DOCSLIB.ORG

111223 Pohjois-Suomi 11 4 2012 Updatekv

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
111223 Pohjois-Suomi 11 4 2012 Updatekv Version: Final Date: 18 April 2012 Regional Innovation Monitor Regional Innovation Report (Pohjois-Suomi) To the European Commission Enterprise and Industry Directorate-General Directorate D – Industrial Innovation and Mobility Industries Kimmo Viljamaa Henri Lahtinen Ramboll Management Consulting www.technopolis-group.com PREFACE The Regional Innovation Monitor (RIM)1 is an initiative of the European Commission's Directorate General for Enterprise and Industry, which has the objective to describe and analyse innovation policy trends across EU regions. RIM analysis is based on methodologies developed in the context of the INNO-Policy Trendchart which covers innovation policies at national level as part of the PRO INNO Europe initiative. The overarching objective of this project is to enhance the competitiveness of European regions through increasing the effectiveness of their innovation policies and strategies. The specific objective of the RIM is to enhance the scope and quality of policy assessment by providing policy-makers, other innovation stakeholders with the analytical framework and tools for evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of regional policies and regional innovation systems. RIM covers EU-20 Member States: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom. This means that RIM will not concentrate on Member States where the Nomenclature of territorial units for statistics NUTS 1 and 2 levels are identical with the entire country (Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania), Malta which only has NUTS 3 regions, Slovenia which has a national innovation policy or Cyprus and Luxembourg which are countries without NUTS regions. The main aim of 50 regional reports is to provide a description and analysis of contemporary developments of regional innovation policy, taking into account the specific context of the region as well as general trends. All regional innovation reports are produced in a standardised way using a common methodological and conceptual framework, in order to allow for horizontal analysis, with a view to preparing the Annual EU Regional Innovation Monitor reports. European Commission official responsible for the project is Alberto Licciardello ([email protected]). The present report was prepared by Kimmo Viljamaa ([email protected]) and Henri Lahtinen (henri.lahtinen@r- m.com). The contents and views expressed in this report do not necessarily reflect the opinions or policies of the Member States or the European Commission. Copyright of the document belongs to the European Commission. Neither the European Commission, nor any person acting on its behalf, may be held responsible for the use to which information contained in this document may be put, or for any errors which, despite careful preparation and checking, may appear. 1 http://www.rim-europa.eu Table of Contents 1. Main Trends and Challenges in the Regional Innovation System 1 1.1 Recent trends in regional economic performance 1 1.2 Recent trends in regional innovation performance 3 1.3 Identified challenges 5 2. Innovation Policy Governance 7 2.1 Degree of institutional autonomy 7 2.2 Institutional-set up, co-ordination and implementation mechanisms 7 2.3 Availability and use of policy intelligence tools 11 2.4 Key challenges and opportunities 12 3. Innovation Policy Instruments and Orientations 14 3.1 The regional innovation policy mix 14 3.2 Appraisal of regional innovation policies 20 3.3 Good practice case 22 3.4 Portfolio of innovation support measures 23 3.5 Towards smart specialisation policies 24 3.6 Possible future orientations and opportunities 26 Appendix A Bibliography 28 Appendix B Stakeholders consulted 29 Appendix C RIM Repository information 30 Appendix D Statistical data 31 Appendices Appendix A Bibliography........................................................................28 Appendix B Stakeholders consulted.......................................................29 Appendix C RIM Repository information ..............................................30 Appendix D Statistical data .................................................................... 31 Figures Figure 1-1 Economic and innovation performance indicators................. 4 Figure 2-1 Management and implementation structure of regional innovation strategy ..................................................................................11 Regional Innovation Monitor i Tables Table 3-1 Overview of the regional innovation policy mix .....................15 Table 3-2 Existing regional innovation support measures.....................18 ii Regional Innovation Monitor Executive Summary 1. Introduction: Main recent trends in the Regional Innovation System Pohjois-Suomi is among the structurally more challenged regions in Finland due to its location, long distances, dominance of small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) and very low population density (on average 4.7 inhabitants/km2). Against this background the per capita gross domestic product (GDP) in the region was rather high (€25,400) in 2007, being 86.3% of the Finnish average and 103% of the EU average. The figure, however, is slightly misleading, because Oulu city- region in Pohjois-Suomi is one of the strongest regions in the whole country contributing considerably to the GDP per capita. Pohjois-Suomi has suffered from high unemployment as well as high levels of outmigration for a long time. Although unemployment has fallen in the 2000s the unemployment rate 10.1% (2010) remains still above the EU27 average (8.9%). Ageing population and outmigration pose challenges to the economic performance of the region. The share of the agriculture (1.57 times the EU27 average) and public services (1.21) in the economic structure are strong. Pohjois-Suomi has plenty of potential in terms of natural resources (e.g. the largest gold mine in Europe, several other mines in the preparation phase and plenty of wood). Moreover, Pohjois-Suomi shares borders with Norway and Russia being close to the very large natural resources of the two nations. Due to the location Pohjois-Suomi has an important intermediary role as part of the multilateral cooperation within the Barents region. The share of young people with tertiary education is also rather high in Pohjois-Suomi (almost 40 per cent compared to 30 per cent of the EU27), which is based on two universities providing higher education in the region. The University of Oulu is one of the largest universities in Finland. However, there is pressure on the national level to decrease the amount of higher education institutions and this causes concern in Pohjois-Suomi in terms of Universities of applied sciences. The innovation performance in the region has also been very good during recent years. The gross expenditure on R&D (GERD) was as high as 5.38% of the GDP in 2007, representing the highest figure among the Finnish regions. In comparison the EU average was only 1.37%. Also the GERD growth rate (4.34% between 2000 and 2007) has been significantly higher (1.81 times the EU average) than in the EU as whole. However, regional disparities are considerable. This is reflected in the share of SMEs innovating in-house in Pohjois-Suomi (0.79), which is somewhat below the national average (0.81). 2. Major innovation challenges and policy responses Challenge 1: Narrow industry focus on strategy and policy levels Regional Innovation Monitor i The strong industrial base of Pohjois-Suomi has been affected by globalisation. As a result traditional industries such forestry, metals and manufacturing have decreased in importance. There are other industries on which the future growth should be built on – especially tourism, experience economy and services – not forgetting the vast natural resources. These have been reflected to a certain extend in the regional strategies (e.g. Industrial Strategy of Lapland 2030) but funding remains targeted to the traditional fields and does not encourage research, development and innovation (R&D&I) in the more future oriented industries. Challenge 2: Regional disparities as a challenge for balanced innovation policy Due to significant regional disparities in Pohjois-Suomi it is challenging to develop the region as a whole. Around one third (229,000) of the population in the region lives in Oulu and the surrounding municipalities with population density of 49 inhabitants per square kilometer. At the same time there are approximately 183.000 people in the whole sub-region of Lapland, which is the northernmost part of the region with the average population density of 1.9 inhabitants per square kilometer. While the former figure is increasing, the latter decreases slowly. Moreover, Oulu is a known information and communication technology (ICT)-hub backed by several other industries and thus also attracts notable amount of both public and private sector funding, which is illustrated in the significantly higher GERD (Gross expenditure on R&D) compared to the EU27 average. The landscape for regional development is also quite different in the sub-regions. The private sector is much more active in Central- and Northern Ostrobothia (especially in the Oulu region) in R&D than in Lapland where the companies are smaller and lack the culture of applying for funding and utilizing the support instruments provided by the public sector. This is also reflected in scarcity of smart specialisation towards the northern
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bothnian Bay Coastal Meadows Management Project
    EUROPEAN LANDSCAPE CONVENTION LANDSCAPE AWARD OF THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE 7th Session – 2020-2021 APPLICATION FORM Council of Europe – European Landscape Convention Presentation The European Landscape Convention aims to promote the protection, management and planning of landscapes and to bring together European co-operation in this field. It is the first international treaty exclusively devoted to all dimensions of European landscape. Taking into account the landscape, natural and cultural values of the territory, it contributes to promoting the quality of life and well-being of Europeans. The Resolution on the Rules governing the Landscape Award of the Council of Europe, adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 20 February 2008 at the 1018th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies, draws attention to the fact that Article 11 of the Convention institutes the Landscape Award of the Council of Europe and that it is in keeping with the work carried out by the Council of Europe concerning human rights, democracy and sustainable development. It effectively promotes the territorial dimension of human rights and democracy by acknowledging the importance of measures taken to improve the landscape for people’s living conditions. Opened to the Parties to the Convention, the Award is intended to raise civil society’s awareness of the value of landscapes, of their role and of changes to them. Its objective is to reward exemplary practical initiatives aimed at successful landscape quality objectives on the territories of the Parties to the Convention. The Award is conferred every two years and the files presenting applications must reach the Secretariat General of the Council of Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • Choose Your Style! in COOPERATION
    Choose your style! IN COOPERATION City of Oulu Kempele Municipality Muhos Municipality Ii Municipality Tyrnävä Municipality Liminka Municipality Lumijoki Municipality North Ostrobothnia ELY Centre Photography Valtteri Kantanen WE WANT TO MAKE CYCLING MORE VISIBLE! The main cycling routes in the Oulu region are made visible and distinct from regular cycleways. The main routes are waymarked and numbered, and signs with maps and distances between destinations are mounted along the routes. The slogan for cycling in the Oulu region is: Choose your style! This brochure gives information about the main cycling routes and the diversity of cycling in Oulu: it does not matter whether you sport a cruiser, mountain bike or a pink Jopo. You do not need special gear to cycle. Instead, you can cycle barefoot or with your boots on and with or without a helmet. The most important thing is that you cycle. New signs will be mounted along the main routes in 2019! Try the new routes and visit the sights nearby. Harri Vaarala Traffic engineer City of Oulu Cycling improves your physical condition and is an eco-friendly mode of transportation… But in the Oulu region cycling is something much more. In Oulu, all styles of cycling are allowed. You can exercise or you can cycle just for fun – there is no need to stress about proper gear or fancy bike models! Cycling is a natural part of the all-year- round lives of Oulu citizens. Choose your style and stay safe! MAIN CYCLING ROUTES People in the Oulu region cycle more than anywhere in Finland MAIN ROUTE 1 1 Oulu-Haukipudas 21 km The route starts at the Market Square and passes over the Tervaporvari bridges in the Oulujoki river delta.
    [Show full text]
  • Lyme Borreliosis in Finland, 1995–2014
    Article DOI: https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2308.161273 Lyme Borreliosis in Finland, 1995–2014 Technical Appendix Methods Case Definitions for Lyme Borreliosis (LB), Lyme Neuroborreliosis (LNB), and Lyme Arthritis (LA) Cases in Avohilmo reflect clinically diagnosed EM cases. EM can be diagnosed as a reddish/blueish skin rash often with a central clearing expanding at least up to 5 cm in diameter in several days to weeks after a tick bite. No laboratory testing is required since the rapid expansion of the rash makes it distinctive from other skin lesion (1). Moreover, borrelia serology is usually negative at the early phase of infection (2). Microbiologically confirmed LB cases are diagnosed by the detection of borrelia-specific IgG and/or IgM antibodies in serum and/or cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), and subsequently notified to the NIDR. In Finland, serology is based on the two-tier testing where borrelia-specific antibodies are detected by a sensitive enzyme immuno assay (EIA) followed by a more specific immunoblot. In total, eight laboratories (including both public and private units) perform LB laboratory diagnostics. We defined a LNB case as a patient diagnosed with the following ICD-10 codes: “A69.2” (Lyme borreliosis) and either “G01.9” (meningitis) and/or “G63.0” (polyneuropathy). A case of LA was defined as a patient diagnosed with “A69.2” and “M01” (arthritis in Lyme disease). LNB is clinically diagnosed as lymphocytic meningitis, radiculoneuritis, or cranial neuritis with the laboratory confirmation of the central nervous system involvement which includes CSF pleocytosis and detection of intrathecally produced borrelia-specific antibodies, or rarely amplification of Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato (Bbsl) DNA from the CSF sample.
    [Show full text]
  • Preliminary Population Statistics 2017, March
    Population 2017 Preliminary population statistics 2017, March Finland’s preliminary population figure 5,504,913 at the end of March New releases will not be produced on preliminary population statistics any more in 2017. Revised figures concerning 2017 will be released at a later date to be announced separately. Corrected on 16 June 2017. The corrections are indicated in red. According to Statistics Finland's preliminary data, Finland's population at the end of March was 5,504,913. During January-March Finland's population increased by 1,616 persons, which is 612 persons more than in the preliminary data the year before. The reason for the population increase was migration gain from abroad: the number of immigrants was 3,868 higher than that of emigrants. There was no natural population growth, since deaths exceeded births by 2,252 persons. Population increase by month 2014–2017* According to the preliminary statistics for January-March 2017, a total of 12,118 children were born, which is 925 fewer than in the corresponding period 2016. The number of deaths was 14,370, which is 291 lower than one year earlier. Helsinki 9.6.2017 Quoting is encouraged provided Statistics Finland is acknowledged as the source. Altogether 7,062 persons immigrated to Finland from abroad and 3,194 persons emigrated from Finland during January-March period. The number of immigrants was 828 higher and the number of emigrants 418 lower than in the previous year. 1 520 of the immigrants and 2,127 of the emigrants were Finnish citizens. According to the preliminary data, the number of inter-municipal migrations totalled 56,798 by the end of March.
    [Show full text]
  • Stakeholder Participation in Regional River Basin Management in Finland
    Stakeholder participation in regional river basin management in Finland Sanna Kipinä-Salokannel Centre for Economic Development, Transport and the Environment for Southwest Finland Lake restoration and management of shallow lakes 21.11.2019, Sanghai (China) The Centres for Economic Development, Transport and the Environment Lapland: Rovaniemi, Kemi Kainuu: Kajaani Duties: North Ostrobothnia: Oulu, Ylivieska Ostrobothnia: Vaasa, Kokkola Financing and development services for South Ostrobothnia: Seinäjoki, Vaasa, Kokkola Rovaniemi enterprises, employment-based aid and Central Finland: Jyväskylä North Savo: Kuopio Kemi labour market training, handling of North Karelia: Joensuu agricultural and fishery issues, management South Savo: Mikkeli Pirkanmaa: Tampere Oulu of immigration issues and work with EU Satakunta: Pori Southwest Finland: Turku, Pori Structural Funds projects Kajaani Southeast Finland: Kouvola, Lappeenranta Ylivieska Häme: Lahti, Hämeenlinna Road maintenance, road projects, transport Uusimaa: Helsinki Kokkola permits, traffic safety, public transport and Vaasa island traffic Kuopio Joensuu Seinäjoki Jyväskylä Environmental protection, guidance on the Pori Mikkeli use of land and construction, nature Tampere protection, environmental monitoring, and Lahti Lappeenranta use and management water resources Turku Hämeenlinna Kouvola Helsinki Water framework directive (WFD) § Adopted in 2000 § The objective is a good status of groundwater and surface waters by 2015 (at the latest 2027) § The status of waters must not deteriorate § 6 year period of water management (2009-2015, 2016-2021, 2022-2027) § WFD legislation in Finland: – The Act on Water Resources Management (2004) ►The Act on Water Resources and Marine Management (2011) – The Decree on River Basin Districts (2004) – The Decree on Water Resources Management (2006) – The Decree on Hazardous and Harmful Substance on Aquatic Environment (2006) § Finland´s high standards of water protection are based on the legislation in the Environmental Protection Act (2000) and the Water Act (2011).
    [Show full text]
  • Answers to the Comments by Reviewer RC2
    Answers to the comments by reviewer RC2: General comments: 1) My main issue with this manuscript has to do with its readability. There are numerous grammatical errors throughout, some of which are pointed out below. A native English speaker should edit the paper before resubmission. This is now done. The authors are grateful for the thorough review also concerning the language. 2) The authors tend to make some broad sweeping conclusions based on trends that are only significant across a small fraction of the total study region. I would like to see more discussion of the full picture (like Figure 9). Pg 10 L2 and Pg11 L5 are two instances where the discussion is too narrow in focus. The authors have now extended the mentioned discussions (sections 3.1.1, 3.1.3 and 3.3.) as requested. The systematic signal of change is not as dramatic in Finland as in some areas, because of the large variation of winter weather. Especially the sea ice extent of Baltic Sea affects largely the Finnish winter weather. If the Gulf of Finland and Gulf of Bothnia freeze completely the Finnish climate is almost continental in winter even on the coast. We added a comment about the hemispherical study published recently, where we studied the effect of weather parameters on the observed changes in larger areas. Section 3.1.1 main addition: Especially variable melt onset timing is in the coastal regions (Southwestern Finland and Southern Ostrobothnia) and in the Lake district. For those regions the standard deviation values of the melt onset day are 14.3, 14.7 and 14.6, respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Answers to the Comments by Reviewer RC1: This Is an Interesting
    Answers to the comments by reviewer RC1: This is an interesting and thorough study, but some of the methods are hard to follow. In particular, I recommend some effort on simplifying and clarifying the descriptions of sigmoid fits in sections 2.2.1 and 2.2.2; figures of example fits might help. The authors are grateful for the encouraging comment. The sigmoid fitting is described now in more detail and related images are included. The method sounds complicated, because one has to take into account also rare, but possible complications (such as marked snowfall after melt onset). However, the main complication really to take into account is the greening up of vegetation. This is demonstrated in the added Figure 2, where we also now include examples of temporary pits before melt onset and temporary peaks after snow melt. Minor comments: page 1, line 26. Forest cover having a significant influence on albedo does not follow from it being an important component of the carbon budget. This sentence is now edited according to the comment. page 2, line 11. “by in” – delete one “in” is deleted as requested. page 2, line 24 “since 200” is sufficient “Year” is removed as suggested. page 3, line 3 I think that standalone forcing of land models with climate model outputs is being dis- cussed here, but it is not clear. The text is edited (page 3, line 6). page 4, line 6 Delete “only” “Only” is deleted as requested. page 5, line 21 “using in-situ FSC observations” Is FSC %-units simply %? Yes, the FSC units is %.
    [Show full text]
  • Riitta Helevä Sculptor
    Riitta Helevä Sculptor Pikisaarentie 7 B1 90100 Oulu, Finland +358 40 721 2887 [email protected] www.kuvataiteilijamatrikkeli.fi/fi/taiteilijat/349 Studies 1976-1981 Helsinki University of Art and Design, Department of Product and Environment Design / Ceramic Art 1975-1976 Helsinki University of Art and Design / Adult Training Center Solo exhibitions 2012 ”Under the Same Heaven” Aine Art Museum, Tornio ”Just like in Dreams” Nelimarkka Museum, Alajärvi 2011 ”Earth remembers” K.H. Renlund Museum, Kokkola 2009 Galleria Harmaja, Oulu Galleria G, Helsinki 2002 Galleria Tyko, Nurmes Galleria G, Helsinki 2000 Galleria Harmaja, Oulu 1996 TM-galleria, Helsinki 1992 Galleria Sculptor, Helsinki 1991 Galleria Okra, Vantaa 1990 ”Seven Silent Guards” sculptures on the seashore, Pikisaari, Oulu 1985 Town Hall, Kuusamo Galleria Sculptor, Helsinki 1983 Oulu Art Museum Selected group exhibitions 2014 ”The Cloudholder´s Heirs” P. Nukari and T. Junno &Helevä, Kaulanen, Meskanen-Barman, Nieminen, Tiisala Art and Museum Centre Sinkka, Kerava 2012 ”The Snowball Effect” - The North Finland Biennial, Oulu Art Museum ”Päivät kohoavat” - Riitta Helevä – Petri Yrjölä, Kemi Art Museum 2010 ”Arctic Heat” - Helevä, Kiuru, Miettunen, Pernu, Södö Galerie Wedding, Berlin 2005 ”Contemporary Birch Bark” Galleria 5, Oulu 2003 VIII Mänttä Art Festival 2001 ”Hokkarikukkia” - The Wihuri Art Foundation, Helsingin Taidehalli and Oulu Art Museum 1998 Annual Exihibition of the Union of Finnish Art Associations, Savonlinna Art Museum 1997 ”Maila Talvio-Salon”, Hartola 1992
    [Show full text]
  • Educational and Technical Visits Program
    OULU FINLAND EDUCATIONAL AND TECHNICAL VISITS PROGRAM 1 OULU Oulu is Northern Finland’s largest city, with easygoing inhabitants and a vibrand cultural life. Oulu is so close to the nature that you might even spot an elk in a park some evening. In addition to the green zones and urban atmosphere, you will enjoy its Arctic magic: the Northern Lights in the winter and a summertime sun that never sets. ARCTIC CIRCLE KALAJOKI Kalajoki is known for its long beach, which is ideal for lying in the OULU sun, relaxing and doing water sports. In summer, the sun shines almost around the clock. In winter, the snow-covered dunes and sea are a startling sight. Kajajoki with its sand dunes area called FINLAND ”Hiekkasärkät” is a compact holiday resort fering a wide range of services and activities for the whole family throughout the year. visitkalajoki.fi HELSINKI LIMINKA Liminka, the most rapidly growing municipality in Finland, is a dream come true for nature lovers. More than 160 bird species nest in the area in the spring, and you can spot thousands of birds in the sky during the spring and autumn migrations. You can even go birdwatching on a fatbike, as Liminka has one of northern Finland’s best mountain biking networks. Along with a hotel, coffee shop and nature exhibition, the Liminka Bay Visitor Centre offers an extensive range of program services. visitliminka.fi ROKUA GEOPARK Rokua UNESCO Global Geopark, the Finnish Outdoor Destination of the Year 2018, is an amazing nature experience. Its landscapes were shaped during the Ice Age.
    [Show full text]
  • Aapa Mire Wilderness Life
    Aapa Mire Wilderness Life - Protection of Finland’s to protect species southernmost aapa mire wilderness areas in Northern Ostrobothnia and Kainuu to protect peatland ecology Final report 2005 for people in Europe LIFE Nature project supported by the European Union Photo: Jorma Luhta Photo: CONTENTS Background to the Aapa Mire Wilderness LIFE project 3 Management and land use plans 5 Habitat restoration 6 Information materials 7 Local recreational use and nature-based tourism 8 Photo: Pekka Sillanpää Pekka Photo: BACKGROUND TO THE AAPA MIRE WILDERNESS LIFE PROJECT The Natura 2000 nature conservation programme aims to preserve European natural habitats by protecting typical species and biotopes in each area of the continent. Finland has a special responsibility in the conservation of peatland biotopes, as no other European country has such extensive and varied peatlands as Finland. The Natura 2000 areas in Litokaira, Olvassuo and Iso Tilansuo-Housusuo, located in the municipalities of Ranua, Pudasjärvi, Puolanka and Utajärvi in northern Finland, are extensive, ecologically significant mire wilderness areas. A common denominator to all of them is a mosaic-like variation of peatland and forest. Typical features of these areas include treeless aapa mires and old-growth forests. These provide ideal living conditions for many endangered animal and plant species. The area has particularly high significance for the conservation of birds. The Natura areas also have great recreational importance. These areas have always had an important role in providing local inhabitants with enjoyment. However, until now no facilities have been set up to serve local recreational purposes or nature-based tourism, a fact that has caused erosion and littering in some areas and, on the other hand, prevented the creation of sustainable nature-based tourism.
    [Show full text]
  • OECD Territorial Grids
    BETTER POLICIES FOR BETTER LIVES DES POLITIQUES MEILLEURES POUR UNE VIE MEILLEURE OECD Territorial grids August 2021 OECD Centre for Entrepreneurship, SMEs, Regions and Cities Contact: [email protected] 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 3 Territorial level classification ...................................................................................................................... 3 Map sources ................................................................................................................................................. 3 Map symbols ................................................................................................................................................ 4 Disclaimers .................................................................................................................................................. 4 Australia / Australie ..................................................................................................................................... 6 Austria / Autriche ......................................................................................................................................... 7 Belgium / Belgique ...................................................................................................................................... 9 Canada ......................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2007 Background Main Results at the Oulujoki River
    RESTORING SALMON INTO OULURIVER Main results of the project OuLo, 2006 - 2007 Background The idea of restoring migratory fish upstream of the dams in the River Oulujoki has been raised since the successful completion of the Merikoski fishway at the river mouth in 2003. Preconditions for salmon migration and reproduction in this former salmon river have been surveyed in the project "Restoring salmon runs into Oulu and Lososinka Rivers", OuLo. The main target area has been the River Oulujoki but studies have also been made in the River Lososinka which runs through the city of Petrozavodsk into the Lake Onego in Russian Carelia. Salmon passage has been blocked in this small river for a long time period. The main aim was to survey the preconditions and possible means of restoring migratory fish runs into these two former salmon rivers. Another main aim was to create close co-operation between Finnish and Russian experts, research institutes and authorities and to develop forms for action in realizing large projects in the different planning cultures of the two countries involved. The project got financial funding from Euregio Carelia Neighbourhood Program. Other funding was provided by the Council of Oulu Region, the Federation of Municipalities and Province of Kainuu, Fortum Power and Heat corp., the municipalities of Muhos, Utajärvi, Vaala and Paltamo and the City of Oulu. The project was part Oulu-Kajaani Regional Development Zone. The project was co- ordinated by North Ostrobothnia Regional Environment Centre. The Finnish partners were Game and Fisheries Research Institute, University of Oulu, Finnish Environment Institute and Kainuu Regional Environment Centre.
    [Show full text]