EIPASCOPE 2009/2 


The European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC) 

The European Grouping of 
Territorial Cooperation (EGTC): 
New Spaces and Contracts 
for European Integration? 


Gianluca Spinaci* and Gracia Vara-Arribas** 

The European Union is becoming one undivided continent, where territories are faced with 
borderless economic, social and environmental challenges while still being governed through 
traditional institutional boundaries. Integration raises the question of cohesion among different 
territories, and territorial cohesion is a new objective for the Union according to the Lisbon 
Treaty. Cooperation between territories, beyond frontiers and across different institutional layers, 
is becoming crucial to provide multi-level governance to new functional regions. The European 
Grouping of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC), a new legal and governance tool established by 
Regulation 1082/2006, was conceived as a substantial upgrade for this multi-level governance 
and “beyond-the-border” cooperation. Three years after its adoption, a number of EGTCs have 
been set up, and new ones are in the pipeline. Despite their early stage, these new ventures are 
generating interesting dynamics, revamping inter-institutional cross-border partnerships and 
establishing a new cooperation geography. However, promoting best practice partnerships would 
require a broader European policy. This article considers possible institutional incentives such as 
the “contractualisation” of the cooperation between the European Commission and the EGTCs. 
These Groupings truly are new governance “contracts” of multilevel cross-border cooperation, 
which can become creative engines for local development and deeper European integration. 
This provides food for thought for the EU policy and budgetary package after 2013. 


Introduction 

EU integration is progressing thanks to several mechanisms, 

and procedures. To solve this, the European Grouping of 
including cross-border actions. The latter are increasingly 

Territorial Cooperation (EGTC) was introduced to bring both 
relevant since land and maritime borders multiply with 

uniformity and legal stability to cooperation. 
every enlargement. Economic, social and environmental 
problems in Europe require joint policies. In order to be 

This article presents the EGTC as a new legal tool 
effective, cooperative responses must focus on certain 

and analyses its constitutive elements, the state of play, 
territories (e.g. the Mediterranean basin) and engage 

the political context and the policy agenda behind it. 
selected groups of municipalities, regions or countries 

By reviewing established EGTCs, in particular their 
facing the same challenges, which may pool their resources 

Conventions and Statutes, three major issues are considered. 
to achieve shared, even cross-border solutions. Since the 

Firstly, how do new EGTCs enhance territorial cohesion 
late 1980s, the European Union has funded this cooperation 

across Europe? Secondly, do established EGTCs tend to 
through the INTERREG programmes, whose management 

stretch the Regulation beyond its original scope of purely 
has been partially hampered by different national laws 

operational cooperation (e.g. project management) by 



www.eipa.eu 

fostering political cooperation (e.g. policy making, external 
relations and lobbying)? Thirdly, which action on the ground 
and institutional incentives can make the EGTC a better lever 
for EU integration? 
The EGTC, constitutive elements and the state of play 
The concept of the European Grouping of Territorial 
Cooperation (EGTC) was set out in 2006 (Regulation 
1082/2006), under the pressure of border regions in particular, 
who were calling for a stronger legal foundation for their 
cooperation, often based on certain civil law agreements, 
differing widely across Europe. The EGTC Regulation offers 
them a European law-based tool for the first time, endowed 
with both EU-wide scope and of a potentially indefinite 
duration. 
Unlike its predecessors (such as Euroregions and working 
communities), EGTCs allow, within the same cooperative 
structure, the interaction of different institutional levels 
in a new form of multilevel governance, where more 
stakeholders can participate than before: regional and local 
authorities, Member States, and all those public or private 
entities (universities, chambers of commerce, foundations, 
etc.) that are subject to public procurement rules.1 It allows 
them to interact on a regional (not only cross-border) basis. 
It establishes a legal personality, with binding decisions in 
potentially remarkably large territories over a wide range 
of cooperation areas. The legal personality enables it to 
have a budget and its own managing organs, the capacity 
of employing staff, holding property, to actively participate 
in legal proceedings, as well as the “EU legitimation” to 
promote cross-border, transnational and interregional 
cooperation. This legal stability reinforces decision-making 
among the partners, their position in interaction with the 
EU institutions, their possibilities for launching or improving 
their international position and the effective management 
of cooperation programs and projects. 
In fact, the EGTC was designed to facilitate the 
implementation of programmes and projects co-financed 
by the structural funds. But it can also develop other forms 
of territorial cooperation without Community funding or 
carry out actions relating to Community policies other than 
structural policy.2 Member States may decide on regime 
applicable to these groupings (either public or private), 
the notification procedures for setting up or joining an EGTC, 
as well as, to a certain extent, the cooperation tasks potentially 
accessible to EGTC members. 
The Regulation triggered a lively debate, since the EU 
was for the first time “legislating” on the governance and 
legal structures of regional policy, rather than on usual (and 
important) business such as the provision of a multi-annual 
plan and financial framework.3 
Implementation is slowly taking off. Most Member States 
adopted the implementing legislative and/or administrative 
provisions after the given deadline, whereas a few others 
are still not complying.4 However, the commitment of 
regions and local authorities is ensuring progress in the field. 
Two years after the full application of the Regulation 
(1/8/2007), a number of EGTCs have been set-up. 
6 
The European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC) 
The first EGTC, Eurometropole Lille-Kortrijk-Tournai 
(FR/BE), was set up on 21 January 2008, half a year after the 
Regulation entered into force. This early establishment, prior 
also to the adoption of national provisions, was possible 
thanks to strong political commitment. Apart from this case, 
the setting up of EGTCs suffered from the delayed adoption 
of national rules. The second establishment was in October 
2008 and five others took place before March 2009. Those to 
be established during 2009 include two large Euroregions, 
Pyrenees-Mediterranean and Alps-Mediterranean, and the 
Eurodistrict Strasbourg-Ortenau. 

So-far, EGTCs tend to emerge on the same borders 
(France-Belgium, Spain-Portugal, Hungary-Slovak Republic) 
and often in adjacent or overlapping areas, probably 
because of the adoption of EGTC national provisions on both 
of the bordering countries, the pre-existence of bilateral 
cooperation agreement(s), as well as the stimulating local 
competitive effect of neighbour EGTCs. 

The Annex provides a list of formally established 
EGTCs, those expected to be established, and those under 
consideration (non-exhaustive list), at the time of writing of 
this article (June 2009). 

The political context and the policy agenda behind the 
EGTC Regulation 

During the last decade, territorial cooperation has been 
gaining political prominence and an operational upgrade. 
The need for an appropriate organizational “legal” structure 
emerged and the Committee of the Regions5 prompted the 
Commission to present a proposal in 2004, which became 
Regulation 1082/2006 establishing the EGTC. In order to 
understand its emergence and aims, it is essential to consider 
the policy agenda and political context behind it, which 
essentially are the following: 

1. 
the emergence of territorially-based EU policies under 
the new Treaty objective: territorial cohesion; 
2. 
the increasing involvement of sub-national government 
in EU policy-making and the evolving Commission agenda 
around it; 
3. 
the consolidation of territorial cooperation as an element 
of EU integration. 
The latest enlargements of the Union have given it a 
certain spatial unity, in line with our continent’s geography. 
Europe has consequently started to think about its territory 
(spatial development) and the Lisbon Treaty sets the new 
objective of ensuring territorial, in addition to economic and 
social cohesion within the EU.6 

So far economic and social cohesion has been ensured 
through EU actions aimed at filling development gaps 
in terms of income per capita and employment rate or 
unemployment rate. Territorial cohesion would additionally 
mean addressing the diversity of our territories (e.g. natural 
specificities, population distribution, degree of connectivity, 
etc.) in order to ensure EU sustainable development. 
For example, one could channel resources into high-
potential territories to ensure better interconnection 


between the strongest and the weakest territorial spots. 
This would require a closer inter-institutional coordination 
of thematic policies in a given territory as well as a possible 
upgrade of spatial planning for Community policies, with an 
enhanced role for the EU and the regions compared to the 
current inter-governmental practice.7 Appropriate set-ups 
for shared territorial governance are thus clearly in demand. 
On this the EGTC Regulation, as the first-ever EU piece of 
legislation explicitly addressing territor,8 is a forerunner in 
supporting territorial cohesion through an innovative multilevel 
governance format. We will therefore consider how 
EGTCs will enhance territorial cohesion across Europe. 
Furthermore, the EGTC Regulation must be read in 
conjunction with the increased involvement of sub-national 
government in EU policy-making. This development, albeit 
slow, is progressive and is based on regionalisation and 
decentralisation trends at national level, the increased 
allocation of competences and resources to the sub-state 
level,9 as well as on major EU policies which, like cohesion 
policy, require implementation at sub-state level. 
Efforts have been made to enhance the role of the regions 
in Europe. The European Commission, through the White 
Paper on European Governance (2001) and the subsequent 
Mandelkern report on Better Regulation, highlighted the 
importance of coordination between the local, regional and 
EU levels in order to ensure Europe-wide regulation of the 
highest possible quality. Governance stands for the diffusion 
of control and cooperation across levels and sectors. 
The “regionalist” agenda was also driven by the large and 
often legislatively powerful regions, which did not want to sit 
on the bench in EU decision-making, while a number of new 
small-sized Member States were gaining access to enlarged 
EU Institutions. The adoption of the EGTC Regulation is 
itself a case of local and regional powers achieving, through 
EU policy-making, their claim for a greater legitimacy to 
be ascribed to their cooperation. Therefore this article 
investigates whether the established EGTCs are stretching 
the Regulation beyond its original scope of purely project-
based cooperation, aiming at gaining higher legitimacy for 
political cooperation. 
The two forces of territorial cohesion and the rise of 
sub-national governments, build on the consolidation 
of territorial cooperation as more effective vehicle to 
develop real cross-border regional initiatives, compared to 
intergovernmental cooperation. “International recognition” 
of this phenomenon came already in the 1980s through the 
Council of Europe’s Madrid Convention, opening the path 
for cross-border cooperation and for innovative structures.10 
But this process has partially been hampered by dependence 
on intergovernmental deliberations and the emergence of a 
strong EU policy for territorial cooperation, via the INTERREG 
Community Initiative. Negotiation on the 2007-13 financial 
package confirmed cohesion policy as a main pillar of EU 
action, and consolidated the INTERREG Initiative (20 years 
old in 2009) into one of its three main Objectives. 
We are now at a turning point. New institutional 
mandates and a new agenda for Europe 2020 are currently 
being shaped. The Lisbon Treaty and the EU budget revision 
will open the way to reform the whole EU policy framework. 
Key to it are the question of how place-based policies11 can 
be combined with sectoral policies and how different levels 
of governments should interact to reinforce the European 
integration process at both local and European level. As the 
third issue, the article identifies some actions on the ground 
and EU incentives to make EGTC better fit for this purpose. 
How do EGTCs enhance territorial cohesion across Europe? 
Although the definition of “territorial cohesion” is being 
debated,12 some objectives are not controversial: boosting 
territorial cooperation through new functional macro-
regions; ensuring territorial cohesion both within the 
strongest territories of Europe as well as between these 
territories and the continent’s weakest areas; and focusing 
policies according to different territorial formats. Early 
established EGTCs seem to meet these three objectives. 
EIPASCOPE 2009/2 
7 
The European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC) 
Note: Established: 1) Amphictyony; Expected to be established: 2) Euroregion Pyrenees-Mediterranean, 3) Euroregion Alps-Mediterranean; Envisaged: 4) 
EURIMED – Mediterranean Islands, 5) Adriatic Euroregion; 6) network of small islands. 
Figure1: EGTCs under establishment in the Mediterranean basin 
(2) 
(3) (5) 
(4) 1 
1 
1 1 
EIPASCOPE 2009/2 
7 
The European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC) 
Note: Established: 1) Amphictyony; Expected to be established: 2) Euroregion Pyrenees-Mediterranean, 3) Euroregion Alps-Mediterranean; Envisaged: 4) 
EURIMED – Mediterranean Islands, 5) Adriatic Euroregion; 6) network of small islands. 
Figure1: EGTCs under establishment in the Mediterranean basin 
(2) 
(3) (5) 
(4) 1 
1 
1 1 

www.eipa.eu 

The European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC)

Secondly, the emerging “EGTC geography” looks 
conducive to a more balanced development of the EU 
territory. Taking the well-known “Blue Banana”13 as reference 
for the territorial backbone of Europe, we find (projects of) 
EGTCs which potentially can:14 
1. bring coordination to its core territories, e.g. Grande 
Region, Strasbourg-Ortenau; 
2. enhance the European position and the urban-rural 
interconnection of its internal weakest spots, e.g. West 
Vlandereen/Flandres-Dunquerque-Côte d’Opale and 
Eurometropole Lille-Kortrijk-Tournai versus the LondonParis-
Brussels triangle; 
3. extend its reach, e.g. towards the Mediterranean Arc, 
see Euroregion Alps-Mediterranean, Euroregion Pyrenees-
Mediterranean; 
4. pool the distinctive and dispersed territorial resources 
available at the periphery, e.g. Galicia-Norte Portugal, 
Duero-Douro, Amphictyony, Ister-Granum, Karst-Bodva. 
Thirdly, EGTCs are applicable to a variety of territorial 
formats, e.g.: 
1. large-scale Euroregions (Galicia-Norte Portugal, Pyrenees-
Mediterranean, Alps-Mediterranean), of between 50,000 
and 100,000 km2, with 5 to over 15 million inhabitants; 
2. medium-scale inter-provincial regions (Eurometropole 
Lille-Kortrijk-Tournai, Eurodistrict Strasbourg-Ortenau, 
Ister-Granum, West Vlandereen/Flandres-Dunquerque-
Côte d’Opale, Duero-Douro), of between 2,000 and 
10,000 km2 with up to 2 million people; 
3. small-scale cross-border or inter-municipal cooperation 
(Karst-Bodva, 53 km2 with around 2,000 people, or 
Amphictyony). 
Are established EGTCs stretching the Regulation beyond 
its original scope of purely operational cooperation, 
fostering political cooperation? 
Although the evidence is not conclusive, some early signals 
indicate a positive answer. 
8 
Firstly, through the EGTC, a new territorial cooperation 
scale is emerging: the functional macro-region. This goes 
beyond the traditional cross-border neighbourhood 
(150 km from border as ruled within structural funds) and 
is more focused than large transnational cooperation basins 

(e.g. the whole North-West Europe), as negotiated between 
national governments. These functional macro-regions are 
rather defined bottom-up on the basis of common needs, 
assets and a dense agglomeration of shared policy making. 
For example, the Mediterranean basin is experiencing such 
an emergence of EGTCs as new functional cooperation 
hubs, aimed at better structuring the specific territories 
and, contemporaneously, the larger basin. The current 
EU experimentation of integrated basin strategies (e.g. 
Baltic Sea Region, Danube River Basin, and to a certain 
extent the Union for the 
The Regulation itself makes a wide range of tasks 
potentially available to EGTCs, despite its wording may 
appear somehow “timid” on this point. The legislator’s main 
concern was to keep functional cooperation, in particular 
structural funds management, as the main raison d’etre of 
the new tool.15 

However, because of existing cooperation arrangements, 
amongst others, local and regional authorities are moving 
to a different agenda. The first EGTCs are marked by a 
higher level of political engagement and ambition, which 
are perceived as constituting a substantial shift in terms 
of EU recognition and international positioning of “local” 
cooperation, providing an opportunity to enhance territorial 
governance (organisation of relationships among policy-

makers and stakeholders) at 

Mediterranean) and their Through the EGTC, a new territorial large. 

concrete action plans could 
serve indeed to map out cooperation scale is emerging: Table 1 illustrates the 
those areas where EGTCs horizontal objectives and co


the functional macro-region. 

can contribute substantially. operation themes as emerging 

from EGTC Conventions. 

At first sight, Conventions appear to confirm that EGTCs 
are vehicles for operational cooperation in key themes for 
territorial development and for structural funds’management. 
However, as broad partnership “contracts”, they also reveal a 
willingness to enhance political cooperation and multilevel 
governance across borders and beyond, promoting the 
external representation of shared interests, rather than 
purely adopting a project-oriented logic. 

This is clear from some of the Conventions: they state as 
objectives the reinforcement of internal political cohesion 
and the promotion of interests within EU and national 
institutions. This is not called for by the Regulation; they 
foresee the figure of a President, and of a Bureau which is 
not expressly indicated in the Regulation;16 some of them 
profile the role of their representative (office) in Brussels;17 
some decide to sign their EGTC Convention in Brussels within 
a high-level institutional and political context.18 

This level of ambition is more evident in the multi-purpose 
EGTCs set-up so far. However one should also consider 
monothematic EGTCs, where operational cooperation is 
likely to prevail and which could become valid interfaces to 
deliver major EU policies. There are EGTCs under preparation 
which would deal with cross-border health (Hôpital de 
Cerdagne) or with cross-border protected natural areas 
(joint alpine park Italy-France: Parc National Mercantour and 
Parco Regionale Alpi Marittime). In this regards, EGTCs can 
effectively implement EU thematic programmes (transport, 
energy, research, innovation, climate, environment, learning, 
etc.).19 

Which actions on the ground and institutional incentives 
can make EGTC a better lever for EU integration? 

If the EGTC is to bring added value to EU integration, it should 
succeed in creating the right conditions for sustainable 
territorial cooperation which delivers results beyond short-
term planning. Long-term EGTC cooperation implies setting 
up an ongoing cost-benefit analysis on establishment 


EIPASCOPE 2009/2 


Table 1: EGCT Conventions 

* EGTCs close to being established 
Source: Authors’ analysis of EGTCs’ (draft) Conventions 
and future development options, a clear definition of the 
governance system within the articulated set of EGTC 
bodies and between constituting members, a successful 
operational launch,20 an effective planning and programme/ 
project implementation. 

In our view, EGTC members should aim to increase the 
level of cohesion, effectiveness and efficiency of their 
cooperation, through some fundamental actions: 

The European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC) 

1. 
integrated territorial planning and the targeting of 
relevant basins of intervention, including interconnection 
with those territories neighbouring the cooperation area;21 
2. 
focusing on policies with a clear impact on citizens 
and for which the constituting members have substantial 
competences, e.g. infrastructure and provision of services 
of general interest; 
3. 
rationalisation and the pooling of initiatives, human and 
financial resources; 

www.eipa.eu 

The European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC)

in fields like the environment, energy, rural development, 
transport, innovation, health, civil protection, etc. 
In line with the above, and in order to promote a clear 
territorial impact of the EU law provisions, the idea of target-
based contracts could be revamped. This idea takes us back 
to the White Paper on European Governance (2001) and the 
Commission’s proposal on target-based tripartite contracts 
between the Commission, the States and the regional or 
local authorities as a flexible means of considering specific 
contexts when drawing up and implementing Community 
policies.24 
Why a “contract” between the European Commission and 
an EGTC? 
One could envisage the “contractualisation” of the 
cooperation between the European Commission and 
the EGTCs for achieving certain objectives, with higher 
targets agreed, a tighter timetable set or experimental 
actions foreseen.25 An example could be the “enhanced” 
compliance of EU law (e.g. a Directive) or experimentation 
of EU policy (e.g. local strategy for growth and jobs, 
“low-carbon” cities and regions, integrated labour markets, 
etc.) at the level of the macro-region, cross-border 
conurbation or cross-border natural area, aiming at a more 
coherent and timely implementation on both sides of the 
border, also through experimental actions.26 
Contractualising this cooperation would take the 
idea of tri-partite contracts back to the initial bilateral 
approach, without challenging the principle of Member 
State responsibility for implementing Community policies. 
This could address some of the difficulties experienced and 
shape a more feasible contract with a very specific purpose 
and well-defined agenda.28 Such a contractualisation 
would legitimise and boost the role of the sub-state level 
in “beyond-the-border” policymaking and finally help to 
overcome those difficulties still existing in a given cross-
border cooperation. 
Cohesion policy could provide another incentive, 
fostering the macro-regional EGTC cooperation within the 
10 
4. 
a sustainable financial framework, through adequate 
modelling of a mix of members’ fees, service revenues, 
loans, fund-raising, and public-private partnerships; 
5. 
proper “association” of economic and social partners; 
6. 
interaction with other (EGTC) cooperation initiatives 
within the same territory or in the neighbourhood.22 
Assuming that the EGTC (partnership) works properly at 
local level, institutional incentives at higher level can only 
reinforce it. EU and national Institutions, which decided 
to adopt the EGTC Regulation, are now expected to fully 
leverage it. How? Firstly, by acknowledging the political 
commitment of local and regional actors to legally bind their 

cooperation within an EU 
context. Secondly, by setting a 
proper policy offer, including 
innovative proposals for EGTC 
applications and financial 
incentives to fully promote 
the EGTC potential, under 
cohesion policy23 as well as 

existing regulatory framework. This could be done through 
several means. Existing management authorities (under the 
convergence, competitiveness or cooperation objectives), 
could delegate (sub)-programmes to EGTCs; or territorial 
authorities could co-finance EGTC cooperation through 
funds allocated to their national or regional programmes 

(Art. 37(6) of the general Structural Funds Regulation 
No. 1083/2006).29 
Assuming that this vision is agreed upon, what lies 

ahead? The European Commission is expected to report 
on the EGTC Regulation (ex. Art. 17) to the European 
Parliament and Council by 2011 at the latest. At that time, 

We could envisage the 
“contractualisation” of the cooperation 
between the European Commission 
and the EGTCs. 

it will first report on the state 
of play of established EGTCs 
and eventually formulate 
proposals for revising the 
Regulation in those areas 
where shortcomings have 
been detected. Possible 
improvements include 

streamlining EGTC establishment procedures, which are 
still too heavily affected by a scattered panorama among 
Member States; thereby facilitating the participation of 
partners from Third countries and of private actors. 

The EGTC cannot solve all the issues related to the 
administrative asymmetry between and within Member 
States, however it can be a valuable common playing field 
to start tackling these issues from the ground, especially 
when a critical mass of EGTCs will be reached. To achieve 
that, the EU and national institutions should provide 
better information on the range of applications available. 
In particular, the European Commission could submit a 
comprehensive roadmap for the further exploitation of 
territorial cooperation through the EGTC, bridging the 
existing experience with a forward-looking EU policy offer.30 

Conclusions 

At this early stage of its implementation, the EGTC has 
shown more potential than achievements, creating a new 
dynamism which could be beneficial both for territorial 
cooperation and European integration. 

EGTCs are slowly drawing up a new legally stable 
cooperation geography, which could help achieve 
greater territorial cohesion across Europe. Thanks to their 
differentiated geographical scope, EGTCs can better 
interconnect the strongest and weakest spots within core 
areas of Europe, as well as link up the core backbones 
of European territory and better agglomerate the most 
peripheral areas. Moreover some EGTCs are about to shape 
new functional macro-regions, going beyond traditional 
cross-border cooperation. 

It is too early for conclusive evidence, however the first 
EGTCs indicate that stable cooperation requires putting 
strong political commitment and institutional recognition, 
at all levels, before a project or programme-driven agenda. 
In this sense a number of EGTCs are likely to profile 
themselves as new inter-institutional governance platforms, 
besides acting as project-delivery vehicles. 


EIPASCOPE 2009/2 


Some actions seem opportune to make the EGTC fit the 
purpose of improving EU multilevel integration. At local 
level, the cooperation should be orientated to inclusive and 
operational partnerships rather than purely institutional 
gatherings. The participation of economic and social 
partners, as well as of national authorities, when relevant, 
should be actively promoted. At EU level, a clear set of policy 
offer , including institutional and financial incentives, should 
be put in place: result-oriented contractualisation between 
the European Commission and EGTCs could be an avenue to 
explore. 

Last but not least, the first generation of EGTCs are 
likely not only to present challenges, but also to provide 
a set of “local solutions”, tackling legal and administrative 

uncertainties and disparities. This knowledge/expertise 
could be managed at EU level to improve the “usability” of 
the tool and spread its leverage effects across applications: 
EU project or program management, large infrastructures, 
cross-border services, cooperation with third countries, 
etc.31 

The EGTC can represent a significant development in the 
political landscape at local and regional level. It could bring 
a sense of European neighbourhood to citizens as well as 
provide local political classes with a substantial European 
perspective. A new vision for a generation of politicians, no 
longer divided by post-war borders, who would rather have 
the shared challenge of jointly projecting their borderless 
territory within, and beyond, our continent - Europe. 

Annex: State of play in the establishment of EGTCs – at editorial closure, June 2009 

a. EGTCs formally established32 
The European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC) 

EGTC name Law 
nature 
Countries of 
members* 
No. of 
members 
Nature of 
members 
Reference 
Territory 
(km2) 
Reference 
Population 
1000 inhab. 
Date of 
establishment 
Eurometropole 
Lille-Kortrijk-Tournai 
www.lillemetropole.fr 
Public BE, FR 14 Mix level of 
government 
3.544 2.000 21/01/08 
Galicia-Norte Portugal (GNP) Public ES, PT 2 Regional 50.852 6.817 23/10/08 
Ister-Granum EGTC Limited 
www.istergranum.hu 
Private HU, SK 85 Municipal 2.000 2.000 12/11/08 
Amphictyony 
www.amphictyony.gr 
Private CY, FR, EL,IT 50 Municipal n.a. n.a 01/12/08 
Karst-Bodva EGTC Limited Private HU, SK 3 Municipal 53 2 11/02/09 
Duero-Douro 
www.duero-douro.com 
Public ES, PT 175 Municipal 8.785 103 11/02/09 
West-Flanderen / FlandreDunquerque-
Côte d’Opale 
www.cud.fr 
Public BE, FR 13 Mix level of 
government 
7.808 2.079 25/03/09 

* Underlined countries host the registered seat of the EGTC. 
b. EGTCs expected to be established33 
EGTC name Law 
nature 
Countries of 
members* 
No. of 
members 
Nature of 
members 
Reference 
Territory 
(km2) 
Reference 
Population 
1000 inhab. 
Euroregion Pyrenees-
Mediterranean 
www.euregio.eu 
Public ES, FR 4 Regional 109.666 13.550 
Euroregion 
Alps-Mediterranean 
www.euroregion-alpesmediterranee.
eu 
Public FR, IT 5 Regional 109.179 16.880 
Eurodistrict Strasbourg-
Ortenau 
www.eurodistrict.eu 
Public FR, DE 7 Municipal and 
inter-municipal 
2.176 868 

* Underlined countries host the registered seat of the EGTC. 

The European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC)

www.eipa.eu 
www.eipa.euwww.eipa.eu

c. EGTCs whose establishment is under consideration (not exhaustive list) 
Cooperation name Countries of partners Focus of cooperation 
Cerdany Joint Cross-border Hospital 
www.hcerdanya.eu 
ES, FR Cross-border health 
La Grande Région 
www.granderegion.net 
BE, DE, FR, LU Integrated territorial development of large area 
Parc Mercantour – Parc Alpes Maritimes 
www.mercantour.eu 
www.parcoalpimarittime.it 
FR, IT Natural areas preservation and valorisation 
Espace Catalan Transfrontalier ES, FR Interprovincial cooperation 
Alzette-Belval 2015 FR, LU Urban and territorial requalification of a carbon basin 
EURIMED CY, EL, ES, FR, IT, MT Network of Mediterranean main Islands 
UTTS Ung-Tisza-Túr -Sajó 
(or UTT Ung-Tisza-Túr) 
HU, RO, SK, UA n.a. 
Eurocidade Chaves-Verin ES, PT Cross-border urban development 
Alpe Adria Working Community 
www.alpeadria.org 
AT, HR, HU, IT, SI Integrated territorial development of large area 
Adriatic Euroregion 
www.adriaticeuroregion.org 
AL, EL HR, IT, ME, SI, Sustainable development of sea basin 

12 NOTES 

* 
Gianluca Spinaci, Committee of the Regions, Cellule de 
Prospective, Administrator. Writing in a personal capacity. 
** Gracia Vara-Arribas, Senior Lecturer, European Centre for the 
Regions, EIPA Barcelona. 
1 
Contracting authorities as defined by Art. 1 of Directive 18/2004/ 
EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 
2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of 
public works contracts, public supply contracts and public 
service contracts, OJ L 134, 30 March 2004. 

2 
There is a general preclusion to the exercise of powers conferred 
by public law to safeguard the general interest of the state or 
other public authorities. See Art. 7 of Regulation (EC) 
No. 1082/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council 
of 5 July 2006 on a European grouping of territorial cooperation 
(EGTC) OJ L 210, 31 July 2006. 

3 
Gianluca, S. (2008). 

4 
EGTC Regulation, Art. 16/18, “Member States shall make such 
provisions as are appropriate to ensure the effective application 
of this regulation”, which “should apply by 1 August 2007, with 
exception of Art. 16, which shall apply from 1 August 2007”. 
18 Member States have adopted EGTC legislation: Belgium 
(federal level, Flanders), Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, 
Denmark, Estonia, France, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, 
Luxembourg, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain 
and the United Kingdom. Process close to finalization in: Austria, 
Germany, Ireland, Malta, The Netherlands. Process underway in: 
Finland, Latvia, Poland, Sweden. 

5 
Opinion CoR 181/2000 fin of 13 March 2002 on Strategies for 
promoting cross-border and inter-regional cooperation in 
an enlarged EU -a basic document setting out guidelines for the 
future. 

6 
The Union “shall promote economic, social and territorial 

cohesion…” (Art. 3 of the modified Treaty on EU). 

7 
Faludi, A. (2004). 

8 
Exception: Regulations defining common classification of 

territorial units for statistics (NUTS). 

9 
These represent: 16% of EU27 GDP; 1/3 of public spending; 
2/3 of all public investment expenditure; 56% of public 
employment. DEXIA, 2009. 

10 
European Framework Convention on Transfrontier Cooperation, 
(Madrid 21 May 1980), Additional Protocol, 9 November 1995 

and Protocol No. 2, 5 May 1998 concerning inter-territorial 
cooperation, paved the way to cross-border institutional 
settings, like Euroregions and working communities. 

11 
Barca, F. (2009). 

12 
The consultation on the European Commission’s Green Paper 
on Territorial cohesion (COM(2008) 616 final of 6 October 2008) 
produced a wide range of replies with different understandings 
on the definition of territorial cohesion and the role of the 
Communities. 

13 
It is a discontinuous corridor of urbanisation in Western Europe, 
which stretches approximately from London down to Milan, 
through Brussels, Amsterdam, Cologne, Frankfurt am Main. 
It covers one of the world’s highest concentrations of people, 
money, and industry. 

14 
EGTCs under preparation are written in italics. 

15 
“… The tasks of an EGTC shall be limited primarily to the 
implementation of territorial cooperation programmes or 
projects co-financed by the Community”. Art. 7(3) 

16 
Art. 10 EGTC Regulation: “An EGTC shall have at least the 
following organs: (a) an Assembly, (…) (b) a director (…)”. 

17 
Euroregion Alps-Mediterranean, Art. 4 draft Convention; 
Euroregion Pyrenees-Mediterranean, Art. 8/13 draft Statute; 
Ister-Granum EGTC, Art. 2 Statutes. 

18 
Euroregion Pyrenees-Mediterranean at the European 
Parliament, 3 December 2008. 

19 
Ref. : TEN-T, TEN-E, FP RTD, CIP, Climate Action, Intelligent Energy, 
etc. 

20 
Illustrative check-list: constitution of running bodies, 
establishment of (pluri-)annual work-plan and budget, 
nomination of director(s), staff hiring and establishment, launch 
of operational projects; communication on the field and at EU 
level. 

21 
EGTC Eurometropole Lille-Kortrijk-Tournai, Art. 4, Convention: 
“Territories, towns and municipalities, placed outside the 
reference territory, however bordering or close to it, could be 
associated to the works of the Eurometropole”. 

22 
e.g.: Euroregion Alps-Mediterranean/Parc Mercantour-Parco 
Alpi Marittime; Euroregion Pyrenees-Mediterranean/Espace 
Transfrontalier Catalan/Hôpital Cerdagne;Grande Region/ 
Euroregio Maas-Rhine/Alzette-Belval. 


EIPASCOPE 2009/2 


NOTES 

23 
European Territorial Cooperation currently counts 7.75 billion 
euros (2.5% of cohesion policy’allocation), hence less than 1% of 
EU budget, less than 0.01% of EU Gross National Income. 

24 
The tripartite contracts were left aside in 2006 when the pilot 
projects were evaluated as lacking political commitment and 
financial support. 

25 
Ref.: Gianluca, S. (2009). 

26 
The authors will soon publish a follow-up article, presenting the 
operational solutions available for contracts between the 
European Commission and EGTCs. 

27 
Working Group 2c, Preparatory works for the WBEG, European 
Commission. 

28 
Vara-Arribas, G., Bourdin, D. (2006). 

REFERENCES 

Barca, F. (2009), An agenda for a reformed cohesion policy. 

Committee of the Regions, “The European Grouping of Territorial 
Cooperation” – EGTC, January 2007, CdR 117/2007, Study. 

Committee of the Regions (2007 onwards), Proceedings of the 
EGTC Expert Group, of the EGTC conferences and workshops; 
collection of national provisions; register of EGTCs, www.cor. 
europa.eu/egtc.htm. 

Committee of the Regions (2008),“Own Initiative Opinion EGTC, new 
impetuous for territorial cooperation in Europe” (CdR 307/2007). 

Committee of the Regions (2009), “The EGTC: state of play and 
perspectives”. 

DEXIA (2009), “Sub-national governments in the European Union. 
Organisation, responsibilities and finance”. 

ESPON and INTERACT (2007), “Cross-border cooperation”. 

European Commission (2008), Green Paper on Territorial Cohesion. 
Turning diversity into strength. (COM (2008)216 fin). 

European Commission (2009), Reflection paper on future cohesion 
policy. 

Faludi, A. (2004), “Territorial cohesion: old (French) wine in new 
bottles?” Urban Studies, Volume 41, Issue 7 p.p. 1349-1365. 

INTERACT (2008), Handbook EGTC “What use for European 
Territorial Cooperation Programmes and Projects?”. 

Levrat, N. (2008), Fact finding on the EGTC and territorial pacts. 
Proceedings of the Second CoR Atelier “The legal and political 
instruments of multi-level governance”, Brussels, 7/11/2008, www. 
cor.europa.eu/ateliers. 

Maier, J. (2008), “EGTC – Regions’ new instrument for Co-operation 
beyond borders”. 

Morata, F. (2008), First fact finding on the EGTC and territorial 
pacts, proceedings of the Second CoR Atelier, idem. 

The European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC) 

29 
Gianluca, S. (2006). 

30 
In the RTD field, the new legal tool European Research 

Infrastructures Consortium (ERIC) is backed by a European 

Roadmap on Research Infrastructures. 
31 This is among the objectives of the EGTC Expert Group, 

established by the CoR, www.cor.europa.eu/egtc.htm. 
32 “The EGTC shall acquire legal personality on the day of 

registration or publication, whichever occurs first”, Art. 5(1) 

Reg. 1082/2006. OJEU notices of establishment are at www.ted. 

europa.eu. EGTC Conventions and Statutes are at www.cor. 

europa.eu/egtc.htm. 
33 Convention and Statutes are already agreed (or signed). 

Procedures of approval by national authorities are underway. 

MOT (2008), The MOT Guide: the EGTC. 

Notre Europe (2001), Coopération transfrontaliere et transnationale, 
la nouvelle Europe s’invente sur ses marges. 

OECD (2009), Investing for growth: building innovative regions. 

Perkmann, M. (2003), Cross-Border Regions in Europe: Significance 
and Drivers of Regional Cross-Border Co-Operation, European 
Urban and Regional Studies, Vol. 10 No. 2. 

Regulation (EC) No. 1082/2006 of the European Parliament and of 
the Council of 5 July 2006 on a European Grouping of Territorial 
Cooperation (EGTC) OJ L 210, 31 July 2006. 

Spinaci, G. (2006), Politica di coesione europea: finanziamento, 
orientamento e governance. Il dibattito politico sulle riforme, 
Argomenti, Vol. 17/2006, Franco Angeli Editore. 

Spinaci, G. (2008), “The EGTC, new legal tool for multilevel territorial 
governance”. Proceedings of the Regional Studies Association, Annual 
Conference “The dilemmas of integration and competition”, Prague, 
27-29/5/2008. 

Spinaci, G. (2009), “The EGTC and meta-regions as new engine(s) 
for European integration”. Proceedings of the Regional Studies 
Association, Annual Conference “Understanding and shaping 
regions: spatial, social and economic futures”, Leuven, 6-8/4/2009. 

Vara-Arribas, G. (2005), “The Changing Dynamics of Sub-state 
participation: the Commission’s proposals for increasing regional 
and local involvement in European policy processes”, EIPASCOPE 
2005/2. 

Vara-Arribas, G., Bourdin, D. (Eds.) (2006), Tripartite Arrangements: 

An Effective Tool for Multilevel Governance? Eipa Maastricht. 

Vara-Arribas, G. (2008), Case study: the EGTC in Spain, the state of 
affairs. Proceedings of the Second CoR Atelier, idem. 

13