5. Summary

National spatial planning objectives among BSR countries are consistent. Emphasis varies depending on specific national conditions.

Transnationality is stressed in most BSR countries, with a focus on:

• urban networking to strengthen competitiveness,
• transnational infrastructure links and corridors to bind BSR countries together and to link them effectively with other parts of Europe,
• strengthening of the role of BSR ports,
• green corridors and networks as regards coastal zones, cultural landscapes and biodiversity corridors.

However, national plans in most cases leave it at the level of declaration of principles, rather than indicating concrete transnational co-operation areas.

Main exceptions are:

• Important transnational transport corridors

  There are clear indications of important transport corridors. The focus is not solely on transport issues. The aim is to use improvements of transport links for economic and social development of entire corridor areas.

  In contrast to other spatial elements, in the transport sector also single transnational projects are indicated (see map).

  The enhancement of border crossings is stressed by Belarus, Finland, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland.

  But no systematic, transnationally coordinated, prioritisation of transport corridors exists, which stresses requirements from the regional development and spatial cohesion perspective.

• Cross-border co-operation

  Explicitly stated co-operation areas are the Oresund region, the area along the Finnish-Russian border, the North Baltic Core Region (Tallinn, Helsinki, St. Petersburg, Stockholm), the German-Polish, the Belarus-Polish and the Lithuania-Belarus border areas.

  But there are many other border regions not highlighted in national plans, with a similar potential for transboundary co-operation.

• Joint coastal zone management

  These are stressed particularly by Lithuania, Poland, Kaliningrad and Germany (Mecklenburg-Vorpommern).

  But again, other transnational co-operation areas of similar importance exist with regard to coastal zone management.

• Conclusion

  The analysis of national plans and concepts reveals that transnational aspects are frequently not indicated even where they are relevant. The main exception is transport infrastructure. There is a need to strengthen the transnational perspective in other fields where cross-border interdependencies exist (green networks, coastal zone development, maritime transport, urban networks), and to ensure that different national concepts are congruent.