This chapter focuses on the second dimension of the OECD Cross-border Governance Framework: Strategic planning. It first compares different formats used for strategic planning, and assesses their relative strengths and limitations. Then, the chapter analyses the wide range of actions that cross-border governance bodies implement to deliver on their mandate. It highlights why many cross-border governance bodies opt for providing 'soft' cross-border actions, such as networking and promotional activities, rather than supporting the delivery of essential services, such as cross-border public transport. Finally, the chapter presents considerations for regional, national and international policy makers on how to support cross-border planning to boost socio-economic development and citizen well-being in border regions.
Building More Resilient Cross‑border Regions
Abstract
Robust strategic planning is crucial for tackling cross-border challenges such as flagging socio-economic development, congestion, and limited healthcare access. It can provide a roadmap for joint action by defining clear objectives and priorities for co-operation. It can also facilitate the mobilisation and allocation of financial and human resources. Finally, by formulating clear targets, it can help policy makers monitor whether cross-border initiatives are achieving their goals or adjustments are needed.
Traditional approaches to strategic planning for regional development often fall short in cross-border regions. This can occur for a variety of reasons. The absence of legal or regulatory frameworks for cross-border development planning is one. Another is that existing strategic planning documents developed by national and/or subnational governments may already address cross-border issues. This can make a cross-border development strategy unnecessary and/or risks layering additional planning requirements on top of those that are already in place.
All cross-border governance bodies must consider which approach to strategic planning is likely to add the most value to their cross-border region and to co-operating partners. One approach can be to focus on supporting the integrated development of the transboundary region, and adopt a strategy that sets objectives to advance the region’s socio-economic development needs and priorities. Another approach can be to focus on the cross-border governance body’s own development over time in order to meet its mandate and objectives and develop an organisational strategy in support of this. Deciding on which approach is more suitable for a cross-border governance body can depend on a range of factors, including the body’s overall objective, and the human and financial resources available to support strategy design and implementation.
Where cross-border governance bodies in the European Union (EU) have adopted strategic planning documents—either to guide the development of their organisation or of the cross-border region—common limitations in their design can often be identified. A frequent gap is the lack of clear guidance on implementation. Without a defined implementation framework, it is difficult to estimate the resources needed for cross-border development, prioritise actions, or secure necessary funding, each of which risks frustrating the cross-border body’s objectives. Additionally, many planning documents lack adequate monitoring and evaluation frameworks. Without them, the effectiveness of cross-border strategies remains difficult to determine, reducing their potential to meet regional needs and foster sustainable development and well-being in cross-border communities.
This chapter focuses on the second dimension of the OECD Cross-Border Governance Framework: Cross-border strategic planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation. It consists of two parts. The first section addresses the value of strategic planning for cross-border development, drawing on the experiences of cross-border governance bodies in five regions. In particular, it compares the different approaches and formats used for strategic planning, and assesses their strengths and limitations. Subsequently, the section provides a series of considerations for regional, national and EU-level policy makers to support cross-border planning. The second part of the chapter explores the wide range of services and support provided by cross-border governance bodies to contribute to the socio-economic development and well-being of cross-border communities. The chapter finishes with a series of considerations for policy makers to strategically assess and prioritise cross-border actions to ensure cross-border governance bodies can deliver on their mandate.
When deciding on the approach and format for strategic planning for cross-border development, cross-border governance bodies should:
Carefully assess the human and financial resources available for strategy design and implementation, and whether existing strategic planning documents developed by national and/or subnational governments already effectively address cross-border issues.
For cross-border governance bodies to be able to deliver on their objectives, it is essential they:
Develop—at a minimum—an organisational development strategy that can guide how they contribute to broader cross-border regional objectives, define implementing partners on both sides of the border, and identify the necessary resources to support implementation.
To ensure that cross-border development strategies reflect local needs and capacities, cross-border governance bodies are encouraged to:
Engage relevant stakeholders in the strategy design process, particularly those whose support is essential for its implementation and those most affected by its actions.
To ensure a cross-border development strategy can be implemented effectively, cross-border governance bodies should consider:
Setting clear, concrete, ambitious yet realistic objectives that provide direction, ensure alignment among relevant stakeholders, and demonstrate how these goals align with existing local, regional, and national plans;
Identifying the public and non-governmental actors essential for strategy implementation, along with the specific contributions (e.g. human, financial) they can provide;
Pinpointing the funding and financing sources required to achieve the objectives;
Determining who will be responsible for overseeing and co-ordinating the efforts of different partners.
To enable cross-border governance bodies to track the outcomes of their work, they should adjust actions where needed, document good practices and share results with relevant stakeholders. More specifically such bodies should:
Ensure that any strategic planning document includes clear and measurable targets and indicators, clarify what monitoring and evaluation activities will be carried out, and how findings will be used.
To support robust strategic planning by cross-border governance bodies, European Union (EU) policy makers could consider:
Establishing a database of cross-border strategic planning documents, providing cross-border policy makers with examples to draw inspiration from and facilitate peer learning;
Organising recurring training sessions or peer-to-peer exchanges focused on strategic planning for cross-border development;
Integrating a cross-border strategic planning toolbox into the Interreg Learning Platform. The toolbox could include online training material and strategic planning guidelines on stakeholder consultation, for example.
Adjusting the European Grouping of Territorial Co-operation (EGTC) regulation to encourage EGTCs to adopt medium- to long-term development planning documents.
Making the adoption of an organisational development strategy a prerequisite for cross-border governance bodies to access Interreg funding.
To enhance the potential of development strategies adopted by local and regional governments in border regions to effectively address cross-border challenges, policy makers could consider:
Adopting spatial and territorial planning frameworks that encourage, or even require, consultation with specific public and non-governmental actors across borders during strategy design, ensuring that the needs, priorities, capacities, and expertise of relevant stakeholders are reflected, and that priorities are aligned where possible.
To help cross-border governance bodies take evidence-informed decisions on the type of actions to implement to address border needs, national and regional policy makers could consider:
Establishing co-ordination mechanisms where cross-border governance bodies can exchange on challenges and showcase innovative practices that could be scaled or adapted by other governance bodies.
Conducting periodic surveys to assess the outcomes of cross-border co-operation, such as gathering feedback on public awareness and satisfaction with cross-border service delivery, as well as trust in neighbouring communities.
Source: Author’s elaboration.
Traditional approaches to regional development planning may not be suitable for cross-border regions due to the unique complexities and dynamics of cross-border co-operation, such as the absence of regulations or other guidelines for cross-border strategic planning. Common challenges to effective strategic planning faced by cross-border governance bodies include engaging with relevant stakeholders during the design phase, clarifying implementation roles and resources, and establishing comprehensive frameworks for monitoring and evaluation. Addressing these challenges can help translate strategic objectives into concrete actions, track progress and, ultimately, contribute to meeting specific cross-border needs.
Benefits and challenges to strategic planning for cross-border development
There are a number of ways in which good-quality strategic planning supports more effective cross-border co-operation. First, it can provide a roadmap for joint action by articulating clear objectives and priorities for the cross-border region. Second, it can guide the mobilisation and allocation of financial, human and material resources to reach shared objectives. Third, it forms the basis for performance measurement through monitoring and evaluation exercises and enables stakeholders to hold cross-border governance bodies accountable. Fourth, it can create a reference point for engagement, partnership and investment by providing a common framework and shared goals around which different groups can rally. Finally, it can guide communication with stakeholders in the cross-border region by clarifying the objectives of cross-border co-operation and how such co-operation can be of value to them. For instance, communication material can illustrate how a cross-border strategy targets needs expressed by residents and businesses.
Strategic planning is commonly understood to include three basic stages (Box 3.2), from conducting an assessment and setting the development vision to implementation, monitoring and evaluation.
The strategic planning cycle reflects a comprehensive approach to developing, implementing, monitoring, and evaluating strategies, policies, plans and other initiatives. Following the three stages illustrated in Figure 3.1 can help policy makers ensure that strategic planning documents are well-designed, executed efficiently and effectively, regularly monitored to identify progress and improve implementation, and evaluated to determine outcomes.
Stage 1. Assessment and design
This stage involves assessing the current development situation by gathering and analysing data on a wide range of relevant indicators. The assessment enables policy makers to detect trends and identify development gaps and priorities, on the basis of which a clear and strategic long-term vision, objectives and priorities can be defined. Finally, this stage typically involves defining how, and with which resources and stakeholders the strategy will be implemented, monitored, and evaluated.
Stage 2. Implementation and monitoring
The practical application of the strategic planning document occurs in this stage. Resources are mobilised, goods and services are procured, and planned actions are carried out. Effective implementation involves co-ordinating stakeholders, managing resources efficiently, and maintaining flexibility to adjust to unforeseen challenges. This stage also involves ongoing monitoring to identify progress and address challenges promptly.
Stage 3. Evaluation and learning
This stage involves evaluation, conducted at specific intervals (e.g. interim and ex-post) to assess the effectiveness, efficiency, and sustainability of the interventions carried out. It also involves documenting evaluation results and sharing them with relevant stakeholders, enhancing transparency and accountability. Finally, in this stage evaluation findings are used to improve future planning efforts, closing the feedback loop and fostering continuous improvement.
Source: Author’s elaboration, based on (OECD, 2024[1]; OECD, 2021[2]; OECD, 2022[3]).
There is no single or best format for strategic planning for cross-border development. Rather, different formats can be adopted by cross-border policy makers, including the following:
A high-level, cross-border development vision that outlines the long-term objectives for the region, offering a flexible framework that public and non-governmental actors can build upon, without being prescriptive about the specific actions they should take.
A development strategy for the cross-border co-operation body that establishes organisational goals, specifies actions for the co-operation body and its partners, includes a performance measurement framework, and identifies funding sources.
A comprehensive, integrated cross-border development strategy that details a vision for development, sets objectives and priorities, and includes a robust implementation plan, as well as a monitoring and evaluation framework.
A cross-border spatial development plan that can guide land use, infrastructure, and environmental initiatives on both sides of the border, promoting cohesive spatial development and sustainable growth.
Strategic planning for cross-border co-operation can also imply embedding a cross-border perspective into existing planning documents (e.g. national, regional or municipal development strategies, plans or other relevant documents).
Which strategic planning format offers the most value to the cross-border region and to co-operating partners depends on at least two factors. First, the existence of different national, regional and local development plans that may already be in place on both sides of the border can affect decision making on whether or not to adopt a cross-border development strategy. For instance, if existing plans already address cross-border challenges, this could make the design and implementation of a dedicated strategy for the development of the cross-border region redundant and unnecessary. Second, cross-border governance bodies, like many other public entities, often have very limited human and financial resources available to support comprehensive strategic planning efforts (OECD, 2023[4]). This can hinder their ability to lead the design and implementation of integrated cross-border planning documents and instead require the adoption of another format (e.g. high-level development vision, organisational development strategy), which may demand fewer human resources to develop and implement.
When considering which format for strategic planning for cross-border development to adopt, policy makers should also define their approach to co-development (Box 3.3). There are two ways to think about co-development in the context of cross-border co-operation: i) as a targeted and flexible approach focused on the collaborative design and implementation of specific initiatives by actors on both sides of a border; and ii) as a comprehensive approach that conceives of a cross-border region as a shared space to be developed through joint efforts. These two interpretations are complementary, with the targeted approach providing practical guidance to design and implement broader strategic goals and address immediate challenges.
Co-development of specific cross-border initiatives
The first approach emphasises the co-design, co-implementation, and co-evaluation of cross-border planning documents, specific projects, and initiatives. It emphasises inclusive, collaborative strategic planning processes with a focus on targeted areas of cross-border co-operation. This approach encourages shared ownership and responsibility for strategic documents and projects, ensuring they are adapted to the realities of the cross-border context. It can foster adaptive, targeted and locally-led solutions to local challenges (i.e. limited cross-border public transport options).
Co-development of a cross-border region
The second approach to co-development treats the cross-border region as a single entity. The goal is to address systemic challenges through a shared vision and long-term, co-ordinated efforts for the mutual benefit of the entire region. This approach aligns with adopting comprehensive, integrated strategies that set clear objectives and assigns responsibilities effectively. It requires a long-term commitment from stakeholders to address regional challenges (e.g. related to public transport, environmental management). Co-development can also involve one country funding projects in another, on the premise that specific investments that are made across the border can benefit the entire region. For instance, under a framework agreement with France on cross-border transport, Luxembourg has invested over EUR 200 million to improve rail connectivity between the two countries. This investment facilitates daily commuting for thousands of workers, reduces traffic congestion on both sides of the France-Luxembourg border and thereby supports socio-economic development in the entire cross-border region.
This second approach to co-development is particularly relevant to cross-border functional zones. These are border areas characterised by functional relationships, co-operative stakeholder networks, and governance mechanisms, aimed at solving common problems. Across the European Union (EU), several cross-border regions (e.g. Alzette Belval along the Franco-Luxembourgian border) have been designated as functional zones, where a cross-border governance body manages and distributes EU funds to support local cross-border projects.
Source: Author’s elaboration, based on (Interreg Greater Region, 2024[5]; Jakubowski et al., 2020[6]; Government of Luxembourg, 2023[7]).
Cross-border regions use a wide range of strategic planning formats to guide co-operation
There are few formal regulations on strategic planning for cross-border development. Consequently, planning formats used by cross-border governance bodies tend to vary substantially. Some regions have implemented an integrated cross-border development strategy, while others only have an organisational development plan. Other regions rely solely on project-based planning. The following section analyses the benefits and challenges associated with each of these practices, providing examples from different cross-border governance bodies.
Adopting an integrated strategy to guide the development of a cross-border region
Adopting a comprehensive, long-term strategy for the entire cross-border region can add value to cross-border co-operation. Ideally based on a long-term vision and ambitious goals for the future of a cross-border region, such a strategy can act as an anchor for mobilising political and public interest in cross-border co-operation. It can also serve as a point of reference for regional and local planning documents.
There are also some challenges associated with this type of approach however, as certain conditions need to be in place for it to be effective. These include a clear demand from relevant authorities to develop this type of strategy; clarity on who should support implementation; and the availability of sufficient resources to guide its design and execution. Moreover, the broad nature of integrated strategies means that they can overlap with other national, regional or local plans, potentially duplicating planning efforts. Without robust co-ordination mechanisms in place, such redundancy may imply that stakeholders fail to leverage synergies or will compete for similar financial resources.
Additionally, integrated cross-border strategies can be hard to achieve. Cross-border governance bodies, such as European Groupings of Territorial Co-operation (EGTCs), typically do not have the human and financial resources and competences to lead the implementation and co-ordination of such strategies. Relatedly, public actors may be inclined to prioritise the implementation of their own planning documents (e.g. regional or municipal development plans) over that of an integrated cross-border strategy due to legislative or regulatory requirements that mandate the implementation of such plans, for which they may be held accountable by regional or local councils.
Furthermore, the development of integrated cross-border strategies may be resource-intensive. Their potentially broad thematic and territorial scope necessitates extensive engagement and consultation with a wide range of public and non-governmental actors to gather their input (e.g. regarding priorities) and to generate ownership for both implementation and results. This process can be time-consuming and costly, potentially imposing excessive burdens on cross-border governance bodies with limited resources.
The 2030 Cross-border Strategy adopted by the EGTC Rio Minho (Portugal and Spain) illustrates some of the benefits and challenges associated with adopting an integrated strategy for the development of the cross-border region (Box 3.4). The Rio Minho 2030 Cross-border Strategy has guided the EGTC’s partners regarding cross-border priorities. For example, interviews indicated that the strategy has been used by municipalities within the cross-border region to inform the design of their own cross-border co-operation plans and projects (OECD, 2023[8]).
Upon its establishment in 2018, the EGTC Rio Minho set out to develop a long-term, integrated development strategy for the cross-border region. The document was developed with technical support from the Centre for Euroregional Studies (CEER)1, and was approved in 2019.
Building on a robust diagnostic of key socio-economic and demographic development trends and challenges, the strategy identified five strategic axes to guide the development of the Rio Minho cross-border region: i) joint governance and services programmes; ii) sustainable and responsible tourism; iii) cross-border culture; iv) sustainable mobility; and v) innovative economy and sustainability. For each of these axes, the strategy also identified strategic objectives and broad lines of action.
The manner in which the strategy was developed reflects the EGTC’s emphasis on co-development. In addition to the significant technical support given by CEER to the drafting process, the strategy was also the product of the EGTC’s extensive consultation with public and non-governmental actors on a draft version. The consultation process included several meetings with local, regional and EU actors to discuss regional challenges and priorities, two cross-border fora with over 70 civil society and non-governmental actors, and an online survey for residents of the cross-border region on its website.
1. CEER is a research partnership between six public universities in Galicia and North Portugal (EGTC Rio Minho, 2019[9]).
Source: Author’s elaboration, based on (EGTC Rio Minho, 2019[9]).
There are, however, concerns among the EGTC and its partners about whether the strategy can be implemented. For instance, the EGTC does not have the competences to implement most of the actions outlined in the strategy. Moreover, the strategy does not identify the human and financial resources that are needed in order to achieve its objectives. It also does not specify if and how the EGTC will co-ordinate with other stakeholders (e.g. municipalities, non-governmental actors) to guide the implementation of the strategy (EGTC Rio Minho, 2019[9]).
Adopting an organisational development strategy
An organisational development strategy serves as an operational roadmap for entities managing and operating the cross-border governance body and as such can offer a number of benefits. First, it can help cross-border governance bodies focus and define clear priorities for cross-border action that match the ambitions of founding members. Second, it can help cross-border governance bodies pinpoint, ex-ante, the human and financial resources needed to support cross-border development. Third, it can help members identify how the strategy will benefit the communities in the region and assess whether the necessary competences and resources are already available within the organisation. Fourth, it can establish clear accountability for the cross-border governance body and its partners in advancing cross-border activities by clarifying tasks and responsibilities. Finally, it can provide members and external stakeholders with a clear idea of what they can expect the cross-border governance body to deliver in the short and long term.
The experience of the EGTC Cerdanya Hospital (France and Catalonia, Spain) helps illustrate the potential benefits of an organisational development strategy. The EGTC Cerdanya Hospital’s Strategic Plan 2023 provides a roadmap for cross-border action by presenting basic information about the hospital (e.g. members, mission), featuring a high-level assessment of challenges and opportunities, and identifying actions to be implemented in the short and medium term. Furthermore, the plan explains why the hospital functions the way it does, outlines its overall goals, and details how it plans to further achieve a series of specific objectives (EGTC Cerdanya Hospital, 2023[10]). Thereby, the plan serves three distinct groups:
1. The cross-border community that the hospital serves, by providing basic information on how the hospital operates and the healthcare services it offers to cross-border residents;
2. The broader regional healthcare sector, by highlighting partnerships with different institutions to deliver a range of healthcare services and by identifying specific objectives that require co-operation with public and private healthcare providers in the region;
3. The EGTC staff, by offering clarity on the hospital’s strategic objectives and outlining the actions it needs to take to achieve these goals.
The targeted nature of an organisational development strategy, while helpful as an organisational roadmap, also has limitations as it may overlook regional development priorities that require wider engagement and integration. Without providing an ambitious, long-term vision for cross-border development, organisational development strategies may struggle to inspire and mobilise stakeholder support.
Cross-border governance bodies that have been set up recently may find themselves struggling to decide which type of strategic format to take—an organisational strategy or an integrated regional strategy. These considerations are currently being explored by the EGTC Nemunas-Niemen (Lithuania and Poland). Established in 2023, this EGTC is assessing what type of strategic planning document to adopt, as founding partners have divergent views on which type of strategy would add the most value to the EGTC and the cross-border region (OECD, 2023[4]). While Polish partners tend to favour developing a long-term, integrated cross-border strategy, the Lithuanian partner, Alytus City Municipality, sees greater value in designing an organisational development strategy, or a combination of both types of documents (OECD, 2023[4]). This reflects the fact that Polish partners view a strategic plan as an opportunity to outline broad objectives for the development of the cross-border region that many public and non-governmental actors could rally behind. Lithuanian partners, however, see the design of a strategic planning document as a chance to provide clarity on what the EGTC as an organisation should aim to achieve and with what resources (OECD, 2023[4]).
Fortunately, an organisational strategy and an integrated regional development strategy are not mutually exclusive, and there have been attempts to integrate them in one document, as seen in the approach taken by the EGTC Alzette Belval. Its seven-year strategy (Box 3.5) includes a series of goals for the cross-border region, effectively blending elements of an organisational development plan with aspects of an integrated strategy for the cross-border region (EGTC Alzette Belval, 2021[11]).
The EGTC Alzette Belval has approved three cross-border strategies to date, the latest of which has strategic objectives covering seven areas: healthcare, mobility, ‘living together’, sustainable development, spatial development, educational co-operation, and co-operation between France and Luxembourg more broadly. While the focus areas of the EGTC’s third strategy are very similar to those of the first two, its approach to strategic planning has evolved in important ways:
1. Territorial focus: While the first two strategies encouraged the implementation of projects targeting the EGTC’s 13 municipalities, the current strategy also proposes projects to be implemented on only one side of the border that could have positive spillover effects for the entire cross-border agglomeration.
2. Implementation period: The first strategy only covered two years, in order to enable rapid review and revision. The current strategy covers a seven-year period that is aligned with the Interreg programming period (2021-2027). This extended timeframe has helped the EGTC obtain recognition as a functional zone under the Interreg IV Greater Region Programme. As such, it now manages a sizable EU fund to support local cross-border projects.
3. Monitoring and evaluation framework: Since the second strategy, the EGTC has included a basic results framework that specifies output indicators and reference values (i.e. what was achieved during the previous strategic planning period).
Source: Author’s elaboration, based on (OECD, 2023[12]; EGTC Alzette Belval, 2021[11]; EGTC Alzette Belval, 2017[13]; EGTC Alzette Belval, 2017[13]; OECD, 2023[4]; OECD, 2024[14]).
Adopting theme- or project-based planning documents
Instead of adopting an integrated strategy for the development of the cross-border region or an organisational development plan, some cross-border regions rely on thematic or project-based planning documents. This practice offers at least three benefits. First, it can help governance bodies and their partners focus funds, expertise, and efforts on specific issues or areas that are most critical at a given time. This targeted approach can lead to more effective problem-solving and potentially quicker results compared to broader, less targeted strategies. Second, adopting these types of planning documents can foster stakeholder engagement by focusing on specific themes or projects for which there is a clear demand from public or non-governmental actors. Third, it can enable meaningful engagement with specific groups or communities that might otherwise be overlooked in larger, more comprehensive planning processes.
Without a unifying vision—either for the cross-border region as a whole or for the cross-border governance body—the adoption of multiple thematic documents could create fragmented and/or incoherent efforts. For instance, different stakeholders may pursue projects that are not aligned or complementary in terms of the cross-border objectives, ultimately weakening the overall outcomes of cross-border co-operation. Additionally, resource allocation can become difficult without clear priorities, and there is a risk of neglecting parts of the organisation’s mission that are not covered by ad hoc thematic or project-based planning documents.
These challenges arose when the EGTC Eurometropole Lille-Kortrijk-Tournai (Belgium and France) was created. While the organisation has developed several thematic documents that inform its actions in specific sectors (e.g. mobility, environment), it does not currently have an integrated cross-border development strategy or organisational development plan that sets clear objectives to guide its cross-border action, or lines of action and organisational resources that can support implementation, monitoring and evaluation (OECD, 2024[14]). As such, the organisation’s overarching mission, as well as the accountability of relevant actors for supporting different cross-border activities, are not always clear. Clarifying these elements could provide a more structured framework for the activities of cross-border governance bodies, and help their members better understand the added value the organisation can bring to them.
Common challenges to the design of cross-border planning documents
The quality of strategic planning documents directly affects how cross-border partners can address shared needs and opportunities. High-quality documents should reflect actual needs and priorities, set clear and ambitious (yet realistic) objectives, establish measurable targets and indicators to track progress, and be presented in a format that facilitates easy understanding and uptake by decision makers and implementers. An analysis of different strategic planning documents adopted by cross-border governance bodies highlights some common limitations in the way they are designed. Particular challenges can include difficulties in engaging key stakeholders, a lack of clarity on implementation, and limited guidance on monitoring and evaluation.
Engaging with relevant actors early in the strategy design process
Engaging with a wide range of stakeholders at the outset of the planning process, while possibly challenging, has long-term benefits. First, it can help to ensure that the needs and priorities of both public and non-governmental actors are more accurately reflected within the strategic planning document. Working with civil servants and other players who will be responsible for implementing the strategy can also help to make the design of proposed goals and actions more realistic. Furthermore, robust stakeholder engagement can help to build ownership of the strategic objectives and bolster political and non-governmental backing for successful implementation. Finally, by providing opportunities for different groups of stakeholders to discuss and exchange views on cross-border development priorities, engagement processes can enable diverse groups to identify shared objectives and align efforts more effectively.
Engaging a wide range of stakeholders effectively can, however, be challenging. Limited availability of human or financial resources to carry out engagement activities, such as organising focus groups or disseminating surveys can hinder the ability of a cross-border governance body to gather diverse input. Additionally, there may be limited interest from relevant stakeholders to participate, particularly if they have already been involved in similar planning initiatives on multiple occasions, which can lead to engagement fatigue and a reluctance to commit further time or resources. Another challenge is the risk of unbalanced participation, where certain actors dominate the process, leading to feedback that does not fully capture the needs or priorities of the broader community or relevant sectors, or where input provided may not be critical to the design of an effective cross-border strategy.
Cross-border governance bodies in the pilot regions generally engage with a wide range of stakeholders during the design of strategic planning documents, placing particular emphasis on robust consultations with their members (e.g. local and regional governments) and academia. For instance, in the Eurometropole, the Blue Park working group—composed of elected representatives, non-governmental actors, and technical staff—helped draft the Blue Park planning booklet (Box 3.6) (OECD, 2023[4]).
In 2018, the Eurometropole Lille-Kortrijk Tournai developed the Blue Park of the Eurometropolis booklet. It is currently the organisation’s most elaborate strategic planning document. The booklet represents a cross-border vision statement that relates to the EGTC’s Blue Park initiative, a cross-border, multi-disciplinary initiative focused on waterways in the region. It was developed by one of the EGTC’s working groups.
The booklet identifies the EGTC’s 14 founding members as key actors responsible for supporting the Blue Park’s development. It focuses on the strategic nature of the Blue Park in its capacity to promote a shared space defined by its many waterways, to connect communities and to offer opportunities for leisure, culture, tourism and sustainable economic development. The booklet is an important communication tool that can help champion and articulate the benefits of cross-border co-operation within the region, and also mobilise stakeholders to support cross-border action.
The Blue Park booklet and related Blue Park activities are the results of the EGTC’s emphasis on co-development. The Blue Park working group, which is composed of elected representatives of the EGTC’s General Assembly, non-governmental actors and technical staff, helped draft the booklet and supports the identification and organisation of concrete activities. The EGTC has also organised workshops with higher education researchers and other sectoral experts to identify concrete initiatives that could further ensure that the Blue Park project supports the well-being of cross-border residents. These co-development practices have contributed to the Blue Park project being coherent with local priorities, which is important for gaining public interest and support. Additionally, it has helped the EGTC mobilise local contributions—both in terms of funding and community engagement—and ensure that the project’s objectives are met.
Source: Author’s elaboration based on (Eurometropolis Lille-Kortrijk-Tournai, 2022[15]; OECD, 2023[4]; Eurometropolis Lille-Kortrijk-Tournai, 2018[16]).
Despite strong engagement with their members and academia, some cross-border bodies have faced challenges in involving civil society organisations and individual citizens. For example, the EGTC Alzette Belval struggled to secure substantial input from community-based organisations and citizens during the design of their strategies (OECD, 2023[12]). This means that the strategies have been primarily shaped by the EGTC’s technical team and founding members. The lack of input from non-governmental actors can limit the strategies’ responsiveness to the broader community’s needs and diminish local ownership.
Cross-border strategic planning documents should include detail on their implementation
Implementing cross-border development strategies can be more complex and challenging than for other types of regions for a number of reasons. For instance, a myriad of actors and stakeholders on opposite sides of a border—who may have different competencies and resources capacities and act within different legal and regulatory frameworks—are involved in the cross-border development strategy cycle or–at least–affected by the actions necessary to implement the strategy. Moreover, strategies can be designed without clear funding or financing prospects for implementation or investment. It can also be the case that no institution or actor has been assigned the responsibility–and with it, the accountability–for implementation. Without accountability and in an environment of competing demands and resources, strategic objectives risk moving down the priority list.
During the design stage of a cross-border development strategy, several actions can be taken to support its effective implementation (OECD, 2024[1]). First, setting clear and measurable objectives is essential to provide direction and ensure that all stakeholders are aligned on the strategy’s goals. Additionally, a collaborative approach to design, such as involving key actors from the outset, helps ensure the strategy reflects actual needs and available capacities, while also building ownership among stakeholders. Successful implementation will also depend on identifying actors with the necessary competences and resources, as well as securing the funding sources needed to achieve the objectives. Finally, determining who will be responsible for overseeing and co-ordinating the efforts of different partners can build accountability and facilitate the strategy’s execution.
Often, the strategic planning documents for cross-border development provide limited clarity on how they will be implemented (OECD, 2023[4]). For instance, the cross-border planning documents developed in the pilot regions typically do not include information on which actors need to be involved to support implementation or how it will be funded and financed. This is an important omission, insomuch as it risks limiting the accountability of relevant actors for supporting cross-border development. It is particularly significant, moreover, when strategic planning documents outline strategic objectives and priorities that cannot be achieved by the cross-border governance bodies alone.
This is the case with the Rio Minho 2030 Strategy, as well as the different Joint Territorial Healthcare Projects developed by the EGTC Cerdanya Hospital to co-ordinate public healthcare planning and delivery in the Cerdanya cross-border region in France and Spain (Box 3.7). Neither of these documents provides much detail about which local, regional and national public institutions are called upon to help meet the strategies’ objectives and/or how they can contribute (e.g. by providing financial or human resources).
The EGTC Cerdanya Hospital has two overarching objectives: i) to establish, operate and manage a cross-border hospital serving the regions of Cerdanya and Capcir in France and Spain; and ii) to promote the co-ordination of healthcare delivery planning and delivery in the region through a ‘territorial healthcare project’. Since the hospital started operations in 2014, it has developed two Joint Territorial Healthcare Projects. They represent an effort by the EGTC to co-ordinate public healthcare services across the Cerdanya and Capcir cross-border region. The first iteration of this plan, covering the 2014-2021 period, provided a framework for co-operation across nine key areas, including emergency and continuous care, maternal health and paediatrics.
In 2021, the EGTC convened public healthcare institutions active in the cross-border region to develop a new Joint Territorial Healthcare Project. The new project was initiated when actors realised that the first Project had not been implemented. The objective of the second Project has been to redefine strategic objectives and areas of improvement to better respond to the needs of the population and healthcare professionals in the territory. It was based on elements of a shared needs assessment. Specifically, the current Joint Territorial Healthcare Project identifies several priority actions to bring about better, more co-ordinated healthcare delivery in the region, including by:
Enabling different healthcare authorities from France and Catalonia, Spain to delegate tasks to the EGTC Hospital to support joint planning in specific healthcare fields;
Enhancing regular engagement and consultation with elected officials and citizens, as well as directors from relevant healthcare institutions in the region;
Establishing a healthcare observatory within the EGTC to provide and analyse data (e.g. on evolving healthcare needs and service delivery) to inform healthcare planning.
Source: Author’s elaboration, based on (EGTC Cerdanya Hospital, 2022[17]).
The lack of clarity on strategy implementation presents significant risks. First, it means that cross-border actors may not have a clear understanding of how they can or are expected to contribute to meeting the strategy’s objectives (OECD, 2023[4]). Second, without clear implementation guidance, it is difficult for the cross-border governance body and its partners to accurately assess the human and financial resources required to support the strategy’s implementation, prioritise actions, and secure the necessary funding. This can result in a lack of preparedness to effectively support the strategy’s goals.
While conventional development plans may address cross-border needs, they often lack guidance on implementation
The lack of information on implementation is not only a feature of many strategies developed by the cross-border governance bodies. It is also often a characteristic of territorial and spatial development plans adopted by local and regional governments in border regions. For instance, development strategies adopted by local, regional and national governments in the France-Luxembourg cross-border region1 typically include a cross-border perspective. In a practical sense, strategies acknowledge that: i) key local or regional challenges are influenced by cross-border dynamics (e.g. the increase in cross-border workers); and ii) addressing these challenges requires enhanced cross-border co-operation. Moreover, most strategic plans identify the main actors on the other side of the border (e.g. the Luxembourg Ministry of Housing and Spatial Planning) that would have to be engaged to improve co-operation. Their strategy design process also generally includes consulting actors on both sides of the border. As such, the different strategies provide a foundation for policy makers at the local, regional and national levels to consider the cross-border dimension in their work (Luxembourgian Ministry of Housing and Spatial Development, 2022[18]; Union of the SCoT Nord Meurthe-et-Mosellan, n.d.[19]; SCoT du Centre Ouest Aveyron, 2024[20]; Greater East Region, n.d.[21]; Luxembourgian Ministry of the Economy, 2022[22]; Luxembourgian Ministry of Housing and Spatial Planning, 2024[23]).
However, the strategies and plans provide very limited information on how such enhanced co-operation should come about or what success would look like. For example, some merely call for more cross-border consultation (without concrete action plans) or indicate that initiatives in fields such as mobility, economic development or education should adopt a cross-border perspective. Acknowledging cross-border challenges without outlining concrete actions, roles for implementation, or specifying which resources can be allocated to address the obstacles can leave gaps in the practical application of the strategy. This lack of specificity makes it difficult to translate broad objectives into concrete actions and measurable outcomes.
Finally, there are basic challenges to enforcing the cross-border dimension of territorial development strategies. Ensuring that actors operating in different countries support implementation is particularly difficult due to variations in legal frameworks, administrative processes, governance structures and a dearth of financial mechanisms to encourage action by actors on the other side of the border (OECD, 2023[12]; OECD, 2023[4]).
Planning documents provide limited guidance on monitoring and evaluation
To help cross-border governance bodies and their partners achieve their strategic objectives, it is important that the planning documents they adopt include clear targets and indicators and specify the monitoring and evaluation activities that will be conducted. Including such information provides the governance body with a framework to track whether it is meeting its objectives. Information obtained from monitoring and evaluation can help governance bodies meet three distinct goals (OECD, 2024[1]):
To support operational decision making, by providing evidence to help identify implementation delays or bottlenecks, and adjust resource allocation and implementation strategies accordingly;
To strengthen accountability related to the use of resources, the efficiency of internal management processes, or the outputs and outcomes of a given cross-border initiative;
To enhance transparency, providing public and non-governmental stakeholders with information on whether the efforts carried out by the cross-border governance body and its partners are producing the expected results.
Developing and using a robust monitoring and evaluation or performance measurement framework requires several elements to be in place. For instance, cross-border governance bodies need specific skills and expertise, for example to set targets, formulate indicators, and gather and analyse qualitative and quantitative data to track performance over time. Such human resources and information are often lacking in cross-border governance bodies, which may help explain why their strategic planning documents often do not include guidance on monitoring and evaluation. This absence undermines their ability to track progress, identify and respond to implementation challenges, and demonstrate accountability.
The lack of information on monitoring and evaluation is evident in a number of the cross-border planning documents developed by the pilot cross-border regions. For instance, the planning documents created by the EGTC Cerdanya Hospital (Strategic Plan 2023) and EGTC Rio Minho (Rio Minho 2030 Strategy) do not include a basic monitoring and evaluation framework (with indicators and targets), which significantly hinders the ability of the EGTCs and their partners to track whether the strategies are actually helping to meet regional and/or organisational objectives and needs.
Some monitoring does take place within these cross-border governance bodies, typically through annual activity reports presented to their deliberative organ, such as the General Assembly. Additionally, mandatory monitoring is conducted for EU-funded projects. However, across the pilot regions, there is typically no systematic assessment of the performance of the cross-border governance bodies to identify whether objectives are being met or to inform adjustments to the strategy or associated activities. The EGTC Alzette Belval stands out as an example of progress made by a cross-border governance body in terms of monitoring and evaluation. The organisation has made important improvements to its monitoring and evaluation approach since implementing its first strategy in 2014. As of its second strategy, the EGTC has included a basic results framework that specifies output indicators and provides reference values. This adjustment has helped the EGTC prepare annual activity reports for its General Assembly. Moreover, at the end of the implementation period of its second strategy, the EGTC conducted an executive evaluation that identified which objectives had been fully met, partially achieved, or still needed attention (OECD, 2023[4]). This evaluation helped inform the design of the EGTCs third and current strategy.
Challenges related to data accessibility and comparability
To support robust strategic planning, cross-border governance bodies also need access to comparable local data from both sides of the border. Such data can help them to i) design strategies that reflect the actual needs of the region and ii) track progress over time. However, in many cross-border regions, there is a significant lack of comparable data, which can hinder the development of well-informed strategies and the ability to monitor their effectiveness.
Often, the frequency of data collection and publication varies between countries. There may also be differences in the data gathering methods, and data published across different platforms can be difficult to find (OECD, 2023[4]). The scarcity of comparable data affects strategic planning in at least two ways, including by i) complicating the identification of needs and strategic priorities and ii) hampering efforts to set development targets.
Addressing the dearth of comparable cross-border data is a priority of many cross-border governance bodies, including the EGTC Nemunas-Niemen and EGTC Cerdanya Hospital (OECD, 2023[4]). Both expressed a desire to establish a cross-border observatory. They can look at the cross-border observatory established by the EGTC Rio Minho for inspiration. This observatory, launched in 2022, was established with the support of academic researchers from Galicia and Northern Portugal. The platform includes 320 municipal-level indicators spanning ten thematic areas providing statistics that can help policy makers better understand the cross-border context, identify key challenges and develop targeted responses (OECD, 2023[4]).
Considerations for subnational policy makers drafting cross-border strategic planning documents
Regardless of the type of cross-border planning document that is eventually taken up, policy makers should take several considerations into account, in order to ensure that the document is both practical for cross-border governance bodies and their members and can be effectively implemented and monitored. These include:
Identifying key trends, gaps, and priorities to establish a clear and strategic long-term vision, along with specific objectives and priorities;
Aligning the cross-border strategic planning document with existing local, regional, and national plans can help identify and build on synergies;
Including an implementation plan that clarifies which actors can support implementation and the types of contributions they might offer (financial or in-kind support) can help convert shared objectives into tangible action;
Outlining potential funding and financing sources can help ensure that proposed measures have the necessary financial backing;
Establishing a monitoring end evaluation framework can help policy makers track progress and make adjustments as needed.
Finally, strategic planning documents should be presented in clear and accessible language to facilitate uptake by relevant stakeholders, including newly elected local and regional officials. Overly detailed and complex documents can overwhelm the intended audience and hinder actionable insights. This is especially true in the context of cross-border planning, where many stakeholders may not be well-versed in cross-border development challenges or the governance initiatives designed to address them. In such a context, clarity and brevity are particularly important to ensure that the strategies are embraced by relevant public and non-governmental actors, and effectively implemented.
In order to be useful to politicians, civil servants and non-governmental actors alike, the EGTC Alzette Belval has developed succinct strategic documents (its current strategy is only 35 pages long). They include a short presentation of the cross-border region and easy-to-understand figures to facilitate their uptake. This makes the EGTC’s strategies much more concise and accessible than typical regional development strategies, which sometimes include several hundred pages of highly technical language (Luxembourgian Ministry of Energy and Spatial Planning/ECAU, 2022[24]).
How regional, national and EU-level policy makers can support cross-border planning
There are also actions that national and regional governments can take to support the design, implementation and monitoring and evaluation of cross-border planning documents. For instance, national and regional governments could assess the need to adjust planning regulations to facilitate cross-border collaboration. For example, spatial and territorial planning frameworks could encourage or even require consultation with specific public and non-governmental actors across borders when designing strategies.
In addition to consultation, another measure could be to create cross-border supervisory or advisory committees to support the design of cross-border development strategies. Governments could encourage or mandate the formation of these bodies to oversee co-ordination, ensure compliance with consultation requirements, and foster ongoing dialogue among government bodies on both sides of the border.
Governments can also implement innovative joint planning mechanisms inspired by projects such as the MORO pilot on land-use planning and development in border regions (Box 3.8). This pilot, implemented by subnational governments in France and Germany, uses simulation games to tackle planning challenges in cross-border areas. By applying similar innovative methods, policy makers can simulate planning scenarios, test policies, and explore collaborative solutions, thus creating a stronger foundation for strategic alignment and integrated planning.
Germany’s MORO initiative has led research projects on land-use planning for 25 years. One component of this initiative is a Franco-German pilot project studying how the territorial development of border regions can be made more coherent by using the German “Planspiel” method. It involves decision makers from both countries. The objective of “Planspiel” (or role-playing simulations) is to address challenges by simulating realistic scenarios. The simulation enables participants to familiarise themselves with complex processes and contexts, and test different measures to understand their potential impacts.
As part of the pilot, the “Planspiel” approach has been implemented in different cross-border regions, including the SaarMoselle region and Upper Rhine region on the Franco-German border. In the former, the simulation focused on integrated planning for a cross-border agglomeration, and in the latter, the emphasis was on cross-border economic development and joint land-use policies. Both exercises resulted in practical recommendations to enhance collaboration and coherence in cross-border development efforts.
Source: Author’s elaboration, based on (National Agency for Territorial Cohesion of France, n.d.[25]) (National Agency for Territorial Cohesion of France, 2023[26]).
At the EU level, several initiatives could be undertaken to support cross-border planning. One valuable measure would be to establish a database of cross-border strategic planning documents, providing policy makers with examples to draw inspiration from and facilitate peer learning. Such a database could be modelled on initiatives such as the online Regional Planning Observatory for Development created by the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC, 2024[27]). The Observatory provides information on the different types of strategic planning documents (e.g. national, regional, urban, spatial), planning laws and co-ordinating bodies in the region. Such a resource could provide policy makers with practical examples and good practices from other cross-border regions, enabling them to adopt and then adapt successful strategies.
Another initiative could involve organising recurring training sessions or peer-to-peer exchanges focused on strategic planning for cross-border development. This approach would foster knowledge-sharing and collaboration among policy makers and experts from different regions (e.g. staff of EGTCs, Euroregions, Eurocities, regional and local governments), enhancing their ability to design functional cross-border strategies. In parallel, the European Commission could consider integrating a cross-border strategic planning toolbox into the Interreg Learning Platform. The toolbox could include online training materials, strategic planning templates and guidelines (e.g. on stakeholder consultation), which would allow policy makers to learn at their own pace. Such a virtual resource could be a cost-effective way to provide easily accessible materials and guidance to local and regional governments.
Additionally, there could be value in exploring adjustments to the EGTC regulation to encourage EGTCs to adopt medium- to long-term development planning documents to guide their actions, enable monitoring and evaluation and, thereby, support improved accountability for cross-border action. The European Commission could consider making the development of an organisational development strategy a criterion for awarding Interreg funding to cross-border governance bodies, such as EGTCs. While this is already encouraged in some cases (e.g. for EGTCs seeking funding from programmes such as Interreg VA Spain-Portugal, POCTEP), applying this requirement more broadly could ensure that EGTCs have a basic strategic plan in place (OECD, 2023[4]).
Cross-border governance bodies can play a significant role in supporting the socio-economic development and well-being of cross-border communities. To fulfil their mandates and meet strategic objectives, these bodies operate across various sectors such as education, culture, healthcare and tourism. They also engage in activities such as conducting research, supporting strategic planning, investing in infrastructure, networking, and lobbying for cross-border development (OECD, 2023[4]). A critical question for policy makers to consider is through which type of activities these bodies can most effectively meet cross-border needs.
While cross-border development challenges (e.g. limited access to healthcare, congestion) may highlight the need for cross-border public service delivery, governance bodies often find such initiatives too complex to support. Providing essential public services may require increased levels of political support and changes in the membership structures to include entities with the necessary service delivery competencies. Moreover, the complexity involved in co-ordinating multiple stakeholders, managing differences between relevant legal frameworks (e.g. regarding service delivery standards), and securing long-term funding makes many cross-border governance bodies hesitant to provide essential public services directly (OECD, 2023[4]). As a result, they focus on delivering 'softer' services, such as networking and promotional activities, which foster collaboration, knowledge-sharing, and integrated development efforts. However, these 'softer' services may be more limited in terms of their potential to enhance the socio-economic development and well-being of cross-border residents.
By helping cross-border governance bodies develop better tools to monitor their performance, increasing the availability of comparable cross-border data, and strengthening structured exchanges with and among these bodies, national and EU-level policy makers can support more effective cross-border co-operation. These actions can help cross-border partners identify the type of actions that are likely to help them meet their objectives.
Services and support provided by cross-border governance bodies
The tasks carried out by cross-border governance bodies can vary significantly, from ‘soft’ forms of co-operation (e.g. organisation of cultural events) to the delivery of very specific services (e.g. provision of healthcare services in a cross-border hospital) (European Committee of the Regions, 2018[28]). One reason for this variation are differences in the overall objectives of cross-border governance bodies (see Chapter 2). For instance, whereas the EGTC Cerdanya Hospital focuses specifically on providing healthcare services, many other cross-border governance bodies—those with broader overall objectives—carry out activities across different sectors, ranging from healthcare and emergency services to education, culture, transport, and tourism (Annex Box 3.A.1). While focusing on the sectors in which cross-border governance bodies operate provides valuable insights into their thematic priorities, another way to understand their work is to consider the types of activities they pursue. This approach categorises actions not by sector, but by the nature of the activities themselves. This offers complementary perspectives that can, for example, help identify capacity needs and strategic gaps more effectively. The actions carried out by the cross-border governance bodies operating in the five pilot regions, for example, fall into eight categories, shown in Table 3.1.
Source: Author’s elaboration based on: EGTC Alzette Belval (AGORA, n.d.[29]; EGTC Alzette Belval, 2024[30]; EGTC Alzette Belval, n.d.[31]; EGTC Alzette Belval, 2023[32]; EGTC Alzette Belval, 2024[33]; OECD, 2023[4]); PMF: (OECD, 2023[4]); Eurometropole: (OECD, 2023[4]; Eurometropole Lille-Kortrijk-Tournai, 2024[34]; Eurometropole Lille-Kortrijk-Tournai, 2021[35]); EGTC Rio Minho: (VISIT Rio Minho, 2024[36]; OECD, 2023[4]); EGTC Cerdanya Hospital: (OECD, 2024[14]).
As shown in Table 3.1, the range of activities carried out by cross-border governance bodies with a narrow public service delivery-oriented objective is relatively limited compared to that of cross-border governance bodies with broader overall objectives. For instance, the Cerdanya Hospital focuses on providing medical services and is engaged in lobbying and advocacy initiatives. In contrast, bodies such as the Eurometropole, EGTC Alzette Belval, and EGTC Rio Minho carry out a wider range of activities. These include promoting cross-border tourism, supporting strategic planning (e.g. of local governments), facilitating networking and exchanges among public and non-governmental stakeholders and brokering information. They also include conducting research to overcome regulatory obstacles and enhance cross-border co-operation in areas such as public transport. The differences in the types of actions pursued by cross-border governance bodies have important consequences, both for their human and financial resource needs, as well as their ability to address cross-border needs.
Direct and indirect effects of cross-border action on socio-economic development and residents’ well-being
The impact of the actions carried out by cross-border governance bodies on socio-economic development and resident well-being can differ significantly. Large-scale public service initiatives, such as healthcare provision or public infrastructure investments, can have direct and measurable effects on improving accessibility to essential public services.
In contrast, activities that support the design of territorial and spatial development plans or promote networking provide more indirect, long-term benefits by establishing a foundation for future co-operation and investment. These efforts are crucial for building relationships, aligning strategies and laying the groundwork for larger initiatives. However, they may lack immediate and visible impacts, which could be perceived as a disadvantage by politicians and citizens expecting quick, tangible results. Similarly, promoting tourism through initiatives such as joint branding campaigns or developing shared touristic routes can enhance regional visibility and encourage collaboration. However, they may not yield immediate returns or directly address pressing socio-economic challenges.
Furthermore, organising cultural events can go a long way in fostering a shared identity and promoting social cohesion across borders (see Chapter 5). Such initiatives can create goodwill and strengthen community ties. However, their impact is often harder to measure in terms of direct socio-economic development or citizen well-being. This makes it challenging to demonstrate how these activities contribute to addressing specific cross-border development challenges and needs.
Despite the more intangible and long-term nature of ‘softer’ forms of cross-border action they can contribute to building relationships and trust among stakeholders on both sides of the border. For example, different cross-border governance bodies do not specifically focus on emergency services (e.g. EGTC Rio Minho). However, their established networks and exchanges among stakeholders in co-operating countries can facilitate co-ordinated responses to crises such as floods, wildfires or the COVID-19 pandemic (OECD, 2023[4]). Through continuous collaboration, these bodies can contribute to an environment of mutual understanding, which can prove vital in emergency situations.
How national and subnational policy makers to strengthen cross-border action
To ensure that cross-border governance bodies can effectively contribute to socio-economic development and improve the well-being of cross-border residents, national and subnational policy makers must strategically assess and prioritise cross-border actions. When deciding on which actions to pursue, policy makers involved in cross-border bodies should carefully balance regional needs and the financial and human resources that are readily available or could realistically be mobilised. While delivering cross-border public services, such as healthcare, education, and emergency services, can have the most tangible impact, this may not be feasible for all cross-border bodies due to varying capacities, resources and possible legislative or regulatory restrictions.
For those cross-border bodies with limited human and financial resources, it is recommended to focus initially on foundational activities such as information sharing, networking and promotion of the cross-border region. Such ‘soft’ co-operation activities can lay a strong groundwork for more ambitious initiatives over time, as resources and capacities grow. A relevant example comes from the EGTC Rio Minho, which has gradually expanded its scope of activities over time, moving from providing training and advice to Eurocities and brokering information, to implementing an e-bike project and establishing a cross-border observatory (OECD, 2023[37]; OECD, 2023[4]). This evolution illustrates the dynamic nature of EGTC activities and highlights the importance of adaptive staffing strategies that align with changing priorities and capacities.
It is equally important to regularly review whether the scope of activities should evolve in response to emerging needs or strategic opportunities, and to assess whether cross-border governance bodies are achieving their objectives. Such reviews ensure that any shifts in focus remain feasible and sustainable, enabling bodies to adapt strategically over time. This adaptive approach must be backed by robust monitoring and evaluation practices. Effective monitoring and evaluation can enable cross-border bodies to learn from successes and challenges, and identify areas where progress may be slow going. It can also help document good practices. For example, evidence on successful service delivery models or strategies to overcome regulatory challenges can serve as valuable sources of knowledge for other cross-border regions (Box 3.9).
The EGTC Cerdanya Hospital’s Strategic Plan 2023 includes some reflections on past performance, strengths, and challenges. However, no formal evaluation of the hospital’s operations has taken place since its creation more than a decade ago. This is a missed opportunity, not only for the hospital and its administration, but also for the Spanish and French governments, as well as the European Union, which have supported this singular initiative to use an EGTC for delivering cross-border healthcare services.
A comprehensive evaluation would enable the hospital to identify what has worked well, the obstacles it has encountered, and whether these challenges were addressed through structural reforms or ad hoc solutions, while also identifying opportunities for improvement. Such insights can inform policy decisions by the EGTC, as well as by policy makers in other cross-border regions and across the EU, helping to determine the feasibility of replicating or adapting this model in other areas.
Additionally, an evaluation could capture practical solutions the EGTC has found to regulatory and legislative challenges. As solutions may not have been documented yet, an evaluation could offer a valuable knowledge base for other hospitals, EGTCs, or cross-border governance initiatives facing similar challenges. This could contribute to broader EU-level policy learning, fostering innovation and effectiveness in cross-border co-operation.
Source: Author’s elaboration, based on (OECD, 2023[4]).
Furthermore, cross-border governance bodies, as well as subnational and national government representatives can explore establishing co-ordination mechanisms promote an exchange on challenges and showcase innovative practices, which could be scaled or adapted in other border regions. For instance, if effectively operationalised, the Cross-border Co-operation Network (RedCot), which includes cross-border governance bodies operating along the Portuguese-Spanish border, could foster information exchange and promote good practices on cross-border co-operation (Ministry of Foreign Affairs, European Union and Co-operation of Spain, 2023[38]).
Finally, national and regional policy makers could consider conducting surveys to support evidence-based decision making on cross-border initiatives. These surveys could address two significant challenges: i) the lack of compatible cross-border statistics; and ii) the difficulty of measuring the outcomes of cross-border actions in areas such as cultural exchange and information brokering. For example, surveys could assess public satisfaction with cross-border service delivery, such as healthcare, and measure trust levels in neighbouring communities and institutions, and in cross-border governance bodies. Such information could help national and subnational policy makers, including those in cross-border governance bodies, refine and adapt cross-border actions to better meet community needs.
Considerations for the European Commission to help reinforce the impact of cross-border action
The EU could implement several policy measures to support cross-border governance bodies in fostering socio-economic development and enhancing the well-being of cross-border residents. One initiative could be to develop guidelines for monitoring and evaluating the performance of these bodies. These guidelines could include indicators to measure impact across various areas, such as tourism, public trust, and access to essential services. Such guidance could enable cross-border bodies to conduct more comprehensive monitoring and evaluation, helping them to track progress, identify bottlenecks, and make data-driven decisions to maximise their impact. Such tools would be valuable not only for the cross-border governance bodies and their members, who could better assess the results of their joint actions, but also for the EU to compare the performance of different cross-border governance bodies, and determine the effectiveness of cross-border initiatives more broadly.
Moreover, there are opportunities to enhance the accessibility of border data on Eurostat. Currently, Eurostat provides disaggregated data for border regions on a limited set of metrics, such as employment, GDP, private sector composition, and crime. However, it does not apply this level of granularity to indicators that are equally important such as productivity and access to essential services, even though such data are often available at the TL3/NUTS3 level. Moreover, there is an opportunity to enhance the availability of border data on issues related to resident well-being (e.g. housing, environment). Increased data granularity would enable policy makers to better understand and address the specific challenges faced by border areas, thereby supporting evidence-informed decision making on what type of cross-border actions to carry out.
Lastly, to improve the delivery of essential cross-border public services, the European Commission could work to identify specific barriers that cross-border governance bodies, particularly EGTCs, experience in service delivery areas such as healthcare, education and transport. By examining the political, financial, legal, and/or administrative challenges these bodies encounter, the Commission could determine whether adjustments to the EGTC regulation or additional guidance are needed to enable more cross-border governance bodies to support the delivery of essential public services.
Robust strategic planning is essential for effective cross-border co-operation, as it helps regional actors achieve shared objectives by setting clear goals and provides a roadmap for joint action. It can also support the mobilisation and allocation of resources, ensuring that financial, human, and material assets are directed toward common objectives. Analysis from different cross-border governance bodies reveals that traditional approaches to regional development may not suit cross-border contexts due to unique complexities, such as differences in territorial administrative structures and the required regional and local development planning documents. Consequently, policy makers must adopt flexible and inclusive strategic planning practices tailored to cross-border needs.
For cross-border governance bodies to deliver on their objectives, it appears important that—at a minimum—they develop an organisational strategy outlining how their organisation will contribute to meeting broader cross-regional goals. Such a strategy should also state the main partners involving in implementing the strategy on both sides of the border, as well as their roles and responsibilities. Finally, it should identify the resources necessary to support effective implementation of cross-border initiatives. Evidence from the pilot regions indicates that these elements are not always included in a cross-border development strategy.
To deliver on their objectives, cross-border governance bodies tend to focus on ‘soft’ activities, such as networking and promotional efforts, rather than complex public service provision, which is often deemed too challenging to manage. Although these ‘soft’ actions foster collaboration, their direct socio-economic impact may be more limited. To maximise the benefits of cross-border co-operation, national and EU-level policy makers are encouraged to support cross-border governance bodies by enhancing data accessibility, developing monitoring tools, and facilitating structured exchanges between these bodies and national governments. Such support can help cross-border governance bodies identify the most effective cross-border actions, and pinpoint any barriers that need to be overcome to help them achieve their goals.
References
[29] AGORA (n.d.), Alzette-Belval: an exemplary cross-border collaboration towards an IBA?, https://www.agora.lu/alzette-belval-an-exemplary-cross-border-collaboration-towards-an-iba/?lang=en (accessed on 2 August 2024).
[27] ECLAC (2024), Observatorio Regional de Planificación para el Desarrollo [Regional Observatory for Development Planning], https://observatorioplanificacion.cepal.org/ (accessed on 2 October 2024).
[30] EGTC Alzette Belval (2024), Pour vous [For you], https://gectalzettebelval.eu/pour-vous/ (accessed on 2 August 2024).
[33] EGTC Alzette Belval (2024), Rapport d’Activités 2023 [2023 Activity Report], https://gectalzettebelval.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/10A-annexe-DAG2024-01-10-RA2023.pdf (accessed on 23 August 2024).
[32] EGTC Alzette Belval (2023), Rapport d’Activités 2022 [Activity report 2022], https://2024.gectalzettebelval.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/DAG2023-01-04-annexe-Rapport-dactivites-2022.pdf (accessed on 23 July 2024).
[11] EGTC Alzette Belval (2021), L’Agglomeration Transfrontalière, Ensemble! [The cross-border Agglomeration, Together!], https://2024.gectalzettebelval.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/STRATEGIE-3-version-definitive-_-mise-a-jour-06.10.2023.pdf (accessed on 3 March 2024).
[13] EGTC Alzette Belval (2017), Travailler Ensemble Pour Faire l’Agglomeration Transfrontalière [Working Together to Create the Cross-border Agglomeration], https://2024.gectalzettebelval.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/BILAN-STRATEGIE-version-validee-02.02.2021.pdf (accessed on 23 August 2024).
[31] EGTC Alzette Belval (n.d.), Un avenir territorial commun et résilient [A common and resilient territorial future], https://gectalzettebelval.eu/pour-faire-lagglomeration/un-avenir-territorial-commun-et-resilient/ (accessed on 2 August 2024).
[10] EGTC Cerdanya Hospital (2023), Plan stratégique 2022 [Strategic Plan 2022].
[17] EGTC Cerdanya Hospital (2022), Projet commun de santé du territoire transfrontalier de la Basse et Haute Cerdagne et du Capcir [Joint Healthcare Project for the Cross-border for the High and Low Cadanya and Capcir].
[9] EGTC Rio Minho (2019), River Miño 2030 Cross-border Strategy, https://aectriominho.eu/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/rivermino2030_crossborderstrategy_en.pdf.
[34] Eurometropole Lille-Kortrijk-Tournai (2024), De Eurometropool Lille-Kortrijk-Tournai in cijfers en kaarten [The Eurometropolis Lille-Kortrijk-Tournai in figures and maps], https://www.calameo.com/read/00660852607bd850c48bb (accessed on 2 August 2024).
[35] Eurometropole Lille-Kortrijk-Tournai (2021), Guide franco-belge des Institutions et de leurs compétence’[Franco-Belgian Guide to Institutions and their Skills], https://www.eurometropolis.eu/en/guide-franco-belge-des-institutions-et-de-leurs-competences (accessed on 1 August 2024).
[15] Eurometropolis Lille-Kortrijk-Tournai (2022), Rapport d’activité 2022 [Activity report 2022], https://www.eurometropolis.eu/upload/attach-document/rapport-activite-em-2022-fr.pdf (accessed on 31 July 2024).
[16] Eurometropolis Lille-Kortrijk-Tournai (2018), Le parc bleu de l’eurométropole [the blue park of the Eurometropolis], https://www.eurometropolis.eu/upload/attach-document/blauweparkparcbleulivreboek-2.pdf (accessed on 31 July 2024).
[39] European Committee of the Regions (2020), EGTC monitoring report 2018-2019, European Union, https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/1b4905f5-6fdc-11ea-a07e-01aa75ed71a1/language-fr (accessed on 25 March 2024).
[28] European Committee of the Regions (2018), EGTC monitoring report 2017, European Union, https://doi.org/10.2863/506306 (accessed on 20 October 2024).
[7] Government of Luxembourg (2023), 7th intergovernmental commission for the strengthening of cross-border cooperation, https://gouvernement.lu/en/actualites/toutes_actualites/communiques/2023/04-avril/17-cig.html (accessed on 12 August 2024).
[21] Greater East Region (n.d.), Stratégie du Grand Est en 30 objectifs [Greater East strategy in 30 objectives], https://www.grandest.fr/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/sraddet-ge-objectifs-nov2019.pdf (accessed on 4 Agust 2024).
[5] Interreg Greater Region (2024), 10/09 : Réunion d’information sur le 4ème appel à projets de la zone fonctionnelle Alzette Belval [10/09: Information meeting on the 4th call for projects for the Alzette Belval functional zone], https://interreg-gr.eu/event/10-09-reunion-dinformation-sur-le-4eme-appel-a-projets-de-la-zone-fonctionnelle-alzette-belval/ (accessed on 23 August 2024).
[6] Jakubowski, A. et al. (2020), Identifying cross-border functional areas Conceptual background, empirical evidence and policy implications, https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/rest/cms/upload/16102020_095202_andrzej_umcs_2020_cross_border_functional_areas.pdf (accessed on 23 October 2024).
[24] Luxembourgian Ministry of Energy and Spatial Planning/ECAU (2022), Vision Territoriale de la Région Sud [Territorial Vision of the Southern Region], https://minett-biosphere.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/VTRS-Rapport-complet.pdf (accessed on 2 August 2024).
[18] Luxembourgian Ministry of Housing and Spatial Development (2022), Interreg SDTGR / REKGR, https://amenagement-territoire.public.lu/fr/grande-region-affaires-transfrontalieres/SDT-GR.html (accessed on 8 August 2024).
[23] Luxembourgian Ministry of Housing and Spatial Planning (2024), Programme Directeur d’Aménagement du Territoire [Spatial Planning Master Programme], https://amenagement-territoire.public.lu/fr/strategies-territoriales/programme-directeur.html (accessed on 8 August 2024).
[22] Luxembourgian Ministry of the Economy (2022), Luxembourg in Transition –Towards a zero-carbon, resilient and sustainable territory, https://meco.gouvernement.lu/en/actualites.gouvernement%2Ben%2Bactualites%2Btoutes_actualites%2Bcommuniques%2B2022%2B05-mai%2B19-turmes-luxembourg-in-transition.html#:~:text=The%20Luxembourg%20Government-,Luxembourg%20in%20Transition%20%E2%80%93Towards%2 (accessed on 3 August 2024).
[38] Ministry of Foreign Affairs, European Union and Co-operation of Spain (2023), Constituida la Red de Cooperación Transfronteriza España-Portugal [The Spain-Portugal Cross-Border Cooperation Network has been established], https://www.exteriores.gob.es/Embajadas/lisboa/es/Comunicacion/Noticias/Paginas/Articulos/20230202_not1.aspx (accessed on 5 Februari 2024).
[26] National Agency for Territorial Cohesion of France (2023), Rapport final et fiches synthétiques: Projet pilote d’aménagement du territoire franco-allemand (MORO) [Final report and summary sheets: Franco-German Spatial Planning Pilot Project (MORO)].
[25] National Agency for Territorial Cohesion of France (n.d.), Le projet MORO ou comment renforcer le développement territorial et l’aménagement du territoire dans les régions frontalières de la France et de l’Allemagne [The MORO project or how to reinforce territorial development and territorial development...], https://www.europe-en-france.gouv.fr/fr/projet-moro-ou-comment-renforcer-developpement-territorial-amenagement-territoire-regions (accessed on 10 December 2024).
[14] OECD (2024), Interviews with local stakeholders, conducted as part of the “Building More Resilient Cross-border Regions” project.
[1] OECD (2024), Towards Balanced Regional Development in Croatia: From Strategy Design to Implementation, OECD Multi-level Governance Studies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/3c0779cf-en.
[4] OECD (2023), Interviews with local stakeholders, conducted as part of the “Building More Resilient Cross-border Regions” project.
[8] OECD (2023), Interviews with local stakeholders, conducted as part of the “Building More Resilient Cross-border Regions” project.
[12] OECD (2023), Questionnaire for the “Building More Resilient Cross-border Regions” project, filled out by EGTC Alzette Belval, PMF and PRO-SUD.
[37] OECD (2023), Questionnaire for the “Building More Resilient Cross-border Regions” project, filled out by EGTC Rio Minho.
[3] OECD (2022), Recommendation of the Council on Public Policy Evaluation, https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/Instrument%20s/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0478 (accessed on 3 August 2024).
[2] OECD (2021), Monitoring and Evaluating the Strategic Plan of Nuevo León 2015-2030: Using Evidence to Achieve Sustainable Development, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/8ba79961-en.
[20] SCoT du Centre Ouest Aveyron (2024), SCoT de l’Agglom’eration Thionvilloise [Thionvilloise Territorial Cohesion Plan], https://scotat.proscot-eau.fr/#contact (accessed on 2 August 2024).
[19] Union of the SCoT Nord Meurthe-et-Mosellan (n.d.), Accueil [Welcome], https://www.scotnord54.org/ (accessed on 5 August 2024).
[36] VISIT Rio Minho (2024), Que é a marca Rio Minho [What is the Rio Minho brand], https://visitriominho.eu/marca-rio-minho/.
A 2020 assessment found that EGTCs work on 13 thematic areas, some of which overlap.
Healthcare and emergency services: includes healthcare delivery through the EGTC Cerdanya Hospital, as well as efforts by EGTCs to promote inter-governmental agreements regarding co-operation of emergency services and exchange among first responders.
Natural disaster prevention and solidarity: includes measures to prevent natural disasters such as floods, for example, by reinforcing water management infrastructure.
Natural protection and preservation of environment: initiatives range from developing communication material on environmentally friendly living, providing vouchers to encourage the purchase of ‘climate-friendly’ goods, increasing awareness of natural hazards, to improving the ability to deal with emergencies.
Access to public services and European citizenship: examples of projects include initiatives to establish bus lines between cross-border communities and pooling resources to establish cross-border childcare facilities.
Investment projects: there are few examples of investment projects by EGTCs, and they often focus on relatively small investments, such as improving cycling infrastructure or establishing a new ferry connection.
Transport infrastructure and ‘soft’ transport projects: initiatives include developing a cross-border transport logistics action plan, establishing expert networks to address obstacles to improved transport infrastructure, and developing digital solutions (e.g. apps) to provide live information on traffic and cycling paths in cross-border regions.
Integrated tourism: examples include projects to increase the visibility of regional products and cultural assets, upgrading tourism infrastructure, as well as integrating considerations related to nature conservation into cross-border tourism strategies.
Education: includes initiatives to promote co-operation and exchange among higher education institutions, develop an educational game for children to discover a cross-border territory, and create a Master's programme on cross-border co-operation and integration.
Culture: initiatives often focus on enhancing a region’s attractiveness to tourists, as well as on fostering the sense of a shared cross-border identity among residents, including by promoting a common tourism brand and joint tourism planning.
Attracting EU funding: many EGTCs apply to EU funding programmes and support public and non-governmental actors (e.g. local governments, businesses) in identifying and applying for EU funding opportunities.
Economic co-operation, jobs, and growth: includes initiatives to reduce the obstacles that EU citizens encounter when working in another EU Member State, organising job fairs, as well as enhancing employment creation through local product development and branding.
Spatial planning: examples include the development of a spatial plan for a cross-border area, the design of integrated investment initiatives, and enhancing the availability of cross-border data to improve strategic planning efforts.
Fund management: A few EGTCs are responsible for managing small project funds (e.g. EGTC GO). Some others act as Managing Authorities for EU funds (e.g. Interreg Grande Région) or manage a cross-border funding programme (EGTC Galicia – Norte de Portugal).
Source: Author’s elaboration, based on (European Committee of the Regions, 2020[39]).
← 1. Relevant territorial and spatial planning documents include: Spatial Planning Master Programme (Programme Directeur d'Aménagement du Territoire, PDAT), Luxembourg in Transition, Regional Scheme for Territorial Planning, Sustainable Development, and Territorial Equality (Schéma Régional d'Aménagement, de Développement Durable et d'égalité des Territoire, SRADDET), Territorial Coherence Plans (Schémas de Cohérence Territoriales, SCoT) for the Nord Meurthe et Mosellan and Thionvilloise agglomeration and the Greater Region Territorial Development Plan (Schéma du Développement Territorial de la Grande Région, SDTGR).