EPRC ARCTIC CONNECTIONS MAPPING REGIONAL COOPERATION IN THE ARCTIC. Paper prepared for the Arctic Connections Conference in Glasgow June 2014

Transcription

1 EPRC ARCTIC CONNECTIONS MAPPING REGIONAL COOPERATION IN THE ARCTIC Paper prepared for the Arctic Connections Conference in Glasgow June 2014 Arno van der Zwet John Bachtler Irene McMaster June 2014

2 European Policies Research Centre University of Strathclyde 40 George Street Glasgow G1 1QE United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0) Fax: +44 (0) The place of useful learning The University of Strathclyde is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, number SC015263

3 CONTENTS 1. Introduction All eyes on the north: The political Context National level strategies European Union A dense network of regional cooperation Regional development programmes in the Arctic Conclusions Characterising Arctic regional Cooperation Drivers of Arctic regional cooperation Reflecting on past experiences Thematic priorities in Arctic programmes Conclusions Collaborative Approaches and Networks Arctic Partnerships Academic/scientific partners Private sector Small partners Near-Arctic regional cooperation Existing collaborative approaches Information access Conclusions Future expectations ANNEX I... 30

4 1. INTRODUCTION Climate change is having an accelerated and profound impact on the Arctic region. The impact is double-edged. It involves significant challenges for the communities in the Arctic and near-arctic but also presents new development opportunities to address some long-standing difficulties faced by the region. On both counts, cross-border, transnational and interregional cooperation initiatives referred to as Arctic regional cooperation (ARC) in this paper 1 - have an important role to play. Due to increased economic and social interdependence and ever closer European integration, such initiatives have proliferated across Europe in the last two decades. The northern periphery of the continent has been at the forefront of this trend. As background for the Arctic Connections Conference in Glasgow, the objective of this paper is to map ARC initiatives and place them in a policy context. The paper also reflects on the specificities of ARC and identifies future potential for ARC activities. The results are drawn from desk-based research of key strategic documents but, crucially, are also informed by the discussions that have taken place as part of the Bodø process (see Figure 1). The Bodø process was initiated through a first seminar organised in March 2013 in Bodø, northern Norway. It has been led by the Mission of Norway to the EU, the Norwegian Ministry of Local Government and Modernisation, and the North Norway European Office. The goal was to discuss Arctic development challenges and explore the opportunities for regional cooperation; the event was followed up with two further major international seminars in Brussels (September 2013 and May 2014); these also involved the Scottish Government, which commissioned the European Policies Research Centre (EPRC) to carry out a survey to assess the level of territorial cooperation among key stakeholders. This paper draws on the results of the survey. In addition, it uses the results of a scoping paper - NPP - the missing link 2 - and a Northern Periphery Programme (NPP) preparatory project report which examined how the Arctic dimension could be best included in the programme, but also reflected on the role of stakeholders in the Arctic and near-arctic. 3 1 Throughout the paper the term Arctic regional cooperation (ARC) is used in a broad sense and includes territorial cooperation between regional partners situated in the Arctic as well as cooperation between Arctic partners. 2 Gaskell, F. and Didriksen, J. (2012) NPP - The Missing Link? Final report on options for the strategic framework of the Northern Periphery Programme for the period , Report to the Ministry of Regional Development & Local Government and Mission of Norway to the EU, Integritas Liaison. 3 Van der Zwet, A., McMaster. I., Bachtler, J. and Gaskell, F. (2013) The Arctic Dimension in the Northern Periphery: Perspectives from Scotland Ireland and Northern Ireland, Report to Highland and Islands Enterprise and Northern Periphery Programme; Mikkola, P. (2014) NPP the Gateway to the Arctic, 24 March 2014, Northern Periphery Programme. 1

5 Figure 1: Bodø process and associated activities NPP Missing Link report August 2012 Brussels Seminar September 2013 Brussels seminar April 2014 Open Days Workshop Oct 2014 Bodø seminar March 2013 NPA preparatory project final report March 2014 Glasgow Conference June 2014 The paper starts by outlining the political, strategic and policy environment for ARC and identifies the major policy changes and the institutional framework in which cooperation activities are initiated. It then discusses the key characteristics of ARC, including: the main barriers and drivers of cooperation in the region; the thematic focus of the programmes and institutions that are engaged in cooperation activities; and some reflections of past experiences of programme activities. The subsequent section considers the role of different stakeholders in cooperation activities as well as the linkages between different programmes and organisations engaged in ARC. The paper concludes with a brief overview of some of the most important future expectations in relation to territorial cooperation programmes in the Arctic. 2

6 2. ALL EYES ON THE NORTH: THE POLITICAL CONTEXT Development in the Arctic has become a topic of global interest and concern. One of the most prominent examples is the transformation of the functioning and membership of the Arctic Council, the main high level political body for the region. Established in 1996, its role was initially obscure, but the Council has developed from a policy-influencing to a key policy-making body for the region. Furthermore, the number of countries which have obtained permanent observer status to the Council has increased to include 12 non-arctic states. 4 In other organisations such as the Barents Euro-Arctic Cooperation and in the framework of the Northern Dimension there has also been an increase in attention paid to the Arctic dimension. Supranational developments have been accompanied by national and European strategies which aim to address various development challenges. 2.1 National level strategies Over the past decade, each of the Arctic states has formulated an Arctic strategy. Norway was the first Arctic state to adopt a formal High North policy in Its overall goal is to create sustainable growth and development in the High North according to three overarching principles - presence, activity and knowledge. In 2013 Finland updated its 2010 Arctic strategy. 5 Whereas the 2010 strategy had a strong focus on external relations, the 2013 adopted a broader perspective and addresses economic development priorities. Notably, the updated strategy refers to the whole of Finland as an Arctic area, rather than just its northern region. In 2011 the Foreign Minister of Denmark presented the Arctic Strategy of the Kingdom of Denmark, prepared by the Danish government and the governments of the Faroe Islands and Greenland. The main goals of the Arctic strategy are to ensure a peaceful, secure and safe Arctic, with sustained economic growth and development, respect for the vulnerable Arctic climate, environment and nature, and in close cooperation with their international partners. Iceland is of the opinion that considerable progress has been made since the Althingi Agreement which set out Iceland s Arctic policy. 6 Bilateral relations between Iceland and other Arctic countries have improved and considerable progress has been made, particularly in relation to scientific cooperation. The Russian Federation, as the largest Arctic state, has targeted the Arctic area for strategic economic growth energy security is a particularly important pillar of its strategy. The Swedish Arctic dimension is formulated at the national level but takes the regional context into account. It aims to balance environmental, economic and human development The main themes addressed in these strategies show considerable homogeneity (see Table 1). They include: sustainable exploitation of economic opportunities (natural resource, innovation, energy); accessibility/ transport; environmental protection; climate change; peaceful cooperation; and security for indigenous peoples and Arctic communities. 7 A recent study carried out by the Kolarctic ENI programme analysed the extent to which different elements of Arctic strategies area link to the Programme s priorities, The results confirm that there is considerable congruence between the 4 China, France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, South Korea, the Netherlands, Poland, Singapore, Spain and United Kingdom. The EU and Turkey have ad hoc observer status. 5 The strategy was ratified by the Finnish Parliament on 23 August Available at: 6 Mikkola, P. (2014) op. cit. 7 Gaskell, F. and Didriksen, J. (2012) op. cit. 3

7 strategies. 8 The strategies also demonstrate the malleability of the Arctic as a concept. For example, in the case of Finland the whole of the country is explicitly defined as Arctic. Table 1: Arctic state national/territorial strategies Faroe Islands Finland Greenland Iceland Norway Russia 10 Arctic / northern goals Strategic assessment of how the Faroe Islands can contribute to and benefit from changing circumstances and future opportunities arising from rapid changes in the Arctic). 9 Exploit new economic opportunities. Nature and environment: conservation and sustainable use of living resources. Safety and preparedness. Arctic population social sustainability and working conditions; indigenous peoples. Education and research interdisciplinary research, maintaining expertise, invest in education, training and research, actively participate in Arctic evaluations. Business operations - business opportunities and economic utilisation, energy, maritime and shipping, renewable natural resources, mining industry, cleantech, tourism, traffic and transport systems, data communications and digital services. Environment and stability - internal and external. International cooperation - bilateral, global and EU. Peaceful, secure and safe Arctic. Self-sustaining growth and development. Respect for the Arctic s fragile climate, environment and nature. Close cooperation with international partners. International cooperation. Security through international cooperation. Resource development and environmental protection. Transportation. People and culture. International cooperation on research and monitoring. Good governance. Knowledge development. Sound management of the environment and resources. Facilitating development of petroleum activities. Safeguarding the livelihoods and cultures of indigenous peoples. Further developing people-to-people cooperation. Strengthening cooperation with Russia. Integrated socio-economic development: create a reserve fund of deposits to guarantee energy security and sustainable development of the energy sector. Establish modern information and telecommunications infrastructure. Transport: development of an all year accessible Northern Sea Route. Research and development: aid resource and mineral extraction. Environmental security. Develop international partnership. Provisions for economic security. Climate and the environment. Sweden Economic development. The human dimension. Source: updated and based on McMaster, I. et al. (2012) op. cit. 8 Kolarctic ENPI (2014) Annex 3 - Study of Arctic strategies of the Kolarctic CBC countries and the EU, Management Authority Kolarctic, Lapland Council. 9 The Foreign Service: Fisheries, Trade and Regional Policy (undated) The Faroe Islands and the Arctic; Challenges and Opportunities in the Circumpolar North. Available at: 10 Russian Government (2013) Russia s Arctic development strategy Available at: 80aealotwbjpid2k.xn--p1ai/docs/22846/ [accessed on 24 June 2013]. 4

8 The Arctic strategies of the other Arctic states (Canada and USA) also have considerable similarities (see Table 2). However, their strategies tend to have a stronger focus on issues relating to sovereignty and security. All strategies stress the need for collaborative approaches to find joint solutions for Arctic development issues. However, the role of the regional level is often not explicitly defined. This perhaps reflects the dominance of national-level politics in the region. Table 2: Arctic Strategies Canada and USA State Canada 11 United States 12 Key goals Northern Strategy (2009) consists of four pillars: Protecting Canada s environmental heritage. Promoting economic and social development. Exercising Canada s sovereignty. Improving and developing governance. US National Strategy for the Arctic: Advance US Security interests. Pursue Responsible Arctic Region Stewardship. Strengthen International cooperation. Its approach follows three guidelines Safeguard peace and stability. Making decisions using the best available data. Pursue innovative arrangements. Consult and coordinate with Alaskan Natives. Source: updated and based on McMaster, I. et al. 2012) op. cit. The United Kingdom is amongst several non-arctic states which have also formulated policies which address and respond to Arctic challenges and opportunities. 13 The UK considers itself the Arctic s nearest neighbour and as such has an interest in Arctic development. Cooperation is one of the principle pillars of the UK s approach to the Arctic. The UK regards science as an underpinning solution to many Arctic issues and as such it remains committed to funding its large active and growing scientific community in the Arctic. This policy highlights human, environmental and commercial dimensions. Under the first two dimensions, the UK s contribution is to a large extent through scientific research. Commercially, the policy identifies energy, shipping, tourism, fisheries and bioprospecting as key areas of interest. 14 As the part of the UK closest to the Arctic, Scotland has a major interest in Arctic development and cooperation. Its recently published Nordic Baltic Policy Statement 15 reflects Scottish interests in, and its long-standing relationship with, Europe s northern periphery. The Scottish Government s Action 11 Canadian Government (2009) Canada s Northern Strategy. Available at: [accessed on 24 June 2013]. 12 United States Government (2013) National Strategy for the Arctic Region. Available at: [accessed on 24 June 2013]. 13 Als Germany has published a Arctic policy guidelines see± 14 HM Government (2013) Adapting to Change UK policy Towards the Arctic, Polar Regions Department, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, London. Available at: _policy_towards_the_arctic.pdf 15 Scottish Government (2014) Nordic Baltic Policy Statement. Available at: 5

9 Plan on European Engagement identifies four key areas of activity maritime affairs, energy, research and innovation (including digital), and social affairs. The Nordic and Baltic countries are regarded as established fellow leaders in these fields and enhanced cooperation is considered to be of great mutual value. The themes expressed in the Nordic Baltic Policy Statement also have an Arctic dimension. 2.2 European Union The EU has been conscious of the need for international cooperation on Arctic issues and is developing a specific approach. Following the European Parliament s resolution on Arctic governance of October , the European Commission adopted its first communication on the Arctic in November The European Union and the Arctic Region 17 established the first layer of an EU Arctic policy by setting out EU interests and proposed actions based on three main policy objectives: protecting and preserving the Arctic in unison with its population; promoting the sustainable use of natural resources; and contributing to enhanced governance in the Arctic through implementation of relevant agreements, frameworks and arrangements, and their further development. The EU has subsequently sought closer links with Arctic organisations 18 permanent observer status on the Arctic Council. 19 and has applied for This application is currently deferred. More recently, the Commission and the High Representative of the EU for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy published a joint communication which sets out progress in relation to an EU Arctic Strategy and highlights areas in which the EU is making a contribution to the protection and development of the Arctic. Proposals are being set out to further develop the EU s policy towards the Arctic in three key areas - knowledge, responsibility and engagement - in which the objectives are to: 20 support research and channel knowledge to address the challenges of environmental and climate changes in the Arctic; act with responsibility to contribute to ensuring that economic development in the Arctic is based on the sustainable use of resources and environmental expertise; and intensify its constructive engagement and dialogue with Arctic States, indigenous peoples and other partners. In May 2014, the Council agreed that the EU should further enhance its contribution to Arctic cooperation. In particular, the efforts of the Arctic states to develop joint approaches and best practice 16 European Parliament (2008) Resolution on Arctic Governance, 9 October Available at: //EP//TEXT+TA ITEMS+DOC+XML+V0//EN&language=EN#sdocta12 [accessed 21 June 2013]. 17 European Commission (2008) The European Union and the Arctic region, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council, COM(2008) 763, 20 November 2008, Brussels. 18 Ashton, C. (2011) Remarks by High Representative Catherine Ashton after the meeting with Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt in Kiruna, Sweden, 7 March Available at: [accessed on 21 June 2013] 19 EC and High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (2012) Joint communication to the European Parliament and the Council, Developing a European Union Policy towards the Arctic Region: progress since 2008 and next steps, Brussels, 26 June Available on: [accessed on 21 June 2013] 20 Ibid. 6

10 to address potential environmental impacts and safety concerns related to increasing activities in the region were considered important. And in this context, collaboration between the EU and its agencies with Arctic Council bodies should be strengthened in order to address common Arctic challenges. 21 Box 1: Elements of the EU s Arctic contribution Fighting climate change: the EU is on track to meet its Kyoto target, has incorporated its 20% greenhouse gas reduction commitment into law and is committed to the long-term target of 80-95% reduction of its emissions by Research on the Arctic environment: the Commission has carried out a pioneering assessment of the EU s current and future Arctic footprint, demonstrating that it has a significant impact on the socio-economic and environmental aspects of the Arctic region. Investing in sustainable development in the North: the EU is providing over 1.14 billion to develop the economic, social and environmental potential of its Arctic regions and neighbouring areas for Reducing future uncertainties and monitoring changes in the Arctic region: the EU, through the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7), has contributed around 200 million of EU funds to international research activities in the Arctic. Shipping and maritime safety: as almost 90% of EU external trade is managed through maritime transport, the EU has significant experience in shipping, ship-building, satellite navigation, search and rescue, and port infrastructure development. Source: EC and High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (2012) Joint communication to the European Parliament and the Council, Developing a European Union Policy towards the Arctic Region: progress since 2008 and next steps, Brussels, 26 June Available at: [accessed on 21 June 2013]. 2.3 A dense network of regional cooperation Territorial cooperation has intensified considerably over the last two decades. Cross-border cooperation (CBC) in the Nordic countries and in the Arctic has a long history, and many institutions and organisations are involved in ARC (see Figure 2). Many such arrangements can be described as mature in terms of the challenges they aim to address, the governance structures in place, and the numbers of actors involved. 22 The following section explores the main programmes and frameworks through which regional territorial cooperation takes place in the Arctic region, and maps their themes. Subsequent conclusions reflect upon the challenges and opportunities associated with a dense network of cooperation. 21 The Council of the European Union (2014) Council conclusions on developing a European Union Policy towards the Arctic Region. Available at: [accessed 14 May 2014]. 22 Van der Zwet, A. (2013) Maturation framework for territorial cooperation, paper presented at UACES Conference, Leeds, Available at: 7

11 Figure 2: Territorial Cooperation Frameworks in the Arctic Nordic Council of Ministers BEAC Territorial Cooperation in the Arctic Arctic Council Northern Dimension ETC / ENI (i) Arctic Council Within the Arctic region, the main international governance body is the Arctic Council. This once obscure body 23 has developed from a policy-influencing to an important policy-making forum and now enjoys high level governmental participation. As an inter-governmental forum, the Arctic Council aims to promote cooperation and coordination between its member states, namely Canada, Denmark (including Greenland and the Faroe Islands), Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russian Federation, Sweden and the USA. Common initiatives are discussed and approved at Ministerial meetings. The Council has six Working Groups which focus on the Council s thematic programmes: Arctic Contaminants Action Program (ACAP); Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP); Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF); Emergency Prevention, Preparedness and Response (EPPR); Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment (PAME), and Sustainable Development Working Group (SWDG). The Arctic Council has also recently established an Arctic Economic Council (AEC) whose purpose is to provide a mechanism to allow business and industry to engage with the Arctic States and Permanent Participants. The AEC would provide a venue for businesses, industries and indigenous enterprises to advance Arctic-oriented interests, share best practices, forge partnerships and engage in deeper cooperation Historically the Arctic Council has regarded itself as a science-driven organisation with no law making powers. 24 Arctic Council (2014) Circumpolar Business Forum Task Force meets in Helsinki. Available at: 8

12 The Council has become increasingly outward-looking, and has included other states interested in Arctic development as observers. Several countries have gained permanent observer status on the Arctic Council (France, Germany, The Netherlands, Poland, Spain, Italy and the United Kingdom from the EU; and China, Japan, Singapore, India and South Korea). The EU also holds ad hoc observer status but its application for full observer status was deferred to The Council also includes representatives from indigenous Arctic communities, known as Permanent Participants. In recent years, the Arctic Council has agreed treaties on oil spill strategies and search and rescue in the Arctic. However the tensions in the Arctic in relation to resource development, environmental and indigenous community protection are reflected in the Council. The Council s permanent Secretariat is in NPA territory at Tromsø, Norway. (ii) EU initiatives INTERREG / European Neighbourhood Instruments European Territorial Cooperation (ETC) is an established strand of the EU Cohesion policy framework, contributing to the main aim of fostering balanced development by strengthening crossborder, transnational and interregional cooperation. The budget for the period is 11.7 billion, which accounts for 3.1 percent of the total Cohesion policy budget, funding a diverse range of projects. Five ETC programmes include Arctic territory. These include three transnational programmes - Northern Periphery and the Arctic Programme, Baltic Sea Region Programme, North Sea Region Programme and two cross-border programmes: North and Botnia-Atlantica. The European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) covers 16 partners to the east and south of the EU s borders. Under the ENP, the EU offers its neighbours a privileged relationship, building on a mutual commitment to values and principles. The proposed budget for the new European Neighbourhood Instrument (ENI) is 18.2 billion for the period In the Arctic ENI, cooperation focusses on Russia and includes three programmes; Kolarctic, Karelia and South East Finland-Russia. Russia s eligibility for ENI funding has been amended, reflecting the specific status of Russia as a strategic neighbour; its eligibility for regional and cross-border cooperation programmes is retained in the new ENI, but bilateral cooperation will be addressed in the future under the new Partnership Instrument (PI). This is a major innovation of the external instruments package, with a budget of 1.13 billion. 25 Section 3.2 below reflects on the themes that these programmes address, and the extent to which they relate to Arctic regional cooperation. (iii) Barents Euro-Arctic Council The BEAC, established in 1993, provides a platform for intergovernmental and interregional cooperation. Thirteen counties from Finland (three), Norway (three), Russia (five) and Sweden (two) currently cooperate in the Barents Regional Council (BRC) in order to improve living conditions and encourage sustainable social and economic development in the northernmost part of Europe. BEAC 25 EU Neighbourhood Info Centre (2014) The new European Neigbourhood Instrument: providing increased support to the EU s partners. Available at: [accessed 27 March 2014]. 9

13 cooperation activities have a strong people-to-people dimension. There are several working groups in the scope of Barents Regional Cooperation: 26 investment and economic cooperation; tourism; sustainable living environment; transport and infrastructure; culture; young people; education and research; energy efficiency; health and related social issues; and indigenous peoples. BEAC is involved in 12 projects which are supported through other funding streams. Some of the subworking groups can also be regarded as projects. Currently, discussions are taking place over whether the Secretariat should become involved in project implementation activities and have its own budget (around 1 million). For example, there are possibilities for financing environmental projects through national and regional target programmes, NEFCO, NDEP and investment banks, the Nordic Council of Ministers, the European Neighbourhood Partnership Instrument and bilateral grants. Under the Finnish Chair ( ), BEAC will pay special attention to economic cooperation, transport and logistics, environment and climate change and youth cooperation. Finland is also committed to strengthening cooperation between BEAC and other regional councils Arctic Council, the Council of the Baltic Sea States, the Nordic Council of Ministers as well as with the Northern Dimension. (iv) Northern Dimension The Northern Dimension (ND) is a joint policy which provides a framework for cross-border and external interaction between the EU, Norway, Iceland and Russia in the Baltic Sea and Arctic Sea area. The policy was drawn up in 1999 and renewed in 2006 as a common policy for the European Union, Norway, Iceland and the Russian Federation, with the involvement of a number of other participants and actors, and with Canada and US as observers. The Northern Dimension is looking to expand its involvement in Arctic issues. 27 Project implementation is undertaken through partnerships, in the following areas: environment (NDEP); public health and social wellbeing (NDPHS); culture (NDPC); and transport and logistics (NDPTL). One of the key objectives of the ND is cross-border and regional development. It is increasingly focussing on north-west Russia, Kaliningrad, the Baltic and the Barents Seas, the Arctic and sub-arctic areas. 28 A Northern Dimension Business Council (NDBC) was also recently formed. The goals of the NDBC are: 26 Barents Regional Council (2013) The Barents Programme , 2 June Available at: 27 Northern Dimension Steering Group (2010) Progress Report submitted to the Second Ministerial meeting of the Renewed Northern Dimension Policy, 2 November 2010, Oslo. 28 Delegation of the European Union to Russia (2014) Northern Dimension. Available at: _en.htm 10

14 to provide a platform for interaction, experience-sharing and networking between companies; to ensures that the view of business community will be taken into account in developing the Northern Dimension policy; and to provide a platform for the dialogue between business and government structures. (v) Nordic Council and Nordic Council of Ministers Established in 1952, the Nordic council is an inter-parliamentary body in which five countries (Denmark Finland, Iceland Norway and Sweden) and three self-governing territories (the Faroe Islands, Greenland and Åland) are represented. In 1971 the Nordic Council of Ministers, an intergovernmental forum for cooperation, was established to complement the Council. The Nordic Council of Ministers consists of ten thematic councils of ministers which meet twice per year. 29 The Nordic Committee of Senior Officials for Regional Policy under the Nordic Council of Ministers (NCM) provides funding for 12 cross-border committees. Six of them can be considered to be in, or adjacent to, the Arctic: Bothnian Arc; Kvarken Council; MittSkandia; NORA Nordic Atlantic Cooperation; North Calotte Council; and Tornedalsradet. The committees have a small budget from the Nordic Council of Ministers, and firms, municipalities and public organisations can apply for funding. Cooperation objectives often centre upon economic development and cultural cooperation, including infrastructure and tourism. 30 Furthermore, the NCM has an annual fund for Arctic projects (10 million DKK). 31 Several other institutions under the auspices of the NCM are also important in the context of Arctic regional cooperation, notably: Nordregio - the Nordic Centre for Spatial Development, whch undertakes strategic research with the aim of producing informed and relevant material for decision-makers at the international, national and regional levels; and Nordic Innovation an organisation which finances activities enhancing innovation, and which cooperates primarily with small and medium sized companies in the Nordic region. Its mission is to make it easier to develop and do business in the Nordic region, unrestricted by national barriers. 29 OECD (2010) Territorial Review NORA Region, The Faroe Islands, Greenland, Iceland and Coastal Norway, OECD Publishing. 30 Bærenholdt, J. (2007) Coping with distances: producing Nordic Atlantic Societies, Berghan, Oxford. 31 Norden (2014) Funding from the Nordic Council of Ministers' Arctic Co-operation Programme. Available at: 11

15 The Nordic working group on sustainable regional development in the Arctic aims to create future scenarios for the Arctic, based on existing information and analysis in order to contribute to ensure there is a greater role for scientific knowledge in political debate. 32 (vi) Other networks and organisations The network for Northern Sparsely Populated Areas (NSPA) represents collaboration between regions that share many characteristics in the three northern most counties of Sweden (Norrbotten, Västerbotten, Västernorrland, Jämtland), the seven northernmost and eastern regions of Finland (Lapland, Oulu, Central Ostrobothnia, Kainuu, North Karelia, Pohjois-Savo and Etelä-Savo) and of North Norway (Finnmark, Troms, Nordland). The NSPA targets three specific policy areas: global competitiveness; demographic development; and energy and energy assets. In addition, it highlights the need to further develop territorial cohesion and territorial cooperation. The NSPA has underlined the importance of the EU in the Arctic. 33 The Norwegian Barents Secretariat (NBS) serves to develop Norwegian-Russian relations in the north by promoting and funding Norwegian-Russian cooperation projects. The NBS is owned by the three northernmost counties of Norway (Nordland, Troms, and Finnmark) but is funded by Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The Secretariat is also a centre of competence on Norwegian-Russian relations. The NBS funds Norwegian-Russian projects on behalf of the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (around 200 per annum). The NBS also acts as a resource centre in the region, carrying through various types of reviews, providing information on project funding in the Barents region, and providing updates for various stakeholders. It also coordinates national goals with the regional political priorities in the region. 34 There are close links between BEAC and the NBS. For example, it is the secretariat of the working group indigenous people (WGIP). The EU European Arctic Information Centre (EUAIC) is an international network of 19 leading Arctic research and outreach institutions from the various European Union Member States and EEA countries. EUAIC uses a network model based on existing expertise and knowledge from its own members. Its headquarters is located in Rovaniemi (Finland). The network s objective is to provide the EU, its citizens, institutions, companies and Member States with an Arctic information source and factual overview about the status of, and trends in, the Arctic. The EUAIC network aims to act as a boundary organisation facilitating two-way communication between experts, decision makers, stakeholders and the public. 35 The EU Arctic Forum (Arctic Forum Foundations) was established in 2010 as a non-profit, crosssector and cross-party neutral platform in the European Parliament. It functions as an independent, non-profit platform and bridge builder for Arctic-focussed actors from politics, science, civil society and business. Through its three pillars the Arctic Economic Forum, the EU Arctic Forum, and the Science Policy Forum the Foundation utilises its extensive network to contribute to balanced 32 Nordregio, Nordic working group on sustainable regional development in the Arctic, available on: 33 McMaster, I. et al. (2013) Ex ante evaluation of the Northern Periphery Programme strategic overview, European Policies Research Centre, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow. 34 The Barents Norwegian Secretariat (2014) About Barents Secretariat; Promoting Norwegian-Russian relations in the north. Available at: 35 Arctic Centre (2014) About us; EU European Arctic Information Centre (EUAIC) initiative. Available at: 12

16 impacts in decision-making processes and efficient cooperation. The Forum has developed into a meeting point for discussions about Arctic issues in Brussels, but involves a broader set of actors including not only core EU institutions such as the European Parliament, the European Commission, the European External Action Service, regions and politicians, but also prominent actors, institutes, companies and networks of science and business from within and outside the Arctic region Regional development programmes in the Arctic Economic development activities in the Arctic depend to a large extent on nationally based regional development programmes. 37 These often have a much larger budget than territorial cooperation programmes and are therefore able to implement more strategic projects. The obvious limitation of these programmes is that they do not directly engage in cross-border and transnational cooperation (although some may have a small budget to facilitate such activities). By establishing closer links between national regional development (either domestic or EU funded) and ARC, more impact can be achieved. It is beyond the scope of this paper to provide a full account of regional development programmes and strategies in the Arctic region. Box 2 provides some examples of regional programmes in the Arctic. The objectives of these strategies are closely linked with wider Arctic challenges and opportunities. From an EU perspective, ERDF and ESF are the major funding sources for regional development. The national/regional ERDF/ESF programmes command a much larger budget than territorial cooperation programmes. All European Structural and Investment programmes are based on the same common strategic framework, and the thematic foci of ETC and ERDF programmes often overlap. It has been a long-term goal to find ways to integrate project activities in ERDF and ETC programmes in order to increase their impact. One logic is that ETC programmes, and transnational programmes in particular, provide opportunities for testing new ideas in different environments and regional contexts. If projects are successful, ERDF funding could be used to roll out project results at the regional level. On the other hand, results from successful ERDF projects could be disseminated and adapted to the specific context in other regions using ETC programmes. 36 Arctic Forum Foundation (2014) Arctic Forum Foundation (website). Available at: 37 This includes nationally-based EU funded regional development programmes (ERDF and ESF) and regional development programmes at the national or regional level. 13

17 Box 2: Examples of an Arctic dimension in national regional development programmes In Finland, each region (NUTS 3, maakunta) has a regional strategic programme, which integrates all regional development measures under one strategic framework. The new regional strategic programmes for are set to be finalised over the course of For instance, the four-year regional strategic programme in Lapland will be merged with the longer-term regional programme into a joint document (called the Lappi agreement). The aim of this agreement is to increase competitiveness and regional welfare with a focus on four strategic areas: competiveness and employment; expertise and welfare; accessibility; and the regional structure of Lapland. Furthermore Lapland has developed an Arctic smart specialisation programme which aims to balance economic, ecological and cultural and social sustainability. 38 Mining and metal industry; Services and industries arising from the needs of large industries; Bioeconomy; Small industries refining natural resources; Independent or new industries; and Tourism and related industries. District and regional policy in Norway comprises a diverse set of policy instruments. The key instruments of district policy are a spatially-differentiated social security concession, business aid schemes, and targeted transfers to municipalities. There is a specific package of measures applicable to the far north in the Action Zone of North Troms and Finnmark. These include a partial write-down of student loans, a reduction in personal tax, and an increase in child benefit. The regional development dimension of the Norwegian High North strategy - which applies to the three most northern counties of Finnmark, Troms and Nordland - has three elements: increasing value-added in oil and gas activities and the exploitation of natural resources; strengthening local expertise in specific fields, notably tourism and Arctic technology; and strengthening international cooperation, notably with Russia, and through programmes such as INTERREG Nord, the Northern Periphery and Arctic Programme and Kolartic ENPI Conclusions The Arctic region can be regarded as a powerful example of international collaboration. 40 countries conform to international treaties and regularly meet in international fora such as the Arctic Council. National strategic documents for Arctic development emphasise the need for a collaborative approach. As such it is not surprising that ARC initiatives have proliferated. The above review does not attempt to provide a fully exhaustive list of cooperation programmes, institutions and organisations in the Arctic region. However it does demonstrate the dense networks of cooperation which have evolved in the Arctic over the last two decades. Cooperation activities are supported at various levels and as such provide entry points for different types of actors. 41 Most 38 Lapland Council (2013) Lapland s Arctic Specialisation Programme. Available at: 39 Wishlade, F. (2013) A new policy narrative: regional policy developments in Norway, EoRPA Paper 2013/2, Vol. 21, European Policies Research Centre, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow. 40 World Economic Forum (2014) Demystifying the Arctic. Available at: [accessed 14 May 2014]. 41 Church, A. and Reid, P. (1999) Cross-border Co-operation, Institutionalization and Political Space Across the English Channel, Regional Studies 33:7,

18 However, this cooperative activity also faces challenges. For example, programmes may fund parallel activities, leading to duplication of effort and waste of resources. Furthermore, the high levels of complexity can make it challenging for stakeholders to navigate their way to appropriate funding streams, particularly if administrative procedures differ. One of the consequences can be a certain degree of cartelisation, where stakeholders stick with programmes which have application processes and administrative procedures which they know and understand. These issues will be further explored in Section 4 below, following a more detailed consideration of the character of Arctic regional cooperation. 15

19 3. CHARACTERISING ARCTIC REGIONAL COOPERATION A considerable stock of knowledge, partnership and project experience in ARC has already been built up and new strategies demonstrate significant continuity with past practices. The following section examines the drivers of Arctic regional and territorial cooperation and the thematic priorities of ARC programmes, reflects on past experiences, and identifies potential future collaboration. 3.1 Drivers of Arctic regional cooperation ARC faces challenges similar to those faced by other territorial cooperation initiatives in other regions. Specifically, these are related to: the availability of resources, the compatibility of institutions, levels of trust and understanding, geographical inconsistencies or boundaries, and policy frameworks (see Figure 3). However, the specific geographical, institutional and policy conditions in the Arctic region mean that some challenges are more applicable than others. Figure 3: Main drivers of Arctic regional cooperation Resources Policy framework Institutional compatability Geographies Cultural / trust and understanding Initiating cross-border and transnational projects is often resource-intensive and time-consuming, particularly in the early stages. The limited resources available for cooperation activities are often identified as an important constraint. In comparison with many other regions, territorial cooperation activities in the Nordic region are relatively well-resourced and enjoy strong political commitment. That said, national and EU funding for cross-border and transnational cooperation remain a fraction of what is spent on regional economic development programmes Van der Zwet, A., McMaster, I., Vironen, H. and Bachtler, J. (2012) Case Study Governance, ESPON TERCO. Available at: R_ScientificReport_Part_II_Dec2012.pdf 16

20 Territorial cooperation often faces significant institutional challenges. It is beyond the scope of this paper to examine the institutional and constitutional arrangements of states partaking in ARC but in general terms the differences in competencies between different levels of governments can represent a considerable bottleneck in developing collaborative projects, and vertical centralised power-relations are often a major barrier to regional based cooperation. One of the main rationales for territorial cooperation is to overcome cultural differences, including working practices, standards, governance approaches, and social interactions between communities across borders. Many of the countries involved in ARC have strong cultural ties. Language skills play an important role, and between Nordic countries these are generally good. However, language is often regarded as a barrier for EU-Russian cooperation, along with cultural differences associated with persistent negative stereotyping. 43 However, regional cooperation in the Barents region goes back more than 25 years, and high levels of trust have been built up. Cooperation has the potential to create trust and understanding between communities across borders. For example, previous research studies note that relations between Finland and Russia have improved significantly since the 1990s, and that this is partly attributable to experience of territorial cooperation. 44 A study of county involvement in territorial cooperation programmes in Norway highlighted the importance of the active involvement of high-ranking officials and politicians. Through their involvement, relations have become institutionalised and the impact of cooperation efforts has increased. 45 One of the main challenges particular to ARC is the complex geography of the region. The vast distances, sparse populations, peripherality of communities, inaccessibility and hostile climatic conditions are barriers to cooperation. On the other hand, such barriers can also facilitate cooperation, providing common cause and shared development concerns. The diversity of Arctic geography and climatic conditions needs to be kept in mind. Some areas of the Arctic are free of ice all year-round; such areas are likely to become more prevalent as sea ice cover recedes. Furthermore, sea conditions in many parts of the Arctic tend to be calmer than, for example, those in the North Sea, this facilitates development. One of the key features of the Arctic in terms of human geography is its low population density, which is an important consideration in relation to ARC. Approximately four million people live in the Arctic permanently. The demographic situation varies hugely across the region but there are some generalisations which can be made. Fertility and mortality rates are higher, and life expectancy is generally lower than southern regions of Arctic countries. The inflow of population is less than the outflow. Most Arctic regions have a smaller share of population in the older age groups. 46 Most settlements in the Arctic remain modest in size. However patterns differ: Russia s Arctic population is largely confined to major cities. The largest cities in the Nordic countries are Tromsø (62,000 inhabitants) and Rovaniemi (58,000 inhabitants). 43 Németh, S., Fritsch, M., Eskelinen, H., Izotiv, A., Scott, J. and Zimin, D. (2012) Case Study on Finland Russia, ESPON TERCO. Available at: 44 Ibid. 45 Iris (2011) The Impact of INTERREG on Norwegian Regional Development Policy, p.xviiii. 46 Bogoyavlenskiy, D. (2013) Arctic Human Development Report Chapter 2. Available at: 17

21 Lastly, there are multiple supranational, multi-lateral and bilateral policy initiatives and strategies which can foster cooperation activity. The development of Arctic strategies at national level, and the fact that most of these strategies identify international cooperation as a key aspect of development in the Arctic, demonstrate national level commitment to Arctic issues. However, the role of the regional level is not always well defined in these strategies. Furthermore, EU cooperation programmes are an important driver of regional cooperation in the region and command a significant budget. Therefore a strong commitment at the EU level to Arctic development provides backing for including a strong Arctic dimension in these programmes. 3.2 Reflecting on past experiences Most programmes welcome increased political focus, which provides benefits in terms of goodwill and resources. However, the increased political focus has not significantly changed the focus of programme activities. The practical projects implemented in past programme periods may not always have explicitly referred to the Arctic but were evidently already attempting to address the challenges and exploit the opportunities that are now expressed through the various Arctic strategies and policies. Figure 4 provides examples of projects from previous programme periods, demonstrate that there is an existing stock of knowledge and experience in the wider region which could be useful in the further development of Arctic projects or clusters. These projects also link well to the themes of the working groups of regional councils in the Arctic region. 18