Malta and the European Spatial Planning Perspective

The European Council of Town Planners (ECTP) held a seminar in London last October to discuss the future of the European Spatial Planning Perspective (ESDP) in Europe and the development of a second work on spatial planning in Europe to be called ESDP 2.

The seminar was attended by the Malta Chamber of Planners (MaCP) who are members of the ECTP and were invited to chair the workshop on enlargement.

The Malta Chamber of Planners has been working to establish the planning profession in Malta and Europe since 1997.

The seminar identified a number of issues related to strategic and regional planning in the EU and was attended by planners from all over Europe, European Commission (EC) DG Regio experts responsible for the EC's regional policy, and UK officials responsible for planning.

Planners present included Professor Andreas Faludi from The Netherlands and Sir Peter Hall from the UK, who have both recently been invited to Malta at the request of the government to address local planners and other professionals.

The seminar identified a number of opportunities and pending issues on the road towards ESDP 2.

Two bodies directly concerned with the development of this spatial planning perspective for Europe are the European Council of Town Planners (ECTP) organisers (and the motor behind the London seminar) and the Association of European Schools of Planning (AESOP), which works closely with the ECTP.

The ECTP also established its Committee of Spatial Development (CSD) in 1991 to co-ordinate activities on EU spatial policy and research. This intergovernmental body has senior officials responsible for EU policy from national ministries concerned with spatial planning. The EC shadows regional development through the DG Regio.

Fifty-three years after the Schuman Declaration and the beginning of the European Union (EU), Europe still lacks an integrated spatial planning perspective to oversee and guide development within the EU and to ensure that such development is sustainable and balanced.

It was only at Potsdam in 1999 that the regional planning ministers of the 15 EU member states agreed on the need for a European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP) document that would act as a key spatial planning reference for development in the EU.

The process for European spatial integration has therefore been a long, uphill struggle and an ongoing process of small incremental steps.

This long drawn out process of slow negotiation was however by no means static and involved a high commitment by European planners to realise this goal.

The concept for the first ESDP document dates back to the first Informal Council of Ministers of spatial planning held in Liège in 1993. It was at the Liepzig meeting of 1994, however, that the political principles for the ESDP were adopted, it was agreed that spatial development contributes in a decisive and positive way to the achievement of economic and social cohesion and sustainable and balanced development in the EU.

The document was to be non-binding and member states would take it forward on their own initiative through networking, lobbying and cross-border planning across Europe.

From the original ESDP experience evolved the benefits of increased communication between EU states and a Europe-wide platform for discussion and exchange.

The ESDP document advocates a polycentric approach to develop-ment, rather than the urban centralisation trends that have clearly led to unsustainable and over-developed cities and towns all over Europe.

Malta too has had its fair share of urban growth, coalescence and sprawl, especially prior to the formulation of the Structure Plan for the Maltese Islands in 1990 and the establishment of the Planning Authority (now Malta Environment and Planning Authority).

The need for a common database on EU spatial development was also identified and this was to be achieved through the European Spatial Planning Observation Network programme (ESPON). ESPON, which will be concluded by 2006, lays the foundations for spatial planning in the EU for the years to come.

The study consists of about 120 datasets on EU spatial data, development trends, territorial typo logies, indicators and thematic maps covering demography, transport, environment, the EU urban and rural systems and other topics.

It involves 27 research projects resulting in 323 maps on the EU, ranging from the EU global perspective to maps incorporating information on the new accession countries, including Malta.

European planners and policymakers will have an enormous task in digesting this new spatial information, but the study will contribute towards the management of structural funds and the interpretation of the territorial dimension of sustainable development, including the social and environmental dimensions.

The results of the ESPON project will be incorporated in the ESDP 2 document.

The ESDP concept aims to bring forward economic and social cohesion in harmony with environmental and cultural development. It is understood this will contribute to long-term sustainable and balanced development.

ESDP 1 involved substantial investment, but from this programme, planning practitioners shared practices between each other and through this interaction, collaboration, networking and joint cross-border projects they experienced an effort that can supersede the differences and bureaucracy that can stall transnational development projects.

Much work has therefore gone into the ESDP 1 process and it is imperative that the European Commission, and particularly the DG Regio, supports and presses on with this programme, especially since the challenges of diversity and differences will multiply with enlargement.

This process can lead to the institutional building and improved governance that will assist the Commission and planners as co-ordinators in its future spatial role. The EC has a role that no one else can play and DG Regio has a responsibility to see the ESDP process to its conclusion.

Let us not be over-optimistic however and assume that differences will not always exist and that spatial positioning will not always be contentious, but the polycentric approach has been adopted by all EU states and the show can go on with this common denominator in place. The ESDP process must continue, but ESDP 2 needs to focus on facilitation and not on regulation.

ESDP 2 will allow for increased trans-boundary co-operation and effective implementation at the Commission level, especially for international development projects required at the regional level. Malta is set to join the EU next May and can play an important role in the southern European regional spatial perspective.

Malta needs to fully participate in spatial development measures and initiatives, particularly transnational and international co-operation as part of the southern Mediterranean region along with Italy, France, Spain, Slovenia, Cyprus and Greece among others. Europe now has a strong eastward and southern perspective following the enlargement process and Malta will inevitably have a strong contribution to make in the EU.

Problems are still faced by European planners. A survey on planners' attitudes towards the ESDP process, conducted by the ECTP and presented at the London seminar, clearly showed that planners all over Europe are more involved in local planning in contrast to regional planning at the European level.

There is also a general lack of support and information from governments and a serious lack of involvement of planners in key aspects of government spatial and development strategy. The seminar mentioned the need of bridging this evident gap between government policy analysts and planners.

There is now the opportunity for a new initiative, as the DG Regio, which has been shadowing the ESDP process closely, may be taking a fresh interest in this process that can clearly assist the EC in its regional development policy, management of structural funds and of the Interreg III programme of regional development.

European planners' concern with the importance of the ESDP 2 is slowly but surely establishing its place at the heart of the European administrative system.

There are indications that the Commission is observing the inter-European discussions that are taking place and that the "roving band of planners," as Professor Faludi aptly calls them, are acting as a mini-Europe in themselves, meeting to discuss common, yet diverse spatial strategies.

To succeed, however, governments need to involve planners, support the planning profession, and in some countries even legally and formally recognise the profession. Planning, after all, is the process that eventually helps achieve the sustainable and balanced development that all governments want.

It was interesting to note during the London seminar that other new members like Slovenia have made great strides in participating in the ESDP process. Slovenia, unlike Malta, started at a very early stage in its collaboration with bordering Austria and Italy and gained valuable experience through such cross-border projects.

In 2002 Slovenia even went as far as incorporating the ESDP process in its legislation. Furthermore, Ireland and the UK are putting their acts together and the Slovaks and Welsh already have spatial development strategy plans.

ESDP 2 will present a new methodology for integrating the older members of the EU with the new countries. There is nothing worse for EU trade than regional disparity.

Cohesion and integration increase trade as lagging regions improve their performance. ESDP 2 will provide a framework to promote accessibility through improved transport linkages, improve the uneasy relationship between urban areas and the rural countryside and establish a healthy competition between cities.

ESDP 2 will continue to explore ways to promote the protection of the natural environment and enhancement of cultural heritage and diversity, reducing environmental damage on a regional level. It will offer a regional perspective to problems of natural disasters like flooding, international security and mass migration. ESDP 2 will, above all, enhance information sharing and knowledge as the basis for spatial development.

To conclude, ESDP 2's relevance to Malta is simple. Malta needs to introduce into the EU policy mechanisms the issues related to a peri-pheral location and of being a small and vulnerable island state dependent on cross-border trade and tourism.

Malta faces difficult tasks on the road to environmental sustainability, considering its high population density and close network and culture of "friends of friends", especially at the local level, that often makes environmental enforcement an ordeal.

The sharing of experiences in the ESDP 2 process is vital in this regard. Malta, through its strategic position, will also act as a "bridge state" between continents and will stand to gain from participating in Europe's peripheral spatial plan.

Finally, an important consideration made in the London seminar was the need for the planning profession to be promoted by the press and for journalists to make an effort to inform the public on the benefits of spatial planning.

Planning has been portrayed all over Europe as the enemy of the market system, but it is not. It is simply the thermostat that ensures that market development is environmentally and economically sustainable and that the system does not overheat.

Anthony Ellul, M.Sc. Environmental Planning and Management, and Marco Attard Portughes, M.Sc. Environmental Planning and Management, are secretary and member of the Malta Chamber of Planners (MaCP) respectively. Both are employed as spatial planners at the Malta Environment and Planning Authority and have an interest in sustainable development and the EU perspective.

The contributors represented the (MaCP) at the London seminar on the European Spatial Planning Per-spective (ESDP) entitled What does Europe want from the next ESDP? For further information on the (MaCP) e-mail aellul@keyworld-.net or mapp@global.net.mt.