Asemakaavoitus Helsingin seudun kasvun hallinnassa

Many Finnish municipalities need to control their growth. In this research growth is understood as developments of land utilisation and also as a wide range of other changes that have mainly ap-peared as a result of a long term growth in population. The development growth control contains four areas: 1. adequate productivity of town planning, 2. stationing the growth to needs led and for sustainable developments, 3. quality of the developing environment, and 4. producing growth with communicative and transparent process. The aim of the research is to represent connection between town planning and development growth control. Research defines the role of town planning in the municipalities development growth control. In addition research focuses on links between town planning and development growth control in history, present and in the development work for the future. According to the hypothesis the extensive examination of town planning enables better growth control and promotes appropriate response to municipal changes regarding housing delivery. As an example there are five outskirt municipalities in the Helsinki region. They are called Kirkkonummi, Vihti, Nurmijärvi, Tuusula and Sipoo. The decision was to use examples based on a contingence theory. According to the theory there is no one correct way to operate. Therefore development should be based on individual municipal needs. In the research, municipality s needs were collected by 20 semi- structured interviews from municipal officials. In addition there were group interviews in Uusimaa Regional Council and in Uusimaa Regional Environmental Centre. There was also secondary material collected from official papers and statistics. Operationalisation was the analysis tool between empiric and literature reviews. The role of town planning has evolved during the 20th century from a more simple town plan level to operative stage in town planning hierarchy. Outskirt municipalities town planning was established during the 1960s. Since then one of the most important aims in the town planning has been to produce growth and building possibilities. Currently the challenge is to reach the satisfying rate of productivity and to meet increased housing demand. Other challenges include locating the appropriate geographical areas for growth; and the balance between required developments and planning permission decisions. Findings concluded that town planning should be more viable and it should have better ability to co-operate and operate in the changing operational environment. Municipality s ability to receive growth can increase and growth control can advance by planned and workable town planning. It is essential to take wide perspective of the each municipality's unique needs to improve productivity rather than to focus simply on productivity.

Trade Blocs and the Cold War : The CMEA and the EC challenge, 1969-1976

The coherence of the Soviet bloc was seriously tested at the turn of the 1970s, as the Soviet Union and its allies engaged in intensive negotiations over their relations with the European Communities (EC). In an effort to secure their own national economic interests many East European countries began independent manoeuvres against the wishes of their bloc leader. However, much of the intra-bloc controversy was kept out of the public eye, as the battle largely took place behind the scenes, within the organisation for economic cooperation, the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (CMEA). The CMEA policy-making process vis-à-vis the EC is described in this study with reference to primary archival materials. This study investigates the negotiating positions and powers of the CMEA member states in their efforts to deal with the economic challenge created by the progress of the EC, as it advanced towards the customs union. This entails an analysis of the functioning principles and performance of the CMEA machinery. The study traces the CMEA negotiations that began in 1970 over its policy toward the EC. The policy was finally adopted in 1974, and was followed by the first official meeting between the two organisations in early 1975. The story ends in 1976, when the CMEA s efforts to enter into working relations with the EC were seemingly frustrated by the latter. The first major finding of the study is that, contrary to much of the prior research, the Soviet Union was not in a hegemonic position vis-à-vis its allies. It had to use a lot of its resources to tame the independent manoeuvring of its smaller allies. Thus, the USSR was not the kind of bloc leader that the totalitarian literature has described. Because the Soviet Union had to spend so much attention on its own bloc-politics, it was not able to concentrate on formulating a policy vis-à-vis the EC. Thus, the Soviet leadership was dependent on its allies in those instances when the socialist countries needed to act as a bloc. This consequently opened up the possibility for the USSR s allies to manoeuvre. This study also argues that when the CMEA did manage to find a united position, it was a force that the EC had to reckon with in its policy-making. This was particularly the case in the implementation of the EC Common Commercial Policy. The other main finding of the study is that, although it has been largely neglected in the previous literature on the history of West European integration, the CMEA did in fact have an effect on EC decision-making. This study shows how for political and ideological reasons the CMEA members did not acknowledge the EC s supranational authority. Therefore the EC had no choice but to refrain from implementing its Common Commercial Policy in full.