Social Capital and Governance in European Borderlands: A comparative study of Euroregions as policy actors By Sara Svensson Submitted to Central European University Doctoral School of Political Science, Public Policy and International Relations In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Supervisor: Dr. Andrew Cartwright Budapest, Hungary FINAL DRAFT – Comments welcome by January 25, 2013 DECLARATION I hereby declare that this dissertation contains no materials accepted for any other degrees, in any other institutions. The dissertation contains no materials previously written and/or published by any other person, except where appropriate acknowledgement is made in the form of bibliographical reference. Sara Svensson January 31, 2012 2 ABSTRACT The dissertation contributes to the literature on multi-level governance in Europe and the literature on borderlands by investigating the mechanisms of local cross-border policy making. It focuses on motivation, participation and interaction patterns of one type of actors, the local governments that constitute the backbone of much institutionalized cross-border cooperation in Europe. As local governments, especially small ones, have frequently been neglected by researchers tending to focus on actors representing regional bodies or major towns, I argue that more attention to their attitudes and behavior can enhance our understanding of variance in function and performance of the type of institutions often referred to as Euroregions. The dissertation uses the concept of social capital (as understood by Coleman, 1990) and addresses two specific questions: (1) Why and how do local governments participate in cross-border cooperation institutions (Euroregions) and how do they interact? (2) Can motivation, participation and interaction patterns form social capital that influences how the Euroregions function and perform? The dissertation relies on an extensive dataset consisting of more than 200 interviews. The core is 136 interviews with political representatives (mayors) and organizational representatives (Chairs and Managers) of six Euroregions located along three national borders that do not pose obstacles in terms of cultural-linguistic, economic development or politico-administrative differences, (Hungary/Slovakia, Sweden/Norway and Austria/Germany), thereby holding constant important factor that could affect the outcome. A mixed-method approach is used in the analysis of the data, combining qualitative analysis with social network analysis. Results demonstrate that local governments’ motivation for joining and maintaining membership in a Euroregion is more frequently based on normative than on instrumental factors. Dense participation and communication patterns, indicating presence of social capital, are not clearly associated with high cross-border cooperation intensity, but for Euroregions to be evaluated favorably by its own members, both within-group (domestic) and between-group (transnational) social capital matters. Inter-municipal cooperation is a resource that plays an important role both at the time of Euroregional formation and later into its operation, and dense communication networks on one side of the border are related to how actively and engaged the members become in the Euroregional organization. Moreoever, normative motivation is more 3 conducive for the creation of social capital than instrumental motivations; especially grant-driven expectations can lead to output legitimacy problems if not fulfilled. The dissertation therefore argues that high levels of within-group social capital serve as a pre-condition for high levels of between-group social capital. However, evidence could not be found to support the expectation that a high-level of between-group social capital in the form of cross-border communication is associated with high organizational performance in the form of cross-border cooperation intensity. While social capital may still be important for Euroregional function and performance long-term (it is likely to enhance the chance for organizational survival), there is no clear evidence that it has an impact in the short time-span within which most Euroregions have operated so far. 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT It is common in acknowledgments to compare a PhD period with a journey, but the metaphor used early on by my supervisor Andrew Cartwright was instead that of an empty room. My task was to bring material to this room, build some things from scratch, organize and decorate. It is now time for the first proper reception, and here I would like to thank all of you who kept me compay and visited me while there was still furniture missing, messy stuff was hidden behind unfitting curtains, and surfaces were cluttered with things I did not know where to place. Thanks to Andrew, therefore, for not losing calm in the face of chaos, and for urging me to keep asking questions. Likewise, I want to thank the two other members of the supervisory panel, Thilo Bodenstein and Tamas Meszerics, for stimulating discussions. Many thanks to my co-authors on various publication projects; much of our efforts is visible in these pages: to Gergo Medve-Balint, who worked with me for a while on the Hungarian-Slovak border, to Andreas Ojehag, who helped me analyze some of the empirical data from the Swedish-Norwegian border, and to Andrey Demidov, with whom I investigated policies of cooperation at the external borders of the European Union. Thanks also to Carl Nordlund, who was essential for the social network analysis, and with whom I hope to continue collaboration. I also thank the more than two hundred interviewees in European borderlands who donated your time to this project. Thanks for many cups of coffee & tea! Some of the places I went to could be called peripheral, but will stay at the core of my recollection of the PhD experience. Many colleagues and friends at the Central European University in Budapest helped me along the way, especially my co-students in the public policy track, Andreea Nastase and Elene Jibladze, but also Kristin, Vera, Stefan, Lucia, and many others. The writing-group that we formed in the last year helped me through the intensive wirite-up period: thanks go to Elene, Sanja, Anvar, Lisa, Philipp, Norbert and to Reka for convening it. Kriszta and Aniko provided valuable administrative support, and I am also grateful to the university as an institution for providing me with the grants that made these years possible and for offering such an overall stimulating environment. The semester I spent at the Department of Historical and Political Studies at Karlstad University was very important for a critical perspective on new regionalism and regional studies. Special thanks to the PhD candidates for many discussions: Line, Andreas, David and Tomas. 5 Before enrolling in the PhD program I worked at the Center for Policy Studies, and the colleagues from there continued to be a great support. Special thanks to those of you who stepped in to help with final proof-reading: Lilla, Heni, and Bori. Finally, many thanks to my family for bearing with me all this time. To my husband, Ádám, for his unfaltering belief in my ability to take this thing to an end. To my children, who often asked when ‘the book’ would be ready; Hanna started school at the same time as I enrolled in the PhD program and we used to compete on who had the heaviest school bag (she mostly won), David took a big interest in ‘what I would become’ after finishing and tried to scare me off a teacher’s career (‘you would have to be very stern with the students or they will misbehave, but when you are stern they won’t like you any more’). Thanks to my brother Martin, for general pep talks and for bringing in a business perspective! Thanks to the rest of the family: my parents, parents-in-law, my uncle, and not the least to my grandmothers, who have been looking forward to coming to the ceremony where the degree will be conferred, and on that day no doubt will think about my grandfathers who were still alive when I started this project. 6 TABLE OF CONTENTS Declaration..................................................................................................................................2 Abstract.......................................................................................................................................3 Acknowledgement.......................................................................................................................5 Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................7 List of Figures and Tables .........................................................................................................10 Chapter 1: Introduction............................................................................................................12 1.1. Key concepts ..................................................................................................................13 1.2. Research questions..........................................................................................................16 1.3. Contribution and policy relevance...................................................................................18 1.4. Summary of research design ...........................................................................................19 1.5. Structure of the dissertation.............................................................................................20