Work
24.February 2005 - 00:00
Position of the EU's thinly populated areas
The Commission’s guidelines for the new regional policy for the period from 2007 to 2013, including the regional development regulations, incorporate the concept of territorial cohesion, whereby regional differences are taken into account. The Union has accorded special status to very thinly populated areas, placing them in a single category along with, among others, islands, mountain regions, and areas affected by other difficulties. The regulation has not, however, dealt comprehensively enough with the very sparsely inhabited parts of Finland and Sweden, which, given their endemic development problems and natural handicaps, are different from the other areas in the same category. According to the third cohesion report, for example, population density in the other areas in the same category varied from 40 to 100 inhabitants per km2, whereas in the thinly populated areas it was just 5 inhabitants per km2. As the population ages and declines, the problems will, in relative terms, become far more acute in a sparsely inhabited area than in other areas.
How will the Commission ensure that investment in thinly populated areas will be sufficient in the future to build the necessary infrastructure, safeguard services, and meet business development needs?
Does it consider it necessary to offer greater support than originally planned to thinly populated areas and perhaps, when determining the level of assistance, to depart from the criteria applied to other regions? Does it likewise believe that support for the areas in question should be guaranteed by, for example, adding a paragraph specifically concerning them to Article 5 of the general regulation so as to enable them to be covered by the convergence objectives?
Answer given by Mrs Hübner on behalf of the Commission
The Commission considers that in its proposals for the cohesion policy for the period 2007-2013, it duly takes into account the specific problem of thinly populated areas, in particular in the northern parts of Sweden and Finland.
The system proposed by the Commission to allocate financial resources for the next programming period utilises, among other criteria, a density indicator which gives a financial bonus inversely proportional to the density of the population in the NUTS III regions, i.e. the lower the density the higher the bonus. The northern parts of Sweden and Finland are the most concerned regions by this indicator.
In addition, for those regions of northern Finland and Sweden which are fully eligible to Objective 1 during the current period, the Commission proposes to apply the statistical phasing out profile even if their status is of phasing in regions, to take account of their particular geographical position.
The Commission considers, on the other hand, that the relatively high gross domestic product (GDP) per capita of these regions (sometimes well above the Community average) does not justify their consideration under the new Convergence objective, whose main objective is to promote the convergence of regions rather than compensate specific natural or geographical handicaps.
The Commission’s guidelines for the new regional policy for the period from 2007 to 2013, including the regional development regulations, incorporate the concept of territorial cohesion, whereby regional differences are taken into account. The Union has accorded special status to very thinly populated areas, placing them in a single category along with, among others, islands, mountain regions, and areas affected by other difficulties. The regulation has not, however, dealt comprehensively enough with the very sparsely inhabited parts of Finland and Sweden, which, given their endemic development problems and natural handicaps, are different from the other areas in the same category. According to the third cohesion report, for example, population density in the other areas in the same category varied from 40 to 100 inhabitants per km2, whereas in the thinly populated areas it was just 5 inhabitants per km2. As the population ages and declines, the problems will, in relative terms, become far more acute in a sparsely inhabited area than in other areas.
How will the Commission ensure that investment in thinly populated areas will be sufficient in the future to build the necessary infrastructure, safeguard services, and meet business development needs?
Does it consider it necessary to offer greater support than originally planned to thinly populated areas and perhaps, when determining the level of assistance, to depart from the criteria applied to other regions? Does it likewise believe that support for the areas in question should be guaranteed by, for example, adding a paragraph specifically concerning them to Article 5 of the general regulation so as to enable them to be covered by the convergence objectives?
Answer given by Mrs Hübner on behalf of the Commission
The Commission considers that in its proposals for the cohesion policy for the period 2007-2013, it duly takes into account the specific problem of thinly populated areas, in particular in the northern parts of Sweden and Finland.
The system proposed by the Commission to allocate financial resources for the next programming period utilises, among other criteria, a density indicator which gives a financial bonus inversely proportional to the density of the population in the NUTS III regions, i.e. the lower the density the higher the bonus. The northern parts of Sweden and Finland are the most concerned regions by this indicator.
In addition, for those regions of northern Finland and Sweden which are fully eligible to Objective 1 during the current period, the Commission proposes to apply the statistical phasing out profile even if their status is of phasing in regions, to take account of their particular geographical position.
The Commission considers, on the other hand, that the relatively high gross domestic product (GDP) per capita of these regions (sometimes well above the Community average) does not justify their consideration under the new Convergence objective, whose main objective is to promote the convergence of regions rather than compensate specific natural or geographical handicaps.