The Torne River and the bridge of Hannula in central Tornio, Finland.
Photo: Methem (Mikko J. Putkonen) / commons.wikimedia.org

In our interviews with municipality officials and politicians, as well as with regional authorities, we identified several main challenges to cross-border integration for Sweden and its neighbours. Tackling administrative challenges to integration remains important to facilitate commuting, working and studying across borders, as well as access to services. Legal challenges hinder some cross-border services and shared services across borders. Planning challenges that require enhanced collaboration also remain. Language is critical to supporting common understanding and integration of populations across borders. It was highlighted by most municipality officials that national authorities need to make an effort to better understand and take into account the realities in cross-border regions.

Through our interviews and desk research we identified cross-border sharing-potential along four axes, namely sharing of capacity, sharing of specialisations, sharing of services and cross-border joint-services. Those will be detailed in the relevant section below. Finally, before presenting policy recommendations for overcoming cross-border challenges, we will discuss funding challenges in relation to cross-border Nordic cooperation.

Working or studying across borders or using services such as healthcare systems in the neighbouring country are administrative challenges that can potentially be alleviated by better cooperation between administrations. On the Swedish-Norwegian border, obtaining a D-number in Norway or a coordination number in Sweden may prove difficult and involve bureaucracy when it comes to cross-border working (Laupsa 2023). Taxation is also an issue.

The Nordic countries adopted a treaty on avoidance of double taxation in 1983 and a cross-border agreement on taxation was concluded in 1996 with the general rule that the country of employment where the employer is established receives the tax contribution for workers that live in a Nordic country and work in another (Øresunds­instituttet, 2017). That system serves as the ground rule for the agreement between Sweden and Denmark adopted in 2003, which has been criticised as being unfair to Sweden. Based on a survey conducted in 2008, the Øresundsinstituttet notes that most healthcare costs are incurred in the country of residence for cross-border workers between Sweden and Denmark (Øresunds­instituttet, 2017). On the other hand, a change to taxation in the country of residence could affect the job market in the Oresund area due to an imbalance in taxation between Sweden and Denmark (Øresunds­instituttet, 2017).

Border municipalities between Sweden, Norway and Finland are subject to a special agreement that sets taxation in the country of residence. Individuals still have to apply once a year for special income tax and there may still be delays that can burden employees for several months. Efforts to increase effectiveness of the taxation agencies are underway (Norden, 2022).

Some interviewees remarked that improved coordination of public services would be beneficial to cross-border integration. For example, it was suggested that the Norwegian Labour and Welfare Agency (NAV) and the Swedish Public Employment Agency could increase cooperation on the availability of work across borders (Laupsa 2023). Stronger cooperation in relation to healthcare and public transport has the potential to add value to cross-border integration (Malm 2023).

There is also potential within the education sector to open up more higher education opportunities and increase integration. Interviewees in Halden and Dals-Ed suggested that allowing students to take part in courses across borders as part of validated programmes would be beneficial to cross-border integration (Nilsson 2023; Laupsa 2023).

Transport of goods across borders, notably to and from Norway due to the EU-border, involves challenges related to customs especially for businesses that work in cross-border regions and need to transport goods and equipment across the border.

Operating public transport across borders and cross-border services, such as ambulances, can involve legal challenges. In the regions of Norrbotten in Sweden and Lapland in Finland, ambulances do intervene on the other side of the border even if the legal implications in the case of an incident or accident are a grey area (Sjaunja 2023). Similarly, buses and taxis are limited in their possibilities to operate on the other side of the border, reducing their efficiency and the service offered to residents.

The impact of Covid on cross-border relations has already been studied at length, in particular by Nordregio researchers (e.g. Wøien Meijer and Giacometti, 2021). Nevertheless, this issue was also mentioned by most of the interviewees in this study. They remarked that the state level needs to better understand the specific needs of cross-border regions and that a lack of such understanding was shown when the borders were closed during the Covid pandemic. An interviewee from Halden summarised the issue as follows:

After hard borders between neighbouring countries were reintroduced, people underwent border controls with daily inspection of their health certificates. Closure of the borders highlighted people’s own nationality in integrated regions where differences in nationalities had slowly faded (Malm 2023). Since border regions had been developed for years into integrated common labour market regions, many essential workers, such as nurses, were living on the other side of the border and had to adhere to the stronger rules set for crossing the border (Moberg 2023). In the Swedish region of Norrbotten, numerous health workers live in Finland and work in Sweden. Closure of the border was thus described as a near disaster for the health and social care sector and was only narrowly averted by finding solutions on the spot (Sjaunja 2023). For the people living in Tornedalen on the Finnish and Swedish border, the border is very porous and integration is very high. However, legal issues remain that were exacerbated during the pandemic when the border was closed. In Tornio, buses could no longer reach their terminal located in Haparanda and the twin city centre located in Tornio could not be reached by residents on the Swedish side (Ainonen 2023).

Many politicians we interviewed voiced the feeling that national authorities lacked an understanding of the reality in border municipalities. Decisions taken at the national level impacted commuters and people with family across the border; suddenly they were impeded daily on their way to work or could not see or help their relatives for several months. After so many years of work on integrating border regions, there was a lack of thinking about how decisions at the national level would affect border regions and how that should be handled. An interviewee noted that “as soon as border controls are introduced, the labour market region deteriorates by several hundred thousand jobs because travel times are extended by about 20-30 minutes between countries” (Kipowski 2023). He also noted that the national authorities need to see the benefits of cross-border cooperation and to be present and active in border regions to a greater extent (Kipowski 2023).

That sentiment was summarised by another interviewee, who said that when they alerted national authorities to the impact of the handling of the pandemic on border regions, they realised “it was a long way between Strömstad and Stockholm” and that it was only when representatives of national authorities came on site and said they “had a completely dead city” that they grasped the severity of the situation (Hansson 2023). Another interviewee supported that view, saying that “Stockholm and national politics need to have a greater understanding of the issues we experience in the border areas and perhaps include the Nordic Council more […] when discussing these issues specifically” (Nilsson 2023). Raising the issue of the handling of the pandemic and its impact on cross-border regions is essential so that cross-border regions –which are increasingly integrated– are also made more resilient. As the same interviewee said, “when the next pandemic comes, we will handle it in a better way than we did” (Nilsson 2023).

Municipalities have specific ways of coordinating their development strategies. They consult their counterpart on issues of common interest arising in their respective plans and coordinate through cross-border committees such as the Svinesund committee or the HH sammarbete or through the common municipal employee and working groups in Tornio and Haparanda. Helsingborg and Helsingør elaborated overall strategies for their cooperation, with a development vision designed to attract residents, jobs and tourists. Tornio and Haparanda have strongly integrated political processes to co-develop the twin city. They adopt strategies and measures discussed by representatives of both cities with the support of their coordinator and several working groups. In the Svinesund region, the committee serves as a bridge to coordinate and complement collaboration between municipalities and to support development of the region at a higher level.

The lack of specific statistics on cross-border commuters and cross-border related issues was highlighted during the interviews and workshop. A report by Statistics Denmark noted that 700 Swedish residents commuted to their workplace in Helsingør in 2022 (Søndergaard Møller, Stender and Thrane, 2023). Statistics on the total number of commuters in and out of Halden, Strömstad, Dals-Ed, Helsingborg and Haparanda are available from SCB and SSB, but they do not distinguish between cross-border and national residents. Statistics including specific information about yearly cross-border commuting are not generally available for our case studies to our knowledge.

Infrastructure is the foundation of better integration. Infrastructure in cross-border regions has already been examined several times in Nordregio’s studies (e.g. Lundgren, Löfving and Westin, 2023). Several interviewees reiterated the importance of infrastructure for better integration. Frequent and reliable public transport is important for the development of the link between Halden and Strömstad. There is currently no sustainable public transport due to the low population density (Catoni 2023). Discussions are ongoing in String on developing the railways to support alternatives to the E6 thoroughfare for transporting people and goods in the regions (Catoni 2023).

A further difficulty is the lower importance accorded at the national level to infrastructure development for sparsely populated areas. An interviewee noted that “in transport, it is pivotal but very challenging to get support for regional initiatives from the national level. The low number of inhabitants is often used as an excuse for not supporting cross-border initiatives (not worth the investment due to high costs)” (Mikkola 2024). Nevertheless “there is a great need for infrastructure to facilitate urban development” (Kipowski 2023).

The language barrier may impede better integration in border regions. That is evident in Haparanda and Tornio where Swedish and Finnish are spoken, two languages with different historical roots. However, it can also become an issue in the case of Swedish, Norwegian and Danish. One interviewee noted that though Norwegian, Danish and Swedish are close and native speakers can commonly understand the other languages, changes in exposure to those languages can detract from mutual understanding and the capacity to integrate on the other side of the border (Laupsa 2023). She perceived a cultural change: “in Norway we always watched Astrid Lindgren, Pippi and Emil, for example and it wasn't dubbed, we watched it in Swedish, but for the new generation that is coming it is much more difficult to understand Swedish. That is the case even in the border region” (Laupsa 2023). The same was made by another interviewee concerning Danish and Swedish: "when I grew up, I grew up with Danish television so I can speak Danish, but my children can't [, they] speak English with Danes” (Kipowski 2023).

Cooperation in cross-border regions could benefit from more flexible funding instruments targeting broader areas. Region Norrbotten in Sweden and region Lapland in Finland cooperate well. That cooperation could be further improved by more funding for areas that are not currently covered by financing instruments according to one interviewee (Mikkola 2024). Another interviewee felt that support for cross-border initiatives is not sufficiently prioritised at the national level, suggesting that there should be an increase in the funds provided for cross-border integration projects (Catoni 2023).

According to one interviewee, national authorities could also get more involved in cross-border issues and better consider the realities and implications of their decisions in border areas (Laupsa 2023). One interviewee recalled that prime ministers from the Nordic countries had set themselves the goal of becoming the “world’s most integrated region and that it should be possible to live, work and have businesses on all sides of the Nordic Region”, so “they must also act on a daily basis to make it a reality” (Malm 2023). The Nordic Council and cross-border committees are seen as pivotal to elevating issues of cross-border integration to the national level (Hansson 2023, Laupsa 2023, Nilsson 2023). Regions can also join forces to communicate their needs to their respective national authorities more strongly (Mikkola 2024).

As mentioned before, cross-border regions and municipalities do not perceive national authorities as being heavily involved or showing understanding of their situation. One interviewee explained that “cross-border perspectives get little attention in national planning because in the capital areas, borders are quite far away from the decision-makers who have little experience from the daily life on the border” (Mikkola 2024). The national level is crucial to support development in general terms, but it is even more critical in cross-border regions because cross-border barriers need to be resolved at national level as they often involve legislation (Sjaunja 2023). Some positive developments were perceived by an interviewee in relation to the perception of the cross-border situation by national authorities from Sweden and Finland. That was helped by the strategic interests and investments in northern Sweden and Finland, but also by visits to the area: “we usually take them to Tornio City Hall to the eighth or ninth floor […] so you can see to Sweden that the border is so close” (Ainonen 2023).

Increased communication between national authorities and cross-border representatives is essential. An interviewee highlighted that issue, pointing out that “what is needed is greater coordination and more dialogue and to move from dialogue to action, so that it is not just talk”; such dialogue should lead to funding or tangible support (Catoni 2023). By way of example, he pointed to the case of traffic congestion in String, noting that the Fehmarn Belt link needs more support, cooperation and greater willingness to invest (Catoni 2023). Another interviewee noted that while government and state authorities do cooperate with one another across borders in the Nordic Region and within the scope of EU cooperation, such communication falls short at the regional and municipal level (Malm 2023). Accordingly, the interviewee underlined that it would be useful for the national authorities and governments to communicate more on their meetings about issues that concern border regions and to tell the regions and municipalities “a little more about what is actually happening” so that they know such issues are being addressed (Malm 2023).

Currently, lack of communication leads to the sentiment that the state is oblivious to the concerns of border municipalities and regions: “We get very little attention and interest from the states to solve things. Nothing has happened in the last 20 years to help us” (Kipowski 2023). The same interviewee asked for the state to be more proactive and for the Nordic Ministers to take the initiative to meet in border regions and to talk to border representatives more (Kipowski 2023).

Since Finland and Sweden joined NATO, border regions have attracted increased interest, especially Haparanda and Tornio with their rail and road link and Helsingborg and Helsingør with the alternative route from Sweden to Denmark. That is expected by some to facilitate integration between Sweden and its neighbours and draw financial support. However, as was said by one interviewee, “there is also a need to look at what obstacles exist and solve them” (Sjaunja 2023). Infrastructure is one element that is central to greater integration and that generates much expectation among border municipalities. An example is the development of a double rail track from Halden down to Copenhagen and Germany. Currently, the project is stalled, “there are big dreams without anything concrete coming out of it, […] it is expensive”; support from the state is lacking according to the interviewee, so financing is a challenge (Laupsa 2023). Cooperation on infrastructure across borders is also difficult, “we can see that the national transport plans do not involve much thinking across borders” and despite some improvement in recent years, “cooperation could definitely be better at the cross-border level” (Catoni 2023).