Ondrej Elbel (p) / Epainos Award Candidate

James W. Scott

This project evaluates the state borders between Czechia and Poland in the region of Cieszyn Silesia from the perspective of memory studies. Emphasizing the fact that the borders and especially border crossings are sites rich in symbolics, the field observation was conducted to explore whether the border-crossings (can) play a role in memory work. These sites, apart from their apparent function, represent bridges between two states and usually two national communities. If these groups were in past in antagonistic relationships (tensions, violence), the border could also become a site of rivalry (e.g., contested border demarcations). In this project, all the border-crossings between Czechia and Poland in Cieszyn Silesia are considered and the imprints of the past are identified. According to the approach of the SANE framework (Björkdahl et al., 2017), some of these border crossings can be also considered memory sites which means they are (can become) a platform for reconciliation or construction of new and better cross-border relationships. That goal is valid also for Cieszyn Silesia which was 1919 divided into two parts (Czechoslovak and Polish). Such demarcation did not respect the national and linguistic distribution of populations and left many Poles in Czechoslovakia. The demarcation of the new border was accompanied by events that turned sensitive from a longer perspective (Czechoslovak military campaign in 1919 on Polish territory, Polish occupation of Cieszyn Silesia in 1938). This paper is, therefore, exploring the reconciling and conflicting narratives the memory sites may have.

Zoltán Pámer (p)

Ondrej Elbel

Cross-border cooperation has a long history along the border of Hungary with Croatia and Slovenia. Slovenia joined the EU, along with Hungary, in 2004, while Croatia followed them later, in 2013, however institutionalised cooperation existed even before, thanks to various pre-accession instruments. The 2014-2020 has been the first full programming period when all three countries have been inside the EU, having bilateral internal cross-border programmes. Besides increase of funding the new period brought a more standardised framework, making cross-border programmes comparable.

The paper aims at presenting similarities and differences of cross-border cooperation in case of the two analysed relations. After outlining a quick retrospective look on the preludes, major improvements in the legislative and institutional framework will be presented, comparing the 2007-2013 and 2014-2020 periods. Then thematic (priorities) and territorial preferences of the two programmes will be presented: identifying the most important nodes of cooperation. Distribution of activity and funding will be presented in regional breakdown, as well as focusing on various levels of the settlement structure. Special attention will be given to distribution of funding targeting physical investments.

James W. Scott (p)

Zoltán Pámer

Debarbieux, Price and Balsiger (2021) hypothesize that project regions, as flexible actor-based constructions, interact with formal administrative regions in ways that are consistent with re-scalings of territorial governance in Europe. As part of these regionalization projects, they argue that complex multi-stakeholder networks have emerged that link bioregional with formal territorial perspectives. However, the delineation of project regions has not proceeded with equal momentum throughout Europe. The term Carpathian Basin (kárpát medence) is presently used in Hungary as an all-purpose geographical idea that represents an obvious regional neighbourhood if only for the cold facts of location: the country shares borders with seven different countries within this space. However, the Carpathian Basin is also a microcosm of contested regional ideas in Central and Eastern Europe (Hajdú 2018), and its failure to be institutionalized as a European cooperation space reminds us of the limits to flexible territorial governance. This paper explores how the geographical idea of the Carpathian Basin has been employed in post-1989 Hungarian conceptualizations of regional development and territorial cooperation across state borders. This involves understanding the tensions that have emerged between different and partly competing notions of the Carpathian Basin as a ‘Hungarian neighborhood’ on the one hand and as a result of the concerns expressed by Hungary’s neighbours on the other. The approach is based on the assumption that links between geography, geographical imaginaries and questions of national identity remain highly salient. More specifically, we will consider the consequences of Hungary-centric neighborhood imaginaries for territorial cooperation as well as the difficulties involved in the institutionalization of the Carpathian Basin as a project region.