(Silesian Province, Moravian–Silesian Province)
Introduction
Increase of the interest of state borderland in Poland and other countries of Central–
East Europe has been an essential element of integration policy with West Europe since the 1990s. It has also been part of activities aiming to equal differences in level of regional development. These areas usually experience doubly negative consequences in social–economic transformations (A. Klasik, O. Milerski (eds.), 2001, p. 29):
a) “in state regional system they belong to a group of peripheral regions; their unfavourable location is mostly seen in relative isolation of borderlands from politically and economically leading centres of the countries;
b) unfavourable element of location in borderland zone is its distance from main transport routes of a country which usually means insufficient infrastructure”.
Similar views are stated by K. Heffner (1998, p. 7), who argued that investi–gations of a borderland because of ... “numerous negative so far processes, acquire special importance (e.g. deep demographic transformations in these areas, mass migrations from villages to cities, depopulation of numerous towns and administration districts, shortage of workforce in agriculture, low population density, disproportions in development of settlement system in both sides of the border)”.
Such phenomena were investigated in Polish–German borderland as early as in the 1980s, especially in Sudety Mountains, which were treated as problem region (e.g. A. Ciok, 1986, 1988, 1990, 1991, 1996; J. Łoboda (ed.) 1993) and also as an object of empirical generalisation for different areas and also object of formulation of theoretical conceptions (e.g. I. Bukowska–Floreńska, H. Rusek (eds.), 1997;
Z. Chojnicki, 1998; P. Eberhardt, 1996; K. Heffner, 1998; A. Klasik, O. Milerski (eds.), 2001; A. Mync, R. Szul (eds.), 1999; T. Palmowski, 2000; J. Runge (ed.), 2003a, 2003b; J. Runge, F. Kłosowski (eds.), 2001; Z. Rykiel, 1985; 1990, 1991, 2001).
A. Mync, R. Szulc (eds. 1999, p. 229–231) stated the following:
1) As far as division of effects resulting from transfrontier contacts is concerned – three situations are possible:
• coordinance of both sides and also equal division of effects,
• asymmetry of sides consisting in domination of better economically develo-ped side, which also offers cheaper and competitive in terms of quality pro-ducts and services;
• asymmetry, where economically richer side influences transfrontier job divi-sion and participates in most benefits resulting from this situation;
2) As the level of transfrontier co–operation is concerned – four levels of interac-tion are distinguished:
• initial strangeness and hostility;
• more or less developed present co–existence;
• economic co–operation;
• transfrontier integration;
3) As economic co–operation is concerned – three possible situations are may occur:
• impulsive trade – carried out by individual people and informal groups;
• regular trade – carried out by registered trade organisations;
• production co–operation;
4) As co–operation of local/regional authorities is concerned – the following sta-ges occur:
• informal contact of authority representatives,
• formalisation of contacts through negotiations of co–operation agreements;
• activities in support of fast economic benefits (e.g. simplifications in crossing borders, searching for and linking companies to co–operate on both sides of a border);
• activities in favour of long–term economic benefits (common aims in spatial management and social policy, common infrastructural investments, common cultural or teaching activity, etc).
There is no doubt that the part of Polish–Czech border discussed here represents a specific type. It separates, from one hand, two territories which until 1920 had been included in one state organism, and on the other hand, within both provinces (Silesian and Silesian–Moravian) adjacent to state border, two traditional economic regions developed, which show features of contact regions (Z. Rykiel, 1985, 1991).
In both cases the hitherto historical social–economic changes (F. Kłosowski, J. Runge, R. Prokop, 2001, p. 24–25):
a) “were conducted in peripheral regions as compared to political–governing centres; due to historical reasons, intensity of infrastructural development and cultural traditions, this location made economic transformation easier rather than difficult;
b) were based on predominated role of traditional industries (coal mining, iron metallurgy, power industry, machine–building industry);
c) contributed to considerable population dislocations in form of communing and permanent migration, because of the insufficient local workforce;
d) caused the necessity of taking up immediate activities in order to rationalise spatial management, creation of new housing districts especially for immi-grants, which was connected with developing industries. Therefore first post–
war regional plans (1950s) of both countries concerned the areas discussed here; a guiding principle was deglommeration of centres through the construc-tion of satellite towns”.
Taking into account these and other characteristics of the borderland studied, the aim of this paper is to point out the most important, according to the Authors, and most currents perspective determinants of development of the area studied, especially in the situation of integration of Central–East European countries in the European Union.
Conditions of social–economic development
The borderland studied, according to the conception of contact region (Z. Rykiel, 1985), until the mid 17th century showed poorly developed spatial–functional in-frastructure, usually in form of local economic links especially in agriculture, tra-de, and craft. The discovery of hard coal and its exploitation and also develop-ment of metallurgy became main factors which rapidly changed the peripheral character of this area. Side by side with structural factors of changes, also secular factors occurred (W. Długoborski, 1967). The structural factors revolutionised the methods and range of use of natural resources and contemporary technology and caused rapid changes in location and structure of dominating industries. The se-cular factors are derivatives of the previous ones and they occur after some time in gradual steady transformations. These transformations usually concern social–
demographic structures (e.g. increasing from generation to generation adapta-tion to mining and metallurgy, increase of percentage of immigrants, problems of social integration between autochthons and immigrants).
”The discovery of coal in the 18th century in the area of present Katowice co-nurbation, Rybnik conurbation and also in the area of Ostrava and Karvina, acce-lerated the process of demarcation of state boundaries at the contact of Prussia, Austria and Poland“ (J. Runge (ed.), 2003b, p. 15). This contributed to creation of borderland regions of Cieszyn Silesia and Upper Silesia. In the 20th century, this contact regions originated (...). Social integration is here in initial stage (...). In social terms the sub–areas of this region contact with each other rather than in-terrelate.
Changes of state boundaries after the 1st world war resulted in the origin of Silesian contact region. Simultaneously, due to political assignations, the integra-ted so far Cieszyn Silesia region was divided into Polish and Czech parts and it became a borderland area.
”Due to intensive industrialisation and impulsive urbanisation, the division of Upper Silesia by state boundaries after the Austrian–Prussian war and then after partitions of Poland, only partially decreased internal social–economic links.
In contrary, the occurrence of state border on the Olza river in the inter–war pe-riod considerably limited contacts between Polish and Czech societies for many years. Mutual distrust was reinforced by regrettable political activities both befo-re the war and after 1945. Historical changes in the course of state boundary cau-sed that many towns in this area played or still play the role of border towns. In the past following towns belonged to this group: Bielsko–Biała, Frydek–Mistek, Karvina and Opava, and now Polish and Czech Cieszyn. In the whole course of former state boundaries of Austria, Prussia (then Germany) and Poland such towns occur most often in the studied area of Cieszyn Silesia and its limits” (J. Runge (ed.), 2003b, p. 16).
The fact that some Central–Eastern European countries joined European Union encourages to wider outlook at these both border provinces in wider social–
economic context. The limitation of state border as an evidence of liquidation of internal spatial barriers in translocation of population within the Union should increase integration processes between Ostrava–Karvina region and its hinterland and also between both conurbations in Silesian Province (Katowice and Rybnik) and their borderland. No doubt that Cieszyn Silesia should play an important role in this integration as it can join the areas studied in historical, social–economic and transport sense.
The liquidation of internal barriers gives possibilities of creation of transfrontier integrated region, i.e. the region which joins borderlands of both neighbouring countries. What are the premises in this aspect? The most essential factors include (J. Runge, 2003, p. 249–250):
• external disintegrational factors – similarity of functional structure based ma-inly on traditional industries (coal mining, iron metallurgy, machine building industry) as a consequence of post–war economic activity of the state; peri-pheral location in relation to government centres of the state;
• external integrational factors – common history of social–economic changes until 1920; cultural and linguistic community; transfrontier location; aspira-tion for joining European Union;
• internal disintegrational – so far poor development of common economic en-terprises; misunderstandings between societies resulting mainly from diffe-rences in life standards, priorities in favour of natural environment protection (Stonava) or the role of border trade;
• internal integrational – numerous forms of co–operation between the societies of both borderlands (e.g. euroregions).
Of course job market will play an important role in the integration process including wide zone of services in attractive for tourists area of borderland.
The question should be asked – Does Cieszyn Silesia show the features of bor-derland region after political–economic changes initiated in the 1990s, especially when such forms of transfrontier co–operation as euroregions occurred? To an-swer this question it should be remembered that borderlands are usually
peri-pheral in two hierarchical systems – in a national scale and regional scale (K. Hef-fner, 1998). As K. Heffer (op. cit, p. 24–25) states, “in case of Polish Czech border-land, its whole area has got peripheral character in the system of both countries – Poland and Czechs, but in regional scale only its some parts have distinctive pe-ripheral character. Individual parts of the borderland studied belong to regional systems of different conditions, rates and possibilities of development (...). In the post–war period, until the 1980s, Polish–Czech boundary had a character of a distinctive economic, settlement and transport spatial barrier, which limited direct contacts of population in regional and local scales. Distinctive peripherisa-tion (expressed in e.g. negative economic, social and demographic consequences) of borderland zone and the areas located in a long distance from the state boun-daries occurred (...). In local and regional scales, as late as in the 1990s some possi-bilities of enlivening of borderlands occurred. Taking into account only Cieszyn Silesia and its surrounding, it should be underlined that, despite belonging to different states between the 18th and beginning of the 20th century, the observed transformations on both sides of the border on the Olza and Odra rivers had similar character. These transformations occurred in peripheral areas of Austria from one side and Prussia from other side and then Germany and Poland basing for many years on dominating role of traditional industries such as coal mining, iron metallurgy, power industry and machine building industry (F. Kłosowski, J. Runge, R. Prokop, 2002; J. Runge, 2002). After 1945 both social economic re-gions i.e. Ostrava–Karvina region and Katowice and Rybnik rere-gions became in Czech and Polish scale strategic economic areas and conditioned economic deve-lopment of both countries for many years. Cieszyn Silesia occurred between the-se regions and, simultaneously, in both sides of the state boundary.
Also significant autochthonous character of the inhabitants of Cieszyn Silesia should be remembered, which influences numerous fammily connections between the inhabitants of both sides. As a result of post–war political assignations and internal policy of the country, autochthonous population in other euroregions left their lands and other population immigrated, usually with quite different cultural–economic standards. Considerable physiographic handicap in form of mountain ranges or rivers as well as political conditions made it very difficult or impossible keep family connections (e.g. Bałtyk, Bug, Tatry Euroregions). And, of course, cognation of language as well as religion differentiation and frankness played a significant role in creation of integrity of Cieszyn Silesia.
In terms of a character of mutual relations among people, the society of Cieszyn Silesia developed with great influence of mass and often impetuous migrations.
Relatively closed, functionally simple, agricultural and settled from genera-tions society of Cieszyn Silesia occurred in new, difficulty condigenera-tions of strong industrialisation, in the area of rapidly growing social stratification. New categories of industrial workers originated in jobs requiring new qualifications. The role of intellectual potential increased with some delay in education, culture and in
various technical–organisational initiatives. Because of development in transport system, the access to different towns became easier.
Traditional agrarian area transformed fast into dynamically developing industrial region. Social structure of villages inhabitants still depended on town interests and was influenced by job market pressure with job offers in industry.
The population migration from villages to towns increased. The contacts of Cieszyn community were influenced by nationalistic structure, where Polish and Czech population predominated and also, until 1945 German population, and in post–
war period also Slovakian, Roman and Greek population. At present it concerns also foreigners especially from post–communistic countries. Generally, integration processes favour the group, which is in majority in given area leading to assimilation of population which is in minority.
Conclusions
Investigations of borderlands, because of their different character requires a specific approach. According to many authors these areas are subjected to many problems because of their location. Most often cited limitations include their peripheral location in relation to political and economic centres of the country, considerable distance from main transport routes, or insufficient development of infrastructure.
Moreover, poorly “permeable” boundaries considerably limit possibilities of co–
operation, which intensifies social–economic differences on both sides of the border. Unquestionable influence of a boundary on economic processes was discussed in many works. Many authors point out also time range of border influence despite its formal liquidation.
Recently, together with liberalisation of border relations, quite new possibilities occurred. The increase of a border “permeability” gives some possibilities to increase the intensity of mutual relations. This may lead to obtain a substantial dynamics of economic growth. In this light, a category of local development acquires special importance, because, as it proceeds from the ranks, it may activate areas, which are not properly noticed from the level of regional or state policy.
Plans of regional development are the bases to define general functions and importance of individual areas on the background of macro–structures.
The institutions that support development of borderlands and also reinforce co–operation between two sides of the border are euroregions, which originate these areas. At present (25.01.2001) there are 15 euroregions along Polish boun-daries and three of them are located in Silesian province. They include Silesia Euroregion, Cieszyn Silesia Euroregion and Beskidy Euroregion. Among other circumstances favouring development of co–operation is fact that south border goes between the countries associated with European Union and represents an internal border of countries belonging to Wyshegrad Group.
The occurrence of state boundary between Poland and Czechs in1920 disrupted territorial integrity of Cieszyn Silesia and started the phase of “closed boundary”
existence. In fact, for 70 next years until the beginning of political–economic transformation in Central–Eastern Europe, the boundary on the Olza and Odra rivers retarded the development of the adjacent area. Despite political declarations of the unity and co–operation of former socialistic countries, the contacts between both borderlands and especially contacts of families living on both sides of the border were hampered.
At the beginning of the 1990s, the second part of transformations of the borderland studied started, i.e. the “phase of a filter border”. It is observed in liberalisation of cross–frontier traffic, creation of new border crossings, substantial increase of migrations, accompanied by the process of equalisation of development possibilities, which were accumulated in the borderlands but divided up to that time by a hermetic spatial barrier in form of state boundary. The impulses of development first go along transport routes leading to car border crossings on both sides of the border. This phase undoubtedly occurs now.
A perspective stage in the process of state boundary development is the phase of “open boundary” identified with formal liquidation of the border after both counties join European Union. Side by side with many similarities there are also many differences concerning for example population dynamics, intensity of services development, role of agriculture in economy or social infrastructure. Early restructuring activities which were taken up in coal mining of Ostrava–Karvina industrial region caused not only translocation of this industry from the central part of the region but also diminished the consequences of political–economic changes after 1990 (e.g. unemployment). In Katowice region this situation was more complex because the delay in restructuring process was accompanied by decreasing dynamics of demographic–social development, large number of unemployed and emigrations abroad.
Simultaneously both parts of the euroregion represent essential constituents of regional settlement system of both countries creating system of agglomerating social–economic bounds with distinctive concentration in Ostrava on the Czech side and more complex system of bounds on Polish side. Here two settlement systems of conurbation character occur (Katowice and Rybnik) and also two large subregional towns, which, until 1998 were capitols of provinces (Bielsko–Biała and Częstochowa). Therefore, side by side with strong subregional links with Bielsko–Biała, the Polish side of Cieszyn Silesia shows numerous links with Rybnik conurbation and also Katowice conurbation.
The following question arises – Do these features indicate integrational or disintegrational character of the system studied? Despite the fact that Euroregion Śląsk Cieszyński was established only several years ago, numerous transfrontier relations have occurred here for a long time, including also family relations.
Differences in post–war economic situation of Poland and Germany caused numerous social–living migrations in the boundary zone, which intensified in the first years of liberalisation of custom regulations, when the “filter” stage of
the border started. Economic links between both sides of Cieszyn Silesia on this background are much weaker and they decrease together with the decrease of coal mining importance as a main development factor on Czech side. The employed there Polish citizens represent a small percentage of the workforce.
The results of investigations (including also inquiries with representatives of local authorities on both sides of the border) show that Euroregion Śląsk Cieszyński is now at the beginning of the process of economic–infrastructural integration. So far it has concentrated in selected towns or areas and it grows weaker outwards the border.
The second expressed earlier problem is identification of strong and weak features of the euroregion in the light of integration processes with European Union. The results of investigations revealed that despite many–century–long traditions of common social–economic development, the separation of Cieszyn Silesia in two different sides in 1920 caused diminishing of relations between both communities, intensified by strong internal urbanisation including immigration from outside the region (Jastrzębie Zdrój, Karvina, Orlova), iron metallurgy (Trinec) or machine and ellectrical engineering industry (Cieszyn).
The next question arises here concerning development possibilities of Cieszyn Silesia after joining European Union. The border infrastructure and realised by it tasks will appear unnecessary. Decreasing recently market–place sales (including alcohol sales) appears to be unnecessary because of the process of price equalisation. Similar situation concerns other services at the state border like catering business, money exchange offices, etc. The lack of the border will diminish
The next question arises here concerning development possibilities of Cieszyn Silesia after joining European Union. The border infrastructure and realised by it tasks will appear unnecessary. Decreasing recently market–place sales (including alcohol sales) appears to be unnecessary because of the process of price equalisation. Similar situation concerns other services at the state border like catering business, money exchange offices, etc. The lack of the border will diminish