欧盟跨边界合作研究对粤港澳大湾区协同治理的启示

热带地理

• •

欧盟跨边界合作研究对粤港澳大湾区协同治理的启示

陈德宁¹(), 吴康敏²(), 吴家瑜³, 马仁锋⁴, 姜炎鹏⁵

^1.广东财经大学文化旅游与地理学院，广州 510320
^2.广东省科学院广州地理研究所//广东省遥感与地理信息系统应用重点实验室// 广东省地理空间信息技术与应用公共实验室，广州 510070
^3.深圳市城市规划设计研究院有限公司，广东深圳 518000
^4.宁波大学地理与空间信息技术系，浙江宁波 315211
^5.华东师范大学城市与区域科学学院，上海 200241

收稿日期:2021-05-12 修回日期:2021-12-23 出版日期:2022-01-24
通讯作者: 吴康敏 E-mail:dening_chen@aliyun.com;kangmwu@163.com
作者简介:陈德宁（1969－），女，广东罗定人，博士，副教授，硕士生导师，研究方向为边界制度与区域一体化发展，（E-mail）dening_chen@aliyun.com；
基金资助:
国家社会科学基金项目(18FJL020);国家自然科学基金项目(42101182);广东省科学院发展专项资金项目(2021GDASYL-20210103004)

The Enlightenment of EU Cross-Border Cooperation Research on the Collaborative Governance in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area

Dening Chen¹(), Kangmin Wu²(), Jiayu Wu³, Renfeng Ma⁴, Yanpeng Jiang⁵

^1.School of Culture Tourism and Geography, Guangdong University of Finance and Economics, Guangzhou 510320
^2.Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing and Geographical Information System, Guangdong Open Laboratory of Geospatial Information Technology and Application, Guangzhou Institute of Geography, Guangdong Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou 510070, China
^3.Urban Planning and Design Institute of Shenzhen, Shenzhen 518000
^4.Department of Geography& Spatial Information Technology, Ningbo University, Ningbo, China 315211
^5.School of Urban & Regional Science, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200062, China

Received:2021-05-12 Revised:2021-12-23 Online:2022-01-24
Contact: Kangmin Wu E-mail:dening_chen@aliyun.com;kangmwu@163.com

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

经济全球化与区域一体化是21世纪区域合作的核心动因，跨边界合作议题备受学界关注。欧盟在区域一体化实践方面有丰硕的理论与实证成果，其发展经验为粤港澳大湾区协同治理提供了指引，二者均涉及到跨制度、边界的协作和权力的尺度重组。文章基于Web of Science（WOS）数据库和中国知网（CNKI），运用Citespace文献计量分析，系统分析了1993—2020年欧盟跨边界合作研究动向。结果发现：1）欧盟跨边界合作研究主要集中在边界区域互动、跨边界合作模式、跨边界合作领域、跨边界合作障碍等方面；2）欧盟跨边界合作的发展得益于国家之间政治上的互动互信、正式与非正式的制度协调和合作范围的扩大与深入，然而在双边差异、跨边界可达性、移民和安全等方面仍存在不足；3）欧盟跨边界合作的实践经验对粤港澳大湾区协同治理具有重要启示作用，增强价值与文化认同，创设特殊制度安排，构建多尺度合作空间与多维度治理体系是实现大湾区协同发展的核心支撑。

关键词: 欧盟, 边界, 边境毗邻区, 粤港澳大湾区, 协同

Abstract:

Economic globalization and regional integration are the core motivations of regional cooperation in the 21st century, and the issue of cross-border cooperation has attracted much academic attention. As the largest regional integration organization with the highest level in the world, EU takes the lead in practicing regional integration in the process of economic globalization. Europe's cross-border governance has been paid attention in a long time in economic geography and political geography, and a large number of theoretical and empirical research results have been achieved on issues such as border cooperation model and cross-border governance mechanism. The development experience of EU provides rich theoretical and practical experience for the collaborative governance in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area, as the two also involve the collaboration across institutional boundaries and power restructuring. Therefore, the analysis of EU cross-border cooperation is of great significance to promote Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao coordination. Based on the bibliometric analysis of Citespace, this paper systematically studies the research trends of EU cross-border cooperation from 1993 to 2020. The study finds that: 1) EU cross-border cooperation research mainly focuses on border regional interaction, cross-border cooperation mode, cross-border cooperation field, cross-border cooperation barriers and other issues. The regional integration of Europe has promoted the transformation of border areas from marginal areas to the forefront of development, and gradually formed a cross-border governance model under the superposition of formal institutional arrangements and informal institutional arrangements. The field of cooperation involves economic cooperation, tourism, environmental governance, health and other fields. 2) The development of EU cross-border cooperation benefits from the political interaction and mutual trust between countries, formal and informal institutional coordination, and the expansion and deepening of the scope of cooperation. However, there are still deficiencies in bilateral differences, cross-border accessibility, immigration and security. 3) As the same cross-institutional border region, the practical experience of EU cross-border cooperation has important enlightenment for the collaborative governance in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area. Value identity is the basis of cross-institutional cooperation in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area. Inclusive and orderly institutional arrangements are conducive to reducing the shielding effect of cooperation boundaries. And the combination of multi-scale cooperation and multi-dimensional governance system will effectively improve the cooperation in border areas.

Key words: EU, boundary, border adjacent area, Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area, collaboration

中图分类号:

K901

陈德宁, 吴康敏, 吴家瑜, 马仁锋, 姜炎鹏. 欧盟跨边界合作研究对粤港澳大湾区协同治理的启示[J]. 热带地理, 2022, (): 1-10.

Dening Chen, Kangmin Wu, Jiayu Wu, Renfeng Ma, Yanpeng Jiang. The Enlightenment of EU Cross-Border Cooperation Research on the Collaborative Governance in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area[J]. Tropical Geography, 2022, (): 1-10.

图/表 3

参考文献 0

	Anderson J and O'dowd L. 1999. Borders, Border Regions and Territoriality: Contradictory Meanings, Changing Significance. Regional Studies, 33: 593-604.
	Brand H, Hollederer A, Wolf U and Brand A. 2008. Cross-Border Health Activities in the Euregios: Good Practice for Better Health. Health Policy, 86(2/3): 245-254.
	Bufon Milan. 1993. Cultural and Social Dimensions of Borderlands: The Case of the Italo-Slovene Trans-Border Area. GeoJournal, 30(3): 235-240.
	Černikovský L, Krejčí B, Blažek Z and Volná V. 2016. Transboundary Air-Pollution Transport in the Czech-Polish Border Region Between the Cities of Ostrava and Katowice. Central European Journal of Public Health, 24(Supplement): S45-S50.
	Darakas E. 2002. The Transboundary River Nestos and Its Water Quality Assessment: Cross-Border Cooperation Between Greece and Bulgaria. Environmentalist, 22(4): 367-375.
	Decoville A and Durand F. 2016. Building a Cross-Border Territorial Strategy Between Four Countries: Wishful Thinking?. European Planning Studies, 24(10): 1825-1843.
	Decoville A, Durand F, Sohn C and Walther O. 2013. Comparing Cross-Border Metropolitan Integration in Europe: Towards a Functional Typology. Journal of Borderlands Studies, 28(2): 221-237.
	Dokoupil J, Havlíček T and Jeřábek M. 2018. Development in the Border Areas as Part of the European Integration Process. In: Havlíček T, Jeřábek M and Dokoupil J. Borders in Central Europe After the Schengen Agreement. Switzerland:Springer, Cham, 37-48.
	Dühr S, Colomb C and Nadin V. 2010. European Spatial Planning and Territorial Cooperation. London: Routledge.
	Duindam S and Waddington L. 2012. Cross-Border Cooperation in the Rhine-Meuse Region: Aachen (d) and Heerlen (nls). European Journal of Law and Economics, 33(2): 307-320.
	Durand F and Decoville A. 2018. Establishing Cross-Border Spatial Planning. In: Eduardo Medeiros. European Territorial Cooperation. Switzerland: Springer, Cham, 229-244.
	方创琳．2017．京津冀城市群协同发展的理论基础与规律性分析．地理科学进展，36（1）：15-24．[Fang Chuanglin. 2017. Theoretical Foundation and Patterns of Coordinated Development of the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Urban Agglomeration. Progress in Geography, 36(1): 15-24.]
	房乐宪．2001．新功能主义理论与欧洲一体化．欧洲研究，（1）：13-20，107．[Fang Lexian. 2001. Neo-Functionalism and European Integration. Chinese Journal of European Studies, (1): 13-20, 107.]
	冯革群．2001．欧洲边境区合作模式探析——以上莱茵边境区为例．世界地理研究，10（4）：54-61．[Feng Gequn. 2001. Study on the Model of Cross Border Co-operation in Europe—The Case in Euroregion Upper Rhine. World Regional Studies, 10(4): 54-61.]
	Héraud J A. 2011. Reinventing Creativity in Old Europe: A Development Scenario for Cities Within the Upper Rhine Valley Cross-Border Area. City, Culture and Society, 2(2): 65-73.
	Hooghe L and Marks G. 2003. Unraveling the Central State, But How? Types of Multi-Level Governance. American Political Science Review, 97(2): 233-243.
	Jeřábek M, Havlíček T and Dokoupil J. 2018. Euroregions as a Platform for Cross-Border Cooperation. In: Havlíček Tomáš, Jeřábek Milan and Dokoupil Jaroslav. Borders in Central Europe After the Schengen Agreement. Switzerland: Springer, Cham, 67-91.
	Johnson C M. 2009. Cross-Border Regions and Territorial Restructuring in Central Europe: Room for More Transboundary Space. European Urban and Regional Studies, 16(2): 177-191.
	Jurczek P. 2002. Cross-Border Cooperation in the German-Czech-Polish Border Region at the Turn of the Century. Journal of Borderlan. ds Studies, 17(2): 97-104.
	Knippschild R and Wiechmann T. 2012. Supraregional Partnerships in Large Cross-Border Areas—Towards a New Category of Space in Europe?. Planning Practice and Research, 27(3): 297-314.
	Leibenath M. 2007. Europeanisation of Cross-Border Governance? A Case Study on the Cause, Form and Consequences of a Co-operation Project in the German-Polish-Czech Border Triangle. Space and Polity, 11(2): 151-167.
	Lundén T. 2018. Border Regions and Cross-Border Cooperation in Europe. A Theoretical and Historical Approach. In: Eduardo Medeiros. European Territorial Cooperation. Switzerland: Springer, Cham, 97-113.
	李铁立．2005．西方边境区经济发展及边境区经济合作评述．国际经贸探索，（6）：8-12．[Li Tieli. 2005. A Review of the Western Theoretic Studies of the Border Area Economic Growth and Cooperation. International Economics and Trade Research, (6): 8-12.]
	刘一．2016．难民危机背景下的欧盟外部边境管控问题．德国研究，31（3）：31-43，125．[Liu Yi. 2016. External Border Control of EU Under the Background of Refugee Crisis. Deutschland-Studien, 31(3): 31-43, 125.]
	Matušková A, Preis J and Rousová M. 2018. Quality of Life and Cross-Border Relations in Selected Czech Euroregions. In: Havlíček Tomáš, Jeřábek Milan and Dokoupil Jaroslav. Borders in Central Europe After the Schengen Agreement. Switzerland:Springer, Cham, 179-196.
	Medeiros E, Guillermo Ramírez M, Ocskay G and Peyrony J. 2021. Covidfencing Effects on Cross-Border Deterritorialism: The Case of Europe. European Planning Studies, 29(5): 962-982.
	Medeiros E. 2011. (Re) Defining the Euroregion Concept. European Planning Studies, 19(1): 141-158.
	Medeiros E. 2014. Is There a New ‘Trust’ in Inner Scandinavia? Evidence from Cross—Border Planning and Governance. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography, 96(4): 363-386.
	Medeiros E. 2019. Cross-Border Transports and Cross-Border Mobility in EU Border Regions. Case Studies on Transport Policy, 7(1): 1-12.
	Michelmann H J and Soldatos P. 1994. European Integration: Theories and Approaches. Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America.
	Miltiadou M, Bouhouras E, Basbas S, Mintsis G and Taxiltaris C. 2017. Analysis of Border Crossings in South East Europe and Measures for Their Improvement. Transportation Research Procedia, 25: 603-615.
	Moravcsik A. 2013. The Choice for Europe: Social Purpose and State Power from Messina to Maastricht. London: Routledge.
	Noferini A, Berzi M, Camonita F and Durà A. 2020. Cross-Border Cooperation in the EU: Euroregions Amid Multilevel Governance and Re-Territorialization. European Planning Studies, 28(1): 35-56.
	欧时新．2018．欧洲一体化的区域治理对粤港澳大湾区发展的启示．知识经济，（9）：25-26．[Ou Shixin. 2018. Enlightenment of European Integration of Regional Governance for the Development of the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area. Knowledge Economics, (9): 25-26.]
	Perkmann M. 1999. Building Governance Institutions Across European Borders. Regional Studies, 33(7): 657-667.
	Perkmann M. 2007a. Policy Entrepreneurship and Multilevel Governance: A Comparative Study of European Cross-Border Regions. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 25(6): 861-879.
	Perkmann M. 2007b. Construction of New Territorial Scales: A Framework and Case Study of the EUREGIO Cross-Border Region. Regional Studies, 41(2): 253-266.
	Popescu G. 2008. The Conflicting Logics of Cross-Border Reterritorialization: Geopolitics of Euroregions in Eastern Europe. Political Geography, 27(4): 418-438.
	Renner T and Meijerink S. 2018. Policy Entrepreneurs in International River Basins—Getting Climate Adaptation on the Cross-Border Water Policy Agenda. Regional Environmental Change, 18(5): 1287-1298.
	Scott J W. 2015. Bordering, Border Politics and Cross-Border Cooperation in Europe. In: Celata F and Coletti R. Neighbourhood Policy and the Construction of the European External Borders. Switzerland: Springer, Cham, 27-44.
	Sohn C, Reitel B and Walther O. 2009. Cross-Border Metropolitan Integration in Europe: The Case of Luxembourg, Basel, and Geneva. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 27(5): 922-939.
	Stoffelen A, Ioannides D and Vanneste D. 2017. Obstacles to Achieving Cross-Border Tourism Governance: A Multi-Scalar Approach Focusing on the German-Czech Borderlands. Annals of Tourism Research, 64: 126-138.
	Studzieniecki T, Palmowski T and Korneevets V. 2016. The System of Cross-Border Tourism in the Polish-Russian Borderland. Procedia Economics and Finance, 39: 545-552.
	Svensson S and Balogh P. 2018. Limits to Integration: Persisting Border Obstacles in the EU. In: Eduardo Medeiros. European Territorial Cooperation. Switzerland: Springer, Cham, 115-134.
	唐昊．2002．试析欧洲一体化理论中的新区域主义．广西社会科学，（5）：210-212．[Tang Hao. 2002. New Regionalism in the European Integration Theory. Social Sciences in Guangxi, (5): 210-212.]
	田里，吴信值，王桀．2018．国外跨境旅游合作研究进展与启示．旅游学刊，33（7）：52-62．[Tian Li, Wu Xinzhi and Wang Jie. 2018. International Research Progress and Implications of Cross-Border Cooperation in Tourism. Tourism Tribune, 33(7): 52-62.]
	Weidenfeld A. 2013. Tourism and Cross Border Regional Innovation Systems. Annals of Tourism Research, 42: 191-213.
	Wennekes L, Hermens R P M G, Van Heumen K, Runde V, Schoelen H, Wollersheim H C H, Grola R P T M, Mulderb P H M and Ottevanger P B. 2008. Possibilities for Transborder Cooperation in Breast Cancer Care in Europe: A Comparative Analysis Regarding the Content, Quality and Evidence Use of Breast Cancer Guidelines. The Breast, 17(5): 464-471.
	Wiering M, Verwijmeren J, Lulofs K and Feld C. 2010. Experiences in Regional Cross Border Co-Operation in River Management. Comparing Three Cases at the Dutch–German Border. Water Resources Management, 24(11): 2647-2672.
	王昆．2016．跨国境地区合作机制研究．国际城市规划，（3）：35-39．[Wang Kun. 2016. A Study on the Mechanism of Cross-Border Cooperation. Urban Planning International, (3): 35-39.]
	王学玉．2001．欧洲一体化：一个进程，多种理论．欧洲研究，（2）：10-17，108．[Wang Xueyu. 2001. European Integration: One Process and Diverse Theories. Chinese Journal of European Studies, (2): 10-17, 108.]
	王雅梅．2006．欧盟跨境合作政策述评．德国研究，（3）：11-16，77．[Wang Yamei. 2006. Review of EU Cross-Border Cooperation Policy. Deutschland-Studien, (3): 11-16, 77.]
	熊灵，覃操，龚晨．2017．跨境经济合作的运行机制与管理模式——欧盟INTERREG的经验及对中国的启示．边界与海洋研究，2（3）：41-58．[Xiong Ling, Qin Cao and Gong Chen. 2017. Operational Mechanism and Management Mode of Cross-Border Economic Cooperation: A Study Based on EU INTERREG Program and Its Inspiration to China. Journal of Boundary and Ocean Studies, 2(3): 41-58.]
	杨爱平，张吉星．2019．纽约—新泽西港务局运作模式对粤港澳大湾区跨境治理的启示．华南师范大学学报（社会科学版），（1）：102-108，191. [Yang Aiping and Zhang Jixin. 2019. Implications for Cross-Border Governance in Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Bay Area from the Operation Model of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. Journal of South China Normal University (Social Science Edition), (1): 102-108, 191.]
	杨荣海．2013．欧洲跨境经济合作区的实践分析及启示．对外经贸实务，（8）：37-40．[Yang Ronghai. 2013. Practice Analysis and Enlightenment of European Cross-Border Economic Cooperation Zone. Practice in Foreign Economic Relations and Trade,(8): 37-40.]
	杨效忠，彭敏．2012．边境旅游研究综述及展望．人文地理，27（4）：19-24，93．[Yang Xiaozhong and Peng Min. 2012. A Review and Prospects of Studies on Border Tourism. Human Geography, 27(4): 19-24, 93.]
	叶玉瑶，王景诗，吴康敏，杜志威，王洋，何淑仪，刘郑倩．2020．粤港澳大湾区建设国际科技创新中心的战略思考．热带地理，40（1）：27-39．[Ye Yuyao, Wang Jingshi, Wu Kangmin, Du Zhiwei, Wang Yang, He Shuyi and Liu Zhengqian. 2020. Strategic Thinking Regarding Building an International Science and Technology Innovation Center in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area. Tropical Geography, 40(1): 27-39. ]
	张虹鸥，王洋，叶玉瑶，金利霞，黄耿志．2018．粤港澳区域联动发展的关键科学问题与重点议题．地理科学进展，37（12）：1587-1596．[Zhang Hong'ou, Wang Yang, Ye Yuyao, Jin Lixia and Huang Gengzhi. 2018. Key Scientific Issues and Important Topics in the Joint Development of the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Region. Progress in Geography, 37(12): 1587-1596.]
	张虹鸥，吴康敏，王洋，叶玉瑶，黄耿志．2021．粤港澳大湾区创新驱动发展的科学问题与重点研究方向．经济地理，41（10）：135-142．[Zhang Hong'ou, Wu Kangmin, Wang Yang, Ye Yuyao and Huang Gengzhi. 2021. Scientific Issues and Key Research Directions of Innovation-Driven Development in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area. Economic Geography, 41(10): 135-142.]
	张荐华，陈铁军．2004．欧美国家边境地区的一体化效应及其启示．财贸经济，（2）：80-85．[Zhang Jianhua and Chen Tiejun. 2004. The Integration Effect of Border Regions of Europe and America and Its Enlightenment. Finance and Trade Economics, (2): 80-85.]
	甄颖．2008．探析欧盟跨境合作中的治理机制．石家庄：河北师范大学．[Zhen Ying. 2008. An Analysis on the Governance of Cross-Border Cooperation in the EU. Shijiazhuang: Hebei Normal University.]

[1]	黄世鑫, 蔡云楠. 国内城镇开发边界研究进展的知识图谱[J]. 热带地理, 2021, 41(2): 256-264.
[2]	郭磊贤, 吴晓莉, 郭晓芳, 周雪君, 阚长城. 城市网络关系中的广州、深圳城市功能研究[J]. 热带地理, 2021, 41(2): 229-242.
[3]	邱坚坚, 刘毅华, 袁利, 陈澄静, 黄清瑶. 粤港澳大湾区科技创新潜力的微观集聚格局及其空间规划应对[J]. 热带地理, 2020, 40(5): 808-820.
[4]	吴迪, 于文金, 谢涛. 高分二号卫星数据在粤港澳大湾区水体有机污染监测中的应用[J]. 热带地理, 2020, 40(4): 675-683.
[5]	孟凡煬, 林姚宇, 肖作鹏, 刘倩. 深圳市轨道交通与休闲设施布局的空间协同评估[J]. 热带地理, 2020, 40(4): 721-731.
[6]	李孜沫, 陈丹阳, 王晓伟. 清代疟疾流行的时空特征、危险模拟与边界探测[J]. 热带地理, 2020, 40(3): 446-454.
[7]	叶玉瑶, 王景诗, 吴康敏, 杜志威, 王洋, 何淑仪, 刘郑倩. 粤港澳大湾区建设国际科技创新中心的战略思考[J]. 热带地理, 2020, 40(1): 27-39.
[8]	陈品宇, 李鲁奇. 区域建构：佛山融入粤港澳大湾区建设的政策和策略响应[J]. 热带地理, 2019, 39(5): 625-634.
[9]	许志桦, 刘云刚, 胡国华. 从珠三角到大珠三角再到粤港澳大湾区：改革开放以来中国的国家尺度重组[J]. 热带地理, 2019, 39(5): 635-646.
[10]	方远平, 彭婷, 陆莲芯, 毕斗斗, 陈再齐. 粤港澳大湾区城市职能演变特征与影响因素[J]. 热带地理, 2019, 39(5): 647-660.
[11]	潘泽强, 宁超乔, 袁媛. 协作式环境管理在粤港澳大湾区中的应用——以跨界河治理为例[J]. 热带地理, 2019, 39(5): 661-670.
[12]	姚华松, 胡蓉, 邵小文. 从公共性维度看粤港澳大湾区转型[J]. 热带地理, 2019, 39(5): 671-677.
[13]	高爽, 王少剑, 王泽宏. 粤港澳大湾区知识网络空间结构演化特征与影响机制[J]. 热带地理, 2019, 39(5): 678-688.
[14]	闫李月, 李洪忠, 韩宇, 陈劲松, 左小清, 王占峰. MODIS与Landsat 8地表温度融合拼接——以粤港澳大湾区为例[J]. 热带地理, 2019, 39(5): 689-700.
[15]	周晴, 赵玲玲, 吴康敏, 李苑君. 粤港澳大湾区传统农业洪潮适应开发模式与生态文明经验[J]. 热带地理, 2019, 39(5): 701-710.