News

The BSPC gathered an expert seminar to discuss the changing population composition in the Baltic Sea region, in particular the ageing population. A focus was placed on lifelong learning to develop skills suited to new demands in the labour market and keeping older people employed, active and healthy. The meeting included about 60 participants from the Åland Islands, the Baltic Assembly, Denmark, Finland, the German Bundestag, Hamburg, Iceland, Karelia, Latvia, Lithuania, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, the Nordic Council, Norway, Poland, the Russian Federation and Sweden. Introduction BSPC President Pyry Niemi welcomed the participants to this seminar on the topic “Adaptation to new demography and challenges to the welfare model: Urbanisation, an ageing population and labour shortages and the connection to trust in public institutions, social and regional equality and young people’s opportunities”. He pointed out that the labour market and social welfare were traditional topics of the BSPC along with the integration of young people into the work force. The pandemic had exacerbated the problems. Connected to that were the trust in democracy and the state. Presentations Mr Gunnar Andersson , Professor in Demography and Head of the Stockholm University Demography Unit (SUDA) on demographic patterns and developments, current challenges and trends in the region, provided an introduction to the current demographic trends that could be seen in the Baltic Sea region. Three population processes were contributing to demographic change: fertility, mortality and migration. Mortality had been a major factor, because of the COVID-19 pandemic, in Sweden and the southern and eastern nations of the Baltic Sea region. Fertility had been declining in recent years in the Nordic countries. Migration had been primarily affected by the influx of refugees in 2015. The pandemic had also impacted migration in that inter-European borders had been shut while a demographic shift from cities to rural areas was taking place. Fertility could experience a short-turn rise but a medium-term decline, it had been suggested. As a whole, Prof Andersson noted that people were living longer in the Baltic Sea region, increasing the number of people receiving pensions. In the younger adult ranges, migration was a major factor – emigration in some Baltic Sea countries, immigration in others. Most decisive for demography was fertility as it set the bottom of the population pyramid and would determine the development for the next 100 years. The pyramid in the Nordic countries was rather balanced, with enough people of working age to support pensioners. In Germany, much like the southern and eastern nations around the Baltic Sea, there had been low fertility for many decades, with shrinking cohort numbers at the bottom. This created much more of a challenge than in the Nordic countries since large numbers of people would move into the pensioner range while far fewer would be coming of working age. Therefore, interest had focused on the Nordic countries with their relatively high fertility, presumably due to their welfare state. In short, they made it easier to combine a working career with a family career through supporting female participation in the labour market and incentivising men taking over parenting duties with parental leave systems. A focus on gender equality and childcare had aided women continuing to work. By contrast, highly educated women in the rest of the Baltic Sea region had to choose between family and work. As a rule, fertility had been higher in the Nordic nations than in the other countries, with educated and less educated women having similar numbers of children. However, there had been a yet unexplained drop in fertility in the past decade, reaching all time lows recently. For example, Finland had even dropped below Germany. Economic and labour force effects could not account for this decline nor social policy changes. Uncertainty about the future might be a factor, as the drop-off had started with the recession in 2010. More research was needed as well as new data that included subjective dimensions, such as perceived uncertainties, trust in society and institutions as well as fertility intentions. Presentation Gunnar Andersson Prof Andersson replied to a question that the Nordic countries, in particular Sweden, had implemented a system to respond to the ageing society: Pension age was tied to the overall age of the population. Two years earlier, it had been raised to 67 years, from 65 before. He was asked about the influence of migration on fertility. Prof Andersson noted that, despite the belief that migrants had a higher birth rate, they were quickly adapting to the fertility rate of their new country. As such, they were contributing by entering a country at a fertile age and having children there but not at higher numbers. Indeed, second-generation migrants even had a lower birth rate. He further pointed out that the life expectancy in the Nordic countries had been barely changed by the pandemic since the disease had primarily affected older people. Ms Tatiana Razumova , Professor at Moscow State Lomonosov University, spoke about Labour Market and Social Policy under COVID-19, with a view to youth employment during the pandemic. Speaking about the latest international labour market developments, some workplaces had shut completely in the spring of 2020 while closures due to circumstances and part-time closures abounded. Overall, the situation in that year had seemed highly difficult. In terms of working hours being lost, Northern Europe had fared quite well compared with Latin America and some territories in Asia and North America. The International Labour Organization (ILO) had estimated the equivalent of 305 million jobs having been lost. The development of different branches of industry as well as agriculture had been hit hard by the pandemic, Prof Razumova explained. Social support measures had been implemented to attempt to counteract the effects. Women were affected worst by the pandemic, followed by young people. For young workers, the conventional risks of the labour market had grown worse, such as unsuccessful job searches or their willingness to work in informal environments lacking social security measures. An increase in the retirement age had led to slower career progression for younger people. The Russian population had declined by half a million people compared to a year earlier, among others due to a high mortality rate from the COVID-19 pandemic. Unemployment in Russia had shot up in the period after March 2020 but had been corrected at the end of the summer. Overall employment had been recovering very slowly since then. At the same time, youth unemployment in Russia had seen an inversion of the usual distribution, now seeing a peak of unemployment in summer and a trough in winter. Russian youths were entering the labour market after university a little bit later than in other countries. During the pandemic, retraining measures had been put in place, with the intent on getting people into the labour force immediately after completion of the course. As of February 2021, 40 per cent of retrainees had found new jobs, underlining the success of said measures. Youth unemployment was particularly struck because most of their employers were industries highly affected by the pandemic, such as tourism, transportation, entertainment and the restaurant business. Urgent support measures had been provided by the government, including direct help as well as several additional payments for young families and families with children. On the whole, it was expected that the ILO programmes in Russia would support the country’s population in overcoming all the difficulties. In response to questions, Prof Razumova underlined that, as per the ILO view, a holistic bundling of employer, employee and state measures to support both businesses and workers was the only way to resolve critical problems. As for labour development, she considered international collaboration, in particular in terms of training, to be vital. She also noted that mortality rates were thought to be higher for women of working age because they were in higher-risk professions, such as medicine. Regarding a question of how parliaments and their cooperation could help in solving these problems, Prof Razumova said that the pandemic was the primary concern. Therefore, cooperation in vaccination efforts, medicine development and the like were the most vital. Also essential was joint work to establish safe conditions for work and life. She expected another wave of labour migration in the near future for which both migrants and native populations had to be protected from disease, given social support and safe conditions of work. Decent and safe work had to be the goal. Presentation Tatiana Razumova Ms Daria Akhutina , Senior Advisor, Head of Priority Area: Sustainable and Prosperous Region, Council of the Baltic Sea States (CBSS), spoke about the Baltic Sea Labour Forum for inclusive labour market in the Baltic Sea region. The Forum was concerned with the social dialogue between trade unions, employer organisations and governments in EU and non-EU countries of the Baltic Sea region. A recent round table event had dealt with “Distant/Remote Work as a New Reality”, specifically the opportunities and responsibilities, the untapped potential, the requisite digital skills as well as whether respective legislation was appropriate. Another conference had concerned “Future Work and Provisions of Lifelong Learning Systems in the Context of an Ageing Labour Force”, with a focus on how retraining could adapt to rapidly changing labour markets and who should bear responsibility for that. She further mentioned the project Baltic Sea Labour Forum for Sustainable Working Life which was promoting Active Ageing. Here, the challenge of an ageing population was to be turned into an opportunity through lifelong learning, competence and skill development, labour migration and senior entrepreneurship. Social and health elements also played a role here, as Ms Akhutina explained. Motivation and incentives were another factor. Policy briefs had been developed on a wide range of topics, such as a gender perspective on early retirement, bridging the digital divide for the age group 55+, age discrimination, future work and technological change and public employment services for older workers. These briefs had been published on the CBSS website. In distributing these outcomes and recommendations, she singled out the BSPC as a crucial conduit to political frameworks. Ms Akhutina highlighted an upcoming event on “Beyond COVID-19: Population Challenges Ahead” which would be dealing with old-age poverty, generational conflict, an ageing society, adaptation of educational systems for lifelong learning and other issues. Presentation Daria Akhutina Mr Rolf Elmér , Director Nordregio, and Mr Mats Stjernberg , Senior Research Fellow at Nordregio, presented on the topic of the silver economy – a response to population ageing: How can older people continue to make valuable economic and societal contributions after retirement? Nordregio was working on regional policy and policy planning. Regarding the lower fertility rates in the southern and eastern parts of the Baltic Sea region, it was crucial to keep older people in the work force. The so-called silver economy referred to all economic activities linked to older age groups, considering seniors as valuable contributors. This “overlooked demographic” continued to be significant in terms of the economy and society, with recent policy changes acknowledging their potential. Active and healthy ageing were closely associated with the silver economy. Population ageing differed somewhat in intensity and timing among the Nordic countries. Location was another factor, with rural areas having a greater share of elderly populations than urban regions. That was common among all Nordic countries. Another key aspect was health in older age, a goal pursued by the WHO. A healthy and active older population was the precondition for their inclusion in the labour market, Mr Stjernberg underlined. In most Nordic regions, men aged 65 still had 18 – 20 years left to live and women 2 – 3 years longer. There were regional and gender differences in that respect while health and wellbeing also depended inter alia on income, educational level, dietary habits as well as living and housing arrangements. Pension and labour market reforms in many countries had aimed at extending the employment span of people into older age. Recent years had seen a significant increase in the Nordic countries, although differences between countries remained noticeable. Overall, it could be said that more people worked longer than before. Mr Stjernberg spoke about the key elements for uncovering the potential of the silver economy. Promoting health and activity was a decisive factor which not only extended the working career but also improved well-being and delayed care dependency. The WHO had also actively promoted age-friendliness in recent decades, establishing a network of age-friendly cities. Society had to be changed to be more age-friendly, removing barriers such as ageism and age discrimination. The perception of population ageing, based on outdated stereotypes, had to be altered. It was necessary to go beyond labour and pension reforms and explore education and training, such as digital skills, minimising the issue of digital exclusion. Mutual learning between older and younger generations was an important aspect. Labour and retirement schemes had to become more flexible, such as part-time engagements to combine work with retirement. Overall, population ageing was a multi-faceted issue that required a holistic approach. The interlinkages between many policy areas had to be taken into account. Collaboration was needed in designing and implementing the policies, bringing together the public sector, private companies and senior citizens themselves as well as the organisations representing them. Presentation Rolf Elmér and Mats Stjernberg Ms Agnieszka Chłoń-Domińczak , Professor and Director of the Institute of Statistics and Demography SGH at the Warsaw School of Economics, Poland, gave a presentation on Lifelong Learning in the current times of crisis – the need of upskilling and reskilling. A recent green paper of the European Commission had pointed out the shrinking labour force. Her presentation focused on the eastern part of the Baltic Sea region (specifically Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland) which would be more severely hit by the ageing population, given the lower fertility rate there. The main challenges for the labour market and skill development were not only population ageing but also technological transformations and globalisation which were changing the skills sought on the labour market. Furthermore, lifelong learning was less a part of life there than in Scandinavia. Digital skills, which could also be performed long-distance, had become an essential skill. The reduction in working age population would hit the central and eastern European countries very soon. About half of the jobs were threatened by computerisation and low ICT skills. Apart from lacking lifelong learning, adolescents and adults also had low skill levels, although the countries had been catching up to the rest of Europe. Estonia had made progress in establishing lifelong learning. Computer skills were below average in most of the observed nations, with rather low shares of highly skilled people. The investment in human capital for ages 0 – 30 were close to the EU25 average, with the exception of the trailing Poland. The employment rate among working adults was generally low, in particular in Poland. What was striking was that those employed in jobs threatened by computerisation were considerably less likely to engage in lifelong learning than the national average. All of those were challenges to lifelong learning in the considered countries, with an added barrier formed by both employers and employees underestimating its importance. To promote lifelong learning, labour market and benefit policies favouring the increase in economic activity at all ages were required, targeting in particular people aged over 50, women as well as people with low education. Sharing experiences and peer learning were one avenue to explore. At the same time, incentives and better conditions for lifelong learning, in particular for the older population, should be put in place. Transversal and social competences were desirable as well, also in light of the COVID-19 pandemic locking especially younger people out of their real-world social networks for over a year. Finally, coordinated support was required to develop new technology sectors, including IT skills, investing in research and development as well as promoting the use of new technologies together with lifelong learning. Presentation Agnieszka Chłoń-Domińczak In the Q&A section, Prof Chłoń-Domińczak noted that new skills and competences were vital in the social area as well even if not directly linked to employment. Lifelong learning had a wider definition and could also involve soft skills and interests. Regarding opportunities to engage in learning, she saw a range of mixed tools as successful, including incentives for employers but also immediate support for learners through e.g., institutions. She underlined that the attitude to appreciate lifelong learning was crucial and had to be developed. Referring to age discrimination, Mr Stjernberg saw developing more age-friendly societies as decisive. In practical terms, the experience and knowledge of older workers should be seen as assets, not least in transferring that to younger workers. Keeping people active into old age was vital, whether connected to employment or not, as they continued contributing to society and felt more valued. As for political tools to counteract age discrimination, tax incentives to employ older people might be an option but Mr Stjernberg stressed that the mindset had to be shifted towards healthy aging. Perception of age had to move beyond stereotypes and also had to acknowledge the great diversity of the older generations. Ms Akhutina saw a complex of measures as necessary, including economic support of employers, the internal culture to welcome older workers as well as healthier life and work conditions. Solutions had to be customised to specific situations and companies. Regarding political approaches, Mr Stjernberg said that healthy aging as currently promoted by the UN and the WHO was vital. The various points mentioned throughout the seminar required a holistic approach at various levels and policy domains, acknowledging both the challenges and opportunities of an ageing population. He underlined the need for research to better understand the trends and diversification within older populations. Ms Akhutina highlighted peer-learning at all levels and in all fields, be they academia or social contexts. Permanent experience exchange was crucial and needed to be facilitated, for example through the Baltic Sea Labour Forum. A further political tool, for instance for the BSPC, was to raise awareness by sharing information such as the policy briefs she had mentioned earlier. These briefs were informed by various levels and groupings, dealing with a multiplicity of topics. Prof Chłoń-Domińczak stressed that ageing should not be seen as a catastrophe. Policies had to adapt to this natural, long-term process as it would remain and stay important. To that end, long-term collaborative international strategies had to be established. Measures that had proven unsuccessful needed to be discarded. She underlined that peer learning was crucial. Closing Remarks BSPC President Pyry Niemi concluded that demographic change strongly affected the labour market as did the digital age. The pandemic had shown how vital it was to focus on young people getting access to the labour market. Keeping older people active in the work force was of equal value, with peer and lifelong learning contributing to shared knowledge and experience among the generations.

How do we secure a democratically and environmentally sustainable future in the Baltic Sea region? These are the crucial core questions that young people will discuss on Saturday, 28 August 2021, with Parliament members from the Baltic Sea Region in a hybrid meeting back-to-back to the 30 th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference to promote dialogue between young people of the region and policymakers. This Baltic Sea Parliamentary Youth Forum will provide an opportunity for you to give your input to policymakers on the issues at hand and to gain insight into international parliamentary cooperation . The purpose is to capture valuable input from the young generation, which is of great importance in our joint endeavour to build back our region – better, greener and stronger – after the COVID-19 pandemic. The results of your discussions will be presented by representatives of the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Youth Forum at the 30 th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference on 29-31 August 2021. They will also feed into the further negotiations of the BSPC Working Group on Climate Change and Biodiversity (CCB). You are welcome to apply if you are between 16-30 years old , interested in climate change, biodiversity and/or democracy and the Baltic Sea Region , and based in Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, Poland, the Russian Federation or Sweden . Please apply by 30 April noon (CET) and read more in the information sheet here You can find this invitation and all further information also on the website of the Council of the Baltic Sea States under the following link: cbss.org

The BSPC Working Group on Climate Change and Biodiversity gathered for another digital meeting focussed on expert presentations. Representatives from HELCOM spoke about the organisation’s own efforts and measures to restore a good ecological status to the Baltic Sea. As best practice examples, experts reported on several projects taking practical measures to improve the ecological status of marine waters. The meeting involved more then 50 participants from the Åland Islands, the Baltic Assembly, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, the German Bundestag, Hamburg, Iceland, Kaliningrad, Latvia, Lithuania, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, the Nordic Council, Norway, Poland, the Russian Federation, Schleswig-Holstein and Sweden. WG Chairwoman Cecilie Tenfjord-Toftby opened the meeting by noting that the digital format offered the opportunity to attract experts who might not be available otherwise. This would be evidenced by this meeting’s rich wealth of information provided. Expert presentations In continuing the long-standing tradition of cooperation and exchange between the BSPC and HELCOM, the first two experts at the meeting spoke about the climate change- and biodiversity-related expertise accumulated by the latter organisation and upcoming decisions and actions to improve the current situation. Mr Rüdiger Strempel , HELCOM Executive Secretary, explained that HELCOM existed because the Baltic Sea was a unique and fragile ecosystem that had to be protected. Although progress had been made, a good environmental status had not yet been reached. The single most pressing issue threatening the Baltic Sea remained eutrophication. Further challenges were either emerging or had not been previously addressed, inter alia marine litter, pharmaceuticals or underwater noise. These challenges had also contributed to forty years of work not having achieved the goal, aside from ecosystem lag, insufficient measures or measures not yet implemented. Mr Strempel noted the long history of HELCOM, reaching back to 1974 and predating most environmental efforts. He explained the structure of the organisation, bringing the foundational Helsinki Convention to life. Its decision-making process was based on science in a bottom-up approach, he underlined. Of its recommendations, 260 had been adopted so far. A fundamental part of its work was monitoring the environment along with thematic and holistic assessments. Mr Strempel highlighted the Baltic Sea Action Plan (BSAP) aiming at removing eutrophication and hazardous substances as well as establishing environmentally friendly maritime activities and a favourable status of biodiversity. An update of the BSAP had been decided by the Ministerial Meeting in 2018, to pursue the same ambition level based on the current plan. Using what had worked and tweaking what had not, the update would consider the economic and social benefits of a healthy sea. Mr Strempel stressed that the BSAP could not function in a vacuum but had to be interlinked with global targets and commitments. Apart from the core Action Plan, HELCOM had established related processes to resolve such challenges as marine litter, underwater noise or climate change. He further outlined the level of implementation of the original 2007 plan, noting that 71 % of joint actions had been put into practice but only 29 % of national actions, such as designating Marine Protected Areas. Accordingly, far more needed to be done. He specified that the parliamentarians of the BSPC could assist in the implementation through interaction with the executive but also with the public. Presentation: HELCOM and BSAP in brief by Ruediger Strempel Ms Jannica Haldin , HELCOM Professional Secretary, spoke about climate change and the Baltic Sea. HELCOM’s goal in this field was to increase the overall resilience of the Baltic ecosystem against impacts from climate change. This was being pursued through a long-term multidisciplinary approach to understanding and communicating these impacts. Together with Baltic Earth, a long-term expert network on climate change (EN CLIME) had been put into place in 2018 to quickly provide quality-assured science to policy-makers. The network had created a Climate Change Fact Sheet that served as an easily accessible report on 34 parameters in a science-driven consensus view. The parameters directly affected by climate change included air temperature, sea level and precipitation. These in turn altered secondary parameters, among them oxygen levels as well as various marine fauna. Indirect parameters also concerned human use of the marine environment, ranging from shipping over tourism to ecosystem services. Derived from them were key messages on what was already happening or about to happen as well as knowledge gaps and policy relevance. Ms Haldin highlighted that it was important to consider other drivers of change in the ecosystem, such as anthropogenic drivers quite apart from climate change. Each statement of the key messages was assessed on the level of confidence HELCOM had in its data, using the IPCC model. From the fact sheets, it could be seen that climate change impacts were evident in the Baltic Sea, affecting the ecosystem as well as human activities. As examples of direct impacts, she mentioned rising water temperatures. Among indirect impacts, the numbers of warm water fish species were increasing while cold water species were decreasing. As for human activities, trawl fishing began earlier in the year. Nevertheless, she underlined that the Baltic Sea ecosystem was highly complex so that climate change effects were not easily distinguished from other human pressures and also varied between the regions. Ms Haldin described the state of biodiversity in the Baltic Sea as poor. Many species were stressed, and climate change was exacerbating the situation. Changes in distribution and behaviour were found in all species covered by the fact sheet: benthic habitats, open sea fish, coastal and migratory fish, waterbirds, and seals. Combining all of these various factors, she explained, described the ecosystem function. Food webs had already been affected. How nutrients were recycled within the ecosystem would likely change in the future. With warmer waters, primary production would increase, giving rise to more algal blooms, decreasing oxygen levels and sun light penetration. Decreased salinity would alter species composition. Eutrophication was already affecting large areas of the Baltic Sea which were solely responsible for huge financial losses. The climate change impact here was particularly difficult to disentangle from other human impacts. Reducing nutrient loads from agricultural practices could significantly decrease eutrophication even under climate change. Ms Haldin explained that the complex, interlinking information from the fact sheet was informing the policy recommendations by HELCOM. Presentation: Climate Change and Biodiversity by Jannica Haldin Mr Bodo Bahr raised a question about marine protected areas. At a previous meeting, Prof Christoph Humborg, Scientific Director of the Stockholm University Baltic Sea Centre, had explained that these were not as restricted for human use as the name would imply and needed further strengthening. In response, Ms Jannica Haldin said that the plan was to link the Baltic Sea Action Plan to the EU Biodiversity Strategy. The latter set a percentage goal for strictly protected areas in which human use other than scientific pursuits was minimised. Discussions, though, were still ongoing. Mr Rüdiger Strempel noted the complexity of the respective legal frameworks, including both the EU and Russia, and the need for consistency across all the instruments employed. Ms Linda Kumblad , Associate Professor in Systems Ecology at Stockholm University and Project Leader of Living Coast, funded by BalticSea 2020, spoke about whether it was possible to regain a good ecological status in coastal areas. Launched in 2011, Living Coast was a full-scale remediation project on areas severely affected by eutrophication and with limited water exchange. Their focus area was the highly eutrophicated Björnöfjärden bay in the Stockholm archipelago. Björnöfjärden could be described as a miniature version of the Baltic Sea. Aside from immediate actions, communication was also important to stimulate action in other areas. The first step had been to identify and quantify the nutrient loads, both anthropogenic and natural. Due to existing methods and accessibility, the project concentrated on phosphorus, even though nitrogen loads were equally important to reduce. The anoxic bottom areas were causing the sediment to release phosphorus in voluminous amounts rather than containing it. Living Coast implemented measures to reduce inputs from agriculture and horse keeping but also to improve local sewage systems. An aluminium treatment assisted in binding phosphorus to the sediment. The measures over a span of 10 years had succeeded in reducing phosphorus loads by ca. 70 %, primarily in the sediment area. Monitoring the water, fauna and flora had shown the phosphorus concentration in the sea reduced by half, leading to less phytoplankton and a higher transparency of the water. Bottom areas were better oxygenated. Both the latter aspects led to fish and benthos being found in deeper layers of the bay. Ms Kumblad summarised that the environmental status of coastal areas could indeed be improved, by reducing nutrient supplies from both land and sediment in a holistic view of the ecosystem. She stressed that this took time, patience and resources. Ms Kumblad also mentioned two further Swedish projects on remediation efforts, LEVA on support for local endeavours and Living Bays working to restore shallow wave-protected bays. Replying to the questions by working group members, Ms Linda Kumblad explained that the project had been successful because the core staff had been deeply involved in studying the ecosystem and getting to understand the local situation. Moreover, they had spent great efforts on informing and involving the community and municipal politicians. Financial support and resources had been vital in the monitoring efforts as well as providing subsidies for the measures. The breadth of efforts and success around the bay had increased the willingness to contribute over time. For instance, the aluminium seeding had visibly cleared the water, proving that the efforts were paying off. Her colleague, Mr Emil Rydin , Associate Professor in Limnology, Baltic Sea Centre, Stockholm University, stressed the importance of community acceptance and trust. Ms Kumblad was not aware of any other similar projects, with comparable financial resources, monitoring efforts and the full scale of remediation measures. Presentation: Regaining good ecological status in coastal areas is that possible? by Linda Kumblad & Emil Rydin Presentation: Effective measures against eutrophication by Linda Kumblad & Emil Rydin Ms Patricia Wiklund , Project Manager, CEO of Invenire – a strategy & communications agency working within the food industry, the bioeconomy and the circular economy, had worked on a very small-scale, community-led project that could be expanded to a wider scope. It had consisted of water area management and a local farmer, situated on the tiny island group Brändö. The island’s waters had visibly changed, with the common reed forming thick beds on previously used land and sea surfaces. Ms Wiklund’s project had aimed to include the reed regeneratively in the local nutrient cycle while assisting in better shore, water and fish management. To that end, in a very visible spot, reed had been harvested repeatedly. The reed was used as ground cover in greenhouses and would be used in the spring to fertilise fields. By harvesting, water pathways and canals had been restored, improving fish habitats. The same applied to overgrown meadows being returned to cow pasture as well as game feed. Ms Wiklund explained that their approach was based on interconnectedness and a holistic view, allowing for surprising combinations to emerge. She highlighted the need for passionate and knowledgeable people from many specialties to be involved in a close-knit network. In her view, the local community had to be at the heart of the efforts, appreciating what was to be achieved. As such, scaling up would mean connecting several nodes of such communities. Presentation: How can we create impact & bring the wow factor into sustainable, local & engaging small-scale pilot projects? Ms Gréta María Grétarsdóttir , Managing Director of Innovation, Social Responsibility and Investor Relations at the Seafood Company Brim in Iceland, said that her company always considered the environment in its activities, including fishing, processing and sales. In 1983, a total allowable catch (TAC) had been set for Iceland’s 200-mile territory, determined by scientists rather than companies or the government. This prevented overfishing and kept the nation’s main export sustainable. The primary impact of the fishing industry on water, though, was oil use. Engine changes to the fishing fleets had to be considered long-term as the average ship age was 30 years, constituting a heavy investment for enterprises. Accordingly, decisions made today might take ten or fifteen years to bear fruit. Since the 1990s, oil use had decreased in both fishing and fishmeal plants. Both were switching more and more to green electricity, thanks to improving infrastructure. The company Brim’s fleet had reduced oil use by 50 % since 2005. Fisheries management and better stocks had enabled shorter fishing trips, thus curtailing fossil fuel use as well. Reliable, traceable and transparent catches were key to retaining healthy fish stocks and economic success. Furthermore, Brim was taking care to return any waste from fishing to be returned to shore, sorted and recycled. They were also seeking to clean the coastal areas from trash. A central part of their environmental efforts was the “Cleaner Value Chain in Fisheries”, holistically determining the company’s carbon footprint and reducing it throughout all operations, among others packaging and transport. This was being achieved through their own real-time data collection system on environmental effects of the vessels and land-based operations. Innovations in ship technology were another pillar of their efforts. Ms Grétarsdóttir underlined that the company had to be fully behind these efforts because only environmental protection ensured its future. Measures had to be continually refined and innovated. Responding to the parliamentarians’ questions, Ms Grétarsdóttir pointed to the switch from fossil fuels to other engine types as a region where governments were vital in assisting this change. Among additional measures to reduce ship emissions, she mentioned scrubbers. Their downside was that fuel consumption remained the same so investment costs could not be recouped. Here, she mentioned Iceland’s carbon tax on fuels. She suggested that governments could lower taxation for reduced emissions despite continued fossil fuel use. In terms of alternative energy engines, Ms Grétarsdóttir noted that her company was planning to switch their smaller boats to hybrid engines in the near future. Using LNG or electricity as propellants was problematic for vessels on long-haul trips of 30 days or more. In her view, hydrogen fuel cells rather than electric batteries were the likely technology of the future for fishing fleets. She reiterated that sustainability was essential for a company’s survival, also from the customers’ point of view who would steer away from non-green enterprises. Presentation: Best practices BRIM Working group discussion After the experts’ presentations, the Working Group CCB discussed the aims and ways of their work, agreeing to mainly focus on regional aspects of the Baltic Sea region. Chairwoman CecilieTenfjord-Toftby announced that a Youth Forum would be held in conjunction with the BSPC Annual Conference in Stockholm in August, dealing with the same topics as the BSPC Working Group CCB . The attendees agreed that the results of the forum would feed into the reports of the working group. The working group decided to hold a governmental survey among the BSPC member states and regions to gather respective data of scientific interest. The next meeting of the BSPC Working Group CCB will take place in digital form on 31 May 2021.

The highest Executive Committee of the BSPC was informed in its online meeting on the activities of HELCOM in strengthening international cooperation to restore the health of the Baltic marine environment as well as efforts to combat the COVID-19 pandemic by experts in the field. The most important strategies to contain the virus and protect health were laid out. The meeting included 50 participants from the Åland Islands, the Baltic Assembly, Denmark, Finland, the German Bundestag, Hamburg, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, the Nordic Council, Norway, Poland, the Russian Federation, Schleswig-Holstein, Saint Petersburg and Sweden. Introduction In his welcoming speech, BSPC President Pyry Niemi referred to the digital seminar the BSPC had held a few weeks earlier on Democracy in a Changing Media Landscape. He pointed out that its findings about the need to defend democracy, to fight for and strengthen it had been echoed by US President Joe Biden in a recent keynote speech. The Council of Europe had also underlined the urgent need for international cooperation. This widespread concern reinforced the Swedish Presidency’s priority for this topic. Mr Niemi further reflected on the one-year anniversary of the last meeting the BSPC had been able to hold in person and that, despite the current mutations, the vaccination efforts would allow them to meet again away from the digital realm. Progress Report on the activities of HELCOM Dr Lilian Busse , chair of HELCOM, explained that Germany was holding the rotating chairmanship from 2020 – 2022 and would host the Ministerial Meeting in October 2021. She outlined the make-up as well as the decision-making process of HELCOM. Dr Busse noted the current Baltic Sea Action Plan’s goals of a good ecological status of the Baltic marine environment by 2021. As these goals had not been met, the decision had been made with a strong political mandate in 2018 to update it by evolving it from the preceding version. In that effort, the economic and social benefits of a healthy sea were considered, along with managing human activities and taking into account current HELCOM topics, such as marine litter or underwater noise. While the ambition level of the original Baltic Sea Action Plan would be maintained, global targets and commitments would also be included, e.g., the SDGs, the Aichi targets and EU MSFD. Ongoing projects and pursuits would be folded into the Baltic Sea Action Plan as well, Dr Busse explained, including efforts in nutrient recycling and maritime spatial planning. They were also developing a HELCOM Science Agenda that would consider which future science would be needed for a healthy Baltic Sea. Through the drafting and segment teams as well as the meetings of the heads of delegation, the updated Baltic Sea Action Plan would be finalised until presented for adoption to the Ministerial Meeting in October 2021. Moving on to the German chairmanship, Dr Busse laid out its five priorities: strengthening ocean governance; updating and implementing the Baltic Sea Action Plan; trying new solutions for well-known, pressing challenges; strengthening marine biodiversity; understanding and responding to climate change and the Baltic Sea. She went on to comment on several issues raised by the BSPC at its 29 th Annual Conference in August 2020. Regarding biodiversity, Dr Busse explained that HELCOM was working on developing a coherent HELCOM network of marine protected areas as well as stepping up efforts to conserve endangered species such as harbour porpoises. HELCOM was also pursuing the reduction of nutrient inputs, e.g., by updating nutrient hotspots. On the problems of sea-dumped ammunitions, shipwrecks and ghost nets, HELCOM was seeking to share information and test technology for a better understanding of the situation and means to safely remove the munitions or fishing nets. They had also developed the Regional Marine Litter Action Plan to work on this issue. Progress Reports on Combatting the COVID-19 Pandemic and International Cooperation in these Efforts Dr Catherine Smallwood , WHO Europe, highlighted that the overall global situation had improved since the end of 2020. Across the countries most affected by the pandemic, the numbers of new cases and new deaths were decreasing. Moreover, seven different vaccines were currently being rolled out, with more down the road. Testing capabilities as well as treatments had become better as well. Existing countermeasures also held up against the new virus variants so far. But despite these positive trends, very high numbers of new cases persisted in specific regions, along with significant demand on the healthcare system. Some of these regions were in the countries of the Baltic Sea region. As such, the focus had to be on reducing infection which, Dr Smallwood stressed, was not possible through vaccination. Vaccination was targeting the vulnerable populations and not those groups driving transmission in society, i.e., the younger, healthier and working population. Another threat to the current progress was posed by new variants of concern emerging. She underlined that mutations were more likely the wider the virus was spread. That is assumed to be behind the rapid acceleration of mutants in recent months, further underlining the urgency to reduce transmission in the human population. The variant of concern B.1.1.7, originating in the UK, had now been detected in 43 of the WHO member states and was growing in prevalence. Although the overall trends were coming down, the proportion of cases with the UK variant were increasing. Moreover, the South African variant might be able to evade the immune system and lower the efficacy of vaccines against it. She stressed that it was the shared belief of experts that vaccines would nonetheless continue to work against the virus. Dr Smallwood also underlined that this might change if the virus was allowed to mutate further. Reducing transmission – through the established and proven hygiene measures – was the key to preventing this and thus the primary concern. Regarding the vaccination efforts, some 200 vaccines were still being researched, in addition to the seven already rolled out. The challenge, though, was distribution when supply was insufficient for the global demand. The WHO was calling for vaccine equity in the world since low-income countries were trailing far behind in vaccination. Dr Smallwood underlined the crucial importance: Unmitigated spread in low-income countries would allow mutations to continue and might lead to the emergence of a variant against which the present vaccines would no longer work. Therefore, transmission had to be reduced on a global scale. In particular, health care workers around the globe should be vaccinated as quickly as possible. Ülla-Karin Nurm , Director of the Northern Dimension Partnership in Public Health and Social Well-Being (NDPHS) Secretariat, underlined that the pandemic had highlighted the need for international cooperation in health. Working on this issue suffused all the NDPHS expert groups, through knowledge and experience exchange. In November, there had been a Northern Dimension Future Forum on COVID-19, dealing with the disruption in public health and health systems as well as the wider societal impact. Ms Nurm stressed that health inequalities had been brought to the forefront as some population groups had been affected disproportionately. For privileged people, the pandemic might be advantageous, e.g., through a better work-life balance. Those who had been suffering before the pandemic might suffer even more now. Mental health had decreased, levels of alcohol consumption had risen. The NDPHS had committed to devoting more time to such issues as well as the following areas: The pandemic had highlighted the already existing shortage of doctors and nurses in the Baltic Sea region but also digitalisation as a possible recourse. Remote health and social services needed to be promoted while acceptance was high. Health service disruptions had made it more difficult for patients with pre-existing non-communicable diseases to be treated. Furthermore, long-term negative health effects were expected, for instance because of lower levels of exercise. In particular, the elderly population was most affected, not only through the threat of the virus but also the loss of social contacts and disruption of treatment. Ms Nurm stressed that international cooperation was vital to combatting both the virus and the secondary effects of the pandemic to create more resilient health and public systems. In response to questions by delegates, Dr Catherine Smallwood outlined the WHO’s COVAX programme which assisted low-income countries in acquiring vaccines at lower prices. Here, she referred to the high-income countries over-purchasing supplies which could be transmitted to the less advantaged nations without impacting the former’s vaccination progress. This would in particular apply once the most vulnerable groups were vaccinated in high-income nations. Regarding best practices, Dr Smallwood underlined that there were some measures that had worked globally while others were valid only in certain regional conditions, e.g., island settings, and could not be transferred. The WHO was promoting harmonisation efforts to streamline mitigation measures globally. She explained that WHO Europe was collaborating with groups from the sub-regional to the regional level and above, primarily the EU but also including the Eastern European countries, Turkey and Russia outside the EU. BSPC Working Group on Climate Change and Biodiversity Working Group Chairwoman Cecilie Tenfjord-Toftby updated the Standing Committee on the progress of the group and plans for the upcoming second meeting. Best practices and research results from various countries would be introduced and discussed. She highlighted efforts to include youth representatives in the conference in August, which she hoped would lead to a longer-term and constructive collaboration with youth organisations. The 30 th BSPC BSPC President Pyry Niemi spoke about the progress in planning the annual conference in August under the title Sustainable Democracy – How to Face a Changing World . This core approach would be reflected in all sessions of the conference. While hopes were high that the conference could be held physically in Stockholm, preparations for a digital meeting were also proceeding. Mr Niemi noted that previous conferences had benefited from high-level political representation which would also be sought for the upcoming conference. Dr Andreas Norlén, the Speaker of the Swedish Riksdag, had already confirmed his participation. The Baltic Sea Parliamentary Youth Forum BSPC President Pyry Niemi provided an update on plans to involve youth representatives in the next conference. The Swedish Ministry for Foreign Affairs, the Swedish Institute and the CBSS had joined efforts with the BSPC to create a back-to-back event with the conference, tentatively planned as a Baltic Sea Parliamentary Youth Forum. The CBSS had agreed to recruit the young participants through a call for applications via their website. BSPC Standing Committee decisions BSPC Finances The Standing Committee approved the 2020 Financial Report including the Financial Result as per the Fourth Quarter of 2020 as well as the budget plan proposal for 2021. The Standing Committee agreed to publish Financial Report on the BSPC website: Financial report 2020 for the BSPC joint financing mechanism (JFM) Further Matters The Standing Committee agreed to proceed on a Memorandum of Understanding with the Parliamentary Assembly of the Mediterranean (PAM) to pursue a closer collaboration. Status reports by the member states and regions on the COVID-19 pandemic and vaccination efforts had already been collected and published on the BSPC website in the summer of 2020. These had been updated in the meantime, and the Standing Committee agreed to release these on the website as well. The Standing Committee decided to hold the upcoming meetings again in digital form. It was further agreed to hold a seminar on one of the priority topics of the Swedish Presidency in conjunction with the next meeting of the Standing Committee on 31 May. Presentations: Dr. Lilian Busse – Progress Report on Activities of HELCOM COVID 19: Situation in WHO European Region

The BSPC Standing Committee members reported at several Digital Standing Committee meetings on developments of the corona crisis to date, the current situation and the assessment of further steps in their countries. The topic turned out to be of high interest for the participants; therefore, the Standing Committee agreed that the members of the BSPC would be asked to deepen the meeting’s survey through written reports on the subject. The following statements update the first published compilation of statements from August 2020 The COVID-19 pandemic – The development in the BSPC member countries and the challenges for the parliaments and give a survey of the development in most Baltic Sea Region Countries. They furthermore inform about the effects on the work of parliaments and interparliamentary organisations as well as on legislative measures to deal with the consequences of the pandemic. The update includes also information about the vaccination progress in the BSPC member countries. The compilation will be updated as soon as further statements are received. The Document can be downloaded here .

Following an initiative by the Swedish BSPC delegation, the Standing Committee of the BSPC held a seminar on the topic Democracy in a Changing Media Landscape: Digitisation, Combating Disinformation and Fake News as well as Protecting Free Media and Freedom of Speech. The topic is one of the main priorities of the Swedish BSPC Presidency . The meeting included more than 60 participants from the BSPC and experts, among them the former President of Latvia, Prof Vaira Vīķe-Freiberga. Participants from the Åland Islands, the Baltic Assembly, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, the German Bundestag, Hamburg, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, the Nordic Council, Norway, Poland, the Russian Federation, and Sweden participated. Opening BSPC President Pyry Niemi opened the seminar by acknowledging the importance of protecting and safeguarding the trust in the democratic system. Mr Niemi mentioned that the pandemic in many ways had led to a democratic backslide and that there were several challenges for democracy today. In detail, he expressed his hope that the year 2021 would be brighter, safer, and healthier for the whole world than the last one and that it would soon be possible to meet in person again. He looked forward to another year of constructive and rewarding parliamentary cooperation and dialogue about mutual concerns regarding Baltic Sea issues. Sustainable democracy was the cornerstone of the Swedish BSPC Presidency, he underlined. The digital age of the present day had provided several reasons to address the challenges and the possibilities that lay ahead. During the last year, several events had made it clear that it was necessary to protect and safeguard the trust in the democratic system. Even where none had ever expected to see something of this sort, Mr Niemi said, images of the vulnerability of democratic structures had shaken everyone to the core. That had once again shown in no uncertain terms that it was necessary to work and fight every day for our democracies. One example was the pandemic that, in many respects, had led to a backslide for democracy. Several countries had imposed restrictions on freedom of expression, and in many places, it was difficult for journalists to do their job. The US election and the two months after were another example of disinformation threatening people’s confidence in the democratic system. BSPC President Niemi stressed that the digital age had made information and communication technology central to people’s lives today. On the one hand, this meant new possibilities for political engagement and access to information. On the other hand, the increase in disinformation and fake news had the potential to create polarisation, extremism, and ultimately undermine democracy. He closed by highlighting that a strong democracy demanded engagement and continuous work. A strong democracy required vital and constructive discussions. Panel I: Digital Democracy: Challenges and Opportunities The first panel was moderated by BSPC Vice President Johannes Schraps . He also pointed to the fact that the democracy was under threat, mentioning the recent events in the US as an example, which had shown how vulnerable democratic structures were. He further reminded the seminar participants that the BSPC Standing Committee had already discussed related issues with one of the present experts in 2017 and had included calls for action to the governments of the Baltic Sea Region in that year, based on the research findings and discussions at that time. The first invited speaker was Dr Jan-Hinrik Schmidt , Senior Researcher at the Leibniz Institute for Media Research/Hans-Bredow-Institut in Hamburg. Dr Schmidt focused his presentation on the positive aspects of digitisation for democracy and mentioned three arguments in this respect. His first argument was that the internet was increasing access to information on topics of collective interest, making it easier for people to stay informed. There was also a diversity of information on the internet. The second reason mentioned by Mr Schmidt was that the internet was supporting people in formulating their opinions and views. People could, for instance, come together and exchange opinions without actually meeting in person. As examples, he pointed to the comment section on a news page or on social media. The speaker’s third and last reason concerned the internet decreasing the transition costs for coordinated action toward common goals, such as Fridays for Future. (For more details click here ) The second speaker of the seminar was Mr Carl Heath , former special counsel for the Committee “National initiative for media information literacy and democratic dialogue”, appointed by the Swedish government. One of the main conclusions from the committee’s work, according to Mr Heath, was that the democratic dialogue was being challenged by disinformation, online hate, and propaganda. The speaker also pointed out that online hate on social media had become more prevalent. One out of three politicians in Sweden had been subjected to harassment, threats, and violence or had avoided speaking out or getting involved in a particular issue. Four out of ten journalists had at some point refrained from certain topics due to the risk of threats. Mr Heath stated that there was a need for a number of actions to be taken in the field, for example strengthening media and information literacy among young adults and adults, prioritising initiatives against online hate speech, and conducting an analysis on how democracy was affected by global social media platform companies. (For more details click here ) The third and last speaker of the first panel was Mr Jack Werner , journalist and co-founder of Källkritikbyrån (a fact-finding agency). Mr Werner gave a presentation focused on the US election and the dangers of conspiracy theories. One example was QAnon, where the general idea was that Mr Trump was planning to imprison all the powerful, supposedly evil people in the US. Mr Werner also pointed to the fact that people, in a weak democracy, often wanted a strong, simple story with a good guy and a villain. Fact-finding journalism was therefore needed to check facts and present findings in an easily-digested way. (For more details click here ) During the following panel discussion, Mr Christian Juhl , MP, Denmark, made a remark regarding there not being one true idea. As parliamentarians, they all had different ideas about what was their ideal society. In the discussion, Mr Kolbeinn Óttarsson Proppé and Mr Johannes Schraps also participated and gave their views on the issue. Panel II: The Role of Free Media in Combating Fake News, Protection of Media Freedom and the Freedom of Speech The second part of the seminar was moderated by Ms Pernilla Stålhammar , MP, Sweden. Ms Stålhammar introduced the panel by drawing attention to the infodemic taking place in connection with the corona pandemic. The first speaker of the second panel was Professor Vaira Vīķe-Freiberga , former president of Latvia and former Chair of an EU high-level group on media freedom and media pluralism. Ms Vīķe-Freiberga stated that information had played a crucial role in the collapse of the Soviet Union and the independence of the Baltic States. Freedom of information was necessary for a democracy: The more totalitarian a government, the less freedom of speech there was. Professor Vīķe-Freiberga also stated that citizens never could be sure of obtaining a neutral truth, since that depended in many ways on how a story was framed or told. The professor gave an example to show that this was not a new phenomenon as Benjamin Franklin had written a column in his own magazine under the name of an old lady from the countryside. Professor Vīķe-Freiberga argued that even though digitisation had changed the media situation dramatically, the underlying principles remained the same. People needed knowledge and insights to be able to separate what was true from what was false. Mr Erik Halkjaer , journalist and President of the Board of the Swedish section of Reporters without Borders, was the second speaker in this panel. He started his presentation by saying that press freedom was not only a topic in relation to dictatorships. Challenges to press freedom also manifested in democracies. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, Reporters without Borders had identified five crises threatening independent journalism and free media: a geopolitical crisis, a democratic crisis, an economic crisis, a technological crisis, and a trust crisis. All of these had worsened during the pandemic. The next press freedom index which would be published in April would show a darker map than in the past year. Mr Halkjaer pointed to Europe as the region in the world where press freedom was currently shrinking the most. He mentioned some countries in terms of their current development and their ranking in the press freedom index. He underlined the necessity to discuss misinformation, disinformation, censorship, and propaganda. Mr Halkjaer urged the politicians to stand up for media freedom, independent journalism, and transparent digital platforms. The last speaker was Ms Anna-Karin Johansson , Secretary-General at the Swedish National Commission for UNESCO. Ms Johansson highlighted the importance of information exchange and education. Among other things, UNESCO offered training programmes for media professionals in developing countries. In her presentation, she also pointed to the positive response from the civil society and international organisations such as the Council of Europe, which was and had been pushing this issue onto the agenda. Ms Johansson continued by saying that education was vital in combating disinformation. Citizens needed to be well-informed to be able to participate in decision-making. She also raised the question of finding financial models to secure independent media. In the following panel discussion, Ms Cecilie Tenfjord-Toftby , MP, Sweden, considered what disinformation was and what it was not and who could make that decision. Mr Johannes Schraps agreed with Professor Vaira Vīķe-Freiberga on the issue of a socially agreed-upon reality and the importance of media pluralism. Mr Kolbeinn Óttarsson Proppé also made a remark regarding state funding for media and the difficulties of ensuring media independence at the same time. Closing The Vice Chair of the Swedish Delegation, Ms Cecilie Tenfjord-Toftby , closed the seminar by thanking all of the speakers and the participants. She concluded that several interesting perspectives had been raised which the BSPC could incorporate into their upcoming work at the annual conference and in regard to the next resolution.

After a first joint meeting 2019 in Istanbul, the Standing Committees of the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference (BSPC) and the Parliamentary Assembly of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation (PABSEC) held a second meeting on the topics of ‘Democracy and the COVID-19 Pandemic’ as well as ‘Safeguarding Our Seas’; ‘Climate Change and Biodiversity’ in a digital format. The meeting was attended by more than 60 participants from the PABSEC and the BSPC as well as the Minister for Foreign Affairs from Sweden and experts from scientific organizations. Delegations from the Åland Islands, the Baltic Assembly, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, the German Bundestag, Hamburg, Kaliningrad, Karelia, Latvia, Lithuania, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, the Nordic Council, Norway, Poland, the Russian Federation, Schleswig-Holstein and Sweden as well as from Azerbaijan, Georgia, Greece, Romania and Turkey participated. Opening BSPC President Pyri Niemi and PABSEC Vice-President and Head of the PABSEC Azerbaijani Delegation, Eldar Guliyev , addressed the participants at the opening. Pyry Niemi underlined the crucial necessity to continue constructive dialogue and close cooperation especially in difficult times. He expressed his regret that due to the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic and the strict global travel restrictions, the second joint meeting of both parliamentary organisations could not be hosted by the BSPC in Stockholm, as planned. Regarding the topic of the joint meeting, he pointed out that for the 27 parliaments and parliamentary organisations of the BSPC, it was of vital importance to make every effort to ensure peaceful and close neighbourliness as well as close cooperation based on democratic values, the rule of law, human rights, and equal opportunities for all. To this end, the BSPC would continue to pursue all the opportunities offered by parliamentary, governmental, and social exchange as well as fostering democratic dialogue among neighbours. Eldar Guliyev pointed out that although both regions are separate and located rather far from each other, they shared many common problems that called for joint forces. The Black Sea as well as the Baltic Sea were important locations for energy projects and also several nations and cultures were located in the region of both seas. The speaker appreciated the cooperation and energy brought by the delegates to the current meeting and expressed his hope for fruitful cooperation in the future. He mentioned the first joint meeting in Istanbul during which many questions had been raised. The situation had changed due to the Covid-19 pandemic, and the existing problems had become even more urgent. The PABSEC had previously discussed all the current features and questions regarding the pandemic. For the Black Sea Economy Committee, a decision had been made that they needed to adapt to the existing circumstances of the pandemic to keep up functioning and parliamentary control. To mitigate the economic effects of the pandemic, joint forces were necessary. Therefore, the Committee had been coordinating their actions at all levels, especially on the parliamentary level. Mr Guliyev emphasised that solidarity, also in international terms, was particularly important. He called for cooperation especially in the area of the economy in order to mitigate the negative effects. He also turned to the issue of climate change, biodiversity, and how the environmental status of both seas could be protected. He admitted that PABSEC had encountered a vast number of different problems and called for strong measures to address climate change and to slow down the extinction of biodiversity on the global scale. Mr Guliyev added that society had to be part of the constructive dialogue. The Black Sea economic community had to be aware that it was especially important to stop the pollution of the sea. In conclusion, the PABSEC Vice-President referred back to the Memorandum of Understanding signed by both organisations as a strong base for strengthening and deepening cooperation between the PABSEC and the BSPC. Session on ‘Democracy and the COVID-19 Pandemic’ During the first session on ‘Democracy and the COVID-19 Pandemic’, chaired by BSPC President Pyri Niemi, Ms Ann Linde, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Sweden, and Mr Cemal Ozturk, Head of the PABSEC Turkish Delegation, addressed both Standing Committees. Ms Ann Linde, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Sweden, highlighted the importance of regional cooperation at the parliamentary and also the governmental level. The Minister pointed out that the CBSS was a good example of the added value of regional collaboration. The COVID-19 pandemic had shown how vulnerable and interlinked their societies were, making cross-border cooperation even more necessary. For Ms Linde, people-to-people cooperation, not least between young people in their region, was the backbone of this cooperation. It bound them all together, serving as a platform for building long-term relationships. Therefore, she welcomed the recent launch of the Baltic Sea Youth Platform as a valuable contribution to this end. Furthermore, she referred to the consequences the pandemic had had on health, humanitarian, developmental, and economic issues. In real terms, the pandemic had had a major impact on the poorest countries and particularly on discriminated and marginalised individuals. Half a billion people were at risk of being thrown back into poverty because of the pandemic. The Minister stressed the fact that the pandemic had had a noticeably clear and negative effect on human rights, democracy, and the rule of law. Restrictions imposed to limit the spread of the corona virus had in many instances been fully in line with international law, but others had been more extensive, and it was vital to continue following this issue closely so that these limitations to human rights and democracy did not become permanent fixtures in some states. It took time, Ms Linde underlined, sometimes generations, to build up stable and impartial democratic institutions, but they could be dismantled very quickly. She stressed that during the pandemic, the working environment for civil society organisations and human rights defenders had deteriorated with limited democratic space, and independent media was at risk in many places. More than 40 countries had introduced restrictions to freedom of expression, and close to 150 governments had introduced illegitimate limits to the freedom of association and assembly. As an effort to provide a counter-narrative to the democratic backsliding, the Minister continued, the Swedish government had set itself the goal to promote and strengthen democracy, in particular the aspects of sustainable democracy, equality, participation, sustainable development, inclusive growth, governance, human rights, and security. Their ambition was to engage a broad range of actors and to stimulate the debate on the state of democracy these days as well as what had to be done collectively to keep it a strong force for tomorrow. Sweden had particularly focused on supporting civil society actors, human rights defenders, and trade union leaders as they had a central role in upholding democracy and holding governments to account. The response to the pandemic had to be based on human rights, democracy, and the rule of law. Only this way, confidence and trust in societies could be ensured, to make the response to this pandemic sustainable in the long run. Ensuring a gender perspective in the response was central. Women and girls had been much more exposed than men during the pandemic. Ms Linde also highlighted that the freedom of the media and independent journalists was under threat. Journalists and media workers had to be able to do their jobs, both online and offline – informing the public and holding the leaders to account. A free and healthy independent media was also the best way to come to terms with the surge of disinformation which they had seen during the pandemic. But it was important that the various participants also started looking beyond the pandemic. They had to act against and formulate a strong counter-narrative to democratic backsliding. It was known that authoritarianism was not the answer to today’s challenges. The Swedish side was as convinced on this day as ever that democracy was the best form of governance for stability and development. Political parties were the essential building blocks of a well-functioning democracy, Minister Linde went on. A pluralistic political system enabled everyone to make their voices heard and gave them the opportunity to influence society and to demand accountability. The participation of women was crucial. Democratic societies were demanding continuous work. As Ms Linde had said before, history had shown that it took time – sometimes generations – to build strong and stable democratic institutions and societies, but they could be dismantled quickly if people did not pay attention or took them for granted. Mr Cemal Öztürk , Head of the PABSEC Turkish Delegation, presented examples of violations of the fundamental rights of citizens during the pandemic in many countries under the slogan of saving national health, and he explained how different strategies had been adopted by the Turkish authorities. The speaker indicated that the fear of an epidemic today was on a global scale, thus strengthening the hand of the existing powers. Once this fear had been released into society, security policies could be implemented without any objections. Tracking systems such as face-scanning systems, loaded onto mobile phones, were open to abuse by authoritarian governments and elites, even though they could be useful in dealing with safety issues. To eliminate the ambiguity in question and for the democratic process to work, it had to be accomplished in cooperation with domestic associations, NGOs, and other parties, and most importantly, through the hand of parliaments, using a supervisory mechanism. At this point, Mr Öztürk gave the example of Hungary in which the Hungarian Prime Minister’s use of the powers of parliament itself had made the parliament dysfunctional. He added the most drastic example of South Africa where harsh policies had created an environment of martial law that would lead to those opposing the quarantine rules being shot by the police and army. In many countries, elections were delayed or cancelled by arbitrary decisions. Authoritarian regimes saw the epidemic as an opportunity, restricting freedoms and causing concern for the future of democracy. Numerical studies on this issue revealed the state of decline, especially in EU member Balkan countries and Latin American democracies. According to the findings of another study by ‘Freedom House’, the crisis of democracy caused by the epidemic had worsened the situation of democracy and human rights in 128 countries. Mr Öztürk stated that in this context, parliamentarians should monitor the balance of power, stick to the principle of transparency, listen to the wishes of their voters, apply policies that would include different segments of society, and exercise control over the government. Regarding the situation in Turkey, the speaker admitted that his country had not declared a state of emergency to combat the COVID-19 pandemic but had chosen to continue its efforts to combat this pandemic by taking the necessary measures in accordance with the legal framework. Turkey had adopted human rights-oriented policies in determining measures to respond to the pandemic. The parliament had effectively carried out its activities and taken an approach that embraced all segments of society without discriminating against refugees and vulnerable groups. Other members of parliaments from the BSPC and the PABSEC also presented the pandemic situation in their countries and exchanged their experience of parliamentary work during the pandemic. Among the speakers were Mr Pyry Niemi for Sweden, Mr Christian Juhl from Denmark, Ms Valentina Pivnenko , Russian Duma, Mr Wille Valve from the Åland Islands, Mr Jarosław Wałęsa , Poland, Mr Johannes Schraps , German Bundestag, and Mr E. Shandalovich , Karelia. The speakers reported on the current situation in their countries, stressed that the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic had shown that in times of crisis, when coordination was particularly important, the role of parliament was more important than ever in adopting the necessary laws, allocating resources, and carefully analysing the situation. (These contributions will be published in detail separately in a compilation of statements on the current situation of the COVID-19 pandemic.) Session on ‘Safeguarding Our Seas’; ‘Climate Change and Biodiversity’ Within the framework of the second session on ‘Safeguarding Our Seas’; ‘Climate Change and Biodiversity’, chaired by Mr Simeon Kedikoglu, PABSEC Vice-President, Head of the PABSEC Hellenic Delegation, presentations were made by Ms Irina Makarenko , representative of the Permanent Secretariat of the Commission on the Protection of the Black Sea Against Pollution, Prof Christoph Humborg, Scientific Director of the Stockholm University Baltic Sea Centre, and Ms Cecilie Tenfjord-Toftby , Chair of the BSPC Working Group on Climate Change and Biodiversity. Mr Simeon Kedikoglu in his introductory speech pointed out that the degradation and pollution of the environment and of the marine environment was so vast that it called for urgent concerted actions. The issue of the preservation of the marine environment of the Black Sea region among other ecological aspects had come to the forefront due to the role of the region in the global economy, firstly by being the main transport and energy hub of the Eurasian continent. The speaker explained that the marine territories of the wider Black Sea region were divided into three main basins, which were the waters of the Black and Azov Seas, the Caspian Sea and the Mediterranean Sea (Eastern Mediterranean). These three sea basins had common features in terms of environmental issues, while at the same time – as a result of the latest economic processes in the region -, they were all closely interrelated to each other. He continued by saying that the geography of the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea brought additional environmental risks: Both those seas were landlocked or had very narrow connection with the oceans. Despite a more advantageous location, the Mediterranean Sea was also considered comparatively landlocked with a narrow connection with the Atlantic Ocean. Those geographical conditions were contributing to a particularly difficult situation in the region, with severe environmental degradation of the regional seas starting in the early 1990s along with the initiation of the economic restructure in the countries of the Black Sea. Mr Kedikoglu said the basic critical factors affecting the marine environment of the region included: extensive use of land and water for agriculture, forests for the paper industry, pulp and construction, rivers for navigation, coastal resources for commercial fishing and tourism, and continued demands for oil and gas extraction. The speaker also mentioned the inflow of large quantities of nutrients from the major rivers resulting in overfertilisation of the seas, the increased intensity of phytoplankton, the introduction, through vessels navigating in the Black Sea, of alien species, including dangerous ones, and finally climate change. The Vice President of the PABSEC highlighted the importance of regional and interregional cooperation and the full implementation of existing regional mechanisms towards improving the effectiveness of environmental cooperation. He confirmed the PABSEC’s member countries’ willingness to achieve sustainable development based on a balanced relationship between social, economic, and environmental activities. The assembly he was representing acknowledged the need for close cooperation among the BSEC member states based on a regional approach in a coordinated manner for the protection of the marine environment, as the maritime aspect played a significant role for all the countries of the region in terms of trade and economic relations. The PABSEC, like the BSPC, through their many recommendations that had been adopted, was calling on the parliaments and the governments of the BSEC member states: to improve the environmental monitoring system essential for a regional assessment of the state of marine environment as well as for the establishment of further actions and measures to rehabilitate the damaged marine environment and to evaluate the risks; to integrate marine environmental concerns into economic sector strategies in line with the principles of sustainable development and to apply economic and financial instruments as incentives for the protection of the marine environment; to strengthen the system of hazardous waste management, recycling of industrial waste and trans-boundary waste movement in the marine environment; to promote the application of innovative, environmentally friendly and resource-saving technologies in the marine environment; to regularly exchange information on the new developments in the legislation concerning the marine environment and the progress towards protecting the marine environment in accordance with international standards and agreements; to ensure the practical implementation of the existing national laws and regulations, including international agreements, which are the essential part of national legislation; to enhance cooperation with international organizations, especially with UN bodies and European institutions; to support the activities of the non-governmental sector with their broad engagement in the protection of marine environment raising public awareness on the issues and challenges faced by the regional marine environment; to establish an integrated coordination centre for maritime search and rescue activities (SAR) and on the fight against oil spills and pollution. Mr Kedikoglu emphasised that any opportunity to enhance cooperation among both assemblies and exchange views on a topic requiring urgent action was truly valuable. He called for developing deeper cooperation and coordinating policy among the BSPC, the PABSEC and national parliaments to further elaborate shaping a global governance for managing and using the world’s oceans and their resources in ways that keep our seas healthy, productive, safe, and resilient. Ms Irina Makarenko updated the meeting participants on relevant activities of the Commission on the Protection of the Black Sea Against Pollution, with some references to the COVID-19 pandemic, and highlighted issues on collaboration with the Baltic Sea. She mentioned that the Convention on the Protection of the Black Sea against Pollution (also referred to as the ‘Bucharest Convention’) had been signed in Bucharest in April 1992 and ratified by all six legislative assemblies of the Black Sea countries at the beginning of 1994 and that it was the basic legal framework for regional cooperation to protect the coastal and marine environment. It consisted of four thematic protocols dealing with pollution from land-based sources , dumping oil and other harmful substances, and the protocol on biodiversity and landscape conservation. Ms Makarenko indicated that the main working document for the Permanent Secretariat was the Strategic Action Plan (SAP) on the Protection and Rehabilitation of the Black Sea – adopted in 1996 and amended in 2009. She also referred to the intensive mutual observer relations with international and public organisations among which were the UN Environment, the EU, and the PABSEC. Ms Makarenko included among the considerable achievements of the Committee’s work the elaboration and adoption of the short format of reporting based on indicators agreed by consensus and compatible with global approach to indicators; the text of the Black Sea Integrated Monitoring and Assessment Program – for the years 2017-2022, drafted within the EU Maritime Strategy Framework Directive project where main approaches were harmonised -; and the First Report on the Implementation of the Black Sea Action Plan, the ‘State of the Black Sea Environment’ Report. Regarding cooperation with other regions, she highlighted a fruitful cooperation with the Danube Sturgeon Task Force on cooperation to implement the program for sturgeon revival in the Danube region and the Black Sea region, also holding a seat as a BONUS Project Advisory Board member, and creating remarkably close – although informal so far – cooperation with the HELCOM Secretariat. The speaker particularly distinguished cooperation with the Mediterranean Action Plan (MAP) Secretariat. Since December 2016, the UNEP/MAP Secretariat had been supporting several activities under the EU-funded Marine Litter MED project to strengthen bilateral collaboration in the field of marine litter management. Ms Makarenko hoped for similar bilateral cooperation with the Baltic Sea region organisations. Professor Christoph Humborg discussed the question whether the Baltic Sea ecosystem was just a victim of climate change or if it could be part of the solution. Professor Humborg referred to the IPCC intergovernmental panel on climate change report, ‘The Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate’, accepted by the IPCC in September 2019, which underlined that due to climate change, the ocean would be higher, warmer, more acidic, see heat waves, hold less oxygen, be less productive and less predictable. Another report he recommended to be read by the delegates was ‘The global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services’ by the IPBES. Both reports featured a summary targeted specifically at policy makers. Regarding the situation in the Baltic Sea, the speaker explained that the Baltic was a unique sea. The water exchange there took 30 years while only three months in the North Sea. Therefore, nutrients and contaminants had a huge effect on the ecosystem of the Baltic Sea. Another factor mentioned by the expert was the low salinity of the Baltic Sea in comparison to the open ocean. That meant that species in the Baltic Sea could hardly survive in those difficult conditions and, consequently, were sensitive and susceptible to nutrification and climate change. Another challenge listed by the expert was the eutrophication that led to algal blooms and dead organic material at the bottom. That material was converted to methane, a powerful greenhouse gas with a 100-year global warming potential 25 times that of CO 2 . Measured over a 20-year period, methane was 84 times more potent as a greenhouse gas than CO 2 . In the second part of his presentation, Prof Humborg spoke about possible ways to improve the situation. First, the efforts to protect coastal areas had to continue. At this point, he mentioned a success story: the reduction of nitrogen and phosphorus contaminates in the Baltic Sea due to common action in the framework of the HELCOM Baltic Action Plan. Another possible remedy against existing threats might be keeping the nutrification low and restoring carbon-rich ecosystems consisting of seaweeds and other organisms to build resilience. In his final message, Prof Humborg underlined that a healthy coastal sea was critical to achieving global targets to limit climate change. Ms Cecilie Tenfjord-Toftby shortly briefed the participants on the activities of the newly formed BSPC Working Group on Climate Change and Biodiversity. The Working Group had held its first meeting on 16 November. Invited to the meeting had been several experts who had given the Working Group valuable information regarding different aspects of climate change and biodiversity but also examples of best practices. The WG members had been informed about the outcome from two recent conferences of fundamental importance: the ‘Our Baltic’ conference on 28 September and the UN Biodiversity Summit on 30 September. Ms Tenfjord-Toftby pointed out that the theme of the Biodiversity Summit, which had gathered heads of state and government, had been an ‘Urgent Action on Biodiversity for Sustainable Development’ – to highlight the action at the highest levels in support of the development of the CBD post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework. A good practice example presented by the speaker was the project ElectriVillage implemented by the Mariestad Municipality. She explained how this was an excellent example of how local communities, in the most practical sense, could take actions to live up to the climate goals of the Agenda 2030. ElectriVillage was an ambitious project aiming to produce solar-powered hydrogen as an environmentally friendly fuel. The project clearly showed that even a small municipality could decide to make large investments to take responsibility and contribute to a sustainable society. Another topic discussed at the first BSPC WG CCB meeting and reported to the joint meeting participants was the scientific research on climate change. The warming of the planet was an indisputable fact. There was currently no scientific explanation for the observed global warming that did not consider the increased greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere. In the current situation, the Paris Agreement and its central aim to limit global warming to well below 2 °C was of the utmost importance, and it was necessary for the agreement to be fully implemented by all nations. Conclusions In the concluding part of the meeting addresses, were made by Mr Constantin-Catalin Zamfira (Romania), Chairman of the PABSEC Economic, Commercial, Technological and Environmental Affairs Committee, and Mr Pyri Niemi (Sweden), President of the BSPC. Mr Zamfira reiterated that in the difficult times of the pandemic, it was necessary to unify efforts and to strengthen the cooperation and the fruitful relations between both organisations. The COVID-19 pandemic had substantially affected global progress towards achieving the Sustainable Development Goals, which had already been uneven, with growing inequality, rapid climate change, and economic hardship on the rise. The pandemic – with its triple effect on health, education, and income – was threatening to bring about a decline in fundamental areas of human development in all parts of the planet. The response of the states in fighting the virus had been to close their borders and impose restrictions on movement in order to stop the spread of the virus. He allowed that the worldwide lockdown had certainly helped fight the virus and save lives, but it had also triggered a global recession, much worse than during the 2008-2009 global financial crisis. The economic downturn from the pandemic had been estimated to be the deepest experienced by our societies since World War II. The speaker nevertheless noted that the pandemic had made people aware of their common destiny, highlighting the need for cooperation between nations and regions on a global scale and the need for practical solidarity. That challenge could be a driving force to review the priorities at the global level in relation to the problems that humanity was facing, such as climate change, biodiversity, and environmental protection. Mr Zamfira referred to the main problems facing the Black Sea region such as the degradation and pollution of the environment and the Black Sea itself. He underlined the efforts of the assembly to implement urgent concentrated action. Concluding his speech Mr Zamfira expressed his gratitude to all participants for their contribution to the successful organisation and completion of the meeting. He expressed his strong belief that strong cooperation between the PABSEC and the BSPC would further continue to be fruitful, constructive, and full of success. BSPC President Pyry Niemi thanked all participants for making the exchange possible and for enabling the cooperation between the BSPC and the PABSEC to continue and deepen, even during the COVID-19 pandemic. He emphasised that only through such meetings, the parliamentary dimension of international cooperation could be maintained and made visible. He hoped a live meeting in Stockholm would be implemented at the end of May 2021. Downloads: Presentation Christoph Humborg Speech Ann Linde Presentation Iryna Makarenko

On 24 August 2020, with the unanimous adoption of the 29 th resolution, the BSPC has established a Working Group on Climate Change and Biodiversity (CCB) for the next two years. The CCB Working Group held its first meeting on 16 November 2020. More than 50 participants – mainly delegations from the Åland Islands, the Baltic Assembly, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, the German Bundestag, Hamburg, Iceland, Kaliningrad, Latvia, Lithuania, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, the Nordic Council, Norway, Poland, the Russian Federation, Schleswig-Holstein and Sweden – participated. The meeting was chaired by Cecilie Tenfjord-Toftby, MP Sweden, Chairwoman of the WG. WG Chairwoman Cecilie Tenfjord-Toftby pointed out that the task of the WG, based on the resolution of the BSPC, was to submit the first report at the 30 th BSPC Conference – with a particular focus on the need for joint and cross-border cooperation. She expressed her regret that, due to a pandemic, the meeting – originally planned in Stockholm with visits in appropriate facilities – had had to be moved to digital space. Ms Tenfjord-Toftby also noted that the report would concentrate on enhanced solutions to preserve the biodiversity inherent to the entire Baltic Sea region and to mitigate the effects of climate change with particular emphasis on the state of policies and strategies concerning climate change and biodiversity in the Baltic Sea region. Ms Tenfjord-Toftby listed as further areas of particular interest for the WG: best practices in addressing the interlinked challenges of biodiversity and climate change with a specific focus on the Baltic Sea; innovations and measures to tackle climate change and preserve biodiversity; climate change adaptation and challenges for science, technology and the economy as well as, last but not least, ensuring efficient and environment-friendly transport and energy supply solutions. The Chairwoman emphasised that the working group would concentrate its attention on the environmental side of climate change and biodiversity as well as on innovation, technology and further economic aspects. Expert presentations Jan Terstad, the Deputy Director General in the Swedish Ministry of the Environment, responsible for the Division for Natural Environment, informed the WG members about the outcome of two recent conferences of particular importance: the “Our Baltic” Conference on 28 September 2020 and the UN Biodiversity Summit on 30 September 2020. Mr Terstad noted that the “Our Baltic” conference had been initiated by the European Commission and Lithuania, gathering ministers, decision makers, scientists and stakeholders from NGOs and industry in the region and across the EU to discuss the challenges faced by the Baltic Sea. In line with the EU Biodiversity Strategy and the Zero Pollution ambition announced in the European Green Deal, the Conference had focused on how to reduce the pressure from fisheries and the input of pollutants, litter and contaminants, including pharmaceuticals. It aimed to improve intersectoral management, e.g. fisheries, agriculture and environment, to boost commitment to the existing goals for the area in EU legislation. The speaker emphasised that the event had combined a high-level ministerial session with stakeholder discussions. Ministers for Environment, Agriculture and Fisheries from eight EU Member States in the region (Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, and Sweden) had signed a Ministerial Declaration at the Conference. With regard to the United Nations Summit on Biodiversity, which had taken placeon the margins of the opening of the 75 th session of the UN General Assembly in New York, Mr Terstad underlined the presence of numerous heads of state and government which he saw as a positive sign of a strong commitment to start urgent action at the highest levels. Said action would support a post-2020 global biodiversity framework contributing to the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The speaker reported that the summit had consisted of an opening segment, a plenary segment for general discussion, two leaders’ dialogues on “Addressing biodiversity loss and mainstreaming biodiversity for sustainable development” and “Harnessing science, technology and innovation, capacity building, access and benefit-sharing, financing and partnerships for biodiversity”, and a brief closing segment. As an initiative of H.E. Mr Volkan Bozkir, President of the General Assembly, the summit had provided an online platform “Voices for Nature”, featuring statements, messages and commitments from a wider range of stakeholders. Mr Terstad shared his hope that the initiatives and commitments heard at the summit would help to lay the foundation for COP-15 in Kunming and that the preparations would not be delayed. Professor Christoph Humborg , Scientific Director of the Stockholm University Baltic Sea Centre , gave a speech on the theme: Is the Baltic Sea ecosystem just a victim to climate change or can it be part of the solution? Professor Humborg referred to the report by the IPCC – the intergovernmental panel on climate change – “The Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate”, accepted by the IPCC in September 2019, according to which climate change would lead to oceans becoming higher, warmer, more acidic, seeing heat waves, holding less oxygen and being less productive, less predictable. Another report he recommended the delegates to read was the IPBES publication ”The global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystems services”. Both reports featured a summary targeted specifically at policy makers. Regarding the situation in the Baltic Sea, the speaker explained that the Baltic was unique. The water exchange took 30 years compared to only 3 months in the North Sea. Therefore, nutrients and contaminants had a huge effect on the ecosystem of the Baltic Sea. Another factor mentioned by the expert was the low salinity of the Baltic compared with the open ocean. That meant that species in the Baltic Sea found it tough to survive those difficult conditions and, consequently, were sensitive and susceptible to nutrification and climate change. Another challenge listed by Prof Humborg was the eutrophication leading to algal blooms and dead organic material gathering at the bottom of the sea. That material had been converted to methane, a powerful greenhouse gas with a 100-year global warming potential 25 times that of CO 2 . Measured over a 20-year period, methane was 84 times more potent as a greenhouse gas than CO 2 . In the second part of his presentation, Prof Humborg spoke about possible ways to improve the situation. First, the efforts to protect coastal area must continue. At this point, he mentioned a success story: the reduction of nitrogen and phosphorus contaminates in the Baltic Sea due to common action in the framework of the HELCOM Baltic Sea Action Plan. Another possible remedy against existing threats may be keeping the nutrification low and restoring carbon rich ecosystems, such as see weeds and other organisms, to build resilience. The final message of Prof Humborg was that a healthy coastal sea was critical to achieving global targets to limit climate change. Susanné Wallner , Development Strategist from the Mariestad Municipality , talked about ElectriVillage – a test and demonstration platform for sustainable development in a biosphere reserve. Ms Wallner stated that ElectriVillage was unique not only because it had been designated a model area of sustainability by the UNESCO but also because there was currently no other model area in the world exhibiting a combination of sustainable transport solutions and energy systems such as ElectriVillage. She added that, through ElectriVillage, Mariestad’s municipality was working to meet climate goals such as the Paris Agreement and the Agenda 2030 with a fossil-independent vehicle fleet. Different types of tests had been carried out in Mariestad’s open street environment and in the daily operations of the municipal operations rather than in fenced-off areas or in laboratories. All test activities in ElectriVillage were based on the needs and conditions of a small or medium-sized city, but they could be scaled up and fitted into a larger municipality. The speaker described briefly test operations performed in several different areas, e.g. renewable energy systems, sustainable transport, logistics and purchasing as well as business development of the area of ​​sustainability. She emphasised that commitment by all parts of society was needed to reach such ambitious goals and expressed her personal satisfaction with living in a region of continuous development. Professor Michael Tjernström, representing the Department of Meteorology at the Bolin Centre for Climate Research at Stockholm University , briefed the Standing Committee on the core question: “What does global climate change mean for the Baltic Sea area, and is there anything that can be done?” The expert cited data showing that the climate was warming up. He stated that between 1960 and 1990, the global temperature had increased by 1 degree centigrade. He admitted that in individual years, the temperatures might even be well below or above the multi-annual average. However, this proved the unpredictability and chaos of change, while the trend was clearly pointing upwards. The expert conceded that one degree of increased temperature might seem small, but looking at climate change over thousands of years, the current rise in temperature was something completely unprecedented. Scientists were now able to investigate climate change over a period of 5 million years based on sediment cores. Professor Tjernström continued by saying that global warming was not evenly distributed across the globe – the further north or south one went, the faster the temperatures would rise. The Arctic was the fastest-heating region, and that was also the situation with the north and south areas of the Baltic Sea region. What had been observed was a temperature rise of 2 °C since 1860 and 1.5 °C since the early 1960s. The expert mentioned another variable considered by scientists, namely the extent of sea ice. Here, too, there had been a decrease in the area covered by sea ice since 1979. This phenomenon was proceeding faster in the Arctic than in the Baltic Sea Region, and it would have a significant impact on the latter. The ice mass in Greenland and the Antarctic was also decreasing: The professor explained that 300 giga tons were being lost every year. This would clearly have an impact on rising sea levels and oceans. While a rise by 3.3 mm seemed to be a small number, during extreme conditions, such as powerful storms, a local sea level rise would be extremely dangerous. Professor Tjernströmpointed out that the climate change models being developed on the ground were showing that there was no scientific explanation for the changes observed, without recognising the impact of increased emissions of greenhouse gases. The expert’s view of the future was not overly optimistic. If the temperature rise was not stabilised at between three and six degrees centigrade, the Arctic ice would disappear around 2050 or earlier, and the sea level could rise by one metre. The rise in temperature would reduce snowfall during the winter and increase evaporation during the summer, thus causing water supply problems. The speaker stressed that only global action could succeed in halting global warming, and at present, this was really the last call to prevent a disaster. After the experts’ presentations, the CCB Working Group discussed the aims and ways of their work, reconfirmed their Mandate, adopted the Draft Scope of Work and approved Ms Liz Mattsson, MP, Åland Islands, as well as Mr Kolbeinn Óttarsson Proppé, MP Iceland, as Vice-Chairs of the BSPC WG CCB. WG Chairwoman CecilieTenfjord-Toftby emphasised at the closingof the meeting that her goal as the Chair of the Working Group was not just to prepare a report, even though it would contain very interesting content but also to ensure that, through the parliaments, progress would be achieved on this issue, further action would be taken by the governments and political recommendations would be pushed forward to be implemented. The next meeting of the BSPC Working Group CCB will take place in digital form on 15 March 2021. Downloads: Presentation: Jan Terstad Presentation: ElectriVillage Presentation: Christoph Humborg Presentation: Michael Tjernström

The highest Executive Committee of the BSPC, led by the new President of the BSPC, Pyry Niemi, held its first meeting under the Swedish Presidency online. Nearly 60 participants – mainly delegations from the Åland Islands, the Baltic Assembly, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, the German Bundestag, Hamburg, Iceland, Kaliningrad, Latvia, Lithuania, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, the Nordic Council, Norway, Poland, the Russian Federation, St. Petersburg, Schleswig-Holstein and Sweden – attended the meeting. Introduction and Expert Presentations BSPC President Pyry Niemi, in his welcoming speech, expressed his determination to maintain and intensify the parliamentary dimension of international cooperation in the Baltic Sea region, despite the difficult times caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. The President clearly indicated that the current Swedish Presidency would focus in the BSPC on sustainable democracy and how to face common challenges in a changing world. The reason for choosing that priority was not only to emphasise the Swedish Parliament’s celebration of 100 years of democracy but most of all to highlight the urgent need to address the preservation of livelihoods and the fundamental issues of democratic coexistence. In that regard, MrNiemi introduced the experts who presented their views on various aspects of cooperation in the Baltic Sea Region. Mr Nils Gustafsson , senior lecturer at Lund University, spoke about new forms of political participation, youth engagement as well as challenges and opportunities for democracy. In his report, he questioned popular beliefs concerning the low youth interest in politics. His research indicated that young people did care but engaged in different forms of participation other than the traditional modes, e.g. more in city movements than political parties. The expert pointed out that the opportunity for democracy was to embrace more flexible and easier ways for citizens to engage with politics and to address the challenge – to include and respect new forms of engagements and organisation without falling for Twitter storms and influence campaigns. Prof Žaneta Ozoliņa , University of Latvia, and Dr Tobias Etzold, lecturer in European Sciences at the University of Trondheim, presented the results of the Reflection Paper on the Vilnius 1 Declaration of 2010 as well as goals, visions and challenges for peaceful and intense cooperation in the Baltic Sea region. Prof Žaneta Ozoliņa indicated that the analysis of the twelve Vilnius visionary statements showed convincing progress in many areas such as the economic situation, people-to-people contacts and the energy sector but also some areas for improvement. For instance, she noted that public-private partnership had not been utilized so far; in the area of integrated maritime policy, a sustainable blue economy and interconnected transport networks had been developed but the activities of the various actors were not always coherent; gaps still existed in socio-economic and public health-related developments between groups of countries in the region; labour markets in the BSR proved to be stable with a low level of unemployment, but the spread of the pandemic would leave its impact. Dr Tobias Etzold referred to the chapter Democracy, Civil Society and Youth of the Declaration, reporting that over the past 10 years, the social tolerance score had increased in several BSR countries, but a divide remained between groups of countries. Across the region, a greater polarisation and a decrease of tolerance to differing opinions could be observed; therefore, more needed to be done to promote tolerance and open-mindedness across the region by bringing people together on various levels. According to the conclusions presented byMr Etzold,significant shortcomings required a more coherent framework for continued strong cooperative efforts and actions in all policy areas, while more flexibility and responsiveness should be developed by regional institutions,with the aim of decreasing existing gapsbetween countries and groups of countries. Progress report from the Council of the Baltic Sea States during the Lithuanian Presidency with a particular focus on youth cooperation The progress report from the Council of the Baltic Sea States during the Lithuanian presidency was presented by Ambassador Kornelija Jurgaitiene , Chair of the Committee of Senior Officials of the Council of the Baltic Sea States, Lithuania, and Ambassador Grzegorz Marek Poznański , Director General of the CBSS Secretariat. Ambassador Kornelija Jurgaitiene reminded the meeting that on 1 July 2020, Lithuania had taken over the CBSS Presidency from Denmark. The outcomes of the Danish Presidency had been discussed on 19 May 2020 in a virtual Ministerial meeting of the Council of the Baltic Sea States, chaired by the Danish Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr Jeppe Kofod. The Ambassador listed the priorities of the Lithuanian presidency such as sustainable development, especially in the field of developing green industry; green and maritime tourism; strengthening resilience in the region against major emergencies and disasters; the fight against human trafficking for labour exploitation in the region as well as the prevention of violence against children. Ms Jurgaitiene informed the delegates that,on the basis of the assessment of the achievement of the region and an evaluation of the CBSS’ role in fulfilling the Vilnius Declaration’s goals, the Presidency would begin work on the new Vilnius Declaration offering “A Vision of the Baltic Sea Region until 2030”. Ambassador Jurgaitieneconcluded her speech by calling for solidarity with the young people protesting in Belarus. Ambassador Grzegorz Marek Poznański drew the attention of the BSPC Standing Committee to the issue of regional identity or rather the alleged regional identity crises. The speaker expressed his opinion that the profound indicator of such an identity could be a cooperative attitude reflected in the strong and dense network of Baltic organisations at the parliamentarian, governmental, regional, subregional, municipal and non-governmental levels. Mr Poznański gave several examples of the CBSS involvement in COVID-19-connected activities: The Children at Risk unit was dealing with mental health and violence among children during the pandemic. The Task Force against Trafficking in Human Beings was monitoring forced labour which had worsened during the pandemic. Then, Mr Poznanski introduced the next speakers from the CBSS secretariat by saying that the young people and their involvement in both the decision-making process and the activities of the BSR were at the core of the CBSS’s political activities. Dr Kaarina Williams and Ms Aline Mayr provided information on youth cooperation and the Baltic Sea Youth Platform. Dr Kaarina Williams reflected on examples of cooperation between the CBSS and the BSPC on youth issues, highlighting a fruitful Youth Forum and joint meeting with the BSPC Working Group on Migration and Integration in May 2019 as well as a panel discussion in the framework of the Youth Dialog in October 2019 with Mr Johannes Schraps as a panellist. Ms Aline Mayr described the aims, structure and activities of the Baltic Sea Youth Platform. She underlined that the project had been financed by the Erasmus plus programme and that the setting of the platform had been a joint effort of several BSR organisations. Ms Mayr reported that the focus of the BSYP was to integrate youth organisations from all levels: local, regional, national and macroregional to improve the political impact of youth on Baltic Sea policymaking, develop tools for better knowledge transfer and to facilitate various innovative projects relying on the interests and capacities of youth in a broad range of policy areas. Since establishing the platform, its members had been highly active, discussing and creating ideas in six working groups and contributing to strengthening Baltic identity. Following the presentations, the delegates discussed questions, comments and statements on the issues raised in the presentations. The Digital 29 th BSPC BSPC President Pyry Niemi in his summary of the 29 th BSPC conference expressed his regret that the delegates could not meet in the beautiful city of Vilnius due to the pandemic situation. He emphasised that thanks to the efforts of Valerijus Simulik and Renata Godfrey, the high-level political representatives of Lithuania had also taken part in this format of the conference, the BSPC delegations had contributed to the content of the conference through speakers of their countries, and the BSPC rapporteurs had been very active. Mr Niemi underlined that the goals had been achieved with regard to the content of the conference. There had been no perceptible difference between the results of the digital 29 th conference and other BSPC Annual Conferences. BSPC Working Groups BSPC President Pyry Niemi thanked all who had been committedly involved in the final report of the Working Group on Migration and Integration and noted that the topic of the working group, “Migration and Integration”, had been intensively addressed during the 3 rd session of the 29 th Conference. The Standing Committee appointed the previous Chairman and Vice-Chairwoman of the former BSPC Working Group on Migration and Integration, Hans Wallmark and Carola Veit , as Rapporteurs on Migration and Integration to follow the implementation of the BSPC’s calls for action and the further development in this policy field. Cecilie Tenfjord-Toftby informed the meeting about the agenda and plans for the future of the newly established BSPC Working Group on Climate Change and Biodiversity (CCB) which would continue its work under her chairmanship for the next two years. BSPC Standing Committee decisions The Standing Committee appointed Mr Johannes Schraps, head of the delegation of the German Bundestag to the BSPC, as Vice-President of the BSPC. Furthermore, the Standing Committee agreed to the BSPC Strategy and Work Programme 2020-2021 BSPC Strategy and Work Programme 2020 – 2021 and decided to arrange an Expert Seminar on Democracy in a Changing Media Landscape on 1 February 2021. To commemorate the 30 th anniversary of the BSPC in 2021, the Standing Committee decided to produce a printed 30-year publication including a short input from each President or Speaker of the BSPC member parliaments, in addition to the content overview of all previous conferences. Further topics of the Standing Committee meeting among others included the issue of the 29 th BSPC Resolution and its follow-up as well as the current plans for the 30 th BSPC in Stockholm on 29-31 August 2021. Downloads: Presentation – Nils Gustafsson Presentation – Dr. Kaarina Williams & Aline Mayr Presentation – Žaneta Ozoliņa & Tobias Etzold

During the Digital 39 th Baltic Assembly, BSPC President Pyry Niemi argued for using the close ties of long-standing and intensive cooperation between the Baltic Assembly and the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference to advance common parliamentary goals, to strengthen sustainable democracy and to face common challenges in a changing world. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the 39 th Baltic Assembly took place in digital format. One of the main topics had been the impact of COVID-19 on economies, health and employment as well as education and research. The Baltic Assembly presented its “Comprehensive analysis on cooperation of the Baltic states during the COVID-19 crisis” as well as crisis mitigation measures and a strategic vision for the recovery of the region, both discussed jointly with respective ministers of the Baltic states. BSPC President Pyry Niemi addressed the Baltic Assembly in a video message this time. He particularly pointed out that there was a need to address not only the preservation of our livelihoods but also the fundamental issues of democratic coexistence. In detail, he underscored that, as face-to-face meetings were not currently possible, it was all the more vital for the two organisations to continue exchanging information digitally despite all the restrictions, to continue their cross-border parliamentary cooperation unabated at this very moment, to look for joint solutions to better cope with the burdens and challenges caused by the pandemic and to keep pursuing their shared goals for a better future together. The president said that the close ties of long-standing and intensive cooperation between the Baltic Assembly and the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference – based on friendship and trust – had to be used intensively in these times as well, to advance common parliamentary goals, to strengthen prosperity and to protect the environment. During the current Swedish BSPC Presidency, he explained that the BSPC would focus on sustainable democracy and how to face common challenges in a changing world. The BSPC saw the more than urgent need to address not only the preservation of their livelihoods but also the fundamental issues of democratic coexistence. On every single day of these months, it had become clear how crucial and fundamental that was. The BSPC wished that all those fighting for democracy and more democratic structures in their countries would find peaceful success. President Niemi pointed out that the people in the Baltic states had demonstrated to the world with the Baltic Way and their human chain 31 years earlier how powerful peaceful demonstrations could be and how they could change the world. Furthermore, the BSPC wanted to continue finding solutions for the protection of their joint environmental foundations. Therefore, the BSPC had established a working group on the issue of climate change and biodiversity. The president called on the Baltic Assembly to continue to work on their common goals with all their energy, to make the Baltic Sea region an increasingly attractive place to live. He wished the meeting good health and fruitful deliberations, adding that he was looking forward to the results of this year’s Baltic Assembly which would also enrich the work of the BSPC.

In supplement to her speech during the digital 29 th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference on 24 August 2020, the BSPC Observer on HELCOM, Ms Beate Schlupp, First Vice-President of the State Parliament of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, has issued her Report on HELCOM-related developments and activities. The present publication provides an overview of the most important decisions and developments from August 2019 to September 2020 with a specific focus on the Baltic Sea Action Plan (BSAP) update process. It primarily concentrates on the decisions of the 41 st HELCOM Meeting as well as the Heads of Delegations Meetings. The structure of the current Report slightly differs from the previous ones. It focuses on central ongoing processes, such as the BSAP update, the preparation of the Third Holistic Assessment of the Ecosystem Health of the Baltic Sea (HOLAS III), the development of the HELCOM Science Agenda with a particular view to climate change on the one hand, and notable events and publications on the other. Also, the Report includes an updated overview of the current HELCOM Working and Expert Groups as well as ongoing projects in the Annex. The Report can be downloaded here and on the Rapporteur’s webpage.

The BSPC Rapporteur on Sustainable Tourism, Ms Birgit Hesse, President of the State Parliament of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, has published her comprehensive Report 2020 on Developments in the Field of Sustainable Tourism. In addition to the respective speech during the digital 29 th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference on 24 August 2020, this report provides a detailed overview of the recent developments, events, projects and publications on sustainable tourism in the Baltic Sea region. The tourism industry worldwide has been among those economic sectors which have been hit the hardest by the COVID-19 pandemic and its effects. This report provides for the first time comparative figures on the recent development in this policy field for the parliamentary work in the Baltic Sea Region. In this respect, it is currently a unique basis for the discussion of the development of tourism in the entire Baltic Sea region, taking into account the COVID-19 pandemic – especially for the forthcoming conferences which will discuss this topic in the autumn of this year. The report can be downloaded here and on the Rapporteurs ’ webpage.