Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the 'Communication from the Commission on A northern dimension for the policies of the Union'
Date: 1999-09-15
Institutions: European Committee of the Regions
Subjects: EU policy, Northern Europe

23.12.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 374/1

II

(Preparatory Acts)

COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the ‘Communication from the Commission on A
northern dimension for the policies of the Union’

(1999/C 374/01)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

having regard to the Communication from the Commission on A northern dimension for the policies of
the Union (COM(1998) 589 final);

having regard to the decision taken by the Bureau on 10 March 1999, under the fourth paragraph of
Article 198C of the Treaty establishing the European Community, to draw up an Opinion on this subject
and to instruct Commission 1 ‘Regional Policy, Structural Funds, Economic and Social Cohesion and
Cross-border and Inter-regional Cooperation’ to draw up the relevant opinion;

having regard to the Draft Opinion (CdR 107/99 rev. 1) adopted by Commission 1 on 30 June 1999
(Rapporteurs: Mr Kauppinen (FI/ELDR) and Mr Virtanen (FI/PES);

having regard to the Committee of the Regions Opinion on The northern dimension of the European
Union and cross-border cooperation on the border between the European Union and the Russian
Federation and in the Barents region (CdR 10/96 fin) (1);

having regard to the Committee of the Regions opinion on Current and future EU policy on the Baltic
Sea region with specific reference to local and regional aspects (CdR 141/96 fin) (2);

having regard to the Committee of the Regions opinion on Spatial Planning in Europe (CdR 340/96
fin) (3);

having regard to the Committee of the Regions Opinion on Cross-border and transnational cooperation
between local authorities (CdR 145/98 fin) (4);

having regard to the report by DG XVI of 28 July 1997 on the Commission’s first meeting on the
Northern Dimension held in Rovaniemi on 18 March 1997;

having regard to the report of the European Parliament on the new strategy for arctic agriculture (1999);

having regard to the draft report of the European Parliament on the Commission Communication on A
northern dimension for the policies of the Union,

(1) OJ C 337, 11.11.1996, p. 7.
(2) OJ C 42, 10.2.1997, p. 6.
(3) OJ C 116, 14.4.1997, p. 1.
(4) OJ C 51, 22.2.1999, p. 21.

C 374/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

23.12.1999

adopted the following opinion at its 30th plenary session of 15 and 16 September 1999 (meeting of
15 September).

General comments

The Committee of the Regions is pleased to note that in
accordance with the proposals adopted by the Committee at
its plenary session on 12 June 1996, the Commission has
taken steps to define a European Union action programme on
the northern dimension.

The Finnish government’s initiative of 12 December 1998 and
the European Council decision relating to it provided a good
basis for the proposal by the Committee of the Regions to
draw up a definition of the EU’s northern dimension and for
the northern dimension to be taken into account in the EU’s
policies.

1.

Introduction: acquiring a northern dimension

1.1.
Finnish and Swedish accession to the European Union
meant that the EU acquired a new northern dimension. The
region is significantly different in terms of climate, location,
economic geography and geopolitics from other EU regions.
Northern regions are characterised by low population density
and long distances, which also differentiate local and regional
authorities in Nordic countries from those in the rest of
Europe.

In geographical

the northern dimension
terms
1.2.
encompasses regions with difficult conditions. The northern
periphery is a long way from the centre of the EU, which
entails higher costs for operators in the region. For example,
the natural environment and weather conditions are harsh and
unproductive. Taken together the above factors mean that the
economy and industry in these regions have not reached the
same level as in the EU’s wealthiest regions. The participation
of these regions in the single market therefore requires special
resources and support in the same way as in other less
developed regions. With regard to EU policy, this raises the
question of how the special requirements of the northern
dimension should be taken into account in internal policies, as
well as in external relations.

1.3.
Austrian, Swedish and Finnish accession have had a
significant impact on the European Union’s geopolitical pos-
ition, as will the upcoming accession. As a result of Finnish
membership the European Union now has a 1 300 kilometre
long common border region with the Russian Federation. This
border region is unique because of the enormous gulf in
standards of living and its cultural significance, as well as the
natural resources and environmental problems of north-west
Russia. This region has its strengths and weaknesses, which

both need to be taken into account when it is being developed.
A specific issue which relates to the external relations of the
northern dimension is how the EU-Russia border region and
cross-border cooperation should be developed.

1.4.
Closer links with north-west Russia and greater cooper-
ation with the EU are, however, also extremely important to
the EU as a whole, particularly as regards energy, transport,
environmental and security policy, as well as the removal of
obstacles to trade.

1.5.
Besides Malta and Cyprus, the next enlargement of the
EU will be to the east and the north, and the Baltic States and
the Baltic Sea will fall within this area. The Baltic will become
an internal sea of the EU. As the accession of Finland and the
other new Member States has given the EU a common border
with Russia and many of the CIS states, it has been argued that
a Mediterranean-style strategy is also necessary for the north.

1.6.
The northern dimension has emerged in many different
policy contexts. Because of low population density and climatic
factors, the northern dimension already became an issue during
Finnish and Swedish membership negotiations. Regional,
structural and agricultural policy support has been directed at
the region on the grounds of its remoteness, severity of
climate, particularly low population density and border coop-
eration with Russia. The Agenda 2000 decisions taken in
spring 1999 guaranteed the continuation of these measures.

The role of northern regions overall has grown con-
1.7.
siderably during the last decade. By now the cooperation in
the Baltic Sea region has developed into an outstanding
example of regional cooperation in Europe, encompassing
nearly all areas of politics, society and the economy.

2. Northern regions and their special conditions

2.1.
The concept of the Northern Dimension covers the
following area: from Iceland in the West across to North-West
Russia, from the Norwegian, Barents and Kara Seas in the
north to the southern coast of the Baltic Sea. The geographic
focus of the Northern Dimension concept is understood to be
on the countries bordering the Baltic Sea and on the North/
West Russian regions, as well as Kaliningrad.

2.2.
In terms of surface area, Sweden and Finland are
strikingly large Member States, representing 800 000 sq. km
of the EU’s surface area. The northern regions make up 2,5 %
of agricultural land in use in the EU and 38 % of forests.

23.12.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 374/3

2.3.
The average population density of EU Member States
is 115 inhabitants per sq. km. Norrbotten and Lapland, the
northernmost regions of Sweden and Finland, each have a
surface area of about 100 000 sq. km. This region is thus
larger than Luxembourg, Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark
and Ireland put together. The average population density of
these countries is 184 inhabitants per sq. km, compared to a
figure of just two inhabitants per sq. km in two of the northern
provinces of Sweden and Finland. Low population density
means that local markets are small and far from their export
markets, which restricts economic development. Equally, the
costs of maintaining public and basic services for citizens, as
well as infrastructure, are inevitably higher than in more
densely populated regions.

At 60o latitude there are about 170 days in the growing
2.4.
season, and in the EU’s northernmost parts there are only 130.
The EU’s Arctic and sub-Arctic regions include Finland, the
part of Sweden north of Stockholm, parts of Scotland and
certain parts of the Alps, in which total annual temperatures
remain as low as 1 300-1 400 degrees centigrade. The climatic
difficulties for agriculture in these regions with their short
growing and grazing seasons constitute a permanent obstacle
to competitiveness, in addition to which their small popu-
lations, remoteness and fragmented agricultural land increase
production costs. The strengths of Arctic agriculture are the
clean environment, special growing conditions, a low level of
livestock density, ethically viable and humane treatment of
animals, as well as the low use of pesticides and antibiotics.

2.5.
Finnish and Swedish membership have led to a large
increase in the EU’s forestry resources, with the result that the
EU is now self-sufficient in wood production. The EU gained a
completely new northern coniferous forest belt, a region in
which reforestation and sustainable use have been a pillar of
both the regional and national economy. These regions are
also home to Western Europe’s last areas of wilderness, the
recreational value of which is considerable for Europe as a
whole.

2.6.
The northern natural environment has special charac-
teristics and is highly vulnerable, as well as being rich in
natural resources.

2.7.
In northern conditions, the construction of infrastruc-
ture, buildings and technical maintenance networks has to
take account of the climate, and this raises costs. Heating costs
and the problems posed by winter transport are restrictive for
individuals as well as companies. Harsh climatic conditions,
especially in the northern parts of Sweden and Finland,
have given rise to specialised skills, working methods and
technology which might also be of benefit to other regions
with difficult climatic conditions. The natural environment of

the northern regions of Finland and Sweden provides a
particularly good laboratory for resolving the specific problems
of the north and for developing specialist skills.

2.8. Maritime transport in winter is a specialist area in itself.
For example, the majority of Finnish exports are transported
by sea. Ensuring regular transport requires the existence and
use of effective ice-breaking equipment.

The regions of

the Russian Federation which are
2.9.
directly adjacent to the EU include St. Petersburg (4,8 million
inhabitants), the surrounding Leningrad Oblast (1,7 million
inhabitants) and the regions of the Karelian Republic (750 000
inhabitants), as well as the Murmansk Oblast (1,1 million
inhabitants). This region effectively includes the Archangel
region bordering Murmansk (1,6 million inhabitants). In total,
about 10 million people live in these north-western Russian
border regions, making up 6,7 % of the entire population of
the Russian Federation. The Kaliningrad region, an enclave on
the Russian Baltic coast between Lithuania and Poland, has a
further 913 000 inhabitants.

2.10.
The circumpolar region is divided into the Arctic and
sub-Arctic. Economically diverse groups — according to
estimates, between 600 000 and 800 000 indigenous inhabi-
tants — have lived, and continue to live in this vast region.
These include hunter-fishermen, hunter-reindeer-herders, and
large lake fishermen. The traditional lifestyle of these peoples
partly illustrates how people have adapted to natural con-
ditions. For as long as can be remembered, northern indigenous
peoples have lived off the land, the sea, the ice and renewable
natural resources.

3. Natural resources and energy networks

Europe’s northern regions possess significant natural
3.1.
resources with enormous economic potential. These natural
resources consist of huge forests, ore, mineral, oil and gas
reserves as well as fish stocks.

3.2.
The EU is increasingly dependent on imported energy.
By the year 2020 it is estimated that the EU will import over
70 % of the gas which it consumes and over 90 % of its oil.
This underlines the need to diversify the EU’s energy pro-
duction sources and networks. It also increases the strategic
importance of energy sources located in North-West Russia.
The EU is already the main purchaser of Russian energy and
raw materials.

3.3.
Exploiting North-West Russian natural resources in a
sustainable way requires extensive research as well as signifi-
cant international funding to modernise existing production
plants and for new investment.

C 374/4

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

23.12.1999

3.4. When constructing energy networks,
the most
important thing is to create an extensive and comprehensive
gas network. With the electricity network, the emphasis will
be on the Baltic States and north-west Russia. Energy-saving
measures also need to be promoted, as well as the use of
alternative local and renewable energy sources. These measures
would directly help to improve the local employment situation
and to lower costs.

4. Security

The aim of greater cooperation between northern
4.1.
regions is partly to increase political stability and civil and
military security. Enhanced security is of central concern to
the local population.

4.2.
Greater openness and cooperation has also brought an
increase in crime. The fight against organised crime is
important
in the north for citizens as well as business
cooperation. Drug use is another growing problem in Europe’s
northern regions.

The discrepancy in living standards between EU and
4.3.
Russian border regions creates problems in the field of health
care and social welfare. Investment in the development of
basic health care in the Russian border regions is of vital
importance for the people living there and a prerequisite to
foster social stability.

5. The environment

The northern environment is highly vulnerable. Unfor-
5.1.
tunately, in many parts of north-west Russia, the Baltic and
the Arctic, the environment is badly polluted. The problems
stem from the exploitation of natural resources, agricultural
pesticides, transport, and untreated waste. The local population
experiences these problems directly.

An issue which affects all of the EU is nuclear and
5.2.
radiation safety, the main problem being the partly defective
safety measures in nuclear power stations. The storage of
radioactive waste and used nuclear fuel is also often inad-
equately handled.

5.3.
On the positive side, environmental cooperation in the
Arctic — the so-called Rovaniemi process — has been
happening within the framework of the Arctic Council since
as early as 1990. Environmental questions are also a priority
for Baltic and Barents cooperation.

5.4.
The work of the Baltic Marine Environment Protection
Commission, Helcom, is also important. All the states round
the Baltic and the European Commission are involved in these
activities.

6. Transport networks and spatial planning

6.1.
An economic and logistical problem for Europe’s
northern region is its remoteness from the core of the EU. It is,
therefore, extremely important to establish good connections
between the transport infrastructure of northern Europe and
that of the rest of Europe. In the northernmost part of Europe
the problem is one of poor east-west links. Therefore the EU is
further developing the concept of TENs (Trans-European
Networks).

The Barents Euro-Arctic transport region is one of the
6.2.
new groups of projects aimed at developing east-west links.
The Archangel and Barents corridors are part of this. Another
important priority for development is air transport, the lack of
which makes it difficult to develop business cooperation in
particular. The Via Baltica and Pohjola triangle transport region
are other important projects in need of development. Another
priority for the north is the development of rail transport and
improving the operational compatibility of networks.

6.3.
The long distances, the location on the periphery, the
central role of sea transport in trade, and the need for fast
connections impose special requirements on the northern
dimension, and must be taken into account both in the
development of the TEN network and in the exploitation of
information technology.

6.4.
In future, the northern dimension should also be
explicitly included in the implementation of the recently
completed programme on the guidelines for European spatial
development (the European Spatial Development Perspective
— ESDP). This applies to transport and energy networks in
particular. The northern dimension policy should also be used
to contribute to the creation of a polycentric, competitive
region in this periphery.

7. Obstacles to trade

7.1.
Trade between the EU and Russia is beset by structural
and technical obstacles, as well as those traditionally encoun-
tered in border trade, and those related to crime, education
and culture.

One of the greatest structural obstacles is obtaining
7.2.
reliable information about economic operators. The risks are,
therefore, large, and business costs in Russia are high.

23.12.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 374/5

There is no legislation in Russia which makes it

7.3.
possible in practice to sell, buy or invest in land.

9. Existing development instruments

7.4.
A key problem in obtaining both short- and long-term
financing in Russia is that no security can be given for credit.
Uncertain ownership rights and the absence of registered
ownership rights makes it impossible to invest in property.
The possibility of foreigners obtaining security for loans is,
indeed, extremely limited.

7.5.
Russia’s excessively stringent standards and certifi-
cation requirements complicate trade. In addition, certification
costs can be surprisingly high and exceed prior estimates.

7.6.
Of the traditional obstacles to border trade, the main
ones are the long duration and high cost of customs clearance,
excessive charges and difficulties at border crossings, as well
as high and continually fluctuating tariff levels.

8. Geographical definition and existing cooperation

organisations

8.1.
The concept of the northern dimension has been
geographically defined as the following: from Iceland in the
west across to North-West Russia,
from the Norwegian,
Barents and Kara Seas in the north to the southern coast of the
Baltic Sea.

8.2.
The main cooperation bodies for these regions are the
intergovernmental Council of Baltic Sea States, the Barents
Euro Arctic Council, the Nordic Council of Ministers and the
Arctic Council and the Baltic Marine Environment Protection
Commission. Another example of bilateral cooperation is
the intergovernmental Finnish-Russian working group on
in which the border
developing neighbourly cooperation,
provinces are also represented.

The main equivalent cooperation bodies at regional
8.3.
level are the Baltic Sea States Subregional Cooperation, the
Baltic Sea Commission, the Barents Regional Council, the
various cooperation bodies of the Baltic Sea region, regional
cooperation bodies working with the Nordic Council of
Ministers, such as the Nordic Arctic Council, and the inter-
national Northern Forum organisation of northern regions, as
well as the North Sea Commission (NSC). In addition to these
bodies, very important roles are played in practical regional
cooperation by the committees responsible for monitoring
and managing the Interreg programmes.

In developing the northern dimension, the intention
8.4.
has not been to establish new forms of cooperation but rather
to work within the existing structure.

9.1.
In the regions falling within the concept of the northern
dimension many forms of cross-border, transnational and
interregional cooperation are taking place, with both EU and
national support. The most important EU programmes are the
Interreg II programmes aimed at the Baltic Sea region, the
Nordic countries, and the Finnish and Russian border regions,
as well as the Tacis and Phare external cooperation pro-
grammes with Russia and the Baltic states.

9.2.
The EU Member States and, for example, Norway, have
bilateral cooperation programmes with Russia and the Baltic
states, which provide financial assistance, export credits and
technical help. Even the USA has participated in, for example,
development projects in the Barents Sea region.

9.3.
International financial institutions such as the EBRD,
the EIB, NEFCO and NIB have also been involved in financing
the development of the region.

9.4. With Swedish and Finnish accession to the EU in
1995, the European Community introduced structural support
specifically aimed at solving problems in the EU’s northern
regions where population density is extremely low (objec-
tive 6). The programmes under this objective play a key role
in the development of these regions. According to the new
Structural Fund regulations, in addition to the GDP criteria,
objective 1 regions also include overseas territories and the
northernmost, particularly sparsely populated regions, which
do not qualify as objective 1 regions on the basis of the GDP
criteria, but are currently objective 6 regions.

9.5.
Agriculture and forestry policy are closely linked to
maintaining habitation and business activity in northern
regions. The Commission’s decision has given Finland the
right to provide long-term national financial support to regions
situated north of 62o latitude, as well as to adjacent regions
with a similar climate where farming is consequently very
difficult. This support will also be necessary in the future in
order to maintain a basic level of production and thereby
support employment, the transportation of agricultural prod-
ucts to markets and their processing, and in particular to
ensure that the environment is protected and the countryside
remains inhabited.

9.6.
The EU has adopted a forestry strategy programme
which provides a common basis for ecological forestry and for
the exploitation of forests as a resource for rural regions. The
Commission supports the development of a pan-European
certification process, which is based on the approval of
national models. This will enable sustainable development to
be defined according to country-specific conditions, making it
viable for the northern regions, too.

C 374/6

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

23.12.1999

10. Developing the role of local and regional authorities

10.1.
The degree of development and effectiveness of local
and regional authorities and the importance of their role in
international cooperation varies enormously between the
countries falling within the northern dimension. In EU Member
States, it is true to say that the role played by the local and
regional level has traditionally been a large one.

In contrast, an important question, for example with
10.2.
regard to Russia’s transition to democracy and a market
economy, is how Russia will succeed in its efforts to create
an effective European-style system of
local and regional
government.

At

the end of

10.3.
the practical aspect of
the day,
development projects is always regional. As a consequence,
the implementation of projects always falls to regional players.
It is, therefore, extremely important to establish operational
principles which will enable local and regional government, as
well as national organisations, to take part in the operation
and decision-making of the projects.

10.4. Within the northern dimension, practical develop-
ment work is often undertaken in extremely difficult con-
ditions, with the result that the expertise and role of local and
regional authorities is crucial. Above all, ensuring sustainable
development requires the involvement of local and regional
players.

11. Conclusions

In summary, the Committee of the Regions is of the view that:

11.1.
As a result of the most recent enlargement, the EU
has acquired a northern dimension and a closer relationship
with the acceding countries and Russia. Northern Europe has
special features which require special support measures, but at
the same time the region has important development potential
for the EU as a whole. Local and regional representatives in
the northern Member States can contribute their significant
experiences so as to establish an integrated platform for the
northern dimension, which is of particular value in exchanges
with the applicant countries.

11.2.
On the basis of the Commission communication, it is
essential to broaden the northern dimension of the EU’s
policies in order to exploit the existing potential for develop-
ment and to solve serious problems which affect the EU as a
whole. The EU must bring together development measures
linked to cooperation under the northern dimension into a
common approach, and improve the effectiveness of existing
instruments.

11.3.
The northern dimension must be viewed as a broad
geographical region, defined as the following: from Iceland in
the west across to North-West Russia, from the Norwegian,
Barents and Kara Seas in the north to the southern coast of the
Baltic Sea.

The northern dimension must be viewed as an
11.4.
integral whole encompassing both external and internal affairs.
With regard to internal issues, the special needs of the northern
dimension should be reflected in regional, structural and
agricultural policy, in particular.

11.5.
Reports must be drawn up on the use of natural
resources in Europe’s northern regions, taking into account
nature conservation issues, as well as the way in which the
regions themselves — their population, including indigenous
peoples as well as the region’s businesses — benefit from this
use. When megaprojects are being implemented, the local and
regional level must be closely involved from the outset.

11.6.
A system must be developed which will enable the
EBRD and EIB to expand their funding to new areas and to
take greater risks when financing development projects.

A comprehensive plan must be drawn up to fight
11.7.
organised crime in the region.
to start
It
implementing the recommendations of the Council of Baltic
Sea States’ working group on organised crime and money-
laundering.

is important

11.8.
In developing the Barents Sea transport region, a
system of logistical centres must be set up to promote the
construction of missing links, as well as regular transport
services between centres. Priority should be given to building
the necessary road and rail links and improving existing ones
between northern Scandinavia and the northern regions of
Russia. Efforts must be made to maintain and improve
east-west air links as well as to create a safe operational
environment for air transport. Effective computerised systems
must be set up to ensure that goods are moved quickly within
the transport region. The use of the North-East Passage for
trade must be promoted.

11.9.
Ensuring reliable transportation in the northern
regions in the winter also requires the existence and use of
effective ice-breaking equipment. To ensure accessibility by
sea, it should be possible to finance these additional maritime
transport costs from maritime, pilotage and other charges
levied elsewhere.

11.10.
In connection with the further development of the
Trans-European transport network, the Baltic region should
also be included as a pan-European transport area, and the
development of Baltic ports and their hinterland links should
be supported in EU transport policy.

23.12.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 374/7

11.11.
The peripheral nature of northern regions must be
taken into account in development by permitting a transport
support system which subsidises the cost to SMEs of trans-
porting their products. This peripherality is a concept which
applies to all of the EU’s outermost regions.

11.19. With regard to the northern dimension area, pro-
vision must be made for the Interreg III B programmes for the
Baltic Sea region and the Barents Sea region. These pro-
grammes would consolidate the successful cooperation under-
taken so far in these regions. The role of the regional level in
the Interreg III B programmes should be stepped up.

11.12.
To ensure air transport in the north it is necessary
to adopt the principle that not all airports need to be financially
self-sufficient; rather, their operation can be subsidised on
regional policy grounds by transport levies from elsewhere.

11.13.
As far as transport is concerned, it is important for
EU locations that the accession countries have actually adopted
social, safety and other technical requirements (for all modes
of transport), as well as the rules on market access and the
relevant occupations (particularly as regards road transport)
by the time they join. This requires placing particular emphasis
on sticking consistently to the principle of ‘harmonisation
before liberalisation’. This also applies to the principles and
practical implementation of charges for use of infrastructure.

11.14.
To get hold of reliable information about economic
actors in Russia, an up-to-date and user-friendly interregional
information system should be set up to provide information
on company ownership structure and credit ratings.

11.15.
Russia must be given help as soon as possible to set
up a practical and legally binding system of registering land
ownership and real estate, as well as regulations to protect
registered rights.

It is appropriate that new Interreg programmes can
11.16.
be approved for regions which already enjoy established
cooperation from an earlier programming period (continuity).
It is important that the programmes are administered by
the regions concerned. The development of new forms of
cooperation is desirable, but diversity in administration and
cooperation should be permitted (flexibility).

11.17.
The new Interreg Community initiative must put a
clear emphasis, as in the past, on programmes for cross-border
cooperation. The delimitation of the programming regions
could be retained in principle.

11.20.
The administration of the Tacis programme should
be improved and simplified, and its measures should be
targeted, taking into account the views of the regions them-
selves. The proportion of the Tacis border region programme
(Tacis CBC) should be increased, and at the same time more
decision-making power should be transferred to the regional
level.

11.21.
Coordination between Interreg programmes and
Tacis CBC/Phare CBC needs to be improved. The Tacis CBC
programme should also be converted into a multiannual
programme in line with the new Interreg programmes. If the
Tacis CBC and Phare CBC programmes can be developed
and simplified,
it would be possible to appoint common
decision-making bodies for the programmes in question. In
this case it would also be appropriate to create a single fund
for Interreg and Tacis CBC and Phare CBC programmes.

11.22.
Establishing a free trade zone across the Finnish-
Russian border could considerably help to promote cultural,
economic and environmental cooperation in the common
border region between the EU and Russia. The Committee of
the Regions feels that the EU should promote the ground work
for the establishment of a free trade zone and participate in it.

11.23.
It is very important for Europe that the northern
regions try harder to develop Arctic expertise, research, and
technology as a part of common European expertise. This
would boost not only the business and environmental develop-
ment opportunities of the northern regions, but also Europe’s
global position.

In identifying the unexploited natural resources of
11.24.
the Arctic regions and making use of the environment in a
sustainable way, research must be undertaken to ensure that,
with any exploitation that occurs, care is taken to preserve the
natural environment, biological diversity and genetic resources,
as well as the rights of indigenous peoples and the vitality of
northern cultures. Research on global change must focus on
the reduction of biodiversity, the pollution of the atmosphere
and soil, and to the strain on the northern natural environment
as a result of transport, tourism and industry.

11.18.
To help the regional and local authorities in north-
ern Poland, the Baltic Republics and Russia to cooperate with
corresponding regions in the area of the northern dimension
it is necessary to maintain a Baltic Project Facility under the
EU Phare and Tacis programme. Furthermore, to strengthen
the regional and local authorities in north-western Russia
— as well as in other parts of Russia — special measures
for ‘institution-building’ should be included in the Tacis
programme.

11.25.
Research on Arctic communities should pay greater
attention to the dynamic of the northern regional structure, as
well as strategies for regional development, the aim being
— with regard to every population group — to ensure
well-functioning, diverse, viable and healthy communities. The
research must provide information on how regional structural
reforms can take place in an ecologically, economically and
socially managed way. The social problems of communities
should be identified and solutions developed.

C 374/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

23.12.1999

11.26.
The sustainable use of northern natural resources as
an objective of economic and energy policy is important for
all of Europe. Regional tourism and recreation should also be
recognised as having clear development potential.

11.27.
Another problem for the development of northern
regions relates to the distorted age distribution. Large migration
flows are also affecting the current situation. Development
measures should, therefore, support the improvement of job
opportunities for women. The equal opportunities issue is also
one which by its very nature requires greater respect for the
subsidiarity principle in relation to the northern dimension.

fields of activity. Thus, culture in its different forms should
also be included on the agenda of the northern dimension.

In the further development of the policy of the
11.29.
northern dimension it is important
to offer regions and
local authorities and/or their cooperative organisations the
opportunity to contribute to the process. This could start at
the ministerial conference on the northern dimension to be
held next November in Helsinki.

11.30.
The Commission should consider taking part in the
work of organisations which exist to promote the objectives
of the northern dimension.

11.28.
Regions within the northern dimension differ from
each other in many aspects, not only in terms of social
development and standard of living but also in terms of
culture. The mutual understanding of cultural diversities also
enhances the possibilities for fruitful cooperation in different

is necessary that

To foster the EU approach to the northern dimen-
11.31.
sion it
the new European Commission
establishes an official unit, which also reflects the need for
local and regional expertise, to co-ordinate the different EU
policies dealing with this area.

Brussels, 15 September 1999.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Manfred DAMMEYER