State and Regions: Territorial contracting without guarantees

The outcomes of program contracts between the state and regions reflect promising prospects for accelerating advanced regionalization. However, the weak legal basis and limited accompanying measures constrain the effectiveness of this mechanism.

Introduction

Advanced regionalization marks a crucial phase in Morocco’s decentralization journey, particularly given the qualitative guarantees for empowering regional council autonomy embedded in the 2011 Constitution. In line with this development, Organic Law No. 111.14 concerning regions, enacted in 2015, facilitated a shift from regions with limited administrative scope to “leading” regions equipped with advanced responsibilities in orchestrating and implementing regional development initiatives. Within this evolving landscape, territorial contracting has emerged as a cornerstone for strengthening the managerial and financial capabilities of regions. This is primarily actualized through program contracts (contrats programmes) that meticulously outline shared commitments and the pathways to their achievement.[1]

In this context, these program contracts between the State and regions are a distinctive mechanism for realizing the ambitious goals of advanced regionalization. They serve as an innovative model of territorial governance, aiming to execute collaborative programs founded on a holistic vision and mutually negotiated commitments. This approach is instrumental in fostering strong alignment between the specific development needs of regions and the broader national development priorities. Consequently, a crucial question arises: How effectively can program contracts between the State and regions drive the implementation of advanced regionalization in Morocco?

To address this question, our analysis is structured around four key areas. Firstly, we examine the significance and evolution of territorial contracting. Secondly, we assess the outcomes of program contracts between the State and regions, and the extent to which they support the advanced regionalization project. Finally, we propose concrete reform pathways to elevate their strategic role. The objectiveis to move beyond viewing these contracts merely as transitional tools for executing projects within Regional Development Programs (PDRs).Instead, the aim is to promote them as a methodical approach to balanced territorial development,based on negotiation and partnership between central and regional authorities, inspired by France’s State-Region Project Contracts (CPER).

 

The role of program contracts between the state and regions in the success of the advanced regionalization project

Advanced regionalization signifies a major turning point in territorial public governancein Morocco. This reform initiative aims to broaden the scope of the regional project, positioning the region as a lever for achieving sustainable and balanced economic and social development across all national territories, and enabling it to mediate between the State and other types of territorial collectivities. To frame this relationship, contracting has been stipulated as a vital principle for embodying the shared competencies between the State and regions. Organic Law No. 111.14 concerning regions explicitly states that the exercise of shared competencies between the region and the State occurs within a contractual framework, either at the initiative of the State or at the request of the region. This legal framework also allows regions to finance or co-finance facilities, equipment, or the provision of public services that do not fall under their exclusive competencies through contractual arrangements with the State, provided that such funding contributes to their objectives [2].

Given the crucial position of the Southern Provinces within the country’s administrative structure, which served as a primary impetus for shaping the advanced vision of Morocco’s regional project, these provinces became the site of the earliest applications of territorial contracting. This began in October 2013 with the articulation of the broad outlines of the Development Model for the Southern Provinces by the Economic, Social and Environmental Council (CESE). The CESE recommended relying on the principle of contracting to structure the administrative and developmental relationship between the State, on the one hand, and the three regions of the Moroccan Sahara, on the other [3]. In response, this model has been progressively implemented since 2015 through program contracts between the State and the regions of Guelmim-Oued Noun, Laâyoune-Sakia El Hamra, and Dakhla-Oued Eddahab [4].

The positive outcomes of these contracts spurred their generalization to include the remaining regions of the Kingdom [5], albeit with a modified vision that reflects the evolving context of regional development. Faced with the funding difficulties encountered in implementing projects listed in the Regional Development Programs (PDRs) during the 2016-2021 period, the Directorate General of Territorial Collectivities, in conjunction with the representative body of regions (Association of Regions of Morocco), initiated the signing of a charter for the activation of regional competencies in December 2019. This occurred during the first National Conference on Advanced Regionalization, whose outcomes recommended developing territorial contracting between the State and regions and preparing a model program contract between the State and territorial collectivities to cover and define the terms for exercising and activating shared competencies [6].

The total financial envelope for the first generation of Regional Development Programs amounted to approximately 400 billion dirhams. However, the majority of these projects did not proceed to implementation due to the limited own-source revenue of the regions and the failure of partners to disburse the required funding. After nearly half of the first term of the advanced regionalization process, the regional councils did not achieve the anticipated developmental impact, facing accumulated challenges in managing development programs due to significant difficulties in funding, coordination, and monitoring. This constituted a real impediment to the progress of the regional project in Morocco as envisioned by the Constitution and Organic Law No. 111.14 concerning regions.

As difficulties mounted in the implementation of Regional Development Programs, efforts to formulate a participatory implementation approach gained traction within the framework of program contracts for financing priority projects.Four regions committed to executing program contracts with the State for the 2020-2022 period: Fez-Meknes, Béni Mellal-Khénifra, Guelmim-Oued Noun, and Dakhla-Oued Eddahab. Despite other regional councils approving their contracts, they encountered numerous difficulties that delayed the endorsement procedure by the Ministry of Interior, or they lacked the necessary references for their operationalization, such as the failure to sign partnership agreements between them and ministerial departments, as is the case for the Eastern, Souss-Massa, and Tangier-Tetouan-Al Hoceima regions. Meanwhile, the remaining five regions made no effort to concretize the contracting mechanism between themselves and the State [7], despite suffering from structural deficiencies in funding their development plans. This perpetuates a duality in the new regionalization process, distinguishing between regions striving to exhaust available solutions to overcome developmental delays and others still managed with a pre-advanced regionalization mindset.

The same applies to the regional councils emerging from the October 2021 elections, where the process of adopting program contracts has been unduly delayed. As of mid-October 2024, regional councils had not yet approved the program contracts for implementing urgent, development-oriented projects included in the Regional Development Programs for the 2022-2027 period [8]. This delay is attributable to several reasons, including the delaysin preparing and endorsing these programs, and the failure to adhere to specific procedures for defining the scope of program contracts [9]. Nevertheless, some councils are expected to adopt promising program contracts with substantial financial allocations in the near future. Examples include the draft program contract between the state and the Rabat-Salé-Kénitra region, valued at approximately 21 billion dirhams, and the draft contract for the Tangier-Tetouan-Al Hoceima region, valued at close to 6 billion dirhams.

 

The first generation of program contracts between the state and regions: orientations and stakes

The Fez-Meknes region stands as the first to embark on the implementation of a program contract with the State for priority projects outlined in its Regional Development Program, spanning the period between 2020 and 2022.With a financial envelope exceeding 11 billion dirhams, the contract aims to fund 97 projects. These initiatives are designed to enhance the economic attractiveness of its territorial areas through the expansion of industrial zones, the development of a logistics hub, the establishment of areas for traditional and artisanal activities, the promotion of the social economy, the valorization of regional products, and the upgrading of road corridors. The contract also supports productive sectors, promotes employment, and encourages scientific research by upgrading educational and applied research infrastructure.

In terms of social development, the contract focused on reducing social deficits and territorial disparities by implementing an early childhood education program and an urban rehabilitation program, supporting emerging urban centers, strengthening healthcare services, and promoting the sports sector. Furthermore, it aimed to enhance cultural heritage and tourist sites, as well as preserve natural resources, by developing tourist circuits and resorts, strengthening tourism infrastructure, establishing, upgrading, and equipping cultural institutions, safeguarding regional cultural heritage, providing flood protection, and conserving natural resources [10].

In July 2020, the Béni Mellal-Khénifra region became the second to ratify a program contract. The contract, totaling nearly 8 billion dirhams, is allocated across several key areas: 4.18 billion dirhams to stimulate investment and enhance the region’s attractiveness; 2.4 billion dirhams to promote social rehabilitation and improve access to basic services; and 825 million dirhams to upgrade tourist infrastructure and support cultural and sports sectors. Additionally, 500 million dirhams were earmarked to reduce isolation in mountainous areas and expand access to potable water [11].

The Dakhla-Oued Eddahab region’s program contract had a financial envelope of 574 million dirhams for the implementation of 14 priority projects organized around three strategic axes. These projects aim to enhance the area’s attractiveness (including rehabilitation of the liquid sanitation network, construction of an entrepreneurship center, road reinforcement, and establishment of a regional development observatory), boost economic competitiveness (through development of a logistics zone at Dakhla port and improvement of beaches and tourist sites), and promote social inclusion (through construction of a regional center for professional education and training, as well as health centers). Similarly, the program contract for the Guelmim-Oued Noun region in the Sahara encompassed 37 projects with a budget of approximately 5.5 billion dirhams. The budget is allocated as follows: 4.6 billion dirhams to improve the region’s attractiveness and enhance its capacity to generate sustainable employment opportunities; 767 million dirhams to foster social inclusion; and 109 million dirhams to protect and valorize natural and cultural heritage [13].

The assessment of the first generation of program contracts reveals limited use of State-region contracts to implement priority projects within Regional Development Programs. This initial phase was confined to four regions. Nevertheless, the ratified program contracts show promise, with a total financial envelope of 23.5 billion dirhams allocated to implement 197 projects. These projects represent 22% of the total financial cost of regional development projects in these four regions [14].

Given this promising financial framework, program contracts are expected to significantly bolster the financial capacities of the regions. Financial transfers from ministerial departments and public institutions constitute a vital source of regional development funding. Many large-scale structuring projects outlined in Regional Development Programs would not have materialized without their inclusion as urgent projects within program contracts. These contracts are implemented through partnership agreements between regional councils and various central government entities, thereby embodying the regions’ leading role in driving territorial development.

Based on this, program contracts can be used to strengthen territorial competitiveness. Initial indications from the implementation of these contracts show the establishment of major infrastructure to attract investments, including industrial and logistics incubators as well as zones for economic and professional activities. This also includes facilities that reinforce the productive fabric and support scientific research and vocational training. These elements enhance the attractiveness of regions and their capacity to attract investment projects, especially in areas with promising opportunities but lacking the necessary infrastructure.

Furthermore, supporting the balanced distribution of projects across the different territorial components of regions should help mitigate poverty, exclusion, and unemployment across various areas, rather than concentrating efforts solely on regional centers. This approach aligns with the French experience, where State-Region Project Contracts (CPER) have effectively improved regional development indicators in priority sectors such as social housing, urban development, vocational training, and rural development [15].

The territorial contracting mechanism is also anticipated to facilitate the mutualized management of territorial development. The flexibility and cross-cutting nature of program contracts enable ministerial departments, public institutions, and territorial collectivities to collaborate in mobilizing available resources and means, thereby accelerating the pace of development project implementation and maximizing their developmental impacts [16].

Limitations of program contracts in accelerating advanced regionalization: roots and manifestations

The implementation agenda for State-Region contracts highlights several difficulties; the rate of concluding these agreements has fallen short of the specified contractual deadlines. 26% of these agreements concern programs and projects contracted before the State-Region agreements were signed. Consequently, the timeline for partner contributions remains inconsistent with the provisional schedule stipulated in the State-Region contracts. 50%of these agreements were not concluded until the second year after the program contracts took effect, despite the latter stipulating their conclusion within three months[17]. This has negatively impacted adherence to the implementation timeline for priority programs and projects. An evaluation of projects specified in contracts signed between the State and regions from 2020 to 2022 shows that the percentage of completed projects increased only slightly, from 7% in 2022 to 9% in 2024 [18]. This contradicts the urgent and time-bound nature of program contracts, which are supposed to be implemented within defined schedules, consistent with their objective as a mechanism for accelerating regional development dynamics.

This situation is linked to the delay in formalizing and institutionalizingcontracting between the State and territorial collectivities, with repercussions on the content, objectives, and implementation guarantees of program contracts. Furthermore, the negative impact of the burden of administrative oversight due to complex and lengthy endorsement procedures is evident. This is exacerbated by a weak awareness of the importance of contracting within ministerial departments. The delay in appointing heads of sectoral and joint administrative representations at the regional level, as well as the failure to delegate decision-making powers to these appointees, has hindered the consultation process between regions and relevant ministerial departments regarding the content of these contracts [19]. Regional councils are also a concern because most do not categorize projects to be executed within a contractual framework during the preparation phase of their Regional Development Programs.

On the level of qualitative impact, despite the promising opportunities that program contracts between regions and the State offer for strengthening the financial and managerial foundations of the regional project in Morocco, there are negative implications that could affect their intended objectives. This is due to numerous challenges that limit their developmental and democratic impact:

• Deepening territorial disparities: Program contracts were indeed relied upon to mitigate the profound disparities between various regions of the Kingdom, aiming to harmonize the pace of regional development. However, the limited accompanying measures appear insufficient to adequately reduce the developmental gap between “useful regions” that progress at a rapid pace, and “less useful regions” that continue to register minimal development indicators [20]. This will negatively impact not only the economic and social situation of weaker regions but also their leading role in stimulating development within their territorial scope. How can these regions be expected to support the local authorities within their jurisdiction when they are unable to implement their own programs or actualize their extensive competencies, which are unmatched by available resources?
• Perpetuating regional centralization: An examination of projects implemented under program contracts reveals that most are concentrated in the regional centers, with only a negligible portion reaching the other provinces and prefectures of the regions. This threatens to re-establish the long-standingcentralization that has long curtailed opportunities for balanced territorial development, effectively turning regional centers into development hubs while treating the other territorial units of regions as mere peripheries. This systematically contradicts the objectives of advanced regionalization, which aimsto achieve a balanced distribution of resources and projects at both horizontal and vertical levels.
• Limited contribution to stimulating investment:There has generally been a noticeable increase in regional investment expenditure, rising from 2.19 billion to 8.27 billion dirhams[21]. Program contracts have to some extent enhanced the contribution of weaker regions to the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The Laâyoune-Sakia El Hamra region recorded growth of 9.1%, and the Dakhla-Oued Eddahab region’s contribution increased by 5.4%. Nevertheless, their share in public investment remains limited compared to the presumed role of regions in stimulating and developing investments. Regional investment’s share of total public investment barely increased from 1% in 2016, stabilizing at around 4%[22]. This necessitates a recalibration of program contracts to encourage investments that generate wealth and added value.
• Recentralization of regional decision-making:The state’s vital rolein the success of program contracts, through incentive, funding, monitoring, and support operations, is undeniable. This role becomes evident in efforts to overcome implementation challenges and resolve tensions between central and territorial partners. However, in the absence of a clear framework governing these contracts, program contracts could enable central authorities to dominate regional decision-making. This may restrict regional autonomy and result in a system where regional councils serve primarily to provide funding and endorse centrally determined decisions[23]. This would undermine the democratic orientation of the advanced regionalization project. In this context, we recall the French case, in which the contracting mechanism introduced uncertainty into territorial governance [24], particularly due to the state’s repositioning as a dominant actor that continuously seeks to steer program contracts toward central government objectives at the expense of regional development priorities[25].

 

Prospects for developing territorial contracting in Morocco in light of the French experience

The negative features of current program contracts highlight a structural deficiency in their design and execution. However, this does not advocate for replacing such a strategic mechanism. It is natural for an experimental phase to reveal challenges. The weak reference framework for territorial contracting between the central authority and territorial collectivities has created legislative and institutional gaps that have impacted its developmental objectives. Therefore, program contracts must be reoriented to serve their intended strategic goals by rectifying the issues that hinder their implementation, drawing lessons from the outcomes of State-Region project contracts in France:

• Strengthening regional administrative and financial autonomy: The governance of public action necessitates granting regions exclusive blocks of competencies that enable them to lead development within their territorial scope. This requires optimal actualization of the subsidiarity principle in expanding and specifying the inherent competencies of regions to limit overlap with the responsibilities of other central and territorial actors. Concurrently, the transfer of shared competencies must be accelerated based on a scoring network to assess the managerial capacities of regions [26]. In parallel, the financial base must be reinforced to enable regional councils to effectively exercise their assigned competencies, in light of the proportionality principle. This will ultimately safeguard the financial autonomy of regions, which is the fundamental guarantee for the success of any contractual process [27].
• Legislative entrenchment of state-region contracting: Current setbacks underscore the urgent need for legislative frameworks to guide the design and implementation of program contracts. This is essential to preserve the contractual freedom of regions, a core pillar of territorial contracting[28]. Instead of continuing to regulate the methodology of territorial contracting through circulars, it is imperative to accelerate the promulgation of specific regulatory texts that define the modalities and conditions for concluding and implementing contracts between the State and territorial collectivities. These texts should clearly delineate the roles of central authority representatives and regional councils and stipulate the binding nature of partnership agreements between regions and relevant ministerial departments and public institutions. This would prevent contracting parties from shirking their financial commitments, which often leads to the stagnation of joint development projects with the potential to fundamentally alter regional realities. Program contracts should clearly define shared commitments between territorial extensions of the central authority and regional councils, while specifying responsibilities, objectives, and financing modalities for development projects [29]. This would establish regional territorial contracting as an optimal mechanism for fostering technico-political consensus between the State and territorial actors through regional mediation[30].
• Negotiated formulation of program contracts: Normatively, territorial contracting requires contracting parties to share an integrated vision for intervention within the regional area. This ensures continuous coordination among various actors and ongoing monitoring of progress to prevent regression or laxity. In this regard, we refer to the French experience, where State-Region project contracts are prepared through negotiations between the State, which defines the general framework via the regional prefect, and the regional councils, which advocate for the choices embedded in their development plans. These negotiations form the basis for compromises between the parties involved in drafting program contracts that reflect shared objectives[31]. Thus, the active involvement of regional councils is essential at all stages of drafting State-Region contracts to balance adherence to public and sectoral policy priorities with consideration of territorial specifics and needs.
• Framing the contractual relationship between regions and other collectivities: The contractual methodology necessitates clarifying the level of contribution of other decentralized governance levels in the formulation and implementation of program contracts, given their essential partnership in financing projects. In this context, France’s pioneering work with territorial development contracts can serve as a guide. For example, State-Region planning contracts branch out into infra-regional contracts, such as city and urban agglomeration contracts, State-Metropolis contracts[32], regional contracts, and Regional Contracts for Local Initiative (CRIL). These contracts are a structured formula for coordination and cooperation between regions and the collectivities within their territorial scope [33].
• Enhancing governance of program contract management: Inadequate monitoring and evaluation mechanisms are a significant issue in the implementation of program contracts between the state and regions in Morocco. This particularly impairs the ability of the relevant regions to continuously track project progress and assess their performance. The absence of clearly defined performance indicators makes it difficult to measure progress or evaluate the extent to which objectives are achieved because these indicators often lack precise criteria for assessing project impact. Therefore, it is imperative to establish a dashboard to monitor program contract implementation outcomes, issue periodic and annual reports highlighting implementation trajectories and their implications for regional development, and assign responsibilities to parties that fail to fulfill their commitments. Immediate action should be taken to address interim dysfunctions and adjust ongoing joint projects to meet regional priority requirements.

At the institutional level, the regulatory framework for territorial contracts must be reviewed based on balanced principles that consider the interests of all parties. Otherwise, under practical pressures, they risk becoming akin to “adhesion contracts”. To this end, the composition and functions of program contract monitoring committees must be reconsidered to ensure broader representation of regions and territorial stakeholders, as they are best positioned to select projects that align with the specific needs of each territory. For this purpose, it is crucial to integrate representatives of civil society and regional economic and social stakeholders into various processes of monitoring, leading, and evaluating program contracts [34]. This maximizes their developmental impact and, from a political standpoint, contributes to the necessary efforts to solidify societal ownership of the advanced regionalization project.

Conclusion

From a practical standpoint, it is still too early to offer definitive judgments on the actual developmental impact of program contracts. The picture remains insufficiently clear due to the delayed adoption process, exacerbated by most regions’ reluctance to experiment with this mechanism. Regarding the impact, it is difficult to confirm that projects included in these contracts have demonstrably enhanced specific indicators, given the simultaneous interventions by other levels of public administration within the same regions, such as ministerial departments, public institutions, and development agencies.

Generally, the outcomes of the first generation of program contracts between the state and regions are promising. Building on these successes could confirm the value of contracting as an innovative approach to fostering balanced relationships between the state and regions for achieving sustainable territorial development. Financial commitments from ministerial departments have significantly helped expand and accelerate the implementation of development projects outlined in regional development programs. Supporting this trajectory could encourage regional councils to exercise their powers and refine their management approaches while removing obstacles that hinder the execution of development plans. This is particularly true given the close support of regional governors, who have assumed a leading role in coordinating between various central and territorial actors thanks to program contract monitoring mechanisms.

However, program contract governance carries risks related to a lack of convergence and coordination. Strategies and programs must be devised based on reliable diagnostics and realistic implementation plans accompanied by measurable indicators to ensure the anticipated impact is achieved. Thus, the strategic impact of program contracts must be maximized to reinforce the foundations of advanced regionalization. This involves bolstering regional development efforts and empowering regional councils to fulfill their constitutionally assigned leading role. At the same time, territorial contracting must be surrounded by necessary guarantees to strengthen regions’ financial and administrative autonomy, avoiding their subjection to centralized management.

Footnotes

[1] Program contracts between the State and regions are multi-year programming agreements for financing urgent operations related to territorial planning and development. In this sense, they represent the embodiment of a participatory approach to managing territorial public affairs, enabling the activation of shared competencies and priorities. See: Leroy 1999. “La négociation de l’action publique conventionnelle dans le contrat de plan État-région.” Revue française de science politique. Vol. 49, No. 4/5, pp. 573-600.

[2] Articles 92 and 93 of Organic Law No. 111.14 concerning regions, promulgated by Dahir No. 1.15.83 on 20 Ramadan 1436 (July 7, 2015), Official Gazette No. 6380 dated 6 Shawwal 1436 (July 23, 2015).

[3] Conseil Économique, Social et Environnemental. Nouveau modèle de développement pour les provinces du Sud. Rabat: CESE, October 2013, p.17.

[4] Tahar Abou El Farah, “Provinces du Sud : le nouveau modèle de développement en marche,” lavieeco.com, December 22, 2022. https://tinyurl.com/28e48m5v

[5] Vedie, Henri-Louis. Le Nouveau Modèle de Développement des Provinces du Sud : des réalisations à un rythme soutenu atteignant les objectifs fixés. Policy Brief 17/23. Rabat: Policy Center for the New South, March 2023, p.10.

[6] General Report on the Proceedings of the First National Conference on Advanced Regionalization, Directorate General of Territorial Collectivities and Association of Regions of Morocco, 2019, p. 151.

[7] Rapport thématique sur La mise en œuvre de la régionalisation avancée : Cadre juridique et institutionnel, mécanismes, ressources et compétence. La Cour des Comptes, October 2023, p.15.

[8] Rapport annuel de la Cour des comptes au titre de 2023-2024, November 2024, p.35.

[9] Article 11 of Decree No. 2.22.475 concerning the procedure for preparing, monitoring, updating, and evaluating the regional development program stipulates the necessity of categorizing regional development projects into those to be executed with own resources and those requiring partnership agreements or contracts with other partners.

[10] Fez-Meknes Region, Program Contract between the State and the Fez-Meknes Region for the Implementation of Priority Projects in the Regional Development Program, 2020-2022, pp. 9-10.

[11] “Béni Mellal Region: Approval of a Program Contract for the Implementation of Development Projects Worth 8 Billion Dirhams,” Febrayer.com, July 6, 2020. https://febrayer.com/767905.html

[12] Mohamed Laabid, “574 MDH pour le contrat-programme de la région Dakhla-Oued Eddahab et l’État,” aujourdhui.ma, March 2, 2021. https://aujourdhui.ma/economie/574-mdh-pour-le-contrat-programme-de-la-region-dakhla-oued-eddahab-et-letat

[13] “Guelmim-Oued Noun : un contrat-programme et un nouveau PDR pour dynamiser la région,” medias24.com, March 31, 2022. https://tinyurl.com/253kqm8b

[14] DésyMbakou, “Régionalisation avancée : Donner aux régions davantage de compétences et de responsabilités,” fnh.ma, June 30, 2024. https://tinyurl.com/27dg53g3

[15] Zineb Sitri, les nouveaux modes de gouvernance des collectivités territoriales à la lumière des nouvelles législations, Remald, série « thèmes actuels », n°93, 2015, p. 189.

[16] Zair, Tarik. “Projets de Territoire et Contractualisation Territoriale.” La Revue Marocaine de l’Administration Locale et du Développement, no. 156, 2021, p.19.

[17] Rapport thématique sur La mise en œuvre de la régionalisation avancée, op. cit., p.15.

[18] Rapport annuel de la Cour des comptes au titre de 2023-2024, op. cit., p.35.

[19] Report of the Superior Court of Accounts for 2023-2024, Official Gazette No. 7360 bis, dated December 13, 2024, p. 9382.

[20] Dalil, Mustapha. “Les Régions au Maroc à L’aube des Contrats – Programmes,” La Revue Marocaine des Systèmes Juridiques et Politiques, N 15, 2019, p.6.

[21] Rapport thématique sur La mise en œuvre de la régionalisation avancée, op. cit., p.11.

[22] Wiam Faraj, “Regions under the Microscope of the Court of Accounts: Uneven Contribution to Wealth Creation,” Moroccan News Agency, November 30, 2023. https://snrtnews.com/article/87909

[23] Tarik Zaïr, la contractualisation des rapports état – collectivités locales, Remald, n°96, 2011, p.48.

[24] Gaudin Jean-Pierre. “La contractualisation des rapports entre l’État et les collectivités territoriales.” In:Annuaire des collectivités locales. Tome 24, 2004, p.231.

[25] Alain Faure and Emmanuel Négrier, Politiques publiques à l’épreuve de l’action locale Critiques de la territorialisation, Éditions L’Harmattan, coll. Questions contemporaines, 2007, p.140.

[26] Conseil Économique, Social et Environnemental. Exigences de la régionalisation avancée et défis de l’intégration des politiques sectorielles. Auto-Saisine n° 22/2016, 2016, p.40.

[27] SamihHamdaoui, “La vocation économique de la région à la lumière de la loi organique,” Remadasa – Double Issue: 2-3, 2017, p. 38.

[28] François-Xavier Fort, Contrat et droit des collectivités territoriales, Éditions L’Harmattan, 2014, pp.10-11.

[29] Sitri, Zineb. “La Contractualisation Territoriale, Fondements D’un Mode D’articulation des Rapports État-Régions.” Revue Marocaine d’Administration Locale et de Développement, no. 163, 2022, p.30.

[30] Marc Leroy. “Le contrat de plan État-région.” In La région, laboratoire politique, edited by Bernard Jouve et al. Paris: La Découverte, 2001, p.225.

[31] Jean-François Joye, “La production des politiques de développement territoriale,” in:le droit administratif- Regard sur les moyens d’action des collectivités décentralisées françaises, in:Nacer El Kadiri, Jean Lapèze, Nouzha Lamrani (Dir.), Éléments d’analyse sur le développement territorial. Aspects théoriques et empiriques, L’Harmattan, 2007, pp.49-50.

[32] Dialogue Maroc-OCDE sur les politiques de développement territorial : Enjeux et Recommandations pour une action publique coordonnée, op. cit., p.277.

[33] Anne-Cécile Douillet, “les élus ruraux face à la territorialisation de l’action publique,” revue française de science politique, vol. 53, n°4, August 2003, p. 587.

[34] Sanaa Fahmi& Sarah Touati, “Programme de Développement Régional : Outil Privilégié des Politiques Contractuelles Etat-Région au Maroc.” Revue Almanara pour les études juridiques et Administratives, N 39, 2022, p.27.