Committee of Senior Representatives (CSR) Nineteenth Meeting Brussels, Belgium October 2011

Transcription

1 Committee of Senior Representatives (CSR) Nineteenth Meeting Brussels, Belgium October 2011 Reference CSR 19/6/Info 1 Title BSSSC newsletter featuring a NDPHS Secretariat article Submitted by BSSSC Summary / Note This issue of the BSSSC newsletter includes an article by the NDPHS Secretariat, entitled Cooperation in health a regional response to regional challenges (page 8). Requested action For information CSR_19-6-Info_1 BSSSC_newsletter_featuring_NDPHS_article 1

2 September 2011 newsletter Investing in Europe s future Focus on selected cohesion policies vs. Strategy Europe 2020 objectives implementation. p.3 The EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region We implement the first European Macro regional strategy! p.5 Maritime safety in the Baltic Sea Region An international project within the Baltic Sea Region programme. p.7 19th BSSSC Annual Conference 5-7 October 2011, Szczecin photo: Marek Czasnojć Patronage of the Polish EU Presidency Ladies and Gentlemen, on behalf of the BSSSC Board and the Westpomeranian Region I have the pleasure to invite you to the: 19th Baltic Sea States Subregional Cooperation Annual Conference The EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region and the Cohesion Policy expectations and the role of the regions in the BSR, which will be held on 5-7 October in Szczecin, Poland. The conference shall form a debate on the effectiveness of the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region and the EU Cohesion Policy in the process of growth and integration of all the regions around the Baltic Sea. Today it is important to identify and to start new engines of sustainable growth in Europe. The experience gained so far indicates that the new development incentives must work towards strengthening European economic, social and territorial cohesion. As in the previous years, BSSSC will continue its active participation in the process of developing and reviewing the Baltic Sea Macroregional Strategy with an appreciation of its influence on tightening interregional cooperation. Therefore, the results of the conference will be taken into account in the review process of the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region and in the debate on future cohesion policy during the Polish Presidency of the Council of the European Union. The meeting will commence with an opening session under which high-level representatives of the Baltic Sea organizations and Polish administration will take the floor. After that session, the plenary session devoted to cohesion policy will address issues related to the impact of cohesion policy on the development of the whole Baltic Sea Region. Following the plenary sessions, the participants in four parallel sessions will have the opportunity to discuss numerous aspects of territorial cohesion, urban-rural cooperation, science, innovation, education and social cohesion. The outcomes of the parallel workshops will be concluded and presented during the closing session of the first part of the conference. The second day of the meeting will open the debate on the regions expectations towards the new programming period, which will lead to the final session focused on a discussion on how the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region can pave the way for regional growth and development. The BSSSC Annual Conference will be accompanied by the BSSSC Youth Event on 3-5 October with young people representing NGO s, student s self-governments, regional and city youth councils from the Baltic Sea area. The idea of the seminar is to create a place for sharing experiences and good practices in the field of youth voluntary work that improves the condition of local communities in the Baltic Sea Regions. The meeting also aims to prepare the youth for a discussion on such important European issue as cohesion policy and strengthening the dialog between youth and policy-makers. The 19th BSSSC Annual Conference shall be conducted under the patronage of the Polish Presidency in the Council of the European Union and will be hosted by the Westpomeranian Region. I very much look forward to welcoming you to Szczecin the capital city of our region. Olgierd Geblewicz Chairman of the BSSSC Marshal of the Westpomeranian Region For registration and a detailed program please visit: or contact bsssc@bssssc.com

3 page 2 Baltic Sea States Subregional Co-operation e d i t o r i a l The 1st of July 2011 marked the start of Poland s presidency in the Council of the European Union for the next six months. The Polish Presidency gets under way amid many serious economic and social challenges now facing the European Union. Poland s program and plan of activity are its response to those challenges. The second half of 2011 is also crucial for Baltic stakeholders. On 22 June the European Commission released the report on the implementation of the Strategy which included recommendations for improvements in the years to come. In late October, Gdańsk will host the 2nd Annual Forum on EU Strategy accompanied by the 13th Summit of the Baltic Development Forum. This will be, we believe an excellent consultation platform for indepth debates about cooperation in the Baltic macro-region. The 19th BSSSC Annual Conference held on 5-7 October 2011 in Szczecin will also significantly contribute to the ongoing debate. Apart from presenting regional points of view on the Strategy, the conference will also tackle the issue of the new programming period, as the voice of the regions is essential in shaping the cohesion policy. You can find more about the collation of the selected cohesion policies with the Europe 2020 objectives in an interesting article written by Mr Marcin Szmyt from the Marshal s Office. A sizable proportion of this second issue of the BSSSC 2011 newsletter is devoted to the general overview of the macro-region, presenting administrative and competency differences between BSSSC member regions (Prof. Janusz Ruszkowski from the University of Szczecin). Dr. Paweł Gut from the State Archive of Szczecin introduces the mutual contacts of the Westpomeranian Region with other Baltic countries. As in the previous release, the hereby presented issue also gives you an interesting insight into some of the ongoing Baltic projects and events. We also have the pleasure of presenting the main priorities of the German presidency in the Council of the Baltic Sea States, which in spring 2012 will coincide with the 20th anniversary of the organization. Have an enjoyable read! BSSSC Secretariat The Polish Presidency of the Council of the European Union The Baltic Sea region witnessed an unprecedented evolution over the past 20 years, becoming more integrated and more competitive as part of the European Union. However, changes that we have already witnessed made us even more conscious about the necessity of acting together to tackle the challenges of the future. There is still a lot to be done, first of all when it comes to removing existing barriers and improving effectiveness of our cooperation. The EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea region offers adequate tools, while proving that littoral Baltic Sea States attempt at meeting the new challenges in a cooperative manner. Only by joining our forces we will be able to succeed in tightening interregional cooperation, strengthening innovation and promoting the Baltic Sea region as an interesting place to live and invest. Therefore the Polish Presidency of the Council of the European Union pays special attention to the first review of the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region (EUS- BSR), planned for the 2nd half of The first review will be crucial for the further development of the Strategy. Therefore, while preparing the process we found it of utmost importance to consult not only the interested Member States, but also European institutions and other stakeholders active in the region. We highly value the commitment of the European Parliament, the Committee of the Regions and representatives of Baltic Sea regions as well as other partners, who shared with us their views and opinions. We welcome and appreciate the involvement of the Baltic Sea States Subregional Cooperation, where this years presidency is held by a Polish region, i.e. West Pomerania. The 19th BSSSC Annual Conference to be held in Szczecin on 5-7 October 2011 as well as the 13th Baltic Development Forum Summit and the 2nd Annual EUSBSR Forum to take place in Gdańsk on October mark important stages not only in the review process of the EUSBSR but also as adequate fora for broad discussions about the future of our region. We should use this excellent opportunity to deliberate on our common challenges and goals. We hope that the discussions and debates will result in valuable initiatives and new ideas on how to strengthen the cohesion and competitiveness of the Baltic Sea region as a whole. Moreover, as the current Presidency of the Council of the European Union we sincerely believe that the EU SBSR review process will provide a valuable stimulus for the further development of our region contributing to the full utilisation of its great potential. Beata Stelmach Secretary of State in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Poland

4 newsletter September 2011 page 3 Investing in Europe s future Focus on selected cohesion policies vs. Strategy Europe 2020 objectives implementation European Commission During his Fifth Cohesion Forum speech in January 2011, J.M. Barroso the President of the European Commission voiced wholehearted support for the cohesion policy right at the heart of the European project. He singled it out as the best European solidarity instrument, which nonetheless, in order to react appropriately to the challenges which the European Union is facing, must closely follow the economic objectives defined by Strategy Europa 2000 and in particular economic dedvelopment based on knowledge, environmental protection and social inclusion. President Barroso appealed to one of the primary conclusions of the Fifth Cohesion Report presented in autumn of last year. The Report confirms, that cohesion policy is the main tool which the European Union has at its disposal in order to implement Strategy Europa At the same time the Report devotes a lot of space to encourage concentrating on certain aspects and focus cohesion policy on a limited number of priorities. Encouraging investing which improves competitiveness will support the European Union in facing new challenges head on. No wonder then that the only key aspects in the current debate on the future of the cohesion policy are: aligning with the obejctives of Strategy Europa 2020 and focusing on chosen policies. Cohesion policy growth catalyst or one off benefit? The cohesion policy must be understood as a means for investing into Europe s future. Only then will it take its correct and rightful place amongst the policies of the European Union. In order to use the cohesion policy effectively requires one to break with the image of the policy as a tool for redistributing means to the poorest, most backward regions from a common budget. Enormous growth potential lurks within the cohesion policy, which provides an opportunity to take advantage of the potential of individual European regions. Deliberate and well planned cohesion policy implementation may yield tangible benefits for The cohesion policy must be understood as a means for investing into Europe s future. Only then will it take its correct and rightful place amongst the policies of the European Union. all European Union countries and regions. If only it would be conductive to the removal of the existing barriers to the common market, the result would be the attainment of more rapid economic growth and an increase of the overall competitiveness of the European Union. Thus it is important to include as many regions as possible within the cohesion policy. As far as possible, the funds, which are the tools for implementing the cohesion policy, should be addressed to all regions. Although it would be essential to focus to a larger extent on the weaker regions, which realistically would only have an opportunity to start investing into their own growth in a number of years.

5 page 4 Baltic Sea States Subregional Co-operation Ambitious objectives of Strategy Europa 2020 The spread of interventions within the scope of the cohesion policy should go hand in hand with a reform of the said policy, in order for it to become an effective tool used to implement the ambitious objectives of is important to focus the cohesion policy on a limited number of such priorities, so that they are consistent with the priorities of the Strategy Europa Nevertheless it would be worth remembering, that their selection should not refer to a list of qualifying expenditures but be based on defining through aims. Focusing more of the funds on a limited number of intervention objectives, priorities and categories will serve a more effective public intervention. Strategy Europa To that end, a reform of the cohesion policy is required in order to work out an integrated approach to development, uniting permanently all of the necessary policies of the European Union and establishing multi-sectoral coordination as well as comprehensive, multi-fund approach to the subject areas of Strategy Europa An across the board and comprehensive character of the cohesion policy together with a detailed plan for its implementation based on strategic programming, monitoring and evaluation is perfectly suited to boost the development processes. As well as to support European countries and regions in the implementation of the aims of Strategy Europa 2020, other words in the building of a green, innovative economy which uses all available social resources. An additional benefit of the cohesion policy in its support of the new strategy is the opportunity to set a strategic direction for the interventions of the said policy. It Less means better More focus on intervention shall translate into assigning more means to priorities associated with Strategy Europa The remaining allocation may be put to good use within areas where the regions differ by the starting point or potential. It would be best, if the priorities were subject to talks between the European Union and its member states and regions. If the countries and regions were to select themselves this limited number of priorities from a list provided by the Commission, then the selection process would take into consideration the resources, characteristics and competencies which are appropriate for the given region s potential. Such an approach would allow for an effective use of regional potential and would guarantee genuine influence over the economic and social situations on regional, national and even European levels. Focusing more of the funds on a limited number of intervention objectives, priorities and categories will serve a more effective public intervention. Curbing the number of cohesion policy s tasks will maximise the effects of intervention within the scope of the cohesion policy by which European added value will be strengthened. Those instruments and areas of support, which do not yield the expected results or bring about effects which would be also evident without the support from public funds, shall be scaled down or withdrawn. The savings resulting from such actions could then be channelled to areas where public intervention is indispensible. The continuation of the current cohesion policy objectives should be accompanied by an adjustment to account for the new challenges facing the European Union. Strategy Europa 2020 may be the answer to those challenges but only if it became the foundation for a focused, integrated and territorial approach to development, implemented on the basis of the current share of the regional level. Marcin Szmyt Director of the Regional Operational Programme Management Department Marshal s Office of the Westpomeranian Region

6 newsletter September 2011 page 5 Dr. Lars Friedrichsen The EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region We implement the first European Macro regional strategy! Wednesday 15 June 2011 at Mecklenburg-Vorpommern EU Office Boulevard Saint-Michel 80, 1040 Brussels The seminar organised by the Informal Baltic Sea Group (ibsg) brought together partners from the European Commission (DG REGIO), the European Investment Bank, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, The Nordic Investment Bank, The Nordic Environment Finance Corporation and the European Parliament to talk about the implementation of EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region. The discussion focused on the experiences and good practices of successful actors and demonstrated examples for partners, which would like to learn from the parties already active and to engage themselves more in this field. The participants of the seminar presented regional showcases and showed how these activities include neighbouring parties, which are not normally included in the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region, to raise awareness of its achievements and further promote more intensive cooperation. Mr Jaakko Henttonen from the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development presented the work of the Northern Dimension Environmental Partnership and pointed out how his organisation promotes cooperation between the European Commission, partner governments (Russia, France, Canada, Germany, Sweden, Finland, UK, Denmark, Norway, Netherlands, Belgium, Belarus) and international financial institutions (EBRD, NIB, EIB, NEFCO and the World Bank) to facilitate optimal financing structures combining loans, grants and local budget funding for implementation of its priority projects. Director Robert Hall from The Baltic Sea Unit of the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida) introduced projects developed by his organisation and illustrated how they promote cooperation between Sweden, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and the Russian counties of St. Petersburg, Leningrad and Kaliningrad using Sida money to help the cooperation get started. Mr. Tilman Seibert Director of the European Investment Bank presented the role of financial institutions in implementing the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region and started a discussion on how existing and future cooperation programmes and financial mechanisms should be geared and developed to accelerate the realisation of the EUSBSR. In light of the review of the strategy and debate on funding for all macroregional strategies from EU sources the seminar presented an active approach to the implementation of the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region and despite all the weaknesses of the EUSBSR, pointed out ways to make most of it. Sebastian Gojdź BSSSC Brussels Antenna Dr. Lars Friedrichsen

7 page 6 Baltic Sea States Subregional Co-operation Administrative and competency differences between BSSSC member regions A common characteristic of the member regions of Baltic Sea States Subregional Cooperation, which, by virtue of its objectives, supports decentralised forms of contact, is the fact that, in an administrative system of a country, within which the given region is located, it is the first level of regional government authority located directly below the national government level. Such an objective stems from the same idea which the BSSSC initiative has been following, in assembling the sub regions located in the space between international local initiatives and government initiatives (national). Despite such a primary objective which pertains to the membership of sub regions in the BSSSC, right from the outset of this form of cooperation in 1993, one may observe some fluidity of membership, which was and still is conditional upon changes (reforms) in administration systems of Baltic countries (comp. the 2008 administration system reform in Latvia, as a result of which, instead of the then 26 Latvian regions in BSSSC we now have 109). It is due to this reason that, as an example, in regions were members of the BSSSC, and now there are Therefore, the BSSSC s membership formula is open, and more significantly flexible (variable) and as a result of which, it does not require for membership fees to be paid. However the practice which characterises the system of administrative partitions of the ten Baltic countries where the BSSSC member regions are located became a natural source of significant differences amongst those regions (particularly in their territorial size, scopes of competence as well as in their economic and demographic potentials). Despite such glaring lack of symmetry it is possible to attempt to compare the current BSSSC member regions. The regional classification introduced by Eurostat within the scope of the EU, based on NUTS (Nomenclature of Units for Territorial Statistics) may be used for such a comparison. In using such a basis for the comparison we achieve four groups of BSSSC member regions (see table below). Only the largest regions, not only considering their socio-economic situations but also their territory, are to be found at the NUTS 1 level, other words the three German federal states (Bundesländer). These are undoubtedly the strongest BSSSC regions, with their own state parliament, prime minister, ministries, and in practice, competencies which are similar to those of a country. The second group comprises of eight BSSSC regions at the NUTS 2 level (Polish and Danish regions). As far as regional classification, these are basic units with their own regional policies looking for appropriate support from structural funds within the EU cohesion policy (this is particularly relevant with regard to Polish regions). The third group of BSSSC member regions is the largest, with 86 territorial units at NUTS 3 level (Norwegian fylke 2, Lithuanian apskritys, Finnish maakunat, Estonian maakond and Swedish lany) from as many as five countries (the other groups include regions from one or at most two countries). Among group three regions mostly small and medium regions aspiring for assistance from EU support programmes can be found, but mostly similar to each other with regard to the competencies at their disposal. All of these regions have their own prerogatives within the scope of health Comparison of BSSSC member regions based on the NUTS/LAU classification Group country Number of member regions Name of member regions in national administration system NUTS/LAU level I Germany 3 Bundesländer NUTS 1 II Poland 3 województwa NUTS 2 II Denmark 5 regioner NUTS 2 III Norway 20 fylke NUTS 3 III Lithuania 10 apskritys NUTS 3 III Finland 20 maakunat/landskop NUTS 3 III Estonia 15 maakond NUTS 3 III Sweden 21 lan NUTS 3 IV Latvia 109 novadi LAU 1 and LAU 2 N Russia 2 oblast/town not classified

8 newsletter September 2011 page 7 BSSSC Secretariat care, public transport, spatial planning, social issues, education, tourism and culture. In this large group of BSSSC member regions, one may notice certain differences in the political systems, which stem from longer or shorter territorial regional government traditions or the administrative make up of a given country and the ensuing degree to which the regions are developed. Regions from unitary countries (e.g. Estonia) as well as regions from countries characterised by strong regional governments (e.g. Sweden) can be found in this group. The directly elected political bodies at the Swedish lany, Norwegian fylke or Finnish maakunat, their significant independence and the ability to pass regulation enforced over the inhabitants of a given region are in direct contrast to, for example, Estonian maakond, which are a part of national administration are the source for their financing can be found in the country s budget. Similarly in Lithuania, the apskritys administration is a part of the national central administration. On the other hand the Estonian regions are represented externally, also at the BSSSC forum, by the Association of Estonian Municipalities. However the Estonian solution is not the standard for BSSSC or other words in countries where the administrative divisions at a level below that of the national government is based on a large number of small regions, this does not automatically translate i nto a cumulative form of representation (e.g. associations of regions) at the BSSSC. The 109 Latvian novadi constitute the fourth group of BSSSC member regions. These administrative units are so small that they have not been classified as regions by the EU and thus do not figure in NUTS. Novadi have been defined as Local Administrative Units (LAU) and they can be found at the EU levels: LAU 1 and LAU 2. 3 Socioeconomic and territorial development lie within their scope of competencies, however these are all within the framework of central planning. Two Russian (Kaliningrad oblast and town of Saint Petersburg) are not included in the NUTS and LAU comparative classification as for obvious reasons EU classification does not include that country. 4 It is thus beyond doubt that the BSSSC member regions are highly differentiated, just as the administrative systems and traditions of individual countries vary. Regions of more centralised countries (e.g. Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia) have a different level of self governance. On the other hand Polish, Finnish or Swedish regions are characterised by much wider competencies. Going even further, federal states of Germany have competencies similar to those of a country. Therefore the criteria used in comparative exercises of BSSSC member regions based on the level of self governance in a given country and the NUTS/LAU classification exhibit characteristics which further facilitate such attempts. In summarising one may conclude that BSSSC regional membership is: 1. variable with respect to their numbers, 2. open to new regions located at a level just below the national government, 3. asymmetric with regards to the parameters characterising these regions (size, scope of competencies, level of economic development, demographics, etc.). Undoubtedly the structure of BSSSC membership is complicated and even hybrid which determines the specific management of the internal bodies functioning within the scope of this grouping. Prof. Janusz Ruszkowski Political Science and European Studies Institute, University of Szczecin 1 BSSSC member regions are represented by their delegates at annual conferences. 2 The Norwegian regions have been classified according to NUTS based on the Norwegian membership of the European Economic Area (since 1992). 3 In 2003 only the three NUTS levels, out of the original five remained. The two bottom levels were renamed to LAU, as the administrative units of EU member countries which so far were in NUTS 4 and NUTS 5 groups lost the title of regions and have been labelled as Lau 1 and LAU 2. 4 However, one may notice that the Kaliningrad Oblast through its defined autonomy and location as an exclave has competencies similar to those exhibited by regions in NUTS 3 group with the possibility of passing local legislation.

9 page 8 Baltic Sea States Subregional Co-operation GERMAN PRESIDENCY An ambitious German CBSS Presidency programme On 1st of July 2011, after Norway, Germany took over the Council of the Baltic Sea States (CBSS) Presidency. The German Presidency coincides with the 20th anniversary of the Council to be celebrated in spring 2012, and the motto of the Presidency puts this as follows: 20 years of the Council of the Baltic Sea States: pioneer of cooperation and symbol of regional identity in the Baltic Sea Region. Indeed, it is this combination of concrete cooperation and identity-building, which best summarises the nature of the CBSS. known, the CBSS has five longterm priorities, i.e. economic As development, energy, environment and sustainability, education and culture and civil security and the human dimension. Furthermore, each Presidency chooses to focus on some particular priority fields. In case of Germany, one might say that basically all five long-term priorities are emphasised equally. Germany s Presidency programme, a 15-page document, details not only these priorities but also lists many concrete actions to be implemented. While the document and its shorter brochure-version can be found at the CBSS website, it is enough here to mention that such issues as maritime policy, maritime spatial planning, tourism, adaptation to climate change, Baltic Sea history project, protection of children and young people, combating human trafficking, youth cooperation, civil protection cooperation, to mention but a few, are highlighted. As many of the specialist networks, which are concretely dealing with these issues, follow the CBSS rotation system and will be chaired by Germany, we may expect well-coordinated results. In implementing the programme, German Presidency naturally emphasises close cooperation and coordination with other regional actors, such as the BSSSC. Of general interest might be that Germany aims to make greater use of the CBSS potential in implementing the EU s Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region. Another interesting notion is that utilising the fact that the Presidency will pass from Germany to Russia German Presidency aims at focusing on a programme to modernize the southeastern Baltic Sea Region, one particular focus being the Kaliningrad region. In the CBSS context, an innovative initiative is to promote public-private partnerships to this effect. The German Presidency will culminate in the Baltic Sea States Summit on May We have reason to expect that the Heads of Government may then conclude that the CBSS is in good shape as it starts its third decade. Christer Pursiainen CBSS Secretariat Cooperation in health a regional response to regional challenges Health is an area with enormous challenges and unexplored opportunities, where targeted joint regional action can bring added value and produce tangible results. The Northern Dimension Partnership in Public Health and Social Well-being (NDPHS) fosters macro-regional cooperation in health through a range of activities, such as policy development, facilitation of project development, coordination and support of healthrelated activities in the region, etc. One of the action areas prioritized by the NDPHS is the leading and coordinating the Health priority sub-area in the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region (EUSBSR) Action Plan. The EUSBSR addresses the growing challenges faced by the region, among them considerable disparities in health conditions. To fulfil the role it plays within the Strategy, the NDPHS, inter alia, fosters and facilities increased cooperation and coordination among relevant stakeholders aimed to ensure a broad participation in the implementation of the Strategy and promote contacts between partners in our region. While it has never been disputed that the Strategy is an internal EU strategy, it is also clear that it includes objectives and issues which call for constructive cooperation with non-eu countries in order to achieve desired results. It is with that in mind that the Council of the European Union has agreed that the Northern Dimension framework provides the basis for the external aspects of cooperation in the Baltic Sea Region. The NDPHS presents an example of pragmatic and successful collaboration between the EU and non-eu countries (the latter being Iceland, Norway and Russia) in fostering the objectives of the health component of the EUSBSR. A number of factors have contributed to this. Firstly, the NDPHS is a jointly created framework of Partners, who, irrespective of the structures they represent, work together for the benefit of all people in this region. Secondly, the NDPHS Strategy correlates with the EUS- BSR, to ensure that the health and social well-being related activities in the Northern Dimension area be implemented in a coordinated and efficient way and involve all relevant actors. NDPHS Secretariat View our website at to learn more about the Partnership and its activities.

10 newsletter September 2011 page 9 Maritime safety Maritime University of Szczecin Maritime safety Transport and Environment in the Baltic Sea Region (Baltic Master II) is an international project co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund within the Baltic Sea Region programme. Its aim is to improve maritime safety by integrating local and regional perspectives with emphasis on issues concerning pollution prevention, coastal zone management and on land response capacity to an oil spill at sea. The project Baltic Master II is recognised as a flagship project in the Baltic Sea Strategy of the European Union. Project partnership comprises 30 full partners and 18 associated ones and it includes entities from 9 different countries around the Baltic Sea. The fact that all Baltic Sea countries are represented in the project gives it a particular strength when carrying out its activities on maritime safety. The project partners range from local, regional and national authorities to research institutes, pan-baltic organisations and universities. Total budget of the project is over EUR 4 mil and its duration spans between 25 October 2008 to 24 January BM II continues works of its predecessor: Baltic Master I. The first BM project identified three main challenges for the future of Baltic Sea: initiate proactive on-land contingency planning, enforce safety regulations and develop the potentials of coastal management. The main objectives of the Baltic Master II project are: enhancing prevention of maritime traffic pollution, improving on-land response capacity to oil spills, enhancing cooperation between Baltic Sea states (regions, municipalities and local stakeholders) in the area of response to maritime accidents. Maritime University of Szczecin through its Maritime Traffic Engineering Department has actively participated in activities of the project. The main scope of MUS responsibilities has been construction/verification of stochastic model of oil spill accidents and, at later stage, construction of oil spill resources allocation algorithm (Contingency Plans), optimised in terms of costs and efficient operation time. Fig. 1. Long term simulation of oil spill accidents due to collisions.

11 page 10 Baltic Sea States Subregional Co-operation West Pomerania is a region with strong ties to other Baltic countries. In ancient times the Germanic people inhabiting Pomerania between the estuaries of the Rivers Odra and Wisła originally came from Jutland (Denmark) and Skåne (Southern Sweden) the proto-germanic cradle. The Germanic tribes left West Pomerania during the Migration Period (IV V Century AD) and were replaced by Slavic people (VI Century). The Slavs developed sailing and their boats reached many Baltic countries. Maritime University of Szczecin Fig. 2. An example of anti-pollution action simulation (PISCES II Simulator) Main scopes of using the simulator for improvement of anti-pollution action effectiveness have been: real time accidents simulations to anticipate their possible effects and improve anti-pollution actions (it is necessary to know the current weather conditions for this type of simulations). oil spill forecast for predicted accident positions (medium/ extreme seasonal weather conditions should be used for this type of simulations), recorded data can be used to optimise costs and response resource allocation. backtracking to determine which vessel caused an oil spill based on AISdata, recorded pollution and reconstruction of oil pollution spreading. staff training to improve coordination of rescue operations in order to optimise local contingency planning. Optimisation of response resources deployment, depending on reduction of costs is very important. Completion of all planned simulations, based on predicted ship accidents, is to give an answer to whether re-allocation of responses resources or their expansion are necessary. Protection of the Baltic Sea environment without bearing unnecessary costs is the main purpose of research conducted by MUS. To present partial findings of its research, MUS organised and hosted a project workshop the subject of which was Enhanced prevention of pollution from maritime transport. The workshop took place on 7-8 April 2011 and was addressed to project partners and local maritime sector stakeholders. Magdalena Markiewicz Maritime University of Szczecin During early Middle Ages in West Pomerania Jomsburg (Wolin) played a crucial role in these contacts. It was then a very rich city, a merchants republic, inhabited by a dozen or so thousand people (Slavs, Danes, Swedes, Germans, and Ruthenians), boats from all the Baltic regions as well as the North Sea moored and sailed from its quays. The inhabitants of Jomsburg and Pomerania succumbed in the 60s of the 10 century to the might of Mieszko I, but Jomsburg remained independent up to the 12th century. The naval power of the Westpomeranian Slavs, built up in the 12th century during the rain of Warcisław I was overcome in 1184 by the Danish fleet by the shores of Koos island (near Greifswald). In the 13th and 14th centuries with the onset of colonisation, granting of German town laws, West Pomerania found itself within the sphere of influence of the largest economic and political league of the Middle Ages the Hansa, whose influence extended over the countries at the shores of the Baltic and North Seas. Pomeranian towns merchants traded with many centres from Bergen in Norway all the way to Velky Novogrod in Russia. Skänor i Falserbo factories on the shores of Skåne played an important role in the economic relations, where Szczecin and other Pomeranian towns had their fishing depots. Szczecin participated in the Hansa war with Denmark ( ) which further consolidated the leagues domination over Northern Europe. In 1397 Eric 1, a Pomeranian Duke was crowned the King of Sweden, Denmark and Norway (Kalmar Union). He fought the Hansa domination over the Baltic. In however, he was dethroned, settled on the island of Gotland, which became his base for pirate expeditions all over the Baltic Sea. In 1449 Eric I escaped to Pomerania, Darłowo, where he hid as legend goes uncounted treasures, a testament to his pirate activities. Towards the end of the 15th century, Hansa begun giving way to the expand-

12 newsletter September 2011 page 11 West Pomerania contacts with the Baltic countries ing Netherlands merchants, and since the time of Bogusław X, the Pomeranian rulers have been curbing the independence of cities with regards to international relations. Through marriages, the Pomeranian Dukes of the House of Griffins were related to the rules of Baltic countries: Poland (Anna Jagiellonka, wife of Bogusław X), Denmark, Courland, Holstein, Mecklenburg and Lüneburg. Pomeranian merchants held trading privileges for Sweden, Denmark and Mecklenburg. In 1570 in Szczecin a meeting of Baltic Sea countries representatives involved with the Livonia War (Sweden, Denmark, Grand Duchy of Moscow, Poland, and Empire) took place. However, the attempts of the Pomeranian Dukes came to nothing and the war went on until The Pomeranian dukes found a balance in their relations with Sweden and Poland, even after the dethroning in Sweden of the Polish King Zygmunt III by his uncle, Karol Sudemański (1604). In 1627 the Thirty Years War ( ) reached Pomerania. In November the armies of the Empire arrived and in 1629 laid siege to Starlsund, which was being helped by the Danes and Swedes. In summer 1630, the King of Sweden Gustav II Adolf landed in West Pomerania and signed a defence treaty with the last Pomeranian Duke, Bogusław XIV. From that time, the Duchy of Pomerania becomes a base for the Swedes during the Thirty Years War as well as during other conflicts up to the Great Northern War ( ). After the Thirty Years War, West Pomerania was divided between Sweden and Brandenburg-Prussia. Since then, its place by the Baltic Sea was dependent upon the policies of authorities in Berlin and Stockholm. In the 18th century, the Prussian Kings build the port and town of Świnoujście which improved the possibilities of sea trade for Szczecin (fairway along Świna). In the 19th century, Szczecin was amongst the most important trading ports of Prussia, especially after introducing free shipping along the Sound in After the unification of Germany in 1871 its role deteriorated due to the influence of Hamburg and Bremen. At the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries Szczecin was one of the major centres of the shipyard industry (Vulcan shipyard). Świnoujście and Szczecin were also the locations where Prussian monarchs received the rulers of other countries. During the inter war period ( ) Westpomeranian ports fell into economic decline. The post war recession ( ) and then the Great Depression ( ) meant that their turnover did not reach the pre 1914 levels. The shipyards were also closed (in particular Vulcan shipyard in 1928). This state prevailed despite economic assistance from Berlin authorities until the end of German rule over West Pomerania. In 1945, as a result of WWII and the Potsdam Conference, West Pomerania together with Szczecin and the estuary of the river Oder became a part of Poland. Right from the outset, polish settlers attempted to restore the potential of the West Pomeranian ports. Already in 1945 ships sailed to Sweden and Denmark, not only from Szczecin and Świnoujście but also from Kołobrzeg and Darłowo. In the mid 50s of the 20th century, first new investments into West Pomeranian ports begun, new quaysides were constructed in Szczecin and Świnoujście (Świnoport I, Świnoport II). Both ports in the 60s and 70s of the 20th century were major centres of Polish coal exports to Scandinavia and imports of iron ore from Sweden. The shipyard in Szczecin built ships for many Baltic countries. In 1967 a ferry route was opened between Ystad and Świnoujście. Since the 80s of the 20th century, ferries from Świnoujście have been sailing to Copenhagen and Travemünde (Lubeck) and in the 90s also to Bornholm. Dr. Paweł Gut The State Archive of Szczecin

13 page 12 Baltic Sea States Subregional Co-operation Calendar Sept. Dec. 12/14 September Schleswig-Holstein XX Annual Conference of Ars Baltica 15/16 September Katowice The Benefits of Transnational Cooperation results and outcomes of the 13 transnational programmes 21/22 September St. Petersburg VI Annual International Conference Cross border cooperation: the Russian Federation, the European Union and Norway 21/22 September Szczecin Central European Transport Corridor Route 65 Ministerial Conference 22/24 September Kursk AEBR Annual Conference 23 September Gdansk Safe Shipping on the Baltic Sea 5/6 October Liepaja XI UBC General Conference 5/7 October Szczecin 19th BSSSC Annual Conference 10/13 October Brussels Open Days 2011: Investing in Europe s future: Regions and cities delivering smart, sustainable and inclusive growth 12/13 October Uppsala Baltic University Programme Rectors 20th Conference 17/18 October St Petersburg X All-Russian Forum Strategic Planning in the Regions and Cities of Russia 24/26 October Gdansk Baltic Development Forum Summit 2011, II Annual Forum of the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region 26/27 October Gdańsk-Karlskrona Baltic Master II Final Conference 28/29 November Schwerin The South Baltic Programme Annual Conference 30 November / 01 December Brussels BSSSC Board Meeting photo: Marek Czasnojć Szczecin Westpomeranian Region, Poland c/o Marshal s Office / Department of the International Co-operation ul. Korsarzy 34, Szczecin tel.: / 189 fax: bsssc@bsssc.com Brussels Antenna Regional Office of Westpomeranian Region in Brussels Rue Montoyer 31, 1000 Brussels tel.: fax: westpomerania@wzp.pl www: Skype: bsssc.pl design & dtp: 2code / Correction In 2010, the European Commission awarded Stockholm the title of European Green Capital It was not Malmö as stated in the last newsletter. While Malmö was among the finalists for 2012 and 2013, Stockholm was awarded the title in Our editorial staff apologises for the misprint. European Green Capital Hamburg