NOAROOTSI NORDPLUS 2015 INTENSIVE COURSE “Consumption of Space and Local Governance in Core-Periphery Relations”

University of Tartu Faculty of Science and Technology Institute of Ecology and Earth Sciences Department of Geography

Case study NOAROOTSI NORDPLUS 2015 INTENSIVE COURSE “Consumption of space and local governance in core-periphery relations”

Helin Tamm Diego Cidrás Fernández Gettel Sink Emmi Alho Arna Dögg Tómasdóttir

Tartu 2015 Contents Introduction...... 4

1. Theory...... 5

1.1 Second-home owners ...... 5

1.2 Involvement of second-house owners ...... 6

1.3 Social network and community...... 7

2. Methodology ...... 10

2.1 Designing research questions ...... 10

2.2 Interviews ...... 11

2.2.1 Semi-structured interviews ...... 11

2.2.2 Interview design...... 11

2.2.3 Selecting participants...... 12

2.2.4 Data and its transcription ...... 12

2.3 Observation ...... 12

2.4 Mapping...... 13

3. Results...... 14

3.1 Description of case study area...... 14

3.1.1 Noarootsi...... 14

3.1.2 Riguldi/ Rickul...... 17

3.1.3 Einbi/Enby ...... 18

3.1.4. Höbringi/Höbring ...... 20

3.1.5 Elbiku/ Ölbäc ...... 21

3.2 Involvement - network and governance ...... 22

3.2.1 Network between Estonians and Estonian-Swedes...... 22

3.2.2 Communication with governance ...... 24

3.3 Second house owners´ influence on local services...... 24

4. Analysis...... 28

5. Execution of the study...... 30

Conclusion ...... 31

References...... 32

Appendices...... 34

Appendix 1. Population change in case study villages ...... 34

Appendix 2. Interview guides ...... 34

Appendix 3. Range of second-home architecture...... 37

Introduction

Located at the coast in Lääne County, North-West Estonia, Noarootsi is a beautiful coastal area. It is known for being one of the places that Estonian Swedes have gathered. Estonian Swedes are one of the oldest minorities in Estonia, having first arrived in the 13th century and settling on the west and north coast. Most of them emigrated back to Sweden around 1939, when the Soviet Union’s army bases moved into Estonia. Today only a small number live permanently in Estonia. (Visitestonia.com, Noarootsi - Nuckö) Their legacy is apparent in many place names in Noarootsi with clear swedish influence. For example Nes, Einbi and many others.

In recent decades small groups of Estonian Swedes are regrouping to study their heritage. They are learning the Swedish language and studying their culture (Visitestonia.com, Estonian Swedes). Many Estonian Swedes residing in Sweden have also come back to Estonia where their families came from. To keep in touch with their heritage in Estonia they have bought second houses on the North and West coast of Estonia.

Due to interesting history and presumable variation of people living in this case study area it is an interesting location for a research. This research paper strives to find out how involved the second homeowners are in different ways - both to the municipality and to the community, and also what is their influence to the local services. Background information about case study area and people living or having second-homes in the region will be gathered through mapping to get overview about demography of the four selected villages.

Research questions are following:

● How involved are second homeowners in the municipality - governing and community?

● What kind of influence do second home owners have on local services?

1. Theory

1.1 Second-home owners

Many of the second-homes, though not all of them, are located in rural areas. At least in Nordic countries having a second-home has a linkage to the idea of rural idyll but also family roots, ties and history, regarding to the place of second-home, have impact on people’s want to have a recreational house. Second-houses are not only located in rural areas but also such places as beach resorts in warm climate destinations and apartments in metropolitan areas and urban regions (see Müller 2011). In this paper we are focusing on second-homes located in Noarootsi rural areas.

Even though urbanisation has been a trend for several decades already the phenomena of counterurbanization has to be noted also (Müller 2011). Besides the term second-home that we are mostly using in this paper there are several other terms in use such as “Recreational home (Gartner 1987; Kaltenborn 1998), summer house (Willard Cross 1993),vacation home (Ragatz 1970) and cottage (Wolfe 1951; Halseth & Rosenberg 1995)” but also the terms alternate home (Kalterborn 1998), and semi-mobile homes (Newig 2000) as some people are using caravans and boats as their recreational housing (see Müller 2011).

Pettersson (1999) argues that during the 1990’s geographers lacked interest in second-home phenomenon. Earlier research on second-homes focused on construction of new cottage sites, diffusion of second-homes meanings that people gave for this practise. Regarding to Pettersson, starting from the 90’s geographers research focused regarding second-homes was concentrated on second-home owners impact on rural development and the relationship between the surrounding environment and second-home inhabitants, though earlier research tradition was still present.

According to Benson and O’Reilly (2009) lifestyle migration, such as having a second home, was earlier seen as being something that usually only wealthy people could afford. It has been characteristic of this phenomena that people who had second-homes travelled between their first and second homes mostly because they saw it as possible provider of more quality in life. In latest research there is evidence that such kind of mobility and lifestyle migration has

5 increased in various ways worldwide, also amongst groups that are not part of the upper class (see Janoschka and Haas 2013).

Second-homes are getting more popular and people are giving new meanings to their second homes. Regarding to Janoschka and Haas (2013), there are several personal motivations why people have second homes, such as better climate at second home’s location or the possibility to “down-shift” in a peaceful environment. Rinne (2014) argues that the most popular reason for second-house owners to come to their second-houses is their desire to be in peace and relax in a place where they have no responsibilities like in their first homes. Müller (2011) adds that different societal changes such as aging of people, technological development and globalization have also revitalized the phenomena of second homes from the 1990’s.

As second home owners have been seen as upper class lifestyle migrants, they have been targeted economically in many places worldwide due to the possible economical boost they might bring to the area with them (Janoschka and Haas 2013).

1.2 Involvement of second-house owners

In our paper we are interested in second-house owners’ involvement in local community, official planning and decision making. Regarding to Rinne et al. (2014), there are three key dimensions that have an effect on people’s involvement in local decision making and planning. These dimensions are second-home owners’ personal preferences, their formal statuses as residents and also informal positions in the communities. Hall and Müller (2004b) state that not much attention has been paid for political rights of second-home owners and their participation in local development and decision-making (see Rinne et al.2014). As second-home owners constitute a more or less heterogenous group, different ways of participation are needed (Rinne et al. 2014). According to Buanes et al. (2005), an example of informal participation could be attending to public meetings where as formal participation might be for example taking part and commenting on hearing phase of some local plan (see Rinne et al. 2014).

As second-home owners are not usually citizens of the municipality where their second- houses are located, narrower possibilities to take part on the local decision making compared

6 to permanent residents. According to Rinne (2004), second-home owners though have the possibility to comment on plans related to their houses and property. Most of the planning regarding to housing takes place at the municipal level.

People in their second-houses are willing to escape their everyday routines and that is why it might be difficult to get second-home owners involved in local decision making (Rinne et al. 2014). Second-house owners might though easily get organised and active when something is threatening their property or landscape near by them.

1.3 Social network and community

This research focuses also on the meaning of community and social networks for second- home owners and is seeking answers to questions about what kind of social networks different groups of second-house owners have built with each other and also with local people. Regarding to Halfacree and Boyle (1998); Roberts and Hall (2001); Evans et al. (2002); McCarthy (2005); Mather et al. (2006) and Woods (2011), compared to traditional agricultural rural areas, the communities are getting more and more diverse due to people’s background, profession and their desires towards the rural landscape which can currently be called as post-productive landscape (see Pitkänen et al. 2013).

Bauman (2001) describes community as a place to be which has many good and warm connotations, a place where people “can count on each other’s good will” and where we can lean on each other when faced with some troubles in our lives. Community is linked to loyalty and some shared values – meaning that people outside of the community might be seen as dangerous or suspicious.

Concept of community comes from Latin word com (with or together) and unus (the number one or singularity) and it is widely used in academic world (Delanty, 2009) but it is also a well-known and used word in everyday speech. Delanty (2009) states that community is related to people’s search for belonging to a group, feeling that they ‘belong’.

Traditionally, communities have been based on religion, ethnicity, politics or class but also neighbourhoods that are spatially close and bound to each other. Currently we can also talk about communities for example based on sexual orientation (Delanty 2009). Wagner (2009) lists different aspects and meanings that are related to community such as longing to be part of a certain kind of group, search for meaning and recognition but also shared and collective identities for a group of people (Delanty 2009). Wagner (2009) adds that community is both real and imagined, and though it can be seen as an “idea” or “utopia” it is not unconnected from social relations between people, history or place (Delanty 2009). In our research paper we are interested in communities in rural areas that experience a combination of people living in the area and other which has just some temporal contact with it, meaning both permanent and second-home owners.

Halset (1993) states that second-home owners, also called as new locals, are one of the most growing dweller groups in rural areas. Regarding to Halset (1993), these people are usually interested in making their life-quality better and being close to nature, but also escapism and recreational activities while being at their second-homes (see Pitkänen et al.2013).

Earlier stated economical benefits possibly gained from second-home owners are not the only effect on local community and municipality of this varying group of people. Regarding to Hall and Müller (2004), effects on local community and economy are twofold as second- home owners need and demand for services in the municipality and their right to take part in hearings and other planning procedures might lead to ‘distortion’ (see Huijbens 2012). Second-home owners might also cause conflicts or on the other hand make improvements when it comes to everyday practises of permanent residents of municipality (Hall and Müller 2004, see Huijbens 2012). As some of the second-home owners have roots and history due to their second-homes’ location, there might be a niche for local products and cultural events which may have an impact to village communities and its social fabric (Hall and Müller 2004, see Huijbens 2012). Social fabric in here stands for eg. health, education and values in certain area.

Stedman (2006) states that there is no difference between locals and second-home owners when it comes to level of attachment: just the target is different. Locals might be more attached to the community whereas second-home owners attachment is concentrated on meanings of environmental quality and escapism. Van Patten & Williams (2008) argue that

8 while local people might have larger social networks, the second-home owners are definitely not socially isolated from other people (see, Pitkänen et al. 2013).

According to Degenne and Force (1999), most researchers are ignoring the reality that individual people belong to different kind of structures that effect on their behavior and opinions. Often in research people are divided in different categories, for example due to their gender, age or class but not always the connectedness of this different classifications and individuals’ effect on each other is not paid attention. Studying social networks is studying relations between individuals.

Degenne and Force (1999) write that in network analysis there is no way that we would know in advance how relations between people are formed and how do they come out. We cannot study social networks without studying the relations between people and its meaning, so in consequence we cannot built the whole network just by observing one individual person. When studying networks it is possible to stick to describing different kind of behavioral patterns and from that built our understanding of the structure of certain network. This paper stays in this first level of description of social networks.

Social networks are frequently far from a perfect development, especially when they are conformed by a reduced number of actors as it might happen in countryside areas. As a consequence of this it is very probably to find some structural holes. According to Burt (2010), the structural hole argument is that social capital is created by a network in which people can broker connections between otherwise disconnected segments.

2. Methodology

Case studies are often understood as a broad methodology or approach to research design rather than as a method. According to Gerring (2004) a case study is an intensive study of a single unit for the purpose of understanding a larger class of similar units. These units or phenomena can be an event, a process or a particular place (Hay, 2010), category where is included our Noarootsi case study area. Four villages were preselected by our gatekeeper: Elbiku, Riguldi, Höbringi and Einbi. Its location and characteristics will be introduced in the next chapter.

Although there is much overlap, case study research is not synonymous exclusively with qualitative research. Rather, case study can be either predominantly qualitative or predominantly quantitative or a mixture of booths of these approaches (Hay, 2010). Our research was based mainly on qualitative methods, such as interviewing and observation.

2.1 Designing research questions

Two main research questions have been initially debated for this case study (see Introduction) Interpretative communities influence our choice of topic and approach to and conduct of study (Livingstone, 2005). This means that there any many external influential and inescapable factors, such as the NORD+ framework, past reports in same study areas or the influence that gatekeepers and their interests might have over the groups. It is therefore important to identify these external factors as challenges to deal with before and during the study. Research studies are often categorized in two different levels: extensive and intensive research. The aim of this study fixes with Sayer’s (1992) view of extensive research, seen as a process of identifying regularities, patterns, and distinguishing features of a population. This extensive approach produces useful information suggesting the existence of common characteristics and patterns.

2.2 Interviews

Two models of interviews have been designed for this research: one for the municipality and one for the home-owners (Appendix 2). This methodology was once defined as “face-to-face verbal interchange in which one person, the interviewer, attempts to elicit information or expressions of opinion or belief from another person” (Maccoby, 1954). Despite it has been traditionally defined as a “face-to-face” fact, nowadays we experience many other methods of interviewing. We have employed both face-to-face and telephone interviews.

The four villages have been covered during three days and in 26 houses face-to-face interviews have been realized. Since the study area was considerably extensive, the group has splitted up into two interview groups. At least two members of the study research took part in every interview. One of them was encharged on leading the interview and the other one on taking notes. However, this was not a fixed structure, so both members could take part in it. Following Dunn’s (2010) model, interview notes have been converted into a typed format on the same day as the interview. As said before, one telephone interview has been realized as a consequence of snowball sampling: one respondent provided us a telephone number.

2.2.1 Semi-structured interviews The semi-structured interview is organized around ordered but flexible questioning. Therefore, this type of interview still employs an interview guide (Dunn, 2010). However, it has been decided to not to follow an ordered interview since our aim was to adapt the questions to the characteristics of the informant, trying to make it as much natural as possible. Different paths have been followed but the aim was to find answers to the initial questions that we had formed. Therefore, our interviews have been in one point in between semi- structured interviews and topic-interviews, and this methodology requires that we as interviewers redirect the conversation if it has moved too far from the research topics.

2.2.2 Interview design Interviews utilize primary questions and secondary questions. Primary questions are opening questions used to initiate discussion on a new theme or topic, while secondary questions are

11 prompts that encourage the informant to follow up or expand on an issue already discussed (Dunn, 2010). Both municipality and second-home owners interviews design (see appendix) were based on primary questions that have been followed up by secondary questions that the interviewers in the fieldwork considered interesting to gather more practical information.

2.2.3 Selecting participants Exploratory and background work often gives researchers the capacity to begin to comprehend the perspectives of participants that we think we want to interact with (Bradshaw, 2010). A combination of maximum variation sampling and snowball sampling was used from the beginning in this case study. The aim was to document diverse variations and patterns by identifying a large range of respondents within the local estonians, the second-home estonians and Swedish-Estonian second-home owners. Snowball sampling has also been used since some of the locals provided us many recommendations of houses to attend to, as well as some information about the characteristics of their neighbors.

2.2.4 Data and its transcription We designed a chart where we could combine quantitative and qualitative data obtained in our interviews. On the one hand, we classified our informants into different categories: local/second-home owner; estonian/swedish-estonian. On the other, we classified the different information archived mainly in two topics: local involvement and social networks. When asked about services it has been made a differentiation between public and private services. No transcription of the interviews are included in the appendix to preserve the identities of the respondents. Instead, they are referred to as interview from village X.

2.3 Observation Among the definitions of observation in the Oxford English Dictionary is “accurate watching and noting the phenomena as they occur”. The intent is to gain added value from time ‘in the field’ and to provide a descriptive complement to more controlled and formalized methods such as interviewing (Kearns, 2010). We considered that using observation as a research method would make our research stronger by taking notes of some of the facts observed by the one of the members of the group. The method we used is in one point between controlled and uncontrolled observation: we decided to focus on a few concrete day-a-day situations,

12 such as the appearance of houses, the types of cars, the upkeep of gardens and the attitude of the respondents to our questions. According to Gold’s (1958) classification of types of observation, the one employed in our case study is ‘complete observer’, what means that the member encharged to observe the area was totally outside the interview: taking notes from the car or having a walk close to the house while the other members were having the interview.

2.4 Mapping At fieldwork two kinds of maps provided to us from Lääne Maavalitsus were used: one smaller-scale map to show village borders and several bigger-scaled maps covering the whole villages. Interviewers marked a house on the map with a number and a circle around it there lived the interviewee. Information about the interviewee was marked with the same number as on the map. If the interviewee knew to tell about nearby houses and who lives there, then this information was also written down with number codes on the map and information paper or it was written on the map (Es - Estonian second house, Ep - Estonian permanent, S - Estonian-Swede second house). Maps were created using Adobe Illustrator 10 software.

3. Results

3.1 Description of case study area

3.1.1 Noarootsi

Figure 1. Noarootsi is one of the municipalities in Lääne county.

Noarootsi municipality is situated in northeast of Estonia as part of Lääne county (figure 1). The centre of municipality is located in Pürksi, which is 37 kilometres away from the county centre Haapsalu and 110 kilometres away from Estonian capital Tallinn. The municipality area is 296 km2 and includes 100 kilometres of coastline. Most of the area is mainland but islands form also 2 %. The municipality consists of 23 villages which all have Estonian and Swedish names, most villages also have Estonian and Swedish village majors. According to 1st of January 2015 about 849 people have registered themselves as residents.. This means that the average population density is about 3 people per km2. Today’s Noarootsi municipality covers the same areas as the historical Noarootsi parish (figure 2). This area has been populated with Swedes for centuries. (Meister 2015)

Figure 2. Swedish speaking village in Noarootsi, 1930. (Svensk Världsatlas 2009)

Swedes have been living in Estonia since 13th century. In 1925 Estonia gave cultural autonomy to minority groups, including the Swedes. During World War II most of the Estonian-Swedes escaped to Sweden. During Soviet Union times Noarootsi was a boarder municipality which means it was militarized. In the early Soviet period private farming was still allowed but later it was replaced with collective farms. This also meant that areas with a bigger collective farm for more centralized and peripheral villages were depopulated. (Rickul/Nuckö Hembygdsförening homepage 2015)

When Estonia gained independence again then Estonian-Swedes started to return in 1991 and with the land reform in 1992 there was a possibility to get back their own or their ancestral land. In 2007 the Swedes got again their own cultural self-government that was later in 2014

15 named Eestirootslaste Kultuuriomavalitsus. The leader of this institution is Ülo Kalm. He was an important contact between Noarootsi municipality and Estonian-Swedes in the beginning of 1990s. (Eestirootslaste Kultuuriomavalitsus homepage 2015)

For the aim of this paper four villages were chosen from Noarootsi municipality – Riguldi, Einbi, Höbringi and Elbiku (figure 3). All of them will be described followingly.

Figure 3. Sketch describing the location of four research villages in Noarootsi municipality.

3.1.2 Riguldi/ Rickul

Figure 4. Mapping second home owners and permanent residents in Höbringi village

In 1934 there used to be 14 houses in Riguldi village – they were occupied by 14 families. This means that there were about 76 Swedish inhabitants. (Kulturföreningen... 1961) Nowadays the houses in Riguldi village are scattered around the whole area. All together there are 47 houses in this villages out of which 38 are used by second home owners (figure 5). The houses are quite far from each other and usually also divided by forest or agricultural land. Officially only 13 people have registered themselves as village residents with the state of 1st of January 2015 (Appendix 1). There are a lot of different house types in Riguldi village (Appendix 3). Some Estonian summer residents have bought land that used to be border zone and not occupied before to build new houses. There are also Swedish summer

17 houses with typical Swedish architecture – dark houses with white window frames. In this village are also some Estonian summer houses that were inherited from grandparents and have stayed humble and have not been renovated too much. Riguldi is also occupied by one permanent resident who keeps horses, chicken and also has agricultural land - she is the Estonian village mayor. Lately also one older man has decided to become a permanent member of the village, he also spends his time farming.

Figure 5. Number of houses divided by second houses and permanent residents or empty houses.

3.1.3 Einbi/Enby Nowadays Einbi village has officially 25 residents who were registered by 1st of January 2015 (Appendix 1). All together there are 47 houses in this village, that includes 31 second homes (figure 5, 6). Einbi village can be divided into three different areas – Einbi, Väike- Einbi and Ramsi peninsula. Ramsi peninsula has not been historically inhabited but has become a popular summer home area in the last years – the houses are mostly Estonian second homes. It is visible that these houses have been built lately and belong to above

18 average earning people. During the case study also half built or almost ready houses were seen. According to an interview with one of the workers found on one of the premises, they talked about feeling like they wouldn’t run out of work in this area any time soon.

Figure 6. Mapping second home owners and permanent residents in Einbi village

Väike-Einbi (Little-Einbi) is populated by one Estonian permanent family and also Estonian and Swedish summer homes. There once used to be very active village life in this area that was centred around the village center ground, where there used to be a village swing. There used to take place different events including midsummer’s eve party. According to one respondent the village life has died out and people only communicate with some of their neighbours.

Last theoretical division is Einbi part. In this part of the village houses are much closer to each other than in the rest of the village. This also has manifested itself in a very active village life. People come together for village get-togethers and events. This part of the village has also some permanent residents. The neighbours communicate with each other and form a sort of community.

Einby village has a very active new village mayor who organizes many events to keep the place active. According to many of the people that were interviewed, in the summer of 2014 they had a village event where permanent and summer residents came together and introduced themselves to each other. All together about 40 people met each other and found out who lives where in the village.

3.1.4. Höbringi/Höbring

In 1934 there were 25 houses, where 29 families lived in Höbringi village. All together there were 158 Swedish residents. (Kulturföreningen... 1961) Nowadays the village has 11 registered residents by 1st of January 2015 (Appendix 1). There are 14 houses in this area out of which 9 are second homes (figure 5 and 7). In this area are two families who live there the whole year long and only a few summer houses. The houses are also quite far from each other. The village is mostly empty with houses concentrated on the eastern part. According to one elder respondent this village used to be highly populated during the soviet times but now most of the permanent residents have died and the houses have been left behind.

Figure 7. Mapping second home owners and permanent residents in Höbringi village

3.1.5 Elbiku/ Ölbäc In 1934 Elbiku village was populated by 20 homes with 22 families. The area was inhabited by 112 Swedes. (Kulturföreningen... 1961) According to 1st of January 2015 the village had 31 registered residents (Appendix 1). There are 48 houses in Elbiku village out of which 32 are second homes (figure 5 and 8). The village is known among many Estonians thanks to Roosta Holiday Village. Still the village is also inhabited by Estonian permanent residents and Swedish and Estonian summer home owners. The number of active Swedish summer home owners is very high in this area and most of them also belong to Rickul/Nuckö Hembygdsförening which will be discussed more followingly. There a lot of different house types in Elbiku. The new Swedish summer houses look similar to each other. There are also examples of humble older farm houses and soviet architecture – built for permanent living but also company’s summer houses.

Figure 8. Mapping second home owners and permanent residents in Elbiku village

3.2 Involvement - network and governance

3.2.1 Network between Estonians and Estonian-Swedes Main connector between Estonia and Estonian-Swedes is Riguldi/Noarootsi Kodukandiühing (Rickul/Nuckö Hembygdsförening). It was formed in the beginning of Estonian independence years, more precisely in 07.03.1992. It unites about 1000 members who themselves or their parents were forced to leave Estonia in 1944 because of the war. When the union was formed its' main focus was to help the members regain their land – to make the restitution as fast and smooth as possible. Nowadays the members are often Swedish citizens who own land in Noarootsi and whose ancestors used to live here – for this reason they are also often referred to as Estonian-Swedes. (Rickul/Nuckö Hembygdsförening homepage 2015)

Nowadays the union’s first aim has been achieved and they have actively formed new goals. One of them is to protect and introduce the cultural heritage of Estonian-Swedes in Estonia

22 and Sweden. According to an interview with Svea Johansson, secretary of Rickul/Nuckö Hembygdsförening they have meetings in Sweden that were also often visited by former Noarootsi mayor Ülo Kalm. Those visits kept the bond between municipality and Estonian- Swedes strong. Ülo Kalm was able to introduce the municipalities work in Swedish so no information got lost in translation. The new mayor has also once visited Rickul/Nuckö Hembygdsförening’s meeting in Sweden but not being able to speak Swedish, she has not attended more. Even today Estonian-Swedes turn to Ülo Kalm for help on translation of documents.

The Rickul/Nuckö Hembygdsförening acts as a mediator between Swedish community and Noarootsi municipality. Municipality administration sends information about planning and strategies to the union. There the information is translated into Swedish and forwarded to members. The municipality representative said that this way of sharing information is the most productive one – the information actually makes it to people in their own language. This way the problem of language barrier and distance is overcome.

Holding their traditions strong is very important for the members of Rickul/Nuckö Hembygdsförening. Four times a year they have a newspaper where information about Estonia and Noarootsi can be found. Every year in July they have a homecoming event that consists of event in a beach in Noarootsi, service in Noarootsi church and all together visiting one village in Noarootsi – there they are told about the history of all the houses in this village, the ones that are new and that once used to be. This week of events is an opportunity for the Estonian and Estonian-Swedish communities to overlap as also local Estonians are invited to those events. In reality the language barrier often stops local Estonians from attending, but also some non-Swedish-speaking Estonians try to connect Estonian-Swedish via body language.

In every research village (except Elbiku) there was a key person who is connected to both Estonians and Estonian-Swedes. In Riguldi the key person speaks Swedish and people turn to them to get farm products and to borrow machinery (for example lawn mower). In Einbi the key person had sauna at one's place and all the village people are welcomed there. If one goes fishing they also give fish to neighbours. In Höbringi people turn to the key person to get

23 honey from one and one also makes wooden signs. The house signs made by Höbringi key person were recognisable in many cases.

3.2.2 Communication with governance Communication between Noarootsi governance and inhabitants takes place mostly via municipality newsletter, which comes out once a month. People can read it electronically on municipality homepage or get it delivered on paper at their home. In the newsletter the municipality informs people about coming events and plans. The municipality also has information displays in every village (except Riguldi and Höbringi). News also spreads from people to people. Estonian-Swedes have their own newspaper in Swedish coming out four times a year.

When new development plans are being made in the municipality, planning area neighbours are informed via letter by the municipality. Everyone can join the public discussions and make suggestions to the planning. In Noarootsi SHOs are participating more actively in the discussions, because they have bought their land to be in peace and they don't want anything near it to change. Noarootsi municipality said they take into account people's suggestions, but inhabitants don't feel that way. Many interviewees said they feel like the municipality ignores their opinion.

Most of the SHOs are not interested in being connected to local planning and desision- making. Interviewee (SHO) from Riguldi village said, that one only goes at her house and then leaves. Also it was said that Noarootsi municipality center Pürksi is located at an unsuitable place - people's paths run pass it. That means it's harder for people to communicate with the municipality if they don't go extra to Pürksi.

3.3 Second house owners´ influence on local services

Second house owners have rather minor influence on local services as they usually like being at their second house in peace and quiet, not having to do consumptive things. Time spent at their second home is also not long enough to have major influence on services: Estonian SHOs are usually at their second house during the weekends, retired Estonian-Swedes are

24 there starting from midsummer until the middle of august, working Estonian-Swedes are able to spend less time of their summer.

The biggest influence SHOs have is on shops. They mostly use local shops at Dirhami, Linnamäe, Nõva and Pürksi to buy small everyday things (bread, milk). Interviewee (SHO) from Elbiku said that one goes to Dirhami shop, because the owner is so positive and nice and one wants to support him by doing shopping there. For larger purchases SHOs usually go to Haapsalu or buy things on their way to Noarootsi. SHOs do not complain about service offers being too far from their house - most of them have a car. As one interviewee (SHO) from Riguldi village said: “When living in a forest you don´t expect to have an ATM next to your house. I know, what place I built my house in.”

As people are so sparsely populated in Noarootsi municipality SHOs don´t think that there would be a necessity for a service bus called ‘lahvka’ in Estonia, which is a bus containing a bank, shop and post office. Noarootsi municipality has another system to provide services - every friday the municipality bus collects people from each village and takes them to Pürksi or Linnamäe depending on which place is closer to each village. There they can go to the doctors, pharmacy, shop or whichever place they need and afterwards the bus takes them back home. This is used by SHOs and permanent residents: “Why should I drive with my own car to the shop when there is a free bus going to the exact same place?” (permanent resident from Höbringi village). Some still prefer to use their own car because the bus stop is too far from their house (5-6 km according to one interviewee from Einbi village) and small village shops are too expensive, so they drive to Haapsalu. But one other interviewee (SHO) from Einbi village said, that to get on the municipality bus they just have to wave to the bus driver by the road.

SHOs usually don´t visit their house in Noarootsi during wintertime. The main reason being that the municipality doesn´t clean the roads of snow leading to SHOs´ houses as they are private roads. Noarootsi municipality only services the roads leading to permanent residents´ houses and SHOs´ houses, who have registered themselves into Noarootsi municipality. That involves cleaning the roads of snow during the winter and applying dust constraint. So SHOs who want to access their second home during wintertime need to be a resident at Noarootsi. Second houses are usually built far from the populated area, which means it's more difficult to get electricity and water into the house. Most of SHOs and permanent residents have dug

25 wells. To get electricity into the house it is more difficult and costs a lot of money. One interviewee (SHO) from Rigulda village built a substation with ones' own money near their house. Now the nearby neighbours are also using the substation to get electricity, so SHOs help to build necessary communications in the area, which others can also use. Noarootsi municipality has a plan to build sewage system in some of the villages if they get money from European funds, but none of the interviewees complained about missing sewage (they mostly have DCs at their second houses).

Overall people are very satisfied with the services provided in Noarootsi, but there are problems related to bad Internet connection and phone reception. Also almost every second house has a contract with a security company and have cameras at their house as there have been a lot of robberies in the area. Although one interviewee from Höbringi village (SHO) pointed out that it takes too much time for the security company to get there in case of an emergency. Another interviewee (SHO) from Elbiku village and an interviewee (SHO) from Riguldi village said that they have an unofficial neighbourhood watch - permanent Estonians keep an eye on their house and so far they have managed not to get robbed. Noarootsi used to have two security guards driving around in the villages to ensure safety in the area, but as it got too expensive they gave this service up. Two interviewees (SHOs) from Höbringi and Elviku villages would like to have this service back.

As introduced before, countryside communities usually lack of strong and defined networks, especially when we relate them into services. Structural holes might be strategically covered by individuals, and this is what we identified in one of our respondents: a middle-age farmer who owns horses and chicken and has been developing strong relations with all the locals and second-home users during the last decades, Swedes-Estonian included. Since the local area lacks on shops to do groceries or recreational activities, the farmer became a central point for providing some services such as horse-riding for the summer residents and selling eggs. When asked about introducing new services, she could not think of anything, however the farmer did not really show any interests on making special business on this aspect. This network is graphically represented in the next figure (figure 9), where we experienced weak local networks (in black) as a consequence of the isolated locations of the houses, and strong connections between both Estonian and S-E owners (in blue and yellow) with this farm.

Figure 9. The farm became a central spot within the Estonian and Swedish-Estonian local network.

4. Analysis

Noarootsi seems to be a place people with ancestral ties choose to hold onto. Many of the people interviewed had family from the area going back many generations, especially in the formerly inhabited areas. Many people with ancestral ties to the place have renovated former residential houses and made into second houses or built new ones in the area, the level of attachment to the area is very clear. Ramsi peninsula was an exception because it had not been historically inhabited and has now mostly new houses. Areas with newer second homes seemed to be built by people with higher than average income. Also the presence of the Estonian-Swedish population and Swedish legacy was very visible. There was a strong presence of the Estonian-Swedish community in many of the places visited, and many of them had the Swedish flag or the Estonian-Swede flag hanging outside their homes. The value of the swedish krona is compared to the euro rather strong, which could add to the reason Swedes see Estonia as a desirable second home place.

Many people didn’t mind the lack of services “I know what place I bought my house in” and it didn’t seem to be an issue for most second homeowners. The escapism that can be felt in such an isolated area is apparent and the peace and quiet that comes with it is a desirable aspect in their opinion. There were only permanent residents that talked with longing for a time when their where more people in the area.

The communal feeling brought to the area by the Riguldi/Noarootsi Kodukandiühing is important when looking at the social network of the area. Events held during the summer are mainly focused on the Estonian-Swedes, though locals are welcome to join as well. But do to language barriers the locals are not always eager to join.

The Riguldi/Noarootsi Kodukandiühing is very active in informing the non Estonian speaking homeowners of local planning and decision making. The general feeling after having conducted the interviews was that second homeowners didn’t give much thought to local planning and decision making. They trust their representatives in the Riguldi/Noarootsi Kodukandiühing to look after their interests.

The people that were interviewed seemed quite satisfied with the services provided in Noarootsi. The only complaints that were brought up more than once were that phone reception and internet connection could be better.

5. Execution of the study

This study was executed over a rather short period of time and that created many barriers for the group. Since this was a study mainly concerned with second-home owners a broader set of interviews could have been gathered if the study were to be executed during the weekend or the high summer months. Many of the people that were interviewed talked about the area being highly populated from midsummer's eve until mid august when Swedish schools begin. Those who visit the area during the weekends were in many cases narrowly missed. Because of travel the study started during the midday on Sunday, which is the same time many who live far away have started their travel home.

Another challenge was when conducting the interviews they tended to become longer than originally expected. People that were home during the daytime seemed in some cases rather lonely and glad to have the company. Which resulted in them being very willing to talk for an extensive period of time, much longer than the interview questions indicated. The longest being about an hour. The gatekeeper of this study had mentioned that last years study had only taken approximately 3 hours per village, so expectations were that this years villages would take a similar amount of time. But the extra talks gave additional insight into the community and feel of the place, which else might have been missed.

Since there is no register available for second homeowners for the four villages, Riguldi, Einbi, Höbringi and Elbiku, there was no way to contact them in advance. It also wasn’t known in advance which houses were second homes and which were local residential homes. So a lot of time was spent on driving around the villages, walking up to almost every house, checking if someone was home and asking if they would answer our questions. All of this resulted in very long, very tiring days for the group. Especially for the Estonian speaking group members, since most interviews were conducted in Estonian.

The depth of the study means that no proper generalization of second homeowners opinions can be drawn from these results. But it should give an acceptable idea of the place and the people.

Conclusion

The aim of the study was to study the four pre-decided villages in Noarootsi; Riguldi, Einbi, Höbringi and Elbiku in regards to second homeowners. The research questions that were put forth were:

1. How involved are second homeowners in the municipality - governing and community? 2. What kind of influence do second home owners have on local services?

24 interviews were executed, 16 with second homeowners and 8 with local residents. After these interviews the involvement of second homeowners seemed to be very limited concerning involvement in local governing. The Riguldi/Noarootsi Kodukandiühing is an organization that the second homeowners trust and have faith in that it looks after their best interests. The involvement these second homeowners have on the community is mainly in the summertime when they visit their second homes. The Riguldi/Noarootsi Kodukandiühing organizes events that are open for everyone, but due to language barriers the Estonian- Swedes seem to be a rather isolated group.

Concerning the second research question, the influence on local services made by second homeowners, doesn’t seem to be much. Second homeowners seem to mainly use local shops and in some cases local security systems. Other than that they seem to be very easy going residents. They come to the area to relax and enjoy the solidarity that the area provides and the interactions between local people and second homeowners seem to be very easy going and pleasant.

References

Bauman, Z. 2001. Community: Seeking Safety in an Insecure World. Polity press in association with Blackwell Publishing Ltd. UK/USA

Burt, R.S. 2010: Structural Holes vs Network Closure, in Social Capital: Theory and Research. Aldyne de Gruyter

Bradshaw, M. 2010. Qualitative Research Design and Rigour. In Hay, I. (edit.) Quaitative Research Methods in Human Geography, Oxford University Press, Canada.

Degenne, A. & Forse, M. Introducing Social Networks. London, GBR: SAGE Publications Inc. (US), 1999. ProQuest ebrary. Web. 14 May 2015.

Delanty, D. 2009. Community (2nd Edition). Florence, KY, USA: Routledge, 2009. ProQuest ebrary. Web. 14 May 2015

Dunn, K. 2010. Doing Qualitative Research in Human Geography. In Hay, I. (edit.) Quaitative Research Methods in Human Geography, Oxford University Press, Canada.

Gerring, J. 2004. What is a case study and what is good for?, American Political Sicence Review 98: p. 341-354.

Hay, I. 2010: Quaitative Research Methods in Human Geography, Oxford University Press, Canada.

Huijbens, E. 2012: Sustaining a Village’s Social Fabric? The Author. Sociologia Ruralis © 2012 European Society for Rural Sociology. Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford. Sociologia Ruralis, Vol 52, Number 3, July 2012

Janoschka, M & Haas, H. 2013: Contested Spatialities, Lifestyle Migration and Residential Tourism. Routledge.

Kulturföreningen Svenska Odlingens Vänner 1961: En bok om Estlands svenskar, Volume

Livingstone, D.N. 2005: Science, text and space: Thoughts on the geography of reading,Institute of British Geographers 30 (4): 391-401.

Maccoby, E. and N. Maccoby 1954: The interview: a tool of social science. In G. Lindzey, ed. Handbook of Social Psychology, Cambridge, MA: Addisn-Wesley.

Meister, M. 2015: Noarootsi vald. Tutvustus ja asukoht. Visited on May 23th 2015: https://noarootsi.kovtp.ee/et/tutvustus

Müller,D. 2011: Second homes in rural areas: Reflections on a troubled history, Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift - Norwegian Journal of Geography

Pettersson, R. 1999: Foreign Second Home Purchases -The Case of Northern Sweden. Umeå University CERUM Centre for Regional Science.

Pitkänen, K; Adamiak, C & Halseth, G. 2013: Leisure Activities and Rural Community Change: Valuation and Use of Rural Space among Permanent Residents and Second Home Owners. Sociologia Ruralis © 2013 European Society for Rural Sociology. Sociologia Ruralis, Vol 54, Number 2, April 2014

Rinne, J; Paloniemi,R; Tuulentie,S & Kietäväinen,A. 2014: Participation of second-home users in local planning and decision-making–a study of three cottage-rich locations in Finland, Journal of Policy Research in Tourism, Leisure and Events

Sayer, A. 1992: Methos in Social Science: A Realist Approach. Londond, Rountledge. Gold. J.R. 1958. Roles in sociological field observation. Social Forces 36: 219-225.

Internet pages:

Eestirootslaste Kultuuriomavalitsus homepage. Visited on May 13th 2015 http://www.eestirootslane.ee

Rickul/Nuckö Hembygdsförening homepage. Visited on May 13th 2015: http://www.rnhf.se/

Svensk Världsatlas (2009) Balticum Och Polen. Visited on May 13th 2015: http://runeberg.org/svatlas/0056.html

Visitestonia.com (no year). Noarootsi - Nuckö. Visited on May 12th 2015 at https://www.visitestonia.com/en/holiday-destinations/the-coastline/noarootsi

Visitestonia.com (no year). Estonian Swedes. Visited on May 12th 2015 at https://www.visitestonia.com/en/holiday-destinations/cultural-treasures/estonian-swedes

Appendices

Appendix 1. Population change in case study villages

Appendix 2. Interview guides INTERVIEW GUIDE 1: Municipality interview.

1. How many second house users there is in your municipality?

2. What is the meaning of second house users to your municipality?

3. Do you have special events or services for second home users?

4. Do you see second home users important to your municipality? In what way?

5. Are second house users involved in local decision making or planning? How about

local people?

6. How do you inform second house users about planning projects, events etc? Do you

think they reach the information?

7. Are second house users in touch with you? Do they contact you to get information or

answers to their questions?

8. Is there any special planning regarding to second house users?

9. Do you have strategy to get more second house residents in your municipality? If not,

would you see that important?

10. Is there conflicts between second-home owners and local people when it comes to

services?

11. Is there any conflicts between second-home owners and local people when it comes to

planning?

12. [Additional question] What could you do/ what have you tried to do to arise the level

of involvement of second house users?

INTERVIEW GUIDE 2: Inhabitants

Descriptive basic facts:

1. Where are you from? If from Estonia, from which municipality? 1.Varifrån kommer du? Om från Estland, från vilken kommun?

2. Are you permanent resident or second-home owner? 2. Är du permanen invånare eller stugägare?

3. How many people lives (or use it) in this house in addition to you ? 3.Hur många människor bor/lever i det hus/ den stuga?

4. How often do you visit your second-house? 4.Hur ofta kommer du hit?

5. How long have you been living here/having a summer house here? 5..Hur lång tid har du bott i din stuga?

5. Is it bought or inherited? 5. Är stugan köpat eller ärvt?

Local services:

6. Which services are you using in Noarootsi municipality? Are you satisfied with the quality? 6.Hurdan/Vilken servicen användar du? Är du nöjd?

7.Which extra services you would like to have in Noarootsi? -How far would you go to use them (in kilometres)? -Have you thought about helping to organize them? (by being in contact with decision makers etc.) 7.Vilka servicen ville du ha i Noarootsi? Hur långt borta skulle du gå at använda denna servicen? Har du tänkt at du kunde hjälpa i ordning av denna servicen?

Involvement in local decision-making and planning:

8. Do you take part in any event, organisation, service pro… or municipality work? 8.a. Would you like to? Is anything preventing you from doing so? 8.Har du deltog I händelser, servicen etc. I communen?

9.Do you feel you are involved in municipality? (development processes, planning, decision making etc.) 9.Känner du at du har et ord med i laget? ( när man gör till exempel planering … )

Questions for permanent residents

Descriptive basic facts: 1.Where are you from? If from Estonia, from which municipality?

2. Are you permanent resident or second-home owner?

3. Are you in contact/do you communicate with second house owners?

4.Do you know nearby people? Locals? Or is there second-house owners? (map) Who they are, nationality (estonian, estonian-swedish, swedish, russian, x?)

5.If second-house owners, do you know how often they visit their place?

Appendix 3. Range of second-home architecture.