Coordination mechanisms for territorial cohesion: Cases of Europe and Luxembourg

The inclusion of territorial cohesion in the Lisbon Treaty triggered a discussion on how to implement territorial cohesion at the EU level, but without clear results. One of the main short-comings in this discussion is the lack of awareness about the main reasoning and core objectives of territorial cohesion and the principal related instruments available to achieve such objective. Any territorial cohesion policy approach, which would not built on coordination mechanisms would "degrade" in an own sector policy. Coordination mechanisms represent the main tools for achieving territorial cohesion, as the territory is the place where any development takes place and the territorial impact of (sectoral) polices creates evidence. The case studies of Europe and Luxembourg represent extremes of a spectrum where on the one side a large territory is governed by a rather weak instrumen tal array of coordination mechanism whereas on the other side a relatively small territory is governed by coordination mechanism with relatively well controlled frame conditions. The result is that territorial cohesion can be defined as a framework that all actors have to comply with because territorial cohesion requires contextual specification. In practical terms, this means that a discussion of the policy objectives is important in order to progress on the coordination. When integrated action is necessary, discursive mechanisms leading to a common action framework appear to be the best choice in order to make coordination happen. However, sticks and carrots, i. e. a development framework, financial incentives and the necessity to end with a common result, are important framing tools to successfully achieve territorial cohesion. A convincing content alone is not enough to overcome vertical and horizontal political rigidities.