DOCSLIB.ORG

Operational Programme

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Operational Programme Cross-border Programme 2007-2013 IPA CBC The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia – Republic of Albania Ministry of Local Self Government Ministry of European Integration Cross-border Programme TABLE OF CONTENT GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS ...........................................................................................................................4 SECTION I DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSES OF THE ELIGIBLE AREAS..................................................5 1 INTRODUCTION AND PROGRAMMING PROCESS ..........................................................................5 2 THE MAP AND THE DESCRIPTION OF THE ELIGIBLE AREAS .......................................................6 3 CURRENT SITUATION IN THE ELIGIBLE AREAS .............................................................................8 3.1 DEMOGRAPHY........................................................................................................................................ 8 3.2 GEOGRAPHICAL FEATURES .............................................................................................................. 9 3.3 INFRASTRUCTURE .............................................................................................................................. 10 3.3.1 Roads ........................................................................................................................................... 10 3.3.2 Border crossings......................................................................................................................... 11 3.3.3 Railways....................................................................................................................................... 11 3.3.4 Airports ......................................................................................................................................... 12 3.3.5 Telecommunication .................................................................................................................... 12 3.3.6 Water supply, waste water, waste disposal............................................................................ 12 3.3.7 Electricity...................................................................................................................................... 13 3.3.8 Health ........................................................................................................................................... 13 3.4 ECONOMY.............................................................................................................................................. 13 3.4.1 General features ......................................................................................................................... 13 3.4.2 Agriculture and rural development ........................................................................................... 14 3.4.3 Industry, mining and energy...................................................................................................... 15 3.4.4 SME sector .................................................................................................................................. 15 3.4.5 Tourism ........................................................................................................................................ 16 3.5 HUMAN RESOURCES.......................................................................................................................... 17 3.5.1 Education, Research and Development.................................................................................. 17 3.5.2 Labour market and poverty ....................................................................................................... 18 3.6 ENVIRONMENT AND NATURE .......................................................................................................... 20 3.7 CULTURE................................................................................................................................................ 21 3.8 INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT...................................................................................................... 22 3.9 SWOT ANALYSIS OF THE ELIGIBLE AREAS ................................................................................. 23 SECTION II PROGRAMME STRATEGY................................................................................................... 28 1 EXPERIENCE WITH CROSS-BORDER ACTIVITIES AND LESSONS LEARNT....................................... 28 2 COOPERATION STRATEGY....................................................................................................................... 29 2.1 SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS FROM THE ANALYSES .................................................................... 29 2.2. OBJECTIVES OF THE CROSS BORDER PROGRAMME ............................................................ 30 3 PRIORITIES AND MEASURES .................................................................................................................. 31 3.1 PRIORITY ONE (I) ................................................................................................................................. 31 2 Cross-border Programme 3.1.1 Measure I.1.................................................................................................................................. 32 3.1.2 Measure I.2.................................................................................................................................. 33 3.1.3 Measure I.3.................................................................................................................................. 34 3.2 PRIORITY TWO (II), TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE............................................................................. 35 3.2.1 Measure II.1................................................................................................................................. 35 3.2.2 Measure II.2................................................................................................................................. 36 4 COHERENCE WITH OTHER PROGRAMMES ........................................................................................... 37 4.1 FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA’S PROGRAMMES.................................... 37 4.2 ALBANIAN PROGRAMMES................................................................................................................. 38 4.3 HORIZONTAL ISSUES ......................................................................................................................... 38 SECTION III FINANCIAL PROVISIONS..................................................................................................... 40 SECTION IV IMPLEMENTING PROVISIONS ........................................................................................... 41 1 PROGRAMME STRUCTURES .................................................................................................................... 41 1.1 ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURES AT NATIONAL LEVEL .....................................................41 1.2 OPERATING STRUCRURES .....................................................................................................41 1.3 JOINT MONITORING COMMITTEE........................................................................................... 42 1.4 JOINT TECHNICAL SECRETARIAT .......................................................................................... 43 1.5 CONTRACTING AUTHORITIES.................................................................................................44 1.6 PROGRAMME BENEFICIARIES................................................................................................45 2 IMPLEMENTING RULES ............................................................................................................................. 46 2.1 BASIC IMPLEMENTATION RULES.................................................................................................... 46 2.2 GRANT AWARD PROCESS ................................................................................................................ 46 2.3 CO-FINANCING AND ELIGIBILITY OF EXPENDITURE................................................................. 47 3 INFORMATION, PUBLICITY AND CONSULTING ...................................................................................... 48 4 FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT ........................................................................................................................ 48 5 MONITORING AND EVALUATION.............................................................................................................. 49 5.1 MONITORING......................................................................................................................................... 49 5.2. PROGRAMME EVALUATION............................................................................................................. 49 6 REPORTING ................................................................................................................................................ 49 3 Cross-border Programme Glossary of acronyms CBC Cross-border Cooperation CBIB Cross-border Institution Building CEFTA Central European Free Trade Agreement EU European Union GDP Gross Domestic Product IPA Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance IUCN World Conservation Union JMC Joint Monitoring Committee JTS Joint Technical Secretariat MDG Millennium Development Goals MIPD Multi-annual Indicative Planning Document NDP National
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The European Cross-Border Cooperation in The
    The European cross-border cooperation in the Balkan countries: Marking space and the multi-scalar production of locality Cyril Blondel, Guillaume Javourez, Meri Stojanova To cite this version: Cyril Blondel, Guillaume Javourez, Meri Stojanova. The European cross-border cooperation in the Balkan countries: Marking space and the multi-scalar production of locality. UET. Pratiques sociales et reconfigurations locales dans les Balkans, 2014. halshs-02560470 HAL Id: halshs-02560470 https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-02560470 Submitted on 13 May 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. The European cross-border cooperation in the Balkan countries: Marking space and the multi-scalar production of locality Cyril Blondel (UMR CITERES, CNRS 7324- Université de Tours) Guillaume Javourez (Université de Provence-UMR TELEMME) Meri Stojanova (NI Institute and Museum, Bitola) 97 Considering borders as the limit of the States’ sovereignty and territorial competency is not enough. During the past thirty years, more and more authors have shown the necessity to take into account the complexity of the processes related to the border issue and have called for a postmodern perspective1. This theoretical approach will constitute our basis for observing border reconfigurations in the Balkans.
    [Show full text]
  • Master Thesis Multinational Villages in the Euroregion Rhine-Waal
    Master Thesis Maarten Goossens S4615646 Radboud University Nijmegen Human Geography: Conflicts, Territories and Identities June 2019 Multinational villages in the Euroregion Rhine-Waal Supervised by: Martin van der Velde And the thing called Europe has become a patchwork of colourful places, and everyone is a stranger as soon as they stick their nose out of their village. There are more strangers than inhabitants in this God blessed continent... Everyone considers their business to be the most important one and no one is planning to sacrifice anything. First of all, to start with, we draw a demarcation line. We split up. We need a boundary. Because we are all for ourselves. But an earth bends under these foolish people, a soil under them and a heaven above them. The borders run criss-cross Europe. In the long term, however, no one can separate people - not borders and not soldiers - if they just don't want to. (Kurt Tuchulsky alias Peter Panter, Berliner Volkszeitung, 27-06-1920) ii Preface The last few months I crossed the Dutch-German border on a daily basis. I did so in a bus, filled with school children speaking Dutch one moment, German the other as if it were one and the same language for them. Often with international students and other people from all over the world making their way from the one side of the border to the other. On my daily trip from Nijmegen to Kleve I sometimes forgot where I was, or fell asleep, and then suddenly noticed I already had crossed the border.
    [Show full text]
  • 41. the Meuse–Rhine Euroregion: a Laboratory for Police and Judicial Cooperation in the European Union*
    41. THE MEUSE–RHINE EUROREGION: A LABORATORY FOR POLICE AND JUDICIAL COOPERATION IN THE EUROPEAN UNION* 1. Introduction Over the past few decades, economic and social integration within the European Union (EU) has rapidly gained momentum. This integration has been largely facili- tated by the Schengen Implementation Convention of 1990, which abolished border controls between the member states.1 However, this easing of border controls has also improved and expanded the opportunities for criminals to engage in cross-border illegal activities. Therefore, police and judicial cooperation has now become a high priority on the European Union’s agenda. The authorities in urbanized border areas are usually the first to be confronted by new developments in cross-border crime. As a result, opportunities for law- enforcement cooperation are quickly grasped, and practical innovations are devised as far as the conventions permit. Hence, border areas often serve as ‘laboratories’ for police and judicial cooperation. A clear example of this is the Meuse-Rhine Euroregion, located in the border areas of the Netherlands, Belgium and Germany. From a scholarly point of view, jurists have largely dominated the discussion about police and judicial cooperation (Corstens and Pradel 2002; Peers 2000; Sabatier 2001). This is easily explained by the fact that up until now criminologists have con- ducted relatively little empirical research on this topic. However, the Meuse-Rhine Euroregion is an exception to the rule, as several studies about police and judicial cooperation with regard to the area have been published over the years (Hofstede and Faure 1993; Spapens 2002, 2008a; Spapens and Fijnaut 2005).
    [Show full text]
  • Country Sheet Macedonia
    The Country of Return Information Project functions as a network of NGO’s for the collection and transfer of specific information on reintegration possibilities for potential returnees and their counsellors. All questions you may have on reintegration possibilities and on which you don’t find the answer in this country sheet, can be directed to the helpdesk “Country of Return Information and Vulnerable Groups”. E-mail: [email protected] COUNTRY SHEET MACEDONIA The Country of Return Information Project and Vulnerable Groups runs until June 2009 and is funded by the European May 2009 Community. The European Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information provided. Sole responsibility for its content lies with the author. 1 1. Access to the territory ......................................................................... 4 1.1 Documentation ...................................................................................................... 4 1.1.1 Travel documents needed for returnees ................................................... 5 1.1.2 Documents needed to the country of return ............................................ 6 1.1.3 How to obtain necessary documents .......................................................... 6 1.1.4 Price of the necessary documents .............................................................. 7 1.2 Travel to country of origin .................................................................................. 8 1.2.1 By air ...............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Good Governance in Education
    GOOD GOVERNANCE IN EDUCATION GOOD GOVERNANCE IN EDUCATION Skopje, October 2010 1 Good governance in education Case studies: Municipalities of Kisela Voda, Kriva Palanka, Vrapchishte, Bitola, Strumica, Shtip, Kicevo and Veles Skopje, October 2010 The SEEU expresses appreciation to the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and Oslo Governance Center for the technical and financial support during the production of this report. 2 Authors: Marija Risteska, PhD Ana Mickovska – Raleva, Mphill Mirjana Kraja - Sejdini, MSc Researchers: Nedzat Mehmedovic Erlin Agic Iga Grabowska Mirlinda Bakiu Tome Gushev Nadica Ljocheva Diogen Hadzi-Kosta Milevski Readers Group (in alphabetic order): Aferdita Haxhijaha-Imeri – UNDP Social Inclusion Practice Coordinator Heather Henshaw – Executive Advisor at SEEU Jadranka Sullivan – UNDP Social Inclusion Specialist Loreta Georgieva – Executive Director of Macedonian Centre for Civic Education Maja Gerovska – Miteva – Institute for Social and labour Policy Report Production Coordination: Shqipe Gerguri - SEEU Layout and Print: Arberia Design 3 Table of contents GOOD GOVERNANCE IN EDUCATION ................................................................................................ 1 CASE STUDIES: MUNICIPALITIES OF KISELA VODA, KRIVA PALANKA, VRAPCHISHTE, BITOLA, STRUMICA, SHTIP, KICEVO AND VELES ............................................................................ 2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION............................................................................................................3
    [Show full text]
  • Drina Euroregion
    Crossing the borders. Studies on cross-border cooperation within the Danube Region Case Study of cross-border cooperation along the Serbian–Croatian border Drina Euroregion Contents 1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 2 2. The development of the cross-border cooperation .............................................................. 7 2.1 Establishment of the Drina Euroregion ......................................................................... 8 3. Determination of geographical confines ............................................................................ 11 3.1 The Serbian–Bosnian border section of the Drina Euroregion .................................. 11 3.2 The Serbian–Croatian border section of the Drina Euroregion ................................. 12 3.3 The Croatian–Bosnian border section of the Drina Euroregion ................................ 12 3.4 The Montenegrin–Bosnian border section of the Drina Euroregion......................... 13 3.5 The Montenegrin–Serbian border section of the Drina Euroregion ......................... 14 3.6 Geographic features of the Drina Euroregion area .................................................... 15 3.7 Administrative units – members ................................................................................. 20 4. Organisational and institutional structure, operation ......................................................... 28 Assembly ................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Zerohack Zer0pwn Youranonnews Yevgeniy Anikin Yes Men
    Zerohack Zer0Pwn YourAnonNews Yevgeniy Anikin Yes Men YamaTough Xtreme x-Leader xenu xen0nymous www.oem.com.mx www.nytimes.com/pages/world/asia/index.html www.informador.com.mx www.futuregov.asia www.cronica.com.mx www.asiapacificsecuritymagazine.com Worm Wolfy Withdrawal* WillyFoReal Wikileaks IRC 88.80.16.13/9999 IRC Channel WikiLeaks WiiSpellWhy whitekidney Wells Fargo weed WallRoad w0rmware Vulnerability Vladislav Khorokhorin Visa Inc. Virus Virgin Islands "Viewpointe Archive Services, LLC" Versability Verizon Venezuela Vegas Vatican City USB US Trust US Bankcorp Uruguay Uran0n unusedcrayon United Kingdom UnicormCr3w unfittoprint unelected.org UndisclosedAnon Ukraine UGNazi ua_musti_1905 U.S. Bankcorp TYLER Turkey trosec113 Trojan Horse Trojan Trivette TriCk Tribalzer0 Transnistria transaction Traitor traffic court Tradecraft Trade Secrets "Total System Services, Inc." Topiary Top Secret Tom Stracener TibitXimer Thumb Drive Thomson Reuters TheWikiBoat thepeoplescause the_infecti0n The Unknowns The UnderTaker The Syrian electronic army The Jokerhack Thailand ThaCosmo th3j35t3r testeux1 TEST Telecomix TehWongZ Teddy Bigglesworth TeaMp0isoN TeamHav0k Team Ghost Shell Team Digi7al tdl4 taxes TARP tango down Tampa Tammy Shapiro Taiwan Tabu T0x1c t0wN T.A.R.P. Syrian Electronic Army syndiv Symantec Corporation Switzerland Swingers Club SWIFT Sweden Swan SwaggSec Swagg Security "SunGard Data Systems, Inc." Stuxnet Stringer Streamroller Stole* Sterlok SteelAnne st0rm SQLi Spyware Spying Spydevilz Spy Camera Sposed Spook Spoofing Splendide
    [Show full text]
  • Borders in Globalization Country Report on Denmark-Germany
    1 2 _________________________________ Borers in oaiation Resear roet 2 Borders in Globalization enmar Germany artin Klatt sabelle alteru University of Borders in Globalization (BIG) DENMARK - GERMANY Isabelle Walther-Duc Martin Klatt A. Introduction Fig. 1: freight and persons crossing the Danish borders, 2006 and 2009/2011 The Danish-German border is short in comparison to other EU internal borders. Still it is relevant also as the border between the continent and Scandinavia, or the countries within the Nordic Council. The border’s history is conflict ridden. It was drawn in 1920, together with other new borders drawn in connection with the post WW-I order in Europe, reflecting (not only) the result of a plebiscite. The decades from 1920 to the 1950’s witnessed a bordering process with clear demarcation as well as the introduction of strict visa regimes and migration restriction, accompanied by the cut of economic flows and continued political challenges to the exact location of the border. Especially Denmark was interested in securing the border from possible German claims of revision. This changed only after Denmark joined the EC in 1973. Infrastructure investments as a freeway (opened fully in 1983) connecting the Jutland peninsula with the Hamburg metropolitan area and its seaport (2nd-3rd in Europe), the shorter “line as the birds fly” rail and road connection across Fehmarn-Lolland, disrupted by a 1 h ferry passage (1963), the introduction of frequent ferry services on the Rostock-Gedser route after German reunification (1990) and the planned fixed link under the Fehmarn Belt together with railway and road improvements on both shores (opening in the 2020’s) have made the region the major transport corridor between Europe and Scandinavia.
    [Show full text]
  • EUROREGION BALTIC About Us
    EUROREGION BALTIC COOPERATING ACROSS BORDERS SINCE 1998 ABOUT ERB Background Established in 1998 Euroregion Baltic (ERB), is a politically solid and well- anchored cross-border cooperation platform in the south-east of the Baltic Sea region, representing regional authorities and local authorities’ associations in nine regions in five countries – Denmark (Bornholm), Sweden (Blekinge, Kalmar, Kronoberg, Skane Association of Local Authorities), Poland (Warmia-Masuria and Pomorskie Region, Association of Polish Communes of Euroregion Baltic), Lithuania (Klaipeda) and Russia (Kaliningrad). The political cooperation enacted by the Euroregion Baltic has allowed for the establishment of the South Baltic CBC Programme as joint efforts promoted within the Euroregion made it possible for the programme to be launched in 2007. As a result, the Euroregion Baltic could rapidly develop into project-based cross-border cooperation, focussing on the South Baltic seashores. one of the biggest maritime euroregions, created in 1998 first to include Russian partners hub for cross-border cooperation with focus on people-to-people projects strategic actions via Interreg projects promoting local and regional perspective in the Baltic Sea Region and EU (MLG) exchanging knowledge and good practice, building capacities for local actors. 2 Mission Since its foundation, Euroregion Baltic understood the importance of making use of EU opportunities to ensure the implementation of projects that could help the objectives of economic growth in the region: industry, agriculture, transport, communication, spatial planning, environmental protection, cooperation in the fields of science, education, tourism, health care, etc. The Euroregion’s mission is to undertake joint initiatives aiming at strengthening and promoting cooperation among the local and regional authorities of the Parties of the Agreement, as well as contributing to the sustainable development of the Baltic Sea Region, with particular focus on the South Baltic area.
    [Show full text]
  • The Adriatic-Ionian EU Strategy (EUSAIR)
    European Economic and Social Committee ECO/359 EU Strategy for the Adriatic and Ionian Region (EUSAIR) Brussels, 21 January 2014 OPINION of the European Economic and Social Committee on the EU Strategy for the Adriatic and Ionian Region (EUSAIR) (exploratory opinion) _____________ Rapporteur-General: Mr Dimitriadis Co-Rapporteur-General: Mr Palmieri _____________ ECO/359 – EESC-2013-07379-00-00-AC-TRA Rue Belliard/Belliardstraat 99 — 1040 Bruxelles/Brussel — BELGIQUE/BELGIË Tel. +32 25469011 — Fax +32 25134893 — Internet: http://www.eesc.europa.eu EN - 1 - On 20 November 2013, Maroš Šefčovič, Vice-President of the European Commission, asked the European Economic and Social Committee, to draw up an exploratory opinion on the EU Strategy for the Adriatic and Ionian Region (EUSAIR). On 15 October 2013 the Committee Bureau instructed the Section for Economic and Monetary Union and Economic and Social Cohesion to prepare the Committee's work on the subject. Given the urgent nature of the work, the European Economic and Social Committee appointed Mr Dimitriadis, as rapporteur-general, and Mr Palmieri as co-rapporteur-general at its 495th plenary session, held on 21 and 22 January 2014 (meeting of 21 January 2014), and adopted the following opinion by 150 votes to 0 with 3abstentions. * * * 1. Conclusions and recommendations 1.1 The EESC welcomes the special attention devoted to drawing up a European Union Strategy for the Adriatic and Ionian Region (EUSAIR), in order to support cohesion and competitiveness in the light of challenges that cannot be satisfactorily resolved by single regions or countries through the usual means. 1.2 The EESC notes that the discussion paper does not mention the strategic value of Mediterranean cooperation.
    [Show full text]
  • Analytical Report on the Decentralization Process
    ANALYTICAL REPORT ON THE DECENTRALIZATION PROCESS Analytical Report on the Decentralization Process Acknowledgements The OSCE Mission to Skopje would like to extend its gratitude to all the municipal administrations and municipal councils that completed the survey questionnaires and provided their valuable inputs to this report. Special gratitude is extended to the representatives of the selected municipalities that gave valuable written and oral feedback at the field visits organized by the Democratic Governance Unit staff and to the participants at the regional roundtable workshops organized to collect additional opinion on decentralization related issues treated in this report in order to provide the reader with more comprehensive insight into the decentralization process development. Finally, the Democratic Governance Unit expresses its gratitude to all of their colleagues who contributed to the publishing of this report. The members of the Democratic Governance Unit and authors of this report are: Kristina Jovanova, Senior Programme Assistant Maja Lazarova Krstevska, National Programme Officer Lirim Dalipi, National Public Administration Officer Metodija Dimovski, National Programme Officer Copyright: OSCE Mission to Skopje Hyperium Building Skopje Boulevard 8- September No 16 osce.org/skopje September, 2014 2 Introduction Decentralization is one of the main pillars of the Ohrid Framework Agreement. Monitoring and assessment of the developments in the decentralization area remain at the core of the OSCE Mission to Skopje’s mandate. Starting from 2006, the Mission has been conducting assessments of the process, providing specific recommendations and suggestions for local and central government stakeholders. The Analytical Report on the Implementation of the Decentralization Process is the result of a field research and desk analysis which were conducted by the Democratic Governance Unit of the OSCE Mission to Skopje during the period July 2012 and July 2013.
    [Show full text]
  • The European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC): a New Tool
    The European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC): A new tool... QUAESTIONES GEOGRAPHICAE 29(4) • 2010 THE EUROPEAN GROUPING OF TERRITORIAL COOPERATION (EGTC): A NEW TOOL FACILITATING CROSS-BORDER COOPERATION AND GOVERNANCE JIRKA ZAPLETAL vrije Universiteit Bussels, Institute for European Studies, Brussels, Belgium Manuscript received July 26, 2010 Revised version November 20, 2010 ZAPLETAL J., The European Grouping for Territorial Cooperation (EGTC): A new tool facilitating cross-border cooperation and governance. Quaestiones Geographicae 29(4), Bogucki Wydawnictwo Naukowe, Poznań 2010, pp. 15–26, 2 tables, 1 map. DOI 10.2478/v10117-010-0028-z, ISBN 978-83-62662-30-2, ISSN 0137-477X. ABSTRACT . The European Union is becoming one undivided continent where territories are faced with borderless economic, social and environmental challenges while still being governed within traditional institutional boun- daries. Integration raises the question of cohesion among different territories, and territorial cohesion is a new objective for the Union according to the Lisbon Treaty. Cooperation between territories, beyond frontiers and across different institutional layers, is becoming crucial for providing multi-level governance to new functional regions. The European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC), a new legal and governance tool established by Regulation 1082/2006, was conceived as a substantial upgrade for this multi-level governance and beyond- the-border cooperation. Four years after its adoption, a number of EGTCs have been set up, and new ones are in the pipeline. Recently the European Commission and the Committee of the Regions have launched a consulta- tion with the aim to review the existing legislation since 2007 on the EGTC and adjust it if necessary.
    [Show full text]