieve efficiency in service delivery, or address the negative impact on the environment. The latter, have a very wide scope and tend to get worse if managed on a fragmented territorial scape, and not on a regional level. Whilst the political barrier, relates to the fact that the policies of different sectors are implemented vertically and are not coordinated on a territorial basis. For instance, if in a water basin the main aim is the quality of water, and the water management policy prevents the flow of the arable land nutrients into the water basin,

21

clearly we are dealing with a contradiction with the agricultural policy which may be aiming more intensive agriculture.

The Third Reason: Protection of natural resources and limate change

This is one of the core, fundamental reasons for regionalisation. In fact, in some coun-tries it is the only starting point or reason and is based on the fact that economic development ought to be sustainable. Also, it is based on the fact that sources are interconnected to one-an-other, on a bigger scale, and are not easily ‘readable’ within a local governance tier – that is to say it cannot work in such a fragmented manner as per the administrative boundaries (as explained also in the second reason). What happens at the source (water, infrastructure, ducting-watering) is reflected at the discharge. The damage caused to a particular species as a result of a decision for economic development, is reflected in the quality and even existence of a whole ecosystem, which not only has no connection to the administrative boundaries, but it becomes a boomerang in other decisions for economic development. In practical terms, the protection of environmental sources includes at least: forests and pastures, water resources, the ducting and watering infra-structure, and renewable sources.

With regards to the protection of the environmental resources, the most suitable re-gion is the natural one, and in particular the watershed basin. The watershed basin is the area, which is defined by a main flowing water body and all the supplying branches, unconditional of their level. Yet, the area is not only the water body (the river and streams), but also all the land, space and functions (natural, urban and agricultural) found along and around these water bodies, including the coastline that is affected directly by this watershed basin (water basin). All these parts are interconnected like chain links and impact the quality of one-another. Because the watershed basin is so sizeable and includes a number of functions, the interested actors are numerous and belong to various sectors. As a result, the interest in a watershed basin may vary, and often contradict. The boundaries of a watershed system are not determined by the adminis-trative boundaries but by the boundaries of comprising, or interconnected ecosystems.

The Fourth Reason: The fragmented sectoral institutional approach Nearly all Ministries have agencies, boards or regional directories. Worth noting here are the education directorates, ducting boards, regional directorates of roads, regional agencies of the water basins, the regional directorates of agriculture, regional directorates of culture, regional agencies of environment, etc. At present, there are nearly 500 offices, directorates or deconcentrated regional agencies. The number of employees in these agencies, without taking into account the teaching staff at all levels, is almost double the number of the people that work for the local government, including the structures dependent on the local authorities. So the existence of so many deconcentrated regional institutions shows three important facts:

- First, in Albania we have a “de facto” intermediate tier of governance, for as long as there are so many institutions depending from the central government, which work to address the government functions on the most suitable territory for the realization of each function;

.

.

22

- Second, we seem to have a significant number of people employed for the realization of central government functions on a regional level, which exceeds the local government togeth-er with the staff and structures of the national/central institutions. The aforementioned figures could be interpreted as a high level of inefficiency in the way human resources are used on the central government level. Nevertheless, to better quantify the lack of efficiency in this case, more elaborated studies are required. Yet, if we want local administration efficiency, we also have to look into the matter of efficiency of the central administration. - Third, the existence of so many offices and directorates is related to the need that dif-ferent Ministries have in accomplishing their functions in connection with the respective sectors on a more suitable territorial level. So the need for a regional approach from the ministries comes rather naturally, yet, the institutional approach of the ministries remains highly debatable. The lack of efficiency should not be interpreted only based on the figures (as presented above), but first and foremost in relation to the result of the current institutional and organization approach. So, having so many regional offices, could prove beneficial as the work result is satisfactory and not costly. Or, maybe this is not the case? We will not be addressing the financial costs that such a regional apparatus could imply for the state budget, considering this a second aspect; rather we will analyse the fragmentation in decision-making, and the results of this approach. For instance, protecting the environment (based on the ecosystem conservation and its services) and developing the economy, make for two contradicting directions, if not addressed under the same integrated framework. Each Min-istry, in an effort to accomplish its mission in relation to the sector, yet in no circumstance to inte-grate with the other sectors since even on a regional level it operates independently, can achieve its results sufficiently well, but not outstandingly well. The lack of sector visions on the territorial level of the region, leads to lack of efficiency, and even further, lack of qualitative results.

KORÇË

VLORË

MAT

PUKË

FIER

TIRANË

DIBËR

SHKODËR

BERAT

KUKËS

ELBASAN LIBRAZHD

TROPOJË

PËRMET

MIRDITË

HAS

KOLONJË

SKRAPAR

GRAMSH

GJIROKASTËR

BULQIZË

TEPELENË

SARANDË

LEZHË

LUSHNJE

KAVAJË

DEVOLL

POGRADEC

DURRËS

KRUJË

DELVINË

KURBIN

PEQIN

MALËSI E MADHE

MALLAKASTËR

KUÇOVË

Legend

Government, Ministries, Central Agencies

TIRANA- Qark Center

District Center 1

District Center 2

Inhabitants/km2

Qark Center

DRBUMKDrainage BoardRegional Directory. National Food Authority

Regional Directory. National Food Authority

Regional Health Directory



SHISHEmployment O�ce

Employment O�ce

Employment O�ce

Regional O�ce of Social Care State Inspectorate for Regional A�airsDirectory of Forrestry ServiceDistrict ProsecutionDistrict CourtTreasuryRegional Tax Directory

Regional O�ce of Social Care State Inspectorate for Regional A�airsDirectory of Forrestry Service

Directory of Forrestry Service

District Prosecution


District CourtTreasuryRegional Tax Directory

District Branches of Taxing

Education Directory

Education O�ce

Regional Health DirectoryEmployment O�ce

Directory of Forrestry ServiceDistrict Branches of Taxing

Education O�ce

SHISH

Directory of Management of Basins

Home of the Elderly

Professional Education Centers

Orphanage

Development Center

Apeal Prosecution

Apeal Court

0 - 25

25,1 - 50

50,1 - 100,0

100,1 - 200

200,1 - 400

400,1 - 853

mbi 853

HARTA E INSTITUCIONEVE

KORÇË

VLORË

MAT

PUKË

FIER

TIRANË

DIBËR

SHKODËR

BERAT

KUKËS

ELBASAN LIBRAZHD

TROPOJË

PËRMET

MIRDITË

HAS

KOLONJË

SKRAPAR

GRAMSH

GJIROKASTËR

BULQIZË

TEPELENË

SARANDË

LEZHË

LUSHNJE

KAVAJË

DEVOLL

POGRADEC

DURRËS

KRUJË

DELVINË

KURBIN

PEQIN

MALËSI E MADHE

MALLAKASTËR

KUÇOVË

Legend


TIRANA- Qark Center

District Center 1

District Center 2

Inhabitants/km2

Qark Center







Employment O�ce

Employment O�ce








Education Directory

Education O�ce



Education O�ce

SHISH


Home of the Elderly


Orphanage

Development Center

Apeal Prosecution

Apeal Court

0 - 25

25,1 - 50

50,1 - 100,0

100,1 - 200

200,1 - 400

400,1 - 853

mbi 853


KORÇË

VLORË

MAT

PUKË

FIER

TIRANË

DIBËR

SHKODËR

BERAT

KUKËS

ELBASAN LIBRAZHD

TROPOJË

PËRMET

MIRDITË

HAS

KOLONJË

SKRAPAR

GRAMSH

GJIROKASTËR

BULQIZË

TEPELENË

SARANDË

LEZHË

LUSHNJE

KAVAJË

DEVOLL

POGRADEC

DURRËS

KRUJË

DELVINË

KURBIN

PEQIN

MALËSI E MADHE

MALLAKASTËR

KUÇOVË

Legend


TIRANA- Qark Center

District Center 1

District Center 2

Inhabitants/km2

Qark Center







Employment O�ce

Employment O�ce








Education Directory

Education O�ce



Education O�ce

SHISH


Home of the Elderly


Orphanage

Development Center

Apeal Prosecution

Apeal Court

0 - 25

25,1 - 50

50,1 - 100,0

100,1 - 200

200,1 - 400

400,1 - 853

mbi 853


Legend

23

Figure 7: Distribution and organization of deconcentrated agencies and central institutions in regional level

KORÇË

VLORË

MAT

PUKË

FIER

TIRANË

DIBËR

SHKODËR

BERAT

KUKËS

ELBASAN LIBRAZHD

TROPOJË

PËRMET

MIRDITË

HAS

KOLONJË

SKRAPAR

GRAMSH

GJIROKASTËR

BULQIZË

TEPELENË

SARANDË

LEZHË

LUSHNJE

KAVAJË

DEVOLL

POGRADEC

DURRËS

KRUJË

DELVINË

KURBIN

PEQIN

MALËSI E MADHE

MALLAKASTËR

KUÇOVË

L e g j e n d a

Qeveria,Ministritë dhe Agjensitë Qëndrore

TIRANA- Qendër Qarku

Qendër Rrethi 1

Qendër Rrethi 2

Qendër Qarku

DRBUMKBordi i KullimitDrejt. Rajon. Autori. Komb. UshqimitDrejtori Shëndetsore Rajonale

Drejtori Shëndetsore Rajonale

Drejtori Shëndetsore Rajonale

SHISHZyra e punësimit

Zyra e punësimit

Zyra e punësimit

Zyra Rajonale e Kujdesit SocialInspektoriati i Shtetit te Punes RajonaleDrejtoria e Shërbimit Pyjor

Drejtoria e Shërbimit Pyjor

Drejtoria e Shërbimit Pyjor

Prokuroria e RrethitGjykata e Rrethit GjyqësorDega e ThesaritDrejtoria e Tatimeve Rajonale

Degët e Tatimeve ne rrethe

Degët e Tatimeve ne rrethe

Drejt. Rajon. Autori. Komb. UshqimitDrejtori Shëndetsore RajonaleDrejtoria Arsimore

Zyrë Arsimore

Zyrë Arsimore

SHISHZyra e punësimitZyra Rajonale e Kujdesit SocialInspektoriati i Shtetit te Punes RajonaleDrejtoria e Shërbimit PyjorProkuroria e Rrethit

Prokuroria e Rrethit

Gjukata e Rrethit GjyqësorDega e ThesaritDrejtoria e Tatimeve Rajonale

Drejtoritë për Manaxhimin e Baseneve Shtëpitë e të moshuarve

Qëndra e Formimit Profesional

Shtëpia e Foshnjes

Qëndra e zhvillimit

Prokuroria e Apelit Gjykata e Apelit

©C

o-P

lan

, 201

4

Banorë për km2

0 - 2525,1 - 5050,1 - 100,0100,1 - 200200,1 - 400400,1 - 853mbi 853


KORÇË

VLORË

MAT

PUKË

FIER

TIRANË

DIBËR

SHKODËR

BERAT

KUKËS

ELBASAN LIBRAZHD

TROPOJË

PËRMET

MIRDITË

HAS

KOLONJË

SKRAPAR

GRAMSH

GJIROKASTËR

BULQIZË

TEPELENË

SARANDË

LEZHË

LUSHNJE

KAVAJË

DEVOLL

POGRADEC

DURRËS

KRUJË

DELVINË

KURBIN

PEQIN

MALËSI E MADHE

MALLAKASTËR

KUÇOVË

Legend


TIRANA- Qark Center

District Center 1

District Center 2

Inhabitants/km2

Qark Center







Employment O�ce

Employment O�ce








Education Directory

Education O�ce



Education O�ce

SHISH


Home of the Elderly


Orphanage

Development Center

Apeal Prosecution

Apeal Court

0 - 25

25,1 - 50

50,1 - 100,0

100,1 - 200

200,1 - 400

400,1 - 853

mbi 853


Prepared by: Co-PLANSource: The Department of Public Administration, 2014

24

The fragmented approach is also related to the existence of planning and territorial administration instruments, as well as the natural resources, which are not interrelated. For instance, the water legislation requires for the designation of water basin management plans, which have a considerable effect on the territory. Based on the law on the protected areas, man-agement plans are to be prepared, which also have an impact on the territory. Yet, there are no legal means (from the sector’s point of view), which foresees the harmonization of these plans with the provisions of the law on territorial planning. By harmonization one doesn’t only imply convergence on a legal level (which is what the law on territorial planning is trying to achieve to a certain extent), but convergence on a content level, on a political orientation level, and of the institutional framework for their implementation. The same thing could be said for the overlap-ping institutions. Going back to the previous example, we have a National Territorial Council and a National Water Council. Both councils have almost the same composition, and both approve plans with a direct impact on the territory.

The Fifth Reason: The historical and cultural factor

The historical and cultural factor includes taking into account the historical boundaries and traditions and customs, as well as the integration of minorities. The presence of minorities should not become a divisive or marginalizing factor. To the contrary, it should be a strong point serving to the internal integration.

.

25

. The sixth reason: The Political Factor

The political factor analyses and takes into account: the trends of the election results over the years as representatives of support for the political forces; the election reforms conduct-ed and the geographic/government unit where the elections take place; the diversification of the political actors, namely the increasing number of parties, or changes in party membership reflected geographically; the democratization of governance, which with time shows that the geography of political representativeness may undergo unpredictable changes, hence not serv-ing as a real factor anymore.

The last two reasons have played a determinant in defining the form of the region and regionalisation in federal states and those with many autonomous regions, such as Austria, Spain, Italy, Germany, Switzerland, Belgium, etc. In unitary states, as is the case with Albania, these factors are not necessarily the most important from a rational point of choosing a model. Yet, these factors could indeed become determinant, although less important. In fact, they can be determinant to the point of halting the whole process. And in the case of Albania, should the historical factor not bear a strong territorial and well argued identity for it to be considered, the decision-making process will then only depend on the political class and its willingness to see beyond the status quo and to democratize governance.

Figure 8: Valbona, 2012

27Figure 9: Trip across Albania, 2012

28

As far as the proposed functions of the region are concerned, not all the possible ones have been included in the following list. Included in the list are only those functions that have been considered as the most appropriate ones based on the six reasons for regionalisation, based on the experience so far with the Albanian society and Albanian politics, as well as based on the understanding of the Government Program. For instance, tourism is not a function in its own right. It continues to remain central (also based on the Government Program), bur regional de-velopment includes the implementation projects for/or in function of the tourism policies. In fact, as experience has shown, an iterative process ought to take place in the government, where certain functions could change the authority or the institutional structure. So basically, the fol-lowing functions are not to be taken as written on stone, but rather as the ones considered as the most suited. With subsidiarity as the core principle of decentralization of governance, the functions and their analysis will define the type of authority the region will have, what the form of the elections and territorial organisation will be.

3. The proposed model for the region

The Aim of the Region: To foster efforts for regional and economic develop-ment and to integrate the sectoral policies; to ensure environmental protec-tion and to ensure efficiency in service provision.

Based on the above analysis, we propose a model of the Region and Regionalisation, which takes into account all the necessary components for the realization of the reform. So, the model responds to an aim, covers some functions, and on this basis it is equipped with a specific territorial configuration.

AIM FUNCTIONS

AUTHORITY

Central or locallevel? Deconcentration?

Direct elections ?

Whom and how?Autonomia

Policymaker/�scal/executive?

FORM OFELECTION

TERRITORIALORGANIZATION

29

Table 3: Functions, fields and modes of financing

The functions proposed on a regional level are:• Regional Development (Economic) • Protection of environmental resources • Territorial planning• Regional transport• Professional education/vocational training • Solid and liquid waste treatment • Social care and welfare • And delegated functions

The means of establishment of an authority, of the appointment or its election, em-ployee recruitment or the credibility ensuring mechanisms, are elements that are critical to the trust the public has in institutions, and as such crucial to its ability to exercise its competences in a most efficient and effective way. In order to discuss the functions, the authority and the form of elections of the region proposed, in the following table you will find the fields/responsibilities that each function will cover, and the means of financing. We discuss on the financing possibili-ties and options of the proposed functions emphasizing that the mode of financing directly affects the mode of elections, whilst the fields/responsibilities orient us on the lever of governance from there the region will draw its competence. Based on the functions listed in Table 2, the competences/responsibilities are usually taken from the central level of governance. In some cases, there are shared functions between the current local government and the central government, such as environ-mental protection or regional planning. In the current governance, the division of such shared functions is unclear. In this proposal, the (re)presentation of the government on a regional level also aims the clarification of the competences between the central and the local government, taking from the functions at hand responsibilities that are usually offered from the central gov-ernment.

30

The case of environment in particular is one of the shared functions, which has not func-tioned as such, as a result of the small territorial scale of the local government units of the first tier. It is important to note that, environmental management does not function in the case of fragmented administrative situtions, and it requires a bigger territorial scale since the environmental impact of a given activity (cause) are experienced/ manifested in faraway territories from the place where it happened. The region is precisely the space and governance tier through which this unclear situation may be addressed/solved.

Also, the same goes for the case of the inter-urban transport, which is of a regional nature as it connects the urban centers of the districts or qarks. Currently, the qarks play (legally) a role in determining the itineraries. As such, it makes sense to think of this as a function managed by the region. The discussion in connection with the financing of the functions or responsibilities proposed for the Region considers the theoretical principles for the financing of the functions and responsibilities on a sub-national governance level, as well as the possibility to grant of manage the right to generate revenue on a regional governance level in our given context. The options available for the financing of the functions and responsibilities on a regional governance level are:

Inter-governmental Transfers: one of the main when it comes to the financing options of the functions and responsibilities on a regional level. This is the case particularly for those functions which are not directly connected to a specific public service; citizens’ access is not direct, or functions that create considerable social impact – regional development; territorial planning on a regional level; environmental protection; vocational training; social welfare; or other delegated functions. Intergovernmental transfers constitute also a financing possibitlity of the regional governance level in the case of a deconcentrated governance on a regional level. For this reason, it is viewed as an instrument for financing of nearly all the proposed functions and responsibilities at the stage of setting up the governing institutions on a regional level. Fur-ther, as the institutions are consolidated, we propose that, for those functions/responsibilities for which there is a financing possibility through shared taxed or direct tariffs, to shift towards forms of financing that enable great fiscal autonomy, leading to as a result, full competences and responsibilities in offering the discussed functions.

Service tariffs or taxes; shared taxes and/or surtaxes: the second option is that the intermediate level is allowed to generate/collect taxes – for as long as they are applied to the direct beneficiaries of the services offered by this governance level. In principle, the sales tax, or tax on personal income could be potentially applied or shared on/with this level of governance. However, practically speaking the only efficient tax, with a large base could be a tax over a cer-tain level of taxation of the personal income that is collected on a central level – often known as surtax or piggyback tax. In such a way it is possible to finance the proposed functions and responsibilities on a regional level, namely: regional economic development; vocational training; environmental protection and regional planning. Waste treatment and regional transport can be financed through service tariffs, which could try to cover the cost of the offered services, given that these two services fulfill the public service criteria, with direct beneficiaries easily identifiab-le.

31

Preaccession funds or other EU funds: noted as one of the main reasons for the organisation of governance on a regional level, one of the main expected benefits of the integra-tion is also the impact of the implementation of the cohesion policy and the Directive for Region-al Development, preceded by the implementation of pre-accession instruments. The functions that concerns economic development, environment, employment and vocational training, are eligible for cofinancing from the pre-accession fund or through the funds for regional develop-ment as part of the “Europe 2020” financial package.

Public Private Partnerships: as one of the main possibilities for offering a service that has been traditionally offered by the public service. The key to a successful application of the ppp is related to making the best use of the abilities/capacities of the private sector, and the transfer of risk to the parties most capable of managing it, and as such making possible a more efficient service for the same investment. Among the proposed responsibilities of the region, the ones related to investments in macro-infrastructure, integrated management of the water re-sources, or protected areas, regional transport and vocational training, can be financed through this form. The ppp model offers not only the possibility to ensure a certain investment on the proposed regional level, but also to ensure that the investment is done/service is provided in a way that improves the longterm sustainability of the service. This is possible through the highest levels of efficiency possible, significant human and institutional resources and advanced technol-ogy. It is important to note however, that for the governing institutions on a regional level to ensure the structuring of the PPPs in such a way, they should first have human and institutional capacities that are competitive with those of the private sector.

To conclude, taking into account the current fiscal situation in Albania, it can be said that the majority of the functions and responsibilities proposed for the region would be financed through central government transfers to the region. As explained above, clearly there are a number of other financing means, yet their use and consolidation depend not only on changes that should happen in the fiscal system, but also on the existence of the multi-tier governance. The multi-tier governance is a relatively new concept and its successful application can only be achieved after a number of challenges have been addressed such as: transparency and infor-mation sharing, highly qualified human resources, compliance of the objectives among all the governance levels; horizontal partnership among all government institutional actors and other actors, social responsibility, etc. Such challenges show that shifting towards multi-tier gover-nance constitutes the modernization of governance, which goes beyond the territorial adminis-trative reform and requires time upon its full implementation. But, taking into account that the regional level will employ EU and private sector funds, the adaptation of innovative governance mechanisms is inevitable even in the short term.

Based on the analysis of financing options and fiscal autonomy, we propose that the form of elections for the region is presented in two stages. First, for a 4-year pe-riod, which corresponds with a governing mandate, the region will be a deconcentrated in-stitutional structure. In this stage, the first year will serve for the consolidation of this new structure, whilst the following three years, apart from its role (to fulfill its functions and aim), the Region will work together with the government and other actors to prepare the second stage.

32

Figure 10: Previous proposals on the regionalisation

Division according to the agricultural character

Regional division based on statistical criteria Regional division according to EU criteria and development characteristics

Source: Ministry of AgriculturePrepared by: Co-PLAN

Source: Aliaj, B. “Misteri i Gjashtë”Prepared: Co-PLAN

Source: Aliaj, B. “Misteri i Gjashtë”Prepared by: Co-PLAN

Source: FAOPrepared by: Co-PLAN

Marketing regions and Action Plan

SHKODERKUKES

BURREL

KORCE

DURRES

TIRANE

ELBASAN

FIER

VLORE

BERAT

GJIROKASTER

SARANDE

1

?

2 3

4

33

LEGEND

Existing district boundaries

Existing Qark boundaries

Boundaries of proposed “Region”

Proposals for the territorial division into regions,Co-PLAN, 2013Prepared by: Co-PLAN

CRITERIA

Access and physical barriers

Urban Poles

Economic and social interaction


CRITERIA

River basins

Historical regions

Main mobility axes


LEGEND


Existing Qark boundaries

Boundaries of proposed “Region”

34

From the second stage onwards, the elections will be direct. As far as the autonomy of the Region as a whole is concerned, it will be full (other than the shared functions), hence policymaking, and fiscal within the legislative scope, and execu-tive. The legislation and the national policies on a sector level (for the given function), remain with the line ministry.

On a last note, the territorial model of the region is yet to be determined. Different proposals on the model of the regions have been drafted previously, even by the authors of this publication. These proposals take into consideration various criteria, according to the respective context (Figure 10). In this study, we have analysed and used 6 criteria, which, if applicable will be elaborated into subcriteria. These criteria are:

• Functions – the omitting of one function alone is enough to change the logis of ther territorial division. The functions explain and define the aim of the existence of the regions, and the form should be such that it simplifies/eases the accomoplishment of the function: e.g. the water basin is the right region for the function of environmental protection. • Historical and Cultural Relations – this criterion helps to understand the tendencies in years and to identify and possible solve any hot spots with regards to administrative boundaries on each level/tier. • Polycentrism – as an objective for the integration into EU. Polycentrism is the territo-rial approach to accomplish cohesion, lower inequalities and stimulate economic development through regional competitiveness. • Access and mobility – these criteria, in addition to polycentrism, are in function of the domestic policies for investments (the The General National Plan), which could change the re-gion geography of Albania. • Inequalities – the basis for investment policies and for the elimination of territorial fragmentation and segregation. • The geography of political representation – To soften or orient the political discussion and tones.

These criteria, other than reflecting the analyses we have conducted over the years, are based on the ESPON criteria on territorial planning and polycentrism, as well as those by OECD and EU for regional development and the respective policies. Prior to presenting what we see as the most suitable territorial organization, let’s analyse each criteria from a spatial point of view. This analysis will show how each criterion is manifested in the territory.

35

.

Figure 11: Economy of scale for the solid waste treatment in landfills, district level

K O R Ç Ë

V L O R Ë

M A T

P U K Ë

F IE R

T IR A N Ë

D IB Ë R

S H K O D Ë R

B E R A T

K U K Ë S

E L B A S A N

L IB R A Z H D

T R O P O J Ë

P Ë R M E T

M IR D IT Ë

H A S

K O L O N J Ë

S K R A P A R

G R A M S H

G J IR O K A S T Ë R

B U L Q IZ Ë

L E Z H Ë

L U S H N J E

K A V A J Ë

P O G R A D E C

K R U J Ë

T E P E L E N Ë

S A R A N D Ë

M A L Ë S I E M A D H E

D E V O L L

D U R R Ë S

D E L V IN Ë

K U R B IN

P E Q IN

M A L L A K A S T Ë R

K U Ç O V Ë

Legend- Districts Population

Less than 225,000

More than 225,000

Prepared by: Co-PLANSource: “Policymakers or Policyfollowers, Alternatives on Urban Development, territorial and environmental management”, 2010.

K O R Ç Ë

F IE R

D IB Ë R

V L O R Ë

E L B A S A N

K U K Ë S

S H K O D Ë R

B E R A T

L E Z H Ë

T IR A N Ë

G J IR O K A S T Ë R

D U R R Ë S

Legend- Districts Population

Less than 225,000

More than 225,000

Figure 12: Economy of scale for the solid waste treatment in landfills, qark level

Let’s look at another function, that of regional development. Regional development aims to increase socio-economic and territorial cohesion, promoting economic development based on competitive advantages of the regions. So, regional development is based largely on the potentionals of the regions, in addition to the investment and employment policies.

Prepared by: Co-PLANSource: “Policymakers or Policyfollowers, Alternatives on Urban Development, territorial and environmental management”, 2010.

Legend- Qark Population

Less than 225,000

More than 225,000

Criterion 1: Functions

We have taken a few illustrations for the functions. For example: In the case of solid waste treatment in a landfill, study conducted by Co-PLAN in 2008 concludes that for a landfill to reach the economy of scale, a population of 225,000 inhabitants would be needed. Even if we were to think that the region would not be needed to reach economy of scale because the reform on the first tier may suffice, we notice that, if we were to have a minimum of 36 districts, this criterion is fulfilled only by the district of Tirana. If we were to go further to the qark level, based on the current configuration, the economy of scale is achieved only by the qarks of Tirana, Durrës, Elbasan and Fier.

36

Prepared by: Co-PLANSource: INSTAT 2012

Figure 13: Number of businesses / 1000 inhabitants

37

Prepared by: Co-PLANSource: INSTAT 2012

Figure 14: Economic Potentials - Industrial Infrastructure

Prepared by: Co-PLANSource: Official website of the National Agency of the Natural Resources in 2013

On a first glance, it becomes evident from both maps that, the greater potentials for economic activities with a regional effect and the higher number of businesses per 1000 inhab-itants, are located mainly along the western part of Albania, and the north-south axes. So, from the perspective of economic development potential, as it will be shown in the following maps, Albania has a vertical division, where the most remote mountainous area in the inner part of the country, which is also the richest in water resources, is overloaded/overburdened by the autho-rized use of the water resources for hydroenergetic purposes. Such a positioning of the resources suggests that any proposed division into regions should not be a clear vertical one, as it would further enhance the division, or the fragmentation among the rich and lesser favorised regions, based on the resource typology. The latter, would not converge with the territorial distribution of the labor force.

The map of potentials shows the type of economic activity, where the extracting and processing industries, as well as the industrial parks are mainly concentrated in the north (apart from the petrol which has a very specific region – Berat and Fier), whilst the activities that make

39Figure 15: Tirana, orthophoto 2007

40

use of renewable resources, are less harmful to the environment but not necessarily to the land-scape (eolic parks, HEC), are situated in the south. Services of different nature, and economy of knowledge have been concentrated in Tirana. Whilst the 3 projects of energetic lines are distrib-uted in 3, with each option ending up in one of the most sensitive areas from an ecological and environmental point of view – in Vlora and Narta.

Based on this simple analysis, the horizontal division of the resource management seems like a more feasible option. This division, upon selection, will serve to orient the invest-ment policies in infrastructure, and environmental protection, whilst at the same time it will promote the specialisation or the strengthening of the regions based on the competitive advan-tages, allowing access to labor force.

The following map of tourism (Figure 18)- as potential for regional development re-flecting an interpretation of government’s 4 tourism priorities and programs (Next Generation Albania), provides an insight into the vertical regions, inside which there are overlapping pro-grams. Although to the government tourism is a central function, clearly the implementation is regional. This holds true not only because this is how the government programs imply it, but also because in reality, tourism is based on the natural and historical potentials, and also on the value chains created thorugh activities in function of tourism. In the case of tourism, the value chain had a greater distribution in the territory, and the more rich it is in functions, the more desired/wanted it becomes and of course more competitive.

It is enough to look at the case of Korça, which wanted to realize its local strategy for tourism, and realized that it could not accomplish it without the cooperation of the neighbouring local government untis. If we were to look at the map, the city of Korça’s focus is on cultural tour-ism, but the region part of which Korça is, offers excellent opportunities for alpine and eco-tour-ism. For the range of services available to visitors to work, and for the value chain to function in the tourism economy, Korça should cooperate with its neighbours on a regional level.

In the map of environmental protection as a function (Figure 17), the layers repre-senting the fields/realms within this function have been included, based on selection as per the functions table. The first layer is the river basin (the official watershed basin and the respective sub-streams). If the region, as the intermediate governance tier, would deal solely deal with the river basin management then the region would be the agency for the river basin management. It would make no sense for a region to manage two river basins, as the decision for one half, would impact the other half, which would be under the administration of the neighbouring region. If we were to add the layer of arable land where the ducting-watering infrastructure is situated, we would be dealing with a vertical region that has no relation with a single river basin, and that currently is partly managed by the municipalities/communes and partly managed by central authorities on a regional level. Further, if we were to add the layer of ecosystems and protected areas, the responsibility for which lies with the Ministry of Environment, then we end up with even a more comples configuration of the regions. So, based on the function of environmental protection, it is important to read together all the environmental layers and to understand the tendencies for regionalisation, which respect all the fields taken into account within the environ-mental protection field.

41

Figure 16 : The environmental impact on the territory: Water basins, agricultural land, ecosystems and protected

Prepared by: Co-PLANSource: Ministry of Environment, GeoConsulting

42

Toka bujqësore

Ekosistemet kryesorë

Zonat e mbrojtura

Ekosistemet brenda zonave të mbrojtura

Legjenda

Lumenjtë kryesor

Kufijtë e baseneve

Prepared by: Co-PLANSource: Ministry of Environment, GeoConsulting

Figure 17: The Environment and its inter-relation with the territory: Ecosystems, agriculture and protected areas

43

Prepared by: Co-PLANSource: Government’s program 2014-2018; official web-site of the Ministry of Environment, www.moe.gov.al, accessed in February 2014

Figure 18: Tourism and its inter-relation with the territory: The Government’s programs for tourism (coastal, alpine, cultural, and eco).

Centers of cultural potential

Potential for alpine tourism

Potential foreco-tourism

Potential forcoastal tourism

LEGEND

44

Figure 19: Distribution of agricultural and pastoral activity by Qark

45Figure 20: Razëm , 2014

47Figure 21: Razëm, 2014

48

Criterion 2: Historical and Cultural Relations

From a historical perspective, the division into regions has changed significantly over different time periods distant from one another. Historical studies show that if some areas have preserved their identity relatively intact in time, whilst others have been divided or subjected to continuous change. This has happened due to the shifts of power, or because the geographical and natural factors have influenced in the preservation or loss of the territorial identity. In the map, we can distinguish a number of hotspots with regards to the division into regions based on the historical criterion:

1.The regions of Pukë, Mirditë and Lezhë, as border areas have often changed the borders of the region they would belong to.

2. Hasi and Tropoja, for cultural and historical reasons, and as a result of previous divisions, were considered as the Prefecture of Gjakova under the ruling of King Zog.

3. Vlora has often changed the region to which it belongs.

Figure 22: Historical divisions.Provinces in antiquity c. VII-II b.c.

Prepared by: Co-PLANSource: Cabanes, P. et al, (2008), Archeological Map of Albania, Pegi

Figure 23: Principates c. XIV-XV a.c.

Prepared by: Co-PLANSource: Albanian Academy of Science, History of Albanian People, ISBN 99927-1-623-1

.

49

Figure 25: Prefectures 1927 and Qarks 2014.

Prepared by: Co-PLAN Source: Selenica, T., (1928), Shqipria më 1927, Botimet Pegi ISBN 99927-726-6-2.

Figure 24 : Administrative division, year 1927.

Prepared: Co-PLAN Source: Selenica, T., (1928), Shqipria më 1927, Botimet Pegi ISBN 99927-726-6-2.

4. Kolonja and Leskovik have also changed the region to which they belong, shifting between Gjirokastra and Korça

5. Albania has traditionally kept a horizontal division along the river of Shkumbin, a division, which has faded away in the map of prefectures and qarks.

6. Over time/historically, Tirana has had very strong ties/affiliations with Mat, Dibër, and Elbasan. But which affiliations have prevailed as the strongest overtime, and should as a result be taken into account knowing that Tirana should not remain a region in itself 4?

7. Korça constitutes a strong region, that could remain a region on its own, but historically speaking, its affiliations have been with Elbasan, and Berat.

KORÇË

FIER

VLORË

DIBËR

KUKËSSHKODËR

ELBASAN

BERAT

LEZHË

TIRANË

GJIROKASTËR

DURRËS

1:900,000

LegendAlbanian Qarks

Prefectures in 1927

LegendQarks in 2008

Prefectures in 1930

4 Otherwise, this would cause a significant increase in spatial disparities and in the socio-economic polarisation in national scale. This division would stand against the principles of balanced, polycentric development, which is one of the criteria for regionali-sation.

50

Figure 26: Access. Time distance from the center of the qark

Criterion 3: Access and Mobility The two access maps show the traveling time between each local government unit to the center of the region or qark. The vertical areas with access over 1 hour from current centers, as defined as the most disadvantaged areas, with low access and lack of current potential for access. Clearly, this analysis shows that a vertical division into regions in Albania, would again (similarly to the analysis of the economic resources) lead to a division among the advantaged and disadvantaged areas, further enhancing their qualities/characteristics hence causing more fragmentation and economic development disparities. This analysis holds true also for the first tier of governance to ensure access to services and economic potentialities.

Figure 27 : Access. Time distance from the center of the district

Prepared by: Co-PLANSource: Co-PLAN, based on the kilometric distances and quality of infrastructure among the units of the first tier and the centers of qarks and regions.

Prepared by: Co-PLANSource: Co-PLAN, based on the kilometric distances and quality of infrastructure among the units of the first tier and the centers of qarks and regions.

KORÇË

FIER

DIBËR

VLORË

ELBASAN

KUKËSSHKODËR

BERAT

LEZHË

TIRANË

GJIROKASTËR

DURRËS

LegendTime (in min) from the center of the Qark

Center of the Qark

K OR Ç Ë

V LOR Ë

MAT

P UK Ë

F IE R

T IR ANË

DIB Ë R

S HK ODË R

B E R AT

K UK Ë S

E LB AS AN

LIB R AZHD

T R OP OJ Ë

P Ë R ME T

MIR DIT Ë

HAS

K OLONJ Ë

S K R APAR

G R AMS H

G J IR OK AS T Ë R

B ULQIZË

T E P E LE NË

S AR ANDË

LE ZHË

LUS HNJ E

K AVAJ Ë

DE V OLL

P OG R ADE C

DUR R Ë S

K R UJ Ë

DE LV INË

K UR B IN

P E QIN

MALË S I E MADHE

MALLAK AS T Ë R

K UÇ OV Ë

LegendTime (in min) from the center of the District

Center of the district

.

51

Figure 28: Accessibility

Prepared by: Co-PLAN.

52

Criterion 4: Polycentrism

Polycentrism is one of the EU orientation objectives for spatial development (an ESDP objective – The European Spatial Development Perspective, 1999) and aims to prevent concen-tration of population, economic, political and financial power in one single dynamic area. The latter, could apply to Albania, where most of the development has been concentrated in the region Tiranë-Durrës and in the metropolitan and rural area around this region. The polycentric model means a more balanced distribution of population, particularly focusing on the way the regional economic advantages are used, and the influx of people and goods mobility. By adopt-ing the polycentric model of spatial and economic development, deconcentrated urban units will be established, operating on a regional level, and develop by avoiding socio-economic dispari-ties/inequalities, and ensuring cohesion.

The existence of resources, services (especially administrative, healthcare and high-er education) and activities in the center, has caused for the population to move towards the triangle Tiranë-Durrës. Given that, over the years 1/3 of Albania’s population has moved to this area, investments in infrastructure have also followed here. Due to a strong monocentric model on a country level, one can note a powerful center (Tiranë-Durrës), a second concentric circle that is influenced by the center, the road axes and the relatively helpful geography, and a range of mountains from north to south which suffers from the economic, demographic, and social depression, with the exception of few places along the country borders. The latter are more ad-vantaged because the relief (despite the higher altitude above sea level) is more flat, and the inhabited ares are situated on valleys making them more accessible on a regional level, but also because of the proximity with the inhabited areas across from the border.

The centers along the border exchange services and economic activities, serving as gates, exposing this part of the country to the neighbouring country/ies and other economic potentials. Their relation/connection to Tirana is usually weaker than with the centers across the border, mainly due to the poor road system (low accessibility). Such an aspect can be used very well for the strengthening of such centers along the border in fuction of the regional polycen-trism and the economic benefits that come with it.

When it comes to mobility, the form of urbanism in the territory, shows the same tendency: we can see that the region Tiranë-Durrës, and the western lowland have absorbed population, and the central mountainous area that have shrunk, with the exception of the main urban areas by the border. Such a tendency is further confirmed by INSTAT’s analysis on internal migration based on the Census on population and housing in 2011.

A proper analysis of polycentrism based on the scientific methodologies available for this purpose, has not been conducted yet in Albania, and for it to be conducted, it needs informa-tion, which at present is not entirely available, not even from INSTAT. For the first time however, INSTAT have prepared the typologies of the local government units, based on the classification urban/rural with as many as 15 types, and of the metropolitan areas and agglomerates. These classifications and corresponding analysis help in obtaining a first understating of the type and

.

53

Figure 29: Polycentrism. The demographic movement during the last 10 years

Figure 30: Polycentrism. Travelling time from the airport.

Prepared by: Co-PLANSource: INSTAT

Prepared by: Co-PLAN

LegendQarks

Change_2001-2011 %

level of existing polycentrism in Albania and the potentials for its creation. However, for us to be able to reach to the current and potential polycentrism schemes, we would need to measure not only the elements from the morphological analysis (as INSTAT have done), but also the func-tions (transport, tourism, industry, education, decision-making and administration), as well as networks and partnerships. With regards to the functions, it is important to measure not simply employment in the various sectors, but variables that indicate the power of the function and its impact on the regional and national economy (no. of beds in tourism, gross added value, the location of universities and businesses, no. of students, etc.).

54

Figure 31: Hubs and Networks.


LEGEND

Population density (inhabitant/km2) in municipalities/communes

Main Road Axes

Border Crossing Points

National Roads

National Corridors

National Peripheral Roads

Regional Roads

Border Crossing

Main Border Crossing

Main Seaports

Airport

Remore Areas

Hub

Network

Gateway

55

Figure 32 : Models and regional tendencies based on polycentrism


57Figure 33: Durrës Harbor, 2014 - HUB

58

However, based on the information available by INSTAT and the qualitative analysis of the territorial relations, spatial analysis of the resource location and of the distribution of admin-istrative functions and higher education, it is possible to note trends of the polycentric or mono-centric model on a regional level also. Such trendes should be supported by the regional invest-ment policies, and by a solid regional governance. We can identify two types of region typologies (polycentric and monocentric) depending on the mobility model towards the center (Figure 32). These trends are identified based on the specific weight of the urban centers and mobility flows. So, we have a number of rings that connect centers almost equal in terms of population and activities, the core of which suffers from poor penetrability/access and insufficient supply with infrastructure and road systems. The second typology is characterized by the monocetric regional model, with a robust core in terms of population and activities and many small town and villages that depend on this center.

Criterion 5: Inequalities A significant study on spatial inequalities was conducted in Albania in 2009, which takes into account over 50 indicators and aims to nurture regional development policies and strategies. The indicators studies for the period 2001-2008, have been further completed with information by INSTAT for the following period, which allows for the study of the temporal series. The GDP (Gross Domestic Product) is one of the main indicators to be studied and that shows the capacity to produce and impact the national economy of the existing regions, i.e. the qarks. The results from the regions analysis based on the GDP, match with the types within the two groups – urban/rural, through which INSTAT classifies local government units in Albania.

So, if we were to compare the GDP in nominal terms and per capita, in both cases Tirana comes out as the strongest region. Whilst in some qarks, e.g. Gjirokastra, Berat, and Kukës, the nominal values are very slow, meaning their contribution to the market economy is also very low, yet, their per capita values are high given their small populations. This reinforces further the rural character of these qarks, which are not only disadvantaged from an economic point of view (in both activities and resources), but also weaker when it comes to polycentrism objective discussed above.

On the other side we have Fier, with relatively high contribution to the national econ-omy, but relatively low per capita values. This shows that it is a qark that is dependant on the center – significant contribution in terms of services from the city of Fier, and with an overall rural character. So, it scores poorly when it comes to the objective of polycentrism, given that it is a monocetric qark with high levels of inequalities within itself. The same assessment would hold true for the case of Elbasan and Korça. Whilst Lezha and Dibra manifest the same trends in both maps, showing how greatly disadvantaged they are. Clearly, the region Tiranë Durrës stands out among the others so it would be best if this region was not to remain as a single administrative unit, or even a planning or statistical region, as it would continue to absorb all the investments in the country, contributing among other things to the increase of ruralisation in other qarks.

.

59

Figure 34: Distribution of LGUs population per Qark, as a percentage to Albania, by altitude

Source: Instat and ISD 2009Prepared by: Co-PLAN and ISD

60

Figure 36: Gross Domestic Product (INSTAT) per capita, year 2012.

Figure 35: Gross Domestic Product (INSTAT) in nominal terms, year 2012.

Prepared by: Co-PLAN. Source: INSTAT

Prepared by: Co-PLAN. Source: INSTAT

61

Figure 37: Spatial Typologies - Qarks Figure 38: Development Typologies - Qarks

LegendQarks

1. Metropolitan center2. Central key location (privileged)3. Central key location4. Inland/intermediate location5. Peripheral location

LegendQarks

1. Developed2. Moderate development (Upper category)3. Moderate development (Intermediate category)4. Moderate development (Lower category)5. Less developed

Prepared by: Co-PLAN. Source: Integrated Support to Decentralization Programm, financed by UNDP and EU

Figure 39: Tirana River, Laknas, 2012

63

Figure 40: Tirana, 2009

Figure 41: Durrës, 2011

64

Criterion 6: The geography of political affiliations .

The geography of political affiliations can be read after the elections have taken place, and it can be hard to predict without some level significant subjectivity. This can be verified from the empirical readings of the results in years. For instance, the electoral maps of 2007 (Figures 42,43) show rather steady political affiliations from a territorial point of view, as per the north/south criterion. The results of 2011 however changed this panorama as per the urban/rural cri-terion with regards to the mayors, and even further when it comes to the city councilors (even if compared to the same elections (Figures 44, 45). So the geography of votes/elections has changed sides by 30-50% in every local government unit, showing that this does not consti-tute a fixed variable in the geography of regions. In a similar way one could reason even about the parliamentary elections. Also, the diversification of the political forces over the recent years together with the change in the composition of coalitions, does not show a correlation with the

Figure 42: The local election results of 2007, local councils

Figure 43: The local election results of 2007, mayors

Prepared by: Co-PLAN. Source: official website of the Central Elections Commission

65

map of the elections of the previous years, hence indicating greater potential for change not necessarily predictable. For instance, if we were to regroup the election results of 2011 as per the 36 districts, we will note that the colour layout in the map will change. This could either be interpreted as a clearer reading of the sustainable areas, or as an inability of a clear reading of the impact the political parties can have, as part of coalitions.

So, it is rather challenging to predict the type of impact the geography of votes can have on a regional administrative division. But, it is clear that any type of impact would only be short-term, so for the medium-term, or further there would be no point to analyse it. The political discussion, more than fearing the way the territo-rial division will impact the general or local elections, in essence could be about how ready the political class are when it comes to the democratization of governance.

Figure 44: The local election results of 2011, local councils

Figure 45: The local election results of 2011, mayors


66

Figure 46: Parliamentary elections results, 2009


67

Figure 47: Parliamentary elections results, 2013


68

As a result of the above analysis:

In conclusion, in order to reach to the proposed territorial model, we go back to the analysis elements and overlay the natural region represented by the basin (as the space where all the environmental protection elements are inter-related), the polycentrism trends (as repre-sentatives of accessibility, economic development and inequalities), taking into account the hot spots from a historical point of view. The natural region is unsustainable. Whilst the polycentrism trends are used with the purpose of preventing monocetric models and promoting polycentrism. As a result, we pair Shkrodra, which features strong monocetric traits, with the ring of Lezha, Kukës, Peshkopi, where all the cities are equally strong. Perhaps, they are not on the same level as Shkodra, but they balance it well both from an economic potential point of view, and accessibility. Based on the same logic, we pair Tirana with Elbasan and Korça with the Berat-Lushnje-Fier triangle. The south region remains clear within itself.

The solution for the hot spots from a historical perspective is accomplished by internal-isig these areas within the region, or using them as dividing boundries, clarifying once again their double position. In any case, we try to preserve as much as possible the boundaries of the basins or sub-basins. Looking at the map, it is only Has-Tropojë and Pukë-Mirditë that are merged in a region, whilst all the other cases (hot spots) namely: Bulqiza, Pogradeci, Gramshi, Leskov-ik-Kolonjë and Fier-Mallakastër, are border areas.

As a result, Albania is divided into four regions as presented in the Figure 50. This option allows for the number of the local government units of the first tier to be at its lowest, which is 36 units. Such a high consolidation of the first tier has the advantage that it goes to the districts, which are tested territorial units, but has the disadvantage that makes for a siginificant jump from 373 units to a small 10% of them. This means that, with time a gradual process of division may start in order to reach a more acceptable figure of more moderate consolidation, for e.g. 100-150 units of the first tier. This may happen because: (i) given that there are many disagreements and debates on the proposed boundaries and the proposed units, a bigger number of units may serve to pave the way to agreements much more than the figure of 36. (ii) Albania is character-ised by a very fragmented geography and distribution of resources. For example, in the case of arable land, where the farms are so small that it will not be possible for Albania to (ever) compete internationally in terms of intensive agriculture. On the contrary, the emphasis should be placed on the special/original products and innovation, by ensuring a niche in the market. Yet, for this to happen taking into account the fragmented level of land, the small unit is more suitable. Thus, subsidiarity together with the economic practicality should be used as criteria in the division of the first tier. Further, it is by doing so that we can create the possibility for the newly established small units to have the same functions, and the capacities to fulfil these functions.

69

Figure 48: Summary of the three main concepts

Prepared by Co-PLAN.

70

Alternatively, in the event that the local actors will not opt for the division into four regions, and if the central government will come to the conclusion that for the subsidiarity to work more than 4 regions are nedded, the proposal with 6 regions can be taken into account, which is a suboption of the 4-region proposal. This case however, would not fit well with a high consolidation of the units of the first tier.

Data on territorial division into 4 regions•Northern region: Population: 526’231; Surface: 969’942 ha•Central region: Population: 1’301’598; Surface: 487’519 ha•East-West Region: Population: 701’734; Surface: 782’356 ha•Southern Region: Population: 272’832; Surface: 589’641 ha

Data on territorial division into 6 regions •Region of Drin: 307’523 inhabitants; 465’230 ha •Region of Mat-Drin: 218’708 inhabitants; 504’712 ha•Region of Shkumbin-Erzen: 1’301’598 inhabitants; 487’510 ha•Region of Devoll: 246’845 inhabitants; 425’811 ha•Region of Seman: 454’889 inhabitants; 356’545 ha•Region of Vjosa: 272’832 inhabitants; 589’641 ha

71

Figure 49 : Agriculture land, CORINE land cover

Source: European Environment Agency

72

Figure 50: Version 1.Territorial division into 4 regions



73

Figure 51: Version 2. Territorial division into 6 regions


74

4. Implications for the continuity of the regionalisation process

The proposal of the regionalisation does not stand/come detached from the decentral-izaiton reform, and that of the territorial division of the first tier. For this reason, and also because regionalisation is part of the governance, there will be implications in other parts of the state affairs/functions. These implications are not necessarily negative, as in some cases they support the reform and the proposed division. However, these are factors of the process continuity and form, and are of the following nature:

Legislative: Refering to all the sectoral legislative changes that will happen in order to allow for the redistribution of functions, currently deconcentrated on the region. That said, the real discussion remain what will happen with the qark. Should the Qark change, or not continue at all as a form of governance, this ought to be reflected in the Constitution. If the Qark – the Region, simply change its size, the constitutional change may not be necessary. There are two options: – Option 1: The Constitution is affected; The Electoral Code; Decentralisation of the Or-ganic Law for local governance; secotral legislation; – Option 2: The organization happens within the current constitutional provisions and the strategy on decentralisation and secontral legislation are reviewed. ,

Institutional: New institutions may be established, and existing ones (agencies, boards, direc-tories) may be reformed; in addition the Prefect’s institution may also be reviewed.

Human Resources: New capacities will be needed in order to fulfil the functions, and siginifi-cant repositioning may be required also.

Fiscal and Financial: Inter-governmental relations and transfers should be amended in order to be able to respond to the regional governance; in addition a number of fiscal policies concern-ing equalisation and redistribution are to be amended.

Political: There is, no doubt, a better chance for the democratisation of the governance

75

Statistical: Statistics should be generated in municipalities and regions, whereby for a first stage NUTS 3 equals to a Region and constituent parts and NUTS 2 are the whole of Albania.

Regional and Cross-border: The proposal for the 4 regions is very well suited with the Strategic European Corridors (Figure 52) and with the crossborder regions. The proposed horizontal divi-sion enables access to the sea for each region, starting from the natural region (the watershed basin which does at times flow beyond the Albanian border) and complying with the centers involved in IPA Crossborder (Figure 53), including the positioning of the protected areas, Natura 2000 and Emerald.

76

PRISTINA

NIS

SKOPJE

BELGRADE

THESSALONIKI

ZAGREB

SARAJEVO

BARI

BRINDISI

SERBIA

BOSNJA&HERZEGOVINA

CROATIA

ALBANIA

GREECE

MACEDONIA

MONTENEGRO

KOSOVO BULGARIA

TURKEY

VLORË

SHKODËR

SOPHIE

Automotive transportation

Corridor IV

Durrës - Prishtinë - Nish Highway

Main road

Railway transportation

Existing railway

Corridor V

Corridor VIII

Corridor X

Proposed railway

Territorial borders

Qark borders

National borders

Notes

1. The 8th Corridor and the Durrës-Nish highway are the main roads linking Albania with Europe

2. Currently Montenegro provides the link of the albanian railway with the railway network of other regionsin the South-East Europe

3. REBIS (EU) proposesthe connection of the railway from Pogradecto Kicevo, Macedonia (FYROM)

77

PRISTINA

NIS

SKOPJE

BELGRADE

THESSALONIKI

ZAGREB

SARAJEVO

BARI

BRINDISI

SERBIA

BOSNJA&HERZEGOVINA

CROATIA

ALBANIA

GREECE

MACEDONIA

MONTENEGRO

KOSOVO BULGARIA

TURKEY

VLORË

SHKODËR

SOPHIE


Corridor IV


Main road


Existing railway

Corridor V

Corridor VIII

Corridor X

Proposed railway

Territorial borders

Qark borders

National borders

Notes




Figure 52: Strategic European CorridorsPrepared by Co-PLAN Source: REBIS, 2003, EC.

PRISTINA

NIS

SKOPJE

BELGRADE

THESSALONIKI

ZAGREB

SARAJEVO

BARI

BRINDISI

SERBIA

BOSNJA&HERZEGOVINA

CROATIA

ALBANIA

GREECE

MACEDONIA

MONTENEGRO

KOSOVO BULGARIA

TURKEY

VLORË

SHKODËR

SOPHIE


Corridor IV


Main road


Existing railway

Corridor V

Corridor VIII

Corridor X

Proposed railway

Territorial borders

Qark borders

National borders

Notes




PRISTINA

NIS

SKOPJE

BELGRADE

THESSALONIKI

ZAGREB

SARAJEVO

BARI

BRINDISI

SERBIA

BOSNJA&HERZEGOVINA

CROATIA

ALBANIA

GREECE

MACEDONIA

MONTENEGRO

KOSOVO BULGARIA

TURKEY

VLORË

SHKODËR

SOPHIE


Corridor IV


Main road


Existing railway

Corridor V

Corridor VIII

Corridor X

Proposed railway

Territorial borders

Qark borders

National borders

Notes




78

Figure 53: IPA Crossborder, Protected areas and BasinsPrepared by Co-PLAN.

Source:The information is based in several sources – www.moe.gov.al; http://www.eea.europa.

eu/soer/countries/mk/nature-protection-and-biodiversity-state/nature-protection-and-biodiversi-

ty-state-2/map-1-national-emerald-network-1/view; http://www.nparkovi.me/sajt/mapa-crne-go-

re-sa-nacionalnim-parkovima; http://www.europeangreenbelt.org/fileadmin/content/downloads/

the-initiative/Fact-sheet_EGB.pdf; http://www.unep.at/documents_unep/Balkan_Feasibility_Stud-

ies/Balkan-Network_25-10-2010.pdf

80

Figure 33: IPA Crossborder, 4 RegionsPrepared by Co-PLAN.

Source:The information is based in several sources – www.moe.gov.al; http://www.eea.europa.

eu/soer/countries/mk/nature-protection-and-biodiversity-state/nature-protection-and-biodiversi-

ty-state-2/map-1-national-emerald-network-1/view; http://www.nparkovi.me/sajt/mapa-crne-go-

re-sa-nacionalnim-parkovima; http://www.europeangreenbelt.org/fileadmin/content/downloads/

the-initiative/Fact-sheet_EGB.pdf; http://www.unep.at/documents_unep/Balkan_Feasibility_Stud-

ies/Balkan-Network_25-10-2010.pdf

4 proposed regions

Direct connection

Secondary connection

Tertiary connection

Sea connection

83Figure 55: Vlora

84

5. References

1. Albanian Academy of Science, History of Albanian People, Tiranë, ISBN 99927-1-623-1.2. Aleanca për Shqipërinë Europiane 2013, Programi i qeverisë 2013-2017 – Shqipëria e Gjen-eratës Tjetër, Tiranë.3. Cabanes, P. et al, 2008, Harta Arkeologjike e Shqiperise, Botimet Pegi.4. Council of Europe, MCL-13 2002 8 final, Helsinki Declaration on Regional Self Government, Conference of European Ministers Responsible for Local and Regional Government. 5. ESPON Monitoring Committee and Partners 2005, ESPON 111 – Potentials for polycentric development in Europe.6. European Commission, Brussels, 3.3.2010, COM(2010) Europe 2020 Strategy, A European Strategy for Smart, Sustainable and Inclusive Growth. 7. European Commission, 1999, ESDP – European Spatial Development Perspective, Towards Balanced and Sustainable Development of the Territory of the European Union. 8. European Commission, 2011, Cohesion Policy, 2014 -2020, Investing in growth and jobs, http://ec.europa.eu/inforegio.9. European Commission, 2003, Regional Balkans Infrastructure Study – Transport, REBIS Transport, http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/archives/seerecon/infrastructure/sectors/trans-port/documents/REBIS/Rebis_FR_Final.pdf, aksesuar maj 2014. 10. INSTAT 2014, Shqipëria Tipologjia e Komunave dhe Bashkive, Tiranë.11. INSTAT 2014, Albania Commuting from Home to Work, Tiranë.12. IPA Adriatic Cross-border Cooperation Programme, 2007CB 16 IPO 001, 2013.13. IPA CBC Programme 2014-2020, Republic of Macedonia – Albania, 2014.14. IPA Cross-Border Programme 2007-2013, Greece – Albania, CCI 2007 CB 16I PO 010.15. IPA CBC 2010-2013, Republic of Albania – Kosovo, 2011. 16. Keating, M. 1998, The New Regionalism in Western Europe: Territorial Restructuring and Po-litical Change, Cheltenham UK and Northampton MA USA: Edward Elgar.17. Selenica, T., 1928, Shqipria më 1927, Tiranë, Botimet Pegi ISBN 99927-726-6-2.18. Shutina, D., Toto, R., dhe Aliaj, B. 2012, Roli dhe kompetencat e Qarkut dhe të institucioneve të tjera (mbështetëse) lidhur me zhvillimin rajonal, në Politikëbërës apo Politikëndjekës 2 – Anal-iza dhe Rekomandime për qeverisjen territoriale në Shqipëri, Co-PLAN dhe POLIS, Tiranë. 19. Shutina, D. dhe Toto, R. (eds.), 2010, “Politikëbërës apo Politikëbërës, Alternativa mbi zhvil-limin urban, manaxhimin e territorit dhe të mjedisit”, Co-PLAN dhe POLIS, Tiranë.20. Tosics, I., Szemzo, H., Illes, D. and Gertheis, A. 2010, “Planning policies and governance ty-pology”, “National Spatial Planning Policies and Governance Typology”,PLUREL Report under the Sixth Framework Programme, European Commission.21. www.moe.gov.al; 22. http://www.eea.europa.eu/soer/countries/mk/nature-protection-and-biodiversity-state/

85

nature-protection-and-biodiversity-state-2/map-1-national-emerald-network-1/view; 23. http://www.nparkovi.me/sajt/mapa-crne-gore-sa-nacionalnim-parkovima; 24. http://www.europeangreenbelt.org/fileadmin/content/downloads/the-initiative/Fact-sheet_EGB.pdf; 25. http://www.unep.at/documents_unep/Balkan_Feasibility_Studies/Balkan-Net-work_25-10-2010.pdf;26. http://extranet.cor.europa.eu/divisionpowers/countries/Pages/default.aspx, accessed on 1 May 2014. 27. http://www.ipe.ro/rjef/rjef2_11/rjef2_2011p84-105.pdf28. http://www.cec.org.al29. http://www.instat.gov.al/al/themes/llogaritë-kombetare.aspx?tab=tabs-530. http://www.fao.org/docrep/009/a0159e/A0159E03.htm#fig3h31. http://www.albania.al/region/vlore# (Figure 55)

All images are taken from the archive of Co-PLAN and that of the authors, except the ones referred to above.

the regionalisation of albania

Documents

regional development

habitat development

regional development

regionalisation of albania

regional levelauthors

regional decentralization

northern albania project

reviewed proposal