The Danube Strategy will ensure that all countries in the region – both EU Member States and non-Member States alike – benefit from work doen toward shared goals.

The EU Strategy for the Danube Region is bringing an ambitious dimension to cooperation in the region. While working together to strengthen the Danube Region, countries are also strengthening links across borders and between a wide range of stakeholders. Here, Colin Wolfe, head of Unit for European Transnational and Interregional Co-operation within the DG Regional Policy at the European Commission, speaks about the future of the Danube Region, and what this will mean to non-EU countries.

Danube Watch: How will EU countries outside of the Danube Region benefit from the Strategy?
Wolfe: There are many features that make the Danube Basin vital for Europe. A region with 115 million European citizens from eight Member States, with the second longest river in Europe (only after the Volga), it represents a priority area with crucial growth and innovation potential, which is a key trading route, has strong cultural heritage and is also very rich in bio-diversity.

Neighbouring countries will benefit from work in all the priority areas – better connections, better environmental conditions, greater prosperity and more concern for safety and security.

Danube Watch: How are non-EU countries involved in the EU Danube Strategy?
Wolfe: In line with EU enlargement and neighbourhood policies, the EU Strategy for the Danube Regions supports the inclusion and participation of neighbouring countries. The non-member states concerned are four enlargement countries (Croatia – which has now received final agreement for the accession – Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Montenegro) and two neighbourhood countries (Moldova and Ukraine).

Up to now, I think they are well involved in the Strategy. They have been actively participating in the consultation phase, submitting positions and proposing actions/projects. Nowadays they are fully involved in their implementation and they participate on an equal basis with Member States in the governance structure of the Strategy. Most of them have been nominated priority area coordinators, and they actively participate in meetings and events held in the framework of the Strategy.

In terms of funding, they can benefit from the external EU funding instruments. I would also underline that in the new regulatory framework of EU cohesion policy for 2014–2020, the Commission proposes better coherence and synergies between the transnational programmes and cross-border and sea-basin programmes under the new European Neighbourhood Instrument (ENI) and Instrument for Pre-Accession (IPA).

Danube Watch: Are there weaknesses in the way the strategy deals with non-EU countries?
Wolfe: The participation in the Strategy needs a great deal of involvement by political and administrative structures of the countries. There needs to be sufficient human and financial resources to participate in the governance structure. This also applies to the internal coordination of administrative levels and stakeholders.

Another important issue is the question of funding available for projects. Membership brings greater EU funding and improves capacity to effectively participate in concrete projects. However, non-EU countries – especially the ones on the way to EU accession – are seeing their participation in the EU Danube Strategy as a very good opportunity in terms of learning and exchange of experiences on EU cooperation networks, EU programmes and funding, etc.

Danube Watch: How can other regional EU strategies learn from the Danube Strategy?
Wolfe: Other geographical areas of the EU have shown their interest in this new approach and working method that is being tested by the current strategies under way in the Baltic Sea and the Danube.

The Commission encourages the countries to cooperate on common issues, and follows with interest these developments. However, the added value of EU led macro regional strategies still has to be assessed. Therefore the Council has asked the Commission to prepare a wide and comprehensive evaluation by June 2013.

With regard to the lessons to be learnt from the ongoing strategies, the first Commission report on the application of the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region (June 2011) gives some useful information on the advantages and drawbacks of such an approach. It acknowledges considerable progress on many fields, but draws attention on issues such as permanent political administrative commitment and funds alignment. An equivalent report for the EU Strategy for the Danube Region is due by the end of next year.

Danube Watch: Europe, 2020. what will be different due to the Danube Strategy?
Wolfe: The macro regional concept is to be seen closely in connection with the idea of territorial cohesion. This approach provides the EU with an innovative policy instrument which is an excellent example of efforts to achieve common EU objectives and more effective coordination of territorial and sectoral policies based on shared territorial challenges.

Whilst adapting broad EU growth objectives for a smart, sustainable and inclusive economy to the local context, macro regional strategies are a central territorial cohesion instrument to attaining the objectives set out in Europe 2020.

There are some clear examples in the Action Plan of the European Union Strategy for the Danube Region. Smarter Europe is reflected in the actions to promote better use of innovation potential across the macro region, as well as in the opening up of access to high speed information networks and the improved linkages between higher education institutions. Sustainable growth is reflected in the reconciliation of the Danube River system in terms of environmental asset, risk protection (e.g. flood prevention) and navigation, and also the improved interconnection and optimisation of transport and especially energy networks. Inclusive growth is supported through the actions to promote inclusion of minorities, better linkage of employment opportunities, and promotion of region-wide access to better jobs. A horizontal and more integrated approach to policy development is being recognised as crucial as a way of meeting more ambitious objectives with less available resources and by way of multilevel governance.