Seminar on strategic thinking in INTERREG development: Spatial visions and scenarios, 27/28 February...

Seminar on strategic thinking in INTERREG development: Spatial visions and scenarios, 27/28 February 2006, Milan

- VASAB 2010 – VISION AND STRATEGIES AROUND THE BALTIC

From Vision to Action – Baltic Sea experience -

Presentation prepared by :

Ulf Savbäck: Ministry of Industry, Employment and Communications - Sweden (country currently chairing VASAB)

Helle Fischer: Ministry of the Environment Danish Forest and Nature Agency Spatial Planning Department

Wilfried Görmar: Federal Office for Building and Regional Planning – Germany

Jacek Zaucha: VASAB Secretariat /BSR

Wiktor Szydarowski: BSR INTERREG III B Joint Secretariat


Co-operation of Ministers responsible for spatial planning and development

Covers all countries bordering the Baltic Sea, plus Belarus„Old“ EU members (DK, SE, FIN, DE)„New“ EU members (PL, LT, LV, EE)Non-EU members (RUS, BY)- all countries on equal footing.

Permanent co-operation since 1992 served by Committee onSpatial Development in the Baltic Sea Region (BSR), since 1994.



Relatively informal character of VASAB- Not overburdened with many formal procedures

- Lean structures and small budget

- Easy to focus on strategic issues

- Flexible in finding right focus



Age

nda

21

for the Baltic

Sea R

egion

INTERREG II C/ III B

Based on values dialoque instrument with the other Organisations

Other projects

Projects(135)

• Sustainable development• Freedom

• Solidarity

• Subsidiarity


The Vision and Strategies (1994)

I. PearlsUrban network of international

importance

II. StringsEffective and sustainable links

between cities

III. PatchesAreas supporting dynamism and

quality of life

IV. SystemComprehensive spatial planning

in function


1992 – 1st Conference in Karlskrona

1994 – „VASAB 2010 – Vision and Strategies around the Baltic 2010” - Tallinn Report

1996 – „From Vision to Action” – Stockholm Report

1998 – VASAB 2010 PLUS – INTERREG III B Project

2001 – „VASAB 2010 PLUS – Spatial Development Action Programme” -Wismar Report

2003 – 2005 – „Connecting Potentials” – Policy Document

2005 – 6th Ministerial Conference, Gdańsk, 19 September 2005

Dynamic process still based on 1994 Vision

(2008) Long-term perspective for the spatial development of the BSR


KEY MILESTONES

Tallinn 1994

1. Vision

2. 4 outline strategies

3. Tentative Action PlanPaving the way to BSR integration, cohesion, sustainable development

Stockholm 1996

1. Summing up of the pilot projects

2. VASAB input to IR2C and B21

3. ICZM – recommendations

Wismar 2001

1. Action Programme (incl. definition of projects)

2. Key themes requiring common efforts

3. VASAB input to IR3B

Gdańsk 2005

1. Connecting Potentials

2. VASAB input to the EU Cohesion Policy

3. Long term perspective


1. Co-operation of urban regions on key issues of sustainable development

2. Strategic development zones important for transnational integration within the BSR

3. Transnational transport links important for cross-BSR and cross-Europe integration

4. Diversification and strengthening of rural areas

5. Development of transnational green networks incl. cultural landscapes

6. Integrated development of coastal zones and islands

VASAB 2010 PLUS 6 Key Themes


Long-term Perspective for the Spatial Development of the BSR

1. Relations of the BSR with other pan-European regions and the rest of Europe (BSR is part of Europe so the importance of EU policies for its development will keep growing)

2. Input to the Rotterdam process

3. Common document shared with various BSR stakeholders

4. Territorial Agenda for BSR

5. Ambition to facilitate co-ordination between transnational and cross-border territorial co-operation in the BSR at least in key strategic issues

The debate is going on……….

FUNCTIONS


ASSETS

1. Periodical Ministerial Conferences

2. Recognition by the Council of the Baltic Sea States

3. Senior Officials Committee – Committee on Spatial Development in the Baltic Sea Region

4. Rotation of the Chairmanship on yearly basis, Troika – ensuring continuity

DEFICITS

1. Lack of recognition from EU Commission.

2. Lack of recognition from sectoral ministerial co-operations in the BSR.

3. Different profiles of ministries representing countries.

4. Different functions of spatial planning at the state level.

POLITICAL ANCHORAGE


1. Through cooperation with BSR IR3B NP Programme:

• Formal introduction to IR3B OP;

• VASAB CSD members in the I3B SC;

• VASAB Secretariat in AT Team;

• VASAB link in the application;

• But difficulties to formulate strategic projects

• Deficits in monitoring overall impacts of IR3B activities.

2. Being part of the important BSR networks as Baltic Agenda 21, BSSSC, HELCOM.

ABILITY TO IMPLEMENT THE VISION

The strength of BSR cooperation is in existing linkage between vision, strategy and implementation stage for new infrastructure and other region building measures. The close collaboration of VASAB 2010 and the Baltic Sea Region INTERREG Programme has resulted in a joint translation of the spatial development vision, strategic goals and objectives into common actions, which then allowed for adjustment of spatial development policies.


ABILITY TO IMPLEMENT THE VISION

Transnational territorial co-operation of II C and III B programmes backed by the political process of VASAB 2010

• 11 countries: old, new and non-Member States working together at the strategic and operational level

• Dense network of pan-Baltic organisations involved in formulating the strategies and initiating the projects - big BSR asset

• IR3B Joint Secretariat - offices in Rostock and Riga

• VASAB 2010 Secretariat in Gdansk

BSR INTERREG III B Neighbourhood Programme2000-2006


How to built and maintain political interest: Big push at the beginning (fall of the iron curtain, Sweden and Germany as engines, pioneering work, right time)

To keep this interest has become more difficult• Ownership of the co-operation by the countries (VASAB our baby).• Raising importance of the territorial questions/sustainable

development at the EU agenda.• Reports produced every 4-5 years addressing key strategic

questions.• Secretariat (lean institutionalisation)

POLITICAL ANCHORAGE


ADVANTAGES: • Recognition of processes having strong spatial impact (in

particular those of sectoral nature) at the state level.• Influence on national legislation (not easy tasks but sometimes it

happens), plans and documents to make them „Baltic” friendly.• The same should happen to investments but this is more difficult.• Creation of the forum for discussing strategic issues and

challenges not biased by day-to-day administrative operations.• Attempt to take care of the long-term Baltic results of the spatial

actions of different stakeholders.• Continuity and reliability.• Integration of the spatial planning parts of the central

governments in the BSR facilitates building of a common region.

POLITICAL ANCHORAGE


DISADVANTAGES:

• Group of high-qualified professionals in their own circle

(restricted focus to national issues, external sources of

expertise less attractive, etc.)

• Narrow ownership of the vision and all other strategic documents

• Two institutions having political mandate to stimulate spatial development of the BSR (CSD and IR3B S.C.)

• Question marks about tangibility of the results achieved since they have to be of political nature.

POLITICAL ANCHORAGE


Varied opinions on the role of VASAB among the BSR countries

1. Forum for exchanging of experience between key spatial planners in the BSR on professional issues (methodology development),

2. Forum for harmonisation of spatial development policies and spatial plans in the BSR (recommendations of transnational policy measures),

3. Common Baltic voice on spatial issues,

4. Forum promoting strategic projects, monitoring their results and disseminating the most strategic ones.

VASAB MISSION


THE MOST SPECTACULAR RESULTS

1. Elaboration of the concept of transnational development zones (e.g. Baltic Palette, Baltic Gateway) and stimulation of zones covering ten poorest BSR subregions (e.g. Via Baltica Spatial Development Zone and South Baltic Arc Development Zone).

2. Promoting an issue of functional polycentricity in the BSR.

3. Facilitating the creation of the network of marinas along the southern BSR coast.

4. Putting on the Baltic agenda question of the offshore planning and preparation and implementation of recommendations for planning in the coastal zone of the BSR.


1. Common BSR Platform on ICZM

2. Monitoring of BSR spatial development

3. Co-operation with the CBSS Ministers for Transport

4. TIA

DIFFICULT CHALLENGES/TASKS


1. Political anchorage is important but equally

important is strong and appealing leadership.

2. Deepening the vision is a permanent dynamic

process

3. Keeping balance between two functions of the

„visionary co-operation”: strategic planning and

project initiation/monitoring projects results

Lessons learned:

CONCLUSIONS

Seminar on strategic thinking in INTERREG development: Spatial visions and scenarios, 27/28 February...

Documents

Transcript of Seminar on strategic thinking in INTERREG development: Spatial visions and scenarios, 27/28 February...