The steering committee of the NSPA network was in Brussels for two days of discussions on current opportunities and challenges facing the NSPA regions, together with the European Commission, the European Parliament, the European Policy Centre (EPC), as well as representatives at the national level in Sweden, Finland, and Norway. The focus of the days was on cohesion policy, the EU’s regional policy and the negotiations on the next Multiannual Financial Framework, as well as the ongoing review of the EU’s Arctic strategy. 

The NSPA network is a close cooperation between the three regions in northern Norway, four northernmost regions of Sweden, and the seven northernmost and easternmost regions of Finland. The regions share similar conditions and challenges and work together to increase awareness of the NSPA within the EU institutions and to influence EU policy. Given the regions’ geographic location and their special status in the EU’s long-term budget – including an additional sparsity allocation in accordance with Sweden’s and Finland’s EU Accession Treaties – regional policy and Arctic policy are of particular importance. During the meetings, the OECD study launched in 2025, “Navigating Global Transition in European Arctic Regions,” was also highlighted, providing a basis for identifying challenges and opportunities for NSPA cooperation with the EU. 

Day 1 – EU strategies for territorial and local development 

The first day, held at the North Sweden and North Norway common premises, began with a meeting with Kadri Uustal, Head of Unit for Cities, Communities and People at the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Regional and Urban Policy (DG REGIO). The meeting focused on the EU’s territorial strategies and the initiative The Right to Stay. The initiative aims to ensure that residents of Europe’s sparsely populated regions can live, study, and work in their home region without being forced to move to larger cities due to a lack of opportunities and services. 

Kadri Uustalemphasised that the initiative is about ensuring that people do not have to relocate in order to access basic services and opportunities. The NSPA was highlighted as a clear example of regions where the strategy is particularly significant. 

The discussion revolved around how geographical criteria should be defined, how EU analyses can be made more accessible, and how national governments can better integrate regional perspectives when designing their National and Regional Partnership Plans (NRPPs). Several participants stressed that the challenge often lies at the national level rather than within the EU itself. 

Concern regarding cohesion policy and the NRPPs 

During the subsequent meeting, the European Commission’s proposal for the NRPPs and the regions’ role in shaping the Swedish and Finnish plans were discussed together with Felicia Stanescu, Deputy Head of Cabinet to Executive Vice-President Raffaele Fitto, and Marek Teplansky, Head of Unit responsible for the Swedish Regional Fund programmes. Felicia emphasised that the European Commission aims to make the 2028–2034 Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) simpler, more flexible, and more effective, while at the same time expressing understanding for the concerns raised by many regions regarding increased centralisation. During the dialogue, Felicia underlined that the intention is for regions to have a seat at the table, and that this must also be respected by the Member States. 

At the same time, NSPA representatives expressed concern that specific earmarked allocations for sparsely populated regions may disappear in upcoming budget proposals. Felicia Stanescu underlined that the NRPPs must demonstrate how Member States plan to support northern and sparsely populated areas, but that the European Commission cannot force the inclusion of dedicated regional chapters. Regional representatives from Sweden also pointed out that the recent invitation to provide input to the Government Offices on the content of the Swedish plan comes with a very short timeframe, and that there is no clarity on how the regions will be involved in the process after submitting their contributions. Representatives from the European Commission emphasised that regions are to be involved and that this will also be requested of the Member States, but that NSPA and others must also raise these issues with their respective governments. 

Arctic, security and geopolitics 

The afternoon was devoted to a roundtable discussion on the revision of the EU’s Arctic strategy, a debate strongly shaped by the current security situation in northern Europe. 

Among the participants were Finnish Member of the European Parliament Mika Aaltola, who serves on the Committee on Foreign Affairs; Andreas Magnusson from Sweden’s Permanent Representation to the EU, responsible inter alia for Arctic issues; Olav Mydland from the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs at the Mission in Brussels; and Maria Martisiute from the Brussels-based think tank European Policy Centre (EPC), where she leads work related to the European Arctic. The discussion focused on the Arctic’s growing geopolitical importance, the rapid security policy shift in the region, and how the EU can better integrate the perspectives of northern regions. 

Mika Aaltola emphasised that the EU needs a common approach to the Arctic, noting that robust defence is built on robust societies. The Arctic therefore requires a shared European strategy. 

Olav Mydland highlighted the importance of viewing investments in transport and infrastructure in the north as both civilian and military, stressing that this is a necessity in the new security environment. 

Andreas Magnusson argued that the EU needs to broaden its perspective on the Arctic beyond a narrow security-focused framework. He warned that the ongoing geopolitical developments, including the growing interest in Greenland and Arctic resources, risk redirecting EU investments unless the needs of the regions are clearly articulated. He further stressed that regional actors must be more systematically involved in the process for the EU’s Arctic policy to become effective and sustainable in the long term. 

At the same time, several NSPA representatives expressed concern that the Arctic is increasingly being reduced to a defence issue, at the expense of social and economic development. 

Risk that the NSPA is “forgotten” in EU strategies 

Throughout the day’s discussions, concerns were repeatedly raised that the EU’s increased focus on the Arctic and The Right to Stay does not necessarily guarantee that the NSPA perspective will be reflected in the budget and regulatory framework. NSPA representatives called for a stronger link between the EU’s Arctic strategy, cohesion policy, and other relevant EU programmes. They also underlined the need for the EU to recognise the dual character of the northern regions – that they are strategically important for Europe while at the same time particularly exposed and vulnerable. 

Day 2 – The next Multiannual Financial Framework 2028–2034 

The second day began at the European Parliament with a breakfast meeting between Members of the European Parliament from Sweden and Finland and the NSPA steering committee, focusing on the future of the EU’s Arctic regions in the negotiations on the EU’s next Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for 2028–2034. 

On the Finnish side, and host of the meeting, was Elsi Katainen, who sits on the AGRI and REGI Committees and is one of three lead negotiators on the European Commission’s proposal for National and Regional Partnership Plans (NRPPs). Among the Swedish Members of the European Parliament who participated were Sofie Eriksson, member of the Committee on Regional Development (REGI) and the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE); Jonas Sjöstedt, member of the Committee on Budgetary Control (CONT), the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (ENVI), and the Committee on Foreign Affairs (AFET); and Emma Wiesner, who serves on the ENVI Committee and the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development (AGRI).  

Elsi Katainen welcomed the participants and emphasised from the outset that she will fight for the NSPA regions in the budget negotiations and for the specific sparsity allocation the regions have received since Finland and Sweden joined the EU, in accordance with their Accession Treaties. She stressed that the structural challenges linked to sparsity, long distances, and low population density have not changed. Combined with the deteriorating geopolitical situation, the growing interest of major powers in the Arctic, and the consequences of Russia’s war against Ukraine, there are today even stronger reasons to continue supporting these regions. Elsi also highlighted the OECD study on the NSPA regions as important evidence base and encouraged NSPA to provide amendments and concrete examples for the ongoing negotiations. 

Emma Wiesner emphasised that competitiveness is built locally and that the next long-term budget must continue to promote small and medium-sized enterprises across Europe. To strengthen the EU’s competitiveness, the Competitiveness Fund and Horizon Europe must also provide space for actors beyond large and already resource-strong companies. She further underlined the importance of improving the proposal so that regions can rely on support and influence in the design of the NRPPs. 

Jonas Sjöstedt noted that the budget proposal contains ambitions such as increased flexibility, simplification, and the merging of certain funds, but that it also includes significant problems that must be addressed. He pointed in particular to the difficulty of tracking how EU funds are ultimately used and stressed the need for stronger audit measures. He also argued that regions risk becoming the major losers if earmarked allocations are removed and if they are not involved in designing the measures. 

Sofie Eriksson concluded the opening remarks by highlighting the structural challenges facing the NSPA regions and underlined that regions must have a seat at the table when EU investments are discussed, as they possess the best knowledge of local conditions. She stressed that she will continue working to reinstate the sparsity allocation – a position also supported by Jonas Sjöstedt and Emma Wiesner, who emphasised that this is an issue that should be pursued across party lines. 

The discussion concluded with broad agreement on the importance of strengthening the role of the regions and jointly advocating for the reinstatement of the sparsity allocation for the NSPA regions, in order to ensure continued support for the development of more resilient and competitive regions in the European Arctic. 

Following the roundtable discussion, the talks continued at the European Parliament with Karin Karlsbro, Member of the European Parliament serving on the Committees on International Trade (INTA), Environment (ENVI), and Fisheries (PECH). The meeting addressed the Arctic as well as trade issues and geopolitical tensions, and how these affect the EU as a whole as well as the NSPA regions, which, as major exporters of raw materials with long distances to markets, quickly feel the impact of shifting trade balances and supply chains. During the discussion, NSPA representatives emphasised the importance of continuing to support local communities so that they can be strengthened in peacetime and be able to hold their ground in times of crisis. The meeting concluded with a call from Karin to continue raising NSPA issues with decision-makers at both the European and national levels, highlighting the timeliness of these matters and the need for local voices to convey what strategically important regions require. 

The Steering Committee also had the opportunity to speak with Siegfrid Mureșan, a Member of the European Parliament from Romania and part of the largest political group, the EPP. Mureșan, who is the rapporteur for the so-called interim report on the proposal for the next MFF, plays an important role in shaping the Parliament’s overall position on the budget proposal, which is one of the most important legislative processes the European Parliament decides on and in which, for example, support to NSPA is handled. Mureșan stated that it is clear that the budget proposal was developed by a small group within the European Commission and that, although there are positive elements in the proposal, many mistakes have been made that need to be corrected. In this, the regions need to be heard, and clear budget lines need to be specified to ensure that cohesion policy is not used as a reserve to finance other measures that are not aimed at regional development. 

He also pointed out that NSPA and other regions with specific challenges need to be made visible and emphasised the importance of NSPA continuing to engage with various MEPs. He noted that it was indeed the right time to organise this meeting and the other meetings on these days from NSPA’s side and thanked for the invitation. Ahead of the adoption of the interim report in May, Mureșan welcomed continued input from the regions and other stakeholders who can help improve the budget proposal and provide strong arguments for the role of the regions. 

Afterward, the group quickly navigated the European Parliament’s seemingly endless corridors and countless elevators, before the NSPA steering committee met with one of the Parliament’s Vice-Presidents, French MEP Younous Omarjee from the Left group. Omarjee, who comes from one of the so-called outermost regions and who has previously received a special allocation—just like the NSPA—due to his region’s particular circumstances, thanked the NSPA network for initiating the meeting. He noted that the NSPA and the outermost regions share several common conditions, which means they continue to require specific support from the EU. In this context, it is important that the NSPA and the outermost regions do not compete against each other but collaborate to ensure sufficient support is secured. 

The challenges facing the regions are significant, but EU support—a relatively small amount of funding—can unlock great potential, especially in regions that are far from the EU’s major markets and must manage long distances, as is the case for both the outermost regions and the NSPA in the Arctic. He also pointed out that, for the EU, recent events have shifted the focus northward. Like many of the other participants during the past days, he emphasised that the situation also presents opportunities for the NSPA regions and the European Arctic, given the growing interest tied to the changing geopolitical landscape—a development that the NSPA network can leverage. 

After intensive and very fruitful discussions in the European Parliament, the NSPA Steering Committee proceeded to the East and North Finland EU Office, where the day’s final meeting was held with Sara Colliander, Minister-Counsellor at the Swedish EU Representation responsible for cohesion policy, and her Finnish counterparts Janne Uusivirta and Ilari Havukainen. Sara, Ilari, and Janne outlined the status of the negotiations among the Member States, which have been ongoing for over six months and are thus significantly further advanced than the Parliament. The negotiations in the Council, which are proceeding in stages with different articles of the regulations divided into blocks, are taking place mainly at a technical level, and the major issues regarding the size of budget lines and allocations to specific territories have not yet been discussed. Therefore, there is not much to report yet regarding the NSPA allocation. However, it is clear that the role of the regions will not be strengthened from the Council’s side. Rather, the flexibility given to Member States in the proposal to prioritize measures without pre-determined earmarking, as has been the case previously, is valued. 

The NSPA regions emphasised the importance of guaranteeing the regions a seat at the table. It was also noted that if Sweden and Finland argue for increased flexibility, there is a risk that other countries, where corruption is a significant issue, might use EU funds for purposes that do not strengthen local communities or contribute to the EU’s shared objectives on security and competitiveness. Clear rules from the EU are therefore needed to ensure that the funds reach the regions and that there is predictability to address the regions’ structural challenges. Despite differences of opinion, the open dialogue on the state of negotiations and the various perspectives was highly appreciated. 

The NSPA thanks everyone for the productive and important meetings on the Arctic and the future of regional policy, and wishes to particularly thank all those who took the time to meet with the NSPA representatives, who in turn demonstrated great commitment to raising the perspectives of the EU’s own Arctic regions on the EU stage. These were crucial meetings and discussions, taking place precisely as the upcoming EU budget is being shaped and the EU’s Arctic policy is under revision. 

Read the OECD study here 

Read about the consultation on the EU Arctic policy here