1. 1 Jacek Szlachta ET2050 Eastern Europe (EE) macroregion Brussels 19 March 2012

2. Policy conclusions and recommendations (1) A. Poland managed to develop whole range of strategic studies until 2020 and 2030, on central and regional levels, embracing economy of places and economy of flows dimension. B. Ukraine started to develop real strategic thinking thanks to European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument and Europe Aid. C. In Belarus until now nothing real happened, local strategies quoted in EU documents are soviet type propaganda. 2

3. Policy conclusions and recommendations (2) D. The relations between EU and Belarus/Ukraine are highly politicised. ET2050 scenario of EE dependent from political climate. E. No chance for Belarus/Ukraine for joining EU before 2030, in very optimistic scenario it is possible for Ukraine in 2050. Current eastern EU border will be the same in 2050. F. Crucial role of European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument which must be conditional, should help establishing quasi cohesion policy. 3

4. Policy conclusions and recommendations (3) G. Europe Aid programme unique role in providing information concerning spatial structures of Ukraine/Belarus and building capacity for territorial policies and approaches (Ukraine – started already, Belarus – missing). H. Fast catching up of Poland, but growing regional disparities, Eastern Poland punished because proximity to external EU border with missing links. I. Spatial structure of socio-economic potential of Ukraine/Belarus is markedly different from new Central European member states. 4

5. Policy conclusions and recommendations (4) J. Role of Ukraine/Belarus in EU’s (also ESPON) and Poland’s strategic studies is neglected. K. What impact of Ukraine/Belarus on EU – (1) migration, (2) illegal human trafficking, (3) environment protection and location of sensitive environmentally industry, (4) transport corridors. L. Most sensitive issues of neighbourhood relations: (1) border crossings density and quality, (2) civic society formation (regional and local self governments), (3) networking of different actors in Ukraine/Belarus with partners in EU 5

6. GDP per km2 World Bank,, 2009, Reshaping Economic Geography, Washington D. C. 6

7. GDP per km2 World Bank, 2009, Reshaping Economic Geography, Washington D. C. 7

8. Functional interrelations between main cities in 2010 and 2030 Spatial Development Concept of Poland 2030, Ministry of Regional Development, Warsaw 2011 8

9. Directions of spatial policy 2030 Spatial Development Concept of Poland 2030, Ministry of Regional Development, Warsaw 2011 9

10. Potential strength of gravity in 2007 Spatial Development Concept of Poland 2030, Ministry of Regional Development, Warsaw 2011, after P. Śleszyński 10