Actions by thecities of Helsinkiand Turku forimproving the stateof the Baltic Sea– a challenge toother actors

With this undertaking and the associated challenge,the cities of Helsinki and Turku are demonstratingtheir concern about the state of the Baltic Sea andof its future. Through this commitment the citiesresolve to put into practice such measures that willenable the cities of Helsinki and Turku to have aninfluence on the state of local waters as well as theentire Baltic Sea.

The measures of the two cities concern point load-ing, improving the cities’ sewage networks, loadingfrom scattered settlement areas, agriculture in thetwo cities, the handling of wastewater from shippingand boating, and dredging carried out by the har-bours.

In addition to the concrete measures for waterprotection, the cities are also committed to investingin international environmental collaboration, re-search into water protection, and providing generalinformation.

Through this challenge campaign the cities wouldalso like to get other actors involved in the workfor improving the state of the Baltic Sea. As far asthe cities’ actions are concerned, Helsinki and Turkuare proposing targeted challenges for differentactors. In particular, the cities are challenging othercities on the Baltic Sea, and propose that the coop-eration networks of the Baltic cities, BaltMet andUBC, would together take the challenge campaignforward.

Furthermore, with this declaration the partiesinvolved also want to get other Finnish actors –municipalities, businesses, universities and minis-tries – to increase their ef-forts for improving thestate of the Baltic Sea.

Helsinki and Turku will report on the progress ofthe campaign and monitor the participation of theparties that have been challenged.

In their declaration, the cities of Turku and Helsinkiare also taking into account the Convention on theProtection of the Marine Environment of the BalticSea Area, the Helsinki Commission’s targets andprogrammes for furthering the protection of theBaltic Sea, regional environmental strategies andprogrammes both in the Uusimaa and SouthwestFinland areas, and Helsinki and Turku will striveto achieve the targets set forth in these.

Communiqué

5

THE BALTIC SEA AND THE ITS STATEThe Baltic Sea is a young and ecologically verysensitive marine area. In terms of volume, it is theworld’s second largest inland body of brackishwater, and in addition to the Baltic Sea itself, itincludes large bays such as the Gulf of Bothnia,the Gulf of Finland and the Gulf of Riga.

In addition to its unique nature, the Baltic Sea isunfortunately also one of the most polluted bodiesof brackish water. The Baltic Sea’s susceptibility topollution and to poisons is due to its shallownessand shape, the small volume of water, and the poorwater exchange. The average depth of the BalticSea is just 55 metres and it is estimated that acomplete exchange of water takes around 30 years.

Eutrophication is regarded as being one of thegreatest and most serious threats. The most visiblesigns of this are the plentiful algae blooms thatoccur almost every summer, and the slime thatgets on beaches and fishing nets. Eutrophicationis mainly due to the high loading coming from thecatchment area, which is around four times thesize of the surface area of the sea. There are 14countries and around 90 million residents in thecatchment area. There is a great deal of industryand agriculture in all the surrounding countries,and therefore both nutrients and environmentalpoisons have entered the sea over several decades.

As a result of eutrophication, the dead algae thatsinks to the seabed consumes oxygen as it decom-poses, and there has been an increase in the seabedareas where oxygen is depleted. Up to a third of theentire Baltic seabed suffers from oxygen depletion.In these conditions of oxygen depletion, more nu-

trients dissolve in the water, which leads to evenfurther eutrophication. Even as the external loadingdecreases, the internal loading will continue for along time, and the improvement in the state of thesea is slow.

The Gulf of Finland is the area where eutrophicationis greatest, and it will not be able to withstand itscurrent nutrient loading, which is three times great-er than that of other areas of the Baltic Sea. Ac-cording to the latest research results, in summer2006 the oxygen-depleted area of the Gulf of Finlandwas exceptionally large, and the state of the seabedwas worse than it has ever been during the 2000s.Furthermore, there was hydrogen sulphide in thewater close to the seabed over the whole area ofthe Gulf of Finland. Oxygen depletion will alwayscause the internal phosphorous loading to start up,when the stratification of water masses createfavourable conditions for this.

Although it has been possible to reduce the loadingof organic material, nutrients and various environ-mental poisons entering into the Baltic Sea, espe-cially during the last two decades, the nutrientloading from Finland as well as from the othersurrounding countries is still too high in terms ofecological balance.

The last decades have also shown that there havebeen great changes in the Baltic Sea and the watershave worsened over the entire Baltic Sea area.Achieving a permanent improvement calls for asignificant reduction in phosphorous and nitrogenloading over the entire Baltic Sea catchment area.

FACTORS THAT AFFECT THE SITUATIONAt present, the Baltic Sea is being burdened mostby the nutrient loadings and hazardous substancesthat have entered and are entering the sea, andalso the greatly increased amount of shipping.

Eutrophication is caused by the activities of people,such as community wastewater, agriculture, scat-tered settlements, traffic, energy production, andindustry. Research has shown that the wastewaterfrom the St Petersburg area affects the entire opensea area of the Gulf of Finland, whereas the poorcondition of our coastal waters is mainly due todomestic emissions.

From 1997 – 2001, the total amounts of nutrientsentering the Baltic Sea were 35,000 tons of phos-phorous and 650,000 tons of nitrogen. During thesame period, Finland’s share of the overall nutrientloading entering the Baltic Sea from rivers andfrom wastewater amounted to 10%.

From Finland’s land area, an average of 3,000 tonsof phosphorous and 42,000 tons of nitrogen enterthe Baltic Sea each year as a result of people’sactivities. When the airborne nutrient depositionand natural leaching are also taken into accountthe annual phosphorous loading is 4,200 tons andthat of nitrogen is 84,000 tons. In comparison withthe loadings from 1992 to 1996, the amount ofphosphorous has remained approximately the same,but the amount of nitrogen has risen by 8,000 tons.

Agriculture is the most significant loading sourcefor Finnish coastal waters, and its significance isunderscored in the reduction of point loading sourc-es of nutrient emissions. From 1997 – 2001 agri-

Review of the state of theBaltic Sea and the factors affecting it

6

culture accounted for almost half of the phospho-rous loading and over one third of the nitrogenloading. The share from agriculture in the Helsinkiand Turku areas is even greater. The share fromagriculture in the Helsinki area is over one half forboth phosphorus and nitrogen loading, and in theArchipelago up to three quarters.

Industry, fish farming and residential centres arealso significant sources of nutrients, although therehas been a significant reduction in the phosphorousand nitrogen loading from these sources duringthe last twenty years.The living organisms and seabed sediment of theBaltic Sea accumulate large amounts of hazardoussubstances in comparison with the oceans. This isdue the high loading of the Baltic Sea, unfavourableconditions for decomposition, and also the lowwater exchange. The discharges of hazardous sub-stances into the Baltic Sea mainly come from com-munity and industry wastewater, and from runoffwaters. In addition to this, there are also airbornedepositions of emissions.

Heavy metals are also carried directly into the seaalong with the emissions from industrial plants,but also as diffuse loadings. Heavy metals affectthe growth, reproduction and activity of living or-ganisms. The amounts of heavy metals have de-creased over the last twenty years, but the valuesare still significantly higher than in the North Sea,for example.

Heavy metal emissions from industry are generallyconcentrated in the coastal waters close to thefactories. Heavy metal loading from river waters,however, spread more evenly over a larger area,

and is tens of times greater than industrial emis-sions. Heavy metals accumulate in the sedimentand seabed layers, from where they can move backinto the Baltic Sea food web. For example, dredgingand the disposal of dredging waste transfer theheavy metals accumulated in the seabed back tothe water.

There are tens of thousands of different chemicalsin use, and for only a small proportion of these isthere any basic information in terms of assessmentof environmental impact. Furthermore, the com-bined impact of various substances is often un-known. There has been a great deal of researchinto the effect of environmental poisons on livingorganisms. Poisons cause, for example, deformitiesin fish, and weaken the ability of shellfish to catchprey. One example that can be mentioned of theproblems caused by hazardous substances is thehigh dioxin concentrations in Baltic herring.

Although the amount of certain environmentalpoisons has decreased, environmental poisonscontinue to accumulate in the living organisms ofthe Baltic Sea. Accurate information on the concen-trations of hazardous substances in the Baltic Seaonly exists for some of the most significant organicmaterials and for some heavy metals.

A large part of the oil in the Baltic Sea has comefrom land, river waters and the air. These oil emis-sions mainly pollute the sediment, but also theentire Baltic Sea ecosystem. The continuously grow-ing volume of tankers has considerably increasedthe environmental risks and the risk of an accidentin the Baltic Sea. Furthermore, deliberate discharg-ing of oil into the Baltic is continuously happening.

There are also over 1,000 wrecks with oil storagein the Finnish marine area.

The natural balance of the Baltic Sea is beingshaken by the increased amount of shipping, andby boating and recreational activity. Problems arealso caused by the construction of bridges, harboursand fairways, removal of sand from the seabed,and other activities being carried out in the BalticSea area, For example, the excavation of sea sandcauses changes to the underwater landscape, thedepth relationships, and the currents.

8

NEW THREATSThe latest major threats to the Baltic Sea are theincrease in the transportation of oil and chemicals,environmental poisons, the arrival of alien speciesin the Baltic Sea, and climate change.

When chemical transportation and other marinetraffic increases in the Baltic Sea, the risk of achemical spill also increases. It is estimated thatin the Gulf of Finland alone the overall amount oftanker traffic could be as much as 160 million tonsby 2010, and about half of the tankers would be oiltankers. There is also a threat from the barrels ofpoison and other waste was that was dumped insea several decades ago.

In addition to the eutrophication affect of the riskof accident, wastewater from shipping, and exhaustgases; the wave and suction effect of shipping aswell as the wake from ships causes erosion of theinner archipelago and raises nutrients and othersubstances from the seabed to the surface. Dredg-ing and disposal also cause muddiness of the waterand may put back into circulation substances thathave already been sedimented, such as environ-mental poisons.

Alien species that have been carried from one watersystem to another in vessels’ bilge water are oneof the biggest threats to the biodiversity of seas.The alien species may displace original speciesand thereby shake up the equilibrium of the sea.

With the rapidly increasing amount of shipping,more alien species than ever before, and fromdifferent sea areas, are entering the Baltic Sea. Sofar over 100 alien species have been recorded in

the Baltic Sea, 60 –70 of which have managed toestablish themselves permanently at least in someareas of the Baltic Sea. This number is significantin relation to the small amount of species in theBaltic, due to its young age.

The number of animal species in the Baltic Seavaries from around 450 in the Kattegat to aroundonly 50 species in the Gulf of Bothnia.

The effects of climate change on the Baltic Sea arestill partly unpredictable. However, we can assumethat there will be several environmental and bio-logical impacts as a result of, for example, a highersummer temperature, increased rainfall, andchanging ice conditions.

For example, the increased rainfall and runoffcaused by climate change will increase the loadingand make the eutrophication of the Baltic Sea evenworse than before. The impacts caused by climatechange are also important in areas such as landuse planning in towns and cities, and the functioningof the water supply and sewage systems.

10

1. REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF POINT LOADING

1.1 Improving the cities’ sewage networks

• The cities will prepare up a storm water handlingplan which clarifies, for example:

– the environmental impacts of storm waterand the possible need for storm waterhandling

– preventing floods caused by storm water– the possibilities for reducing the amount

of storm water entering the combinedsewage network

• Increase the renovation of the sewage network,try to minimize wastewater overflow, and possiblytry to channel the fees paid for using the combinedsewage network primarily to improving the net-work. Minimise overflows particularly by upgrad-ing areas with combined sewage systems. En-couraging real estate owners to direct drainageand rainwater from their properties into the stormwater sewer, if they are directed to the presentwastewater or combined sewer.

Reasoning:

It is thought that climate change will increase theoccurrences of extreme weather, increasing therisk of flooding in cities. The storm water from theroads and industrial areas that enters ditches,streams and onwards to the sea may contain haz-ardous substances to such an extent that there isa need to study the quality of the storm water andclarify the need for treatment.

The management of storm water in the city canbest be advanced by preparing a plan for handlingstorm water, which specifies the main principlesand procedures for managing storm water. Duringflood situations, sewage water from the combinedsewer has to be discharged as an overflow to thesea. The amount of storm water entering the com-bined sewer can be reduced by upgrading the net-work, thereby reducing network overflows enteringthe sea.

Challenge to other actors:

Helsinki and Turkuchallenge the followingto improve the sewagenetworks:• Other municipalities• Water and sewage

departments

Actions by the cities

12

2. REDUCING DIFFUSE POLLUTION

2.1 Reducing agricultural loading

• Fields owned by the cities (e.g. Haltiala fields inHelsinki, and the fields at Ruissalo in Turku) tobe changed to model fields as far as agriculturalwater protection actions are concerned.

– the fields will be planted by the direct sow-ing method

– the fertilizer level to be reduced to matchrealistic harvest targets, taking into accountthe phosphorous situation of the land

– the annual nutrient levels for different sec-tions to be calculated, in order to determinethe following year’s need for fertilizer.

– field areas that are repeatedly flooded orare particularly sensitive to erosion not tobe cultivated

– between the field and water system, isalways left a sufficiently wide unfertilisedand uncultivated protection area from whichthe vegetation is cut

– set special requirements in terms of watersystem protection for those fields that thecity rents out

• Using land exchange or other methods, concen-trate on ending cultivation of erosion-sensitiveland and land at risk from flooding, also fromprivate owners.

Reasoning:

From its present state, there can be no significantimprovement in the protection of the Baltic Seawithout intervening in the loading caused by agri-culture. Diffuse pollution has a great impact on thestate of the coastal waters. Measures to reduceerosion will enable the quality of the water to beimproved, and will reduce the loading from solidsand nutrients caused by agriculture.

Methods used in the specific environmental supportof agriculture: protection zones and bands, sedi-mentation basins, wetlands, and submerged weirs,have been used to stop the flow of solid substancesalong with water. In terms of water protection,keeping the solid substances on the fields is moreefficient than actions to stop solid substances inchannels. Direct sowing refers to the sowing andspreading of fertilizer on untilled soil. Direct sowingcan protect the land surface from erosion all yearround. Another advantage of direct sowing is thelow cost. Not using a plough saves time and cost.

Similarly, the use of carefully measured nutrientson the blocks of field saves both money and theenvironment. The best method of all for reducingloading of the water system from fields susceptibleto flooding is to stop cultivating them altogether.

Although the cities of Helsinki and Turku are notsignificant agricultural producers, the cities en-deavour to reduce the nutrient discharges to thewater systems through their agriculture and fromthe fields they own.

Challenge to other actors:

Helsinki and Turkuchallenge the following toreduce pollution fromagriculture:• Other municipalities• University of Helsinki• Southwest Finland

Agricultural ProducersUnion

• Uusimaa AgriculturalProducers Union

• ProAgria• Rural Advisory Centres:

ProAgria Farma andProAgria Uusimaa

14

2. REDUCING DIFFUSE POLLUTION

2.2 Reduction of wastewater emissionsfrom scattered settlement areas

• Improving and extending the sewage networksfrom the scattered settlement areas that are mostimportant in terms of water protection

• The cities will encourage the establishment ofwastewater consortiums in built-up scatteredsettlement areas, providing they do not have thepossibility for connection to the pressure sewagenetwork.

– using support activity to speed up connec-tion to centralized water supply for thoseareas without a sewage network

– the target areas are the Helsinki archipel-ago, the Turku archipelago and the Aurajokiriver catchment area

• By 2010, the cities will upgrade the wastewatertreatment systems to the standard specified inthe regulations for their own real estate in thescattered settlement areas

• Real estate owners will be given information andadvice to encourage them to upgrade and improvethe wastewater treatment systems before thetime limits specified in the so-called wastewaterdecree.

Reasoning:

In the sparsely populated areas, the organic mate-rials and total phosphorous in the wastewaters ofa household pollute the environment 6 – 8 timesmore than the household wastewater of a residentwhose house is connected to the water supplycompany’s sewage network. Improving the waste-water treatment systems of real estate owned bythe cities (schools, camping areas etc) will speedup making wastewater treatment more efficient,compared with the time limits specified in the so-called wastewater decree.

Challenge to other actors:

Helsinki and Turkuchallenge the following toreduce diffuse pollution• Other municipalities• Water and sewage

departments

16

3. DREDGING OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENT

• Dredging to remediate the areas of worst pollutionby organotin compounds or other hazardous sub-stances.

– dredging will focus on those areas that havehigh concentrations of hazardous substanc-es, or that have the risk of spreading thesubstances to clean or already cleanedareas.

• In Helsinki the worst problem areas are off theWest Harbour and Sörnäinen Harbour, and incertain places at Kruunuvuorenselkä, In Turkuin the Aurajoki river estuary.

– the sediments in nearly all the small boatmarinas have been polluted with TBT etc,

• The cities work in cooperation with other actorsfor the establishment of treatment and disposalareas for contaminated sediment, and the devel-opment of treatment methods.

Reasoning:

The seabed sediments of the marine areas of thecities are contaminated in many areas as a resultof industrial activity. In recent years the most harm-ful and most usual polluting compounds haveproved to be organotin compounds, the most com-mon of which is tributyl tin (TBT), which has beenused in painting the hulls of ships and boats.

In several dredging areas the concentrations ofhazardous substances in the sediments have beenso high that these cannot be dumped at sea, butthe sediment has to be dumped in special disposalareas that will be constructed in such a way thatthe hazardous substances cannot enter the marineenvironment. The contaminated sediments on theseabed can also harm the environment as a resultof other actions. The wake from ships propellersand river dynamics can cause the sediment to drift,causing the hazardous substances to enter thewater and the living organisms that are there.

For this reason, the worst polluted dredging areas,other than those in connection with harbour orfairway construction, should be included in thescope of remediation dredging, as the benefits fromremediation are significantly greater than the harmcaused by the work.

Areas suitable for the disposal of contaminatedsediments should be established through cooper-ation between the municipalities and the state. Thiswould give areas better suited for disposal than atpresent, also for actors other than the city harbours.

Challenge to other actors:

Helsinki and Turkuchallenge the following forreducing the impact ofdredging on water systems:• Harbour towns• Harbours• Marinas and docks• Ministry of the

Environment• Regional environment

centres• Finnish Maritime

Administration

18

4. REDUCING THE WASTEWATER DISCHARGESFROM SHIPPING AND BOATING

• Change the harbour dues so that a wastewatercharge is automatically included in the vesselwaste fee, irrespective of whether the vesseldischarges its wastewater to sewage system orto sea.

• Reduce or eliminate the wastewater fee for thosevessels that are exempt from paying vessel wastefees so that it is more attractive for them todischarge their wastewater on land, and try toarrange discharge points at the docking berths.

• Create better preconditions for vessels in regularoperation to use shore to ship -electricity.

• Increase the number of septic tanks at boatharbours and camping areas in the city.

Reasoning:

Under the vessel waste legislation, vessels thatoperate internationally can discharge their untreat-ed latrine wastewater at sea at a distance of 12nautical miles from the coast, and treated waste-water at a distance of 3 nautical miles from thecoast. A wastewater fee has to be paid for discharg-ing wastewater at the harbour. At present the vesselwaste fee does not include a wastewater charge,but this is paid separately when the wastewater isdischarged. Vessels in regular operation are gen-erally exempt from the vessel waste fee (FinnishMaritime Administration) and they manage theirwaste themselves. However, they do have to pay afee for any wastewater they discharge at the har-bour.

The Turku and Helsinki harbours have the facilitiesto accept wastewater. Wastewater discharged atsea by shipping has a direct impact on the eutroph-ication of the sea. One effective way to promote thereceiving of wastewater is to fit the appropriateequipment for receiving wastewater at the dockingberths.

Using shore to ship electricity reduces the emissionsto the air and the noise pollution from ships in theharbour. Increasing the use of shore to ship elec-tricity requires investments in the ships and in theharbours.

The septic tank network for small boats is still toolimited, and for large recreational yachts in partic-ular, there are few emptying places on offer.

Challenge to other actors:

Helsinki and Turkuchallenge the following toreduce emissions fromshipping:• Harbour towns• Harbours• Ministry of Transport and

Communication• Finnish Maritime

Administration• Shipping companies

Helsinki and Turkuchallenge the following toreduce loading of watersystems caused by boating:• Other municipalities• Marinas• Turku and Helsinki

boating societies20

5. INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION

• The cities support international environmentalprojects focusing on the Baltic Sea through theirown networks, such as through cooperation withBaltMet, or the Union of the Baltic Cities

– For example, the Clean Sea project by theJohn Nurminen Fund, where the aim is toestablish chemical phosphorous eliminationat wastewater treatment plants in St Pe-tersburg

• Invest in international environmental cooperation,particularly in Russia

– To forge closer environmental cooperationbetween the cities of Helsinki, Turku andSt Petersburg, emphasising cooperationon water protection

Reasoning:

We have been actively involved in the work of thecooperation networks, and the cities have an im-portant role in international cooperation. Thesenetworks include BaltMet (Baltic Metropoles), whichis a network of the major cities in the Baltic Searegion, and UBC, the Union of the Baltic Cities.Through these networks it is possible to efficientlypromote the environmental protection actions ofthe cities to focus on improving the condition of theBaltic Sea, taking into account the optimal use offunding possibilities from the States, the EU andfrom the private sector.

The environmental work aims to support theprogress of environmental protection in Russiancities, particularly St Petersburg. Phosphorousencourages algae growth, and chemical phospho-rous removal at St.Petersburg’s three largest waste-water treatment plants would reduce the phospho-rous discharge into the Gulf of Finland by almost27%.

According to research carried out by the FinnishEnvironment Centre, this is the quickest and mostcost-effective way to improve the state of the opensea in the Gulf of Finland when compared to all theother possible water protection actions in Finlandand Russia. This action would reduce the amountof algae in the Gulf of Finland within a few years.(www.puhdasitameri.com)

Challenge to other actors:

Helsinki and Turkuchallenge the following toget involved in internationalcooperation:• Other municipalities• Businesses• Organisations• Ministry for Foreign Affairs• Ministry of the

Environment• Ministry of the Interior• Baltic Metropoles• Union of the Baltic Cities

22

6. RESEARCH PROJECTS ANDTHE ESTABLISHMENT OF A PROFESSORSHIP

In cooperation with universities, institutes of highereducation, and research institutes, the cities par-ticipate in technical/scientific research projectsconnected with improving the state of the BalticSea

• In connection with this, Helsinki will establish anendowed professorship in the field of environ-mental research or protection.

– Participate in research projects concerningthe state of the Baltic Sea.

Reasoning

Since 1998 the University of Helsinki, the HelsinkiUniversity of Technology and the cities in the met-ropolitan area have had urban research professor-ships, whose task has been to undertake scientificresearch in connection with the cities’ needs andactivities.

Similarly, the city of Turku has endowed professor-ships at the University of Turku and the TurkuSchool of Economics. Under the same principle,the professorship to be established would concen-trate on environmental protection or on furtheringenvironmental research.

The research projects would be focused on coop-eration with universities, research institutes andthe practical stakeholders involved. For example,one project starting up is studying the nitrogenemissions and impacts of ships that operate be-tween Helsinki and Tallinn.

Challenge to other actors:

Helsinki and Turkuchallenge the following toparticipate in researchprojects:• Universities• Polytechnics• Other municipalities• Businesses

24

7. TO ESTABLISH A FUND FOR THE PROTECTIONOF THE ARCHIPELAGO IN ASSOCIATION WITHTHE CENTRUM BALTICUM FOUNDATION

• Turku is taking part in establishing the Archipel-ago Protection Fund in association with the Cen-trum Balticum foundation.

Reasoning:

The aim of this fund is to support concrete waterprotection activity for the archipelago, and researchinto water protection. Improving the state of thearchipelago calls for even more purposeful actionsand significant financial investment.

Because of this there is a need for new, innovative,precisely targeted and cost-effective water protec-tion actions that are based on research. The moneyfrom the fund would be directed towards waterprotection activities that would achieve significantbenefits in terms of water protection. The citiesplay an important role in the establishment of theprotection fund.

Challenge to other actors:

Turku and Helsinkichallenge the following toaction and funding for theArchipelago Protection Fund:• Municipalities and

firms in the archipelagocatchment area

26

8. INCREASING AWARENESS ABOUTTHE STATE OF THE BALTIC SEA

• Increase the awareness of the municipal residentsabout their possibilities to contribute to improvingthe state of the Baltic Sea by, for example, orga-nising thematic evenings and information events,and by increasing cooperation with other actors.

Reasoning:

Education and information relating to environmentalissues and water protection in particular will in-crease the municipal residents’ awareness of theimpact of their own actions on the immediate sur-roundings, and in this way promote environmentally-friendly behaviour.

Challenge to other actors:

Helsinki and Turkuchallenge the following toincrease communication ofinformation:• Other municipalities• Educational institutes• Societies• The media

28

Concerned about the state of the Baltic Seaand its future, and committing themselvesto the actions put forward above, the Citiesof Helsinki and Turku wish to show a goodexample to others for saving the Baltic Seafor future generations.

The Cities challenge the other municipalities,State organizations and other partiesmentioned above, as well as all citizens,citizens’ organizations, businesses, unionsand educational institutes to become involvedin action to achieve the common goal.

Esite painettu Galeri Art Silk paperille, joka täyttää ympäristövaatimukset.