No abstract

No abstract

Active interactions between the countries, regions, economic entities, non-profi ts, and inhabitants of the Baltic Sea territories contributed to the emergence and development of a transnational socioeconomic region. Th e Baltic macroregion is one of the most developed among international regions that appeared as a result of regionalization, which is strengthened by globalization. At the same time, its creation is a consequence of coastalization, which aff ects settlement patterns and the spatial organization of the economy. In academic literature, this factor is primarily seen as a general tendency; however, there are signifi cant geographical diff erences. Th e impact of the coastalization on the Baltic region has not been studied suffi ciently. Based on available statistics, this article analyses diff erences in the levels and rates of settlement and economy in the coastal zone and the rest of the Baltic region. Th e economic, statistical and cartographical methods were applied. Th e indicators of the study object's condition include population density and growth rate, gross regional product (GRP) per capita, and GRP growth rate. Th e study covers the period from 2005 to 2016. Th e obtained results have allowed identifying the features of 'coastalization' at the microlevel by country, showing that this factor is less signifi cant in Russia, Germany, and Poland than in the other countries of the region. Th us, the study identifi es microregions with a varying eff ect of the 'maritime' factor on their development. Th ese patterns can be used in developing national strategic and spatial planning documents and in international spatial planning eff orts in the Baltic region.

This data article presents macroeconomic data that can be used for comparative territorial studies. The data cover a sample of 413 regions (national administrative-territorial units corresponding to second level of a common classification of territorial units for statistics of the European Commission – NUTS 2 level region of the European Union, and comparable administrative-territorial units outside the EU) of 48 European countries, including Cyprus, Turkey, the European part of Russia, and two partially recognized states – the Republic of Kosovo and the Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic. The statistical database covers a five-year period of 2010–2014. This dataset is created to enhance our understanding of the contemporary coastalization dynamics in Europe. Despite the fact that coastal regions of European countries exhibit an extensive level of development and remain attractive to human settlement, industry localization, and investment flows their contribution to the socio-economic development of Europe is unclear. The reported data cover a series of macroeconomic data on key indicators traditionally used in comparative analysis of regional development: average annual population, gross regional product (GRP) in purchasing power parity (PPP), labor productivity, population density and GRP (PPP) values per sq.km. Accounting for differences in geoeconomic position of the European regions enables to distinguish four subtypes of regions with a particular emphasis on the coastal area: coastal border, coastal other, coastal hinterland, and inland other. An additional focus is made on differentiating the performance indicators of regions depending on their border geo-economic position: border regions with a state border over land, lake or river surface, and midland regions – other non-border regions. This data is to be used as a comparative benchmark for the coastal border subgroup of regions against the totality of border and midland regions.

In this article, I carry out a comparative analysis of population change in the bordering regions of Russia and the European Union. Peripheries of their countries, most of these regions enjoy a more or less favourable demographic situation, which, however, differs from place to place. To attain the aims of the study, I analyse official data from Russian and EU statistical offices and map the results obtained. I identify significant differences between border regions and cities. The most adverse demographic situation is observed in the borderlands of the Baltics, a slightly better one in Poland and Finland. As to Russia’s border regions, a population increase is characteristic of Saint Petersburg and the Leningrad and Kaliningrad regions. Yet, a number of cities in the immediate vicinity of the border face a population decline. The demographic situation could be improved by more active transboundary collaborations and by the border serving increasingly as a contact area rather than a barrier.