Examples of using Crossborder structures in English and their translations into Portuguese
{-}
-
Colloquial
-
Official
-
Medicine
-
Financial
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Computer
-
Official/political
Strategic cooperation requires permanent and"binding" crossborder structures.
Whilst the development of genuinely crossborder structures is quite difficult to achieve in a short period of time, some practical arrangements can be set up swiftly.
Cooperation at project level can however require the setting up of projectlevel crossborder structures.
These Euroregions are at the same time the most advanced crossborder structures in the Central and Eastern European countries.
However, some cooperation projects may however require the setting up of projectlevel crossborder structures.
PL/D, CZ/D, CZ/A, HU/A. EST/FIN:These are land frontiers with established crossborder structures and considerable experience in programming and implementation.
AEBR currently has 79 Members, comprising first level regions andlocal authorities or crossborder structures.
The Guidelines also contain precise provisions regarding joint crossborder structures responsible for the overall implementation(technical management and financial management) of new INTERREG IIIA programmes.
There are however some possible solutions for formally setting-up project level crossborder structures on an appropriate legal basis.
Moreover, regional crossborder structures in the Nordic countries have considerable similarities with the Euroregions, especially in terms of identity, capacity, and role in INTERREG IIA.
There are however some options available for formally setting-up project level crossborder structures on an appropriate legal basis.
There are now many crossborder structures in existence, representing a considerable diversity in purpose, powers and capacities including involvement in INTERREG and related programme or projects.
In some cases this is done through aformal INTERREG agreement between the competent Member State authorities and the relevant regional/local crossborder structures.
Regional and local authorities in border areas and regional-level crossborder structures are expected to take the lead in the preparation of' the programmes, working in partnership with national authorities where appropriate.
Cooperation at project level can be dealt with by existing bodies on eitherside of the border, but it may sometimes require the setting up of projectlevel crossborder structures.
Although projects generally can benefit from agreements on crossborder structures for strategyoriented cooperation, no uniform legal instrument for cooperation at project level exists in EU-Member States.
Many crossborder projects can be dealt with by existing bodies on either side of the border,while others may require the setting up of projectlevel crossborder structures.
In several countries these crossborder structures need a document of approval of central state authorities, while in other countries like Germany or the Netherlands such agreements are required only if cooperation is based on public law.
The second category represented a top-down approach,with programmes compiled by national authorities without the involvement of crossborder structures, in the few cases that such structures existed e.g. Pyrénées for E/F.
LACE has promoted crossborder cooperation and crossborder structures throughout Europe and has been actively involved in strengthening networking between border regions and facilitating the transfer of know-how and best practice.
A broad variety of legal instruments has been tried in order to generally allow for/ facilitate crossborder cooperation orto specifically enable the setting up of genuine and sustainable crossborder structures and joint programmes.
The main needs of these regions are the creation or strengthening of regional/local level crossborder structures and the improvement of the knowledge of regional/local level players in programme development and implementation, and financial management matters.
SK/HU, RO/BG, FYROM/BG and FYROM/AL: These are less advanced" regions with little orno practical experience in crossborder programmes and projects, as well as lacking well-established crossborder structures only on the SK/HU border there are newly created Euroregions.
In setting up projectlevel crossborder structures, two essential factors should be taken into consideration: the duration of the project(use of various long and shortterm instruments) and the suitability of the instrument to the type of action the project pursues.
Even if different framework conditions may require(or allow for) specific cooperation structures, it is vital to recognise that developing crossborder structures does not mean creating new layers of government and legal entities let alone under international law.
Recurrent mistakes that hinder crossborder structures and joint programme management are attempts to harmonise and make similar legal authority and structures on both sides of the border as a precondition for crossborder cooperation.
Crossborder structures for each national border have evolved in various ways and in many cases now involve elaborate crossborder structures with the JPMC at their apex, and various other components below e.g. sectoral working groups in HU/A. and Euroregions in PL/D.
Developing crossborder structures primarily means interlinking players and organisations at regional/local(and in some cases national) level which often already exist, and creating a permanent capacity(political, technical, administrative structures) for cooperation such as establishing joint secretariats or branch offices.
Not all of these relatively loose activities need their own permanent crossborder structure.
They rarely have separate decision making from their members, maintaining an interorganisational form of decision-making,i.e. participants in the committees, working groups etc. of the crossborder structure acting as representatives of their own authority.