sou · GWB348EN · 2009-01-01 00:00:00 — The regional plans should also include this type of area within the baseline, since it will otherwise be diffi- cult to build up a holistic view of the sea and its exploitation and protection. How the formal responsibility for planning should be allocated between municipalities and regions in this case needs to be examined further. Consideration should be given to the ques- tion of whether it is possible to allow comprehensive plans and regional plans to overlap one another. In this case, it must be made clear what legal status the plans have in relation to one another. In the economic zone, central government must have full responsibility for spatial planning. To that end, a govern- ment authority for spatial planning should be appointed. This authority should also be given responsibility for supporting the planning by regional bodies and for hearing appeals regarding the plans established by the regional bodies. Guaranteeing the legality of the planning system requires for- malised mechanisms for appeals. When a regional plan has been adopted and the government authority has ruled on the appeal issue, the possibility of further appeal to the Government should be open to the region, the municipalities and other parties con- cerned. As regards the economic zone, the competent authority should produce proposals for a spatial plan. Authorities, regional bodies and others concerned should be given the opportu- nity to submit views regarding the plan. Planning of Swedish sea areas must thereafter submit the proposed plan, together with its own comments and an account of the views received, to the Govern- ment, which should take a decision on it. A planning system must take strategic, practical, organisational and cooperation-oriented issues into consideration. Be monitored and developed by a central government authority and applied by other authorities and regional bodies. Contain a clear division of responsibility between actors and define a clear hierarchy of decision-making. Be based on broad plans corresponding to the municipal comprehensive plans for land areas. However, in contrast to the comprehensive plans, the plans should include binding components. Regional bodies should be given responsibility for planning in the territorial sea and in sea areas within the baseline. A central government authority must have responsibility as regards plan- ning in the economic zone. The planning system must also: Handle development and exploitation issues as well as tradi- tional conservation matters. Include a system for zoning of the sea areas as a binding compo- nent within the plan. Harmonise with international and EU legislation on sea areas, as well as with Commissions view of how spatial planning should be developed. Be designed so that the concepts and standards in adjacent countries are relatively similar, in order to facilitate international cooperation. Contain provisions ensuring that spatial planning takes place in consultation with the international organisations con- cerned and with relevant actors in adjacent countries. Contain provisions relating to consultation with municipalities. For example, the municipalities must be consultation bodies in the planning process. Planning of Swedish sea areas Contain formalised mechanisms for consultation with the gen- eral public and stakeholders as regards planning within the base- line and in the territorial sea. Define the appeals procedure regarding regional spatial plans. It is furthermore a question of managing the planning model that is proposed here, which also includes responsibility for ensuring that spatial plans contribute to good management of resources as well as help to balance different interests. It is also a matter of highlighting the advantages of stakeholder cooperation and showing how different physical structures and links can be cre- ated or maintained. The latter can for example include ensuring the development of electricity network infrastructure in areas where there are good for the exploitation of windpower. The Inquiry has considered alternative solutions. One alterna- tive to appointing regional bodies as those responsible for spatial planning in the territorial sea is to transfer responsibility for planning in the territorial sea as a whole to central government. This could be done by giving the task to the county administrative boards. This would nevertheless entail a formal shift in the division of responsibility between central government and the municipali- ties, which breaks with Swedish planning tradition. This alternative has therefore been rejected by the Inquiry. The chapters that follow aim to define more precisely the com- ponents of the planning system; the changes that are required in the matter of organisational structure, the functions of authorities and legislation to create comprehensive and effective spatial planning. 4.3A government authority competent for spatial planning I propose that , and Planning be appointed the government authority with over- arching responsibility for planning in Swedish sea areas and spe- cific responsibility for planning in the economic zone. This responsibility also includes review of the spatial plans for Planning of Swedish sea areas which regional bodies will be responsible, as well as supervision with regard to regional planning. It also entails developing a zoning system and coordinating planning material. The activities of , and Planning will need to be changed in important respects because of this new assignment. Whereas , and Planning is today primarily the responsi- ble authority as regards inspection and control, it will in future also be competent for tasks of an executive nature. The pro- posed legislation and implementation inquiry should also clarify how this task should be integrated into the Boards existing remit. As mentioned above, there is a need to designate a competent gov- ernment authority for spatial planning in the economic zone in particular and for spatial planning in general. spatial planning is a new phenomenon within Swedish physical planning and, as a consequence, no Swedish authority cur- rently has any direct experience of these issues. Specifically, it is a question of responsibility for conflict-resolution and for sectoral coordination of the plethora of activities undertaken within the sea area. An important part of the overarching national planning will also entail review of the plans submitted by regional bodies. 4.3.2Responsibilities of authorities in the sea area A number of national actors are in Swedish sea areas or have a monitoring and control responsibility. Several of them also have a sector responsibility. International legislation is applicable in sec- tors such as and cable-laying. EU legislation applies in the fisheries sector. The national scope for action is thus limited by this legislation but it is not non-existent. The Government ulti- decides in several issues that affect exploitation and conser- vation in the economic zone. The competent authorities in these sectors are as follows: : responsible for energy production, energy distribution and wind and wave power. Planning of Swedish sea areas : responsible for the conservation and exploitation of fisheries resources, commercial fisheries, aquaculture and angling. Swedish Armed Forces: responsible for certain constructions, navigable channels and exercise areas in sea areas. Legal, Financial and : repre- sents the states right of disposition over public water. Swedish Guard: keeps watch and implements environmental protection measures at sea, as well as being responsible for border controls. : develops and monitors national environmental policy and legislation, evalu- ates environmental objectives and has responsibility for moni- toring and reporting on the state of the environment. : responsible for archae- ology and the cultural heritage. : out hydrography and safety inspection, provides infrastructure service, ensures the safety of lanes and also monitors them. Geological Survey of (SGU): responsible for geological surveys and other studies relating to geology and the extraction of . Permits for the extraction of sand, gravel and stone are issued by SGU. (): responsible for geo- technical issues, including shore erosion. Swedish Meteorological and (): responsible for meteorology and oceanography, applied research, planning and information data for climate, weather and water. The responsibilities of the authorities will remain relatively unchanged as a result of the Inquirys proposals. The change will consist mainly of their activities being better coordinated under the leadership of the government authority competent for spa- tial planning. Assessment of permit applications, for example for windpower and resource extraction, may perhaps need to be cen- tralised in one authority instead of being dealt with by the Gov- Planning of Swedish sea areas The Government should primarily retain responsibility for matters of principle relating to sea area that are sub- ject to negotiation with other countries and with the IMO. The government authority should be competent for general monitoring of the numerous international conventions and agreements, in order to be able to draw attention to any need for greater strin- gency or for further legislation. In this way, the Government can continually keep up-to-date the basis for establishing priorities, as well as being proactive in international environment work. 4.3.3The competent authority for spatial planning spatial planning is a new task in Swedish planning of which no Swedish authority has any previous experience as an overall concept. As regards the question of responsibility, it is important to make best use of the expertise of the relevant authorities with- out breaking up existing bodies. The objective has therefore been to strengthen the authority regarded as the most suitable and give it a remit to cooperate closely with the other authorities concerned, rather than to divide responsibility among several authorities. follows a reasoning about the present tasks and powers that relate to the existing planning tasks within the relevant authorities, with a view to illustrating the consideration the Inquiry has given to the question of giving responsibility to a specific authority. , and Planning is the national authority for matters affecting the built environment and management of land and water areas, physical planning, and management of built-up areas and housing questions. has a supervisory responsibility for the planning and build- ing system in , which entails monitoring the way in which legislation functions and is applied in practice. It has responsibility for the central administration of state support within its remit. It also has responsibility for the construction sector when it comes to environmental work and for environmental and disability issues linked to its remit. The Board coordinates, follows up and reports Planning of Swedish sea areas on fulfilment of the environmental quality objective A good built environment. Other areas of responsibility include announcing regulations, administration of matters that affect supervision, inspection and management, information about new or amended rules, follow-up of the application of the Planning and Act, the Regulation Act and parts of the Environmental Code. Other tasks are to monitor the development of physical plan- ning, to coordinate the government authorities application of Chapters 3 and 4 of the Environmental Code in accordance with Ordinance (1998:896) on the management of land and water areas, and to propose changes in planning legislation. The basis for the work is the Planning and Act, the Regulation Act and parts of the Environmental Code. The Boards responsi- bility is linked to questions of spatial planning through its responsibility for application of the management provisions in Chapters 3 and 4 of the Environmental Code and for various types of international cooperation that relate to spatial planning. It has currently no particularly designated responsibility for economic zone. The management provisions in Chapters 3 and 4 of the Environmental Code are, however, applied in deci- sions under the Economic and the Shelf Act. has been involved in the development of zone planning in but has limited experience of work on matters of spatial planning. (Swedish EPA) As regards planning issues, the Agency currently has responsibility for area protection (in accordance with Ordinance 1998:1252 on area protection) and supports the Government in its international work. That applies to overall coordination of nature reserves, national parks, Natura 2000 sites and areas protected by virtue of international commitments. In the course of 2008, the Agency has reported on a government mandate on the management and plan- ning within a pilot project based on the ecosystem approach, which primarily concerns the decision-making basis for spatial planning. Through its lead responsibility for the environmental objective Reduced Climate Impact, the development of renewable energy (including wind power) is a matter for the Agency, even Planning of Swedish sea areas though the has the chief responsibility for energy matters. In addition to nature conservation issues, the Swedish EPA also has explicit responsibility for outdoor life and hunting, which has relevance for areas and the sea. Beyond these focus areas, however, the Swedish EPA has no experience of managing spatial planning work. is described in its remit as a management authority for the conservation and exploitation of fish resources. The authority has a sector responsibility for environmental issues linked to its remit. Within this framework, the authoritys role is to coordinate, support and promote activities in relation to other parties con- cerned. It has responsibility for planning as regards fisheries catches and related area protection measures. The present functions of the authorities are inadequate to ensure well-functioning spatial planning. A government authority should be competent for assessments and considerations within the economic zone and should at an overall level follow up the work that is done in territorial seas and within the baseline. Central gov- ernment should retain responsibility, through the county adminis- trative boards, for ensuring that there is sufficient background material for spatial planning in the territorial sea. It can be considered appropriate that the authority that is to be competent for spatial planning should adopt a more or less sector-neutral approach. The Swedish EPA, which can be consid- ered a potential candidate since spatial planning shall be based on the ecosystem approach, currently assumes most of the major management tasks associated with planning environmental protection in . A planning function, with the Swedish EPA as the lead authority, can therefore lead to problems as regards retaining legitimacy among stakeholders who will be affected by the planning. There is a risk of the Agency, in this context, being seen as a representative for the environment sector whose interests should be considered in the planning process, even if the environ- Planning of Swedish sea areas ment and environmental protection should not be regarded as a sectoral interest. In the majority of neighbouring countries, the spatial planning sector comes under government functions for regional development and planning. A number of representa- tives of the sector with whom the Inquiry has been in contact con- firmed that they had not envisaged nature and environment units as potential candidates for shouldering responsibility for spa- tial planning, precisely because such units have interests to repre- sent in the planning. For reasons of legitimacy the Swedish EPA ought not therefore to be given the role of spatial planning authority. is nonetheless expected to cooperate on spatial planning questions with whatever authority is appointed, among other reasons to ensure that the ecosystem approach is satisfactorily applied. The Swedish EPA also has an important role in coordinating planning material as regards envi- ronmental aspects and the landscape. currently has a very limited role in planning since it has responsibility only for planning that relates to fisheries catches. To appoint it as the planning authority would entail far-reaching changes in the organisations tasks and remit. The Inquiry has considered this possibility but did not regard it as a good solution. It should be borne in mind that, even more so than the Swedish EPA, would be regarded as a sector representative in this context and, as a result, would not have the legitimacy that the function demands. The reorganisation of into an authority for resources, in which responsibility for planning would also be included, has also been considered but adjudged to be altogether too complicated to develop within the framework of this Inquiry. It would also entail transferring the activities of cer- tain other authorities to the resources authority and hence breaking up their present activities. The of a new authority with responsibility for spatial planning could theoretically be a possibility but there are a number of obstacles. For example, a spatial planning authority will have a limited task and therefore constitute only a small authority, which could not be regarded as justified from the point of view of cost. , and Planning must therefore be regarded as the most suitable authority to shoulder responsibility for spatial planning. Its role should be rein- Planning of Swedish sea areas forced in general through the receipt of clear powers in connection with its responsibility for spatial planning. Since the Board has previously only had responsibility for inspection, coordination of sector authorities and in certain cases general guidelines within its field of responsibility, the new instructions will entail a change in the authoritys remit to include tasks of an executive kind. The Inquirys proposal to include binding components in spatial planning is also a novelty in Swedish comprehensive planning. This entails the Board, as an authority, changing the direction of its activities to a certain extent by acquiring also the responsibility for reviewing the planning conducted by regional bodies. The Boards new direction may need to be reflected in a new name. It must also develop a new role with planning responsibility based on the eco- system approach. The legislation and implementation inquiry, which should be appointed prior to implementation of the propos- als in this Inquiry, should consider how , and Planning should develop this new function, as regards its organisation, expertise and other functions. The inquiry should also investigate how far the assessment of permit applications within the economic zone can be transferred to the Board. 4.3.5Instructions for , and Planning Section 4.2 provided a list of the components that should be included in spatial planning. A number of actors will have delimited tasks in relation to implementation. The Boards general tasks should specifically consist of the fol- lowing: To issue comments on its review of regional spatial plans. To review regional spatial plans. To draw up spatial plans for economic zone. To coordinate planning material nationally. To advise regional organisations in planning matters. Planning of Swedish sea areas To assume responsibility for developing the zoning system that is to be developed. To be responsible for some assessment of permits within the sector. To conduct a dialogue with private stakeholders, including windpower entrepreneurs. To conduct a dialogue with the authorities concerned in . To take responsibility for communication and cooperation with neighbouring countries. To maintain expertise on international legislation. To keep the Government, stakeholders and the general public informed about what is happening in the sector as regards conflicts of interest and environmental protection, as well as traffic and other operations. After regional body has finalised its spatial plan, a statutory review is held, in which the Board is given the opportunity to assess whether the plan considers fundamental government inter- ests. The following general government interests must be taken into account in the review: Health and safety. Environmental quality standards and management provisions. Planning of Swedish sea areas 4.4Regional responsibility for spatial planning in the territorial sea and within the base-line I propose that responsibility for spatial planning in the territorial sea and in sea areas within the baseline should be vested in existing regional organisations (currently regional cooperation bodies and regional planning associations). The regional bodies should have responsibility to develop and take decisions on spatial plans, i.e. comprehensive plans that include zoning, for the sea areas mentioned. In contrast to comprehensive plans, spatial plans should have legal force and should be subject to appeal. The municipalities and the Board should cooperate in the planning work. The legislation and implementation inquiry, which the proposes, should examine the need for, and possibility of, introducing a special chapter in the Planning and Act relating to spatial planning and its organisation. 4.4.1The present regional organisation for planning Experience of regional organisation is currently limited in . The municipalities are responsible for the greater part of Swedish physical community planning. The county administrative boards coordinate central government interests in the planning process. The Planning and Act, together with the Environmental Code, are the most applicable legal instruments for this work. The legislation also relates to watercourses and littoral water areas. The municipalities have sovereign right to determine develop- ment within their territory and to develop planning material in the sea areas under their jurisdiction, i.e. internal waters and territorial seas. Certain planning matters extend across municipal boundaries and can then be organised regionally. There is, however, only lim- ited regional physical planning. In these cases, it is a question of cross-municipality regional planning, on the initiative of the municipalities concerned, and with central government authorisa- tion. Regional physical planning today takes place within the Planning of Swedish sea areas framework of regional planning in County. There are various types of organisations at the regional level in the 14 counties of . In 11 of them, the municipalities have chosen to form regional cooperation bodies or similar bodies, which primarily have taken over regional development tasks from the county administrative boards. In the counties of and , a pilot project is in progress with larger regions embracing the county councils tasks, with a political superstruc- ture in the form of a regional board and regional assembly. One exception is the municipalities in , which have not yet decided how they should organise the regional development func- tion. For the time being, therefore, continues to have responsibility for regional development. At the present moment (Spring 2008), the future of the regional cooperation bodies and the pilot activities is unclear, since the issue is connected with the consideration currently being given to the proposals by . The final report by the Committee outlines a new regional administra- tive level, regional municipalities. It is proposed that they should replace the county councils and assume their tasks, powers of taxa- tion and constitutional position. Regional municipalities should be given the task of defining geographical regional interests, which includes overall planning of nature and water areas.