Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Territorial Agenda
Date: 2007-04-25
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: ESC opinion, economic and social cohesion, economic development, regional cooperation, sustainable development, town and country planning, urbanisation

C 168/16

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

20.7.2007

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Territorial Agenda

(2007/C 168/03)

On 7 November 2006, the Federal Ministry for Transport, Construction and Urban Development asked the
European Economic and Social Committee, on behalf of the German Presidency, to draw up an opinion on
the Territorial Agenda.

The Section for Economic and Monetary Union and Economic and Social Cohesion, which was responsible
for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 20 March 2007. The rapporteur
was Mr Pariza.

At its 425th plenary session, held on 25 and 26 April 2007 (meeting of 25 April), the European Economic
and Social Committee adopted the following opinion unanimously.

1. Conclusions and recommendations

1.1
The EESC wishes to thank the German Presidency and
congratulate it on its preparatory work and on its efforts in
ensuring transparency and consultation on the Territorial
Agenda.

1.2
The EESC considers that the time has come to move
beyond the current phase of informal coordination within the
Council and enter a new phase based on closer political coop-
eration. On the basis of the work that has already been done
and with the new contributions planned by ESPON, a further
step towards integration should be taken, giving the Commis-
sion a clear mandate under which it can exercise its right of
initiative.

1.3
The EESC considers that discussions on the Territorial
Agenda within the Council should result in more precise policy
decisions and to achieve this, greater involvement on the part of
the European Commission is needed, because the Commission
is better placed than anyone to ensure that
the different
approaches to territorial cohesion in the European Union are
coherent and compatible with one another.

1.4
The objective of territorial cohesion at EU level requires
the Commission to have a specific and robust unit analysing,
assessing and presenting policy proposals that confirm the
added value of a European approach to territorial cohesion.

The Committee proposes

1.5
that continuity should be
ensured when the German Presidency comes to an end. The
Commission should study, synthesise and implement the Terri-
torial Agenda by means of an action programme that respects
the Member States' and regions' spatial planning competences.

The fourth report on cohesion currently being drawn up
1.6
by the European Commission should analyse the territorial
impact of Community funds and establish links between cohe-
sion policy and the objectives of the Territorial Agenda. The
EESC considers
that cross-border cooperation programmes
should be enhanced, once the Constitutional Treaty has been
adopted.

1.7
Balance between the different levels of administration
working on the ground — local, regional, national and Com-
munity — should be ensured for
the Territorial Agenda's
governance and organised civil society, which must be consulted
in advance, should also be involved in this task.

The EESC proposes that the Council of Ministers engage
1.8
the open method of coordination, providing precise guidelines,
for the Territorial Agenda as a first step towards bringing these
issues under the Community method, following approval of the
Constitutional Treaty.

1.9
The EESC would like the EU in the near future to adopt
the Constitutional Treaty, which includes the objective of terri-
torial cohesion and proposes that, on the basis of
the real
consensus that exists on the Territorial Agenda, the conclusions
of the Leipzig Informal Council should recommend that it is
implemented gradually rather than emphasising its non-binding
nature.

1.10
The EESC, therefore, calls on the European Commission
to propose that the Council of Ministers push ahead with imple-
menting the Territorial Agenda on the current legal bases.

2. Referral from the German presidency

2.1
On 7 November 2006, the Federal Ministry for Trans-
port, Construction and Urban Development asked the European
Economic and Social Committee, on behalf of the German Presi-
dency, to draw up an exploratory opinion on the Territorial
Agenda.

2.2
At the informal ministerial meeting on territorial cohe-
sion and urban development that will be held in Leipzig on 24
and 25 May 2007, European ministers will adopt a policy docu-
ment entitled The Territorial Agenda of the EU (TAEU) (1),
which is based on a paper entitled The Territorial State and
Perspectives of the European Union (2). This background docu-
ment analyses the main spatial-planning challenges facing the
EU and uses examples to illustrate ways in which the potential
of Europe's territorial diversity could be better exploited for
sustainable economic growth. The TAEU contains recommen-
dations for the more effective use of Europe's territorial diver-
sity and proposals
spatial-planning policy action
programme.

for

a

(1) http://www.bmvbs.de/territorial-agenda.
(2) http://www.bmvbs.de/Anlage/original_978555/The-Territorial-State-

and-Perspectives-of-the-European-Union-Document.pdf.

20.7.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 168/17

2.3
Since 1995, the EESC has stated its support for closer
cooperation on European spatial planning policy in the
following documents:

— Europe 2000+ Cooperation for European territorial development

— OJ C 133, 31.5.1995, p. 4.

— Spatial planning and inter-regional cooperation in the Mediterra-
nean area — OJ C 133, 31.5.1995, p. 32 + Appendix
(CES 629/94 fin).

— Europe 2000+ Cooperation for European territorial development

— OJ C 301, 13.11.1995, p. 10.

Other, more recent opinions also support closer involvement in
and greater consideration of the territorial dimension of Euro-
pean integration, including:

and social cohesion. The territorial dimension of Community
policies is also analysed in the Third report on cohesion, which
was presented by the Commission in 2005. The Community
Strategic Guidelines for cohesion, which were adopted in 2006,
also include this new territorial dimension of cohesion.

3.6
At the informal ministerial meeting held in Luxembourg
in May 2005, ministers adopted the following themes and
priorities set out in the Territorial Agenda:

— Promoting Urban Development in line with a Polycentric

Model.

— Strengthening Urban-Rural Partnership.

— Promoting Trans-National Competitive

and Innovative

Regional Clusters.

— European Metropolitan Areas:

socio-economic

implications

for

— Strengthening Trans-European Technological Networks.

Europe's future — OJ C 302, 7.12.2004, p. 101.

— Promoting Trans-European Risk Management.

— A Thematic Strategy on the Urban Environment — OJ C 318,

23.12.2006, p. 86.

— Strengthening Ecological Structures and Cultural Resources.

— The impact and consequences of structural policies on EU cohesion

3.7

Key actions include the following:

— CESE 84/2007.

— Actions for Promoting More Territorially Coherent EU Poli-

— Housing and regional policy — CESE 42/2007.

cies.

3. The Territorial Agenda — turning words into action

— Actions for Providing European Tools for Territorial Cohe-

sion.

— Actions

for Strengthening Territorial Cohesion in the

3.1
The first informal meeting of ministers responsible for
spatial planning and territorial policy in general was held in
Nantes in 1989.

Member States.

— Joint Activities by Ministers.

the initiative of

This type of meeting is held at

3.2
the
successive six-month EU presidencies. In 1993, at the meeting
held in Liege, it was decided to draw up the European Spatial
Development Perspective (ESDP) (3), which was adopted in
1999 at Potsdam and which provides a common reference
framework for informal meetings of ministers responsible for
spatial planning and territorial policy.

3.3
At the informal ministerial meeting on territorial cohe-
sion held in Rotterdam in November 2004, ministers agreed to
add the preparation of a summary paper entitled The Territorial
State and Perspectives of the European Union, the document
on which the Territorial Agenda is based, to the agenda.

3.4
The Territorial Agenda constitutes a strategic frame-
work setting the priorities for the EU's territorial development.
It contributes to economic growth and sustainable development
by strengthening territorial cohesion, which can be defined as
cohesion policy's ability to adapt to the specific needs and char-
acteristics of geographical challenges and opportunities, in order
to ensure that the EU's territory develops in a balanced and
sustainable way.

3.5
The objective of territorial cohesion was incorporated
into Article III-116 of the June 2003 draft Treaty establishing a
Constitution for Europe, as the third dimension of economic

4. The European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP)

The ESDP is a common reference framework for the
4.1
different stakeholders involved in spatial development and plan-
ning (the EU, Member States, regions and other local bodies),
which supports
the territorial dimension of a polycentric
Europe and the much-needed ‘territorialisation’ of EU sectoral
policies. This is an intergovernmental initiative, adopted at the
Potsdam ministerial meeting held in 1999 and which is not
binding. In practice, the ESDP has only been implemented in
the context of setting up the European Spatial Planning Obser-
vation Network (ESPON (4)) and,
indirectly, under the three
INTERREG programmes.

4.2

The ESDP has the following aims:

— To define at EU level,

territorial
action, in the aim of achieving a sustainable and balanced
development of European territory.

the main principles of

— To contribute to the economic and social cohesion that is

taking shape and becoming a reality in the territory.

— To conserve Europe's natural resources and cultural heritage.

— To ensure a more balanced competitiveness of the European

territory.

(3) http://europa.eu/scadplus/leg/en/lvb/g24401.htm.

(4) http://www.espon.eu.

C 168/18

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

20.7.2007

Four main areas interact with one another and exert

4.3
considerable pressure on territorial development:

5. Comments

— Development of urban areas. More than three-quarters of

Europe's population lives in cities.

— Development of rural and mountainous areas, which cover

around three-quarters of Europe's territory.

— Transport and infrastructure distribution across the territory.

— Conservation of Europe's natural and cultural heritage.

Building on the above ideas, the ESDP has established the

4.4
following guidelines:

— Polycentric spatial development.

— Stronger rural-urban partnerships.

— Parity of access to transport and telecommunications infra-

structure and knowledge.

— Prudent management of Europe's natural and cultural heri-

tage.

4.5

Some concrete measures that have been planned are to:

— Take account of the ESDP's policy guidelines when imple-
menting Structural Funds and spatial planning policy in
each Member State.

— Experiment with cross-border,

transnational and inter-

regional cooperation under INTERREG.

— Take account of the territorial impact of other sectoral poli-

cies, such as transport.

— Strengthen European cooperation in the field of urban

policy.

— Launch ESPON — the European Spatial Planning Observa-

tion Network.

4.6 ESPON — the European Spatial Planning Observation Network

ESPON,

4.6.1
the European Spatial Planning Observation
Network, is an applied research programme in the field of terri-
torial development financed by INTERREG and the Member
States. The aim of the programme is to provide policy makers
on the European, national and regional
level with systematic
and new knowledge on territorial trends and impacts of policies
that affect regions and territories within Europe, a knowledge
which can directly support the formulation and implementation
of policies.

All of

4.6.2
the applied research undertaken within the
ESPON programme covers the territory of 29 European coun-
including the 27 Member States of the EU, as well as
tries,
Norway and Switzerland.

5.1 Legal base and the Community method

In all

territory-related issues,

5.1.1
the added value of a
common European approach is crucial. The experience gained
in recent decades and the need to take account of the territorial
dimension of European integration mean that policies affecting
the overall European territorial approach should gradually be
‘communitarised’.

The European Union pursues numerous Community
5.1.2
policies that have an effect at territorial
level. These include
competition policy, trans-European transport networks, telecom-
munications and energy, environmental policy, agricultural
policy, research and technological development policy, regional
policy, EIB investments, etc. What the EU lacks, however, is a
common approach that addresses, assesses and coordinates the
implications of these policies for Europe's territory.

5.1.3
A common European territorial approach requires
common European objectives and guidelines. The added value
of these European territorial guidelines in objectives such as
environmental protection, polycentric and sustainable urban
and European-level
development,
plans to prevent natural,
technological and climate change-
related disasters is clear to see.

trans-European networks

Under the ‘Community method’ (5) the Commission,
5.1.4
on its own initiative or at the initiative of other Community
bodies, draws up concrete proposals to be adopted by the
Council of Ministers and, where appropriate, under the co-deci-
sion procedure with the European Parliament.

5.1.5
For some policies, the Council has implemented what
is known as the ‘open method of coordination’, which involves
a less intense and precise form of political action than the Com-
munity method. The EESC considers that for the issues on the
Territorial Agenda,
the open method of coordination could
provide a useful first step before resorting to the Community
method. The open method of coordination can be used until
the adoption of the Constitutional Treaty, which allows for use
of the Community method.

5.1.6
As European experience in other policies has shown,
however, this system is only of benefit when the Commission
has a very active role and when very precise objectives and
guidelines are set.

fate of

Irrespective of

5.1.7
the draft Treaty
the eventual
establishing a Constitution for Europe, section III of which
includes territorial cohesion in its title — a development
supported by the EESC — the following articles of the Treaty
currently in force (TEC) should serve as the legal base for
drawing up a common European territorial approach,
if it is
the European
accepted that
Union:

this remains a competence of

4.6.3
The budget is envisaged to expand substantially, from
the EUR 7 million for the period 2000-2006, the new ESPON
2013 Programme (for the period 2007-2013) now stands at
EUR 34 million and could reach EUR 45 million with national
contributions.

— Article 2 states that ‘The Community shall have as its task … to
promote throughout the Community a harmonious, balanced and
sustainable development of economic activities’.

(5) MEMO/02/102 — http://europa.eu/rapid/searchAction.do

20.7.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 168/19

— Article 16 refers to social and territorial cohesion in the

context of services of general economic interest.

5.4.2
territory. It is:

It is worth highlighting some characteristics of

this

— Article 71 in the context of a common transport policy.

— continuous: it has no borders;

— Article 158 states that: ‘In order to promote its overall harmo-
nious development, the Community shall develop and pursue its
actions leading to the strengthening of
its economic and social
cohesion’.

— Article 175(2)(b) states that the Council shall, on a proposal
from the Commission, adopt measures affecting town and
country planning.

5.2 Regional policy

Community regional policy is

a key instrument
5.2.1
supporting economic and social cohesion, economic conver-
gence and, in general, the process of European integration.

— finite: it is not renewable;

— diverse: it is not homogeneous;

— stable: it does not change suddenly;

— vulnerable: it is not free from risk and disaster;

— irreversible: it cannot easily change use.

As a physical and geographical entity, the territory is thus of
fundamental strategic importance. The Commission's impact
assessments should include this territorial approach, which
would require cooperation with ESPON.

The EESC has always supported this policy, which aims
5.2.2
— with success — to reduce disparities between European
regions.

5.5 Governance

This

regional policy, which is one of

5.2.3
the most
successful of all Community policies, must remain in operation,
given the new disparities that exist as a result of the enlarge-
ment process.

This regional policy is not

incompatible — indeed
5.2.4
quite the opposite — with an effective territorial cohesion
policy, as proposed in the Territorial Agenda, which is to be
implemented under the new 2007-2013 period.

5.3 Enlargement

5.3.1
The two latest rounds of enlargement have created new
challenges for the European territory, which since 2004 has
increased from 15 to 27 Member States, with its population
increasing by 28 % (from 382 to 490 million inhabitants) and
its territory by 34 % (from 3.2 to 4.3 million km2). This new
dimension and the diversification of the EU's territorial charac-
teristics mean that there is an urgent need for an overview of
this territorial and geographical
situation and of potential
changes to it.

The two latest rounds of enlargement represent a
5.3.2
major territorial challenge, which the European Commission
must analyse thoroughly.

The number of internal and external border regions
5.3.3
has increased considerably. Border regions present a challenge
and also a genuine opportunity for the process of integration to
produce real change.

5.4 Europe's territory

5.4.1
The challenges and risks affecting Europe's territory
must be addressed by means of a European approach. The
added value of a shared vision of the European territory is unde-
niable and a shared vision of this nature should be acknowl-
edged to be a key strategic need.

5.5.1
The EU should have an appropriate system of govern-
ance, in which the right balance is struck between the different
levels of territorial government, because within European terri-
tory, local, regional, national and EU-level governments all play
a role. The principle of subsidiarity must be respected, whilst
guaranteeing coherence and a holistic, common and shared
approach.

5.5.2
Civil society should also participate at the different
levels through the structured procedures for social and civil
dialogue. Many Member States and many European regions now
have economic and social councils (or similar bodies) which
should be engaged so that, in conjunction with the social part-
ners and other civil society organisations, they play an active
role in the systems for consultation and governance with regard
to territorial affairs.

6. The Territorial Agenda: The Territorial State and

Perspectives of the European Union

6.1
The Territorial Agenda is based on the document entitled
The Territorial State and Perspectives of the European Union which,
rather than a summary document, is one to which successive
six-month presidencies have added their different contributions.
The document gives a 197-point presentation of all the chal-
lenges facing the territory and is thus an extremely useful guide,
on the basis of which the Commission should propose an
action plan.

6.2
The Territorial Agenda should incorporate Member
States' territorial strategies, take account of the territorial dimen-
sion of other Community policies and seek out areas of comple-
mentarity and synergy in order to achieve a European synthesis,
by means of guidelines for a territorial strategy for the EU,
which are set out in point 8.

6.3
Development of the EU's Territorial Agenda should focus
on an approach based on economic, social and environmental
sustainability.

C 168/20

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

20.7.2007

7. Territorial Agenda objectives

7.1 Territorial cohesion

7.1.1
Territorial cohesion aims to introduce a European terri-
torial approach that provides a framework for and renders
compatible the territorial strategies drawn up and implemented
by the Member States and regions.

7.1.2
Territorial cohesion should focus on the issues that
affect territorial planning, first of all, and secondly, urban and
regional planning. As stated by CEMAT (6) in 1994, spatial plan-
ning is the ideal instrument for implementing sustainable devel-
opment at territorial level.

planning must take up this new challenge in an attempt to miti-
gate and remedy some of the effects that climate change is
having on the territory.

7.3.2
A European plan for dealing with risks and natural
disasters must be drawn up. This is not a question of writing
science fiction. The recent report by the economist Sir Nicholas
Stern (9), commissioned by the British government, starkly illus-
trates what is at stake for the planet: at least 1 % of the world's
GDP would need to be invested in the fight against climate
change to prevent global costs and risks of climate change from
causing a loss of 5 % in world GDP, a figure that could reach
20 % if
the most harmful effects of warming continue to
worsen at their current pace.

7.1.3
Efforts must therefore be made to clarify the concept,
methodology and terminology of spatial planning. Spatial plan-
ning is a multidisciplinary approach and is a cross-cutting
priority that affects a range of issues, especially the environment,
transport and communications, housing and human and indus-
trial settlements, etc.

Climate change could have a detrimental effect on
7.3.3
cohesion and competitiveness, on the quality of
life and on
sustainable development sooner than has been predicted to date,
as confirmed in the recent report by the United Nations' panel
of experts on climate change, which was presented in Paris on
2 February 2007. The EESC proposes that account be taken of
the effects of climate change on spatial planning.

7.2 Economic and social cohesion

7.2.1
In line with the Lisbon strategy, the EESC proposes that
more balanced economic development should be ensured for
the European territory to the benefit of all of its citizens and
regions, including regions with permanent natural and structural
handicaps (7).

7.2.2
All European policies should promote the objective of
social cohesion. The EESC proposes that the Territorial Agenda's
objectives include those of social cohesion, because the Euro-
pean territory is where people live, where they find opportu-
nities and where they face their problems.

7.2.3
The polycentric development of urban and metropo-
litan areas and a constructive relationship between these and
peripheral and rural areas can help to achieve greater economic
and social balance in Europe. Combating poverty and social
integrating immigrants (8), boosting housing policy,
exclusion,
equal opportunities and establishing high-quality public services
should also form some of
the territorial
approach.

the basic aims of

7.3 Climate change and natural risks

All of the most recent reports on climate change draw
7.3.1
attention to the gravity of
the problem. Global warming is
clearly a fact and not a matter of opinion. Many effects of
climate change are beginning to appear on the ground. Spatial

(6) The Council of Europe's European Conference of Ministers responsible

for Regional Planning.

(7) EESC opinion on How to achieve better integration of regions suffering from
permanent natural and structural handicaps — OJ C 221, 8.9.2005, p. 141.
(8) EESC opinion on Immigration in the EU and integration policies: cooperation
between regional and local governments and civil society organisations —
OJ C 318, 23.12.2006, p. 128.

The risks to be considered should include those caused
7.3.4
by technological disasters (radioactive, chemical or bacteriolo-
gical crises) caused by accidents or terrorist attacks and provi-
sion should be made for the potential mass displacement of the
population.

7.4 Trans-European Networks

The

7.4.1
idea of Trans-European Transport Networks
(TEN-T) was first mooted in the late 1980s, in the context of
the single market. Talk of the single market and freedom of
movement only made sense if the different national and regional
transport networks were linked to one another by means of a
modern and efficient Europe-wide infrastructure system.

Since 1992, Title XV of the Treaty (Articles 154, 155
7.4.2
and 156) has been dedicated to Trans-European Networks. The
record of the last fifteen years is disappointing, even alarming.
Funding difficulties and lack of political will partially explain
this poor record. The EESC regrets the fact that governments
have consigned to political oblivion the 2003 Initiative for
Growth (10), which included the construction of major trans-
European networks. The EESC would ask: to what extent does
the absence of an overview of European territory and its infra-
structure account for the poor record of the Trans-European
transport, telecommunications and energy networks?

One of the basic objectives that the EESC wishes to
7.4.3
individuals and all regions should have
highlight is that all
proper access and links to transport networks,
through a
balanced pan-European network that has good connections to
small towns, rural areas and island regions.

(9) STERN report — Sir Nicholas Stern — 30.12.2006 — ‘Stern Review

executive summary’ — New Economics Foundation.

(10) Conclusions of the Brussels European Council, 12 December 2003,

points 2, 3, 4 and 5.

20.7.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 168/21

7.4.4
Europe today does not have an adequate energy
network (for electricity, oil and gas). The lack of such a network
could seriously undermine economic activity, and leads to
unequal opportunities for the regions and territories that do not
currently enjoy access to these networks.

7.4.5
European energy policy must take on board the terri-
torial approach both in order to protect natural resources and
to ensure social and territorial cohesion.

7.4.6
To implement the Lisbon Strategy too, all territories
and all citizens should have access to the information society
and its networks, free movement of knowledge and training.
The EU Territorial Agenda should consider this to be a priority
approach.

7.5 Environmental protection

The aim of protecting Europe's physical and natural
7.5.1
environment and biodiversity can only be achieved if a common
political approach is adopted across the territory. From this
point of view, European added value is crucial.

The Territorial Agenda should form the basis for a
7.5.2
new, more effective policy for protecting the environment and
for preserving biodiversity (11).

7.6 Cultural heritage

7.6.1
Europe has a cultural heritage of enormous impor-
tance, which the EU must protect. Europe's regions offer great
cultural diversity, which forms the cornerstone of Europeans'
history and identity.

The Territorial Agenda should support the conserva-
7.6.2
tion of this rich and diverse cultural heritage, which should also

Brussels, 25 April 2007.

be promoted as an endogenous factor for economic develop-
ment and social cohesion.

8. Guidelines for an EU territorial strategy

The guidelines for an EU territorial strategy should
8.1
endeavour
to achieve maximum economic efficiency, social
cohesion and environmental sustainability, whilst respecting the
principles of subsidiarity and proportionality.

8.2 Without
impinging on the competences of Member
States' and regions' spatial planning policies, the guidelines for a
sustainable territorial strategy for
the Community territory
constitute a reference framework for the European territory that
must provide content and meaning for territorial cohesion.

The guidelines

8.3
strategy to achieve
for a territorial
economic, social and territorial cohesion should, as a matter of
priority, address:

— a European approach to the transport and communications
the Trans-European Transport

infrastructure that makes
Networks (TEN-T) possible;

— a European approach to energy policy and, in particular, to

the Trans-European Energy Networks (TEN-E);

— a European approach to protecting and conserving the
physical and natural environment, paying particular atten-
tion to natural biodiversity and cultural wealth;

— a European approach to combating the detrimental effects
of climate change and, by means of a common policy,
potential risks and disasters on European territory;

— a polycentric and sustainable approach to regional and

urban planning.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Dimitris DIMITRIADIS

(11) EESC opinion on the Communication from the Commission on Halting the
loss of biodiversity by 2010 — and beyond — Sustaining ecosystem services
for human well-being COM(2006) 216 final — OJ C …