(2004) points out that many people have commented on the interdependencies of these two
processes and claims that regionalization within the nation states is strongly influenced by
regional integration on the continental level (Tommel, 2003). In consequence, we are
witnessing a multiplication of layers of governance, a process which critical geographers have
called ‘multi-level governance’ (Marks et al., 1996) or a ‘multi-tiered system of governance’
(Leibfried & Pierson, 1995). Pierre and Peters (2000, in: Bohme et al., 2004) also assert that
“governance is increasingly ‘multi-level’, where international, national and sub-national
processes of governance are interlinked in a negotiated fashion.”
Regional policy within the EU accelerated the importance of the sub-national level. The
European regional policy, which emerged at the end of the 1980s, focuses on economic and
social improvements. Many important changes in the convergence and cohesion of regions
have been brought about. Shifts towards multi-level governance in the 1990s increased the
partnership principle with sub-national governments. But although regional disparities
between countries have lessened, disparities between regions have increased on some
measures (Getimis, 2003). It was realized through the increase in the differences within
countries that these regions must be geared to function according to their own strengths and
weaknesses. Partly as a result, the sub national or regional level has risen in importance.
But in the discourse on a European spatial planning system, the multi-level governance issue
is also fundamental. This emergent European planning system extends over many spatial
planning scales, from a supranational level to a local one (Figure 1) (Tewdwr-Jones et al.
2000; Tewdwr-Jones & Williams, 2001; Janin Rivolin & Faludi, 2005). European directives
and policy have a territorial impact in areas such as transport, energy, and the environment.
This is also acknowledged in the 2001 EC White Paper on European Governance (CEC,
2001).
In conclusion, we can say that, on the one hand a supranational level has arisen through the
European unification, as has cross-border cooperation. On the other hand, a stronger regional
level has emerged. In the policy field there is thus evidence of an extension of the number of
scale levels, a situation to which the formal spatial planning system in the various countries
has yet to be adapted.
3. Subsidiarity
The discourse on multi-level governance is partly linked to that on subsidiarity. Bordewijk
(2005) indicates that the subsidiarity principle stems from the theory of collective
expenditures; not every government decision has the same significance. The subsidiarity
principle means that such decisions should be taken at the lowest possible level.
Consequently, decisions must be taken as far as possible in agreement with the wishes of
those for whom it is relevant, and to generate a maximal contribution to their prosperity. The
principle took root with the increase in the responsibilities of the European Union and can
also be traced back to the national discussions.
Jordan (1999) argued that, within the European context, subsidiarity has been interpreted
much more narrowly to mean that the Commission should provide a higher level of
justification before it proposes EU legislation. The subsidiarity principle is also addressed in
the much-discussed Constitution for Europe. The principle forms part of the foundation of the
Union’s functioning and “is intended to ensure that decisions are taken as closely as possible