20 013
Examensarbete 30 hp Juni 2020
Friluftsliv and friluftslivsmålen as tools for sustainable regional development –
An analysis of the role of outdoor recreation
in the regional planning process in Sweden
Mathias Ekström
Teknisk- naturvetenskaplig fakultet UTH-enheten
Besöksadress:
Ångströmlaboratoriet Lägerhyddsvägen 1 Hus 4, Plan 0
Postadress:
Box 536 751 21 Uppsala
Telefon:
018 – 471 30 03
Telefax:
018 – 471 30 00
Hemsida:
http://www.teknat.uu.se/student
Abstract
Friluftsliv and friluftslivsmålen as tools for sustainable regional development
Mathias Ekström
This thesis has set out to shine a light on the prevalence of outdoor recreation in regional strategies, regarding how friluftsliv can contribute to regional development and growth. In the context of the outdoor recreation goals, friluftsliv has been pushed to be involved within the regional development and spatial planning process in regions. However, the extent of measures to involve friluftsliv in RDS/P (Regional Development Strategy/Plan) from regional authorities are far in-between. The County Administrative Board (TCAB) on the other hand, are actively working within their regions on how to involve friluftsliv in the spatial planning process, partly because of difference in
responsibility factors from the two authorities. The same can be said regarding the many similarities and differences found primarily in the work from TCABs. For example, how friluftsliv frequently is described to have a positive contribution on citizens well-being and quality of life, that in-turn positively impact aspects of regional development, while some discuss the implications of friluftsliv on the environment.
Friluftsliv can work as a catalyst for regional development, although it can be argued to be geographically dependant for commercial activities, while its indirect social, economic, and environmental contributions are not geography dependant. One conclusion made in the thesis is that a more transcending planning process regionally to promote friluftsliv is needed, where both the regions and TCAB carry out the planning in unison with the SEPA (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency) to spread the needed knowledge for the purpose of smart spatial planning between the authorities.
20 013
Examinator: Ulrika Persson-Fischier Ämnesgranskare: Patrik Rönnbäck Handledare: Daniel Wolf-Watz
iii
SAMMANFATTNING
Denna masteruppsats har syftat till att belysa förekomsten av friluftsliv i regionala strategier, relaterat till hur friluftsliv kan bidra till regional utveckling och tillväxt. Detta analyserades i samband med uppkomsten av friluftslivsmålen, där friluftsliv är syftat till att vara involverad i den regionala utvecklingen och den fysiska planeringsprocessen i regioner. Emellertid är omfattningen av åtgärder för att involvera friluftsliv i RUS/P (Regional Utvecklingsstrategi/Plan) från regionala myndigheter låga. Länsstyrelserna å andra sidan arbetar aktivt inom sina regioner för att involvera friluftsliv i den fysiska planeringsprocessen. Detta är på grund av den skillnaden i ansvarsområden över specifika faktorer mellan de två myndigheterna. Detsamma kan kopplas till de många likheter och skillnader som främst återfinns i Länsstyrelsernas arbete. Exempelvis hur friluftsliv ofta beskrivs bidra på ett positivt sätt för medborgarens välbefinnande och livskvalitet, som i sin tur positivt påverkar många aspekter av regional utveckling, medan vissa fokuserar på att diskutera konsekvenserna av friluftsliv på miljön.
Friluftsliv kan fungera som en katalysator för regional utveckling, även om friluftslivets kommersiella
verksamhetsmöjligheter kan påstås vara geografiskt beroende kan dock dess indirekta sociala, ekonomiska och
miljömässiga bidrag för regional utveckling syftas till att vara geografiskt oberoende. En slutsats som gjorts i
uppsatsen är att en mer övergripande planeringsprocess regionalt för att främja friluftsliv behövs, där både
regionerna och Länsstyrelserna genomför planeringen i överensstämmelse med Naturvårdsverket för att sprida
den nödvändiga kunskapen i syfte att engagera i aktiv diskussion för främjandet av smart rumslig planering
mellan myndigheterna.
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I want to thank my supervisor Daniel Wolf-Watz for his active involvement in the making of this thesis. His
useful comments and remarks led to valuable insights for me as the author. Furthermore, I want to thank Ulrika
Persson-Fischier, for her supporting role and exemplary leading capabilities throughout this master’s program,
and Patrik Rönnbäck, for his participation in thoughtful discussions that ultimately led to the creation of this
thesis’ topic. Lastly, I want to thank my peers for their valuable participation in discussions, projects, group
works and seminars throughout these two years in the Master Program in Sustainable Destination
Development.
v
NOMENCLATURE
SEPA The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency RDS Regional Development Strategy
RDP Regional Development Plan
ÖP Översiktsplan (municipal masterplan) TCAB The County Administrative Board
LONA Local Nature Conservation Investment Project
SOU Sveriges Offentliga Utredningar (Swedish Government Official Reports)
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION ... 1
1.1 REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN SWEDEN ... 1
1.2 REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND FRILUFTSLIV ... 1
1.3 PLANNING FOR FRILUFTSLIV – A SHORT OVERVIEW ... 3
1.4 CURRENT RESEARCH GAP ... 3
1.5 PURPOSE AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS ... 4
1.6 DEMARCATIONS OF THE THESIS ... 4
1.7 DISPOSITION... 4
2. REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND FRILFUTSLIV ... 5
2.1 REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT ... 5
2.2 REGIONS IN SWEDEN ... 6
2.3 THE POLITICS OF REGIONALIZATION ... 9
2.4 REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN SWEDEN ... 10
2.5 FRILUFTSLIV AND ITS PREREQUISITIES ... 11
2.5.1 FRILUFTSLIV AND ALLEMANSRÄTTEN ... 11
2.5.2 FRILUFTSLIV AND ITS POSSIBLE CONTRIBUTIONS TO REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT ... 12
2.5.3 THE 10 OUTDOOR RECREATION GOALS ... 14
2.6 FRILUFTSLIV IN REGIONAL PLANNING ... 15
2.6.1 FRILUFTSLIV IN THE PLANNING PROCESS ... 17
3. ANALYSING TEXTS ... 19
3.1 METHODOLOGY ... 19
3.1.1 REFLECTIONS ON CONTENT ANALYSIS ... 20
3.2 EMPIRICAL MATERIAL ... 20
3.2.1 GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE ... 21
3.2.2 REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY/PLAN ... 22
3.3 INTERPRETATION AND CODING OF THE CONTENT ... 23
3.4 SOURCE CRITICISM ... 24
3.5 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS ... 24
vii 4. THE PREVALENCE OF FRILUFTSLIV IN REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLANS AND
STRATEGIES ... 25
4.1 REGIONAL AUTHORITIES AND THEIR FOCUS ON FRILUFTSLIV ... 25
4.2 THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE BOARD AND THEIR FOCUS ON FRILUFTSLIV .... 26
4.3 REGIONAL REPESENTATIONS OF ACTIONS RELATED TO FRILUFTSLIV ... 27
5. CRITICAL DISCUSSION OF FRILUFTSLIV IN SPATIAL REGIONAL PLANNING ... 30
5.1 REGIONAL STRATEGIES AND FRILUFTSLIV IN SWEDEN ... 30
5.2 DEFINING FRILUFTSLIV ... 33
5.3 SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, ECONOMIC GROWTH AND DISSENTING RESPONSIBILITIES ... 33
6. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS ... 35
6.1 CONCLUDING DISCUSSION ... 35
6.2 CONCLUSIONS ... 36
6.3 FUTURE RESEARCH ... 37
REFERENCES ... 39
APPENDIX A – CONTENT ANALYSIS ... 54
BLEKINGE ... 54
DALARNA ... 54
GOTLAND ... 56
GÄVLEBORG ... 59
HALLAND ... 59
JÄMTLAND/HÄRJEDALEN ... 60
JÖNKÖPING COUNTY ... 60
KALMAR COUNTY ... 63
KRONOBERG COUNTY ... 63
NORRBOTTEN ... 65
SKÅNE ... 66
STOCKHOLM ... 68
SÖDERMANLAND ... 69
UPPSALA ... 71
VÄRMLAND ... 72
viii
VÄSTERBOTTEN ... 73
VÄSTERNORRLAND ... 73
VÄSTMANLAND ... 74
VÄSTRA GÖTALAND ... 76
ÖREBRO COUNTY ... 77
ÖSTERGÖTLAND ... 78
APPENDIX B – TABLES FROM QUANTIATIVE CONTENT ANALYSIS ... 81
ix
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
Table 1. Inhabitants per km2, population and land area in km2 regionally. Data from SCB (2020a)... 9 Table 2. Overview of the read publications and its content related to friluftsliv and/or the outdoor recreation goals. ... 81 Table 3. How many times friluftsliv is mentioned in RDS/P for each respective region. ... 82 Table 4. How many times frilufts(liv)(s)mål(en) (the outdoor recreation goals) are mentioned in RDS/P for each respective region. ... 83 Table 5. How many times friluftsliv is mentioned in documents from the responsible County Administrative Board for each respective region. ... 84 Table 6. How many times frilufts(liv)(s)mål(en) (the outdoor recreation goals are mentioned in documents from the responsible County Administrative Board for each respective region. ... 85
Figure 1. The current divison of regional authorities in Sweden as of april of 2020. Figure from Kulturens (2019).
... 8 Figure 2. Who does what? An explanation from Boverket (2019) about who does what in regard to how spatial societal planning is planned in Sweden. The figure directly refers to the official Regional Development Strategies and/or Plans (RDS/P) in regions across Sweden. ... 15 Figure 3. The multi-level governance in Sweden related to the outdoor recreation goals and the development of frilfutsliv. Made with inspiration from Norén Bretzer (2017, p. 23) & Naturvårdsverket (2019b) and translated into English. ... 16 Figure 4. The Approach of Hermeneutics. Taken from Kuckartz (2014, p. 19). ... 24
1
1. INTRODUCTION
Regional differences in Sweden exist, and are in-fact to a certain degree growing. Some common differences are the rate of growth, unemployment, and level of education (Regionfakta 2020) – making some regions more, or less, attractive. Some regions are more vulnerable than others, while some do not have any vulnerabilities whatsoever. One of the more common vulnerabilities that one can see in Sweden stem from a dependency perspective – that municipalities in regions are dependent on larger businesses or specific sectors. Therefore, regional development exists as a concept and strategy, to try and plan to avoid these kinds of dependencies. Of course, these dependencies do not have to be about businesses in the private sector, they can also be in regard to how a municipality or region has chosen to venture into specific sectors where they see a potential economic benefit – to create an engaging region for start-ups in specific sectors. This is in other words called sustainable development (Andersson et al. 2018; Tillväxtverket 2016).
1.1 REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN SWEDEN
A region in Sweden is a local subdivision composed of several municipalities with the purpose of developing the region (Nationalencyklopedin 2020d). In Sweden, Regional development can be seen as exhaustive and comprehensive planned change (majority of it being physical, and to some degree intangible) in geographical areas with the aim to reducing disparities. This could be to enable entrepreneurs to grow, and/or encourage networking between actors to reach common interests.
Although regional development does not necessarily describe anything more than economic development, it has been accepted in Sweden to describe this process as sustainable regional development, to encompass the conjunction of three overarching aspects of development and growth:
Social, economic, and ecological development. The origin for this common definition is from the Brundlandt commission and is described as “a development that meets today’s needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs” (Emmelin et al. 2010).
In Sweden, a mandatory used tool when planning for regional development is a Regional Development Strategy/Plan (RDS/P). It is a unified visionary and planned strategy for a region. These strategies are created for the purpose of identifying the current state of the region related to aspects that the region deems relevant. The strategies are also conducted for the purpose of making sure the region can be strengthened in a long-term perspective (SKR 2019a). In these strategies or plans, priorities are set regarding what needs to be improved upon in the region. Priorities can range from making urban greenery more attractive and visible in municipalities in the region, to overarching strategies on how to create a more attractive business environment for actors across the region. A concept that has lately been brought forward in official documents regionally is outdoor recreation/life, as it is described in having a benefit to the overall well-being and quality of life for its inhabitants and increases the development of the geographical area (Peterson Forsberg 2012; 2014).
1.2 REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND FRILUFTSLIV
In a recently released follow-up report, released by the SEPA (Swedish Environmental Protection
Agency, they outline 10 goals that were set in 2012 by the Government of Sweden on how to improve
2 and promote friluftsliv (outdoor recreation) in regards to policy-making and politics on a national level spread across all regions. These goals are called the outdoor recreation goals. According to government and the advisory board that created the goals, they are important to development in contemporary Sweden, as they can work as catalysts for regional growth:
The friluftsliv is broad and spans several policy areas, including nature conservation policy, regional growth policy, agricultural policy, forestry policy, politics for rural development, public health policy and education and research policy are a few examples. The friluftsliv aspects of public health, and both preventive and rehabilitative health care, as well as cultural life and social planning are central.
Municipal and regional planning has a key role in the safeguarding of urban greenery, for the purpose of access to friluftsliv (Skr. 2012/13:51, p. 3-4 – translated by author).
The goals are to be progressively met on a local and regional level, while being monitored and evaluated bi-yearly on a national scale by the Swedish National Board of Housing, Building and Planning (Boverket), the SEPA, the Swedish Forestry Agency (Skogsstyrelsen), the Swedish Public Health Agency (Folkhälsomyndigheten) and the Swedish Agency for Economic and Regional Growth (Tillväxtverket) (Naturvårdsverket 2019a; Skr. 2012/13:51). All 10 goals are:
1. Accessible nature for everyone 2. Strong commitment and collaboration 3. Allemansrätten (Right of public access) 4. Access to nature for outdoor recreation 5. Attractive natural areas in urban settings
6. Sustainable regional growth and rural development 7. Nature conservation areas as a resource for friluftsliv 8. Meaningful outdoor recreation in school
9. Outdoor recreation for public well-being and increase in quality of life 10. Spreading knowledge regarding outdoor recreation (Skr. 2012/13:51)
These goals were outlined to be related to the global Agenda 2030 goals, and to work towards a sustainable future – because of the goals’ relation to how they can be connected to sustainable regional development while using friluftsliv and nature as catalysts. The bigger challenge is to reach these goals locally and regionally across Sweden, therefore TCAB (The County Administrative Board) for each region is seen as the responsible authority to support, collaborate and monitor the progress being made in their region, with the help from the aforementioned authorities (Skr. 2012/13:51).
The responsibility regarding the strengthening of friluftsliv and who should conduct measures to
meet the outdoor recreation goals in regions are not exclusive to a single actor, as all actors in a region
is expected to contribute. It is the TCAB that is responsible to motivate, monitor and assist
municipalities and regional authorities to work towards these goals. In-turn, TCAB in each region is
responsible for conducting their own action-plans, called “Green Infrastructure” (GI), which cover
issues and cost-effective measures regarding the environment, biodiversity, and friluftsliv. GI is
primarily focused on urban aspects, but because of Sweden’s landscape, rural regions are as relevant
as ever as all regions are limited by their own needs and challenges (Naturvårdsverket 2018a):
3 There will be proposed actions to achieve goals in the regional action plans. These
goals aim to provide support in carrying out measures in order to enhance the green infrastructure. As parts of Sweden all look different, the prioritised measures will vary between different counties and over time. Individual land areas are different, important segments of the overall landscape, with different properties contributing to the whole. Landowners know their land and its values, which means that they can contribute knowledge and engagement based on their own conditions. No one can do everything, but everyone can do something, and together we can achieve more (Naturvårdsverket 2018a, p. 5).
1.3 PLANNING FOR FRILUFTSLIV – A SHORT OVERVIEW
A thorough review of scientific research regarding the spatial planning and strengthening of friluftsliv primarily on the municipal level, was published in 2010 by Emmelin et al. (2010). This book can be seen as a foundation of research that has come after, as it is not deemed as a practical handbook for public servants, but instead towards further research regarding the topic. Extensive research regarding the prevalence of friluftsliv in local spatial planning has been made primarily by Peterson Forsberg (2012; 2014). She has done research surrounding the scope of friluftsliv and nature-based tourism in municipal local-planning in, for example, her dissertation. Later Rasmussen (2017), has analyzed to which extent and scope friluftsliv was prevalent in municipal masterplans in the Västra Götaland region, with the outdoor recreation goals as the primary variables. Sandell (2016) and his work on ecostrategies is a valuable resource for the purpose of planning for friluftsliv. He has also been involved in a myriad of research conducted regarding friluftsliv. In 2013, the scientific research program “Outdoor Recreation in Change”, funded by the SEPA, published their final report from this 7-year long process, who aimed to analyze the current dynamics of outdoor recreation and nature- based tourism in Sweden. This report is scientific and studied the national arena of friluftsliv in Sweden (Fredman et al. 2013). The work published by the aforementioned authors have worked as pylons for inspiration for this thesis.
1.4 CURRENT RESEARCH GAP
Current research has so far focused primarily on the local (municipal) spatial planning of friluftsliv,
or scientific overviews of the national friluftsliv. However, research conducted regarding spatial
regional planning for friluftsliv is this far largely unexplored in Sweden. Given that friluftsliv is
brought forward and presented as important for regional development by both regional and state
authorities and frequently by within official documents, it is out of great interest to study how
friluftsliv is considered in regional development strategies and plans. Therefore, the analysis in this
thesis will provide a great overview regarding the spatial planning for friluftsliv that is being done on
a regional level. Because of the requirement that every region needs to have an RDS/P in place, and
a TCAB that is operating as a regional extension of the government exists in every region, researching
differences and similarities will not be difficult as the material is publicly available.
4
1.5 PURPOSE AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS
Given how friluftsliv is officially highlighted as an important part of regional development, the aim of this thesis is to study how it is acknowledged in the regional planning process. The study takes as starting point the following research questions:
• To what extent and scope is friluftsliv and the outdoor recreation goals discussed in regional strategies?
• What differences or similarities can be found in strategies and measures to strengthen friluftsliv and the outdoor recreation goals in regions across Sweden?
• What role for sustainable regional development do regional authorities ascribe to friluftsliv?
1.6 DEMARCATIONS OF THE THESIS
In this thesis, the subjects of friluftsliv and the outdoor recreation goals will be related to aspects of regional development & growth. This thesis will explicitly avoid publications in regards to Sweden’s national environmental goals, even though the outdoor recreation goals can be seen as closely related.
The national environmental goals are mentioned in the results-section, but will only serve as indicators to friluftsliv.
The publications used in the thesis were chosen because of their relevance to regional development. Although, as mentioned, goals on a national level can only be seen properly if/when implemenented locally/regionally. Because of the scope of this thesis focuses on regions, and not municipalities, individual municipal masterplans (ÖPs) will not be discussed, but instead focus on analyzing RDS/P and TCAB work on friluftsliv in the region/county. However, municipal masterplans will be discussed as a concept. Regions and counties will be referred to regions and counties in this thesis, as the regional administration exist inside the geograpihcal county, while the county administration is referred to as TCAB.
1.7 DISPOSITION
In Chapter 1, regional development and friluftsliv is thoroughly problematized. Demarcations of the thesis are also laid out for the purpose of clarification. In Chapter 2, a theorietcal assessment and overview of aspects surrounding: development as a concept; the structure of regions, relevant authorities and their purpose in Sweden; regional development in Sweden; definitions of friluftsliv;
and inserting friluftsliv into the perspective of spatial societal planning. In Chapter 3, the chosen methodology for this thesis is explained and explored through a critical lens. An explanation of the empirical material is also thoroughly explained.
In Chapter 4, the empirical results from the content analysis are summarized for further analysis in the following chapters. In Chapter 5, the research questions and the potential answers and related issues to them are critically analysed and problematized further through the use of the theoretical overview and the empirical material. Friluftsliv, regional development and growth are questioned on a theoretical and practical level. In Chapter 6, the research questions are discussed and answered.
This is followed by discussing implications of and for further research into the subject of friluftsliv
in the regional planning process and its possible contributions to regional development and growth.
5
2. REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND FRILFUTSLIV
In this chapter, central concepts will be touched upon, while the Swedish context of friluftsliv and spatial regional planning will be explored in detail to introduce the reader to possibilities and challenges related to friluftsliv and the regional planning process.
2.1 REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Development can never be achieved without having an end goal related to this specific development.
The end goal is often described as being “better” than the previous position or state this aspect was in. Development can be described in short- and long-terms. The goal of development is often related to creating new products, new processes, new systems, or improving currently existing products, processes, or systems by identifying lacklustre aspects of them. (Nationalencyklopedin 2020b;
2020c). In an overarching manner, development is described by Thomas (1996; 1992) in two different ways that sometimes overlap with each other:
… (1) as an historical process of social change in which societies are transformed over long periods; and (2) as consisting of deliberate efforts aimed at progress on the part of various agencies, including governments, all kinds of organizations and social movements (Thomas 1992, p. 7).
The simple way to describe the broad term of regional development, is the efforts to make regions equal while reducing disparities. This can be in local regions, regional regions, national regions or supranational regions, it all depends on the context of what the discussion is about. The OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) outlines regional development internationally as: “Regional development is a broad term but can be seen as a general effort to reduce regional disparities by supporting (employment and wealth-generating) economic activities in regions.” (OECD 2019). Lastly, a new approach to how regional development is strategized and construed can be identified in many countries among the world, including Sweden and many European nations. The OECD has taken steps to develop and define this approach as follows:
OECD work on regional development recognises that a new approach to regional development is emerging; one that promises more effective use of public resources and significantly better policy outcomes. This involves a shift away from redistribution and subsidies for lagging regions in favour of measures to increase the competitiveness of all regions.
Some key features of this new approach to regional development include:
• a development strategy that covers a wide range of direct and indirect factors that affect the performance of local firms;
• a focus on regional specific assets, and less on top-down investments and transfers;
• an emphasis on opportunity rather than on disadvantage or need for support;
• a collective/negotiated governance approach involving national, regional and
local government plus other stakeholders, with the central government taking
a less dominant role. (OECD 2019).
6 Regional development and its new commonly used approach in many European nations does not necessarily relate to any sustainable aspects in its description. However, as mentioned in the introduction, sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Sustainable development is often discussed in terms of sustainable environmental, economic, and social development as a conjunction. It is regarded as development from a long-term perspective with a respect to global issues. Initiatives regarding sustainable development can be found in all aspects of the worlds’
societies, especially regarding spatial societal planning and adaptation to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that were set by the United Nations in 2015 (United Nations 2020;
Nationalencyklopedin 2020c). Regional development with a sustainable mindset and measures could therefore be said to be the overarching end-goal.
2.2 REGIONS IN SWEDEN
Since Sweden entered the European Union in 1995, the word Region came with the entrance. This word and concept now had to be acknowledged on the agenda of Swedish politics. Regions in European countries such as Germany and Belgium have had strong autonomy for hundreds of years, and this is where the regionalist concept in the European Union had as inspiration for its agenda to promote regions in other European countries (Tallberg 2016). Regionalization is described coherently by Lucarelli & Heldt Cassel (2019) as:
Regionalization, formulated as discourse about strategic policy for political integration and socio-economic development, is based on the notion that regions are important geographical entities that should foster endogenous growth and thus create stronger regions and achieve development and cohesion (Lucarelli & Heldt Cassel 2019, p. 1).
This concept was previously not acknowledged on state-level in Sweden and the closest common denominator could be Landskap, Län or Landsting
1. Although all the named words could describe a Region, they would have been used in different ways for different purposes, such as administrative, (exclusively) geographical or political (Norén Bretzer 2017). In the newly updated constitution of Sweden, we can now find the word Region being acknowledged as an administrative geographical area for the first time:
The Instrument of Government also states that Sweden has local authorities at local and regional level. The local authorities – municipalities and county councils – account for a very large proportion of the public sector. Democratic principles also apply in the local government sector, with decision-making powers in the municipalities and county councils being exercised by elected assemblies. These bodies are responsible for local and regional matters of public interest on the principle of local self-government. (Regeringen 2015a, p 4).
1 Län is the international equivalent of county while landskap is the international equivalent to province (with no administration, but rather the name of a province). Landsting on the other hand, is the overarchingly political and administrative regional self-directed area. As of the 1st of January of 2019, all 21 landsting were officially re-named to Regions after an 8-year long re-classification, for reasons such as consistency in what role regions are supposed to have. Inside each county there now exists a political administration called region (Nationalencyklopedin 2020d).
7 Since 2007, there has been an active, albeit tedious, discussion regarding implementing official bigger regions and scrapping the current county-classifications in Sweden. This is because of the increase in responsibilities for the county. That in-turn has inspiration from the EU-inspired regional empowerment (Norén Bretzer 2017; SVT 2016a). At this moment, the process of implementing these bigger regions has been halted completely, because of its lacking support from the public and internal decision-makers (SVT 2016b). However, although the regional debate is ongoing, the development in regions in Sweden is an active process. The current division of regions in Sweden can be seen in Figure 1. However, as mentioned, this division is set to change in the future.
As was mentioned in the introduction, the regions in Sweden are not equal. A baseline difference all over Sweden is the discrepancy of population density and total population regionally, in other words rural/peripheral and urban regions that show large differences. For example, the Stockholm region has a population of 2 377 081 and the population density is 365 people per km
2with the fifth smallest land area (6 514 km
2) of all regions in Sweden, while for example the Norrbotten region has a population of 250 093 and a population density of 2,6 people per km
2and having the largest land area (97 257 km
2) of all regions in Sweden. On top of this, each region has a heavy difference in the number of municipalities that exist in the region, with fewer municipalities in a region, one require less collaboration between municipalities, and with the more municipalities a region has, the more networking is required for efficient collaboration. For example, the Gotland region is its own municipality, therefore there is a single municipality on Gotland that coincidentally also is the regional municipality, while the Västra Götaland region has 49 municipalities (SCB 2013; 2020a).
See Table 1 for information about land area, number of municipalities, population density and
population regionally in Sweden. Another important aspect to mention regarding the discussion of
rural versus urban areas are that there exist only three metropolitan areas in Sweden, located in
Stockholm, Skåne and Västra Götaland region, respectively. These three metropolitan areas are the
Greater Stockholm, Göteborg, Malmö Areas (SCB 2020b).
8
Figure 1. The current divison of regional authorities in Sweden as of april of 2020. Figure from Kulturens (2019).9
Table 1. Inhabitants per km2, population and land area in km2 regionally. Data from SCB (2020a).Inhabitants per km2 Population Land area in km2
Blekinge 54,4 159 606 2 931
Dalarna 10,3 287 966 28 030
Gotland 19 59 686 3 134
Gävleborg 15,9 287 382 18 133
Halland 61,5 333 848 5 427
Jämtland/Härjedalen 2,7 130 810 48 935
Jönköping 34,8 363 599 10 436
Kalmar 22 245 446 11 160
Kronoberg 23,9 201 469 8 423
Norrbotten 2,6 250 093 97 242
Skåne 125,7 1 377 827 10 965
Stockholm 364,9 2 377 081 6 514
Södermanland 49 297 540 6 072
Uppsala 46,9 383 713 8 189
Värmland 16,1 282 414 17 519
Västerbotten 5 271 736 54 664
Västernorrland 11,4 245 347 21 548
Västmanland 53,9 275 845 5 117
Västra Götaland 72,5 1 725 881 23 800
Örebro 35,8 304 805 8 504
Östergötland 44,1 465 495 10 557
2.3 THE POLITICS OF REGIONALIZATION
Regionalization is an accepted and common discourse within the European Union, and in a way could be seen as closely related to neo-liberal development discourses with competition-economics as its core, often formulated as:
… discourse about strategic policy for political integration and socio-economic development, is based on the notion that regions are important geographical entities that should foster endogenous growth and thus create stronger regions and achieve development and cohesion (Lucarelli & Heldt Cassel 2019, p. 1).
Regionalization is one of the core aspects of what the European Union works to strengthen in
member countries in modern times. Regionalization in Sweden has a history, albeit being mostly for
administrative reasons (Lucarelli & Heldt Cassel 2019). In 1950s Sweden, a plan to share and
redistribute resources between locations (such as municipalities and villages) was enacted, often
referred to as lokaliseringspolitik (location policy). The goal was to stabilize and redistribute the
nations resources and to give security to all inhabitants of Sweden in different locations. Through
actively redistributing resources, the wording of what this strategy was actually doing, was soon
enough renamed to “territorial integration” (Andersson et al. 2008). In 2001, the basis of how Sweden
will focus on its regional development policies were set. In short, it can be described as a competitive
aspect of regional development, where competitiveness within regions (between municipalities) and
between regions was the forefront of the strategy. The redistribution of resources was therefore
10 marginalized from the state’s perspective, and a bigger focus was activated towards competitiveness and growth across the Swedish regions (Andersson & Molina 2008).
The European Union have had their focus on allocating resources and implement programmes, and not necessary in member states. Over the years, Sweden has adopted the strategy from the European Union with making regional authorities more autonomous, however TCAB does still have an active role in monitoring the region (Norén Bretzer 2017; Blomqvist & Bergman 2010).
Regionalization is also a process where matters on a governmental level are translated to regional level. This can also be described as a decentralization of the decision-making process, as TCABs are in-fact the actor responsible for this (Blomqvist & Bergman 2010).
2.4 REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN SWEDEN
The time regional development was acknowledged in Sweden was in 1965, at the time when territorial integration started becoming a larger strategy for the entirety of Sweden. An expert group was formed to evaluate, initiate and cooperate research within the area of regional development, for the purpose to give the government an analytical tool with results on which locations, municipalities and regions should receive the redistributed resources. The effects from their results were lasting throughout decades, all the way until 2001, whereas, a new basis was founded for a competitive aspect of regional development (Andersson et al. 2008; Andersson & Molina 2008). This then led to the introduction of the RDS/P, that is an important tool in the regional work for growth and development. This strategy shall be conducted in collaboration with all municipalities, TCAB and relevant state authorities in the region, to make sure that all actors have a say in what measures should be undertaken in the region (SKR 2019a).
The ones who are responsible for the regional development in the now-called Regions are elected officials in the regional board. Their responsibility is to handle 6 over-arching aspects of the growth and development in the region (Norén Bretzer 2017; Emmelin et al. 2010):
1. Develop and establish a strategy for the region’s development and coordinate efforts to implement the strategy
2. Decide on the use of some state funds for the work regarding regional growth 3. Carry out tasks within the framework of the European Regional Development Fund
(European Commission 2020)
4. Draw up and establish regional plans for regional transport infrastructure
5. Cooperate with the municipalities in the county, and other relevant state authorities, and consult with organizations and businesses in the region (Norén Bretzer 2017, p. 187).
Regions are responsible for the matters of regional development (Lag 2010:630). These matters
are that a region shall conduct a strategy that will work towards the development of the region and
collaborate measures for the actualising of this strategy. This strategy shall be monitored, and the
regional development progress shall be evaluated yearly to the government. The region is also
responsible for collaborating with relevant state authorities, TCAB, all municipalities in the region,
spokespeople for concerned parties & businesses in the region to make sure that the strategy is
implemented with all actors having a say in it. All state authorities, such as TCAB, must take the
11 adopted strategy into account for the development of the county (Norén Bretzer 2017; Lag
2010:630).
However, TCAB is responsible for the regional growth and development in the region, while also being responsible for matters of: Energy- and climate; Agriculture- and fishing; Nature care and environmental protection; and the organization of conducting general elections (Norén Bretzer 2017). This makes the question about who is responsible for regional development a complex question that will be discussed later in this chapter.
The work with regional development in each respective region across Sweden is often related to business development, competence provisioning, cultural development, tourism and increasing the attractivity in the region. However, these are overarching aspects and do not cover region-specific measures (Nationalencyklopedin 2020e). There have been arguments from many regarding how culture is a key aspect when it comes to development and growth regionally in Sweden, and how culture often can, and should, be a regarded as a key resource for regional development. Culture is suggested to increase business and employment growth, strengthening of regional attractivity, and strengthening the social capital for inhabitants in regions across Sweden. However, regarding culture as a resource can have many positive aspects related to it, along with several negative aspects. For example, the authenticity of cultural traditions in regions can be seen as non-authentic if it’s being used in strategies where regional attractiveness is the main achievement. Therefore, RDS/P often describe culture, but instead of explicitly “selling it”, it is embedded into the overall strategy, making the RDS/P conspicuous (Hermelin 2008; Heldt Cassel 2008).
2.5 FRILUFTSLIV AND ITS PREREQUISITIES
As this thesis focuses on friluftsliv, sustainability and the outdoor recreation goals. There is a need to present the concept that encompass these overarchingly from a Swedish perspective, namely friluftsliv. Friluftsliv is needed to be discussed for the purpose of connecting the overarching theme of the thesis.
2.5.1 FRILUFTSLIV AND ALLEMANSRÄTTEN
The short definition, given by the Swedish Government, of friluftsliv (outdoor life/recreation) is “an outdoor stay in the natural and cultural landscapes for the purpose of well-being and experiences in nature, without the need for competition or contest” (Prop. 2009/10:238, p. 10 – translated by author).
However, it has been described in a multitude of different ways throughout the years to try and piece together the understanding of the philosophy of friluftsliv. An inspirational quote by Henderson (2001, p. 32) outlined how friluftsliv can be described as “outdoor recreation with its heart within the land and linked to a tradition of being and learning with the land”, while Dahle (2003, p. 248) links friluftsliv as being in harmony with ones surroundings: “friluftsliv, first and foremost, is about feeling the joy of being out in nature, alone or with others, feeling pleasures and experiencing harmony with the surrounding” (Beery 2013).
The importance in understanding the concept is to understand that it is not what one does in nature,
but rather how one experiences nature. Friluftsliv is a part of Swedish culture. Friluftsliv can be walks
in urban greenery, to kayaking in remote mountain ranges. Friluftsliv can be sitting on a rock listening
12 to the birds chirping. Friluftsliv also encompasses recreational activities in nature, together with many kinds of nature-tourism activities (Andersson 2018; Länsstyrelsen Värmland 2018).
One of the prerequisites for friluftsliv to flourish is the right of public access (Allemansrätten), described coherently by Sténs & Sandström (2014):
… the allemansrätt allows people, whatever their origin, to visit, walk, and use non- motorised vehicles on almost all land, public as well as privately owned, landscapes, and to harvest some of its resources. Not all areas of the landscape are included in the right; military zones, cultivated farmland, and private gardens are excluded, for example. Natural and cultural conservation areas may also be associated with specific restrictions. Also excluded are limited resources of present or historical economical importance such as trees or parts of trees, grass, stones, gravel, or peat. Hunting and fishing are also strictly regulated and do not fall within allemansrätten (Sténs & Sandström 2014, p. 106).
This quote from Sténs & Sandström (2014) describe the custom and concept called allemansrätten that goes far back in the history of Sweden and had its first big impact politically in the mid-twentieth century. The concept is as mentioned only a custom, and not a law per se. The custom is an important part of Swedish national identity, and similar customs can be found in for example Finland and Norway. Although allemansrätten is a custom, it is acknowledged and protected in the constitution of Sweden as a customary law, however only by name, and no description of it is necessarily given.
The short description of allemansrätten can be described as “do not disturb, do not destroy”.
Allemansrätten, is in a way, needed for friluftsliv as a concept to exist in Sweden (Andersson 2018;
Sténs & Sandström 2014).
Friluftsliv is also regarded as a cultural ecosystem service (ES) in Sweden, as it enables natural and cultural services across the nation in the form of strengthening social capital (Naturvårdsverket 2017; Nationalencyklopedin 2020g).
2.5.2 FRILUFTSLIV AND ITS POSSIBLE CONTRIBUTIONS TO REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Since the 1990s, friluftsliv in Sweden started to have an exploding success in aspects regarding commercial activity within the outdoor recreation-sector, especially in regard to adventure-, eco- and nature-tourism. This is not to discredit the 80 percent of adults in Sweden who stated that they engage in friluftsliv as a leisure activity during their vacations or spare time (Emmelin et al. 2010). Friluftsliv and nature-tourism has also been put forward by national authorities as important for the well-being and quality of life for citizens in the nation (Folkhälsomyndigheten 2019), not just because of the healthy lifestyle friluftsliv promotes, but also because of the social capital it strengthens on a national, regional, and all the way down to local level (Peterson Forsberg 2012). This is also strengthened by the arguments brought forward by Manning (2011), where he argues that outdoor recreation (i.e.
friluftsliv) has a range of benefits related to it, such as: increased trust in others, improved image of
public agencies, environmental awareness and sensitivity, prevention of social problems by at-risk
youth, increased longevity and perceived quality of life, contributions to net national economic
development, increased worker productivity, public involvement in environmental issues and many
more.
13 Swedish people spend around 75 billion SEK annually for friluftsliv-related activities and that the value added from friluftsliv in the national economy amount to approximately 34 billion SEK annually. This amounts to a total of one percent of the Swedish GDP (Gross Domestic Product), compared to agriculture, forestry and fishing that amount to two percent of the Swedish GDP (Fredman et al. 2013). Since this was calculated back in 2013, these numbers have most certainly changed over the years, as Sweden is becoming more and more import-heavy on the agricultural side.
While Swedish friluftsliv-related sectors have been marketed heavily internationally over the years (Visit Sweden 2020; SvD 2019; SVT 2015).
The increase in development of nature conservation areas, such as national parks has its argument in that nature-tourism in rural areas has a largely positive effect of the regional development in these rural areas. The argument comes from an economics-standpoint, observed in the US and Great Britain. It is also expected that, in Sweden, this will have a positive effect on the economy in rural regions. However, long-term economic, social and environmental effects regarding national parks have not yet been studied overarchingly. For example, a study was made regarding local development and the creation of national parks, the study found that an increase in protected areas in rural regions can hinder the local population to develop over-time. A flaw, found in the study, that makes the research questionable to an extent, was that the national park in this specific area that was studied had been non-prioritized by the municipality for a long time. Newer and more developed national parks are of interest in the future to be studied, as there is a large possibility that these will have extensively different effects that this particular study. In short, geography and priorities locally & regionally can make friluftsliv contribute to the development of the region either flourish, stagnate or be hindered (Fredman et al. 2013; Naturvårdsverket 2005).
One important thing to point regarding nature conservation areas, are that there exist several different discourses regarding what the underlying purpose of them are. These discourses from state authorities differs greatly from country to country, or even region to region (Emmelin et al. 2010).
Some argue that nature conservation areas are created for the sole purpose of limiting access and resources to them, while other discourses see them as protecting and making an area easily accessible for everyone to see and experience. In a way, there is a multifaceted issue related to this that could be described as: either one protects nature for 1. the purpose of friluftsliv, or 2. to limit friluftsliv. This issue with discourses can lead to conflicts when it comes to spatial and physical planning for friluftsliv, as the inherent issue with friluftsliv is that it, to a minor extent, has a negative effect on nature and the environment. Exploitation of nature for the purpose of developing friluftsliv, in any shape or form, is inevitable to a large extent. Especially if one views friluftsliv as something one can commercialize through nature-tourism or other activities, or even to increase access to areas to exercise friluftsliv in (Emmelin et al. 2010; Sandell 2016).
The goal from the SEPAs side of things, is that they want to champion measures related to the 1
stmentioned discourse: Nature shall be protected for people, not from people, maintenance of nature
conservation areas will be focused on making them accessible and welcoming, using the nature
conservations areas as an important resource for local and regional development, making investments
from the tourism sector and other interested actors in nature conservation areas secure, and increase
14 the participation from state authorities when developing nature conservation areas (Naturvårdsverket 2005).
The concept of nature-tourism is a rapidly profitable and growing sector in Sweden and has big potentials for the future. However, nature-tourism is often geography-dependant, and not all regions can benefit from it. Only time will tell how things turn out in the future, and what priorities are being set locally, regionally, nationally, and even supranationally (Fredman et al. 2013; Peterson Forsberg 2012).
More indirectly and in the long-term, attractive nature and opportunities for friluftsliv and recreation function as a positive location-factor that can contribute to the development of the municipality and the region as a whole. Employment and income from nature conservation areas are of great importance for local acceptance and its connection to nature & area conservation, especially in rural areas. Friluftsliv is an important overarching aspect of the current work that is being done regionally when it comes to sustainable growth and rural development (Naturvårdsverket 2005;
Länsstyrelsen Dalarnas Län 2018).
2.5.3 THE 10 OUTDOOR RECREATION GOALS
The outdoor recreation goals, in Swedish Friluftslivsmålen or friluftsmålen, was as mentioned decided on in 2012 by the Swedish Government, for the purpose of creating good prerequisites to regularly exercise friluftsliv in the natural- and cultural landscapes that exist across regions in Sweden (Skr. 2012/13:51; Naturvårdsverket 2015; 2019a). Boverket has emphasized the importance of the outdoor recreation goals in the RDS/P and overarchingly in the regional planning measures across the country. Boverket made it clear how when it comes to spatial societal planning locally and regionally, goals 1, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 9 are especially relevant when conducting strategies and plans:
1. Accessible nature for everyone,
4. Access to nature for outdoor recreation, 5. Attractive natural areas in urban settings,
6. Sustainable regional growth and rural development, 7. Nature conservation areas as a resource for friluftsliv, and
9. Outdoor recreation for public well-being and increase in quality of life (Boverket 2015; Skr.
2012/13:51).
Access to nature and the ability to exercise friluftsliv is and should be a present priority in the local spatial planning process. This is not only regarding the creation and maintenance of nature conservation areas, but also urban spatial planning and access to greenery in an urban proximity. It is of special importance that the ability to exercise friluftsliv has influence in the ÖPs locally, and strategies regionally – as the access to areas has, according to Boverket and Folkhälsomyndigheten, a proven benefit to citizens’ well-being and quality of life (Boverket 2020a; 2020b).
In the latest evaluation report from the SEPA, they find that even though these goals are to be pursued on a national level, they are not prioritised in the respective regions across Sweden.
Exploitation regarding housing and buildings are prioritised over most of the goals, and therefore the
greenery in both urban and rural areas are slowly but surely disappearing. It has also been identified
that a lack of mapping of important friluftsliv-areas regionally is leading to the conclusion that the
15 authorities in regions do not know which areas “worth” prioritising are regarding friluftsliv. It is difficult to make the goals relevant to local and regional authorities across the country, as they have all kinds of different priorities. This was identified in both the first and second assessment from the SEPA. To make sure that the entire region has a larger focus on the outdoor recreation goals, TCAB in the respective regions must increase their collaboration efforts to make sure the entire region follows the governments decisions (Naturvårdsverket 2015; 2019a).
2.6 FRILUFTSLIV IN REGIONAL PLANNING
During the 1990s, any national goals regarding the development of friluftsliv had completely disappeared from the agenda. The responsibility from the SEPA to coordinate efforts related to friluftsliv had been taken away. In 2002 and onward, there was an explosion in development of friluftsliv from the government, giving the SEPA and the Swedish Public Health Agency many tasks related to researching the benefits of friluftsliv. The low point in the 1990s did have large effects on the spatial societal planning in regions and especially in municipalities, where mentions of friluftsliv was absent. This is something that municipalities and regions are still catching up with and continues to do, with the help from state authorities and TCAB in their respective region (Peterson Forsberg 2012).
Figure 2. Who does what? An explanation from Boverket (2019) about who does what in regard to how spatial societal planning is planned in Sweden. The figure directly refers to the official Regional Development Strategies and/or Plans
(RDS/P) in regions across Sweden.
16 Responsibility when it comes to spatial planning for friluftsliv is an overarching question with lots of nuances. While the SEPA has the national responsibility in protecting and developing friluftsliv on a national level, it’s often accepted that the municipalities have the most impact in their spatial societal planning processes to make friluftsliv have an active role in the local planning frameworks.
However, the lengths municipalities go to when planning for friluftsliv differs largely between municipalities, one can say that the ambition and visions are overarchingly different depending on which municipal ÖP one is analysing (Fredman et al. 2013; Peterson Forsberg 2012).
Although regions are responsible for the matters of regional development (Lag 2010:630), there’s a bigger picture related to the line of responsibility in Sweden, partly described in Figure 2. When it comes to the outdoor recreation goals and the development of friluftsliv, Figure 3 describes the feedback and evaluation loop. This is in other words called multi-level governance and is a robust structure in the Swedish authoritative system (Sandkjaer Hanssen et al. 2011; Norén Bretzer 2017).
Figure 3. The multi-level governance in Sweden related to the outdoor recreation goals and the development of frilfutsliv. Made with inspiration from Norén Bretzer (2017, p. 23) & Naturvårdsverket (2019b) and translated into
English.
