The Baltic Region

2021 Vol. 13 №2

Back to the list Download an article

Opportunities for sustainable economic development of the coastal territories of the Baltic Sea Region in the context of digital transformation



The article explores opportunities for the sustainable economic development of coastal territories in the Baltic Sea region (BSR) arising in blue economy sectors in the framework of digital transformation. The study argues that a more active commercialisation of territorial resources can facilitate the sustainable economic development of the BSR coastal territories, following digitally-driven innovations. The paper provides an overview of methodological approaches to territorial sustainability. It also assesses the 2009—2018 level of the socio-economic development of the BSR coastal territories, underpins the importance of the blue economy and highlights the role of digital transformation in reaching the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in the BSR through digitally-driven innovations. A comparative and problem-targeted statistics analyses show significant differences in the level and dynamics of socio-economic development in the BSR coastal territories with their GRP per capita being generally lower than the national or macroregional average. A review of literature on sustainable development in the BSR has shown that a more active use of unique resources of the coastal territories along with a technology-driven growth of blue economy sectors can counterbalance the negative impact of the territories’ uneven development on the progress towards the SDGs in the BSR. Increasing the competitiveness of the BSR coastal territories requires investment in digital solutions in the blue economy sectors and the creation of a communication infrastructure. The review of key innovations in the blue economy sectors shows that their implementation gives impetus to other industries by reducing costs, creating new jobs, and improving the quality of products and services.


1. Simonyan, R. H. 2019, Russia-European union and Russian-Chinese borderlands: economic and demographic dimension, Balt. Reg., vol. 11, no. 3, p. 43—60. doi: 10.5922/2079-8555-2019-3-3.

2. Stepanova, S. V., Shlapeko, E. A. 2018, Trends in the development of crossborder trade in the Russian-Finnish borderlands, Balt. Reg., vol. 10, no. 4, p. 103—117. doi: 10.5922/ 2079-8555-2018-4-7.

3. Tambovceva, T., Atstaja, D., Tereshina, M., Uvarova, I., Livina, A. 2020, Sustainability Challenges and Drivers of Cross-Border Greenway Tourism in Rural Areas, Sustainability, no. 12, 5927. doi:10.3390/su12155927.

4. Fedorov, G. M., Kuznetsova, T. Yu. 2019, The coastal microdistricts of the Baltic region: the spatial aspects of development, Ekonomika regiona [Economy of Region], no. 15 (1), p. 137—150. doi 10.17059/2019-1-11 (In Russ.)

5. Druzhinin, A. G. 2020, The strongholds of Russian coastal borderlands: economic dynamics amid geopolitical turbulence. Balt. Reg. 2020. vol. 12, no. 3, p. 89—104. doi: 10.5922/2079-8555-2020-3-6.

6. Palmowski, T., Tarkowski, M. 2018, Baltic Cooperation in Marine Spatial Planning, Balt. Reg., vol. 10, no. 2, p. 100—113. doi: 10.5922/2079-8555-2018-2-7.

7. Fischer, J. Alimi, D., Knieling, J. Camara, C. 2020, Stakeholder Collaboration in Energy Transition: Experiences from Urban Testbeds in the Baltic Sea Region, Sustainability, vol. 12, 9645. doi: 10.3390/su12229645.

8. Stankevičienė, J., Nikanorova, M., Çera, G. 2020, Analysis of Green Economy Dimension in the Context of Circular Economy: The Case of Baltic Sea Region, Economics and Management, vol. 12, no. 1, p. 4—18. doi: 10.15240/tul/001/2020-1-001.

9. Gänzle, S. 2018, ‘Experimental Union’ and Baltic Sea cooperation: the case of the European Union’s Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region (EUSBSR), Regional Studies, Regional Science, vol. 5, no. 1, p. 339—352. doi: 10.1080/21681376.2018.1532315.

10. Grönholm, S., Jetoo, S. 2019, The potential to foster governance learning in the Baltic Sea Region: Network governance of the European Union Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region, Environmental Policy and Governance, vol. 29, no. 6, p. 435—445. doi: 10.1002/eet.1870.

11. Nikanorova, M., Stankevičienė, J. 2020, Development of environmental pillar in the context of circular economy assessment: Baltic Sea Region case, Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, vol. 8, no. 1, p. 1209—1223. https://doi. org/10.9770/jesi.2020.8.1(81).

12. von Braun, J., Mirzabaev, A. 2019, The development of bioeconomy of the Baltic Region in the context of regional and global climate change, Balt. Reg., vol. 11, no 4, p. 20—35. doi: 10.5922/2078-8555-2019-4-2.

13. Raszkowski, A., Sobczak, E. 2019, Sustainability in the Baltic States: Towards the implementation of sustainable development goals (SDG). In: The 13th International Days of Statistics and Economics, September 5—7, Prague, Czech Republic, p. 1253—1262. doi: 10.18267/pr.2019.los.186.125.

14. Grönholm, S., Rydén, L., Zuin, O., Elrick-Barr, C., Powell, N. 2015, Assessing the Status of Sustainable Development in the Baltic Sea Region: A Macro-regional Perspective, Baltic University Programme Press, Uppsala. doi: 10.13140/RG.2.1.1207.2087.

15. Gløersen, E., Balsiger, J., Cugusi, B., Debarbieux, B. 2019, The role of environmental issues in the adoption processes of European Union macro-regional strategies, Environmental Science & Policy, no. 97, p. 58—66. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2019.04.002.

16. Sokolovskaya, O. E. 2019, Various aspects of ecological factor influence on the formation of a region’s sustainable development, Moskovskiy ekonomichskiy zhurnal [Moscow economic journal], no. 8, online resource. doi: 10.24411/2413-046Х-2019—13034 (in Russ.)

17. Tretyakova, E. A., Miroliubova, T. V., Myslyakova, Yu. G., Shamova, E. A. 2018, Methodical Approach to the Complex Assessment of the Sustainable Region Development in the Condition of Greening the Economy, Vestnik UrFU, Seriya ekonomika I upravlinie [UrFU Bulletin, Economics and management series], vol. 17, no. 4. p. 651—669. doi 10.15826/vestnik.2018.17.4.029 (In Russ.).

18. Shayakhmetov, M. S. 2017, The Main characteristics of sustainable regional development, Uspekhi sovremennogo estestvoznaniya [Advances in current natural sciences], no. 6, p. 108—112 (In Russ.).

19. Mingaleva, Zh. A., Gershanok, G. A. 2012, Sustainable development of a region: innovations, economic security, competitiveness, Economika regiona [Economy of a region], no. 3, p. 68—77.

20. Munim, Z. H., Dushenko, M., Jimenez, V. J., Shakil, M. H., Imset, M. 2020, Big data and artificial intelligence in the maritime industry: a bibliometric review and future research directions, Maritime Policy & Management, vol. 47, no. 5, p. 577—597. doi: 10.1080/03088839.2020.1788731.

21. Gabryelczyk, R. 2020, Has COVID-19 Accelerated Digital Transformation? Initial Lessons Learned for Public Administrations, Information Systems Management, vol. 37, no. 4, p. 303—309. doi: 10.1080/10580530.2020.1820633.

22. Kudyba, S. 2020, COVID-19 and the Acceleration of Digital Transformation and the Future of Work, Information Systems Management, vol. 37, no. 4, p. 284—287. doi: 10.1080/10580530.2020.1818903.

23. Agostino, D., Arnaboldi, M., Diaz Lema, M. 2021, New development: COVID-19 as an accelerator of digital transformation in public service delivery, Public Money & Management, vol. 41, no. 1, p. 69—72. doi: 10.1080/09540962.2020.1764206.

24. Oldekop, J. A., Horner, R., Hulme, D. et al. 2020, COVID-19 and the case for global development, World Development, vol. 134, 105044. doi: 10.1016/j. worlddev.2020.105044.

25. Rapaccini, M., Saccani, N., Kowalkowski, C., Paiola, M., Adrodegari, F. 2020, Navigating disruptive crises through service-led growth: The impact of COVID-19 on Italian manufacturing firms, Industrial Marketing Management, no. 88, p. 225—237. doi: 10.1016/j. indmarman.2020.05.017.

26. Soto-Acosta, P. 2020, COVID-19 Pandemic: Shifting Digital Transformation to a High-Speed Gear, Information Systems Management, vol. 37, no. 4, p. 260—266. doi: 10.1080/10580530.2020.1814461.

27. Cai, M., Luo, J., 2020, Influence of COVID-19 on Manufacturing Industry and Corresponding Countermeasures from Supply Chain Perspective, Journal of Shanghai Jiaotong University (Science), no. 25, p 409—416. doi: 10.1007/s12204-020-2206-z.

28. Plakhotnikova, M., Anisimov, A., Kulachinskaya, A., Mukhametova, L. 2020, The impact of digitalization of the economy on the development of enterprises in the Arctic. In: Fedyukhin, A., Dixit, S. (eds.) Sustainable Energy Systems: Innovative Perspectives, 29—30 October 2020, Saint-Petersburg, Russian Federation. doi: 10.1051/e3sconf/202022001041.

29. Klemeshev, A. P., Korneevets, V. S., Palmowski, Т.,Studzieniecki, Т., Fedorov, G. M. 2017, Approaches to the Definition of the Baltic Sea Region, Balt. Reg., vol. 9, no. 4, p. 7—28. doi: 10.5922/2079-8555-2017-4-1.

30. Balcerzak, A. P., Pietrzak, M. P. 2016, Application of TOPSIS Method for Analysis of Sustainable Development in European Union Countries. In: Loster, T., Pavelka, T. (eds.) The 10th International Days of Statistics and Economics, Conference Proceedings, September 8—10, 2016, Prague, Libuse Macakova, Melandrium, p. 82—92, available at: http://econpapers. repec. org/bookchap/pesecchap/19.htm (accessed 30.12.2020).

31. Shedko, Yu. N. 2015, Analysis methods assessment of sustainable development of regional Socio-ecological and economic systems, Sovremennye problem nauki i obrazovaniya [Current issues of science and education], no. 1—1, p. 693—693 (in Russ.).

32. Pîrvu, R., Bădîrcea, R., Manta, A., Lupăncescu, M. 2018, The Effects of the Cohesion Policy on the Sustainable Development of the Development Regions in Romania, Sustainability, no. 10, 2577. doi: 10.3390/su10072577.

33. Masilevich, N. A., 2018, Implementing sustainable development strategy in Belarus at the regional level, Trudy BGTU [BGTU proceedings], 5: Economics and management, no. 1 (208), p. 23—27 (In Russ.).

34. Łozowicka, A. 2020, Evaluation of the Efficiency of Sustainable Development Policy Implementation in Selected EU Member States Using DEA, The Ecological Dimension, Sustainability, vol. 12, no. 1, p. 435. doi: 10.3390/su12010435.

35. Gonzalez-Garcia, S., Manteiga, R., Moreira, M. T., Feijoo, G. 2018, Assessing the sustainability of Spanish cities considering environmental and socio-economic indicators, Journal of Cleaner Production, no. 178, p. 599—610. doi: 10.1016/j. jclepro.2018.01.056.

36. Skvarciany, V., Jurevičienė, D., Volskytė, G. 2020, Assessment of Sustainable Socioeconomic Development in European Union Countries, Sustainability, vol. 12, no. 5, 1986. doi: 10.3390/su12051986.

37. Daly, E. H., Cobb, J. B. Jr. 1990, For the Common Good: Redirecting the Economy toward Community, the Environment, and a Sustainable Future, Beacon Press, Boston, MA, p. 482. doi: 10.1177/027046769101100137.

38. Menegaki, A. N., Tugcu, C. T. 2018, Two versions of the Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare (ISEW) in the energy-growth nexus for selected Asian countries, Sustainable Production and Consumption, no. 14, p. 21—35. doi: 10.1016/j. spc.2017.12.005.

39 Rugani, B., Marvuglia, A., Pulselli, F. M. 2018, Predicting Sustainable Economic Welfare—Analysis and perspectives for Luxembourg based on energy policy scenarios, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change, no. 137, p. 288—303. doi: 10.1016/j. techfore.2018.08.005.

40. Gigliarano, C., Balducci, F., Ciommi, M., Chelli, F. 2014, Going regional: An index of sustainable economic welfare for Italy, Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, no. 45, p. 63—77, doi: 10.1016/j. compenvurbsys.2014.02.007.

41. Talberth, J., Cobb, C., Slattery, N. 2006, The Genuine Progress Indicator 2006, A Tool for Sustainable Development. Redefining Progress, Oakland CA, available at: https://www. researchgate. net/publication/252265237_The_Genuine_Progress_Indicator_2006 (accessed 06.01.2021).

42. Saeed, N., Cullinane, K., Sødal, S. 2020, Exploring the relationships between maritime connectivity, international trade and domestic production, Maritime Policy & Management, p. 1—15. doi: 10.1080/03088839.2020.1802783.

43. Çetin, O., Irak, D. M., Kahyaoğlu, N. 2020, A comprehensive model for a sustainable maritimization: 3-Layer Holistic Maritimization Model, Maritime Policy and Management, vol. 47, no. 8, p. 1064—1081. doi: 10.1080/03088839.2020.1744756.

44. Oznamets, V. V. 2018, Modelling of sustainable development of territories, Nauki o zemle [GeoScience], no. 1, p. 61—69 (in Russ.).

45. Cadil, J., Mirosnik, K., Petkovova, L., Mirvald, M. 2018, Public Support of Private R&D—Effects on Economic Sustainability, Sustainability, no. 10 (12), 4612. doi: 10.3390/su10124612.

46. Kupriyanovskaya, Yi. V., Kupriyanosvskiy, V. P., Klimov, A. A., Namiot, D. E., Dolbnev, A. V., Siniagov, S. A., Lipuntsov, Yu. P., Arsenyan, A. G., Yevtushenko, S. N., Larin, O. N. 2018, Smart container, smart port, BIM, IoT and blockchain in the digital system of internation trade, International Journal of Open Information Technologies, no. 6(3), p. 49—94 (In Russ.).

47. de la Peña Zarzuelo, I. 2021, Cybersecurity in ports and maritime industry: Reasons for raising awareness on this issue, Transport Policy, no. 100, p. 1—4. doi: 10.1016/j. tranpol.2020.10.001.

48. de la Peña Zarzuelo, I., Soeane, M. J. F., Bermúdez, B. L. 2020, Industry 4.0 in the port and maritime industry: A literature review, Journal of Industrial Information Integration, no. 20, 100173. doi: 10.1016/j. jii.2020.100173.

49. Pencarelli, T. 2020, The digital revolution in the travel and tourism industry, Inf Technol Tourism, no. 22, p. 455—476. doi: 10.1007/s40558-019-00160-3.

50. Voss, R., Quaas, M. F., Hoffmann, J., Schmidt, J. O. 2017, Chapter 17 — Social-ecological tradeoffs in Baltic Sea fisheries management. In: Levin, P. S., Poe, M. R. (eds) Conservation for the anthropocene ocean, Academic Press, p. 359—377.

51. Acciaro, M., Sys, C. 2020, Innovation in the maritime sector: aligning strategy with outcomes, Maritime Policy & Management, vol. 47, no. 8, p. 1045—1063. doi: 10.1080/03088839.2020.1737335.