Avrupa Birliği üyelik sürecinde Türkiye'de sınır bölgeleri ve sınırötesi işbirliği: Edirne-Kırklareli örneği

Sınır ötesi işbirliği, sınır bölgelerinin gelişmesine ve komşu ül- keler arasında iyi ilişkiler kurulmasına katkı sağlayan önemli araçlardan birisi olarak gösterilmektedir. AB’nin öncü destek- çileri arasında yer aldığı bu tür işbirlikleri, adaylık süreci ile birlikte Türkiye’nin de gündemine girmiş, Bulgaristan ve Su- riye ile sınır ötesi işbirliği programları uygulamaya konulmuş- tur. On beş yılı aşkın süredir deneyimlenen sınır ötesi işbirliği programları aracılığı ile özellikle Edirne ve Kırklareli illerinde yüzlerce proje gerçekleştirilmiş ve bu alanda bir kurumsal yapı oluşmuştur. Bu çalışma, 2013 yılında gerçekleştirilen bir saha çalışmasına dayanarak Edirne-Kırklareli bölgesindeki sınır öte- si işbirliği deneyimini incelemektedir.

Turkish border regions and cross-border cooperation in the eu accession process: The case of Edirne and Kırklareli

Turkey has been engaging in cross-border cooperation projects for over a decade, and these accelerated following the granting of EU candidacy status to Turkey. The major cross-border coopera- tion activities take place on the western border regions of Turkey, namely on Edirne and Kırklareli, two provinces which border EU member country Bulgaria. Here, under the auspices of the IPA-CBC programme, several projects have been realized targeting various sectors, from infrastructure development to joint festival prepara- tions. In addition, various actors from public institutions related to central government, municipalities, business organizations and NGOs have been involved in the process of generating a diverse institutional structure. Based on a field study conducted in the summer of 2013, this study aims to explore the established insti- tutional structure of cross-border cooperation in Edirne-Kırklareli Border Region, by analyzing the projects realized, and questioning central-local relations and perceptions of cross border coopera- tion projects among the local actors through in-depth interviews.

___

  • 1. AB. (2006), Regulation (Ec) No 1638/2006 of the Euro- pean Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 2006 laying down general provisions establishing a European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument.
  • 2. Amin, A. ve Thrift, N. (1994). Living in the Global içinde Globalization, Institutions and Regional Development in Europe, p. 1-22, Ed. Amin, A. ve Thrift, N., Oxford Univer- sity Press, New York, USA.
  • 3. Archer, C. (2008). The European Union, Routledge, New York, USA.
  • 4. Baud, M. ve Schendel W. Van. (1997). Toward a Compara- tive History of Borderlands. Journal of World History, Vol. 8 Nr.2, pp. 211–242. doi:10.1353/jwh.2005.0061.
  • 5. Bayırbağ, M. K. (2013). Continuity and Change in Public Policy: Redistribution, Exclusion and State Rescaling in Turkey. International Journal of Urban and Regional Re- search, Vol. 37 Nr.4, pp. 1123- 1146.
  • 6. Benton, E. J. (2013). Local Government Collaboration: Considerations, Issues, and Prospects. State and Local Government Review, Vol. 45 Nr. 4 pp.220- 223.
  • 7. Brenner, N., Jessop, B., Jones, M. ve MacLeod, G. (2003). Introduction: State Space in Question, içinde State/ Spa- ce A Reader, s. 1-26, Ed. Brenner, N., Jessop, B., Jones, M. ve Macleod, G., Blackwell, Malden, USA.
  • 8. Brülhart, M., Crozet, M. ve Koenig, P. (2004). Enlarge- ment and EU Periphery: The Impact of Changing Mar- ket Potential, Hamburgisches Welt- Wirtschafts- Archiv (HWWA) discussion paper, 270.
  • 9. Delabbio, D. J. ve Zeemering, E. S. (2013). Public Entrep- reneurship and Interlocal Cooperation in County Govern- ment, State and Local Government Review, Vol. 45 Nr. 4 pp. 255- 267.
  • 10. DPT. (2006). Dokuzuncu Kalkınma Planı, 2007- 2013. DPT, Ankara.
  • 11. Dulupçu, M. A. (2005). Regionalization for Turkey An Il- lusion or a Cure?, European Urban and Regional Studies, Vol.12 Nr.2 pp.99-115.
  • 12. Erkut, G. ve Baypınar, M. B. (2013). Sınır Bölgelerinde Yerel Ekonomik Kalkınmada Girişimcilik ve Sosyal Ağların Rolü, İTÜ Bilimsel Araştırma Projesi.
  • 13. Erkut, G., Baypınar, M. B., Özgen, C. ve Gönül, D. (2008). Batı Marmara Bölgesi’nde Stratejik Gelişme ve Sınırötesi İşbirliği, İTÜ Dergisi A, Cilt 7, S. 2, s.114-127.
  • 14. Gkintidis, D. (2013), Rephrasing Nationalism: Elite Repre- sentations of Greek–Turkish Relations in a Greek Border Region, Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 13:3, 455-468.
  • 15. Harvey, D. (1989). From Managerialism to Entrepreneu ralism: the Transformation in Urban Governance in Late Capitalism, Geographska Annaler, Cilt 71B, 1, pp. 3-17.
  • 16. Hilvert C. and Swindell D. (2013). Collaborative Service Delivery: What Every Local Government Manager Should Know, State and Local Government Review, Vol. 45, Nr. 4 pp. 240- 254.
  • 17. Kaplan, D. (2000). Conflict and compromise among bor- derland identities in northern Italy. Tijdschrift Voor Eco- nomische En Sociale Geografie, 91(1), 44–60.
  • 18. Keating, M. (2003). The Invention of Regions: Political Restructuring and Territorial Government in Western Eu- rope, içinde State/ Space A Reader, s. 256-277, Ed. Bren- ner, N., Jessop, B., Jones, M. ve Macleod, G., Blackwell, Malden, USA.
  • 19. Keleş, R. (1994). Yerinden Yönetim ve Siyaset. Cem Yayı- nevi. İstanbul.
  • 20. Martinez, O. (1994), Border People: Life and Society in the U.S.- Mexico Borderlands, University of Arizona Press, USA.
  • 21. Mengi, A. (2007), Avrupa Birliği’ne Uyum Sürecinde Ye- rel Yönetimlerle İlgili Düzenlemeler, içinde Yerellik ve Politika Küreselleşme Sürecinde Yerel Demokrasi, Ruşen Keleş’e Armağan Serisi, s.101-116, Ed. Mengi, A., İmge Yayınları, Ankara.
  • 22. Moisio, S. and Paasi, A. (2013). Beyond State-Centricity: Geopolitics of Changing State Spaces. Geopolitics, Vol. 18 Nr. 2, p. 255–266. doi:10.1080/14650045.2012.7387 29.
  • 23. Niebuhr, A. (2006). Spatial Effects of European Integrati- on - Do border regions benefit above average?, The Revi- ew of Regional Studies, Vol. 36, No. 3. pp. 254-278.
  • 24. Taminnen, T. (2004). Cross-border Cooperation in the Southern Balkans: Local, National or European Identity Politics? Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, Vol. 4, No. 3, pp. 399–418.
  • 25. O’Dowd, L. (2003). The Changing Significance of Europe- an Borders, içinde New Borders for a Changing Europe, s. 13-37, Eds. Anderson, J., O’Dowd, L. and Wilson T.M., Frank Cass Publishing, London, Portland, OR, US.
  • 26. Ricq, C. (2006). Handbook of Trans- frontier Co-operation, Council of Europe, http://www.coe.int/t/e/legal_affairs/ local_and_regional_democracy/documentation/lib- rary/transfrontier_cooperation/tfc_handbookTC2006_ EN.pdf.
  • 27. Rumford, C. (2012). Towards a Multiperspectival Study of Borders. Geopolitics, 17(4), s. 887–902.
  • 28. Scott, J. W. (1999). European and North American Con- texts for Cross Border Regionalism, Regional Studies 33(7), pp. 605- 617.
  • 29. Scott, J. W. (2003). Cross-border Governance in the Baltic Sea Region, , içinde New Borders for a Changing Euro- pe, s. 136- 154, Eds. Anderson, J., O’Dowd, L. and Wilson T.M., Frank Cass Publishing, London, Portland, OR, US.
  • 30. Sezgin, E. ve Gezici, F. (2008). Joint Small Projects Fund: Cross Border Co-Operation for Ordinary People, 48. Av- rupa Bölge Bilimi Kongresi (ERSA), 27 – 31 Ağustos, 2008, Liverpool.
  • 31. Smart, A. ve Lin, G. C. S. (2004). Border Management and Growth Coalitions in the Hong Kong Transborder Region, Identities: Global Studies in Culture and Power, 11, pp. 377-396.
  • 32. Sparke, M. (2002). Not a State, But More than a State of Mind: Cascading Cascadias and the Geoeconomics of Cross- Border Regionalism, içinde Globalization, Regio- nalization and Cross- Border Regions, pp. 212- 238, Eds. Perkmann, M. and Sum, N.L., Palgrave McMillan, Hamp- shire and New York.
  • 33. Van Der Veen, A. (1993), Theory and Practice of Cross- border Cooperation of Local Governments: The Case of the EUREGIO Between Germany and the Netherlands, içinde Regional Networks, Border Regions and European Integration, p.89-95, Eds. Cappelin R. ve Batey, P. W. J., Pion Publishing, Londra.
  • 34. Vazquez- Castillo, M. T. (2001). Mexico- US Bilateral Plan- ning: Institutions, Planners, Communities, European Planning Studies, 9(5), pp. 649-662.
  • 35. Virtanen, P., (2004), Euregios in Changing Europe, in Cross- Border Governance in European Union, eds. Kramsch, O. and Hooper, B., Routledge Publishing, Lon- don and New York.
  • 36. Zartman, I. W. (2010). Introduction: Identity, Movement and Response in Boundaries içinde Depth and Motion, p.1-20, Ed. Zartman, I.W., University of Georgia Press, Georgia, US.
  • İnternet Kaynakları
  • 1. AB, (2010), Consolidated Treaties, Charter of Fundamen- tal Rights, http://bookshop.europa.eu/is-bin/INTERS- HOP.enfinity/WFS/EU-Bookshop-Site/en_GB/-/EUR/ ViewPublication-Start?PublicationKey=QC3209190, son erişim tarihi 16.10.2012
  • 2. AB Bakanlığı, (2013), Türkiye- AB Mali İşbirliği, http:// www.ab.gov.tr/index.php?p=5&l=1, son erişim tarihi 19.03.2013
  • 3. AB Bakanlığı, (2013b), Bulgaristan-Türkiye IPA Sınır Ötesi İşbirliği Programı, http://www.abgs.gov.tr/index. php?p=45456&l=1, son erişim tarihi 03.01.2014
  • 4. AB. (2013), European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) Over- view, http://eeas.europa.eu/enp/index_en.htm, son eri- şim tarihi 29.12.2013
  • 5. DPT. (2010), Türkiye- Suriye Bölgeler arası İşbirliği Prog- ramı Uygulama Rehberi 2010- 2012, http://www.karaca- dag.org.tr/ContentDownload/Program_Uygulama_Reh- beri%20_2010-12_.pdf, son erişim tarihi 31.12.2013