Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) in the Baltic Sea Region: Policy Recommendations

Transcription

1 Project part-financed by the European Union Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) in the Baltic Sea Region: Towards a systemic and regionalised approach Policy Recommendations Contact: Dr. Michael Arndt, Angelika Pauli IRS - Institute for Regional Development and Structural Planning Dept. 1: Regionalisation and Economic Spaces Flakenstr , Erkner (Germany) Phone : +49 (0) Fax: +49 (0) arndtm@irs-net.de, paulia@irs-net.de Erkner,

2 Table of Contents: 1 General Framework Structure of recommendations Governance approach Conditions and Aims of ICZM in the BSR The need for harmonization Towards an integrated transnational approach? Conflicts and Problems in ICZM Exemplification of problems From problems to holistic solutions? Towards Holistic Approaches in ICZM Some theoretical and practical considerations Features of integrated approaches Good Practices Baltic 21 Lighthouse projects The Coastman project Conclusions and Recommendations for Further Action First Conclusion: Coordination - The transnational level Strategic Planning The macro-regional level: Implementation of strategic projects The regional level Exemplification: ICZM in a multi-level perspective References...25 Presentations Other Sources Annex: Workshop Agenda

3 1 GENERAL FRAMEWORK These policy recommendations are based on an expert workshop on Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) which took place in Riga 25 April The workshop formed part of the BSR INTERREG IIIB project "COMMIN Promoting Spatial Development by Creating COMmon MINdscapes" 2. COMMIN aims at enhancing mutual understanding of planning processes in the Baltic Sea Region (BSR) by improving transnational information flows and communication. The ICZM workshop brought together experts with different disciplinary and professional backgrounds, such as spatial planners, environmental experts and economists. The Institute for Regional Development and Structural Planning in Erkner (Germany) organised the workshop and is also responsible for the elaboration of this document. From the organiser s point of view, the workshop evolved around three main points of interest, namely the interplay between different levels and sectors, approaches for integrated planning and management, and criteria for successful projects. 1.1 Structure of recommendations Integrated Coastal Zone Management can be an instrument both to protect and at the same time develop coastal zones. It is defined by the European Commission as a dynamic, multi-disciplinary and iterative process to promote sustainable management of coastal zones (...). ICZM uses the informed participation and co-operation of all stakeholders to assess the societal goals in a given coastal area, and to take actions towards meeting these objectives. ICZM seeks, over the long-term, to balance environmental, economic, social, cultural and recreational objectives (Commission of the European Communities 2000:25). Since dedicated solutions are necessary for special requirements of different coastal zones, ICZM processes are mainly implemented at the regional level. However, the regional processes are embedded in regulatory frameworks which are provided at the "higher" spatial levels by international and EU legislation as well as provisions by the nation states. At the same time, there often is a territorial differentiation between the originators of problems and those affected. Polluters, for example, are often situated either at rivers or off-shore, but the manifestation of related problems takes place in coastal zones. Therefore, integrated and transnational approaches are indispensable in ICZM. 1 A workshop agenda, including a list of participants, can be found in the Annex. 2 COMMIN is a follow-up project to the Baltic Manual (INTERREG IIC). For further information, please visit 2

4 Based on these general considerations, the expert workshop comprised four thematic parts: 1) Part 1: ICZM in the Baltic Sea Region 2) Part 2: Conflicts and problems in ICZM 3) Part 3: Towards holistic approaches in coastal zones 4) Part 4: Good practices 1.2 Governance approach These four parts are also used as an underlying structure for the following recommendations. At the same time, the ICZM workshop shares some basic ideas with an earlier workshop on Trans-European Transport Networks (TEN-T) 3 which also formed part of the COMMIN project. The TEN-T workshop was based on the assumption that the European Union can be regarded as a system of multi-level governance. The multi-level governance approach includes a vertical as well as a horizontal dimension and refers to an increased interdependence, both between different levels and between governments and nongovernmental actors (Bache/Flinders 2004:3). When applying the multi-level governance approach to the Baltic Sea Region (BSR), we suggest to distinguish between three different spatial levels: The transnational level, i.e. the Baltic Sea Region as a whole. This is the level which sets the strategic framework for future regional development. The macro-regional level, which consists of several larger development zones within the BSR. Macro-regions can be seen as transnational areas of interaction, where integration is promoted through functional cross-border relations. The regional/local level of neighbourly relations and regular cross-border interaction. Each of these three spatial levels faces its specific challenges and tasks. The recommendations given in Chapter 6 also distinguish between these levels. A specific focus of the ICZM workshop was on gathering relevant information for the design and the implementation of tangible projects. Here, the principles of good governance elaborated by the European Union provide some important orientation. The five principles of good governance elaborated in a White Paper are openness, participation, accountability, effectiveness and coherence (Commission of the European Communities 2001:10f). These five principles are intended to reinforce the earlier principles of proportionality and subsidiarity and can also be observed both in programming and in project implementation. 3 This earlier workshop also resulted in policy recommendations which can be downloaded at 3

5 2 CONDITIONS AND AIMS OF ICZM IN THE BALTIC SEA REGION Coastal zones are an important living space, since almost 50% of the EU population live within 50 kilometres of the sea. At the same time, coastal zones face serious problems because of multiple uses and usage claims which are often damaging to their natural habitats. General problems in coastal zones include an unsustainable and ungoverned spatial development, the decline of traditional and ecologically compatible industries, coastal erosion and marginalisation because of insufficient transport and communication infrastructures. The Baltic Sea in particular is one of the most polluted regional seas worldwide and faces serious problems because of eutrophication. 2.1 The need for harmonization As outlined before, managing the seas has a regional as well as an international perspective. The EU pursues for its coastal zones a flexible and problem-oriented strategy, using an "integrated and participatory territorial approach". In this connection the European Union mainly takes on the role of creating a common vision and initiating measures at the national and the sub-national level. As part of this strategy, the Member States were asked to set up national strategies for ICZM by February However, it became obvious during the elaboration process that the different member states employ quite different strategies which also reflect the distinct planning traditions und planning cultures in the respective countries. Approaches differ e.g. in whether they take a hierarchical approach or prefer widespread stakeholder participation. Apart from this, the EU Recommendation on ICZM is a non-binding instrument and therefore strongly depends on the Member States' will and capacities to implement such a strategy 4. At the same time, legislation such as the Water Framework Directive or the new EU Maritime Strategy 5 provide additional regulation relevant to coastal zones. These different national and regulatory approaches should be harmonised or coordinated. Otherwise, the different strategies might result in regulatory competition or even fragmentation. A transnational perspective for ICZM in the BSR seems to be an adequate approach towards an integrated perspective. 4 The Evaluation of Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) in Europe (see: showed that no country has implemented an ICZM National Strategy as prompted by the EU ICZM Recommendation. Only Spain has prepared an ICZM National Strategy, which has been approved by the relevant Ministry. In the BSR, two countries (Finland, Germany) have an ICZM National Strategy ready for approval or under development. The other six EU countries (Denmark, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Sweden) have no ICZM equivalent policies in advanced stages of preparation, only fragmented tools are in place to address coastal issues. 5 A green paper was published June 2006 (Commission of the European Communities 2006). 4

6 2.2 Towards an integrated transnational approach? The Baltic Sea Region features various pan-baltic organisations which are relevant for ICZM. VASAB and HELCOM 7, for instance, both offer concepts and strategies which cover the whole of the Baltic sea. Therefore, their respective approaches on ICZM were introduced and discussed in the first part of the workshop 8. Bernhard Heinrich s presentation from the VASAB perspective raised the question of spatial planning's possible input to the EU ICZM and Maritime strategies. He outlined some results of the BaltCoast project (INTERREG IIIB) which might provide input into existing strategies. Some of the assets and achievements of spatial planning are its proven methods of participation and conflict management and the production of binding, plan-based results. Mr. Heinrichs concluded that no new ICZM-specific institutions were necessary. Instead, cross-sectoral agencies at the regional level should be leading in implementation and in linking regional approaches with case-specific solutions. In addition, some cross-sectoral, project-oriented coordination procedures such as territorial impact assessment were needed. Quite different in approach are HELCOM and the Baltic Sea Regional Project, which were presented by Kaj Granholm. Both are dedicated to the environmental protection of the BSR both for the sea and the catchment area. Maritime and offshore activities are monitored according to whether they pose an environmental risk. HELCOM started as early as 1974 and thus offers a truly long-term approach and a comprehensive amount of institutional consistency. In 1992, the Baltic Sea Joint Environmental Action Programme (running until 2012) identified 149 environmental hot spots. A programme implementation task force was set up and since then, a considerable amount of these hot spots has been removed from the list. Both perspectives take different approaches: Spatial planning works with zoning and tries to employ a cross-sectoral approach. HELCOM and the Baltic Sea Regional Project focus on the environmental sector and employ an ecosystem approach. This incorporates stocktaking of activities which influence ecosystems. Both approaches do not seem ideal for an 6 VASAB 2010 = Visions and Strategies around the Baltic Sea, an intergovernmental multilateral cooperation of 10 countries of the Baltic Sea Region in spatial planning and development. 7 The Helsinki Commission, or HELCOM, works to protect the marine environment of the Baltic Sea from all sources of pollution through intergovernmental co-operation between Denmark, Estonia, the European Community, Finland, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Russia and Sweden. HELCOM is the governing body of the "Convention on the Protection of the Marine Environment of the Baltic Sea Area" - usually known as the Helsinki Convention. 8 The first part of the workshop received an input from two presentations: Mr. Bernhard Heinrichs gave a presentation on Integrated coastal zone management challenges for coastal regions: The VASAB perspective and Kaj Granholm (Baltic Sea Regional Project) talked about HELCOM and the GEF Baltic Sea Regional Project from regional approach to actions in ICZM. 5

7 integrated perspective: the HELCOM approach because it is mono-sectoral and the VA- SAB approach because is it too static. It also became clear during the following discussion that a great deal of cooperation and integration work still needs to be done. HELCOM has clear goals, but only works on hotspots and tends to neglect social and economic factors which cause environmental damage. The spatial planning side has also not been very successful yet in implementing integrated projects which incorporate social, environmental and economic perspectives. Summing up the first workshop part, the cooperation between the two organisations can and should be improved 9. The ecosystem services approach was suggested as an innovative approach for defining ecological indicators. Another suggestion concluded that a costal forum, i.e. a transnational, pan-baltic organisation, could be a good idea to integrate HEL- COM, VASAB and Baltic CONFLICTS AND PROBLEMS IN ICZM Difficulties in managing coastal zones mostly boil down to convincing relevant partners and stakeholder to participate and to commit. The underlying problems can be subsumed into three groups: 1) Economic development problems: Business interests exert a strong pressure in favour of certain types of coastal uses which might hamper or prevent other, possibly more sustainable regional uses. At the same time, financing is an important incentive to advance favoured projects or to ensure participation and commitment. 2) Regulatory and legal problems are due to non-existing, concurring or fragmented legislation. They are even more complicated in regional cross-border contexts. 3) Cultural and cognitive problems include difficulties to cross different types of borders or create consciousness for "new" environments like coastal zones. Especially interesting and at the same time difficult to handle is the land-sea-interaction. It was the aim of the second part of the workshop 10 to shed some light on these problems and to assess which problems are solvable and which are not. 9 There was a cooperation between Baltic 21, HELCOM and VASAB 2010 in the Baltic Sea Region ICZM Platform. However, the platform only met once in Input presentations were given by Ramunas Povilanskas on Transboundary ICZM in SE Baltic Sea Region and by Andrzej Cieślak On some cognitive problems in ICZM. 6

8 3.1 Exemplification of problems The presentation given by Ramunas Povilanskas from the EUCC s Baltic Office exemplified some of these problems. He talked about transboundary ICZM in the South Eastern BSR. The region is characterized by different, sometimes conflicting uses such as ports, seaside resorts and nature conservation zones. Some of the main weaknesses and problems in ICZM in this region include regulatory and legal problems such as the lack of a comprehensive national ICZM programme (Latvia) or of proper legislation (Kaliningrad) or the violation of existing coastal legislation. Bureaucracy such as in Poland or a top-down approach like in Kaliningrad pose additional obstacles. Problems related to economic development also became apparent during the presentation. They originate either in an unbalanced settlement structure and spatial development (Latvia) or in strong pressures which are exerted onto the coast, either from industries (Kaliningrad) or because of the smallness of the coastal strip (Lithuania). In addition, a lack of resources for ICZM also seems problematic, such as in Lithuania and in Kaliningrad. As part of the solution, Povilanskas suggested to establish a coordinating body and develop a transboundary ICZM programme, both based on the littoral cells approach. Furthermore, cooperation between research and costal management institutions should be enhanced and ICZM linked to sustainable tourism. Andrzej Cieślaks presentation focussed on cognitive problems in ICZM. He stressed the need to define and understand land-sea interactions. Physical interaction can be defined the most easily, economic and social interactions are much harder to grasp. And, what is more, there often is a lack of awareness for these interactions. But how can cognitive and other border be crossed? Cieślak pointed out the importance of ports, both as an instrument and a starting point for overcoming different borders, especially the land-sea divide. Ports could serve as regional promoters and places which generate not only growth and production, but also foster the economic and social development in their regions. Combined with research and development and new technologies, e.g. in logistics and in sea use, they can also provide highly attractive jobs. A supporting social and cultural infrastructure would be needed in the surroundings of these ports, such as universities and research institutes as well as soft infrastructures like culture, arts and recreational facilities. 3.2 From problems to holistic solutions? Cieślak concluded that ICZM could be a holistic solution, because it integrates sectors, different temporal and spatial scales and different stakeholders. However, for holistic solutions integrated decision-making systems are necessary. Such integrated solutions should include an approved vision, an adequate legal framework and best possible monitoring and information flows. 7

9 It became clear in the following discussion, however, that the interpretations of what could be an integrated approach still differ widely. Is functional zoning an integrated approach or are other approaches more fruitful? How can economic and social interactions in coastal zones and also between land and sea be defined and measured? How can the diverse management structures be integrated and ICZM aims linked to regional development? Summing up the discussion, there seem to be five central challenges for consideration when developing integrated approaches: First, ICZM has an image problem, it is often seen as a restrictive approach and as opposed to development. Second, cross-sectoral and cross-border integration which is crucial for holistic approaches, is still not sufficient. Third, the lack of spatial vision needs to be overcome and, fourth, clear aims and priorities have to be formulated. Lastly, some definitional work needs to be done to bring more clarity into ICZM matters. 4 TOWARDS HOLISTIC APPROACHES IN ICZM The Baltic Sea can be regarded as a functional system, with different coastal zones as subsystems. Seen from this angle, a conservative spatial planning approach which is based on the principles of cause and effect does not seem appropriate. What is rather needed for coastal zones is a holistic and systemic approach which crosses all different types of borders cognitive, territorial, and sectoral and which harmonizes and integrates different uses. From this perspective, coastal zone management is also closely related to regional development. The third part of the workshop 11 discussed how such holistic approaches for coastal zones might be achieved. 4.1 Some theoretical and practical considerations The first presentation by Hannu Vartiainen provided a sound theoretical perspective by offering an outlook on holistic approaches from game theory. He outlined that economics offer a language to talk about problems and stressed the need to find a common language. From an economists point of view, the crucial point in ICZM are incentives. This is due to the fact that the standard answer from economics to scarce resources - the market approach - does not work with natural resources. Therefore, with natural resources and corresponding market failure, regulatory acts are necessary, such as taxes, quotas or restrictions. The key question here is: Who should regulate? If power is distributed to the wrong authority, it can create free-riding problems. Therefore, the second best solutions seems optimal, which is to give the right to the stakeholders. Stakeholders here are all affected communities, be 11 Input to this part was provided by the presentations of Hannu Vartiainen ( Incentives in coastal zone management ) and Kitty Sommer ( Crossing borders with holistic approaches: The Storstrøm example. ) 8

10 they global, continental, national, or regional. Regulation should consider the subsidiarity principle and follow certain criteria for regulatory actions such as transparency, effectivity and simplicity (manipulation-freeness). This approach favours regulatory networks rather than hierarchies, since the latter are more vulnerable to manipulation. Kitty Sommer outlined holistic approaches from the practical side. Although the structures in Denmark are currently changing due to administrative reform, Denmark has a long tradition of coastal planning 12. In the 1980 s and 90 s a lot of development interests (wind energy, recreation) came up which had to be harmonised. Coastal planning was integrated into the planning act as early as The Danish ICZM both for national and international projects takes place at three interacting levels: 1) the overall strategy (vision, development perspectives); 2) implementation in spatial planning; 3) local level in an Agenda 21 way. ICZM projects involve the participation of stakeholders from different administrative levels. The crucial question is how the interaction between the different administrative levels works. Sommer also suggested some indicators for ICZM such as land use change, water quality, biological diversity, nature protected areas, recreation, tourism and suggested that their elaboration could take place in international networks. 4.2 Features of integrated approaches It became clear during the following discussion that several aspects have to coincide to reach holistic solutions. These points are briefly mentioned here and will be further elaborated in the conclusions and recommendations of chapter 6. Firstly, common, clear and explicit spatial visions are needed. Sustainable development, for example, does not qualify as such as vision because it is too open for personal interpretation. Second, a long-term perspective has to be employed to disconnect ICZM processes from changing political coalitions and political leadership. This is also a matter of generating proper knowledge and continuity/maintenance of knowledge and data. Third, participation and involvement of concerned stakeholders is necessary, also to elaborate and support common visions. In addition, participation can create awareness for ICZM processes and forster involvement in tangible ICZM tasks. 12 ICZM is currently part of the regional planning system. After the administrative reform in Denmark, the responsibility for ICZM will be at the municipal level. 9

11 Fourth, communication matters greatly. This refers both to a common language which needs to be developed and to communication skills, i.e. that content and messages are comprehendible. Language and communication skills also have to be applied with and conveyed to the stakeholders. 5 GOOD PRACTICES The following part of the workshop 13 focussed on Good practices and was meant to shed some light on how these principles might be applied in tangible projects. If possible, some answers should be gathered on project aims, occurring problems and methods of conflict resolution. Ieva Rove talked about NATURA 2000 in Latvia coastal zones. As main problems she identified the fact that the project success depends on personalities and on the local municipality. In the open sea coast areas, development often proceeds planning processes and the Riga gulf faces problems of over-recreation. In general, planning is fragmented by regions, local municipalities with no common guidelines yet. NATURA 2000 action also only encourages point-to-point action. However, she concluded that Latvia has only just started its ICZM process and could be catching up. The next two good practice examples seem more advanced as far as problem solution is concerned. 5.1 Baltic 21 Lighthouse projects Angela Schultz-Zehden introduced an assessment of INTERREG IIIB for Baltic 21. Here, several so-called Lighthouse projects were identified which are to demonstrate sustainable development in action. Criteria for these projects include regional impact and high visibility, added value and innovative approaches, cross-sectoral character, a multi-stakeholder approach, and a transnational outlook, i.e. at least 3 countries are involved as project partners. Baltic 21 Lighthouse projects on ICZM-related topics include BaltCoast (on spatial planning and ICZM), NewHansa (on sustainable ports), and Agora (on sustainable tourism). These are three of several 14 ICZM-related projects co-financed by the BSR INTER- REG IIIB programme. It was concluded that cooperation between Baltic 21 and INTER- REG offers mutual benefits: INTERREG is the most important funding source for Baltic 21 lighthouse projects. At the same time, Baltic 21 is an important project source for IN- 13 Input was provided by three presentations: Ieva Rove talked about Natura 2000 in Latvian Coastal Zones, Ronald Wennersten presented Coastman and Angela Schultz-Zehden introduced Baltic 21 Lighthouse Projects: Assessment of INTERREG IIIB BSR. 14 Others are: ASTRA (Developing Policies & Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change in the Baltic Sea Region), Baltic Master (maritime safety), BERNET (Integrated Management of Catchments), Coastman (conflict resolution, see below), CoastSust (exchange between protected areas), SEAREG (planning and rising sea levels), SuPortNet (networks of marinas and linkages to tourism facilities) and Watersketch (River Basin Planning). 10

12 TERREG as far as sustainable development is concerned and can serve as a multiplier and distributor of project results. Benefiting from previous project and evaluation experiences, Ms Schultz-Zehden also introduced the PLANCOAST project which just started under INTEREG IIIB CADSES. Pilot projects areas are located in the Baltic, the Mediterranean and the Black Sea. Project aims include an analysis of spatial planning s role in ICZM and data collection by using Geographical Information Systems (GIS). Maritime spatial planning for offshore areas as a new planning instrument is also to be introduced in the participating regions. One of the project outcomes will be policy recommendations for the local and the national level on the implementation and further development of ICZM strategies. The project also tries to create links between Baltic 21, HELCOM, the United Nations Environment Programme/Mediterranean Action Plan (UNEP/MAP) and the Black Sea Commission. 5.2 The Coastman project The Coastman project was introduced by Ronald Wennersten. Its objective is to demonstrate the conditions under which spatial conflict resolution can be handled in a bottom-up perspective 15. The project is designed around different practical case studies in several BSR countries that are mainly connected to port development. Coastal zones are defined in a problem-oriented way, i.e. along potential use conflicts, such as harbours, beaches, natural reserves, residential areas and coastal fishing areas. The actors involved in the project include universities, municipalities, companies and NGOs; mutual communication and integration processes are ensured by information events, seminars, workshops and direct enquiries. Additional methods which are used in case study research include risk assessment in environmental conflict solution, scenarios and visions, hearing and policy dialogues with stakeholders, frame analysis (i.e. how do stakeholders frame a situation) and indicators for sustainable development. Taking the Loudden Oil Terminal in Stockholm as an example, Wennersten outlined how administrative and legislative arenas often fail to effectively address environmental problems. In this concrete example, the Stockholm city government decided to close down the biggest regional oil terminal, which is located in the middle of the city, until However, the city government failed to propose alternative land uses and now there are many questions and expectations from stakeholders. This example shows how administrative or legislative decisions often do not resolve basic issues under discussion, the underlying controversies remain unsolved, and more lawsuits are to be expected in the future. Successful 15 For further information visit 11

13 conflict resolution strategies consist in a combination of measures, and often involve third, neutral parties. Conflicts should be addressed early in the process to come to an agreement. Possible problems in conflict resolution include that, in case of sensitive political issues, cities or municipal actors not sure how free they are to act. In addition, it can be quite difficult to get information and a change of key persons is also often problematic. Wennersten draw several conclusions for future projects based on his Coastman experiences. First, the commitment of all partners, including the higher levels of government and administration, is necessary. Since planning often involves long-term processes, alternatives (or backups ) for key persons are needed. Second, he regarded more flexible project designs (away from the 3-year pattern) and less auditing and reporting work, especially for project lead partners, as beneficial. Third, he stressed the need for better and more harmonised communication: Half of the problem with communication is related to the fact that people use different words for the same thing. The other half is related to the fact that people are using the same word for different things. The following discussion showed that most of the participants agree with this view on things. A better communication of project results, especially from INTERREG projects, was also considered necessary. Besides, a longer project phase and consideration of the often timely and costly conception phase were regarded as important. 12

14 6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER ACTION Summing up, the authors would like to draw some conclusions and give recommendations for further discussion and practical guidance. While they received important input from the workshop presentations and discussions as well as other sources 16, they reflect solely the view of the authors. The recommendations are divided into four parts and pick up topics which seemed of major importance both in the conception phase and during the workshop. Conclusions one to three are of a general manner, with each focussing on one spatial scale (transnational, macro-regional, regional). The fourth conclusion then exemplifies the first three conclusions along the subject of ICZM. The recommendations on Trans-European Transport Networks (TEN-T) 17, which also emerged from the COMMIN project, stressed the necessity for reducing insecurities in multi-level systems by means of good governance criteria and a functional rather than a territorial conception of space. Multi-level strategies are implemented and accentuated by new innovative arrangements between different levels (vertical integration) as well as new and discursive modes of governing at the local and regional level such as networks and stakeholder participation (horizontal integration). Projects pursuing multi-level strategies and integration should be used for project monitoring and controlling at different political levels. The practical relevance of these projects and the employability of new modes of governance can only be conceived through critical reflection in an iterative and learningoriented process. Five guiding principles should be considered, which can be employed at different spatial levels as programme criteria (transnational level), process criteria (macroregional level) as well as project criteria (regional level): 1) The principle of sustainability: The definition of sustainability used here goes beyond the integration of economic, ecological and social needs. It mainly describes a strategic outlook on the future, based on a teleological approach and a long-term perspective; 2) The principle of goal achievement: The principle of goal achievement can be described as realistic, well-defined aims and the feasibility of targets; 3) The principle of governance mainly encompasses institutional and organisational aspects as well as steering, controlling and monitoring; 4) The principle of adaptivity refers to learning capacities and flexibility; 16 Such as BaltCoast (2005), Schernewski (2006), STRING II. 17 Sea above, as well as 13

15 5) The principle of transferability concerns the interaction with the overall framework and environment and works in two directions, both as the dissemination of results as well as the absorption of new impulses. 6.1 First Conclusion: Coordination - The transnational level As outlined before 18, these recommendations are based on a multi-level governance approach where each of the three spatial levels transnational, macro-regional and regional has its own responsibilities and tasks. For the transnational level, i.e. the INTERREG programme area like the Baltic Sea Region, the five guiding principles can be translated into programme criteria in the following way: Coordination: Recommendations for the transnational level (BSR) Key actors: BSR INTERREG Programme level, Council of the Baltic Sea States (CBSS), Baltic Development Form (BDF) Principles Sustainability Goal Achievement Governance Adaptivity Tasks & Aims Application of a teleological and sustainable perspective through: Horizontal coordination of BSR nation states Joint positioning regarding the Territorial Agenda of the European Union and the Lisbon and Gothenburg Strategies Elaboration of a Joint Baltic Sea Region Policy Integration of joint sectoral objectives (such as a clean Baltic Sea, security, innovative regional development) through a joint vision which is both operational and feasible Definition of joint minimum standards for good governance in the Baltic Sea Region Agreement on procedures, routines and control systems. Identification of planning differences and barriers for implementation Reduction of obstacles to transnational cooperation through communication and consulting tools 18 See above, page 3. 14

16 Principles Transferability Tasks & Aims Evaluation of process criteria and process results (macroregional level) Evaluation of project criteria and project results (regional level) Examination of compliance with joint Baltic Sea Region Policy Checking of transferability of results to other spatial contexts Adoption of results from other spatial contexts 6.2 Strategic Planning The macro-regional level: Macro-regions (or transnational development zones) are the medium level of the underlying multi-level governance model. They are organised along functional spaces, such as transport linkages and infrastructures, city networks, corridors of regional development, cultural landscapes, etc. They should combine functional organisation with a strategic perspective on regional development (conditio sine qua non). This strategic perspective interprets the overall aims of connectivity and cohesion for the spatial conditions of the macroregion (sufficient condition). Macro-regions serve as coordinating units, both in a regional and a vertical perspective. They can only fulfil their function as integrators and linking agents for strategic planning if they dispose of a joint institutional and sustainable structure. Although the development of macro-regions is desirable, they are not formally established spatial structures yet. Therefore, the following process criteria should be seen as ideals. Strategic Planning: Recommendations for the macro-regional level Key actors: Functional macro-regions with a certain institutional structure, such as Barents Region, COINCO, STRING, etc. Principles Sustainability Tasks & Aims Agenda Setting: Transfer of transnational guidelines into macro-regional framework Consideration of transnational visions and coordination of own macro-regional vision Formulation of strategic objectives for the macro-region 15

17 Principles Goal Achievement Governance Adaptivity Transferability Tasks & Aims Selection of strategic projects according to the thematic and monetary focus of the macro-region Cross-linking of selected strategic projects in thematic, organisational and spatial respect Promotion of investments: development of regional investment models together with the resident investment banks; reduction of risks Linkage of the different support programmes (e.g. INTERREG IIIA, LEADER, URBAN, EQUAL) Macro-regions can serve as interfaces/navigators in several respects: In recruiting strategic partners (politicians, banks) which can be incorporated into different project contexts As connectors between the national and the regional level, between different sectors and between the nation states To obtain and ensure political support To ensure consistency of key actors Harmonisation of different planning cultures by initiating cooperation and resulting joint learning processes Absorption and reduction of coordination problems which are based on cultural differences by establishing routines of behaviour Success Indicator: Establishment of networks Elaboration, testing and diffusion of model solutions and instruments for the efficient management of transnational development zones (macro-regions) 16

18 6.3 Implementation of strategic projects The regional level Transnational and strategic planning in macro-regions rely on their implementation through projects in regional contexts. For the individual projects within the macro-regions, we suggest a two-tier procedure, where only those projects that have successfully mastered the first phase will be eligible for funding in the second phase. Such a contest-oriented approach could not only increase the effectiveness and efficiency of the INTERREGprogramme 19, but also promote the synchronisation of programmes and a better interconnectedness of projects. The suggested two phases are: 1) Conceptualisation and statement of interest 2) Clarification and elaboration of project planning (partners, staff, etc.) While the recommendations for the transnational and the macro-regional level only encompassed aims, we will try to make the aims verifiable by giving concrete indicators for the regional or project level and therefore employ a slightly different structure. The aims and indicators given in the following are neither mandatory nor exhaustive. Their priority and relative importance should be defined by the programme level or the macro-region. Phase 1: Conceptualisation and statement of interest (regional level) Guiding principle: Sustainability Aims Transnational project design, joint transnational solutions aspired Innovative integration of transnational and macro-regional guidelines in target formulation of the project Contribution to macro-regional cohesion processes Indicators o Number of partner countries o Partner quality: diversity, adequacy, qualification o Transnational relevance of output o Matching of project target with transnational programmes and visions (Gothenburg and Lisbon strategy, ESDP) o Incorporation of content-related priorities of the macro-regional level (innovation, etc.) o Relevance of tackled problems (joint cross-border problems, reference to up-to-date problems, societal relevance) o Long-time perspective o Cooperation aspect, network building, communication o Cross-sectoral relevance 19 Of course such an approach would also require a more flexible application and financing procedure than the current handling by the INTERREG programme. 17

19 Phase 2: Clarification and elaboration of project planning (regional level) Guiding principle: Goal Achievement Aims Significance of the project for the region and for the macroregion Outline of planning relevance Cost effectiveness and financial planning Guiding principle: Governance Indicators o Description of the added value of the project (cost-benefit-assessment) o Linkages to (existing) project clusters and connecting factors with other macro-regional projects (synergy effects) o Description of linkages of spatial planning with sectoral planning o Interdisciplinary approaches o Outline of multi-level strategies (local/regional/ national) o Realistic appraisal of potential planning problems (risks, obstacles, conflicts, possibilities of exerting an influence) o Outline of individual measures and of investments in relation to the overall project budget o Outline of measures for preparing investments and assessment of expected investments / future developments o Assessment of possible follow-up costs and follow-up investments o In-depth schedule of tasks Aims Network building (i.e. networks of project partners) Concept for embedding the network into the region Indicators o Strategy for establishment of partner network o Denomination of key actors, role assignment, elaboration of cooperation and control structure o Elaboration of network management and communication strategies o Commitment of partners (liabilities, responsibilities, engagement) o Ensuring of political support for the project (strategic partners at the national and the regional level) o Willingness of third parties to invest (potential cofinancing, public-private partnerships) o Involvement of stakeholders to increase regional acceptance of the project 18

20 Guiding principle: Adaptivity Aims Knowledge transfer within the project Indicators o Harmonisation and synchronisation of individual measures within the project o Organisation and development of joint problem solving o Internal communication and exchange Guiding principle: Transferability Aims Knowledge transfer into the region Knowledge generation and added value for future projects Indicators o Networking and linking of the project with strategic players/actors o Marketing and public relations, external presentation of the project (e.g. awareness-raising campaigns, public visibility of the project, communication strategy) o Problem-oriented trainings and qualifications o Networking with other projects and transfer of know-how o Description of learning processes (e.g. work routines, developing joint standards, cultural rapprochements, conflict resolution strategies) o Transferability of solutions to other areas of BSR spatial development 19

21 6.4 Exemplification: ICZM in a multi-level perspective The criteria outlined above are now exemplified along the subject of ICZM, with the first part outlining general measures for ICZM in a multi-level perspective and the second part giving a blueprint for strategic project aims and indicators at the regional level. Coordination in ICZM: The transnational level (BSR) Principles Sustainability Goal Achievement Governance Adaptivity Transferability Tasks & Aims Application of a teleological and sustainable perspective through: Elaboration of a joint Baltic ICZM strategy which considers and harmonizes existing national strategies Provision of legal and regulatory framework for crosssectoral and cross-border ICZM projects Agreement on joint definitions (what is ICZM? How are coastal areas/coastal zones defined?) Creation of a joint vision on ICZM that integrates existing visions (HELCOM, VASAB, Baltic 21) and joins ecologic aspects with a social and economic development perspective Emphasis of strategic importance and functions of coastal zones for the Baltic Sea Region and elaboration of long-term goals Institutionalisation of ICZM at the BSR level, e.g. through a permanent coastal forum. Development of dynamic models for ICZM which allow for (long-term) changes Reduction of barriers for actors to enter into ICZM processes (less regulations, better incentives) Examination of compliance of existing measures with Baltic ICZM strategy Evaluation of existing ICZM projects and their results Adoption of ICZM results from other European sea areas (e.g. North Sea Region) 20

22 Strategic Planning in ICZM: The macro-regional level (e.g. STRING region) Principles Sustainability Goal Achievement Governance Adaptivity Transferability Tasks & Aims Interpretation of sustainability in relation to ICZM and balancing of the conflicting aims of economic, ecologic and social sustainability Elaboration of a macro-regional ICZM vision for synchronisation of conflicting uses and priority setting (interpretation of transnational ICZM vision) Set priorities for different and sometimes conflicting uses (e.g. ports, seaside resorts, nature conservation zones) and chose strategic projects accordingly Acquisition of investors for ICZM-related projects in the macro-region (e.g. tourism industry, port management) Linkage of projects under different programmes (e.g. INTERREG, Agenda 21) Establish routines and orientations for transnational stakeholder involvement Improve communication skills of involved actors and stakeholders, e.g. through trainings Provide communication and marketing strategies for ICZM Elaborate strategies to improve and increase commitment of partners Establish ICZM-related networks with different foci (according to ICZM vision and priorities) Analyse and harmonise coordination problems which occur from different priority settings Collect and inform about successful conflict resolution strategies in ICZM Make project results achieved at the regional level visible in the macro-region and organise distribution 21

23 Aims and Indicators for strategic ICZM projects at the regional level Phase 1: Conceptualisation and statement of interest (regional level) Guiding principle: Sustainability Aims Transnational project design, joint transnational solutions aspired Integrated and multidimensional approach Contribution to transnational cohesion processes Indicators o Number of partner countries o Partner quality: diversity, adequacy, qualification o Transnational relevance of output o Consideration of two or all three relevant dimensions (ecology, economy, society), according to priority setting at higher levels o Integrated perspective on coastal zones based on consideration of land-sea interactions o Consideration of strategic importance and functions of coastal zone as outlined by the transnational level o Consideration of macro-regional ICZM vision Phase 2: Clarification and elaboration of project planning (regional level) Guiding principle: Goal Achievement Aims Significance of the project for the region and the macro-region Outline of conflict resolutions strategies Indicators o Description of the added value of the project (costbenefit-assessment) o Linkages to existing ICZM projects and connecting factors with other macro-regional projects (synergy effects) o Description of tackled conflicts because of different use interests and suggested approaches to conflict resolution o Measures for conflict resolution (e.g. involvement of third parties) o Description of approaches for overcoming the land-sea divide o Outline of multi-level strategies (local/regional/ national) 22

24 Cost effectiveness and financial planning Guiding principle: Governance Aims Network building (i.e. networks of project partners) Concept for regional embeddedness Stakeholder involvement strategy Guiding principle: Adaptivity o Outline of individual measures and of investments in relation to the overall project budget o Outline of measures for preparing investments and assessment of expected investments o Assessment of possible follow-up costs and follow-up investments o In-depth schedule of tasks Indicators o Strategy for establishment of partner network o Denomination of key actors, role assignment, elaboration of cooperation and control structure o Elaboration of network management and communication strategies o Commitment of partners (liabilities, responsibilities, engagement) o Ensuring of political support for the project by strategic partners from environmentalists, spatial planners and regional developers. o Willingness of third parties to invest (e.g. ports industry, tourist industry) o Outline of planned stakeholder involvement (as early as possible) and envisioned measures o Strategy for raising public awareness and acceptance of ICZM o Planned measures of public information campaign o Description of potential investments resulting from stakeholder involvement o Outline on different dimensions of stakeholder involvement (local-regional; cross-border solutions) Aims Improve communication in cross-border and cross-sectoral perspective Indicators o Harmonisation of ecological, economic and social measures o Continuous communication processes between project partners to ensure cross-border perspective on problem solving o Agreement on key terms of project and cross-border definition work 23

25 Guiding principle: Transferability Aims Knowledge transfer into the region Indicators o Diffusion of conflict-resolution strategies and solutions to higher spatial levels o Marketing and awareness-raising for ICZMrelated achievements in regional development o Qualification of stakeholders for ICZM processes (e.g. conflict resolution strategies, communication skills) o Networking with other macro- regional projects o Transfer of know-how with ICZM projects from other regions 24

26 REFERENCES Presentations All presentations were given at the COMMIN thematic workshop Integrated Coastal Zone Management in the Baltic Sea Region: Towards a Systemic and Regionalised Approach, Riga, 25 th April Cieślak, Andrzej (2006): On some cognitive problems in ICZM. Granholm, Kaj (2006): HELCOM and the GEF Baltic Sea Regional Project from regional approach to actions in ICZM. Heinrichs, Bernhard (2006): Integrated coastal zone management challenges for coastal regions: The VASAB perspective. Povilanskas, Ramunas (2006): Transboundary ICZM in SE Baltic Sea Region. Rove, Ieva (2006): NATURA 2000 in Coastal Zone of Latvia. Schultz-Zehden, Angela (2006): Baltic 21 Lighthouse Projects: Assessment of INTERREG IIIB BSR. Sommer, Kitty (2006): Crossing borders with holistic approaches: The Storstrøm example. Vartiainen, Hannu (2006): Incentives in coastal zone management. Wennersten, Ronald (2006): Coastman Coastal Zone Management in the Baltic Sea Region. Other Sources Bache, Ian/Flinders, Matthew (2004): Multi-level governance, Oxford. BaltCoast (2005): The Role of Spatial Planning in Integrated Coastal Zone Management: Findings and Recommendations from the Interreg IIIB BaltCoast Project, Executive Summary (April 2005). Commission of the European Communities (2006): Towards a future Maritime Policy for the Union: A European vision for the oceans and seas, Green Paper, COM (2006) 275 final, , Brussels. Commission of the European Communities (2001): European Governance: A White Paper, COM (2001) 428, , Brussels. Commission of the European Communities (2000): Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on Integrated Coastal Zone Management: A strategy for Europe, COM (2000) 547 final, , Brussels. HELCOM Recommendation 24/10: Implementation of Integrated Marine and Coastal Management of Human Activities in the Baltic Sea Area, Adopted 25 June 2003, having regard to Article 20, Paragraph 1 b) of the 1992 Helsinki Convention. HELCOM Recommendation 21/3: Sustainable and Environmentally friendly Tourism in the Coastal Zones of the Baltic Sea Area, Adopted 20 March 2000, having regard to Article 20(1), Paragraph 1 b) of the 1992 Helsinki Convention. 25