Systemic evaluation of cross‐border networks of actors: Experience with a German‐Polish‐Czech cooperation project

Journal of Borderlands Studies

Volumn 20, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 73-90

  Leibenath, Markus ^a   Knippschild, Robert ^a  

^a LEIBNIZ INSTITUTE OF ECOLOGICAL URBAN AND REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 36749102378     PISSN: 08865655     EISSN: 21591229     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08865655.2005.9695635     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Blatter, Joachim. 2003. “Beyond Hierarchies and Networks: Institutional Logics and Change in Transboundary Political Spaces During the 20th century.”. Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration and Institution, 16(4): 503–526.
2. Casteigts, Michel, and Eisenberg., Ewald. 1998. “Evaluierung im grenzüberschreitenden Kontext [Evaluation in a Cross‐Border Context].”. In 1998: Grenzüberschreitende Zusammenarbeit in Europa. Theorie‐Empirie‐Praxis [Cross‐Border Cooperation in Europe. Theory‐Empirical Findings‐Practice], Edited by: Brunn, Gerhard, and Schmitt‐Egner, Peter. 241–249. Baden‐Baden: Nomos.
3. CEC (Commission of the European Communities). 2000. “ Communication from the Commission to the Member States of 28.4.00 laying down guidelines for a Community Initiative concerning trans‐European cooperation intended to encourage harmonious and balanced development of the European territory INTERREG III. [On‐line] ”. http://europa.eu.int/comm/regional_policy/sources/docoffic/official/guidelines/pdf/inter_en.pdf, 06.01.2005
4. CEC (Commission of the European Communities). 2001. “ Communication from the Commission on the impact of the Enlargement on regions bordering candidate countries ”. In Community action for border regions, COM (2001) 437 final, 25 July 2001 [On‐line] http://europa.eu.int/comm/regional_policy/sources/docoffic/official/communic/pdf/borden.pdf, 17.01.2005
5. CEC (Commission of the European Communities). 2002a. “ The 2000–2006 Programming Period: Methodological working papers No 8 a ”. In The Mid Term Evaluation of Structural Fund Interventions—INTERREG III [On‐line] http://europa.eu.int/comm/regional_policy/interreg3/doc/pdf/interreg_mte_en.pdf, 06.01.2005
6. CEC (Commission of the European Communities). 2002b. “ Call for proposals for cross‐border initiatives between local and regional authorities in EU regions bordering the candidate countries, issued by the European Commission ”. (2002/C 174/09). [On‐line] http://europa.eu.int/eur‐lex/pri/en/oj/dat/2002/c_174/c_17420020720en00160017.pdf, 17.01.2005
7. CEU (Council of the European Union). 1999. Council Regulation (EC) No. 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds. in: Official Journal of the European Communities 1999/L 161/1, [On‐line] http://europa.eu.int/comm/regional_policy/sources/docoffic/official/regulation/pdf/l_16119990626en00010042.pdf, 06.01.2005
8. Drewello, Hansjörg., 2002. “Evaluationsmethodik der grenzüberschreitenden Zusammenarbeit ”. In Das Beispiel Oberrhein [Methodology of Evaluating Cross‐Border Cooperation, Bern: Haupt. The Example Upper Rhine]
9. EC‐DG Enlargement. 2003a. “ Grant Contracts Awarded During May/June 2003 ”. [On‐line] http://europa.eu.int/comm/enlargement/borderregions/pdf/Grant_contracts_awarded_admin.pdf, 28.07.2005
10. EC‐DG Enlargement. 2003b. “ Fact Sheet. ”. [On‐line] http://europa.eu.int/comm/enlargement/borderregions/pdf/fact_sheets_smes.pdf, 28.07.2005
11. EC‐DG Regio (European Commission, Directorate‐General for Regional Policy). 2004. “ Cohesion policy: the 2007 watershed ”. [On‐line] http://europa.eu.int/comm/regional_policy/sources/docgener/informat/reg2007_en.pdf, 05.01.2005
12. EC‐DG Regio (European Commission, Directorate‐General for Regional Policy) and AEBR (Association of European Border Regions). 2000. Practical Guide to Cross‐border Cooperation., Third Edition 2000. [On‐line] http://www.aebr.net/publikationen/pdfs/lace_guide.en.pdf, 06.01.2005
13. European Commission. 2004. “A new partnership for cohesion—convergence, competitiveness, cooperation.”. In Third report on economic and social cohesion [On‐line] http://europa.eu.int/comm/regional_policy/sources/docoffic/official/reports/cohesion3/cohesion3_en.htm, 17.01.2005
14. Förster, Horst. 2001. “Staatsgrenzen übergreifende Regionen an den Außenzonen der Europäischen Union [Regions Across National Boundaries at the External Borders of the European Union].”. In "Europäische Integration als Prozess von Angleichung und Differenzierung. Forschungen zur Europäischen Integration [European Integration as a Process of Assimilation and Differentiation. Research on European Integration].” Edited by: Tömmel, I., 235–261. Opladen
15. Gualini, Enrico. 2003. “Cross‐Border Governance: Inventing Regions in a Trans‐national Multilevel Polity.”. DISP, 152: 43–52.
16. Hummelbrunner, Richard, Lukesch, Robert, and Baumfeld, Leo. 2002. “Systemische Instrumente für die Regionalentwicklung ”. In Endbericht [Systemic Instruments for Regional Development Final Report].” [On‐line] http://www.oear.at/downloads/endbericht‐methoden‐systre.pdf, 08.12.2004
17. Keating, Michael. 2002. “Paradiplomatie und regionale Netzwerke [Paradiplomacy and Regional Networks].”. In Europäisches Zentrum für Föderalismus‐Forschung 2002: Jahrbuch des Föderalismus 2002 [Yearbook of Federalism], 43–53. Baden‐Baden: Nomos.
18. Keller, Sabine, and Stamm, Thorsten. 1997. “Grenzen und Perspektiven von grenzüberschreitenden Städtenetzwerken [Limits and Perspectives of Transboundary City Networks].”. Raumforschung und Raumordnung, 55: 14–23.
19. Kennard, Ann, and van Houtum, Henk. 2003. “The Institutionalization of Borders in Central and Eastern Europe: A Means to What End?”. In Routing Borders Between Territories, Discourses and Practices. Edited by: Eiki, Berg. 193–210.
20. Knoepfel, Peter, Varone, Frédéric, Bussmann, Werner, and Mader., Luzius. 1997. “Evaluations‐gegenstände und Evaluationskriterien [Evaluation Objects and Evaluation Criteria].”. In Einführung in die Politikevaluation [Introduction into Policy Evaluation], Edited by: Bussmann, Werner, Klöti, Ulrich, and Knoepfel, Peter. 78–118. Basel: Helbing & Lichtenhahn.
21. Manske, Fred, Yonggap, Moon, Ruth, Klaus, and Deitmer., Ludger. 2002. “Ein prozess‐ und akteurorientiertes Evaluationsverfahren als Reflexionsmedium und Selbststeuerungsinstrument für Innovationsprozesse [Process‐ and Actor‐centred Evaluation as a Means of Reflection and Self‐determined Innovation Processes].”. Zeitschrift für Evaluation 2/2002,: 245–263.
22. Mark, Melvin M., and Henry., Gary T., 2004. “The Mechanisms and Outcomes of Evaluation Influence.”. Evaluation, 10(1): 35–57.
23. Mickwitz, Per., 2003. “A Framework for Evaluating Environmental Policy Instruments.”. Evaluation, 9(4): 415–436.
24. Müller‐Kohlenberg, Hildegard, and Beywl, Wolfgang. 2003. “Standards der Selbstevaluation ‐ Begründung und aktueller Diskussionsstand [Standards of Self‐Evaluation—Justification and Recent State of Debate].”. Zeitschrift für Evaluation,: 65–75. 1/2003.
25. Patton, Michael Quinn., 1996. “Utilization‐Focused Evaluation.”, Thousand Oaks: Sage.
26. Perkmann, Markus. 1999. Building Governance Institutions Across European Borders. In Regional Studies, 33 (7): 657–667.
27. Schleicher‐Tappeser, Ruggero, and Schröder., Conrad. “Participative intermediate Evaluation of Interreg Programmes on the Upper Rhine.”. (Paper for the European Conference on Evaluation Practice in the Field of Structural Policies. March16–171998, Sevilla. [Online] http://europa.eu.int/comm/regional_policy/sources/docconf/seville/theme01/interreg/interreg.pdf, 8.12.2004
28. Scott, James Wesley. 1999. European and North American Contexts for Cross‐Border Regionalism. In Regional Studies, 33.7: 605–617.
29. SLFS (Statistisches Landesamt des Freistaates Sachsen), Ceský statistický úrad, Urzad Statystyczny We Wroclawiu Oddzial w Jeleniej Górze. 2004. “Cross‐border friendship database.”. [On‐line] http://www.crossborderdatabase.de/, 17.01.2005
30. Stamm, Margrit., 2003. “Evaluation im Spiegel ihrer Nutzung: Grande idée oder grande illusion des 21. Jahrhunderts? [Evaluation in the Mirror of its Utilization: Great Idea or Great Illusion of the 21st Century?].”. In Zeitschrift für Evaluation 2/2003 183–200.
31. Stockmann, Reinhard., 2002. “Qualitätsmanagement und Evaluation: Konkurrierende oder sich ergänzende Konzepte? [Quality Management and Evaluation: Competing or Complementary Concepts?].”. In Zeitschrift für Evaluation 2/2002. 209–243.
32. Van der Knaap, Peter., 2004. “Theory‐Based Evaluation and Learning: Possibilities and Challenges.”. Evaluation, 10(1): 16–34.
33. Van Houtum, Henk. 2000. “An Overview of European Geographical Research on Borders and Border Regions.”. Journal of Borderlands Studies, XV(1): 57–83.
34. Walser, Manfred, Scherer, Roland, and Schnell, Klaus‐Dieter. 2001. “Prozessbegleitende Evaluation und ‘verborgene Hypothesen’ ‐ INTERREG mit der Schweiz [Continous Evaluation and Hidden Hypotheses ‐ INTERREG with Switzerland].”. In Informationen zur Raumentwicklung 6/7.2001. 437–450.
35. Williams, Richard H., and Ward., Stephen. 1997. “From Hierarchy to Networks? Sub‐Central Government and EU Urban Environment Policy.”. Journal of Common Market Studies, 35: 438–464.
36. Witt, Andrea. 2003. "Die deutsch‐polnische und die US‐mexikanische Grenze‐Grenzüber‐schreitende Zusammenarbeit zwischen regionaler Identität, nationaler Priorität und transkontinentaler Integration [The German‐Polish and the US‐Mexican Border: Transboundary Cooperation Between Regional Identity ”. National Priority and Transcontinental Integration. [On‐line] http://edoc.hu‐berlin.de/dissertationen/witt‐andrea‐2003–07–08/HTML/, 11.05.2004