Cross border cooperation –promoter of tourism development



1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Bauska

District

Lithuania

“67

-.7

“9.4

4667

~L2

“8

Aizkraukle

District

Lithuania

“90

^T2

T9

^434

~L2

“6

Jekabpils

District

Lithuania

~442

"T2

12.3

“619

~L2

T5

Daugavpils

District

Lithuania,
Byelorussia

~229

"T4

20.5

~664

“0.8

~20

Kraslava

District

Byelorussia

~268

-12.9

19.4

~226

“0.6

~23

Ludza

District

Russia

^267

-13.2

24.5

^^238

“0.5

266

Balvi

District

Russia

~220

-10.4

25.8

~224

“0.4

244

Aluksne

District

Russia,
Estonia

^200

-J

“8.5

^^263

“0.5

Л9

Valka

District

Estonia

~577

T5

T2

^3^23

“0/7

Лз

Valmiera

District

Estonia

^107

TI

“8.0

^^845

T9

Limbazi

District

Estonia

“87

“7.4

^431

“0.9

~12

Source: Latvia's regions in figures 2003, Central Statistical Bureau of Latvia, Riga,
2003

Latvias road atlas, Jana seta, 2002

Development of Regions in Latvia, State company Ltd. “Regional Development”,
2003

Result from table 1 shows four districts particularly with negative tendencies of
development. All four districts has border with Russia or Byelorussia. There is lowest
level of living because very high unemployment rate in these regions: 3 times higher
as the average unemployment rate in Latvia in year 2002. It is connected with changes
from 1991 when there was necessity to change thinking and understandings about free
trade philosophy and start to take decisions themselves not to fill commands. This
tendency has close interaction with activity of enterprise numbers, which is also the
lowest number in these regions. The crucial indicator is number of natural increase of
population for tourism development in cross border development and cooperation
processes. It is key element of development in cross border regions because without
human resources are not possible to develop any activities: to establish enterprises; to
create new jobs; to cooperate with neighbourhoods regions, to develop economic
diversification activities. The average natural increase of population rate is negative in
all Latvia country -5.1 in 2002, but the most negative indicator is in Ludza district -
13.2. There is interaction between indicators if low number of natural increase of



More intriguing information

1. The name is absent
2. Visual Artists Between Cultural Demand and Economic Subsistence. Empirical Findings From Berlin.
3. Income Mobility of Owners of Small Businesses when Boundaries between Occupations are Vague
4. AN ECONOMIC EVALUATION OF THE COLORADO RIVER BASIN SALINITY CONTROL PROGRAM
5. A Study of Adult 'Non-Singers' In Newfoundland
6. A Pure Test for the Elasticity of Yield Spreads
7. The Values and Character Dispositions of 14-16 Year Olds in the Hodge Hill Constituency
8. A Regional Core, Adjacent, Periphery Model for National Economic Geography Analysis
9. Fiscal federalism and Fiscal Autonomy: Lessons for the UK from other Industrialised Countries
10. The Impact of Hosting a Major Sport Event on the South African Economy
11. New Evidence on the Puzzles. Results from Agnostic Identification on Monetary Policy and Exchange Rates.
12. Cryothermal Energy Ablation Of Cardiac Arrhythmias 2005: State Of The Art
13. Cancer-related electronic support groups as navigation-aids: Overcoming geographic barriers
14. Cross-Country Evidence on the Link between the Level of Infrastructure and Capital Inflows
15. Gender and headship in the twenty-first century
16. An Efficient Circulant MIMO Equalizer for CDMA Downlink: Algorithm and VLSI Architecture
17. Nurses' retention and hospital characteristics in New South Wales, CHERE Discussion Paper No 52
18. The name is absent
19. The name is absent
20. The name is absent