Fostering the socio-economic potential of the Baltic Sea region
- Author(s):
- Parliamentary Assembly
- Origin
- Assembly debate on 8 October 2010
(36th Sitting) (see Doc.
12264, report of the Committee on Economic Affairs and
Development, rapporteur: Mr Kaikkonen; and Doc. 12348, opinion of the Committee
on the Environment, Agriculture and Local and Regional Affairs,
rapporteur: Mr Lotman). Text adopted
by the Assembly on 8 October 2010 (36th Sitting).
- Thesaurus
1. The Baltic Sea region, bringing
together eight European Union member states (Denmark, Sweden, Finland,
Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Germany), the Russian Federation
and some of their close partners, has established itself as a distinct
and very dynamic European area. Aware of their cultural proximity, common
resources, shared political concerns and economic interdependence,
the states of the Baltic Sea region have sought to develop co-operation
structures since the 1950s when the Nordic Council was created. However,
their operational co-operation was hindered for decades by the East-West
division which exacerbated social and economic differences in the
region.
2. The 1990s opened a new era of co-operation with the spread
of the market economy and democracy to the south-eastern part of
the region. A variety of regional structures emerged, forming a
solid basis for fostering socio-economic development and stability
in the region. They include the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference (set
up in 1991), the Council of the Baltic Sea States (set up in 1992),
the Baltic Sea Chambers of Commerce Association (set up in 1992),
the Baltic Sea States Sub-regional Co-operation (set up in 1993),
the Union of the Baltic Cities (set up in 1991), the Baltic Sea
Commission of the Conference of Peripheral Maritime Regions of Europe
(set up in 1996) and the Baltic Sea Seven Islands Co-operation Network
(B7, set up in 1989). Organisations for environmental co-operation,
planning and sustainable development in the Baltic Sea region, such
as HELCOM (Helsinki Commission – Baltic Marine Environment Protection
Commission), the intergovernmental network VASAB (Vision and Strategies
around the Baltic Sea) and Baltic 21, have longstanding experience
in the issues of environment and sustainable development in the
region.
3. These complementary co-operation schemes have stimulated particularly
fruitful regional exchanges concerning environmental problems, educational
issues and economic challenges. It is essential that these sub-regional
networks continue working in concert towards further sustainable
development of the region, not least in the light of the economic
and financial turmoil which has strongly affected public finances
and development prospects across the region. Rising unemployment,
a dramatic fall in investment and shortcomings in financial regulation
are revealing national vulnerabilities in the changing global context
while offering a new opportunity to rethink strategic development
orientations.
4. The Parliamentary Assembly welcomes the launching of the European
Union Strategy for the Baltic Sea region in 2009 and appreciates
the importance of making good use of the European Union funding
earmarked for projects in favour of environmental sustainability,
enhanced competitiveness through small and medium-sized enterprises
and innovation, improved interconnections for communications, transport
and energy sectors and better risk prevention strategies over the
2007-2013 period. The Assembly believes that the national parliaments
and regional parliamentary assemblies of the Baltic Sea region should
play a central role in preparing relevant projects and overseeing
their implementation.
5. The Assembly views a close and constructive dialogue with
the Russian Federation as a core element of co-operation in the
Baltic Sea region and a means of advancing co-operation between
the European Union and the Russian Federation in a broader context.
It recalls the special circumstances pertaining to the situation of
the Kaliningrad enclave and reiterates its readiness to assist the
furthering of regional integration through support for the unimpeded
movement of people and goods. Moreover, the Baltic Sea region countries
should consider engaging more actively in supporting grassroots
entrepreneurship and democracy projects in neighbouring Belarus.
6. The Assembly is convinced that efforts to increase energy
security and to pursue a “greener” development path offer much room
for pragmatic collaboration in the Baltic Sea region and vast opportunities for
enhancing competitiveness. The cost-benefit rationale of the Russian-German
undertaking to build the Nord Stream gas pipeline on the Baltic
seabed is debatable and the consultations leading to this grand
project proved insufficient. The building of the pipeline implies
major environmental risks due to the fact that after the Second
World War large quantities of chemical munitions were dumped on
the bed of the Baltic Sea and significant quantities of various
dangerous chemicals were used in agriculture and industry. The risks
of disturbing the sediments thus include the release of hazardous
substances. The countries of the Baltic Sea region should now show
more solidarity in working out joint participation mechanisms for
the realisation of projects not only in the field of energy, but
also transport and innovation. Co-operation in these matters should go
beyond bilateral agreements and be driven by the shared interests
of all the countries in the Baltic Sea region.
7. The fishery industry in the Baltic Sea is of utmost importance
to local economies. Problems due to overfishing and pollution should
therefore be an issue of concern for political decision makers.
Ignoring environmental concerns because of socio-economic considerations
is an unsustainable approach and leads in effect to the undermining
in the long term of these very socio-economic interests.
8. Threats to the sea from eutrophication resulting from pollution
by nitrogen and phosphorus coming from agricultural and municipal
sources are also an issue of major concern for environmentalists.
A reform of the European Union Common Agricultural Policy is needed,
as well as further improvement of the treatment of waste water and
a halt to the use of washing powders containing phosphate.
9. Germany, which is at the heart of the European Monetary Union,
and Denmark, Finland and Sweden, which are leading European Union
countries in terms of global competitiveness underpinned by innovation
and high-quality public institutions, possess a wealth of experience
that should be shared more widely in the Baltic Sea region and beyond.
The Assembly believes that it could serve as a relay for the lessons
that can be drawn in this context to the benefit of other countries
and regions across Greater Europe.
10. The Assembly is convinced that the Baltic Sea region, endowed
with high economic, social and political potential, builds its prosperity
on an open co-operation model that could nurture interaction with
other sub-regional co-operation schemes such as the Union for the
Mediterranean and the Northern Dimension policy, both European Union
initiatives, and the Organization of the Black Sea Economic Co-operation.
Towards this end, more joint activities could be envisaged in the
short term with a view to generating joint projects in the medium
term, notably as regards energy supply and labour mobility.
11. The Assembly underscores the importance of managing the Baltic
Sea region in an integrated way. Strengthened transfrontier co-operation,
political co-ordination, adequate funding and cross-sector partnerships
between governments, parliaments, local and regional authorities,
the private sector and civil society, will form the axis of development
and secure a more prosperous future for all stakeholders in the
Baltic Sea region.
12. The Assembly therefore calls on member governments of the
Baltic Sea region to:
12.1 work
actively for a closer political and economic partnership at all
levels of governance in the Baltic Sea region, and promote continued
confidence building and genuine participatory democracy in the region
and its neighbourhood;
12.2 give priority to multilateral agreements which will allow
the complex development challenges common to the countries of the
region to be tackled in a spirit of solidarity and mutual understanding;
12.3 consider laying the foundations of a unique regional structure
that would enable a smoother and more efficient co-ordination of
multilateral co-operation initiatives, foster the sense of unity
and provide for high-ranking representation through a “Mr/Ms Baltic”;
12.4 ensure that European funds for priority projects in the
Baltic Sea region receive adequate additional input at national
level;
12.5 facilitate the economic co-operation and trade between
countries of the region by reducing trade barriers and improving
mobility of labour and goods;
12.6 support innovative co-operation projects, such as the
Baltic Sea Action Group, a body in which public, private and civil
society organisations combine their resources and contributions
in order to save the Baltic Sea;
12.7 take into consideration issues related to the environment
in the Baltic Sea region.
13. The Assembly underlines its support for the European Union
Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region and urges the European Union
to:
13.1 involve the Russian Federation
not only in projects in the environmental and maritime fields but also
in most of the programmes and projects that will be conducted under
the Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region;
13.2 consider allocating additional funding to the social programmes
to be implemented under the Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region,
especially taking into account the erosion of public finances as
a result of the economic recession afflicting in particular the
eastern part of the region;
13.3 foster the implementation of research and development
projects involving countries of the Baltic Sea region under European
research programmes;
13.4 ensure that new nuclear power plant projects in the Kaliningrad
region and Belarus near the European Union border are implemented
in accordance with international nuclear safety and environmental
protection standards and conventions. Final decisions regarding
nuclear projects should be made after completion of an international
process of environmental impact assessment and reasonable concerns
of neighbouring countries should be respected;
13.5 reform its Common Agricultural Policy in order to ensure
a better protection of the environment, inter
alia, by maximum reduction in the use of fertilisers
and pesticides;
13.6 promote integrated management and spatial planning of
marine and coastal areas so as to avoid conflicts between various
environmental and socio-economic interests, and, inter alia, find the best possible
sites for proposed wind parks where these would not come into conflict
with the need to protect nature.
