Cooperation in Latin America and the European Union

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

  • 8/10/2019 Cooperation in Latin America and the European Union

    1/14

    208

    * Academic MSc, National University of CostaRica.** Academic MSc, National University of CostaRica.*** Academic MSc, National University ofCosta Rica.

    Cross-border cooperation in Latin Americaand the European Union:

    Contributions to the regional integration processAurora Hernndez*Alicia Jimnez**

    Juan Carlos Picn***

    At present, the vast extension of borders existing in Latin Ame-

    rica and Europe are an active part in the processes of regional integra-

    tion and cross-border cooperation. This article examines the cross-border

    cooperation relationships between State and local governments in the

    Latin American and European regional integration processes and the

    contribution of public decentralised cooperation to the strengthening of

    those processes. Cross-border cooperation in Latin America is a priority.

    It is pertinent to clarify that there is informal cross-border cooperationin Latin America. It is carried out spontaneously by municipalities and

    communities. However, this type of cooperation has little dissemination

    and therefore it is most difficult to collect this type of experiences.

    The article concludes by stating that functions and relationships

    produced on the border are currently facing a new scenario, in which

    they are being transformed by globalisation processes and trade blocks.

    The idea of borders being areas that are permeable for relationships, that

    foster regional integration, and where there is a wide history of cross-

    border cooperation, is advancing with the new millennium.

    b

    [

    1. Introduction

    KEY WORDS:

    Latin America |Cross-border cooperation |

    Borders |Regional integration |European Union |

    In Latin America, setting internationalborders has given way to enormous tracts ofborderland. Within its 20 million plus squa-re kilometres (around 8 million square mi-les), there are 36 borders, with boundariesextending along more than 40,000 kilometres(24.854 miles). In the European Union (EU),internal borders represent one quarter of theterritory. Territorial importance and the in-creasing economic, social, and cultural impor-tance of borders turn them into a subject thatis increasingly present on regional integrationagendas.

    Borders today are no longer perceivedas the State boundaries. Due to the intensecross-border relationships carried out in the-se spaces, they have become strategic areas forintegration. As an example, one of the aspectsthat best represents these cross-border inte-ractions are the 66 hydrographic basins sha-red by two or more countries in Latin America(UNEP 2002). The Amazon Basin and theGuaran Aquifer are two of the largest sourcesof water on the planet, and both are politica-lly divided. The Amazon Basin alone incorpo-rates eight South American countries withinits more than five million square kilometres(1.930.000 sq. miles) , and it demarcates over8,000 km (4.970 miles) of boundaries (Roba-

    giati 2004). The Guaran Aquifer, on the otherhand, is shared by four countries and extendsover more than one million square kilometres(386.000 sq. miles) (ProDiversitas 2006).

    The aim of this article is to examine therole of cross-border cooperation relationshipsbetween local and regional governments inthe Latin American and European regionalintegration processes, and the contributionof public decentralised cooperation to thestrengthening of those processes. In order toachieve this, the document has been divided

    Regional integration processes

  • 8/10/2019 Cooperation in Latin America and the European Union

    2/14

    210

    [

    Latin America, as a geographical re-gion, has an extension that represents almost4% of the emerged surface of the planet, andit has a population of over 500 million inha-bitants (CIA 2006). In other words, it is in-habited by 8% of the world population. Thisvast re gion, which b egins with the norther nborder of Mexico and extends to the end ofTierra del Fuego in Argentina, has 41,120kilometres (25.550 miles) of boundary linesthat separate 18 Latin American countries

    (CIA 2006).The configuration of these political

    boundaries in Latin America have a long

    history of conflicts and wars that have inmany cases propitiated tense internationalrelations between the Latin American coun-tries, which still persist today. Such is thecase of the differences between Costa Ricaand Nicaragua due to the interpretation ofthe border treaty regarding navigationalrights on the River San Juan.

    The political constitution of Statesand their subsequent administrative politi-cal division have originated 709 borderlinemunicipalities, of which 40 are in Mexico,181 in Central America, and 488 in SouthAmerica (See Table 1). As regions, bor-

    ders can vary according to the extension ofthe areas influenced by these interchanges.However, this analysis will specifically con-sider the borderlands demarcated by politi-cal-administrative divisions; in other words,it will include the seven hundred odd LatinAmerican borderline municipaliti es.

    The border has its own nature, deter-mined by the system of intense relationshipsoccurring on either side of the boundary;these in turn originate cross-border cultu-res and economies. Concrete awareness ofthis type of cross-border relationships andregional integration processes conform thebases from which one may begin to unders-tand Latin American borders as spaces forcooperation.

    Current configuration of the dyna-mics to which borders are subjected, such as

    the creation of new commercial networks,of trade blocks, and the challenge on globaltechnology, all have caused some of themto lose their traditional nature as securityzones and containment for activities carriedout within the State. There are many exam-ples that help illustrate this, such as consign-ments, electronic transfers, migrations, andvirtual education aids that, together, gene-rate society dynamics that can no longer bespatially contained. It is now possible to ob-serve greater flexibility on some borders for

    the movement of people. Such is the case ofthe North of the region, with the so-calledCA-4 Agreement, which opened and unifiedmigration procedures between Guatemala,Honduras, El Salvador, and Nicaragua; orin the South of the region with the AndeanCommunity, of which Bolivia, Colombia,Ecuador and Peru are members. However,the application of new migration barrierssuch as the case of Costa Rica-Nicaragua canalso be observed. This definitely has an im-pact on bordering communities, since it canrestrict or maximise cultural and economicinterchange. In the case of Nicaraguan mi-

    grants with children born in Costa Rica, itmakes it more difficult to visit Nicaragua dueto the additional cost of a visa. The impor-tance of free circulation in the life of bor-dering communities is not only reflected ontheir social and cultural interchange, but alsoon their economy. For some communities,such as the Trifinio Region, it is better tosell products to neighbouring countries whe-re they can obtain better prices than to sellthem on the internal market (Lpez, Vega,Hernndez and Ramrez 2004).

    In the EU, internal borders shared bymember countries cover 27% of the territory

    and hold 18% of the population (EuropeanCommission 2002). There are zones for prio-ritized attention to European regional policyin these territories: the so-called StructuralFunds Objective N1 regions. Some of the-se are characterised by being areas with lowpopulation density, as happens in the Northof Sweden and Finland, in rural areas such asthe southern part of the border between Spainand Portugal, or in urban spaces oriented totraditional industry, as is the case of the borderbetween the Benelux countries and between

    2. Latin America and its borders

    Regions and countr ies Number of border ing municipalit ies

    Mexico 40

    Guatemala 44

    Honduras 51

    El Salvador 42

    Nicaragua 26

    Costa Rica 10

    Panama 8

    Mexicoand Central America

    221

    Colombia 74

    Ecuador 25

    Venezuela 26

    Brasil 82

    Per 26

    Bolivia 30

    Uruguay 14

    Paraguay 67

    Chile 60

    Argentina 84

    South America 488Source: CIAT 1998.

    Table 1 |Latin America Bordering municipalities

    3. European experiencewith cross-border cooperation

  • 8/10/2019 Cooperation in Latin America and the European Union

    3/14

    212

    [

    instead of channelling it through the States orspecific regions. The Euroregions have the-refore been the object of this programmesintervention, a very much developed con-cept among Belgium, Netherlands, Germany,Luxembourg, and France (European Com-mission 2002).

    Chapter A of the Interreg initiative, un-der the name of Cross-Border Cooperation,was aimed at fostering an integrated regionaldevelopment among neighbouring border-lands, including regions located on externalborders and certain maritime zones, in orderto establish social and economic cross-border

    cooperation through assistance to joint deve-lopment strategies and programmes (Euro-pean Commission 2002:46). This Chapter Ahas assigned assistance to 64 programmes forthe period 2000-2006, (OCD 2006).

    According to the Obser vatory for De-centralised Cooperation EU-Latin America(OCD 2006:25), the spheres of action ofInterreg III A are the following: Fosteringurban, rural, and coastal cross-border deve-lopment.

    Promoting entrepreneurial spirit andthe development of small and medium-sizedenterprises, tourism, and local initiatives fordevelopment and employment.

    Fostering the creation of an integratedlabour market and social inclusion.

    Increasing cooperation in the spheresof research, technological development, edu-

    cation, culture, communications, health, andcivil protection.

    Encouraging environmental protection,increasing energy efficiency, and promotingrenewable energy sources.

    Improving the basic infrastructures ofcross-border interest.

    Developing legal and administrativecooperation.

    Promoting cooperation among citizensand institutions.

    Facilitating technical assistance.

    The issues developed in the sphere ofcross-border cooperation are formulated wi-thin the needs and difficulties of the local andSub-State governments that are addressed bythe initiative (OCD 2006). One of the mainachievements of this initiative has been thecapacity to generate relationships betweenSub-State authorities of different countriesand the contribution this has made to socialand economic cohesion in Europe.

    3.2. Lessons learned and progress madein territorial cooperation

    in the European UnionThe development of territorial coopera-

    tion actions in the EU is visualized as a funda-mental factor for the development of regionalintegration processes, of social and economic co-hesion, and of progress. This integration processhas been boosted by the sole market, the eco-nomic and monetary union, and the program-mes for regional development and cross-bordercooperation.

    The development of cross-border projectshas faced a void of spontaneous cooperation ex-periences and joint work experiences on differentlevels of power or competence (European Com-mission 2002). Advances have been achievedsuch as the dissipation of prejudices of historicorigin. However, there are differences that mustbe overcome, such as the case of political insti-tutions, administration systems and procedures,

    legal frameworks, technical and environmentalregulations, cultural and linguistic differences,and geographic conditions that act as natural ba-rriers with the presence of mountains, seas andrivers (European Commission 2002).

    According to the European Commission,the Interreg Initiative can be catalogued as asuccess of cooperation, since it has strengthe-ned the EU experience in this field (EuropeanCommission 2002). The need to establish truejoint cooperation structures and to overcomepractical cooperation obstacles, such as the le-

    gal and financial aspects, still persists today.One of the main strengths of the activities

    undertaken within the framework of these coo-peration activities is that their thematic guideli-nes are generally part of the regional or local go-vernment agendas, and are thus converted intothe institutional capacity-building of these levelsof power (OCD 2006).

    The decisive processes for Sub-State unitcapacity-building as cooperation agents are thefollowing (See Chart 1):

    The Latin American borders possess agreat ethnic, cultural, and environmental di-

    Process

    Formulat ion and implementation of polit ical treaties Boosted

    Eur op ea n i ni ti at ives a nd pr og ra mm es Fac il it atfinance

    T ra nsna ti onal it y a s a comp ul so ry cond it io n Obl ig ed

    Transnational exchange within the framework of communityinitiatives

    Created New proFunds.

    R elat io ns b e tween t ra nsna ti onal p a rt ne rs Fos te redpartners

    Cross-border cooperation development DetermiCooperaStates wcharactecoopera

    Cooperation practices within community initiatives andtransnational programmes

    Created regionalcommun

    Capacity-building Derived

    Dynamics created by community initiatives, interlinking local andregional partners from different States.

    Establishfor this

    Source: OCD 2006 (Observatory on Decentralised Cooperation).

    Chart 1

    |Processes and results for Sas cooperation a

    4. Cross-border cooperation in Latin America

  • 8/10/2019 Cooperation in Latin America and the European Union

    4/14

    214

    [

    motion of cross-border cooperation activitiesis carried out through the main integrationagendas: the Central American IntegrationSystem (CAIS), the Southern Common Mar-ket (MERCOSUR) and the Andean Com-munity (ACN). These agendas and the in-tegration processes they promote have beencharacterised by the development of state ofthe art agreements, which embrace free tradezones, customs unions, and even the creationof common markets. The Institute for the In-tegration of Latin America and the Caribbean(INTAL) is one such case which has been sti-mulating these integration agendas (INTAL

    2005a).At present, the environmental, social,

    economic, and political imbalances that affectLatin American borders are developed inscenarios that are rich in nature and culture.Both elements propitiate interchanges thathave not necessarily been formally structuredin State policies between close local govern-ments and communities. A cross-border mee-ting on tourism was carried out on the borderbetween Costa Rica and Nicaragua in August2006. Therein, local actors and institutionalrepresentatives from both countries manifes-ted their interest in maximising cross-bordercooperation and an axis for local develop-ment, and signed agreements to give the ini-tiative continuity (CEMEDE/UNA 2006).This meeting was convened by the NationalUniversity in coordination with both coun-

    tries tourism institutes as a forum of local ac-tors connected with tourism activities in theCosta Rica-Nicaragua dyad. This initiativehad its first follow-up meeting in the monthof November. At the time, it was found that,in order to form a Bi-national Commission,representation and communications betweenthe parties interested in cross-border tourismneeded improving.

    In the same way, cross-border pro-jects are carrying out cooperation activitiesin search of the interconnection of the com-

    munities on either side of the border. Severalof these cooperation experiences along LatinAmerican borderlands are developed with fi-nancial support from the EU and organiza-tions such as the Inter-American DevelopmentBank (IDB) and non-governmental agencies,among others (European Communities 2004,IDB 2006). Some examples of these projectsare: Strengthening of Local Managementof Natural Resources of the basins of Patuca,Negro and Choluteca Rivers financed by theEU, the Acoyapa - Costa Rican Border RoadIntegration Program, recently approved byIDB, and the projects for Cross-border coo-

    peration in Central America, carried out withfunding from the Ford Foundation (EuropeanCommunities 2004, IDB 2006). A typologyof the cooperation actions on Latin Ameri-can borders can be established by identifyingthree subjects: the environment, assistance fordevelopment, and regional trade initiatives.

    4.1. Cross-border cooperation and the environment

    The acknowledgement of the interna-tionalisation of environmental problems hasencouraged different Latin American States tosearch for joint solutions to these problems, es-pecially those of a borderline nature. This hasallowed the development of actions dedicatedto the protection, extraction of natural resour-ces, and community education on environmen-tal matters. Two examples connected to envi-

    ronmental protection that will help to illustratethis type of projects are being carried out onthe borderland shared by Costa Rica and Ni-caragua. These are the El Castillo-San Juan-La.Selva Biological Corridor project, which hasbeen developed for 14 years and is dedicated tothe protection of the Ara ambigua and the ElManat (Trichechus manatus) project, as a toolfor the integrated conservation of the San JuanRiver wetlands and forests and the Tortugue-ro plains. Both projects are initiatives of non-governmental organisations that have involved

    the resident communities on the borders. Thefollowing achievements may be highlighted:diagnoses of the habitat and population of thesespecies, and bi-national campaigns for their pro-tection (Eco-index 2006a and 2006b). Threeof the main challenges these projects must over-come are: a) the diagnoses stages, b) to createknowledge and socioeconomic conditions thatwill allow the community to participate in theconservation, and c) to obtain funding in orderto continue with the activities.

    In the area of borderland natural resour-ces, the countries are making an increasingeffort to establish an adequate legal, political,

    and institutional framework to regulate thedevelopment and management of water re-sources. In order to support these efforts, theSustainable Development Unit of the OAS, theUnited National Environment Programme, theWorld Bank, the IDB, and the United NationsEducational, Scientific and Cultural Organiza-tion (UNESCO), have provided the countrieswith mechanisms for intergovernmental dia-logue and cooperation (especially regardingcross-border issues). They have fostered theexchange of information and experiences andhave helped to design, formulate, and executeprojects related to the integral management ofwater resources and the development of hydro-graphic basins (Robagiati 2004).

    4.2. Cross-border cooperation and human development

    International assistance aimed at crea-ting better conditions for human developmenton the borders constitutes a long-term con-tribution to generate better quality of life forthe population. An example of this is the Trifi-nio Transborder Regional Development Plan,which has been carried out since 1989. Oneof its most relevant achievements is the con-solidation of a Tri-national Commission. ThePlan has been able to carr y out actions, enablesustainable agriculture, and increase trade arti-culation of bordering populations, where the

  • 8/10/2019 Cooperation in Latin America and the European Union

    5/14

    216

    South American borderlands. This marketmobilises large investments for explorationand exploitation, gas processing plants, ducts,installations, and electric generation based ongas, among others. Taking the geographicaldistribution into consideration, in many casescross-border cooperation is necessary to su-pport gas producing countries (especially thebordering communities who own this resour-ce) in their processes for the insertion of theirproduction in adequate markets, the commer-cialisation of natural gas, and adequate pro-duction systems.

    The extension of the neo-liberal reforms

    in the region during the decade of the nine-ties, the most recent free trade movements(with the military control initiatives and sys-tematic governance that accompany them),and the increase in the world market demandover the past year, have made natural resour-ce exploitation (intensive, aimed at exporta-tion and, in a good part, under the control oftransnational capitals) one of the core powersfor the recovery of regional economic growth(Seoane 2005).

    In addition, cross-border cooperationconnected with regional trade also includesthe construction of new highway networ-ks to link the economic regions of the LatinAmerican States or a section of these. This isthe case of the construction of the highwaybetween Acoyapa (Nicaragua) and the borderwith Costa Rica, which purports to join both

    countries approach to the Caribbean.

    In summary, these three approachesof cooperation show how, at present, thefunctions and relationships produced on theborder are facing a new scenario, where theglobalisation processes and the constructionof trade blocks are transforming them. In thenew millennium, the idea of the border as apermeable area for relationships, that fostersregional integration and where there is a widehistory of cross-border cooperation, is ad-

    vancing. It is important to sa y that, in termsof access to funding, the main initiatives areconducted by States and non-governmentalorganizations. In this sense, the decision togenerate more opportunities for cross-borderterritorial cooperation management would bemarked by the organisation of mechanismsto disseminate problems, possible solutions,sources of funding, and lessons learned fromthis type of cooperation processes that havebeen carried out in Latin America and otherparts of the world, such as the EU.

    4.4. How does cross-border cooperationassist in overcoming social, economic,political, and environmental imbalanceson Latin American borders?

    Applying cooperation on borderlandshas begun to positively impact on the capaci-ties of those local governments that have par-ticipated in this type of interchange. Decen-tralised cooperation is just in the first stages ofconformation and, in many cases, such as thatof Central America, it has been propitiated bythe action of non-governmental agency pro-jects, such as FUNPADEM and IUPN (Pro-golfo 1998). Both organisations have carriedout projects in the region that have propitia-ted the formation of municipal organisationson the borders and have collaborated in theseorganisations follow-up meetings. Although

    there are still many challenges to generate lo-cal participation and be able to develop jointcross-border projects, the Latin American bor-ders and their populations are showing greaterlocal conditions to maximise their own deve-lopment. This is a consequence of the fact thatthe projects that have been carried out up tonow, although mostly conceived by actors fo-reign to the borders, have allowed diagnosesprocesses and improving infrastructure. Theyhave also generated changes in the way capitalcities perceive the borders.

    These efforts on borders have alsobeen accompanied by regional agreementsthat show the need to acknowledge bordersas areas for the union of interstate coope-ration efforts, of great natural and cultu-ral riches, and with a local system of socialrelationships that can be utilised as a me-chanism for the sustainable development ofthese regions. Thus two agreements wereformulated and implemented over ten yearsago in the North and the South of the Cen-tral American isthmus: The Trifinio Plan(Trinational cross-border regional develop-ment plan Trifinio), signed by Guatemala,

    Honduras, and El Salvador in 1988 (Lpezet al. 2004) and the Cross-border coope-ration agreement between Costa Rica andPanama, ratified by Panama in 1994 andby Costa Rica in 1995. In South America,agreements have also been signed to addressand solve a variety of needs or problematicsituations connected to natural issues, in anintegral way. These include water resource

    [Pas MERCOSUR Acuerdo de

    Cartagena

    Argentina X -

    Bolivia - X

    Brazil X -

    Colombia - X

    Chile - -

    Ecuador - X

    Guyana - -

    Paraguay X -

    Per - X

    Suriname - -

    Uruguay X -

    Venezuela - X

    Source: Koohafkan 2006.

    Table 2 | Example of the main sub-regional agrresources in S

  • 8/10/2019 Cooperation in Latin America and the European Union

    6/14

    218

    [

    cases that have been chosen as relevant foranalysis, because they have a great regional im-pact, they are not traditional models of assis-tance, and they exemplify the type of projector initiatives that are being generated due toregional integration processes. These cases donot specifically correspond to territorial cross-border cooperation initiatives; however, theyallow visualising how cross-border cooperationis being accomplished in the region. They arealso useful, even though they have not beenpromoted by the local authorities, since the-se consider themselves to be very importantactors and are incorporated to the implemen-

    tation of these regional projects and plans invarying degrees.

    The cases described are: the Trifinio Planand the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor, inCentral America and Mexico. For South Ame-rica, two relevant cases ar e the Bi-national Planfor Development of the Per u-Ecuador BorderRegion and the Amazon Cooperation Treaty.The four cases are initiatives with the commoncharacteristic of maximising regional integra-tion in the areas in which they are developed.

    Trifinio Plan. For over a decade, the Tri-finio Plan has been executed with the aim ofcontributing to Central American integration,through the joint action of Guatemala, El Sal-vador, and Honduras, tending towards the in-tegral, harmonious, and balanced developmentof the bordering region of the three countries

    (Tri-national Commission of the Trifinio Plan2006) (see Figure 1).This project began its activities in 1992

    with EU funding. Its main achievement hasbeen to consolidate an international systemfor the integration of participating countriesactions, the creation of the Tri-national Com-mission, the creation of local institutions ca-lled Associations for Sustainable Developmentin the Trifinio Region (ATRIDEST) and theConsultative Committee of the Trifinio Planformed by 45 mayors, the governors, and the

    ATRIDEST. This committee formalises localauthority participation in the Trifinio Plan. Adialogue forum has been formed which hasgiven local governments greater participation(Lpez et al. 2004).

    The consolidation process of this inter-national regime has essentially been manifestedin four aspects (Lpez et al. 2004):

    There is a governmental integration pro-cess between the participating States, which has

    tral American region, which has propitiated theexchange of experiences and lessons learnedwith the execution of this integration project.

    Even though the advances regardingregional integration of the Trifinio Plan havebeen many, great challenges had to be facedin order to reach these achievements, such asthe reliance on external funding or internatio-nal cooperation, and the difficulties to definetri-national agendas and cover a wide, diverse,and politically fragmented geographical space(Lpez et al.2004).

    The great strength of the Trifinio Planis that it has demonstrated that it is possible to

    overcome the challenges of State coordinationrequired to develop a tri-national integrationprocess in the Central American region. In thissense, one of the most successful steps takenwithin the framework of this project is the le-gitimization of its activities through the Treatyon the Execution of Trifinio Plan between ElSalvador, Guatemala and Honduras, ratifiedbetween 1998 and 1999.

    The Trifinio Plan is ongoing. Activitiesare being carried out connected with the pro-motion of water administration as a regionalpublic good in the upper basin of the LempaRiver; the definition of the legal, institutional,and administrative framework for the Manage-ment of the Montecristo Trinational ProtectedArea; the sustainable development project forthe upper basin of the Lempa River; and theregional programme for participative imple-

    mentation of plague and agro-forestry mana-gement with small and medium scale producerfamilies (CTPT 2006).

    5.1. Mesoamerican Biological Corridor (MBC)

    It constitutes one of the most importantefforts for the conservation of biodiversity inMesoamerica (for this initiative, it includesCentral America, Panama, and the five southernstates of Mexico). This initiative hopes to coun-teract the environmental problems it is facing,

    Figure 1 |Trifinio Plan Region

    been formally expressed through the countriesVice Presidents.

    This plan has integrated the local bor-dering communities, manifested through thedecision made regarding development projectplanning and execution.

    The investment in local infrastructurehas encouraged regional trade development inthe zone.

    The Trifinio Plan has achieved recogni-tion and projection of its activities in the Cen-

  • 8/10/2019 Cooperation in Latin America and the European Union

    7/14

    220

    Project Countries Protec

    Mayan f or es t Mex ico-Be li ce -G ua tema la Maya

    Barra de Santiago-Monterr ico Guatemala-El Sa lvador Mont

    M er en do n- CO BI ME G ua te ma la -H on du ra s C op an

    CB A tl an ti c Coa st al Ma ri ne Gua tema la -Hondu ra s Mana

    Trifinio Guatemala-El Salvador-Honduras

    Mont

    Gulf of Fonseca*

    El Salvador - Honduras -Nicaragua Bay o(Hon)Volca

    Heart of MBC (Mesoamerican BiologicalCorridor)

    Honduras-Nicaragua Pltan(Nic)

    El Castillo-San Juan-La Selva Biological Corridor Nicaragua-Costa Rica Indio

    Wet la nd Co rr id or N icar agua -Cos t a R ica L as CaMigue

    La Amistad International Park Costa Rica-Panama La AmManz

    *Contains 26 protected areas, only the largest ones are mentioned here.

    RB: Biosphere Reserve. PN: National Park. R Biol: Biological Reserve. RV: Wi

    by accepting to be part of the MBC, thus de-centralising their implementation. There hasbeen an attempt to incorporate the governanceprinciple and practice with this initiatives ac-tions. This principle promotes the participationand distribution of responsibilities and rightsamong the different actors, including the localauthorities.

    Since the attempt has been made to de-centralize the implementation of the MBC,there has been no formal coordination with thelocal authorities at a regional level; rather, theparticipation of these actors has been promo-ted in each priority area in which biological co-

    rridor projects are being developed. The caseof the El Castillo-San Juan-La Selva BiologicalCorridor exemplifies how local authorities arebecoming involved and contributing their owninitiatives to the biological corridor objectives,in addition to helping to generate cooperationamong border communities (see Chart 2).

    One of the important changes that havebeen generated with the MBC in the region is

    [

    that it has helped to change the form of im-plementing biodiversity conservation actionstowards more holistic strategies, where theemphasis is not only on the biological interestin conservation, but also to provide the meansto generate economic activities (with the sys-tem of payments for environmental services)to promote the sustainable development ofthis region. The integral strategies for develop-ment and conservation prove indispensable inthis region which, with the exception of CostaRica and Panama, has very low ratios of humandevelopment; Nicaragua and Honduras, toge-ther with Haiti, are the poorest countries on

    the American continent.This change of viewpoint has influenced

    the MBCs support of conservation actionswith direct benefits for the communities; the-refore, different social actors have taken an in-terest in participating in this initiative.

    This is evidenced with the surge of initia-tives with systems of payment for environmentalservices fostered directly by the municipalities,

    for the protection of water sources that supplythe communities. One example is the experien-ce of the Municipal Water Bureau of Campa-mento Municipality, Honduras. This munici-pality, with the aid of the PASOLAC regionalprogramme and other institutions, has carriedout the economic valuation studies of the waterresource and initiated the process to allow char-ging users for the environmental water protec-tion service, to be distributed to the owners ofthe forests that are being conserved to protectthe water sources. Another similar experience isthat of the Municipal Water Agency of Tacuba(CCAD-PNUP/GEF, GTZ 2004).

    Regarding concrete actions of the MBCat a regional level, focus is being placed on thedevelopment of biological corridors in pro-tected cross-border areas. There are at least11 cross-border biological corridor initiativesat present, some in a preparatory design sta-ge, and others already being implemented (seeChart 3).

    Chart 2 | Bi-national Biological Corridor El Castillo-San Juan-La Selva

    This biological corridor is located in the border zone between Costa Rica and Nicaragua. It seeks the following areas connectivity:

    Fuerte de la Inmaculada Concepcin de Mara, Indio Maz Biological Reserve, and Ro San Juan y Maquenque Wildlife Shelters. Onereason for this is the need to increase the habitat for endangered species such as the Great Green M acaw and the almond tree, connecting

    degraded areas, specially on the Costa Rican side, with Indio Maiz Reserve, which is in a good conditions.Even though the initiative has a strong biological emphasis, it has been carried out with a holistic approach, incorporating local

    communities, mainly from municipalities (El Castillo in Nicaragua and San Carlos in Costa Rica), to environmental education processes,payment schemes for environmental services, municipal development, and ownership of land, among others. El Castillo municipality hasplanned boosting projects to reforest and for forests conservation by paying for environmental services. Local authorities shall pay lan-

    downers for their conservation efforts. These plans are still in a preliminary phases, but it is interesting to know that local authorities haveshown great interest in promoting conser vation in their area of influence.

    An outstanding feature this initiative is that even though it is developing in a context of strong political strife, this project isbringing different organizations and government institutions together to work on environmental issues, generating collaborative work andenvironmental cooperation processes.

    Source: Lpez and Jimnez 2006.

    Chart 3 | Cross-border conservation pr

  • 8/10/2019 Cooperation in Latin America and the European Union

    8/14

    222

    [

    considered relevant actors for this type of ac-tion.

    The MBC was not designed as an initia-tive for cross-border cooperation; however, thepositive externalization of its implementationis allowing the creation of conditions in whichto develop the type of institutions needed tomitigate cross-border environmental problemsand to generate cooperation schemes.

    5.2. Bi-national Plan for Developmentof the Peru-Ecuador Border Region

    The borderland between Peru and Ecua-

    dor is a relevant example of local developmentprocesses and regional integration with the par-ticipation of national and international coope-ration, of both State and private organisations.

    The Peru-Ecuador borderland en-compasses a bi-national territorial surface of420,655.54 km2 . The region has a populationof over four million people, of whom almostthree million are Peruvian. All the populationlives in low social and economic developmentconditions when compared to the rest of theterritories in both countries (Bi-national Planfor Development of the Peru-Ecuador Bor-der Region 2006). This borderland has beenaffected by conflicts between the governmentsof both countries, which have brought conse-quences such as the closing of the border andthe scarce support from the national govern-ment for the growth of local economies and

    local institutions. With the signing of the 1998peace agreement, the cross-border develop-ment of that zone was made a priority.

    As a result of the peace agreement, theBi-national Plan for Development of the Pe-ru-Ecuador Border Region was formulatedwith the mission of increasing the quality of lifeof local cross-border populations in the De-partment of Tumbes in Peru and the Provinceof El Oro in Ecuador (North and Northeastof Peru, and South and East of Ecuador). ThisPlan set out strategies for integration and coo-

    peration between the two countries, throughvaried projects including the development ofbasic infrastructure, social and productive de-velopment, adequate and sustainable mana-gement of natural resources, strengthening ofthe cultural identity of the native communities,among others (Bi-national Plan for Develo-pment of the Peru-Ecuador Border Region2006).

    The execution of the Bi-National Plan isforeseen for a period of ten years (2000-2009).The plan contemplates the execution of diverseprojects in order to achieve the zones progress.It is formed by four programmes that comple-

    ment each other to attain an integral develop-ment (Bi-national Plan for Development of thePeru-Ecuador Border Region 2006).

    Bi-national Programme for Social andProductive Infrastructure Projects (in zonesthat share resources or have complementaryeconomies).

    National Programmes for the Construc-tion and Improvement of Productive and Ser-vices Infrastructure (works that will facilitatecross-border transit, sustainable developmentof zones with productive capacity, and theconstruction of physical infrastructure that willfoster local productive and commercial interac-tion).

    National Programmes for the Construc-tion and Improvement of Social Infrastructureand the Environment (works covering health,education, sewage and urban development, ba-

    sic services and the environment).Programme to Promote Private Inves-tment (to identify investment areas and oppor-tunities in which the private sector can parti-cipate in the execution and financing of pro-jects).

    This initiative was first promoted by theState governments due to the strong politicalconflicts between both nations. However, sin-ce the Bi-national Plan promotes the construc-tion of small infrastructure works, attention tothe demands made by organised groups in the

    communities, and support to micro, small andmedium-sized enterprises in the borderland,other social actors are currently participating,among others local governments from borde-ring communities.

    Examples mentioned in an article writ-ten by the Mayor of San Ignacio de Cajamarca(Peru)1are the agreements signed by this PlansBi-National Fund with the provincial and dis-trict municipalities, with which projects havebeen carried out for amounts of up to US$ 50thousand, to build schools, colleges, health cen-tres, productive infrastructure for coffee, brid-ges, cable pontoons, mini-hydroelectric plants,

    and highways. In July 2005, the EU formalis ed a

    Figure 2 |Andean Axis - Colomb

    Source: Bi-National Plan of the Peru-Ecuador Border Region 2006.

    1 | See article in: http://planbinacional.rree.gob.pe/domin900721EC8?OpenDocument

  • 8/10/2019 Cooperation in Latin America and the European Union

    9/14

    224

    and public organisations of the zone, as well asnon-reimbursable cooperation received fromthe Brazilian government.

    This project is expected to have positiveimpacts on the transit of people and vehicles, toincrease trade, and to reduce the vulnerability ofthe infrastructure in the face of natural pheno-mena. The project is connected with the inte-gration process of the coastal zone of Colombia(Puerto Tumaco)-Ecuador (Puerto Esmeralda-Guayaquil)-Peru (of the Andean Axis group),with the aim of maximizing trade and tourismrelationships of these countries neighbouringcoasts (Bi-national Plan for Development of the

    Peru-Ecuador Border Region 2006) The pro-jects for 2007 are along the lines of interven-tion, such as: electrification, road infrastructure,water, drainage and sewage, health and educa-tion, local productive infrastructure, irrigation,construction and rehabilitation of small piers.The above require Executive Entities (EE) thatmay be public institutions, among them localgovernments or private sector organisationsthat fulfil the legal requirements and coordinatewith the municipalities. The EE must addresscommunity demands, the elaboration of tech-nical reports and complementary studies of theworks, the execution of the projects, and theyare responsible for delivering the completedwork to the final beneficiaries (Bi-national Planfor Development of the Peru-Ecuador BorderRegion 2006).

    5.3. The Amazon Cooperation TreatyThe Amazon basin is an ecosystem

    shared by eight countries: Bolivia, Brazil,Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana, Peru, Surinamand Venezuela. It has great socioeconomicand environmental importance for thesecountries who, in different degrees, dependon the resources from this basin for their de-[

    velopment. Acknowledging the dependenc eand interest in the protection of this basinsresources, the adjoining countries signed theAmazon Cooperation Treaty in July 1978.This treaty is a cooperation agreement withthe aim of coordinating efforts to protect theAmazon basin and promote its development(Colombian Ministry of the Environment,no date). Its aims include, among others, thefree commercial navigation on the Amazonand shared international rivers, the respectfor each countrys sovereignty for the use ofresources, the coordination of efforts for theuse of water resources, and the interchange

    of information. It is insisted that the exploi-tation of Amazonia should generate benefitsthat directly serve the Amazon countries,calling upon the strong role of participatingStates. This reiteration is due, in part, to theinterest of the international community inpreserving this zone as a world heritage, pro-posal which is not shared by some sectors inthese countries (Gudyans 2004, Figueredo2002). With this treaty, various declarationsare formulated on the future of cooperationfor development and protection of the herita-ge of their respective Amazon territories; forexample: the Amazon Declaration in 1989and the Declaration of Manaus in 1992, inwhich a joint vision is establis hed for the Riode Janeiro Convention on Biodiversity.

    The participation of local or regionalborder governments is being stimulated in

    many of the development programmes wi-thin the framework of this Treaty. In addi-tion to seeking to strengthen the local go-vernments, these programmes incorporatemeasures such as the creation of an Amazonmunicipality network to address the issue ofthe Amazon basin management2 (See docu-ment on this initiative).

    This treaty and its declarations have

    been overshadowed, since the pressure of tra-ditional exploitation of land is so strong, andin most of their forms they are not environ-mentally sustainable nor do they assure bene-fits to the local communities as expected withthe Treaty (Gudyans 2004). In addition, theissue of security in Colombia, with the pro-blems of narcotics and guerrillas, affects thecoordination of efforts. Notwithstanding theabove, efforts to activate and implement thisTreaty are still in effect. The Amazon Coope-ration Treaty Organisation (ACTO) was crea-ted in 1998. It is a permanent organizationthat is working toward the implementation of

    agreements to achieve the sustainable develo-pment of the Amazon basin on which all theparticipating countries are agreed.

    5.4. Challenges for the developmentof borderlands that make cross-bordercooperation necessary in Latin America

    The difficulties encountered by regionalintegration processes all over Latin Americaare originated in the need to overcome tradi-tional views on sovereignty, to stop per ceivingborders as marginal areas of development, andto overcome the lengthy border disputes thathave marked foreign relations between thecountries. The creation of regional institu-tions such as the Central American Integra-tion System, MERCOSUR, and the AndeanCommunity, guides us to the reflection that

    borders are visualised as territories for regio-nal cooperation and integration.Two of the great challenges faced by

    this new vision of borders that is emerging arehow their populations quality of life can beimproved as a result of development plans, andhow to manage the issue of migrations withinthe region. Paradoxically, while Latin Ameri-can borders are becoming more permeable tocommercial exchanges, in some countries ofthe region migration controls have been in-creasing, a fact that hinders peoples entry to2 | See http://www.wsp.org/iquitos/Acuerdos%20de%20Iquitos%202006.pdf

  • 8/10/2019 Cooperation in Latin America and the European Union

    10/14

    226

    [

    Mesoamerican Biological Corridor with theecosystem fragmentation problem; and alsoin a common search for development alterna-tives for the borderlands, such as Trifinio.

    The cooperation experiences presentgreat challenges, since the participating Sta-tes normally put their individual interestsbefore regional ones, causing some of theseexperiences to stop advancing in the quest fortheir objectives, such as the case of the Ama-zon Cooperation Treaty.

    The participation of actors such as localauthorities is fundamental to carry out coo-peration actions in practice. However, the

    great organisational weaknesses historicallypresented by these actors have made theirrole less influential in the initial defining sta-ges of these cooperation experiences. At aregional level, there have been some effortsto strengthen local authorities by fosteringdecentralization processes, in part so thesemay be valid referents for the different de-velopment pr ojects a nd cooperation initiati-ves among countries. The fa ct that the aboveexperiences have local government participa-tion is, on different levels, an indicative thatthere are changes in capacity-building for co-ordinated inter-institutional work, at least insome local borderland governments.

    Latin American borderlands have beencharacterized by the little attention they recei-ve from the authorities. They are zones that,until two decades ago, have historically beenmarginalized from the State economic deve-lopment processes. Human development andthe conformation of productive structures arenow being placed on regional agendas, basedon the advantages offered by agriculture, catt-le raising, trade, services, and mining, in theseareas.

    The municipality shares with the Statethe characteristic of being an entity with totaland general objectives, which brings about thepossibility of carr ying out a series of dissimilaractivities. This characteristic, added to the factthat the municipal space is simultaneously Sta-te space, on which an endless amount of insti-tutions with different degrees of competenceare projected, makes it inevitable that there bean overlapping of tasks and friction regardingjurisdiction. This demands municipal partici-pation with high coordination and leadership,with the capacity to articulate programmes andprojects linking borderlands in order to achie-

    ve the maximization of resources and greatereffectiveness of cooperation projects, both na-tional and international.

    Local border authorities, notwithstan-ding their constitutional importance as beingresponsible for maximizing and administeringlocal development, show voids regarding inter-vention in local problematic issues. Recurringproblems are the lack of public services andmore accentuated social lagging indexes thanin other zones, added to other characteristicsthat make one reflect on the wished participa-tion of local border authorities as real agents toimprove the communities quality of life, thusfulfilling the objectives for which they are res-ponsible.

    The role of local authorities in LatinAmerica is becoming more important, sinceit requires involving all the sectors of society

    in a level of awareness of its closeness to theneighbouring country, so that cultural, eco-nomic, and social aspects of mutual interestare acknowledged and valued as a maximizingelement for the successful outcome of cross-border cooperation.

    Border municipalities socioeconomicproblems can worsen if intervention is noteffectively and opportunely carried out. A fac-tor that hinders the intervention of municipa-lities and cooperation projects in these zones isthe weak associative organization, This makes

    communal education or awareness training ne-cessary, with actions that foster an associativeculture and leadership of the private productivesector, supported by public investments, mixedactivities (public-private), and decentralizedcooperation (Bustamante 2005).

    Unemployment, poverty, and low wa-ges, among others, are frequent subjects inmany Latin American borderlands. Overco-ming them implies it is necessary to invigoratethe economy in these zones. However, this re-quires investments in road infrastructure and inpublic services so that producers and investorscan perform under competitive conditions. Lo-

    cal border authorities are summoned to be theagents that will attract investments for publicworks and that will improve social and produc-tive organization in the borderlands. Both ac-tions would allow increasing local production,generating employment, increasing municipaland peoples income, and would propitiate apositive impact on the populations quality oflife.

    The environmental issue is considered inthese municipalities priorities. The bad mana-gement of solid waste produces negative im-pacts on the quality of life of those people whoinhabit this zone. The policies are directed ataddressing these problems; however, the par-ticipation of national or international agents isrequired.

    Regarding the community perceptionand confidence required for the integration

    processes to be successful, there are groups inthe community with high expectations, in con-trast with groups that show high levels of mis-trust and suspicion. According to Bustamante(2005), municipalities must address the inte-gration process with education, but also withthe evaluation of political actors, in order tokeep a medium and long term direction in ac-cordance with the vision of local development.

    Borderland intervention necessarily re-quires coordination with the municipalities.However, there are programmes, such as those

    6. Local borderland authorities:actors for cooperation and integration?

  • 8/10/2019 Cooperation in Latin America and the European Union

    11/14

    228

    dination with each countrys municipal sectorand with the support of international volun-tary workers, for over a decade FEMICA hasdebated on the essential issues that contributeto a better local public administration, parti-cularly at the periodical meetings that havebeen held as part of the political dialogue net-work that has been institutionalized by theFederation.

    FEMICA has developed a Work Plan thatcorresponds to the priority issues on the Mu-nicipal Agenda defined by the Central Ameri-can Mayors and local authorities. The generalpriority items defined are: Transparency and

    Probity, Local Economic Development, Lo-cal Risk Management, Citizen Security, andMunicipal Finances. The Plan also adopts as areference framework, the commitments madeby the Regions governments at the SummitMeetings of Heads of Government regardingdecentralisation and strengthening of localdemocracy (FEMICA 2003b).

    MERCOSUR: Mercosur has three ins-tances connected with border community de-velopment, which allow local authority parti-cipation in the decision-making process withinthe integration agenda (INTAL 2005).

    One instance is the Ad Hoc Group onBorder Integration, created in 2002, subordi-nated to the Common Market Group, whichis coordinated by the Ministries of ForeignAffairs and composed by high level repres en-

    tatives of the technical bodies relevant to thespecific issues to be addressed in the agenda.Among the functions of the Ad Hoc Group isthe elaboration of proposals of regulating ins-truments or other courses of action destinedto facilitate relationships between border com-munities. These proposals shall be referred tocommercial exchanges between border loca-lities of the MERCOSUR States Parties andto the aspects of health, education, labour,migration, transport, economic development,and others that tend to encourage integration

    [

    among border communities (INTAL 2005).The remaining two instances are con-

    nected with the Mercocities initiative. Thisinitiative was created in 1995 by the govern-ment authorities of the cities of Buenos Aires,La Plata, Rosario, Cordoba, Rio de Janeiro,Brasilia, Curitiba, Florianopolis, Porto Alegre,Salvador, Asuncion and Montevideo, with theaim of achieving municipal participation wi-thin MERCOSUR and at the same time ofencouraging the interchange and cooperationbetween the cities of the region (Mercocities2006). It is currently MERCOSURs mainnetwork of municipalities and the main refe-

    rent of the integration process regarding localgovernments. It has 123 associated cities inArgentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay, Chile,and Bolivia, with a total of over 72 million ci-tizens. It has a Permanent Technical Secreta-riat, in charge of managing cooperation pro-jects for the complete network (Mercocities2003).

    Within its orientations, Mercocities hasa border policy aimed at improving the de-velopment conditions of border communitiesand at contributing to solve problematic as-pects regarding trade, customs, border traffic,epidemiological and sanitary aspects in gene-ral, and migration and sociocultural issues.Mercocities promoted before the Ministriesof Foreign Affairs and the Executive Powers,the creation of an organization for local go-vernment participation in MERCOSUR. Af-

    ter six years of negotiations, the SpecializedMeeting of Municipalities and City Councils(REMI) within the MERCOSUR was crea-ted in 2001. It is worth mentioning that thisinstitutional space was obtained through thework, interest, and persistence of the localauthorities themselves, encouraged by theirconviction that the integration process musttranscend Foreign Ministries and integrate ac-tors in different spheres closer to the peoplesdaily lives.

    The new economic outlook felt in MER-

    COSUR following the IX Mercosur Summitof Heads of State Montevideo-2003, duringwhich the integration process was reactivated,incorporated a new agenda that opens a pro-mising, but demanding, outlook for the cities.It is promising because many proposals putforward by cities are starting to be consideredby main leaders of the block. It is demandingbecause these new times require cities to de-velop specific policies with audacity and cr ea-tivity in order to address the solution to theircitizens most serious problematic issues.

    Regarding specific borderland actions,most of the efforts within the context of MER-

    COSUR are connected with health issues, es-pecially epidemic prevention An example ofthis type of actions is the project RegionalCo-operation and Integration in the Areaof Health, Proposal of an Integrated HealthSystem for MERCOSUR which attempts tosolve health problems of border municipalitypopulation using the Brazilian Unified HealthSystem as a referent. Even though there isnot much funding at present, support is beingrequested, especially from IDB (MERCO-SUR 2004).

    Andean Community : The AndeanCommunity has had a Border Developmentand Integration Community Policy since1999. This is an essential component for thestrengthening and consolidation of the inte-gration process and the holistic development

    of borderlands. Two forms of making borderdevelopment operational are conceived wi-thin the framework of this policy: the BorderIntegration Zones (BIZ) and the Bi-nationalBorder Service Centres (CEBAF). In additionto these, the Border Development ProjectsBank has been developed within the AndeanCommunity General Secretariat (Taccone etal. 2005).

    The BIZ are border territorial spheresadjoining Andean Community member Sta-tes, in which plans, programmes, and projects

  • 8/10/2019 Cooperation in Latin America and the European Union

    12/14

    230

    [

    There are initiatives, however, thathave arisen from local authorities and diffe-rent second-degree organizations, which areincluded but not necessarily directly connec-ted with any official integration agenda. Oneexample is the Latin American Federationof Cities, Municipalities and Local Authori-ty Associations (FLACMA), that subscribedthe Latin American Municipality Agenda in2003, as the result of the different NationalAssociations of Local Authorities. The guide-lines to promote decentralization and goodgovernance through the strengthening of lo-cal governments are shown on this Agenda.

    An inter esting as pect of this Agenda is thatit highlights the role of these local govern-ments to promote and facilitate national andinternational integration. There is a broadconsensus regarding the problems that affectlocal governments and communities in theregion, as well as on the objectives and com-mitments they must make in order to achievethem (FLACMA 2003).

    European Union decentralized coope-ration towards Latin America is a priority issuefor local authorities in the region, especiallywhen analyzing the socioeconomic problemsof Latin American countries and borderlands,which renders greater impor tance to the te-rritorial dimension of regional developmentand integration.

    The Latin American developmentagenda defines local development and regio-nal integration programmes and projects, va-luing the role of Sub-State governments ascoordinating agents and executors of speci-fic support actions to communities with so-cial and economic lagging. This is the caseof communities that reside in borderlands.

    However, commercial and economic libera-lization processes introduced over the pastyears carry opportunities and thr eats for allthe communities, leaving behind those ha-ving competitive limitations for productionand interchange.

    European Union decentralised coope-ration in Latin American border communitiesis analysed as an integrating alternative, con-sidering the territorial dimension of regionaldevelopment and integration as a path toaddress necessities with the participants fromdifferent countries, in which border commu-nity organisations show commitment and for-

    mality to subscribe coordination agreementsthat will make the efforts effective.One of this years prototype experien-

    ces shows a tendency to redefine the role oflocal governments. Such is the case of cross-border territorial cooperation with the bor-der municipalities of Ccuta (Colombia), andBolvar and Pedro Mara Urea (Venezuela).These municipalities have experience andtradition in the production of leather goodssuch as bags, jackets, purses, and shoes. Thepresent condition of production is identifiedas a weak productive chain with a great lackof coordination and difficulties to operate.The municipalities are attempting to articu-late and coordinate the productive process,integrating private and trade union entities inorder to achieve the integrated work of all theparts of the productive chain and the confor-mation of clusters (Bustamante 2005).

    Another specific territorial cross-bordercooperation experience has arisen from theidea of creating an international network ofregions to promote the integration of SouthAmerican bi-oceanic corridors through theuse of instruments of information, training,and technical assistance on territorial de-velopment. These are processes such as theCentral-west South American IntegrationArea (ZICOSUR) (that includes regions ofArgentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Paraguay

    and Peru); the South American Central Bi-oceanic Corridor Regions Forum (that inclu-des regions of Argentina, Brazil, Chile, andUruguay); the internodal bi-oceanic networkthat joins Brazil, Bolivia and Peru; or furtherNorth, the integration possibilities betweenColombia and Venezuela. In terms of de-centralized cooperation policy priorities, theproposal will value all those spaces of regio-nal integration that are currently in construc-tion. Foreign collaboration can contributegreat added value to this network, by availingSouth American counterparts of the collabo-ration experience gained with other countries

    in similar processes, on some of the issuesconsidered as priority by all the Latin Ame-rican authorities, such as local development,economic integration, foreign trade, the fightagainst poverty and social exclusion, the en-vironment and sustainable development, andtechnological innovation and development.The European experience can also be usefulin relation to transversal issues such as theconsolidation of Sub-State institutions, su-pport to territorial internationalisation, andinterregional and cross-border cooperation.

    All territorial cross-border integrationand cooperation actions consider the possi-bility of receiving financial support from EUdecentralised cooperation. For this reason, alltheir postulates propose deepening the coor-dination between the EU and Latin America,renewing the strategy applied in the last de-cade.

    Relations between both regions havebeen strengthened over the past few years.The European Union is the first foreign in-vestor in Latin American and the first provi-der of funds in the region, a s well as being thefirst commercial partner in numerous coun-tries, those from MERCOSUR in particular.Political relations are consolidated thanks toinitiatives such as the three EU-Latin Ameri-can Summits (Rio de Janeiro in 1999, Madridin 2002, and Guadalajara in 2004). On their

    7. EU-Latin America decentralizedcooperation and territorialcross-border cooperation in Latin America

  • 8/10/2019 Cooperation in Latin America and the European Union

    13/14

    232

    [

    Issues connected with the environmentare generating new cooperation alliances atthe borders, due to the greater acknowled-gement of relationships of interdependenceand the internationalization of environmen-tal problems that affect shared natural resour-ces and are of interest to the States and localcommunities who depend on these resources.When S tates perceive that joint actions willbring greater benefits to prevent commonenvironmental problems, the probabilities ofgenerating cooperation schemes increase, asis the case of MBC. This project has achie-ved the political acknowledgement of the im-

    portance of harmonizing actions to diminishthe problem of ecosystem fragmentation andof finding joint solutions to promote betterquality of life for their inhabitants. Specificactions which put this initiative into practi-ce are taken with State participation, but inmost cases civil society organizations, withthe participation of local authorities, set the-se initiatives in motion, such as in the case ofthe Mesoamerican Biological Corridor. Thisis probably one of the most relevant lessonsto be learned from this example.

    Finally, it is clear that in the differentvisions of regional integration, local gover-nments are being consulted and acknowled-ged more as important actors, especially sincecooperation between States is accomplishedin the borderlands.

    Bibliography

    Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo(IDB) (2006). Proyectos. http://www.iadb.org/projects/Project.cfm?project=NI-L1006&Language=Spanish (Accedido30/11/06).

    CCAD-PNUP/GEF, GTZ (2004).Sistematizacin de experiencias de pago porservicios ambientales. Proyecto establecimientode un programa para la consolidacin delCorredor Biolgico Mesoamericano.

    CEMEDE/UNA (2006). Acuerdos

    tomados en el taller binacional Costa Rica-Nicaragua desarrollo fronterizo y turismo.Taller Binacional Costa Rica-NicaraguaDesarrollo Fronterizo y Turismo. Realizadolos das 7, 8 y 9 de agosto del 2006, Nicoya.

    Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)(2006). The World Factbook. Disponibleen: https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/index.html. (Accedido 20/09/06).

    Centro Internacional de AgriculturaTropical (CIAT) (1998). Archivo digital conlos municipios de Amrica Latina.

    Comisin Centroamericana de Ambientey Desarrollo (CCAD) (2002). Naturaleza,gente y bienestar: hacienda realidad el desarrollosostenible en Mesoamrica. Conferencia desocios y donantes de la iniciativa del CorredorBiolgico Mesoamericano. Pars.

    Comisin Europea (2002). Polticas

    estructuras y los territorios de Europa.Cooperacin Sin Fronteras. Oficina depublicaciones Oficiales de las ComunidadesEuropeas. http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/interreg3/documents/cooperation_es.pdf (Accedido el 1/12/2006).

    Comisin Mixta MERCOSUR-UE(2000). Memorandun segunda reunindel Comit de Negociaciones BirregionalesMERCOSUR-UE.

    Comisin Trinacional del Plan Trifinio(CTPT) (2006). El Plan Trifinio. http://

    tonomy for territorial administration and forthe creation of alliances with neighbouringborder municipalities that will allow themto address the needs of their inhabitants.This is fundamental to start changing theeconomic and environmental scenario ofmost border municipalities, marked by lowconditions for production, lack of infras-tructure, lack of local training to exploit thecomparative advantages of these borderlandcommunities, and the need to address con-servation of the natural and cultural richesthey enclose.

    Although the problems and needs in

    the borderlands are many, decentralizedcross-border cooperation is directed at theexecution of projects with high socioeco-nomic, environmental, and cultural impact.Communities with high levels of social andhuman development lagging are the focusfor decentralized cooperation, which seeksto improve the capacity to produce goodsor services that will generate local benefitsfor the poorer sectors of the population. Inthis sense, the interest in communal wor-ks of general usage prevails: the creation ofroad networks, bridges and aqueducts, thatwill prov ide the community w ith the me ansto increase competitive capacity for localproduction by improving trade conditionswith the rest of the country and with thecross-border communities.

  • 8/10/2019 Cooperation in Latin America and the European Union

    14/14

    234

    [

    Municipios y Asociaciones (FLACMA) (2003).Agenda del Municipio Latinoamericano.Visin y Misin de los Gobiernos Locales.http://www.flacma.org/index.htm (Accedidoel 06/10/2006)

    Food and Agriculture Organization ofthe United Nations (FAO) (2006). Progresson hunger reduction by country. FAO:Statistics Division. Socio-Economic Statisticsand Analysis Service. http://www.fao.org/faostat/foodsecurity/MDG/EN/Mexico_e.pdf (Accedido el 24/09/06)

    Grimson, A. (2005). Fronteras, Estadose identificaciones en el Cono Sur. En Mato,

    Daniel. Cultura, poltica y sociedad Perspectivaslatinoamericanas. Buenos Aires: CLACSO,Consejo Latinoamericano de Ciencias Sociales.Acceso al texto completo: http://bibliotecavirtual.clacso.org.ar/ar/libros/grupos/mato/Grimson.rtf

    Gudyans, E. (2004). El relanzamiento delTratado de Cooperacin Amaznico. http://www. lai ns ign ia .or g/2 004 /se pti emb re /ecol_007.htm (Accedido 29/09/2006).

    Hernndez, A y M. Ros (2006). AmricaCentral y la Convencin de Naciones Unidassobre el Derecho de los Usos de los Cursos deAguas Internacionales para fines distintos de laNavegacin. CEMEDE: San Jos.

    INTAL (2005). Informe MERCOSUR.Perodo Segundo Semestre 2004 - PrimerSemestre 2005. INTAL/BID.

    INTAL. (2005a). La integracinregional a los 40 aos de la creacin delINTAL . http://www.iadb.org/intal/detalle_articulo.asp?idioma=esp&aid=1151&cid=583(Accedido el 03/10/2006).

    Jimnez-Elizondo, A. (2004). Thepolitics of participation in a biodiversityconservation Project, the Osa BiologicalCorridor. Tesis de Maestra en Ciencias,Resource Development. Michigan StateUniversity.

    Koohafkan, A. (2006). La Biodiversidady el Desarrollo Rural Sostenible en Amrica del

    Sur. Departamento de Desarrollo Sostenible(SD) de la Organizacin de Naciones Unidaspara la Agricultura y la Alimentacin (FAO).http://www.fao.org/sd/spdirect/EPan0004.htm (Accedido el 30/11/2006).

    Lpez, A., Vega, H., Hernndez, A. yC. Ramrez (2004). Plan Trifinio: un procesode desarrollo sustentable transfronterizo enCentroamrica. San Jos: CEMEDE.

    Lpez, A. y A. Jimnez (2006).Environmental conflict and cooperation:the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor as amechanism for cross-border environmentalcooperation. UNEP, CEMEDE. En prensa.

    Masi, F., Penner, R. y R. Dietze(2000). Evaluacin del Rol de las RegionesFronterizas en el Proceso de DesarrolloEconmico del Paraguay. Desarrolladodentro del marco del Convenio con el BancoInteramericano de Desarrollo. ATN/SF-5469-PR. Coordinacin: Departamento deEconoma Internacional Banco Central delParaguay. Asuncin.

    Mercociudades (2003).Mercociudades: La integracin desdelas ciudades. XVI Reunin del Consejo.Rosario. http://www.idrc.ca/uploads/user-S/11437519951Mercociudades.pdf(Accedido 12/10/2006)

    Mercociudades (2006). Sitio web oficial:http://www.mercociudades.org/ (Accedidoel 03/10/2006).

    Mercociudades (2003). DcimaCumbre de Mercociudades. Sitio web http://www.buenosair es.gov.ar/ areas /10cumbre /red.php . (Accedido el 03/10/2006).

    MERCOSUR (2004). XXII Reuninordinaria del subgrupo de trabajo N 11Salud MERCOSUR/ SGT N 11/Acta N1/04. (Accedido el 03/10/2006).

    Miller, K, E Chang y N Johnson(2001). Defining common ground for theMesoamerican Biological Corridor. WRI.

    Ministerio del Ambiente - Colombia.S.f. http://web.minambiente.gov.co/biogeo/

    menu/legislacion/legisinternacional/coop_amazonica.htm (Accedido el 30/09/2006).

    Mulongoy, K. y S. Chape (2004).Protected areas and biodiversity. UNEP,WCMC, CBD. Nueva York: Cambridge.

    Murillo, A. y C. Villalobos (2006).Necesidades desiguales desafan eleccin dealcaldes. La Nacin. http://www.nacion.com/ln_ee/2006/octubre/02/pais844340.html (Accedido el 03/10/2006).

    OCD (2006). Aportes de la cooperacindescentralizada Unin Europea-Amrica Latinaa la cooperacin territorial en Amrica Latina.Elementos para el debate. Montevideo: OCD

    (en prensa).Olivares, E. (2005). Gobierno adviertea compaas mineras que autorizaciones parauso de aguas en el norte lleg a su lmite.http://www.olca.cl/oca/chile/mineras/agua00.htm (Accedido el 10/10/2006).

    Plan Binacional de la Regin FronterizaPer-Ecuador (2006). http://planbinacional.rree.gob.pe/domino/nsf/planbinacional.nsf/OpcionesJSWeb/D11A3398D6821DB505256EC900721E58?OpenDocument (Accedido25/10/2006).

    Programa de las Naciones Unidas parael Desarrollo (PNUD) (2005). Informesobre desarrollo humano 2005. Perspectivageneral. La cooperacin internacional ante unaencrucijada: Ayuda al desarrollo, comercio yseguridad en un mundo desigual. http://hdr.undp.org/reports/global/2005/espanol/pdf/HDR05_sp_complete.pdf (Accedido el2/10/2006).

    ProDiversitas (2006). AcuferoGuaran. Programa Panamericano de Defensay Desarrollo de la Diversidad biolgica,cultural y social, asociacin civil. http://www.prodiv ersita s.bioe tica. org/des 47.htm(Accedido el 2/10/2006).

    Robagiati, E. (2004). Avanzando laAgenda del Agua: aspectos a considerar enAmrica Latina. En Series sobre Elementos dePolticas, Fascculo 2. Organizacin de Estados