Understanding differences in the governance of macro-regional cooperation

From 2009 onwards, as part of a more comprehensive macro-regional strategy, the EU initiated the gradual establishment of four so-called macro-regions. By now, such macro-regions are established or under construction in four European areas: the Baltic, the Danube, the Adriatic-Ionian and the Alpine macro-regions. Since they have been in place for about 2 to 7 years only, macro-regions can still be considered a very recent phenomenon. This paper intends to review their current state, looking at these macro-regions as new modes of (territorial and functional) governance. Firstly, I observe both similarities and differences in the issues these macro-regions are dealing with and in the organizational structure that has been set up. On the one hand, they are expected to align with EU policies at the macro-regional level; on the other hand, there are considerable differences in their scope, substantive message, governance and implementation structures. Secondly, a better understanding of the differences between macro-regions cannot content to look at the issues their respective issues and regional particularities they face here and now. In addition, one needs to pay attention to the politico-geographical history of these regions and to pre-existing cooperative arrangements that result from these. In so doing, current substantive scopes and organizational settings can be explained by pre-existing forms of regional cooperation (or the lack thereof), and their (un)successful performance. Although this paper looks for a comprehensive comparison between four macro-regions, my particular focus is the Adriatic-Ionian case