V. A European Spatial Development Perspective (E.S.D.P.) as a Foundation for Coordination of Departmental Actions with Spatial Impacts

1. Aims and Fields of Action

The document Principles for a European Spatial Development Policy was prepared by the Spatial Development Committee from contributions from all Member States and from the Commission of the EU, and was placed before the informal Council of Ministers responsible for Spatial Planning at their meeting in Leipzig on 21-22 September 1994. The Ministers responsible for Spatial Planning and the EU Commissioner responsible for regional policy jointly charged the Committee for Spatial Development with the task of converting the paper Principles for a European Spatial Development Policy into a European Spatial Development Perspective (E.S.D.P.), in a process of close cooperation among the Member States themselves and with the Commission, and which was to be placed before Ministers in draft form in 1995. The operational objectives for spatial development included22:

Development Objectives - Balancing Objectives - Protection Objectives.

The more detailed concerns are:

- the preservation and consolidation of a balanced, decentralised or poly-central and hierarchically graduated system of city regions,

- the installation of satisfactory connections between these European city regions using suitable environment-friendly modes of transport (TENs),

- conservation and-where necessary-improvement of the natural resources in all parts of Europe, and in particular in densely populated industrial regions,

- improvements to cross-border cooperation between both communes and states along internal and external EU borders by drawing up general principles for spatial planning in border areas,

- continued development of poly-central regional administrative organisations and structures for political decision-making in order to improve spatial planning at regional level.

In addition, a number of fields were designated for joint action, such as:

- strengthening cooperation among Member States in the field of spatial planning as a basis for national spatial planning policy conceived in a European context (reinforcement of the subsidiarity principle),

- coordination of policy areas dealt with by the Commission which have an effect on spatial development on the basis of the objectives agreed upon by Member States,

- designating action areas for spatial planning policy to support poly-centrally orientated spatial and settlement development for Europe which is capable of strengthening spatial cohesion,

- intensification of cross-border cooperation in the field of spatial planning and in the development of subject plans,

- continued development of a poly-centrally organised forms of administration for spatial planning through mutual cooperation among European cities and with the support of the Commission,

- improvement of information strategies as instruments of European spatial development (one example: the Commission's Europe 2000+ document23.

At the meeting of Ministers on 30-31 March 1995 in Strasbourg the next step towards the European Spatial Development Perspective was presented. In a series of maps, the French Presidency outlined the future development of settlement structure, traffic flows and open spaces in Europe. In a Europe without internal frontiers the trend towards a concentration of settlement structures will be intensified, congestion on major European routes will become more acute and there will be a marked increase in the pressure on Europe's natural open spaces. The results of the Strasbourg conference demonstrate that the goal of cohesion, in the sense of European sub-areas growing closer together, generates a very significant need for action in the field of spatial planning policy, not only in the EU's peripheral areas, but also at the centre of Europe, if the aim of sustainable spatial and settlement development in Europe is to be achieved (Sustainable Europe).

The next step towards framing the European Spatial Development Perspective will be to draw the political consequences from the trend scenarios presented by France. Under the present Spanish Presidency, in addition to a summary interpreting the trend scenarios put forward in Strasbourg, papers are currently being prepared detailing directions for action by the Member States and the Commission derived from the these trend scenarios (spatial planning options). The European Spatial Development Perspective is expected to reach its final form in the course of 1996.

In the view of the ARL working-party, it is only by establishing the E.S.D.P. as a directly binding component of the revised Maastricht Treaty that it will be possible to ensure that the Commission frames its sectoral policies in accordance with the orientations decided upon by Member States.

2. Thoughts on the Concrete Shape and Binding Force of an E.S.D.P

2.1 Compatibility of Basic Orientations of Member States
The E.S.D.P., which is currently in the process of preparation, will build principally on the proposals put forward by the Member States. It can, therefore, be assumed that the final product-subsequent of course to a stage of harmonisation from a Community point of view and the addition of specific Community perspectives-will to a large extent not only be compatible with the general intentions of Member States, but will in fact reflect them directly.

When parts of a community are affected by the content of a higher-order instrument or document, they tend to exert an influence on the binding force of such instruments or documents in such a manner that benefits are maximised and any restrictions minimised. This is no less the case in connection with an E.S.D.P. The degree of compulsion which any Member State will wish to attribute to the final outcome of negotiations will be directly proportional to the perceived net gain.

Any parties whose behaviour is not based purely on pragmatism will attempt to resolve the question of binding force independently of the concrete outcome. This means that the tendency will rather be towards a lesser degree of compulsion, as this will allow Member States to protect themselves more effectively against the consequences of possible restrictions and minimal net gain.

2.2 Legal Forms for Adopting the European Spatial Development Perspective
From a purely formal point of view, the question of whether the European Spatial Development Perspective is legally binding hinges on whether or not it is adopted in conjunction with secondary legislation. Such secondary legislation may be enacted by the Council or by the Commission, depending on how responsibility has been defined in the Treaty or in preceding secondary legislation. In the present subject area and case, there is no basis for secondary legislation to be enacted by the Commission as long as it does not have powers in the field of spatial development policy. It must, therefore, be assumed that approval for a European Spatial Development Perspective, if this is indeed to be given in any formal manner, will be accompanied by a document of a status lower than that of secondary legislation, i.e. at best in the form of a Resolution. This would then, nevertheless, be adopted by the Council or by the representatives of the Governments of Member States meeting in Council. Such a resolution would be published in Series C (Announcements) of the Gazette of the European Communities.

The formal arrangement and wording of a Resolution is not governed by any special rules. As it does not constitute secondary legislation, it does not have binding force in law; depending on how it is worded, however, it can to a greater or lesser degree develop binding character from a political perspective. Major elements could be:

- acknowledgement of substantive issues and statements with accompanying arguments;

- recognition of the problems associated with the need for Community action (to be defined in greater detail) and of the need for a range of specific action elements;

- recognition of the value of the Perspective;

- approval, endorsement and affirmation of the aims, the mechanisms to be adopted to achieve these aims, and of the underlying strategy;

- appeals, requests and demands to the Commission on how specific elements of the Perspective are to be consolidated, considered and pursued in the future;

- commitments to be made by the Council in respect of further steps and future consequences;

- demands to other Community organs, Member States and-where appropriate-"non-state" actors to undertake specific actions and desired measures.

In the case of it not being possible even to produce a Resolution, all that remains is the simple announcementwith which the Commission passes the document on to the Council, which is not, however, capable of having the slightest effect externally as an orientation for action. In this respect this course of action would have to be deemed to have failed.

These remarks show clearly that the strength of the backing which the Council, and the government representatives meeting in Council, can give to a European Spatial Development Perspective through a Resolution will largely be dependent on the persuasiveness of the document's contents. As described above, the crucial factor will be that of perceived net gains, as well as its proposals related to the issue of competencies and the effect of setting a precedent. The extent to which the Perspective finds the acceptance of the Member States will depend on what it contains, on presentation, and on the expectations in respect of Community funding associated with it. The persuasiveness of the Perspective will itself have an exponential effect: the more convincing the ideas contained in the European Spatial Development Perspective are, the more effective it will be in its own right, and consequently the more robust will be the language in which support for it is couched in the accompanying Resolution. A qualified Resolution should then be the goal to underpin the E.D.S.P.

However, should the EU be granted clearly defined powers in respect of an E.D.S.P., either in Art. 3 or at some other point in the Treaty, then it could be adopted as secondary legislation "... of the Council and the Ministers ... in the Council ..." or "... of the Council and the representatives of the Governments of Member States meeting in Council". The seconds variant would be preferable as it would lend clearer expression to the cross-sectional character of the E.D.S.P., being directed expressly not at any particular departmental policy, but rather intended to address all policy areas with an impact on spatial development.

Inhaltsverzeichnis zurück weiter Seitenanfang