The Engagement of Territorial Knowledge Communities with European Spatial Planning and the Territorial Cohesion Debate: A Baltic Perspective

Abstract

Recent, dramatic spatial development trends have contributed to the consolidation of a unique territorial governance landscape in the Baltic States. The paper examines the transformation of this evolving institutional landscape for planning practice and knowledge, which has been marked by the disintegration of Soviet institutions and networks, the transition to a market-based economy and the process of accession to the EU. It explores the evolution of territorial knowledge channels in the Baltic States, and the extent and nature of the engagement of actors' communities with the main knowledge arenas and resources of European spatial planning (ESP). The paper concludes that recent shifts in the evolution of these channels suggest the engagement of ESP has concentrated among epistemic communities at State and trans-national levels of territorial governance. The limited policy coordination across a broader spectrum of diverse actors is compounded by institutionally weak and fragmented professional communities of practice, fragmented government structures and marginalized advocacy coalitions.

Acknowledgements

Giancarlo Cotella would like to thank the Alexander von Humboldt foundation (http://www.humboldt-foundation.de) for the financial support of his research activity. The authors also would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for providing us with constructive comments and suggestions.

Notes

1. The methodology for this paper involved a series of semi-structured interviews undertaken in late 2010 and early 2011 with some of the key spatial planning and regional development actors in the Baltic States, including academics, civil servants and practitioners active at the national and sub-national levels in both the public and private sectors. Identities have been concealed upon request of the interviewees. The data generated during this process have supplemented desktop analysis of relevant documents and databases, with a particular focus on the responses to the Green Paper on Territorial Cohesion and the relevant websites for Interreg and ESPON programmes and projects.

2. Chief Planner for Riga City in the inter-war period, whose ideas were influenced by the English Garden City movement and resulted in proposals for low density suburban development.

3. There is only one dedicated postgraduate programme in spatial planning available in the Baltic States (started at the University of Latvia in 2007).

4. The Estonian Association, for example, is a full member of the European Council of Spatial Planners, which provides opportunities for exposure to and engagement in European debates.

5. List of VASAB achievements identified at the 2009 Vilnius conference: (1) defined common vision and principles for sustainable spatial development in the BSR; (2) inspired transnational spatial planning policy documents within the framework of CEMAT and the EU; (3) provided a forum for discussion on spatial policy issues within the BSR; (4) improved basic knowledge on spatial development processes and challenges in the BSR; (5) initiated integrate coastal zone management and maritime spatial planning processes in BSR; (6) strengthened spatial planning at national and regional level (with the emphasis on new EU countries); (7) generated transnational co-operation projects and (8) contributed to InterreegIIC and Interreg IIIB operational programmes for BSR ad to overcoming incompatibilities among Interreg, PHARE and TACIS programmes.

6. Estonian stakeholders confirmed during interviews that the Estonia 2030 process has been informed and influenced by the VASAB LTP and that the influence of the latter could be seen clearly in many local and county-level planning documents.

7. Much ESPON data are presented at NUTS2 or NUTS3 levels and therefore provide only limited insights in terms of sub-national issues for the individual Baltic States, which in the ESPON space constitute as many NUTS2 regions.

8. EUROSILANDS project focusing on the sustainable development of the European islands included Saarema County in Estonia and the PURR: Potential of Rural Regions has stakeholder regions in the UK, Norway and Latvia.

9. All responses to the consultation are available at http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/archive/consultation/terco/consultation_en.htm

10. The Committee of Spatial Development is the coordinating organ of VASAB and may be closely associated with an epistemic community composed of experts from the different countries, whose expertise focuses on spatial planning and development in BSR.

11. Klaipeda County in Lithuania was a member of both Euroregion Baltic and the Baltic Sea Commission and Riga Region in Latvia was a member of the Baltic Sea Commission.