The EU BSR Strategy represents a novel approach to the introduction of the EU's territorial policy agenda to a rather heterogeneous transnational area. The Commission does not however seek to pursue an exact geographic demarcation. In this they hope to avoid the impression that such a macro-regional strategy might replace the well established and territorially pre-defined INTERREG-programme for transnational cooperation projects. This has existed since 1998 for the Baltic Sea Region.
Perhaps the most eye-catching element in the EU-strategy is that it contains a number of proposed actions/projects that will not be followed by new legislation, instruments or institutions. As such, this approach is labelled as the three "No's" (no new legislation, no new instruments and no new institutions).
In that sense, the EU BSR Strategy can be viewed as a comprehensive and inter-sectoral inspirational source built on four central pillars: environmental protection, economic prosperity, accessibility and attractiveness, and finally, safety and security. This is important to stress, since the strategy is indeed developed by the Directorate General for Regional Policy (DG Regio), but a number of other DGs have also been involved in the elaboration process.
Such a comprehensive inter-sectoral strategy is naturally contested since it is coupled with and partly overlaps other pre-existing polices, programmes and action plans in such a large transnational area as the Baltic Sea Region.
The Commission feels however that a stronger commitment from the relevant local, regional and national stakeholders is needed in order to use the already available financial resources more efficiently in future.
The Strategy has also drawn criticism as some have suggested that the Baltic Sea Region is becoming overburdened and 'too rich' in its 'organisational capital'. The argument here is that a multiplicity of stakeholders now exists with similar interests, agendas and scope of action. This can have the effect of slowing territorial cooperation and the implementation of individual actions and projects.
Other voices have argued that the existing organisations, councils, networks and foundations, which have evolved over the past 60 years or so, already provide both a critical mass and the necessary organisational capacity for transnational cooperation. There is then no need for an additional strategy. For example several of the most important challenges facing the Baltic Sea Region are, it is argued, already being tackled within the context of Nordic/Baltic Cooperation.
It appears that one of the most important elements in the EU Baltic Sea Strategy is its 'demonstration effect' in terms of the development of further macro-regional strategies – currently under discussion for the 'Danube region' and for the 'North Sea-English Channel area'. The critical question however remains whether those strategies would help to better take into consideration the existing 'territorial diversity' and the EU's intrinsic striving for territorial cohesion across Europe. In sum, macro-regional strategies seem to have become a central plank in the EU's strategic policy approach to territorial cohesion.
It could however be argued that such a change in the established EU policy toolbox requires a multi-level implementation approach, diverse partnerships and functioning programme-based management and assessment procedures.
Another pre-condition would be the visibility of the new macro-regional approach, which demands high speed implementation as well as clear and communicable evidence of the succeeded impacts; only then can it be seen to fulfil expectations.
The Long Term Perspective (LTP) for the Territorial Development of the Baltic Sea Region, the so-called VASAB-strategy puts in place another action agenda for the Baltic Sea Region. In particular the LTP takes into account the current challenges with regard to territorial cohesion and spatial integration in the Baltic Sea Region.
It is also tasked with leading the transformation of the BSR into a well integrated and coherent European model for a macro-region up to 2030. In particular urban regions are expected to play a critical role in connecting the potentials that exist in the region thus contributing to a territorial cohesion perspective.
Almost half of the 22 actions in the LTP address the role of urban regions. In other words the VASAB strategy promotes an explicitly 'territorial' approach. Like the EU BSR Strategy the LTP also identifies possible stakeholders who might take responsibility and promote such actions. In addition, as with the EU BSR strategy, it does not introduce any new legislation, instruments or institutions.
The difference between the two strategic documents lies in the different starting points of their authors. While the EU Baltic Sea Strategy addresses the inter-sectoral challenges of the Baltic Sea Region, without mentioning where they occur or where such actions should best be tackled, the VASAB-strategy is the product of a more place-based perspective developed by civil servants of national ministries responsible for spatial planning.
A large number of strategic maps help to illustrate and communicate the territorial development perspective. In addition an attached background synthesis document can be seen as a comprehensive study on territorial challenges with numerous analytical maps.
In this respect the two Baltic Sea Region strategies could at least potentially complement each other quite nicely. There is however as yet, no hint as to how they might cross-fertilise each other.
The EU Baltic Sea Region Strategy has been criticised for lacking a clear territorial perspective – it is overly reliant on a sectoral point of view, neglecting for instance the fact that stakeholders in the cities and regions have a responsibility for the well-being of people thus demanding a more comprehensive cross-sectoral and place-based approach.
The VASAB Long Term Perspective could, at least to some extent, compensate for this, if the two documents were to be brought closer together when it comes to the identification and prioritising of actions and projects. The latter also acknowledges rather more forcefully that socio-economic disparities within this macro-region are increasing.
These politically motivated strategies for the Baltic Sea Region have not simply emerged out of thin air. They are both designed to follow a certain normative agenda. At first glance these initiatives, designed to co-ordinate territorial policies explicitly at the transnational level, appear to push forward the integration process though in reality they leave numerous questions unresolved.
Such questions include: How are the pre-selected major stakeholders to be mobilised to work on the proposed actions? Which of the existing financial resources are really available for implementation purposes? And how are these inter-sectoral and far-reaching initiatives to be organised within the existing complex multi-scalar governance setting in the BSR? Otherwise it may be felt that the introduction of the 'macro-region' as a relevant object for policies consumes too many resources at the expense of other fields in politics and planning.
In the light of those rather critical issues the added-value of a macro-regional strategy, such as its potential to address joint challenges from a common denominator (e.g. to protect the Baltic Sea), to introduce a new way of thinking about multi-level governance and subsidiary, to promote a globalisation strategy for the BSR, and finally to overcome, to some extent at least, traditional administrative divisions and cultural barriers, should also be emphasised.
Further reading
Commission of the European Communities (2009) European Union Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region, Brussels, 10.6.2009 COM (2009) 248 final.
Dubois, A./Hedin, S./Schmitt, P./Sterling, J. (2009) EU macro-regions and macro-regional strategies – A scoping study, Nordregio Electronic Working Paper 2009:4, 43 pp.
Schmitt, P. and Dubois, A. (2008): Exploring the Baltic Sea Region – On territorial capital and spatial integration. Nordregio Report 2008:3, Stockholm, 138 p.
VASAB – Visions and Strategies around the Baltic (2009) VASAB Long-Term Perspective for the Territorial Development of the Baltic Sea Region. Towards better territorial integration of the Baltic Sea Region and its integration with other areas of Europe, Riga, October 2009.
The 4 pillars of the EU Action Plan:
1. To make the BSR an environmentally sustainable place
2. To make the BSR a prosperous place
3. To make the BSR an accessible and attractive place
4. To make the BSR a safe and secure place
The 3 pillars of the VASAB-strategy:
1. Promoting urban networking and urban-rural cooperation
2. Improving internal and external accessibility
3. Enhancing maritime spatial planning and management.
How the VASAB network presents their territorial development perspective for 2030 by integrating the three thematic pillars of the Long Term Perspective. Source: VASAB CSD/BSR.