The current settlement pattern has developed since early feudalism in Latvia. Riga becomes the main centre of the settlement structure in the 13^th century and still remains this role today. However, importance of many other medieval towns has changed considerably. During the 17^th century - the beginning of the 20^th century the East region (Latgale) developed separately from other territory of Latvia. Due to the prolonged separation the urban structure of Latgale has its own place in the urban structure of Latvia, less strongly banded with the rest. Before the WW II the established settlement pattern had a more or less balanced structure. The latter characterised existence of a main centre and a network of about 100 small towns and villages, which provided services for about 200000 disperse located farms. The average density of settlements in the pattern was 3 per sq.km.

At present the urban structure of Latvia has a strongly primate distribution of settlements, with a dominant capital city, weakly developed intermediate cities and a wide spread of about 700 small towns and rural service centres. The number of farms has gone down essentially (table 1). The density of settlements was 1 per sq.km in 1989.

The change of the former structure proceeded to open the way for localisation of population, industries, services and public institutions in a situation, where:
-Redistribution of the population between urban and rural areas took place;
-Permanent increase in the population was observed due to external migration;
-Manufacturing industry received priority over services;
-Profitability in market sense was not the main factor by location of industrial and agricultural enterprises and keeping them operating;
-No land market and no substantial housing market existed.


Table 1. Evolution of Settlement Pattern

No information is available about the number of rural settlements.
Source: Materials of population census in 1959, 1989

The process of transformation began with restructuring of the administrative division and expanded together with restructuring of economics. The latter meant joining the local industries to the centralised industrial complex of USSR and collectivisation of agriculture.

Regional planning was introduced as subject subordinated to central economics planning. Its proposals based on the concept of a regular and homogeneous development of regions and on the concept of establishing a strictly hierarchic settlement structure as a tool to effect the above mentioned development. Both concepts the Soviet government adopted in the early 60-ties. The development philosophy lacked respect to the inherited nature and built environment, also to the conventional settlement pattern. This philosophy considered needs of economics the most important ones and, as a rule, reduced the latter to development of new industries and large scale collective farming.

The soviet planning theory and praxis allowed much room for providing with service. The matter closely linked with the establishment of the new hierarchy of centres and often was used to manipulate with public opinion. The service catchment areas determined according to the Soviet town building standards. The latter changed several times, but not in general principles. Services like trade (including baker's, butcher's, grocer's), public catering, plenty of entertainment, sports included in the social service system along with education, medical and social care. All kinds of social services divided into the groups of standard services and specialised services. The standard ones grouped into daily (daily needed) services and periodical services (periodically needed services). To suit requirements:

Local centres should provide a set of daily services. The latter included a kindergarten, a primary school, a medical aid post, a grocery, a canteen, consumer services, a club equipped for demonstration of movies, a post office, the local administration office, the office of state or collective farm;

Multi-municipal centres should provide a full complex (set) of daily services and a certain number of periodical ones;

District centres should provide all daily and periodical services, i.e. a full complex (set) of standard services;

Regional centres should provide a set of standard services and a certain number of specialised ones;

The national centre should provide a full complex (set) of standard and specialised services.

In theory the catchment area assessed basing on the accessibility of the service objects on foot or by mean of public transport. In the 80-ties the time limit to spent was for local centres 15 minutes, for multi-municipal centres - 30, for district centres - 60, for the regional ones 90 minutes. The accessibility for the capital city expressed as the possibility to provide services weekly for 90% of the population of Latvia. In practice each local and district municipality was provided with a separate "own" centre.

The size of some service objects, for instance, schools, hospitals, enterprises of public catering accounted for each centre in line with the population forecast, established by the respective planning project. For other objects (a rural club, library, post office, medical aidpost) the account performed in response to planning or sector rules.

The service system was easy in its formation principle, but not rationale, as settlements provided with equal in size and range service objects served different hinterlands. The number of population in the hinterland of a local centre varied from about 500 up to 2000 and more persons, a district - from 25000 up to 50000 and more persons. Such a practice violated the principle that different goods have market areas of different size. The system worked successfully owing the fact, that the culture, education and health care objects running costs fully covered state or enterprises. Part of running costs of the retail trade and public catering enterprises covered indirectly.

Planners used zoning when preparing the general plans of settlements, but there was no zoning prepared at the national level determining urban and rural areas.Aspects and criteria for giving or keeping the status of an urban or a rural settlement had not paid much attention. The established administrative, statistical, planning, research, etc., practices were that settlements having corresponding legal status considered urban. Settlements without such status incorporated in rural municipalities and they did not have legally authorised boundaries. There were many small settlements, that had lost their former importance among the legally accepted urban ones and a lot of settlements with some urban characteristics existing incorporated in rural municipalities. Land use, services, technical infrastructure, building, also demography of such rural settlements did not deviate in large scale from the relevant characteristics of small towns. In addition it was established a legal status "town-village" for some settlements related with industrial enterprises, what made the picture even more unclear.^*

Considering this philosophy specialised institutions successively produced several planning projects that served as the background for alteration. The local authorities had to accept the proposals with no objections. The projects proposed to create the above outlined hierarchic system of regularly distributed urban and rural centres with developed vertical links. In accordance with the range of the centre they advanced a standard set of service institutions. The settlement hierarchy considered as a sum of partly isolated elements without any horizontal links accepted. The whole structure regarded as a static unit having permanent population number along with infrastructure development in limits foreseen by planning scheme.

Localisation of new industrial and agricultural enterprises, housing and service objects, improving of the communication with and transport infrastructure within the settlements chosen occurred to build up the hierarchic structure. Great significance took delegating new administrative functions to the settlements. In centralised economics administrative function granted all major economics decision-making. These way settlements with an administrative function acquired better chances for development as the comparable ones without this function.

Medium sized and small towns became locations of one or a few industrial plants, mostly dependencies of some great enterprises without own marketing, research and development capacities. In the district centres a number of agriculture service enterprises established to meet the needs of large scale collective farming. In rural areas about 500 new settlements, the so called perspective villages, built up as location places of state- and collective farms.

Often enterprises fulfilled a social function in their respective settlements. For example, state and collective farms built and maintained the rural perspective villages, as a rule. At the same time in the so called non-perspective settlements (farms, hamlets, small villages) construction of industrial and service objects and housing was banned. All these actions radically transformed the traditional settlement pattern and landscape as well as life style of population.

The settlement structure has developed in counteraction between powers of inertia conventionally ruling the development of settlement pattern and restructuring activities executed by the Soviet power by the help of regional planning. At present in the hierarchic system centres of all the planned ranges are represented, however the expected regular (balanced) urban structure has not developed. Towns and villages with a larger initial potential and precisely fixed place in the administrative hierarchy (capital, district centres, local centres) developed faster than the ones without such advantages.


Background for development

The settlement pattern framework includes:

Local centres as a rule is rural villages (former perspective villages).At the end of 80-ties the average village population has been 550 people, most commonly between 400-800 persons.

In 90-ties the respective local government resides in the village. The changes in population of villages go in line with the population changes in the respective rural municipality.

A primary school, library, ambulance or medical aid post, post office and some shops function in the village as a rule. The buildings of kindergartens, canteens and clubs often either use inadequately or close at all.

The villagers live either in multi-storey reinforce concrete block houses or in one-family homes.

Villages have centralised water supply, sewerage and heating systems. Normally block houses and public buildings connect to the systems. At present there are rather many villages where municipality is not able to run the centralised heating supply systems due to lack of resources. Industries are either of local importance or do not exist at all.

Multi-municipal centres(centres for several rural municipalities) as a rule is either small towns or larger villages (prospective villages).

Soviet power did not reward with specific administrative function centres of this range and free competition among settlements found use. In the 80-ties it was stated by a research that 78 settlements were fulfilling the function of multi-municipal centre instead of the 115 planned ones. A part of the working centres was not the ones included in the accepted proposals. The population number of such centres fluctuated from 1000 up to 5000 residents, in most cases the population number was about 2000. The relationship between centre and its catchment area took the path that links in the field of services far exceeded the labour and business ones. As a rule the centre had a secondary school, an ambulance or hospital, club (culture hall), library, retail shops, public catering (canteens, cafes, etc.), a post office, local office of the Savings Bank, a drug store. In some centres, specially in small towns, there are also music, art, sports schools, a professional school, sometimes a hotel.

At present these centres are either centres of a rural municipality or an urban municipality. The municipalities are likely to have difficulties identical to that of local centres. As a rule small towns have a historic core, but most of residents live either in multi storey block houses or in one family home. Not all the centres have comprehensive centralised water supply, sewerage and heating systems. Industries are either of local or of district importance.

District centres are towns performing the corresponding administrative function for their respective district. Two of the district centres have also the functions of regional centres, but one - Riga - is also the capital city of Latvia. Also the "pure" district centres (Aizkraukle, Aluksne, Balvi, Bauska, Cesis, Dobele, Gulbene, Kraslava, Kuldiga, Limbazi, Ludza, Madona, Preili, Saldus, Talsi, Tukums, Valka) are not uniform. The following characteristics are rather different:

1. Capacity: Population in most of the towns is within the range of 9000 - 20000 inhabitants, but in some of them exceed 20000 inhabitants (Ventspils, Valmiera, Rezekne, Jekabpils, Jelgava, Ogre). The aggregate includes both - towns with enterprises of state importance and the ones with mainly industries of district importance. Some of the towns have higher educational establishments, the other - medium level establishments.

Ventspils has a specific development capacity - a sea port with the largest cargo turnover in country.

1. Location. There are towns situated either within the Riga influence area (Jelgava, Ogre) or nearby it (Aizkraukle, Bauska, Limbazi,Tukums). Others are out of the directly influence zone of Riga. The influence area of a district centre does not exceed the respective district.

2. Land use. There are towns without free land for new construction, also towns that will face such a problem in nearest future, as well as towns with a comparatively large reserve of free lands. Land use of towns (proportion of different land use types; percentage of not built up land, including greenery) partly correlates with characteristics of population density (table 2)

The variety of services is wider in district centres. There are kindergartens, basic, medium level and higher schools, specialised education establishments (sports, music, art, etc., schools), district health care services, a hospital, a first aid medicine centre, drug stores, a district library, a cultural hall, cinema, sports stadium, hotel, canteens, cafes, restaurant, retail shops, market places, a district post office, the lower level court in the district centres in 90-ties. One local newspaper issues in every centre at least. Also local television is operating often. Most of centres have amateur theatres, local museums, sports halls (usually in schools). Some have also higher educational establishments (Valmiera, Ventspils since 90-ties, Rezekne since 80-ties, Jelgava since 50-ties). With some exceptions the towns have a historic core complemented with multi storey (3-5-9) housing blocks construction of which started in 60-ties. All centres have centralised water supply, block houses are supplied with central heating and hot water. Centralised amenities usually are not provided for blocks of one-family home. They have local heating and waters supply as a rule.

Industries - private small enterprises of district importance, sometimes - the former industries of state importance.

Regional centres. No division in regions are found in Latvia. Therefore no specific administrative functions were assigned to settlements supposed to play the role of regional centres. Partly due to this fact only the second and the third city Daugavpils and Liepaja and do play the role of full value. Both have sufficient services and a stable influence area larger than the administrative territory of their respective districts. Both cities have rather similar capacity, locations, distances from the centre of the urban structure of Latvia, as well as rather similar land use and services provided.

Daugavpils. The city situates in the South east part of Latvia, distance from Riga is 229 km; total area - 60 sq.km; population - 117500, density - 1632 people per sq.km. Several industries of state importance locate there, the city is a rather important transport junction. Its influence area comprises territories in Latvia, Lithuania and Belarus. There are no more contacts with Belarus because of political reasons.

The city and district local governments and the State Frontier Guard office reside in Daugavpils. All services of a district centre and more are available here. Also a university, a professional theatre, some interesting music groups, branches of the state institutions, offices of several banks and insurance companies, also several active NGO's, houses in the city.

Liepaja. The city situates in the South - west part of Latvia. Distance from Riga is 213 km, total area - 60 sq.km, population - 97300, density - 1621 people per sq.km. The sea port and some industrial enterprises of state importance locate here. The influence area of Liepaja comprises territories in Latvia and Lithuania. Basically the city provides all the same services as Daugavpils. However, in 80-ties a research has stated that the variety of service is wider and they are of higher quality in Liepaja, specially in the field of culture.

Liepaja got the 4^th place, but Daugavpils the 7^th one when comparing industrial social and demographic indicators of 33 Latvian administrative units (1996). Liepaja has better industrial characteristics, but difference between the sums of social and demographic data of both cities is just one point. Both of them have historic core consisting mostly of buildings from the late 19^th early 20^th century. Around 60% of housing consist of 5-9 story reinforced concrete block houses built between 60-ties - 90-ties.

Reconstruction of water supply systems has begun in both cities. The cities have centralised heating; boiler houses of industrial enterprises produce also heat.

Services typical for regional centres develop rather rapidly in Rezekne, Valmiera, and Ventspils in 90-ties.

The national centre is Riga, the capital of Latvia. Riga has 815900 inhabitants or one third of total population resides here. The area of Riga is 307 sq.km, population density - 2658 people per sq.km. Population number of Riga and second city of Latvia - Daugavpils are in the ratio of 7:1 showing clearly the dominance of Riga in the urban structure. Riga is dominating also in the structure of economics. The city is the main financial, commercial, industrial, transport centre and an important sea port of the state.

Riga has been an important trade and financial centre of the Baltic Sea Region since Middle Ages. The sea port and industries have grown most rapidly in the periods end of 19^th- - beginning of the 20^th century and after the WW II in the 50- 80-ties. In the 90-ties it has developed the financial centre function (private banks, Stock Exchange) of the restored Republic of Latvia, but a slope down in industries and ports activity has taken place due to transition. In the years 1996 - 1997 the port, food production and light industries have developed rather successfully, however the crisis in other sectors is not yet overcame.

Riga is also a most significant scientific, education and culture centre of Latvia. The social and culture capacity of Riga exceeds more than 11 times the one of Liepaja taking the second place in this respect, according estimates given by a research work published 1981.

Riga is a compact city and its central part had developed in convention of a European metropolis. It has a historic Old Town from times of Hansa League and architectural heritage of eclecticism and Art Nouveau of the eve of the twentieth century. At present the centres surround a number of new housing estates, which consists 50-60% of the total apartment housing. The estates have built mainly in prefabricated reinforced concrete constructions in between 60-ties - 90-ties. In the 90-ties the building activities stopped. In late 90-ties the main projects will be reconstruction of the centralised water supply and heating system, planned by the local government of the. The project runs by the help of the World Bank.

The lasting incorporation in an entirely separate economic and political system has shaped time-lag in development of Latvian urban structure relative to the one in European countries.

The urban structure in Latvia has developed until yet under the view of the urban system as a hierarchy of centres, organised only through vertical, unbalanced relationships.

In Latvia the main factors in performance of settlements are structural elements not dynamic by their nature (geographical situation, regional location, sector structure of employment). At present settlements orient to elements of dynamic nature (response capabilities to external change of local crisis, marketing capability, innovation capability, capability of strategically reinvent in the settlements roles and functions) in the western countries.

The technical infrastructure and provided municipal services in Latvian settlements are inadequate with the European standards. The preceding refers equally to the electronic communications, water supply, heating, waste utilisation. Approximately half of building does not meet energy saving principles.

The tools advanced in Western Europe to improve the qualities of urban structure are not in use. There is no experience in mutual advantageous co-operation among settlements, centres of the same or lower range. Even neighbouring municipalities, which have common interests in use of environment and transport, developing of services, etc., have no practice in working together to seek for more rational solutions. Some examples of co-operation projects developed in last years show withdrawal from experience gained in Western Europe. For instance, the co-operation is asymmetrical involving the national government administrative structures alongside with the local governments, or the co-operation is of a unilateral character, what often takes place in relation with foreign partners.

Population. The total population number was 2.48 million residents in 1996. In towns (cities) lived 69% of the inhabitants, but 31% - in countryside. About 48 % of the urban population lived in Riga, while only 10% in cities with about 100000 and more residents. About 40% of urban population lived in urban centres with less than 100000 residents. In rural areas about half of population lived in the villages - local centres, the others resided in farms and hamlets.

External migration has been the main factor securing population increase from about 1,3 mill persons in 1944^** to 2,6 mill persons in 1989. Natural increase provided a population growth within limits of about 3,6 persons /1000 inhabitants per year during the last 50 years.

Population decreases steadily since 1991, because of mortality rate exceeding the birth rate and the number of emigrants exceeding the number of immigrants. In the period from 1991-1996 due to emigration the total population of Latvia has decreased by 120000 and mortality exceeds birth rate by 18800 people. In 1992 emigration has reached the maximum, in following years it steadily decreases and comprises 7300 people in 1996. Population has decreased in all the cities and towns of Latvia, as well as in all districts, but it did not manifest itself with equal force at all locations. The highest emigration was noted in places, where Soviet army was located. The decline of the relatively not high birth rate started with the sharp drop in living standard and lack of social safety in transition period.

At the beginning of 1997 19.9% of total population were of age under 15 years, 22.4% were of retirement age (in 1997 retirement age for women is 56 years, for men - 60 years). The demographic load is 732 persons per 1000 persons of productive age. In the nearest 10 years the demographic strain should weaken, bearing in mind:
- gradual raising of retirement age for women;
- reaching the pension age by the generations of the time of WW II and after war period;
- decrease in the number of children.

Another rising of demographic strain expects after 2010 when the comparatively small generation born in 90-ties will reach productive age.

A demography forecast is worked out under guidance of P.Eglîte in October 1995. There are two alternatives developed. The work bases in statistics published at the beginning of 1995 by using the method of components. Death and birth rates of the year of 1994 are kept constant in the version of inertia. The active version assumes that the above mentioned rates gradually reach the level of 80-ties when they were the most favourable in latest 50 years. External migration in both alternative models presumes basing on the actual number of emigrants in the years 1991-1994 and on the inquiries.

According to the above mentioned forecast there are two scenarios for Latvia in the year 2015 possible, but in both cases the population number is diminishing. The actual population number expects to be within the range of figures given in both alternatives, e.g., among 2.14 and 2.34 millions in 2015.

Economics development. Exclusion from the world economy has resulted in interruption of economical connections westwards and a division of the activities in consequence with the socialist labour division. Latvia had the role of producer of light industry and agricultural goods in the centralised system.. The Latvian industry oriented to the Soviet Union internal demand. The service sector was under-developed to compare with Western countries and there was no goods and service market in the sense of market economy.

Latvia's economy has gone through a huge transformation in early 90-ties. GDP per capita decreased tremendously during 1991-1994. The inflation was also tremendous and became an important hinder to establish economical relations with other countries. The same is valid with regard to the absence of formal and legal capitalistic institutions, for instance of a banking system similar to the Western one.

Economically motivated close-down of ineffective factories resulted in unemployment. Unemployment was first registered in 1992. Since 1993 the officious rate constantly fluctuates around 7%. The number of unregistered unemployment (forced half-time work, people non registering themselves; in rural areas - people having a plot of land) is much higher. In rural areas among residents of local centres it may reach even 50% and more. The unemployment closely connects with decrease of the labour force. The discouraged people, specially frequent female workers, persons close to retirement age, leave the labour force.

During economic restructuring 1991-1996 contribution of different sectors has considerably changed in GDP. Percentage of agriculture has decreased from 22.5.% in 1991 to 7.9 % in 1996, industrial production has decreased from 34.9% to 19.3.%; construction - from 5.6.% to 4.2%. The share of service sector has grown from 32% in 1992 up to 50,7 in 1996; power sector (electricity, gas, water supply) correspondingly - from 2.2% up to 4.9.% on the other side.

After the restructuring the first year of growing GDP was 1996, when GDP increased by 2.8.% in comparison with the previous year. In 1997 GDP increased by 5.8%.

Industrial sector's productivity increased in 1996, but in 1997 decrease of the volume of production stopped for the first time. Conjuncture of industry improves gradually, however, evaluation is still negative. Technical improvements are still unsatisfactory in sector, also problems in crediting exist; the property structure is still under change. In 1996 40% of the total production was the food one; 67%- production of textile industry;11% - wood production; 6,5% - production of chemical industry. In Riga situate around a half of the Latvian industries and 54% of the total production are manufactured there.

Agricultural production is still decreasing. The process began after reorganisation of state and collective farms into shareholder companies. Self-liquidation of more than two thirds of them followed in 1992-1993. Total production of agriculture reached just 41% of the amount in 1990 in the year 1996. Subsistence economy practises more than 95% of 300000 private farms. In 1996 the about 100 large scale farms still operating supplied more than quarter of market production.

Transport and communications have been the most rapidly developing sectors in 1996, 1997. The total production has increased by 13.5% in 1996 to compare with 1995, but in 9 moths of 1997 - by 9% to compare with 9 months of 1996. The main reasons for such a growth have been development of transit transport and port services. Internal cargo and passenger transport still reduce. The most dynamic development takes place in the ports of Ventspils (total volume - 35.7 mill tons), Riga (7.5 mill tons), Liepaja (1.6 mill tons). In 1996 and 1997, like the previous years, railway (cargo) transport increased, but motor transport reduced its service. Development of the Riga airport passenger traffic in latest years was rather slow, e.g., 497 000 people in 1996, cargo turnover - 3900 tons.

The most important development project in the communications sector is reconstruction of the company "Latttelecom". On the 01.10.1997 digital lines connect 191100 subscriber's lines or 24% of the total volume. There are digital telephone exchanges in Riga, Ventspils, Cesis, Liepaja, Jelgava, Daugavpils.

Building industry in 1996 and 1997 obtained approximately one fourth of the total production of 1990. The hardest year for the sector was 1993 when the total production was only 18.9% of that in 1990. Private enterprises manufacture more than 90% of total production in the sector. The structure of sector's production is changing - the share of reconstruction work is growing. The chances of building activities limit the low conjuncture.

Power sector enterprises mostly are State monopolies. Restructuring and privatisation and efficiency rising of enterprises are acknowledged as a vital issue in further development of the sector. In 1997 more than 70% of consumed fuel was imported, 35-40% of it was used for heating. The serious dependence on the imported fuel can raise obstacles to further development of the sector.

Trade. In 1996 retail trade turnover decreased by 9% (in comparable prices); in the 10 months of 1997 it rose by 14.6%. An obstacle to further growth is constantly low purchasing capacity. Proportion of the private sector in retail trade turnover in 1996 has been 89.3%, in public catering - 87.8%. Wholesale trade volume in 1996 has increased by 19% and has reached 758.5 million Ls.

Comparison of the retail trade volume per capita reveals differences in standards of living between town and rural population, as well as in different regions of Latvia. For instance, the average retail trade volume has been 80 LS per capita in the second quarter to 1997, however in most rural districts it has not reached even a half of the national average. In Valmiera district, the most favourable one, the volume was 65 Ls per capita.

Conclusions. The most obvious problems of transformation are solved in economics at the end of 90-ties. The inflation is almost under control, GDP per capita is rising. The unemployment still is an actual problem, specially outside Riga and its influence area.

The problems that arise upon discussion now are the structural changes, (in relation to it problem of labour force composition) and concentration of investment in a few places (Riga, Ventspils).

The positive into the turbulence period has been the fast transformation. A new state of things is introduced in economics in a relatively short time. A basis for a new development in the long run is shaped, even if there are a lot of problems in the short and medium time.

Within the social development the position falls short of the one in economics. Dramatic change has taken place during the transition period. The pressing problems of today at least of tomorrows entirely dominate in actual practice of public institutions. Most of communities do not share long term goals and strategies as for social development.

The pattern of settlements has changed quite a little at an offhand glance in the last five years. However, the internal development trends are changing in almost any town. Population and employment are usually shrinking, but the service development is taking off, except rural villages. Building of living space has ceased everywhere. Some towns have started trimming infrastructure - water supply and heating. The sector accounts for all the most extensive projects implemented or started. Collapse observes in the settlements established to serve just agriculture.

The dominant trend of spatial development in the last decade is growing economic and social disparities among urban and rural areas, among cities, towns and villages. Cost and other economic advantages and disadvantages of different locations and the different entrepreneurial and market experiences of regions and settlements manifest themselves. At many places, specially in the rural ones, the situation irritates the fact that with closure of branch-plant settlements lose not only working places, but also some social service and amenities, maintained earlier by them. Disparity most pronounces between the two leaders Riga and Ventspils on the one hand and the rest of settlements on the other.

In the transition period settlements have suffered massive deindustrialisation and fail in developing compensating activities. A number of new service and small scale production enterprises have created, but their capacities do not cover the losses in most of settlements.


Challenges

Latvia's National Report to the UN World Conference on Human Settlements Habitat II - 1996, regarding the urban structure as the case in priority establishes:

1. Setting up of a counter-balanced polycentric human settlement network activating medium-size towns alongside with the remote rural areas attached particularly favouring the implementation of measures to facilitate a sustainable development of human settlement and areas.
2. Humanising of the built environment in Latvian cities, towns and villages.

These goals do not oppose the ones established by the Baltic Sea Region and European Union countries for development of their respective regions.

In Latvia in a long-term perspective setting up of the counterbalanced settlement structure will take place in a situation where:
-A gap between Latvian and European settlements has to be overcome;
-The local and regional government authority will grow;
-The population number is diminishing in the country and redistribution of the population between rural and urban areas is not preferable;
-Tertiary sector has received priority over manufacturing industry;
-Profitability is the main factor regulating the activities of service and production enterprises;
-The possibility to develop relations among settlements within Latvia and outside its borders exists;
-Land and housing markets exist;
-The capital Riga remains its country-wide influence;
-Differences in regional development, depopulation and underdevelopment of some regions are growing.

A number of short-term factors influence the evolution of the counterbalanced settlement structure today. Among them:
-Lack of the State economical strategy, and corresponding lack of consequent regional policy at national level;
-Insufficient co-operation of the parties involved in regional development and regional planning activities, i.e., state institutions, local governments, private business, public;
-Prolonged land reform and confusion concerning land ownership rights;
-Limited resources of the state and local government institutions for financing of infrastructure development and maintenance of social service objects (education, medicine, culture);
-Lack of planning philosophy appropriate for the transition period; lack of specialists in the branch.

In the years that follows one important point to remember is further correlation between the national spatial development goals and the ones advanced in the framework of VASAB and the Baltic Agenda 21. For attention call the responsibilities, what result from preparation for the European Union along with the ones inside the BSR.

It may be recommended to concentrate the regional policy activities in the following directions:

• To elaborate upon a planning philosophy and a spatial development concept sharing the principles evaluated and goals suggested by the BSR and European Union documents and appropriate for Latvia in the transition period.

In Latvia both politicians and planners need a comprehensive spatial development concept to have a common basis for their actions. As well a need exists to gain greater insight into the interdependencies and mutual relations among the forces driving spatial development in the transition period and effects expected.

Such a concept can give impetus to the territorial administrative reform including a new dimension and arguments substantiating the proposals for changes in administrative division. At least a planning philosophy and planning concept are wanted to ensure some progress to the elaboration of the national spatial development plan.

• To overcome the former strong hierarchy in settlement pattern and to develop ways of distribution of functions and co-operation among settlements along with strengthening of competition.

In this regard it would be advisable to recognise a settlement structure composed of dynamic, attractive and competitive cities, towns and villages to be the motor in economic competition of regions in Latvia. Developing such a structure targeting would focuses on regional centres that could most effectively serve the twin principle of a polycentric Latvia and of sustainable development of existing settlement pattern. The objective would be to enhance qualities most likely to raise the competivness of regional centres: above all, accessibility to flows of people and information, and a high urban quality of life.

Great emphasis should place on voluntary action by regional and local governments to achieve the goals set.

Co-operation that contains working together of national government, regional and local municipalities, national and local management, finance and business structures, individuals, as well as working together with international institutions, needs to develop. The co-operation should be action-oriented, based on vertical and horizontal co-ordination and mutual understanding of different level administration and institution approaches. Attention should be paid to ability of the common co-operative institutions and structures to produce results along with maintenance and further development. All actors need to respect the fact, that conflicting effects may result from decisions taken in the framework of separate policies.

• To accept a new view in relation to the peripherality issue.

It seems, rather good opportunities for successful development of Latvian urban structure lies in performing new policies and forms of centre - periphery relation. The relativity of peripheral location should be admitted and the concept of a critical mass for regional cities adopted. According this concept, regional centres would play the key role to negotiate the peripherality. They shall seek to develop the transport and communication links, locally based decision-makers in government and commerce, and cultural facilities in order to overcome any sense of inferiority due to supposed peripheral location.

• To raise parity of access to infrastructure and knowledge.

In this aspect it would be necessary to work in two directions: public service and infrasructure. It is necessary:
-To elaborate a new view on the public service structure and the respective catchment areas,
-To evaluate (assess) the structure of urban centres in respect to the rationale catchment areas and expected restructuring of administrative territorial division of the country,
-To evaluate (assess) the structure of urban centres in respect to the development of the joint Baltic Sea Regions urban system,
-To develop networks of roads, communication, power supply, water supply meeting the European standards and this way improve the access to the higher level centres.

• To provide a prudent management and development of Latvia's natural and cultural heritage.

In this aspect the most crucial issue to address is how to make the economic, social and environmental aspects of development interact and support each other. In transition period high risk exists, that efforts made to assure that economic activities are kept within the long-term carrying capacity of nature are insufficient, if favourable investments are easy of access. To remedy this, the requirements for environment and social impact assessment as an adjunct to investment projects has to be enhanced and following the requirements taken under control.

• To extend the capability of information exchange and education.

The development can benefit greatly from policies, where the short-term problems do not block the view for medium and long-term strategies. As well the development can benefit from successful co-operation between the actors. Implementation of strategies towards closing the time lags between Latvian and European settlement offers an alternative for development of settlement pattern. These ways the structure may increase its general competitiveness, find a path to sustainable growth and improve its spatial balance and cohesion. By developing the new activities consideration deserves not only the changes taken place in Latvia, but as well, the ones in progress in the European countries.

It is supposed that marginalised areas could take advantage of the Information Society. Due to their important and often well preserved cultural and natural heritage, their local products, their tourism potential, the lesser cost of certain production factors (land, man-power) marginalised areas attract particular interest. Such a path of development can offer a good chance for Latvia.


Sources

Collections of statistical data

Statistical Yearbook of Latvia 1996.-Central Statistical Bureau of Latvia.-Riga, 1996

Statistical Yearbook of Latvia 1997.-Central Statistical Bureau of Latvia.-Riga, 1997

Administrative Districts and Major Cities of Latvia 1997. Statistical Yearbook.- Central Statistical Bureau of Latvia.-Riga, 1997

Agriculture in Latvia. A Collection of Statistical Data.- Central Statistical Bureau of Latvia.-Riga, 1997

Towns and Civil Parishes in the Administrative Districts of Latvia 1998, part I,II. A Collection of Statistical Data.- Central Statistical Bureau of Latvia.-Riga, 1998

Reports

Economic Development of Latvia. Report. - Ministry of Economy Republic of Latvia.-Riga, December, 1997

Economic Development of Latvia. Report. - Ministry of Economy Republic of Latvia.-Riga, June, 1998

Latvia Human Development Report. -UNDP.-Riga, 1997

Latvijas lauku apdzivojums 1979.-1989.g. un ta attistibas iespejas. Research report.-

Latvian Building Research Institute.- Riga, 1990

Latvijas iedzîvotaju prognoze lidz 2015. gadam. Report. -Academy of Science of Latvia. Institute of Economics.-Riga, 1995

Publications

Filimonenko L.A. Latvijas PSR apdzivojuma pilnveidosanas principi. Kraj.: Rajonu planosana un pilsetbuvnieciba Latvijas PSR.- Riga, 1989., 10.-16. lpp. (in Russian)

Mezapuke V. Latvijas PSR apdzivojuma sistemas attistibas problemas un perspektivas.- Kraj.: Rajonu planosana un pilsetbuvnieciba Latvijas PSR.- Riga, 1981., 12.-31. lpp. (in Russian)

Prikasa B. Latvijas PSR pilsetu socialais un kulturas potencials.- Kraj.: Rajonu planosana un pilsetbuvnieciba Latvijas PSR.- Riga, 1981., 54.-69. lpp. (in Russian)

Prikasa B. Apdzivoto vietu apkalpes saiknes ka republikas apdzivojuma pilnveidosanas faktors. - Kraj.: Rajonu planosana un pilsetbuvnieciba Latvijas PSR.- Riga, 1989., 34.-45. lpp. (in Russian)