Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on "The problems of island regions in the European Union in the context of enlargement"
Date: 2000-03-13
Institutions: European Committee of the Regions
Subjects: economic and social cohesion, peripheral region, regional disparity, regional policy, structural policy

C 192/42

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

12.8.2002

k)

The Committee of the Regions calls upon the European
Commission to issue within two years a White Paper on
in which the recommen-
trans-European cooperation,
dations made in this opinion and in the survey are further
developed and synthesised as a cohesive policy. This
White Paper could be drawn up by a European Com-
mission working party, made up of representatives from
the DGs involved, the Member States, the Committee of

the Regions and the representative European associations
of non-central authorities.

27.
The Committee of the Regions asks the Council of
Ministers, the European Commission and the European Parlia-
ment to take account of the recommendations set out in this
opinion when further fleshing out
the policy on trans-
European cooperation.

Brussels, 13 March 2002.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Albert BORE

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on ‘The problems of island regions in the European
Union in the context of enlargement’

(2002/C 192/10)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

having regard to the decision taken by its Bureau on 12 June 2001, in accordance with the fifth
paragraph of Article 265 of the EC Treaty, to issue an opinion on The problems of island regions in the
European Union in the context of enlargement and to instruct Commission 1 for Regional Policy,
Structural Funds, Economic and Social Cohesion and Cross-border and Inter-regional Cooperation to
undertake the preparatory work;

having regard to the draft opinion (CdR 301/2001 rev. 2) adopted by Commission ‘Regional Policy,
Structural Funds, Economic and Social Cohesion and Cross-border and Inter-regional Cooperation’ on
18 January 2002 [rapporteur: Mr Christos Paleolo´ gos, Mayor of Livadia´ (EL/PES)];

having regard to Article 158 of the Treaty of Amsterdam, together with Article 154 and Declaration
No 30 attached to the Treaty;

having regard to the conclusions of the European Council meeting in Nice in December 2000
(paragraph 55 and declaration);

having regard to the European Spatial Development Perspective;

having regard to the 2nd Report of the European Commission on Economic and Social Cohesion (January
2001);

having regard to the report of the European Parliament Committee on Regional Policy on the problems
of island regions in the European Union (March 1998);

having regard to the own-initiative opinion of the Economic and Social Committee (July 2000) ‘Guidelines
for integrated actions on the island regions of the European Union following the Amsterdam Treaty’
(Article 158);

12.8.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 192/43

having regard to the Cagliari declaration of February 2001 of the conference ‘The EU islands after Nice’,
which was attended by the Islands Intergroups of the European Parliament and the Committee of the
Regions;

having regard to the conclusions of the conference of the Islands Commission of the CPMR of June 2001
in Corsica;

having regard to Council Regulation (EU) No 1447/2001, Article 1(2) (1);

having regard to the declaration of the European Union in connection with the process of adopting
Council Regulation (EU) No 1447/2001, Article 1(2) (1),

adopted the following opinion unanimously at its 43rd plenary session held on 13 and 14 March 2002
(meeting of 13 March).

1.
The CoR considers that the EU Treaty should include the
concept of territorial balance and harmonious development in
Europe, with a reference to the regions that face long-term
structural disadvantages. Specifically, the CoR recommends
that Article 158 of the Amsterdam Treaty be reformulated so
as to include:

address their particular situation, the fact that the issue is
absent from the report’s proposals and is mentioned only
fleetingly creates a need for further action and for steps to be
taken to explicitly include the matter in the Third Cohesion
Report.

a)

b)

c)

‘territorial cohesion’

the idea of
the
formulation and implementation of economic and social
cohesion policies;

to complement

explicit reference to the problems created by long-term
structural factors such as insular nature, geographical
isolation and very low population density;

confirmation that special measures must be taken in
accordance with the severity and accumulation of these
disadvantages in each region.

4.
The CoR calls for the island dimension to be taken into
account when Community guidelines or rules are formulated
and when Community policies are implemented, for example
in relation to liberating the energy market, special taxes on
fuel for air transport, reform of the trans-European transport,
energy and telecommunications networks (TENs), implemen-
tation of the new common fisheries policy, CAP, etc. It would
propose that:

To make it easier for the particular situation of the island
2.
regions to be taken into account in Community policies, there
must be explicit recognition of
the island dimension in
Community statistical nomenclatures (2). The CoR therefore
suggests that consideration be given to the proposals of the
Committee of the Regions for a special definition of the islands
not based on population criteria.

3.
The CoR believes that, despite the valuable references in
the Second Cohesion Report to the particular problems of the
island regions and the need to take special measures that

a)

b)

(1) OJ L 198, 21.7.2001.
(2) Rapporteur’s note:

In the Commission Communication ‘First
progress report on economic and social cohesion’ (COM(2002)
46 final), island regions are defined as an area of at least 1 km2,
permanently inhabited by a statistically significant population (at
least 50 people), not linked to the mainland by permanent
structures, at least 1 km distant from it and not including the
capital of a Member State.

the ‘insular nature’ criterion should be considered and
redress provided for the islands’ natural disadvantages
when selecting projects for support under any Com-
munity measure, programme or policy, so as to compen-
sate for the high per capita cost of setting up and running
basic infrastructure and services;

special measures should be adopted in relation to state
aids, and economic and tax incentives should be provided
to protect the islands and promote endogenous develop-
ment and employment. It is important to ensure that
local consumers enjoy the same prices and quality of
products for basic goods as people in the mainland
regions of their countries. Lower VAT rates for sensitive
sectors,
local
products and other local businesses, tax exemption for
the initial phase of investment in vulnerable sectors (e.g.
renewable energy sources, development of communi-
cations), subsidies to promote island businesses outside
of their local market, incentives to promote employment
and a range of similar measures could be considered,
implemented and combined according to the needs and

lower taxes on income from sales of

C 192/44

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

12.8.2002

situation prevailing in Europe’s various islands. Steps
must be taken to ensure adequate regular, reasonably
priced transport with sufficient capacity to and from
islands. It is important in each case to ensure that the
various measures to be taken will benefit the whole
population and not just businesses outside the islands;

criteria include a peripheral location, low population density,
remoteness, poor access, sparse population and severe winter
conditions. In the context of future reform of the Structural
Funds, the CoR proposes the following:

c)

d)

e)

f)

a procedure should be developed to: 1) evaluate legislative
provisions taken in areas that are of crucial importance
for the island regions (e.g.
internal market, energy,
environment, transport, fishing, agriculture) in order to
establish to what extent they have a negative effect on the
situation of the island regions, and 2) allow exceptions or
special provisions;

new ways should be explored of organising and providing
high-level services of public interest in island regions (e.g.
communications, transport, energy, health, education,
culture) so that opening up markets for these services
does not harm the island regions owing to low demand,
and the European Commission should take adequate
measures to offset the additional cost of these services;

the PSO (Public Service Obligation) should be broadened
to include transport to and from island regions via
another country.

and

other

European

the Commission should set up an Interservice Group
with a view to optimising coordination between the
Directorates
bodies when
implementing integrated policies relating to the legal
system, funding, incentives, etc. This group would work
in each case with both the Member State involved and
with the corresponding local and regional authorities of
the islands. The activities of the Commission’s Director-
ates should be coordinated in such a way that disadvan-
tages caused by geographical factors (islands, mountain-
ous regions, low population density, peripheral location,
etc.) would receive special attention in implementing
various Community policies.

5.
The CoR believes that in order to address and redress the
disadvantages created by the fact of being an island, special
provisions must be considered with a view to implementing
structural policies that take into account not just GDP criteria
but also territorial, geographical and social factors. These

a)

island regions should automatically be included under
Objective 1, in the light of Article 158 of the Treaty
and Declaration (No 30) annexed to the final act of
Amsterdam, which recognises that the handicaps experi-
enced on account of island status must be taken into
account, and specific measures taken in response to them.
Assistance must be adjusted in line with GDP,
the
additional cost imposed by structural handicaps and
factors that exacerbate and amplify the effects of isolation
(e.g. an island with mountainous regions, a sparsely
populated or isolated island belonging to a territorially
fragmented archipelago);

b) when designing Community initiatives it would be useful
for a special programme for island regions to be provided
under the Interreg. Priority must be given to islands for
interregional
cooperation
measures, and inter-island cooperation must also be
promoted by providing support for all existing networks
and systems that encourage links between island regions.

intergovernmental

and

6.
The CoR supports the idea of establishing integrated
action plans for the development of island regions in cooper-
ation with local authorities and the social partners. It therefore
calls on the Commission:

a)

b)

to compile and publish a report every three years on the
situation of the island regions,
including comparative
data on the competitiveness of island regions, and the
impact and outcome of implementing various Com-
munity policies, and to identify the areas of action to
eliminate or offset the disadvantages experienced by the
islands;

to promote cooperation between an Interservice Group
of the Islands Committee and equivalent groups working
in the European Parliament, the CoR and the ESC, and
with the networks and other organisations representing
the islands’ interests such as the Islands Commission of
the Conference of Peripheral Maritime Regions of Europe,
IMEDOC, Islenet, etc., with a view to setting up an
integrated action programme for the islands;

12.8.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 192/45

c)

to incorporate into the European Spatial Development
Perspective a development strategy for island regions and
then set up an action programme with a specific timetable
for taking integrated measures in favour of island regions
that will take their specific needs into account.

7.
The CoR notes that the need for visible initiatives creating
a special system of support for island regions is not just

essential but also urgently needed in view of EU enlargement,
so that
island regions do not risk further isolation and
marginalisation. The CoR calls on the Commission and the
European Council to address the problems of the islands as a
matter of priority.
It undertakes to cooperate as fully as
possible and proposes to contribute to future measures
supporting demands and pursuing the objective of balanced
and sustainable development of the EU’s island regions.

Brussels, 13 March 2002.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Albert BORE

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the ‘Communication from the Commission to the
Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the
Regions — Strengthening the local dimension of the European Employment Strategy’

(2002/C 192/11)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on strengthening the local dimension
of the European Employment Strategy (COM(2001) 629 final);

having regard to the decision of the Commission on 6 November 2001, under the first paragraph of
Article 265 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, to consult it on this matter;

having regard to the decision of the President of the Committee of the Regions on 20 November 2001 to
instruct Commission 6 (Employment, Economic Policy, Single Market, Industry and SMEs) to draw up an
opinion on this subject;

having regard to its opinion on the Communication from the Commission — From guidelines to action:
the National Action Plans for Employment and the Communication from the Commission — Proposals
for guidelines for Member States’ employment policies 1999, adopted on 19 November 1998 (CdR 279/
98 fin) (1);

having regard to its resolution on the European Employment Pact, adopted on 2 June 1999 (CdR 156/
1999 fin) (2);

having regard to its opinion on the Proposal for guidelines for Member States’ employment policies
2000, adopted on 18 November 1999 (CdR 360/1999 fin) (3);

(1) OJ C 51, 22.2.1999, p. 59.
(2) OJ C 293, 13.10.199, p. 70.
(3) OJ C 57, 29.2.2000, p. 17.