Europeanization and Democratization - CIRES

258
representation of interests and identities, both electoral and functional. This field, though,
has acquired peculiar aspects following the evolution of the European framework, which
until then used to have much weaker relevance and impact on the national and local
phenomena of individual states.
The third channel thus acquires peculiar aspects and hence operates as a combination of the
two classical channels, integrating them and to some extent absorbing them.
This means that the classical view of channels of representation has been overturned: while
the territorial aspect used to complement and integrate the two traditional channels, now,
with its new relevance and new institutional characteristics, it acts as a container into which
the functional and electoral channels come together to complement and integrate it.
Furthermore, if this is so, on the one hand, territory is increasingly a multifaceted locus of
representation, aggregating interests of different kinds (local, regional, national, European)
and different origin (individual citizen, groups that in turn vary in nature and kind,
communities, etc.) and lying on multiple, simultaneous dimensions, and which of course
have relevant consequences on the nature and modes of representation itself; on the other
hand, it must be analysed in conjunction with other dimensions of representation (national,
European, etc.) in order to understand the existence of a form of compounded
representation (Brezinski Lancaster Tuschhoff 1999; Fabbrini 2004).
The double nature of territory (territory as a solid and consistent unit of representation, or
else as a field in which cleavages and conflicts among political actors are expressed) leads
us to distinguish between territory (and territorial institutions) as an actor, and territory (and
territorial institutions) as an arena.
It thus appears appropriate to consider territory in relation to the outside (European Union,
nation state, etc.) as a consistent unit, of which institutional actors are in fact representative,
and thus consider territorial institutions as actors. This perspective would cover all the
aspects of research that relate to territorial representation at the EU level, its characteristics
and transformations following the impact of Europeanization, and primarily the
phenomenon of activation of regions and subnational authorities. Towards the inside, on the
other hand, it seems appropriate to view territory – both with respect to the regional
administration and to the other actors and interests that operate within it – as the locus of
representation, but also as the locus for the formation of policies and the transmission of
behaviours and ideas, and thus to think of territorial institutions as arenas.
If indeed the concept of territory as an actor includes the relationships between territory
itself and the outside world, and particularly with the Community sphere, we must then
identify a series of contexts and analytical dimensions along which such relationships may
be addressed. Starting from the concept of subnational activation (Hooghe, 1995), we may
observe that the best contexts for this analysis are all those channels through which
subnational authorities do in fact relate with European institutions, usually defined as
activation channels or extra-state channels. These include the activities of territorial
institutions in the Committee of Regions, in interregional associations, and in regional
offices in Brussels. To these classical channels we may add one further context in which the
abilities of territorial institutions as actors are particularly evident, namely the context of
partnerships and European collaborations between subnational levels. Finally, it may be
relevant to address the use that regions make of the mediation exercised at the national level
by ministries and permanent delegations in Brussels in order to reach the centres of
European decision making.