Navigating Global Transitions in European Arctic Regions

6. Multilevel governance, co‑ordination and cross-border collaboration in the NSPA

Abstract

The NSPA governance framework emphasises inclusivity and multilevel collaboration, with local and regional governments playing a key role in policy development and service delivery. Subnational governments, empowered with certain degrees of autonomy, engage diverse stakeholders to create policies that meet regional needs. A central focus is the integration of Indigenous peoples’ rights, particularly those of the Sámi people, ensuring their perspectives are included in regional planning. Participatory processes, such as public consultations and digital platforms, promote transparency and shared responsibility. Equitable financial mechanisms address regional fiscal disparities, allowing all communities to benefit from regional growth.

Introduction

The analysis of the multilevel governance (Hooghe and Marks, 2001[1]) of the NSPA begins by clarifying the term "region" in this context (OECD, 2017[2]). The 14 regions under study are classified as Territorial Level 3 (TL3) according to the OECD's classification of geographical units, typically representing smaller regions within larger TL2 regions. This classification is closely aligned with the NUTS3 level in the EU system.1 In the countries of Finland, Norway, and Sweden, these regions are commonly referred to as "counties" or "districts" in Norway, and this designation has historical roots that date back for decades, if not centuries, even though the administrative boundaries have often changed. The term “region” may be used interchangeably with “county” to refer to this level, though a distinction will be made when referring to the TL2 regions, particularly in the context of EU cohesion policies (OECD, 2022[3]).

The multilevel governance within the NSPA reveals both commonalities and specific differences across the three countries. The purpose of this chapter is to explore these similarities and differences, offering insights into the NSPA as a complex and multifaceted system. Any actions taken within this framework must align with the governance structures in place in each country.

A classification system proposed by the OECD (OECD, 2022[4]) divides regional governance models into four categories:

• Regions with legislative power. These regions have their own elected regional assembly which is vested with either primary or secondary legislative powers.

• Decentralised regional governance. Such regions are governed by elected bodies that operate at a higher level than local authorities. This is most prevalent form of regional governance in the OECD and the EU, where regions are governed by elected regional governments.

• Co-operative regions or regional associations of municipalities. The regions under this category are legally constituted, and their establishment necessitates the assent of the constituent municipalities. In general, these entities are governed by regional councils, comprising members elected by municipalities, and a cabinet or executive office responsible for the administration of their activities.

• Planning or statistical regions. These are territorial units established by the central government with the objective of planning at the regional scale and/or providing statistics at the regional level that may prove enlightening in the context of the planning process.

The regions of Norway and Sweden typically fit the decentralised governance model (the second category), where elected bodies govern at a regional level without legislative power. Finland’s regional organisation, on the other hand, aligns more with the third category, representing an association of municipalities. However, a recent reform in Finland introduced elective regions called "wellbeing service counties," which now fall into the second category, similar to the regional models in Norway and Sweden.

Additionally, the OECD classifies regions based on their degree of rurality, which considers proximity to and interconnection with a Functional Urban Area (FUA). Regions are categorised as either Metropolitan Regions (MR) or Non-Metropolitan Regions (NMR), depending on their distance from urban centres. In the case of the NSPA, 11 of the 14 regions are classified as non-metropolitan, remote areas geographically isolated from any FUA, while only three regions are near smaller FUAs. As a result, the NSPA is primarily characterised by its rural and remote nature.

NSPA multilevel governance structure: a cross-country comparative overview

The functions of the municipalities

In the three Nordic countries, which are unitary states, constitutional laws delegate executive powers to municipalities, granting them autonomy and decision-making authority to manage local interests and responsibilities. Municipalities can impose local taxes to fund their operations and public services. A significant portion of their budgets comes from national subsidies, allocated through equalisation mechanisms to ensure that all communities have access to comparable service levels (Moisio and Vidal Bover, 2023[5]). While the criteria for these equalisation mechanisms may differ across countries, the approach is consistent and particularly relevant for the NSPA. The functions of regional authorities vary more, influenced by national regulations or the autonomy granted to regions, especially in Finland where regions may take on responsibilities from municipalities.

Table 6.1 presents a summary of the primary functions that national legislation in the three countries attributes to municipalities. While the core services are largely similar across all cases, there is some variation in the additional, non-compulsory services that municipalities may be tasked with, particularly in the areas of economic development, business development and local transportation.

Table 6.1. Municipal-based functions of government bodies in NSPA

	Finland	Norway	Sweden
Compulsory	Education and Childcare Crisis preparedness Health and Social Services (from 2023 moved to Wellbeing Services Counties) Library operations Public Utilities and Infrastructure Planning and Building Regulation Culture and Recreation Environmental Protection Public Safety and Emergency Services	Education and Childcare Health and Social Services Public Utilities and Infrastructure Planning and Building Regulation Culture and Recreation Environmental Protection Public Safety and Emergency Services	Education and Childcare Health and Social Services Public Utilities and Infrastructure Planning and Building Regulation Culture and Recreation Environmental Protection Public Safety and Emergency Services Crisis preparedness and civil defence Library operations Public housing
Additional	Energy Housing Local business and employment services Public transportation	Economic Development Housing Immigration and Integration Public transport and regional planning (in co‑operation with the regions)	Leisure and culture Energy Employment Business development Regional and local public transport (in co‑operation with the regions) In general, the municipalities in Sweden may prioritise other services recognised of public local interest.

Source: Author’s elaboration.

The growing role of the regions

The role of regional government has been a significant topic in political discussions across the three Nordic countries over the past few decades, driven by a trend towards greater decentralisation and regional autonomy (EU, 2009[6]). This shift reflects a broader movement in OECD countries since the 1970s to devolve more responsibilities to regional and local levels (OECD, 2022[4]). As a result, the regions in these countries, typically referred to as counties (TL3) at the local level, now function as a direct elective tier of administration, positioned between municipalities and central government. This model applies in Norway and Sweden, though in Finland, only recently introduced wellbeing counties are directly elected, and the County Council, which continues to operate at a second administrative level, is composed of representatives appointed by municipalities.

Regions play a critical role in strategic development, planning, and the provision of public services with regional impact, such as transport infrastructure. They are increasingly responsible for delivering services in a more efficient manner, capitalising on economies of scale while remaining close to the communities they serve. This is especially noticeable in areas like local economic development and welfare and healthcare services (OECD, 2017[2]).

Table 6.2 provides an overview of the main regionalisation reforms in the three Nordic countries since 1980, confirming a general progressive tendency towards increased regional empowerment.

Table 6.2. Regional reforms in Finland, Norway and Sweden

Country	Main regional reforms
Finland	2019. The regionalisation project, that had been in the works since 2015 to be effective in January 2019, was abandoned in April 2019 due to political disputes that led to the resignation of the government. 2021. Enactment of a reform for the creation of 21 “wellbeing service counties” across the territory (excluding the capital city of Helsinki, which will have a special status). The first county elections were held on 23 January 2022. As a result the responsibility for organising healthcare, social welfare and rescue services was transferred from municipalities and joint municipal authorities to wellbeing services counties on 1 January 2023. 2022. The reform of the Regional State Administrative Agencies (AVI) and the Centres for Economic Development, Transport and the Environment (ELY Centres) – the central government agencies in the regions - to enhance the responsiveness of these centres to regional needs, improve service delivery, effectively address the diverse needs of different parts of the country and align the functions of these agencies more closely with the government's broader strategic goals. 2024: Employment and economic development services (TE services) reform. These services will be transferred to municipalities on 1 January 2025. The reform creates 45 employment areas or municipalities responsible for organising employment services.
Norway	2002. Recentralisation of the responsibility for hospitals from the counties to the central government in the framework of the national healthcare reform. 2003. New tasks granted to counties: spatial planning, regional development and innovation policy. 2010. New tasks granted to counties: public roads, cultural activities, management of marine resources, operation of vocational schools and environmental protection. 2020. Abolition of the 18 counties which were replaced by 11 larger counties (fylker), with new tasks such as the administration of national road networks. Other tasks and instruments will be allocated so that they become “stronger regional community developers”: cultural heritage protection, integration (immigrants), broadband development, fishing ports, research and innovation, business development, agriculture and forestry, climate and environment, integration (immigrants), public health. Given the local opposition to the reform, the reform was amended and some of the larger regions split again into smaller ones, as for 1 January 2024 the final number of regions is 15.
Sweden	1997-2007. Experimentation of asymmetric regionalisation. No single model of regionalisation imposed but instead different options available in terms of political representation (directly and indirectly elected) and responsibilities. 2007. Report of the Committee on Public Sector Responsibilities, promoting the extension of the “pilot region” model providing counties with more responsibilities. Since 2007. Sweden has further extended the transfer of regional development competencies to county councils. 2017. Attempt to reduce the number of counties from 21 to 6, which ultimately failed. 2019. End of the gradual, experimental and asymmetric regionalisation process in Sweden carried out since 1997. All counties have the same governance structure (directly elected councils), including Gotland Island, a municipality with county responsibilities. They are now called “regions”.

Source: Author’s elaboration.

The national government in the regions

As a result of recent reforms, both regions and municipalities have taken on greater responsibilities. However, to ensure the implementation of national policies and administrative duties, each country has maintained regional offices staffed by appointees from the national government. In Finland, the AVI and ELY Centres are responsible for ensuring compliance with legislation and the implementation of national policies at the regional level. In Norway, the County Governor, appointed by the central government, represents the national administration at the county level, while in Sweden, the County Administrative Board performs a similar role. These bodies have varying specific functions but are primarily tasked with representing the central government and supervising regional activities (OECD, 2022[4]).

The co‑ordination between municipalities and regional representatives in the NSPA is generally effective, particularly between elected representatives and municipal councils. This success is partly due to the equal status of municipal and regional elected levels in Norway and Sweden, where they are not hierarchical but function as peer entities. This equality is reflected in their terminology, with the municipalities referred to as "primary" and the regions as "regional" municipalities in official documents. Despite this, tensions occasionally arise between these local bodies and national agencies, as the latter are the ultimate decision-makers and may not always align with local needs and expectations, although they are more closely aligned with national priorities.

The strategic planning in Finland, Norway and Sweden

The strategic planning process for regional and local development in all three countries is based on an overarching normative framework set at national level. Formulated by the government, different kinds of guidelines stemming from the law serve as a reference for the development strategies elaborated at the regional and local levels. While the terminology and some connected details vary in each of the cases, the conceptual rationale is common to all countries. The comparative table (Table 6.3) offers a comparative outlook of the specific national case.

Table 6.3. The strategic planning process in Finland, Norway and Sweden

	Finland	Norway	Sweden
National Government	Regional Government Decision linked to the Government Programme The decision guides the development activities of the various administrative branches and the regional councils and the co‑ordination of the relevant measures. The Regional Development Guidelines 2040 define the key issues for regional development in the future.	National Expectations for Regional and Municipal Planning 2023-2027(every 4 years) The Expectations set out the framework for regional and municipal planning in order to promote sustainable development throughout the country.	National Strategy for Sustainable Regional and Rural Development 2021-2030 The strategy defines the overall strategic framework for regional development in Sweden
Regional (County Council)	Regional development plan (long term perspective 2040) From the plan are then elaborated: Regional strategic Programme Regional Land Use Plan	Regional Planning Strategy (the only legal element in the planning system at the regional level) Under the Strategy the following: Regional plan Regional planning determination	Regional Development Strategy It defines the objectives and priorities for regional development over a medium- to long-term programming period. This varies from region to region (often this strategy looks ahead to 2030 or even 2050),

Source: Author’s elaboration.

Stakeholder engagement

Stakeholder engagement (Lehtinen and Aaltonen, 2020[7]) has been a central feature of the programming and decision-making process in the NSPA, explicitly outlined in national regulations related to planning. Local political and institutional representatives view direct stakeholder involvement as crucial for shaping development policies, particularly due to the challenges posed by vast, sparsely populated areas and the lack of agglomeration effects. These representatives highlight the need for pooling resources and capacities under common strategic objectives to overcome the issue of reaching a minimal critical mass for effective policy implementation.

Various bodies, agencies, and initiatives have been created to ensure ongoing engagement and commitment of stakeholders, including representatives from the economy, academia, and local civil society. As a result, local citizens, associations, businesses, research institutions, and universities play a dynamic role in formulating regional policies.

This engagement has two primary outcomes. First, it fosters a communication loop between local society and political decision-makers. Second, it promotes a participatory attitude among stakeholders, enabling them to advocate for shared interests and collaborate on achieving common goals. For this engagement to remain effective over time, it must be supported by transparent policy processes, decision-making procedures, and implementation mechanisms. In the NSPA, the concept of "social control" and reciprocal commitment is particularly strong, requiring the open and timely circulation of information and access to decision-making processes. While this transparency is a strength of open governance in the region, it faces challenges in maintaining accessibility, especially given the rise of social media, which can efficiently spread information but also pose risks of misinformation.

The Indigenous peoples in the NSPA

A particularly important case within the NSPA is the presence of Indigenous peoples, especially the Sámi, who are the only Indigenous group in Finland, Norway, and Sweden to be granted distinct rights and cultural protections. However, it is also important to acknowledge other local minorities in these regions, such as the Kven people, primarily in Troms and Finnmark (Norway) and northern Finland, and the Tornedalians in the Tornedalen region of northern Sweden, near the Finnish border.

The Sámi are concentrated in the northernmost areas of Lapland (Finland), Finnmark, Troms, Tröndelag, and Nordland (Norway), and Norrbotten, Västerbotten, Jämtland, Härjedalen, Dalarna, and Västernorrland (Sweden). These regions, often referred to as Sápmi, represent the cultural homeland of the Sámi people, encompassing their identity and traditional livelihoods. The Sámi people are also native to parts of the Russian northwestern territories. In all NSPA counties, there is a clear responsibility to provide information, protect Sámi culture and language, and ensure their participation in decision-making, despite varying national legislation and obligations.

The Sámi are recognised as key players in regional and local policies, particularly in spatial planning and in balancing competing land uses. Their role in ensuring sustainability and biodiversity is increasingly significant, with local stakeholders noting that areas with a higher Sámi presence tend to have better natural preservation. This is crucial for protecting traditional Sámi livelihoods, such as reindeer herding and associated rights. Additionally, preserving the Sámi language, culture, and way of life is considered vital.

Sámi representatives hold a unique position in policymaking across the NSPA, with legal recognition of their rights to participate in local decision processes. This is demonstrated by the establishment of three Sámi Parliaments, one in each of the countries, which serve as representative bodies to promote the interests, language, culture, and rights of the Sámi people, including Sámi education.

The funding of regional development and the role of the EU cohesion policy

Regional development strategies, programmes, and projects are primarily funded through a mix of public resources, with significant contributions from local and national budgets. Each Nordic country has compensation and equalisation mechanisms designed to ensure equitable distribution of public funds across regions, particularly addressing areas with lower tax revenue capacity. These mechanisms are generally applied at the municipal level but also extend to regions, particularly in countries like Sweden and Norway where regions have taxation authority. A detailed account of these mechanisms is provided in the country-specific sections of the paper.

In addition to national funds, European Union (EU) funding, particularly through regional development and cohesion funds, plays a critical role in supporting regional and local development in Finland and Sweden (EC, 2022[8]). As EU member states, both countries benefit from these funds, alongside other European programs accessible to regional and local entities, businesses, and universities. The LEADER initiative, part of the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), is particularly relevant in Finland and Sweden. It promotes local governance in rural areas through Local Action Groups, empowering local actors in rural development. Another notable example is the Horizon Europe programme for research and innovation, which is open to Norway as well, even though it is not an EU member. While Norway is excluded from accessing cohesion funds and CAP, it can participate in Horizon Europe’s open calls, which form a key part of its regional development efforts.

The governance of EU cohesion funds in Finland and Sweden is complex, with a multilevel approach to their management. In Finland, the national government, through the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment, oversees a single programme that includes all EU cohesion funds (ERDF, ESF+, and JTF). However, regional implementation must align with each region's strategies, with intermediary roles played by County Councils and ELY Centres, the latter being decentralised government bodies. In Sweden, the governance of cohesion policies is partially regionalised, particularly for the ERDF programmes. The Swedish Agency for Economic and Regional Growth holds overall authority, while regions, which are larger TL2 regions formed by consolidating smaller TL3 regions, have local Structural Fund Partnerships (SALAR, 2022[9]) comprising government representatives and stakeholders. However, recent developments suggest that the role of these decentralised bodies may diminish in future programming, with decision-making potentially centralising within the Agency.

Strategic foresight as a tool for policymaking

The NSPA faces significant social and economic challenges due to megatrends and geopolitical risks, which require immediate governmental action. Foresight, a tool used in future studies, helps policymakers anticipate and address emerging issues (Monteiro and Dal Borgo, 2023[10]). The OECD highlights the importance of prioritising foresight at the regional level to address challenges such as depopulation and green transitions.

Foresight involves anticipating and exploring future developments to guide decision-making, combining data, perceptions, and creative thinking (UNESCO, 2023[11]). Strategic foresight, a more advanced approach, integrates these insights into policy and planning by exploring potential future scenarios. The OECD defines strategic foresight as a structured method to help governments make informed decisions in uncertain contexts. Governments increasingly use techniques like trend analysis and policy translation, often through workshops with experts and stakeholders, to address emerging risks and opportunities.

Foresight is most effective when tailored to regional contexts, especially for regions facing interconnected challenges like poverty, climate change, and economic growth. The OECD encourages the integration of foresight into regional development policies through leadership training and innovation in public policy (OECD, 2024[12]).

Factors to consider when doing regional foresight work are:

• Robust data that delineates the regional story. Regions have unique characteristics in industries, populations, and economies. Foresight should begin by gathering data that reflects these regional differences, such as Finnmark’s focus on energy and fisheries, or Norrbotten’s specialisation in iron ore, to ensure policies are effective and equitable.

• Contextualising data with trends and change drivers. Megatrends and local drivers (e.g. technological advancements or geopolitical shifts) impact regions differently. The OECD highlights the importance of localised data to understand these effects. For example, regions like NSPA, with ageing populations and limited stakeholder engagement, need tailored foresight to address labour force challenges and innovation gaps.

• Focusing on specific problems. Foresight should tackle urgent regional issues. In NSPA, Kainuu faces challenges like attracting skilled labour, which requires targeted foresight. Complex issues, like labour shortages, should be broken down into subthemes (e.g. wages, education) to develop effective policy solutions.

• Rigorous imagining and blending perspectives. Foresight involves various stages such as data gathering, analysis, and policy planning. Combining top-down (policy-driven) and bottom-up (local) perspectives ensure broad engagement and innovation.

• Multi-layered approach (top-down/bottom-up). A co-designed foresight process involving diverse stakeholders ensures that both local and policy-driven concerns are integrated.

• Co-design the process and engage stakeholders. It is crucial to involve a broad range of stakeholders, from government officials to citizens, using personas to represent different community groups. This ensures that foresight outcomes are user-cantered and address diverse needs.

• Balancing regional and individual perspectives. Successful regional development requires aligning regional goals (e.g. innovation ecosystems) with local priorities, such as affordable housing. Balancing these perspectives is key to ensuring both regional progress and individual well-being.

• Vision setting and policy action development. To convert foresight insights into actionable steps, it’s important to understand the roles of implementing entities and consider political and feasibility constraints. For example, cross-border collaboration on labour markets and transportation in NSPA, involving Finland, Norway, and Sweden, requires understanding each country's governance structures. The capacity of regional governments to implement foresight-driven actions will influence the scope and timeline of these initiatives.

Building the capacities for better local governance

In the Nordic countries, the provision of courses and programs aimed at updating and improving the skills and knowledge of local and regional officers directly benefits the NSPA. These initiatives are designed to ensure that both civil servants and political representatives are equipped to tackle the evolving challenges of regional and municipal development. Such capacity-building activities are essential for the long-term, sustainable development of the NSPA, which is known for its unique characteristics and sensitivities (OECD, 2023[13]).

The approach to capacity building varies depending on the specific region, its unique features, and the prevailing administrative culture. However, several common elements can be identified. Regions and municipalities are responsible for determining the training priorities for their personnel, which requires a proactive approach to designing tailored capacity-building projects. Despite this, small municipalities with limited budgets often consider training and development costs as one of the first areas to cut when facing financial constraints.

Universities in the NSPA are typically committed to developing future-proof capabilities within the local communities they serve. This includes training students who will become the next generation of local development officers, as well as offering continuous training for those already working in municipal and regional institutions. Additionally, national associations of regions and municipalities play a crucial role in supporting the development and implementation of tailored training programs at all levels.

The establishment of horizontal co‑operation—through joint training programs across municipalities, regions, and even between Nordic countries—is recognised as a significant advantage. This co‑operation facilitates the exchange of experiences and practices, fostering mutual learning processes. While such cross-border collaboration already exists across the NSPA, its potential for further development remains underutilised, offering room for greater advancement.

The co‑operation as a necessary attitude across the NSPA

The NSPA has a rich history of cross-border and transnational collaboration, shaped by the necessity of operating in harsh and extreme conditions. This has fostered co‑operative relationships with neighbouring entities, leading to a variety of experiences, projects, and institutions, such as councils, boards, and associations, some of which have been active for decades. The extensive border with Russia, in particular, played a central role in facilitating local-to-local collaboration, especially for neighbouring NSPA regions. However, following Russia's invasion of Ukraine, many of these collaborative initiatives were abruptly halted, forcing a re-evaluation of cross-border structures and institutions. The impact of this shift has varied depending on the regions' proximity to Russia, but overall, there has been a move towards new forms of cross-border co‑operation that exclude Russia for the time being.

Despite these changes, regional development policies in the NSPA continue to rely on co‑operation as a cornerstone for long-term growth. It remains crucial to reflect on past collaborative experiences and assess their evolution over time. The European Territorial Co‑operation programmes, particularly Interreg, offer a framework that can support ongoing collaboration. The Nordic Council also provides valuable resources and instruments to facilitate regional co‑operation. Additionally, local initiatives, initially formed to address practical concerns along the borders, have often evolved into integrated local development agencies, further contributing to the region’s co‑operative efforts.

Box 6.1. Strategic foresight as a tool for policymaking

The NSPA faces significant social and economic challenges due to megatrends and geopolitical risks, which require immediate governmental action. Foresight, a tool used in future studies, helps policymakers anticipate and address emerging issues. The OECD highlights the importance of prioritising foresight at the regional level to address challenges such as depopulation and green transitions.

Foresight involves anticipating and exploring future developments to guide decision-making, combining data, perceptions, and creative thinking. Strategic foresight, a more advanced approach, integrates these insights into policy and planning by exploring potential future scenarios. The OECD defines strategic foresight as a structured method to help governments make informed decisions in uncertain contexts. Governments increasingly use techniques like trend analysis and policy translation, often through workshops with experts and stakeholders, to address emerging risks and opportunities.

Foresight is most effective when tailored to regional contexts, especially for regions facing interconnected challenges like poverty, climate change, and economic growth. The OECD encourages the integration of foresight into regional development policies through leadership training and innovation in public policy.

Factors to consider when doing regional foresight work are:

• Robust data that delineates the regional story. Regions have unique characteristics in industries, populations, and economies. Foresight should begin by gathering data that reflects these regional differences, such as Finnmark’s focus on energy and fisheries, or Norrbotten’s specialisation in iron ore, to ensure policies are effective and equitable.

• Contextualising data with trends and change drivers. Megatrends and local drivers (e.g. technological advancements or geopolitical shifts) impact regions differently. The OECD highlights the importance of localised data to understand these effects. For example, regions like NSPA, with ageing populations and limited stakeholder engagement, need tailored foresight to address labour force challenges and innovation gaps.

• Focusing on specific problems. Foresight should tackle urgent regional issues. In NSPA, Kainuu faces challenges like attracting skilled labour, which requires targeted foresight. Complex issues, like labour shortages, should be broken down into subthemes (e.g. wages, education) to develop effective policy solutions.

• Rigorous imagining and blending perspectives. Foresight involves various stages such as data gathering, analysis, and policy planning. Combining top-down (policy-driven) and bottom-up (local) perspectives ensure broad engagement and innovation.

• Multi-layered approach (top-down/bottom-up). A co-designed foresight process involving diverse stakeholders ensures that both local and policy-driven concerns are integrated.

• Co-design the process and engage stakeholders. It is crucial to involve a broad range of stakeholders, from government officials to citizens, using personas to represent different community groups. This ensures that foresight outcomes are user-cantered and address diverse needs.

• Balancing regional and individual perspectives. Successful regional development requires aligning regional goals (e.g. innovation ecosystems) with local priorities, such as affordable housing. Balancing these perspectives is key to ensuring both regional progress and individual well-being.

• Vision setting and policy action development. To convert foresight insights into actionable steps, it’s important to understand the roles of implementing entities and consider political and feasibility constraints. For example, cross-border collaboration on labour markets and transportation in NSPA, involving Finland, Norway, and Sweden, requires understanding each country's governance structures. The capacity of regional governments to implement foresight-driven actions will influence the scope and timeline of these initiatives.

Source: OECD (2021), “Annual Meeting Report”, OECD Government Foresight Community: Strategic Foresight for future-ready public policy, https://www.oecd.org/strategic-foresight/ourwork/GlobalForesightReport2021.pdf (accessed on 8 August 2023).

Multilevel governance in Finland

Institutional context

Finland operates as a democratic unitary parliamentary republic, where the President, elected every six years, is independent of Parliament. The President introduces government bills to Parliament and ratifies laws, while also serving as the Commander-in-Chief of the Defence Forces. The unicameral Finnish Parliament (Eduskunta), with 200 members elected every four years, holds legislative authority, approves the state budget, monitors the government, and oversees administration. A government must have the majority support of Parliament to be formed. The government, composed of the Prime Minister and approximately 20 ministers, administers the state through 12 ministries.

Finland's administrative structure is divided into three levels of government: national, regional, and local (municipal). The country is divided into 19 regions, each managed by a Regional Council, which consists of representatives from municipalities within the region. These councils are not directly elected by the public but are appointed through municipal councils, reflecting regional political preferences. Different regional authorities handle planning, development, and services like healthcare and public transport, but they cannot levy taxes and rely on state grants and municipal contributions for funding.

Central government agencies such as the Regional State Administrative Agencies (AVI) and the Centres for Economic Development, Transport, and the Environment (ELY Centres) operate at the regional level to enforce national policies. These agencies are not elected bodies and are funded by the national government.

At the local level, Finland has 309 municipalities, 108 of which are cities or towns. Municipalities, governed by elected councils, are responsible for providing services such as education, healthcare, and infrastructure, and they have the power to impose taxes. In 2023, a reform introduced 21 "wellbeing counties" for managing public health and social care services. Each county, including Helsinki, has an elected Wellbeing County Council, funded primarily by state subsidies.

In this system, the national government sets the legal framework and allocates resources, ensuring that services are distributed uniformly across the country. The structure is designed to balance central authority with local autonomy, ensuring effective governance and citizen involvement. Despite the unitary state structure, Finland’s system emphasises decentralisation, strong local governance, and co‑operative governance between regions and municipalities. This framework supports efficient service delivery and planning while allowing regions and municipalities to collaborate effectively.

Territorial reforms

Three significant ongoing administrative reforms in Finland are reshaping the governance of local and regional policymaking and the delivery of public services. These reforms aim to enhance the efficiency and adaptability of public services in response to societal changes and future challenges. The reforms are: the establishment of Wellbeing Counties, the reform of local employment services, and the restructuring of the AVI and ELY Centres, the regional government agencies.

The first reform, the creation of Wellbeing Counties, was implemented in 2023 and marks a substantial shift in Finland's public service delivery. This reform transfers the responsibility for organising social welfare and healthcare services from municipal authorities to newly established administrative entities. The Wellbeing Counties are designed to improve accessibility and ensure consistent service quality across the country. These counties manage a broad range of services, including primary and specialised healthcare, social services, and emergency care. Funding from the state ensures the equitable distribution of resources, and each county is governed by a directly elected Wellbeing County Council, responsible for decision-making and budgeting.

The second reform concerns the public employment services. Scheduled for completion in 2025, this reform transitions the responsibility for employment services from the regional level (ELY Centres) to the municipal level. Municipalities are required to form co‑operation areas for employment services, with a minimum of 20 000 employees per area. This shift aims to better align employment services with local labour market needs, making them more responsive and efficient. By localising services, the reform seeks to improve job matching, support, and counselling, ultimately enhancing employment outcomes and fostering a more inclusive labour market.

The third reform addresses the structure and organisation of the AVI and ELY Centres. This reform is designed to improve the responsiveness of these agencies to regional needs, enhance service delivery, and align their functions more closely with the Finnish government's broader strategic goals. It involves improving co‑ordination between the agencies to streamline administrative processes, reduce duplication, and ensure a unified approach to regional governance. The reform is implemented in phases, starting with assessments and planning (2022-2023), followed by pilot projects (2023-2024), and full implementation across all centres in 2024. The reform also involves adjusting the regional scope of these centres to reflect administrative, economic, and demographic realities, potentially reducing the number of regions they serve through consolidation.

The restructuring of the AVI and ELY Centres has territorial implications, including a reorganisation of regions to better match regional needs and optimise resource allocation. The reform aims to balance centralisation and decentralisation, ensuring that services remain standardised while allowing for regional customisation. Additionally, the reform seeks to foster greater regional co‑operation, particularly in areas where regional economies or ecosystems are interconnected, which may lead to the creation of shared services or joint initiatives across regions.

Responsibilities across government levels

Finland is a unitary state with a significant transfer of responsibilities to local governments, particularly municipalities, which play a central role in governance. The regional level, while primarily a collaborative body of municipalities, is also undergoing reforms, especially with the creation of Wellbeing Counties. Despite these changes, the authority to levy taxes remains shared between the government and municipalities. Legislative power is centralised at the national level, with no legislative authority granted to lower levels of government. Regional councils, however, play a substantial role by serving municipalities and implementing regional policies. In addition, regional state agencies, such as the AVI and ELY Centres, are responsible for executing national policies at the regional level, tailored to each region's needs.

The Åland Islands are an exception to this structure, enjoying a special autonomous status with its own regional government.

At the national level, the Finnish government establishes overall policy and provides funding for regional development, with key ministries, such as the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment, shaping the national framework for development, infrastructure, and economic innovation. These ministries work alongside national agencies to allocate resources and implement programs supporting regional and local initiatives.

The regional level is composed of Regional Councils, which are joint municipal authorities responsible for regional planning and development. These councils create regional development plans, ensuring that local initiatives align with national goals, and facilitate collaboration among municipalities. They also co‑ordinate the access to EU funds and national grants for projects that foster economic growth and infrastructure development.

The ELY Centres, which number 15 across Finland, play a key role in regional development by promoting growth, overseeing infrastructure projects, and ensuring environmental protection. They are responsible for executing national policies at the regional level, providing funding and expertise to municipalities and businesses, and aligning regional strategies with national objectives.

Similarly, the regional AVI Centres, totalling six in Finland, are responsible for implementing national policies across various sectors, including health, education, environmental protection, and rural development. They ensure that national regulations are uniformly applied at the local level, promoting legal security and equitable access to public services. AVI Centres also support local businesses, helping to drive sustainable development and economic growth while adapting national policies to local contexts.

At the local level, municipalities are the primary actors in implementing policies and projects tailored to their communities. They manage local services and infrastructure, working closely with Regional Councils to align their initiatives with regional strategies and access national support. Municipalities are responsible for a wide range of services, including education, urban planning, and environmental management.

Multilevel governance has become a key feature supporting public policymaking and service delivery throughout the country. The main functions devolved to local actors are summarised in Table 6.4 below.

Table 6.4. Regional-based functions of government bodies in Finland

Municipalities	Regional Councils	Wellbeing Counties	Regional State Agencies
			AVI Centres	ELY Centres
- Healthcare (primary and secondary healthcare); - Dental services; - Social services (social welfare, child day care and services for the elderly and disabled); - Education (pre-school, primary, secondary, vocational training, adult education, library services); - Culture programming; - Sports programming; - Land use planning; - Construct and maintain local infrastructure and the municipal environment including streets, energy, water and wastewater management, and harbours; - Public transportation; - Promote local business and employment.	- Regional development. They formulate regional development strategies and implement programs in collaboration with local, national, and EU bodies to foster economic growth and social cohesion within their regions; - Land use planning. Regional Councils are responsible for spatial planning, including the preparation of regional land use plans that guide the use and development of land in a manner that is sustainable and considers both national interests and local needs; - International co‑operation. They engage in international partnerships and projects to promote regional interests, share best practices, and attract investments; - Advisory role. Regional Councils act as intermediaries between local governments and the national government, providing expertise and advice on issues affecting their region.	Health services primary health care specialised medical care Social services social welfare services for children, young people and families mental health services substance abuse services services for the disabled pupil welfare Rescue services In addition, the wellbeing counties are responsible for social welfare and health care centres, hospitals and rescue departments.	- Public safety and health, supervision of healthcare and social services, occupational safety and health; - Education and culture, oversight of educational institutions, cultural services; - Environmental protection, environmental permits and inspections, water and land use management; - Consumer protection and market supervision, consumer rights Enforcement, market surveillance; - Licensing and regulation, issuing licences, making sure everyone's following the rules; - Civil protection and emergency preparedness, organising the emergency response, sharing information with the public; - Administrative appeals and disputes, dealing with appeals; - Supporting regional governance, working with municipalities and other agencies.	- Financing and development services for enterprises, employment-based aid and labour market training, handling of agricultural and fishery issues, management of immigration issues and work with EU Structural Funds projects; - Vocational education, library services, sports and fitness services, and projects involving the education system and youth services; - Road maintenance, road projects, transport permits, traffic safety, public transport and island traffic; - Environmental protection, guidance on the use of land and construction, nature protection, environmental monitoring, and use and management of water resources.

Source: Author’s elaboration.

Strategic planning

Finland's strategic planning for regional development follows a multi-level governance approach, involving national, regional, and local governments to address regional needs and opportunities. This approach fosters co‑operation and ensures that regional development strategies align with national goals while being tailored to local conditions. Key instruments for regional development include the Regional Development Guidelines 2040, the Government Decision on Regional Development, and individual regional development strategies.

The Regional Development Guidelines 2040, prepared by the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment with broad stakeholder input, focus on long-term regional development issues. These guidelines highlight three key themes: regional and demographic trends, the transition to a sustainable economy, and the importance of high-quality expertise and education. Climate change, biodiversity loss, flexibility, digitalisation, networks, and security are considered cross-cutting issues that must be integrated into regional development strategies.

The Government Decision on Regional Development sets the national priorities for each government term, guiding the actions of administrative branches, regional councils, and municipalities. The Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment is responsible for preparing this decision in collaboration with other ministries and regional stakeholders. The current decision, valid from 2024 to 2027, focuses on three main areas: sustainable vitality and investment, healthy populations and communities, and attractive living environments. Cross-cutting themes such as comprehensive security, international orientation, and regional accessibility are emphasised as essential to achieving these priorities.

At the regional level, the regional development strategies align with these national guidelines but are designed to address specific regional challenges. These strategies are developed through inclusive, participatory processes. The regional development plan serves as a long-term steering document, while the regional strategic programme outlines medium-term objectives and projects, typically spanning four years. The regional councils are responsible for preparing these plans, with the support of the ELY Centres, municipalities, businesses, educational institutions, and other stakeholders. The plans are approved by regional assemblies and implemented through annual plans that include financing details and co‑ordination of resources.

The Ministry of Employment and the Economy oversees the co‑ordination, monitoring, and evaluation of these regional strategic programmes, working closely with regional councils, ELY Centres, and other key actors involved in regional development.

With reference to the NSPA of Finland, Table 6.5 provides an overview of the regional development strategies currently in place, highlighting the main priorities outlined in the respective strategic documents. The priorities presented in the table are a synthesis of findings derived from the OECD team’s site visits, a cross-analysis of various documents, and a review of relevant official websites.

Table 6.5. Regional Development Strategies of Finnish NSPA

Region (TL3)	Regional Development Strategy Key documents	Main priorities
Kainuu	Kainuu Regional Plan 2040 Kainuu Regional Programme 2022–2025	Vision 2040: Kainuu – Kainuu is all about freedom and possibilities for a meaningful life close to nature, attracting positive net migration as well as multilocational inhabitants Priorities: Wellfare and employment, Livelyhoods and know-how, Accessibility and regional structure, Green and just transition.
North Karelia	Development Strategy 2040 North Karelia Plan 2040 Regional strategic programme “POKAT 2025”	Economic competitiveness and innovation. Fostering more competitive and international businesses, enhancing the operating environment, and leveraging the region's unique strengths; Human capital development. Promoting continuous learning and addressing demographic challenges, such as the ageing population, by ensuring the availability of skilled labour; Social inclusion and welfare. Enhancing health, well-being, and social services, preventing marginalisation, and ensuring comprehensive community participation; Environmental sustainability. Supporting climate resilience, sustainable development, biodiversity preservation, and the green transition.
Pohjois-Savo	Regional plan 2040 Regional programme 2022–2025	Backbone of the Economy: Machine and energy technology; Forest Industry; Food production. Emerging Areas: Health technology; Intelligent water systems; Biorefining. Under tapped opportunity: Tourism industry.
South Savo	Regional Strategic Plan 2030 Regional Programme 2022-2025	Forest. Forest growth in South Savo region is 9 million cubic meters per year. Forestry and wood processing is the largest business sector in the area. The forests are perfect for outdoor leisure activities and South Savo is among Finland’s topmost holiday areas; Water. The lakes in South-Savo are the cleanest in the world. Our high-tech water technologies provide extensive business opportunities. The beautiful nature around Lake Saimaa attract movers from everywhere; Food. South Savo nature grows the best and purest tastes. To prepare excellent dishes, we use local ingredients that are produced by regional farmers. Our food expertise is high grade business.
Central Ostrobothnia	Regional Strategy 2040 Regional programme 2022–2025 Growth programme 2024–2025	Preconditions for sustainable growth, well-being and vitality: A carbon-neutral region; Acceleration through the Smart Specialisation strategy to develop into a leading region of bio, hydrogen and circular economy, with high-value products and emissions-free energy systems; Digitalisation of the public and private sectors with accessibility to all residents of the region; A high-quality education system, high employment rate, availability of workforce and competence, continuous learning, customer-oriented employment services and labour immigration to support the private and public sector; Well-being and inclusion; An attractive, high-quality living and cultural environment.
Northern Ostrobothnia	Regional Strategic Plan 2040 Regional Programme 2022-2025	Mitigating climate change and safeguarding biodiversity; Building sustainable communities with good connections; Innovating business life and accelerating RDI; Making skills and education a resource for regional development; Increasing inclusion and wellbeing and preventing inequality.
Lapland	Regional Strategic Programme 2022-2025	Sustainable growth of the Arctic economy and industry through renewal; Managing the challenges of population development and workforce adequacy; Developing expertise to respond to rapid changes in the operating environment; Quality of living environment, well-being, and basic services as essential elements of a good life; Mitigating climate change and preserving biodiversity; Good accessibility as an enabler of competitiveness and growth; Ensuring the vitality of Sámi culture.

Source: Author’s elaboration.

EU cohesion programming

In Finland, as in Sweden, European Union funds for cohesion and regional development are a significant component of regional development policy. These funds, known as the European Structural Funds, were created to reduce disparities between regions and address the backwardness of less-favoured areas, a goal established in the Treaty of Rome. Over half of the EU budget is distributed through these funds, which are managed jointly by the European Commission and the governments of EU Member States. Their main goal is to promote employment, investment, and the development of a sustainable European economy and environment.

For the 2021-2027 programming period, several EU funds are relevant to Finland's National Strategic Planning Area. These include the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), which aims to strengthen economic, social, and territorial cohesion by addressing regional imbalances and fostering smarter, environmentally-friendly, and inclusive investments; the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+), which supports human capital development and the European Pillar of Social Rights; and the Just Transition Fund (JTF), which helps regions transition towards climate neutrality while preventing exacerbating regional inequalities.

In addition, there are two EU funding sources not directly part of the cohesion policy but highly relevant to regional development. These are the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD), which supports rural development under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), and the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF), which focuses on supporting sustainable aquatic and maritime industries.

The Structural Funds primarily target areas such as research and innovation, digital technology, low-carbon economies, sustainable management of natural resources, and small businesses. Their implementation in Finland is guided by the Partnership Agreement, which outlines the objectives, resources, and programmes for cohesion policy, and runs through the 2021-2027 period.

EU Partnership Agreement with Finland (2021-2027)

The EU Partnership Agreement with Finland for 2021-2027 is a strategic document detailing the use of around 2 billion euros from European Structural Funds. It focuses on economic, social, and territorial cohesion, with a particular emphasis on green and digital transitions. The Agreement aligns with EU priorities, including the European Green Deal.

Key investment focuses in the Partnership Agreement include:

• Innovation and competitiveness: Approximately €523 million allocated for R&D and innovation to stimulate SMEs and digital transformation.

• Green transition: 40% of investments (funded by ERDF) are dedicated to energy efficiency, climate change adaptation, and resource efficiency, particularly addressing the environmental impacts of reduced peat production.

• Social cohesion: €580 million from ESF+ to enhance skills, employment adaptability, and social inclusion, especially for marginalised groups.

• Resilient fisheries: EMFAF supports innovation and adaptation within the fisheries and aquaculture sectors, including the continuation of Fisheries Local Action Groups (FLAGs).

Regional development Programmes under EU Cohesion

The Partnership Agreement is implemented through two main programmes:

• Innovation and Skills in Finland 2021–2027: Covers all of continental Finland and is funded by ERDF, ESF+, and JTF.

• Åland Structural Funds Programme 2021–2027: Focuses on regional and cohesion action in the Åland Islands.

The Innovation and Skills in Finland programme is the one most relevant for the Finnish NSPA and has the largest share of EU funding. The programme addresses priorities such as R&D, sustainable mobility, energy efficiency, youth employment, and reducing material deprivation. It is structured around seven action lines, including:

• Innovative Finland. Promotes regional business research and innovation, enhancing SME growth and digitalisation (funded by ERDF).

• Carbon-neutral Finland. Supports energy efficiency and climate change adaptation (funded by ERDF).

• More accessible Finland. Develops transport infrastructure in sparsely populated regions (funded by ERDF).

• An employable, competent, and inclusive Finland. Focuses on employment, skills development, and lifelong learning (funded by ESF+).

• Finland of Social Innovation. Aims to improve the welfare of children and young people in child welfare services (funded by ESF+).

• Finland addressing material deprivation. Provides support for vulnerable groups through food and basic material assistance (funded by ESF+).

• Just Transition Finland. Facilitates a regional transition away from peat production, diversifying livelihoods and mitigating negative environmental impacts (funded by JTF).

The programme’s budget totals €3.159 billion, with €1.935 billion from EU sources and €1.224 billion in national co-financing. Funding is distributed by Regional Councils, ELY Centres, and the Finnish Food Authority, following geographical allocations in regions such as Southern, Eastern, Western, and Northern Finland.

Rural development and LEADER

Rural development plays a central role in Finland's regional development strategy, especially within the NSPA, which mostly comprises remote rural areas. The European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD), part of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), supports rural sustainability by addressing economic, environmental, and social challenges in these areas.

The LEADER approach, supported by the EAFRD, is crucial for rural development in Finland. LEADER encourages local actors to develop strategies for their regions, fostering collaboration across public, private, and non-profit sectors. Local Action Groups (LAGs), representing these sectors, implement local development strategies that promote competitiveness, business growth, and employment opportunities in rural areas. Since its inception, LEADER has been used across Europe, establishing over 2,800 LAGs and benefiting 170 million rural inhabitants, about 62% of Europe’s rural population.

In Finland, entrepreneurship based in rural areas is supported through business start-up and business development schemes under the CAP Plan, as well as co‑operation measures including LEADER. Moreover, the Plan facilitates investment in rural businesses. With CAP support, Finland's 55 Local Action Groups (LAGs) span 95% of rural areas, with the objective of encompassing 100% of the rural population under the new Plan, relying on a budget of about 100 million Euro allocated to the purpose.2 Of these, 22 Local Action Groups are situated within the NSPA, covering all the regions.

Resources for regional development

Finland's territorial structure for distributing financial resources ensures that funding aligns with the responsibilities and needs of different government levels, promoting equitable service provision across the country. The system combines centralised funding mechanisms with compensatory measures to address interregional disparities, alongside considerable local fiscal autonomy. This approach allows tailored development and service provision at the regional and municipal levels.

The primary sources of funding for regional and local development in Finland are drawn from three levels: the European Union, national funding programmes, and regional and local initiatives, with the latter largely based on local tax revenues.

European funds

Finland manages EU funds at the regional level through a collaborative model involving the national government and local authorities, including Regional Councils and ELY Centres. This system ensures alignment with EU and national cohesion policy objectives. Strategic priorities are set by the government in co‑ordination with the EU, and Regional Councils oversee the planning, distribution, and monitoring of ERDF and JTF funds to promote regional prosperity and social cohesion. Local stakeholders such as businesses, educational institutions, and NGOs are actively involved in the planning process.

The central reference programme is the Innovation and Skills in Finland 2021–2027 programme, which covers a wide range of areas including business, energy, climate, innovation, education, and employment. This programme is supported by the ERDF, ESF+, and JTF funds, and is managed by the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment. The funds are distributed at the regional level via public calls for proposals that align with each region's specific strategies and needs.

The ERDF focuses on advancing research and innovation, digitisation, and supporting green transition efforts like energy efficiency and climate change adaptation. The ESF+ funds social cohesion initiatives, focusing on employment access, lifelong learning, and addressing material deprivation. The JTF is targeted at regions heavily dependent on carbon-intensive industries, particularly benefiting areas like North Ostrobothnia, North Karelia, and Kainuu.

In total, the allocation of EU funds for regional development in mainland Finland for 2021–2027 period amounts to approximately €3.159 billion, with €1.935 billion coming from EU sources, as already reported. Of this the ERDF accounts for 47%, followed by 32% from ESF+, and 21% from the JTF.

National resources

At the national level, Finland’s government plays a key role in the distribution of resources through grants, subsidies, and transfers. These funds help reduce fiscal disparities between municipalities and ensure a standard level of public services, such as education, healthcare, and social services. Transfers are calculated based on factors like population size and demographic needs to promote balanced regional development.

Key national bodies involved in funding distribution include ELY Centres, which support regional projects focused on business development, labour, and environmental sustainability, and Business Finland, which offers funding for research and innovation to enhance Finnish industries' competitiveness.

Regional and municipality budgets

At the regional and local levels, municipalities have significant fiscal autonomy. They can impose taxes and manage their finances, which are primarily used to fund basic public services. Revenue sources for local governments include income taxes, corporation taxes, real estate taxes, service charges, and central government transfers.

The central government provides legislative guidance and allocates financial resources to local authorities. It also determines the tax bases and central government transfers to municipalities. Local governments develop budgets and financial plans that typically span at least three years, with the focus on ensuring financial balance. Municipalities may create corporate entities, such as companies or co‑operatives, to carry out local functions, guided by the municipal council’s strategic objectives.

Local authorities are also involved in industrial policy measures, which are not mandatory but may be adopted to promote municipal vitality. The financial stability of municipalities is assessed using indicators such as annual surpluses and cash flow from operations and investments.

Capability for better public governance across the levels of government

In Finland, the Association of Finnish Local and Regional Authorities (AFLRA) plays a central role in building the capacity of local and regional officials. Similar to other Nordic and European associations, AFLRA advocates for Finnish municipalities and local governments, focusing on local self-government and the modernisation of municipal services. A key part of AFLRA’s approach is continuous training and capacity building, which is essential for enabling municipalities and regions to manage their responsibilities effectively, deliver quality services, and adapt to changing societal needs. AFLRA supports municipalities through a range of initiatives, including training, research and development, networking, and advocacy.

Finnish academic institutions, such as the University of Eastern Finland, also contribute to capacity building efforts by promoting continuous learning and the development of public sector employees and working communities.

Additionally, local authorities in Finland’s Nordic-South Baltic Area (NSPA), along with other NSPA regions, benefit from capacity building initiatives funded by the Nordic Council of Ministers. One notable example is the Nordic-Baltic Public Administration Mobility Programme, which focuses on knowledge exchange, best practices, and the development of networks among Nordic civil servants. This programme also works towards harmonising working standards.

The European Union offers similar opportunities through its Civil Servant Exchange Programme (CSEP), which facilitates exchanges, internships, and networking to promote capacity building and the sharing of best practices.

In conclusion, capacity development in Finland's local government sector is driven by a collaborative and continuous effort involving individual municipalities, organised groups like AFLRA, academic institutions, and international initiatives aimed at enhancing public sector governance and strengthening local authorities.

Multilevel governance in Norway

Institutional context

Norway is a parliamentary democracy and constitutional monarchy, known as the Kingdom of Norway, with a division of power among three branches: the legislative (Storting), the executive (Government), and the judiciary (Courts). The King is the head of state, but in practice, the Prime Minister exercises executive power with the support of the Storting. The Prime Minister appoints the cabinet, which is assisted by ministries that manage government sectors. Norway's governance operates across three levels: national, regional, and local. As of 2024, Norway has 15 regions (fylke) and 356 municipalities (kommuner), with Oslo functioning as both a municipality and a county authority. Local governments are led by elected councils, with mayors and county mayors overseeing local and regional administration. County Governors, appointed by the King, represent the central government at the local level.

Norwegian citizen participation is promoted through electoral systems that guarantee proportional representation. The Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development oversees participation mechanisms, including public consultations, town halls, and access to government information, reinforcing transparency and democratic engagement.

Territorial reforms

Norway has undergone significant regional and local reforms aimed at improving governance efficiency and sustainability. In 2014, the municipal reform led to the merger of many municipalities, reducing their number from 428 to 356 by 2020, with the aim of improving service delivery, financial stability, and local democracy. In parallel, the regional reform, passed in 2016, aimed to strengthen counties as community developers by transferring certain responsibilities from the national government. This reform reduced the number of counties from 19 to 11, implemented in 2020. The region of Troms og Finnmark was formed from the merger of Troms and Finnmark counties, but faced significant opposition, leading to a split back into two counties in January 2024.

Further, in 2023, the government introduced a white paper outlining a long-term vision for regional and rural policy. Key priorities include giving municipalities more autonomy for planning, enhancing co‑operation between municipalities, improving local services, and strengthening infrastructure. The paper also focuses on sustainable business development, including support for agriculture and tourism in northern Norway, and promoting educational opportunities. The policy aims to foster balanced development across Norway, with special emphasis on northern areas, including Sámi communities, and addressing challenges such as the impact of Russia's war in Ukraine and the region's need for skilled labour.

Responsibilities across government levels

Norway's administrative reforms have shifted responsibilities to local governments, particularly counties and municipalities, which are directly elected. Municipalities have significant autonomy in managing local services, including welfare, infrastructure, and regulatory functions. They primarily fund these activities through taxes. Counties manage regional tasks that require co‑ordination beyond municipal borders but are not handled by the national government. Although counties can levy some taxes, their budgets depend heavily on transfers from the central government. This multi-tiered governance system ensures co‑ordination and local autonomy across various administrative levels.

Table 6.6 shows how the main functions and responsibilities are shared between counties and municipalities.

Table 6.6. Responsibilities devolved to the regions and the municipalities in Norway

Responsibilities	Municipality	County
Mandatory	Municipalities are responsible for local services and infrastructure, including: Education and Childcare Primary and Lower Secondary Education Kindergartens Health and Social Services Primary Healthcare Elderly Care Social Services (Support for individuals and families in need, including financial assistance, housing support, and services for people with disabilities) Child Welfare Services Public Utilities and Infrastructure Water Supply and Sewage Local Roads and Transport Waste Management Planning and Building Regulation Local Planning Building Permits Culture and Recreation Cultural Services Recreational Facilities Environmental Protection Local Environmental Management Public Safety and Emergency Services Fire Services Civil Protection	The primary role of counties is to manage regional tasks that require co‑ordination beyond the municipal level but are not handled directly by the national government. Education Upper Secondary Education Adult Education Public Transportation Regional Transport Planning Infrastructure Maintenance Economic Development and Planning Regional Development Land Use and Planning Culture and Cultural Heritage Cultural Promotion Cultural Heritage Management Health Services Dental Services Public Health Initiatives Environmental Protection Environmental Management Conservation Efforts
Additional	Economic Development Housing Immigration and Integration	Regional Collaboration: Facilitating co‑operation between municipalities within the county Civil Protection and Emergency Planning Social Services (disability support and regional welfare programmes)
Shared	Counties and municipalities often collaborate on projects that cross administrative boundaries, especially in transportation and regional planning

Source: Author’s elaboration.

Strategic planning process

Norway’s regional development is governed by national laws aimed at ensuring balanced growth, sustainable development, and social equity across regions. Two key acts frame this process: the Local Government Act (2018), which defines the roles and powers of municipalities and counties, ensuring local autonomy and fostering regional development, and the Planning and Building Act (2008), which regulates spatial planning and requires municipalities and counties to create comprehensive plans in line with national goals. Over the last decade, significant reforms have strengthened the participatory nature of the land use planning system. A 2014-2018 evaluation of the Planning and Building Act led to changes that promote more inclusive, knowledge-based planning with an emphasis on environmental concerns.

The National Expectations for Regional and Municipal Planning (2023-2027) document outlines the national framework for planning, emphasising co‑ordination and collaboration, inclusive planning, welfare, sustainability, and climate goals. This includes objectives such as fostering vibrant communities, promoting green industries, and ensuring climate and environmental sustainability. The regional planning system consists of three core elements: the regional planning strategy, the regional plan, and the regional planning determination. These are adopted by the County Council and guide both regional and municipal planning. Table 6.7 outlines the regional development strategies of Finnmark, Nordland and Troms.

Table 6.7. Regional Development Strategies of the Norwegian NSPA

Region (TL3)	Regional Development Strategy Key documents	Main priorities
Finnmark	Development Plan for Finnmark 2024-2028	The status of Finnmark as a county is currently being reinstated, with the new status set to take effect on 1 January 2024. It is anticipated that the new plan will be adopted by December 2024. The regional planning strategy for Finnmark was approved by the Troms og Finnmark County Council in March 2023. The plan is guided by the following principles: The development plan determines which regional plans and other plans and strategy documents will be drafted in the coming years. The development plan will set the strategic direction for community development in Finnmark, outlining long-term goals and strategies. The development plan will facilitate co‑ordination among public sector entities in Finnmark. It will be created through a collaborative process involving municipalities, state organisations, institutions, organisations and other stakeholders affected by the planning work. The development plan aligns with national goals, guidelines and expectations.3 The previous strategy covered both Finnmark and Troms. For details, please see the next point about Troms.
Troms	Regional planning strategy for Troms and Finnmark 2021-2024 | Se nord - Geahca davás - Katto pohjaisheen County plan for Troms 2014 - 2025	As of 1 January 2020, the former counties of Troms and Finnmark were amalgamated into a single county. The strategy, which was prepared at the time, covers the entire territory. With regard to the new counties, which came into effect on 1 January 2024, their strategies are currently being prepared. The Regional Strategy for Troms and Finnmark 2021-2024 has been designed to align with 3 long-term development goals (towards 2032): The region's opportunities must be seen and developed from a northern perspective, based on the region's advantages, diversity, business and working life, innovation, infrastructure and sustainability. The objective is to establish Troms and Finnmark as a region that fosters collaboration, knowledge sharing and expertise. This should provide a solid foundation for future development and growth. Troms and Finnmark will serve as the focal point for the development of the Nordic region and its relationship with Russia. This will include a focus on the development of the Sámi and Swedish language, culture and community life. The strategy builds on these goals with 4 areas of focus and one investment area: Climate change Equalisation of social inequalities and reduced alienation Mobility Site development Investment area: a region with strong growth potential. Prior to the 2020 merger, Troms had already elaborated and approved its Troms County Plan for 2014-2025. The main themes of such a plan were: - The northern areas - Industry and competence - Centre strategy - Public health4
Nordland	County plan for Nordland 2013-2025	The county plan provides a comprehensive framework for the overall development of Nordland. The Nordland county plan has three target areas, each with a set of corresponding goals. Quality of life Ensure that all residents of Nordland have the opportunity to develop their abilities, skills and interests. Provide residents of Nordland with good living conditions. Viable local communities and regions Regional centres must act as drivers for growth in viable regions Nordland must offer attractive and functional local communities and regions Nordland's population must have access to flexible and robust educational offerings. Value creation and competence Increased competence and research and development activity (R&D) Nordland must have a sufficient and competent workforce Nordland must have a competitive, innovative and sustainable working and business life. The three target areas embrace a wide range of subjects, sectors, interests and opportunities. Goals, strategies and measures have been drawn up for each target area. The measures are collated in the action programme of the plan, which must be implemented on an annual basis. The action programme (Development programme Nordland) identifies the responsible parties and collaboration partners.5

Source: Author’s elaboration.

Successful planning is underpinned by intergovernmental co‑operation, ensuring that national policies are adapted to local and regional contexts. The Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development plays a central role in these efforts, supporting regional development to achieve balanced growth and sustainable living conditions.

The regional planning process in Norway is supported by various horizontal co‑operative initiatives between public agencies and administrative bodies. One example is the Regionvekstavtalen (Regional Growth Agreements), which fosters dialogue and co‑ordination between regions on key community development issues, based on a unified knowledge base. Another significant initiative is the Arktisk Jernbaneforum (Arctic Railway Forum), aimed at building a railway connecting Troms and Finnmark, involving stakeholders from local governments, academia, and industry. Additionally, Klimapartnere Troms og Finnmark was a collaborative network focusing on climate and sustainability issues, although it has since been discontinued following the demerger of Troms and Finnmark.

The Forsvarsforumet (Defence Forum) represents another example of regional co‑operation, where local governments and military representatives collaborate on defence-related matters. These initiatives demonstrate the importance of collaboration across local, regional, and national levels to address regional challenges and promote sustainable growth. However, such co‑operation often faces challenges, including limited resources, geographical distances, and conflicting stakeholder interests, which require ongoing efforts to ensure successful participation and alignment with regional development goals.

In summary, these co‑operative mechanisms aim to enhance regional governance by sharing resources, aligning policies, and promoting sustainable development through active participation from diverse stakeholders, ensuring that regional strategies are tailored to the specific needs of local communities.

European projects and synergies

Although Norway is not a member of the European Union, it maintains close economic and political relations with the EU, primarily through its participation in the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) and the European Economic Area (EEA). Norway’s affiliation with the EEA, formalised in 1994, extends the EU’s single market to EFTA member states, except for Switzerland. The EEA includes 27 EU member states and three EFTA members: Iceland, Liechtenstein, and Norway.

Norway engages with the EU through a range of EEA institutions, such as the EEA Council, Joint Committee, and Parliamentary Committee. While the EEA Agreement covers most policy areas, it excludes certain EU policies, such as those related to agriculture, fisheries, customs, foreign policy, and monetary union. As part of the agreement, Norway adopts a significant number of EU directives and regulations and actively participates in various EU initiatives, including the Schengen Agreement, which facilitates the free movement of people between Norway and the EU.

Through its membership in the EEA, Norway is involved in 11 EU programmes and 32 EU agencies, contributing financially to these programmes as well as to initiatives aimed at reducing economic and social disparities within the EU, such as the EEA and Norway Grants.

Several EU programmes in which Norway participates have direct implications for regional development, making this an area of particular interest for Norway’s Nordic regions. Notably, Norway engages in programmes like Horizon Europe, Erasmus+, Creative Europe, and the EU's Employment and Social Innovation (EaSI) under the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+). Additionally, Norway is adopting the Smart Specialisation Strategy (S3), a bottom-up policy approach for regional innovation, with Nordland County’s innovation strategy serving as an example of this EU-driven approach.

The Horizon Troms and Finnmark regional EU network is another example of regional engagement. This network plays a key role in mobilising regional actors and clusters to participate in Horizon Europe, facilitating co‑operation between research institutions, innovation bodies, and the private sector. Lastly, Norway's Nordic regions are also involved in cross-border and transnational co‑operation through the EU’s Interreg programmes, supporting local partnerships across Norwegian, Swedish, and Finnish borders, further fostering regional development and collaboration.

Resources for regional development

Norway's fiscal system is structured to allow the national government, regional county councils, and municipalities to levy taxes, with a high degree of integration across these levels. The system is regulated at the national level by the Storting, which sets annual ceilings in the National Budget. In 2023, out of a total tax revenue of NOK 2,105 billion, over 87% is allocated to the central government, 11% to local governments, and 2% to regional ones. The revenues of counties and municipalities are generated from taxes they levy and funds allocated by the national fiscal budget, which includes a territorial equalisation mechanism to ensure equal access to public services.

The income system is responsible for distributing discretionary income to municipalities and county councils. This system consists of "free income," which includes both framework grants and tax revenues, and represents approximately 70% of municipal income. The system incorporates equalisation mechanisms to balance regional disparities: expenditure equalisation addresses involuntary cost differences, while income equalisation adjusts tax revenue disparities. However, local financial autonomy is limited, as decisions on user fees, such as the government’s free ferry policy, can directly impact regional revenues.

The proposed revisions to the income systems have sparked debates, particularly over the perceived benefits to urban areas, like Oslo, while potentially disadvantaging rural areas such as Nordland and Troms.

National resources

The central government significantly influences regional fiscal health through grants, which are based on population size and demographic factors. These grants are redistributed among regions to ensure financial equilibrium, allowing all areas to provide similar levels of public services. The national equalisation system (Inntektssystemet) transfers income from wealthier municipalities to those with fewer resources to guarantee equal access to public services. Redistribution is based on factors like age distribution, socioeconomic characteristics, and geography.

The government also directly finances initiatives supporting counties and municipalities. Notable examples from the 2023 White Paper on regional and rural development include rural housing policy, with increased funding for housing initiatives, and healthcare collaboration between municipalities and hospitals, supported by a NOK 920 million allocation. In 2023, NOK 3 billion was allocated for maintaining county roads and transport infrastructure.

Regional resources

At the regional level, county councils operate under a decentralised budgeting framework, focusing on indicators like net results, fund grade, and debt ratio to determine resource allocation. Significant resources are dedicated to public transportation, including bus, boat, and ferry services, as well as the maintenance of county roads and investments in education.

The county budget is largely funded by framework grants, taxes, state refunds, and user fees such as dental health contributions and transport ticket revenues. For example, in Finnmark, 99% of the county’s budget comes from transfers from the central government, including grants and tax redistribution. These funds are allocated by the county council according to regional planning strategies and may be supplemented by EU programme funding, such as from Interreg. However, counties face challenges in managing these funds, including limited time, capital for matching funds, and administrative burdens.

While counties have flexibility in resource allocation, they are bound by national standards to ensure equitable service delivery across municipalities. Financial controls are minimal as long as budgets are balanced and counties are not under financial distress oversight (ROBEK).

Municipal resources

Municipalities’ tax revenues are also equalised at the national level through income equalisation. Municipalities derive income from personal income and wealth taxes, as well as taxes on power companies. Since 2005, Norway has implemented a system of symmetrical income equalisation, where municipalities with lower tax revenues per capita are compensated for the difference, while those with higher revenues are subject to a deduction. Currently, the system provides 60% compensation for discrepancies in tax revenue, and municipalities with tax revenues below 90% of the national average receive additional compensation. This system ensures that municipalities with lower tax income can still provide comparable services, with supplementary compensation financed by deductions from higher-revenue municipalities.

Capability for better public governance across the levels of government

Improving skills and abilities is a central element of Norwegian working life, particularly within the public administration, defence, and social security sectors. According to Statistics Norway, these sectors see the highest participation in non-formal learning, with 52% of employees attending courses and conferences in the past year. Non-formal courses and formal lifelong learning are the primary methods used to train local civil servants in Norway. These courses are often organised by municipalities themselves, sometimes in collaboration with other municipalities, county councils, or county governors.

The Norwegian Association of Local and Regional Authorities (KS) plays a significant role in enhancing the capacity of public officials. KS's development initiatives are designed around the needs of local authorities and focus on areas such as community development, innovation, service quality, efficiency improvements, and the growth of local democracies. KS's work is strongly shaped by EU and EEA policies, with its Brussels office offering services and expertise in these areas, as well as co‑ordinating co‑operation with European sister associations and other international organisations. Norwegian municipalities also participate in international programs like the Nordic-Baltic Public Administration Mobility Programme organised by the Nordic Council of Ministers.

Much of KS's capacity-building efforts are structured through networks and meetings where members with similar challenges can share experiences and knowledge. KS also serves as the secretariat for several clusters that bring together political and administrative leaders. Skills development for local decision-makers occurs through seminars, conferences, and webinars organised within the County Council. These activities aim to improve the skills of local politicians and municipal administrators.

Additionally, the county provides support to enhance planning competence by offering guidance, creating networks for new planners, and making resources like online platforms for sharing knowledge and statistics available. There is also a focus on strengthening regional development competence through collaboration with state administration and involvement in research projects. Civil servants are encouraged to participate in retraining programs and engage in networks that focus on public health, local community development, and environmental management.

Multilevel governance in Sweden

Institutional context

Sweden operates as a constitutional monarchy with a parliamentary system. The Parliament (Riksdag), elected every four years, is responsible for passing laws. Executive power resides with the Government, which is accountable to Parliament. The Government is supported by the Government Offices, consisting of ministries and approximately 400 central government agencies. These agencies function independently according to laws and regulations, without intervention from the relevant ministry. Some administrative tasks may be delegated to regional or local authorities or private entities.

At the regional and local levels, Sweden is divided into 21 counties and 290 municipalities. Four of these counties are part of the NSPA, covering 44 municipalities. There are two types of municipal organisations: primary municipalities (the municipalities) and regional municipalities (the Regions). The Regions operate within the boundaries of counties and are governed by regionally elected representatives.

The Region, formerly known as the County Council until the 2019 reform, is a political entity chosen by the county's inhabitants. The Regional Assembly appoints representatives to its board, directorates, and committees, which handle delegated mandates and responsibilities. Similarly, each municipality has an elected assembly responsible for appointing the Municipal Council, which manages local affairs. Both the Regions and municipalities operate independently, with no hierarchical relationship between them, as Sweden is not a federal state.

Additionally, each county has a County Administrative Board (CAB), which dates back to 1634, making it Sweden’s oldest institution. The CAB implements national policy objectives for the region and manages specific regional tasks. It is led by a county governor and operates as a government agency co‑ordinating regional agencies.

Territorial reforms

A regional reform process to establish Regions in Sweden has been discussed for nearly three decades, partly due to Sweden’s EU accession in 1995. As of January 1, 2019, county councils were restructured into Regions, typically corresponding to one county, though exceptions exist. The reform granted the Regions additional responsibilities in regional development.

The 2019 reform was enacted through the Act on Regional Development Responsibility (2010:630), alongside several important legal frameworks:

• The Local Government Act (Kommunallag, 2017:725): This updated law outlines the organisation and powers of municipalities and regions, including the creation of Regional Councils.

• The Health and Medical Care Act (Hälso- och sjukvårdslag, 2017:30): This act transferred more healthcare responsibilities to the newly formed regions to enhance service co‑ordination.

• The Act on Regional Development Responsibility (Lag om regionalt utvecklingsansvar, 2010:630): This law expanded the regions' role in economic development, infrastructure, and public transport.

• The Public Transport Act (Lag om kollektivtrafik, 2010:1065): This legislation enables local authorities, including Regions and municipalities, to jointly manage and organise public transport services.

• The Administrative Procedure Act (Förvaltningslag, 2017:900): Though not specifically focused on the regional reform, this act establishes administrative procedures for public authorities, including regional bodies.

These laws and amendments laid the legal foundation for the 2019 regional reform, which was a continuation of a process that began with pilot regions in 1999. Prior to the reform, services like healthcare and public transportation had already been devolved to the regions under the County Councils.

Responsibilities across government levels

As a result of the Swedish government's reforms, municipalities and regions are assigned distinct responsibilities. Municipalities handle a broad range of local services and welfare programs, while regions focus primarily on public health services and regional development, with public health services accounting for approximately 90% of regional expenditures. Public transport responsibilities are typically shared between the Region and the municipalities within a county, unless otherwise specified.

The Local Government Act allows municipalities and regions to take on additional responsibilities that fall within their jurisdiction, provided these tasks are not reserved for the state or another municipality or region. This means the range of responsibilities is flexible and can adapt to the specific needs and priorities of each region or municipality.

Municipalities and regions have the authority to levy taxes, and their operations are primarily financed through these taxes, as well as fees and state subsidies. The national government provides various grants, such as those allocated through the Structural Funds, which support regional development, particularly in sparsely populated areas and in the development of essential public infrastructure.

Municipalities bear significant responsibility for public services, including environmental and health protection, and are required to fulfil these duties uniformly across all municipalities, regardless of their size or population. While municipalities enjoy autonomy in managing and financing services, their powers are often limited, especially for smaller municipalities in rural areas, which face greater financial challenges in meeting legal obligations. The Local Government Act provides the legal framework for the operation of both municipalities and regions.

In contrast, the County Administrative Boards (CAB) function as knowledge-based government agencies with a broad range of responsibilities that involve cross-sectoral issues. These areas include food controls, animal welfare, rural development, infrastructure planning, sustainable community planning, climate and energy, cultural heritage, disaster preparedness, nature conservation, and social integration, among others. While the CAB contributes to regional growth, its role is mainly supportive and analytical, providing expertise to assist the regions.

Table 6.8 provides a more detailed insight into the responsibilities devolved to local authorities in Sweden.

Table 6.8. Responsibilities devolved to the regions and the municipalities in Sweden

Responsibilities	Municipality	Region
Mandatory	Social care (elderly and disabled care as well as individual and family care) Pre-school, primary and secondary school and municipal adult education (komvux) Plan and construction issues Environmental and health protection Cleaning and waste management Water and sewer Rescue service Crisis preparedness and civil defence Library operations Residences	Healthcare, including ambulance services Dental care Regional development including transport infrastructure planning
Voluntary	Leisure and culture Energy Employment General business development	Culture Training Tourism
Shared	Regional and local public transport

Source: Author’s elaboration.

In Sweden, regional development is guided by key strategic frameworks. The National Strategy for Sustainable Regional Development for the Whole Country 2021-2030 sets the overall strategic direction for the nation, while each region develops its own Regional Development Strategy. This regional strategy, created through an inclusive process, outlines the objectives and priorities for development from 2021 to 2027, often extending to 2030 or 2050. These strategies align with national and European cohesion policy objectives and sustainable development goals.

The national strategy identifies four key areas to address societal challenges, leverage opportunities, and promote sustainable development. These areas are equal opportunities in housing, work, and welfare; skills supply and development; innovation, entrepreneurship, and enterprise; and improved accessibility through digital communication and transport systems. The government emphasises that co‑ordinated efforts across these areas will create favourable conditions for implementing regional development, rural policy, and other related policies. Both national authorities and regions are expected to play an active role in the policy's implementation.

Regional development is a mandatory task for regions, which are governed by national legislation and regulatory frameworks. To fulfil this task, regions are required to develop their own strategies, co‑ordinate local efforts, and ensure collaboration between municipalities, businesses, educational institutions, and civil society. The role of the region includes developing and prioritising regional development strategies, managing regional development funds, monitoring and reporting on progress, and overseeing specific tasks related to EU Structural Funds. Additionally, regions are responsible for defining transport infrastructure plans.

The Regional Development Strategy is the main policy document for development within each county. Designed by the region's Regional Development Board, it takes into account the region's specific characteristics and challenges, aligning with the national strategy to guide the region's development. In addition to the Regional Development Strategy, each region may also develop sectoral strategy documents addressing areas such as culture, energy and climate, healthcare, skills supply, transport, digitalisation, and tourism, among others.

These regional strategies are the result of an inclusive planning process involving various stakeholders. Following the completion of the strategy, the region collaborates with municipalities and other partners to implement the plan. Local authorities also contribute to the strategic planning process through their own documents, such as sustainable urban development strategies and Local Action Plans for rural development.

The responsibility for regional development in Sweden passed to the regions on January 1, 2019, transferring the task from the government (through the County Administrative Boards, CABs). Regional elections were held in 2022, marking a formal shift from the previous county councils.

Despite this progress, concerns have been raised, especially by municipal representatives, about the capacity of smaller municipalities to participate in the collaborative development process. These municipalities often focus on delivering essential services and may lack the resources to engage in strategic planning. There is also a challenge for civil society organisations to participate effectively in the process, highlighting the need for additional support and incentives to ensure their involvement.

Table 6.9. Regional Development Strategies of the Swedish NSPA

Region (TL3)	Regional Development Strategy Key documents	Main priorities
Jämtland-Härjedalen	Regional Development Strategy (adopted in October 2024)	Goal and long-term priorities for the regional development policy in Jämtland-Härjedalen 2024–2050 Long-term goal: “Development power with enhanced local and regional competitiveness for sustainable development in all parts of the county” Priorities: Equal opportunities for local development throughout the county Skills supply and skills development throughout the county Innovation and transition, as well as entrepreneurship and business development throughout the county Accessibility throughout the county through digital communication, physical infrastructure, and sustainable mobility Horizontal Starting Points for regional development Development Power – This is about finding a balance between economic, social and environmentally sustainable development. According to the vision of the regional development strategy, "people are at the centre, ecology sets the boundaries and the economy is both a tool and a prerequisite for sustainable development". The work is therefore based on a solid strategic foundation in these three dimensions of sustainability, including the specific conditions and needs of the Sámi community. Competitiveness - Refers to the ability of a business, industry and the county itself to compete successfully with others. Geography - Jämtland-Härjedalen is a large geographical area with varying conditions and needs. This requires initiatives to take a territorial perspective, taking into account intra-regional differences, in order to create conditions for both development and competitiveness throughout the county.
Norrbotten	Regional Development Strategy	Priorities: Sustainable Economic Growth Industry and Innovation Support for SMEs Infrastructure and Connectivity Transport and Logistics Digital Infrastructure Social Cohesion and Quality of Life Healthcare and Education Cultural and Social Inclusion Sustainability and Environmental Protection Climate Action Biodiversity and Natural Resources Human Capital and Talent Attraction Education and Skills Development Attracting Talent Regional Co‑operation and Internationalisation Cross-Border Collaboration Global Competitiveness
Västerbotten	Regional Development Strategy 2020-2030	Overarching Goal “An Attractive Region Where Differences Drive Development” Priorities Sustainable Economic Growth - Innovation and Diversification - Natural Resources and Green Transition Infrastructure and Connectivity - Transport Infrastructure - Digitalisation Social Cohesion and Quality of Life - Healthcare and Education - Cultural Heritage and Social Inclusion Climate Action and Environmental Sustainability - Climate Neutrality - Biodiversity and Natural Resource Management Human Capital and Talent Attraction - Education and Skills Development - Attracting and Retaining Talent Regional and International Co‑operation - Cross-Regional Collaboration - International Partnerships
Västernorrland	Regional Development Strategy	Overarching Goal "The power of action, the power of life and the power of nature. Together for the growth of people and business, in a healthy living environment for future generations" Priorities Västernorrland position shall be strengthened nationally and globally Co‑ordinated lobbying at national and international level Joining forces to create, attract and retain competence and investment in the county Universities, colleges and research institutes as drivers of innovation and development Bold regional leadership that takes responsibility for the future! Västernorrland is the place people choose to live in and visit A growing region with attractive, viable towns and countryside Everyone must have a basic qualification from primary school and upper secondary school. More flexible forms of learning through new methods and ways of working A functional and coherent system for sustainable travel Greater perceived proximity to the outside world, whether physical or digital Västernorrland is the place where companies and organisations choose to grow Financing decisions for the implementation of the new Ostkustbanan, Mittbanan and Ådalsbanan. An interconnected logistics system that significantly reduces the climate impact of the county's transport sector A regionally adapted education offer School and working life working together to improve the matching of labour market opportunities Strengths developed through smart specialisation New and growing sustainable businesses and more enterprising residents A developed and coherent finance, business and innovation support system

Source: Author’s elaboration on the basis of various official Swedish government sources and direct input from local stakeholders collected during and after the OECD field visit

EU Cohesion Programming

EU funds for cohesion and regional development play a significant role in Sweden’s regional development policy. These funds aim to reduce disparities between regions, as outlined in the Treaty of Rome. The framework for these funds in Sweden is set by the Partnership Agreement, which defines the objectives, resources, and programmes for cohesion policy, including long-term financial planning for the period 2021-2027. The regions are then responsible for developing regional programmes in line with this framework, detailing the governance structures for fund distribution and implementation.

While rural development is technically part of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), it is included in this context due to its relevance for local and regional development, particularly through initiatives like LEADER, which are funded by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and managed by the County Administrative Boards (CAB).

EU Partnership Agreement with Sweden (2021-2027)

The EU Partnership Agreement for Sweden (2021-2027) outlines an investment strategy worth €2.2 billion, aimed at enhancing economic, social, and territorial cohesion. Funding will come from several EU funds: the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), the European Social Fund+ (ESF+), the Cohesion Fund, the Just Transition Fund (JTF), and the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF). The key priorities of this strategy include supporting Sweden's green and digital transitions and fostering a competitive, innovative, and export-oriented growth model.

However, the preparation of the Partnership Agreement deviated from the expected process. It was presented only after the regional programmes had been drafted, resulting in a lack of dialogue between regions and the national level. Consequently, the Partnership Agreement became more of a retrospective compilation than a unified strategic framework.

Strategic objectives and investment priorities under this agreement include:

• A smarter, digital, and connected economy, with significant investments in the circular economy, digitalisation, and broadband.

• A socially inclusive labour market, focusing on lifelong learning and skills development, especially for those at risk of poverty or exclusion.

• A fair green transition, with investments aimed at reducing emissions in key industrial sectors and promoting sustainable practices.

• Additionally, the EMFAF allocates funds for the fisheries, aquaculture, and fish processing sectors, contributing to the green transition.

The Regional Development Programmes under the EU Cohesion

In Sweden, the implementation of ERDF programmes is managed through bilateral co‑operation between the Swedish government, represented by the Swedish Agency for Economic and Regional Growth, and the regions. The Agency administers two key EU Funds (ERDF and JTF) and oversees eleven EU programmes for 2021-2027. These programmes target large regions (NUTS2), with specific focus on eight regional groupings of counties. For the Swedish NSPA (Northern Sweden), four TL3 regions are grouped into two larger regions: Middle Norrland and Upper Norrland.

The regional programmes aim to support overarching EU goals, including:

• A smarter Europe, with a focus on innovation, digitalisation, and SMEs.

• A greener Europe, with priorities on energy efficiency, renewable energy, and sustainable urban mobility.

• A more interconnected Europe, particularly for Upper Norrland and Middle Norrland, which focus on developing sustainable transport networks.

The Swedish Agency for Economic and Regional Growth serves as the Managing Authority for these programmes, responsible for planning and fund distribution. Regions prioritise projects based on local needs and strategies, with Structural Fund Partnerships ensuring co‑ordination at the regional level. However, these partnerships may be dissolved after 2027, centralising decision-making within the Agency.

Rural Development and LEADER

Rural development is a critical component of regional development, particularly in remote areas of Sweden. Three-quarters of the Swedish NSPA regions are classified as remote rural areas, making rural development initiatives highly relevant. Rural development in Sweden is supported by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) under the CAP, which promotes economic, social, and environmental sustainability in rural areas.

The LEADER approach, a key element of rural development, encourages local actors in rural areas to design strategies for their own development. This participatory process is facilitated by Local Action Groups (LAGs), which represent the collaboration of the public, private, and non-profit sectors. LEADER has been active for nearly three decades across Europe, and in Sweden, 40 LEADER areas have been approved by the Swedish Agency for Agriculture.

For the period 2023-2027, eligible subjects in Sweden's NSPA regions can apply for funding under LEADER. These areas include Norrbotten, Västerbotten, Västernorrland, and Jämtland Härjedalen, with ten local strategies approved across these regions. LEADER is complemented by efforts to expand broadband connectivity and commercial services in rural areas, with funding allocated to support regional growth and development.

In conclusion, rural development in Sweden involves a combination of LEADER initiatives, infrastructure investments, and regional growth strategies. These efforts aim to enhance the attractiveness and sustainability of rural areas, addressing both the specific needs of the population and the broader EU objectives.

Resources for Regional Development

Regional development in Sweden is tailored to the specific needs, challenges, and priorities of each county. This approach is supported by territorial reforms, which allow regions to create regional development strategies and plans that align national policy with the broader European regional framework. Regions are responsible for implementing these strategies, with competitive procedures used to allocate funding for projects that align with regional goals. The main sources of regional development funding in Sweden come from the European Union, the national budget, and regional resources generated through local taxation.

European Funds

Approximately one third of the EU budget is allocated through the European Structural Funds to address regional needs. These funds are jointly managed by the European Commission and the governments of EU member states. In the 2021-2027 programming period, the key EU funds available to Sweden include:

• European Regional Development Fund (ERDF): This fund aims to promote economic, social, and territorial cohesion by reducing regional imbalances and supporting investments in a smarter, greener, and more interconnected Europe. The ERDF also funds European Territorial Co‑operation (ETC) programs to foster cross-border regional collaboration.

• European Social Fund Plus (ESF+): The ESF+ focuses on economic, territorial, and social cohesion by investing in human capital, supporting social inclusion, and addressing regional disparities. It plays a key role in the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights.

• Just Transition Fund (JTF): Targeting regions most affected by the shift towards climate neutrality, the JTF helps prevent regional disparities by supporting industries in the transition to a greener economy. Notably, this fund is not accessible to the Middle Norrland region, which excludes Jämtland Härjedalen and Västernorrland.

Additionally, two EU funds outside the cohesion policy framework are important for regional development in Sweden:

• European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD): Supports rural development, including the LEADER approach for community-led local development.

• European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF): Aims to foster sustainable fisheries and maritime development.

The Structural Funds in Sweden are primarily directed towards five key areas: research and innovation, digital technology, supporting a low-carbon economy, sustainable resource management, and small business support. The ERDF and ESF+ are the largest funding sources, with the ERDF being regionally programmed into eight large regions, while the ESF+ is managed through a single national program. The Swedish Agency for Economic and Regional Growth is the managing authority for both the ERDF and JTF, while the Swedish ESF Council manages the ESF+.

The Integrated Territorial Investment (ITI) tool, although not eligible in Sweden due to national legislation, has been explored for use in northern regions. If adopted, it could provide a bottom-up approach to funding territorial development strategies, integrating multiple EU funds into a single initiative.

From the ERDF, ESF+, and JTF, Sweden is expected to receive approximately €4.03 billion for 2021-2027, with €1.73 billion coming from the EU, representing 43% of the total. Within the two NSPA regions—Middle Norrland and Upper Norrland—the ERDF allocates €847.3 million, with a significant portion directed toward the "Smarter Europe" objective, focusing on research, innovation, and business development.

The JTF will be available to regions in Upper Norrland, supporting industrial green transition projects aimed at improving sustainability and skills in affected sectors.

National Resources

National resources for regional development come through two mechanisms: compensatory and competitive financing. Compensatory appropriations are based on a 1:1 co-financing principle and are used to support regional projects, particularly in areas facing significant challenges. These funds are allocated primarily for initiatives related to innovation, entrepreneurship, and business support.

Competitive funds are awarded through calls for proposals and managed by agencies like Vinnova (Sweden’s Innovation Agency), the Swedish Agency for Economic and Regional Growth, and the Swedish Energy Agency. These funds support collaborative innovation projects between businesses, universities, and public organisations. Vinnova also administers Sweden's participation in Horizon Europe, the EU’s research and innovation program.

Regional Resources

Regions also contribute to regional development through their own fiscal resources, primarily derived from local taxation. These resources are used to support regional development projects and to meet co-financing requirements for EU and national funding. However, these regional resources are typically smaller in scale compared to the EU and national funds. According to a 2020 survey, the northernmost regions of Sweden have some of the highest per capita development funds in the country. In addition to public resources, municipalities, local businesses, and civil society organisations can access various funding sources, including state grants, hydropower compensation, and private investments.

The data on total development funds per inhabitant for 2017 and 2018 (SKR, 2020[14])reveals a clear policy focus on Northern Sparsely Populated Areas (NSPA) in Sweden, with regions like Norrbotten, Jämtland Härjedalen, and Västerbotten consistently receiving the highest per capita allocations. This prioritisation reflects the challenges faced by these regions and the need for targeted investments in infrastructure, services, and economic diversification. The funding aims to address these structural disadvantages while leveraging the regions' strategic importance for Sweden’s green and digital transitions.

Capability for Better Public Governance Across the Levels of Government

In Sweden, capacity building for municipal and regional officials is largely determined by the initiatives of individual institutions. This discretionary approach results in uneven availability of training programmes across the regions, with some regions lacking mandatory general training for civil servants. Smaller municipalities, in particular, often face challenges prioritising capacity building due to resource constraints and a focus on essential services such as education and social care. This situation has been identified as a disadvantage for societal transformation, as public sector skills development, particularly in areas like health, care, and education, does not receive the same attention as in the private sector.

In some NSPA regions, however, there are provisions for mandatory training in specific areas. For example, in Jämtland Härjedalen, civil servants are required to undergo basic training programmes tailored to their roles, such as gender equality or knowledge about the Sámi community and language. This reflects the county’s inclusion in the Sámi administrative area, which mandates the protection of Sámi culture and the provision of personnel with requisite language skills. This requirement is not universal across Sweden but highlights the importance of tailored skills training to meet specific local needs. Furthermore, a more comprehensive skills development programme, particularly focusing on knowledge of EU policies and the ability to apply for EU funds, would be beneficial for fostering public governance across all regions.

Despite the lack of a universal framework, there are effective programmes and initiatives to enhance the skills of civil servants, particularly in the NSPA regions. Institutions such as Mid Sweden University (MIUN), with campuses in Östersund and Sundsvall, play a significant role in this effort. MIUN collaborates with local municipalities to implement initiatives aimed at providing high-quality education and strengthening local capabilities. Such partnerships underline the university's contribution to regional socio-economic growth and sustainability through research, education, and co‑operation with stakeholders.

Additionally, the Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions (SALAR) plays a central role in providing training and capacity-building programmes for local governments, similar to its counterparts in Finland and Norway. These programmes address emerging challenges and enhance the competencies of local government officials, ensuring they remain innovative, resilient, and capable of meeting community needs. Training is delivered through various formats, including face-to-face workshops, online courses, and customised programmes tailored to the specific needs of municipalities or regions.

International training opportunities, such as those provided by the Nordic Council of Ministers and the European Union, also contribute to capacity building by offering peer learning and best-practice sharing for local government staff. These initiatives, alongside local programmes, ensure that Swedish local authorities remain equipped to address governance challenges and meet the demands of their communities effectively.

Regional Co‑operation Agreements and their governance

The NSPA, due to their unique characteristics and structural setup, are strongly oriented toward collaboration and co‑operation, more so than other Nordic regions. This focus is critical for advancing development policies and ensuring long-term viability, as well as addressing complex societal and economic challenges. Co‑operation is particularly important because of the weak market forces and market failures that dominate these regions. Unlike areas with functioning market economies, the NSPA does not have the same access to best practices, so solutions from other regions are not directly applicable. Therefore, there is a need for customised, ad hoc solutions tailored to the NSPA, necessitating a collaborative approach.

This collaborative spirit is also evident at the regional level, where governance practices are designed to optimise the use of structures, programs, and initiatives across the NSPA. The collaborative dimension significantly influences development policies in Finland, Norway, and Sweden’s northernmost regions, even when viewed from an interregional or international perspective within the broader Nordic context.

Several experiences, initiatives, agreements, and institutions support this collaboration. These co‑operative efforts are experienced through various spaces, which can be grouped into four main categories:

• Intergovernmental initiatives: These arise from agreements between governments and typically lead to the creation of intergovernmental organisations and institutions.

• Interregional co‑operation agreements and programs: Initiated by regions or municipalities, these are the main drivers of co‑operation and action within the NSPA.

• European Territorial Co‑operation: This includes the Interreg programs, which are mainly funded by the European Union through its regional development and cohesion policies.

• Instruments and initiatives for policy liaison with European institutions: These initiatives advocate for the NSPA's needs and interests, and promote its position on relevant matters within the European context.

As a result of these diverse initiatives, the NSPA regions have benefited from a variety of co‑operation agreements and bodies that have shaped their collaborative attitude over time. The next sections provide a summary of the development of such co‑operation.

NSPA/Arctic Co‑operation Agreements

Intergovernmental Initiatives

There are three key intergovernmental entities that operate in the Nordic region: Nordic Co‑operation, the Arctic Council, and the Barents Council. These initiatives have emerged from the desire to strengthen regional institutional collaboration. While the scope of these entities often extends beyond the NSPA, their actions are directly relevant to the region.

Nordic Co‑operation is based on the Nordic Council of Ministers and the Nordic Council, which serve as the main forums for official Nordic co‑operation. The Council includes Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, the Faroe Islands, Greenland, and Åland. The Nordic Council, founded in 1952, has been an enduring partnership, recognised as the longest-standing such alliance in the world. Its governance structure includes members nominated by national parliaments, with no direct elections. The Council holds two annual sessions—Ordinary and Theme Sessions—to deliberate on issues and urge Nordic governments to take action. The Presidency of the Nordic Council rotates biennially among member countries, and the Council’s work is supported by committees and party groups.

The Nordic Council of Ministers co‑ordinates intergovernmental co‑operation in the Nordic region. It is managed by the Ministers for Nordic Co‑operation, with daily operations overseen by the Nordic Committee for Co‑operation. The Secretariat, based in Copenhagen, manages the agenda and the implementation of decisions.

The Arctic Council, an intergovernmental forum of eight member states and six Permanent Participants representing Arctic Indigenous peoples, facilitates co‑operation on Arctic issues, particularly environmental protection and sustainable development. The Council operates on a consensus basis, and its activities are supported by a Secretariat established in Tromsø, Norway, in 2013. Despite the geopolitical challenges posed by the Russia-Ukraine conflict, Norway has continued its leadership of the Arctic Council since 2023, working to revive co‑operation among its members.

The Barents Council represents intergovernmental co‑operation in the Barents Region, aiming to address collective challenges that the countries of the region cannot solve alone. Formed in 1993 through the Church Declaration, its dual-level structure includes both intergovernmental and interregional components. The Barents Euro-Arctic Council, made up of foreign ministers, and the Barents Regional Council, composed of regional political representatives, are the core components. This co‑operation is further supported by the International Barents Secretariat, located in Kirkenes, Norway. The chairmanship rotates between governmental and regional entities, with Finland and North Karelia currently holding the position.

Interregional Co‑operation

Over the past few decades, Arctic regions and municipalities have been active promoters of interregional co‑operation, particularly on sector-specific issues like Arctic climate change, scientific collaboration, and security. Many of these initiatives have a narrow thematic focus, but they also address broader social and economic development within the NSPA. A common feature of these initiatives is the involvement of local authorities, which often drive the governance schemes.

These interregional experiences typically involve a three-tiered governance structure. This includes a political assembly with representatives from the regions and municipalities, an executive board, and thematic working groups that combine political and technical expertise. A secretariat, which operates based on the board's mandate, manages the activities. Many initiatives emphasise a bottom-up approach, focusing on local priorities and engaging local actors, especially in relation to minority identities.

These interregional co‑operation bodies often have well-established histories and, in some cases, were initially driven by specific needs, such as the creation of a cross-border local labour system. Over time, the scope of these collaborations has expanded. In some instances, they were motivated by a strong local identity or a desire for unified policy to address common challenges.

Interregional bodies often maintain connections with intergovernmental and international organisations, such as the Nordic Council and the European Union, and they frequently receive funding from these bodies. The funding is typically allocated through projects incorporated into multiyear strategies and action plans.

European Territorial Co‑operation 2021-2027

The European Territorial Co‑operation (ETC) and its Interreg programmes aim to foster integration and collaboration in border regions and cross-border areas, promoting networks between cities and regions throughout Europe. These programmes enhance regional competitiveness, stimulate economic growth, and encourage the exchange of best practices. They also align with the environmental goals of the European Green Deal. The Interreg programme, in particular, focuses on strengthening the economic position of the Baltic Sea Region at both European and global levels, while addressing the challenges of sparsely populated northern areas.

The 2021-2027 EU programming period sees the continuation and expansion of these initiatives. Many of these programmes have been in place since the 1990s and have evolved to include co‑operation with non-EU countries, creating a persistent territorial co‑operation framework. From 2000 to 2020, 48 ETC programmes involved NSPA regions, funding over 1,700 projects with cross-border or transnational partnerships.

Currently, nine initiatives are operational under the 2021-2027 framework, with three cross-border co‑operation programmes (Interreg VI-A), two transnational co‑operation programmes (Interreg VI-B), and four interregional co‑operation programmes (Interreg VI-C) relevant to the NSPA. These include:

• Cross-border programmes: The Sweden-Finland-Norway (AURORA) programme, the Finland-Estonia-Latvia-Sweden (Central Baltic) programme, and the Sweden-Norway programme.

• Transnational programmes: The Baltic Sea Region programme and the Northern Periphery and Arctic programme.

• Interregional programmes: Interreg Europe, ESPON 2030, Interact, and URBACT IV, which focus on policy exchange, territorial analyses, collaborative practices, and city networks.

In addition, the Arctic Urban-Regional Co‑operation programme (AURC), launched in early 2024, offers new prospects for co‑operation across the Arctic and between NSPA regions. Although not part of the ETC, the AURC is supported by the European Union’s foreign policy instruments. It aims to address shared challenges in the Arctic, including climate change, geopolitical pressures, energy transition, and social issues. The programme connects 15 local authorities across the Arctic from Canada, Greenland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Finland, and the USA, to work together and develop local action plans.

Table 6.10. Territorial coverage of EU Interreg programmes across NSPA

NSPA	Interreg VI-A Finland-Estonia-Latvia-Sweden (Central Baltic)	Interreg VI-A Sweden-Finland-Norway (AURORA)	Interreg VI-A Sweden-Norway	Interreg VI-B Baltic Sea Region	Interreg VI-B Northern Periphery and Arctic
Kainuu
North Karelia
Pohjois-Savo
South Savo
Central Ostrobothnia
Northern Ostrobothnia
Lapland
Troms and Finnmark
Nordland
Norrbotten
Västerbotten
Jämtland Härjedalen
Västernorrland

Source: Author’s elaboration.

Liaison with EU

The northern regions and the NSPA actively engage with European institutions through various initiatives and funding sources, resulting in a dynamic governance landscape. The European Union plays a central role in advancing many of these initiatives by providing significant resources. NSPA representatives maintain regular communication with EU bodies, advocating for the needs of Arctic regions and ensuring the effective use of EU policies and resources at the local level.

To facilitate this engagement, the NSPA has established three representative liaison offices in Brussels: the North Sweden European Office, the East and North Finland EU Office, and the North Norway European Office (NNEO). These offices help optimise the position of these regions within the broader European context, handling liaison functions and ensuring that local priorities are effectively communicated.

Two case studies illustrate this co‑operation in action. The first is the Horisont Troms og Finnmark initiative, which facilitates the involvement of stakeholders from the Norwegian counties of Troms and Finnmark in Horizon Europe, the EU’s research and innovation programme. The initiative supports local entities in disseminating information about opportunities, fostering collaboration, and identifying potential partners for research and innovation projects.

The second case involves NSPA participation in the Conference of Peripheral Maritime Regions (CPMR), particularly through the Baltic Sea Commission, which represents regional authorities from the Baltic Sea area. The CPMR serves as a platform for policy-oriented co‑operation and lobbying, advocating for the involvement of regional stakeholders in the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region and promoting collective action to address regional challenges.

References

[8] EC (2022), Partnership Agreement with Finland 2021-2027 & Partnership Agreement with Sweden 2021-2027.

[6] EU (2009), The Committee of the Regions’ White Paper On Multilevel Governance,, https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/3cba79fd-2fcd-4fc4-94b9-677bbc5391.

[1] Hooghe, L. and G. Marks (2001), Multi-level Governance and European Integration, Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

[7] Lehtinen, J. and K. Aaltonen (2020), Organizing external stakeholder engagement in inter-organizational projects: Opening the black box., https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2019.12.001.

[5] Moisio, A. and M. Vidal Bover (2023), Fiscal equalisation and regional development policies: Is there a case for enhanced synergies?, OECD Publishing, https://doi.org/10.1787/0d28a879-en.

[10] Monteiro, B. and R. Dal Borgo (2023), Supporting decision making with strategic foresight: An emerging framework for proactive and prospective governments, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/1d78c791-en.

[12] OECD (2024), The Strategic Foresight System of the Government of Flanders, Belgium, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/e55125c5-en.

[13] OECD (2023), Findings from OECD study missions to Finland, Norway and Sweden’s NSPA, May to November 2023.

[4] OECD (2022), Regional Governance in OECD Countries: Trends, Typology and Tools, OECD Publishing.

[3] OECD (2022), Territorial grids, https://www.oecd.org/cfe/regionaldevelopment/territorial-grid.pdf.

[2] OECD (2017), Multi-level Governance Reforms: Overview of OECD Country Experiences.

[9] SALAR, S. (2022), Structural Funds Partnerships.

[14] SKR (2020), Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner.

[11] UNESCO (2023), Futures literacy laboratory playbook: an essentials guide for co-designing a lab to explore how and why we anticipate.

Notes

← 1.  NUTS. Nomenclature of territorial units for statistics (in French Nomenclature des Unités territoriales statistiques), is the geographical nomenclature subdividing the economic territory of the EU into regions at three different levels (NUTS 1, 2 and 3 respectively, moving from larger to smaller territorial units). This is based on Regulation (EC) No 1059/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 May 2003 on the establishment of a common classification of territorial units for statistics (NUTS).

← 2. Source: “Finland’s CAP Strategic Plan at a Glance” [https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/cap-my-country/cap-strategic-plans_en]