The sub-national level in the EU is often seen as pioneering for Europeanization processes. Regions and cities can be well-suited entities to try out Europeanization on a small scale. Via activities such as town twinning and policy-related projects, a dense network of contacts and interactions emerges at the subnational level, which can be captured by the sociological concept of "horizontal Europeanization". Especially in border regions Europeanization has fallen on fruitful grounds, since cross-border exchanges have been additionally stimulated by the new legal and political framework the EU provided.

Nevertheless, asymmetries between regions and cities can lead to competition and push and pull factors can result in an uneven distribution of funds or immigration or brain-drain. Many funded projects are not designed for long-term cooperation and run the risk of being limited to symbolic actions. On part of the administration, cooperation can cause substantial effort and might lead to a "clash of bureaucracy". On the citizens' side (but not only), language barriers and socio-economic factors are still major barriers for cross-border activities. Perceptions of inequalities can lead to dissatisfaction, hostility and low trust through cross-border activities, if these programs and activities are not accompanied by appropriate measures. Besides, loosening borders requires long-term approaches in order not to overwhelm stakeholders and reignite old conflicts. All of this requires substantial effort on side of the proponents of Europeanization, who are often idealistic individuals and committed Europeans. This process no longer can be understood as simple vertical development but evolves in a highly relational set-up and faces back and forward as well as sideways movements when actors progress deeper in spheres of Europeanization.

Our panel aims to take stock of current research on horizontal Europeanization at the sub-national level. It is concerned with issues of horizontal Europeanization at the local or regional level, reporting from a top-down perspective (policy programmes and funding) and a bottom-up perspective (activities and interactions of citizens, civil society actors) or addressing the strong interconnection between these two levels.

Has the implementation of EU funds promoted exchanges of policy ideas and practices across regions? Have these transfers helped to adjust regional administrative structures and capacities? Are there insurmountable barriers to the Europeanization of subnational public bureaucracies? This study offers novel data that were gathered through questionnaires, which were completed by practitioners holding responsibilities in the field of EU funding in all Spanish regional organizations. It covers both formal adaptations -e.g., the establishment of new units and/or working groups- and cultural changes -in values, ideas, and discourses about governance- associated to EU funding. The analysis shows, on the one hand, at what extent managing EU funds has promoted horizontal collaboration on the regional level in Spain, both between departments within a single regional bureaucracy and between different subnational organizations that face or experienced in the past similar blind spots as regards capacities to successfully execute EU funding. On the other, it explores whether regional practitioners intend to build networks and arrangements for transnational cooperation, with a special focus on border regions. Furthermore, it discusses about the effects of all these modalities of horizontal collaboration on administrative reform at the subnational level. Lastly, the paper sheds light on major hurdles for the Europeanization of Spanish regional public organizations.

The contribution explores the pivotal role played by capitals within the Pact of Free Cities in the ongoing process of Europeanisation. As interconnected nodes of political, economic, and cultural influence as well as multicultural hubs, these capitals serve as dynamic agents shaping the trajectory of European integration. Within this context, the research delves into the multifaceted contributions of capitals in the region of Central, Eastern and South-Eastern Europe to the Europeanisation process. Economically, these cities act as hubs of innovation, driving regional growth and bolstering the collective economic resilience. Politically, they serve as laboratories for progressive governance models, experimenting with policies that transcend national borders and promote a harmonized European identity. Culturally, the capitals contribute to the tapestry of a shared European heritage, fostering a sense of unity amidst diversity.

Focus will be placed on the collaborative approach facilitating European integration through acting as a bridge between cities of EU and EU candidate countries as well as the broader European community. Through cooperative and dialogue efforts within the Pact, these cities contribute to regional stability, economic growth, cultural cohesion, and increased political influence, aligning non-EU municipalities with the principles and values of the European Union.

Through a nuanced exploration of the dynamics between European and city level, the paper further aims to contribute to a deeper understanding of how the Pact influences and is influenced by the ongoing evolution of concepts of an isolationistic national sovereignty and a unified European identity.

The Lisbon Treaty's introduction in 2009 prompted a critical examination of regional parliaments' role in EU policymaking. It marked the first time that regional parliaments could participate in the EU legislative procedure, consulted "where appropriate" in the Early Warning System for subsidiarity scrutiny (EWS) by national parliaments. Using a comprehensive dataset covering all regional parliaments with legislative power in the EU, this study investigates whether regional activities translate into substantive influence in EU decision-making. The argument asserts that coordinated efforts among regional parliaments within a country have the potential to amplify their impact on the EWS. Analysis through penalized maximum likelihood estimation for rare event data reveals negligible probabilities for individual regional parliaments to influence the national position on subsidiarity issues. However, coordinated activities significantly strengthen the position of regional parliaments in the EWS. While this contradicts the claim of re-legitimized decision-making through the EWS it also opens a perspective for regional adaptation in this instrument and more broadly in the EU multilevel system. To make a regional voice heard in subsidiarity issues these findings underline the necessity of regional cross-country cooperation not only at national but also subnational level in the EWS. This work thus contributes to the ongoing debate on the EU multilevel system and the strategies its´ actors can apply to strengthen their position.

European integration has considerable impact on local governments. Local governments and their associations are often struggling how to handle the opportunities and constraints of European integration. Research on the way local governments adapt to European integration – defined here as Europeanization (Vink and Graziano, 2007: 7) – has been fairly limited, although scholarly attention has been growing more recently (see e.g. Guderjan and Verhelst, 2021; Gröbe et al., 2022). In order to describe the various phases of Europeanization of local governments, scholars often rely on a ladder developed by Peter John (2001), ranging from minimal Europeanization (including compliance with EU law) to maximal Europeanization (advising the EU on implementation issues). The linear and cumulative nature of John’s ladder has been criticized, however, as local governments do not necessarily climb up the consecutive rungs and stay there (ROB, 2013; Verhelst, 2017). This paper presents a typology of local governments’ Europeanization derived from the phases of mainstreaming (Scott et al., 2021). Based on large-scale qualitative and quantitative research on the Europeanization of the two tiers of local governments in the Netherlands, municipalities and provinces, this typology depicts how local governments’ adaptation to European integration ranges from ad hoc, fragmented and temporary responses to Europe, via initiatives from policy entrepreneurs to put Europe more firmly on the policy agenda, to Europe being a self-evident and integral part of local policy-making. This typology describes the extent of Europeanisation of local governments more accurately and comprehensively, also providing local governments a better grasp of the ways they can adapt to European integration.