Local government system in Estonia: some basic characteristics, differences from the Nordic municipal systems, and involvement in cross-border cooperation programmes Veiko Sepp
Territorial units in Estonia Local municipality units linn (city) or vald (rural municipalities) Regional units maakond (county) and regioon or piirkond (region) Settlement units: Linn city (town) Alev - borough Alevik - borough Küla - village Historical and imagined territorial units: Kihelkond - parish Kant and nulk - rural corner
Division of local government system
0 999 1000 1999 2000 2999 3000 3999 4000 4999 5000 9999 10000 14999 15000 19999 20000 Division of local government system 90 84 80 70 60 50 40 30 34 34 29 20 15 15 10 6 5 5 0
Territoriality of local government Local government units Regional local government units Regional local government co-operation units Regional state government units Estonia Denmark Finland Norway 226 98 336 431 5 19 15 19 15... 5 6 & 15 19
Tasks of local governments Obligatory tasks Voluntary tasks Social services Youth work Housing and communal economy Waste management Spatial planning Local transport Local roads and streets Entrepreneurial support, business development, workplaces Tourism Vocational schools Schools and kindergartens Cultural and sport institutions Health centres
Local government incomes Investment grants from State Budget 2% Earmarked grants for current expenditures from State Budget 2% Block grant from State Budget 17% Transfers from foundations and NGO-s 5% Sale of property 1% Other revenues 3% personal income tax (PIT) 47% Equalization fond 6% Income from economical activities and property 11% other local taxes 2% land tax 4%
Local government expenditures Culture 12% Government 10% Utility management, transport 22% Education 43% Environment services 3% Social care 10%
Malta Küpros Kreeka Luksemburg Portugal Belgia Austria Slovakkia Hispaania Saksamaa Iirimaa Bulgaaria Sloveenia Prantsusmaa Ungari Island Sveits Euroopa Liit (27 riiki) Leedu Tsehhi Vabariik Rumeenia Eesti Suurbritannia Läti Itaalia Poola Norra Holland Soome Rootsi Taani Share of local government expenditures in government exp. 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 25% 28% 20% 10% 0%
Local government co-operation County unions National unions separately for rural and urban municipalities Joint businesses, non-profit organisations and foundations Joint officials Co-operation/co-ordination contracts Missing models Obligatory co-operation Joint municipality in a particular field
The analysis of EU territorial co-operation: priorities, problems and effectiveness (University of Tartu. Centre of Applied Social Sciences) Textual analysis of strategic documents: national (24), regional (55) and local strategies (52) Interviews with representatives of ministries (16), county governments and other regional organisations (15), local governments (3) and SME Foundation Determination of needs and requirements: governmental fields and regions Frameworks for evaluation: political guidelines Problems and effectiveness of territorial co-operation Evaluation of needs and requirements Suggestions
Problems in territorial co-operation - 1 Lack of capacity in regional and local authorities to participate and lead projects Internal co-operative structures of local municipalities and businesses are weak Difference of governmental systems and authority especially with Russia (prestige of state authorities) Different interests of potential partners and predomination of competitive thinking
Problems in territorial co-operation - 2 The project bureaucracy is too complicated and financial transactions take too much time for smaller organizations, esp. compared to gains achieved Territorial co-operation is not important for and in ministerial policies, lack of motivation in administrative staff Strict residence-permit policy in Estonia Visa-regime and custom-border between EU and Russia
Efficiency and effects of territorial co-operation - 1 The most important effect is personal development of participants in co-operation new skills and knowledge, enhanced confidence. Co-operative projects are used to get additional finances for local projects formally integrated to co-operative projects. Some times it is considered to be the main motivation for cooperation.
Efficiency and effects of territorial co-operation - 2 The application of learnt knowledge depends on local situation organizational and financial capacities, strategic positioning of co-operative projects in development practices. The integration of territorial co-operation to strategic planning should be improved the key problem is in planning practices as such, esp. in regional level. Sharing of experience and production of new solutions in co-operation between only some municipalities is inefficient.
Efficiency and effects of territorial co-operation - 3 The capacities of local governments should be enhanced to improve efficiency of projects and sustainability of the results for local and regional communities merger of municipalities or effective co-operative structures (incl national organizations). Co-operative projects should be open to different types of organizations municipalities, state agencies, SMEs, universities, etc.
Results: priorities in CSF thematic objectives (1) STRENGTHENING RESEARCH, TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT AND INNOVATION (3) ENHANCING THE COMPETITIVENESS OF SME S (7) PROMOTING SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORT AND REMOVING BOTTLENECKS IN KEY NETWORK INFRASTRUCTURES (10) INVESTING IN EDUCATION, SKILLS AND LIFELONG LEARNING