In the case of public transport , administrative obstacles were identified in areas such as: technical specifications for bus transport, different standards for rail operators, prohibition of cabotage, validity of driving licences and navigation qualifications, differences in road ownership, etc.

In the field of health , problems include differences in practices between ambulance services, the unresolved situation of ambulances crossing borders, language barriers in medical documentation and data management barriers to common software development.

Many of the obstacles encountered in tourism stem from the different structures. Interviewees experienced difficulties with tourism development, projects and lack of coordination of ideas.

In agriculture , the main problem is the unresolved situation of cross-border marketing of local products, in addition to the lack of access to specialised training.

In the employment field, attention was drawn, for example, to the lack of harmonisation of legislation, differences in contributions, differences in employment arrangements, the complexity of recognising certificates and qualifications and the lack of general information.

In the case of social services, the lack of interoperability between the two countries’ systems and the differences in the Slovakian side’s regulations on family and child welfare were frequently mentioned as obstacles. In addition, the process of recognition of social qualifications needs to be simplified, as does the accessibility of social security systems.

In the field of education , the respondents consider it important to cooperate with the Slovak authorities on guardianship issues concerning children from across the border and to make the national systems for the classification and diagnosis of children with SEN interoperable. There are also differences in the length of compulsory schooling between the two countries.

Environmental issues have been raised in the area of cross-border air and product pollution.

Differences related to water management are reflected in the procedures for planning, permits and consents, which should be approximated. A similar need has been identified in relation to measurement methods and data (benchmark flood levels, river clarity, navigation stage, status of water bodies, etc.).

The feedback received on disaster management indicates that the different structures in the two countries make cooperation and project development considerably more difficult and that a legal basis for this should be established as soon as possible. In addition, there are obstacles in the application of internationally agreed phases of disaster management (preventive activities, local preparedness, etc.), in disaster management methods and certification.

There is also a need for convergence of different regulations in the field of nature conservation in order to preserve biodiversity (protection of juvenile fish in navigation, allowing the classification of nature parks, designation of digital borders, etc.).

In forest management, experts are concerned about language barriers, inadequate information for forest users and the lack of cooperation for biodiversity.