Flensburg Fjord: A cross-border challenge

By Annika Pohl Harrisson, postdoctoral student, International and Regional Politics, Department of Political Science and Public Management, and Associate Professor Dorte Jagetic Andersen, Centre for Border Region Studies

In recent years, the worsening state of Danish fjords has drawn widespread attention and concern, time and again making headlines. As summer fades, it’s become common to see reports and articles laying out the alarming conditions in the fjords. The focus is on oxygen depletion, excessive nutrient levels and the resulting rise in algae growth. Lately, worrying news has emerged that oxygen depletion in Danish fjords is progressing even faster this year than it did at the same time last year.

The state of the fjords has sparked concern across Danish society. A recent report from the Danish Centre for Environment and Energy identified Flensburg Fjord as one of the hardest-hit areas.

Flensburg Fjord is a complex case as it straddles the border between Denmark and Germany. Since the fjord is fluid by nature and doesn’t recognise man-made borders, decisions and actions – or the lack of them – on one side of the border inevitably affect conditions on the other. The boundless nature of water makes it clear that any efforts to improve the fjord’s health must be seen from a cross-border perspective. The fjord highlights the challenge of tackling environmental issues, which are often cross-border and international by nature.

Each side for itself

Many of the ideas and plans for improving Flensburg Fjord’s condition – including safeguarding the coastal towns along its shores – are the same on both the Danish and German sides. Local authorities on each side have identified key challenges, such as the need for better wastewater treatment and improved handling of runoff from streams. These issues are dealt with at the municipal and regional level on either side of the fjord. But the efforts don’t always match up across the border.

One example is mussel fishing with bottom-dragging gear, a practice criticised for damaging the seabed. Experts have pointed out that bottom trawling not only harms the seabed but also depletes mussel stocks, which play a key role in filtering polluted water in fjords. On the Flensburg side, bottom trawling for mussels was halted in 2019 following a local political decision. For a while, it looked as if Denmark would follow suit. In autumn 2022, the Danish government announced a ban on bottom trawling in the area from the island of Als down to the Flensburg Fjord border. The ban was meant to take effect at the start of the new year. But after a general election brought a new majority to power, the government decided to delay the ban.

So there’s still no joined-up, cross-border strategy for managing the marine environment. There’s also no clear overview of pollution sources and what needs to be done to curb them. Right now, efforts to fix these problems can feel like swimming against the tide.

Working together across borders

The current cross-border teamwork on the fjord and efforts to push the green transition forward are limited. That’s worrying, to say the least, given the scale of climate change – not just what we’re seeing now but also what’s on the horizon. The climate of the future will make problems like water quality, biodiversity loss, rising sea levels, stronger storms and more frequent flooding even worse. This makes greater cross-border action more urgent.

That said, there are some positive signs that things are starting to move. A few cross-border projects are already underway, particularly those led by civil society groups and EU-funded initiatives. A Danish citizen-led effort, for instance, is working to establish stone reefs and plant eelgrass in the fjord, with help from German recreational divers and researchers from Flensburg University. Another example is the Danish-German emergency preparedness collaboration, DanGer112, which focuses on planning and running drills to ensure effective response to major climate-related events across the border.

So there are local initiatives focused on sharing knowledge and coordinating emergency responses. But official cooperation between Denmark and Germany on water management is still lacking. The way decisions are made in Denmark and Germany is very different, making it harder to set up a smooth and effective partnership. It’s still a challenge to find the right contacts on the other side of the border due to the big political and administrative differences between the two countries.

A recently launched project and network, ClimatePol, has started exploring these complexities in relation to climate adaptation efforts in the Region of Southern Denmark, Region Zealand and Schleswig-Holstein. While an initiative like this could help strengthen cross-border efforts in Flensburg Fjord, it doesn’t change the fact that there’s still a serious lack of political will and drive to build a strong and lasting collaboration between local authorities on both sides.

A warning for the future

The situation in Flensburg Fjord, and in the Danish-German border region as a whole, is a sharp reminder of how crucial it is to consider national borders when dealing with environmental and climate adaptation issues. Denmark is a country surrounded by water, a fact that has not just geopolitical weight but also major climate implications. It’s vital to engage with neighbouring countries that share key waters to ensure a sustainable approach to climate and the environment. Successful cross-border cooperation can bring big benefits, not just for the environment but for all parts of society. That makes a strong case for a joined-up, cooperative approach that stretches across borders.

The challenge of saving Flensburg Fjord shows why a cross-border effort is needed. With the world facing urgent environmental and climate changes, it’s clear that new frameworks must be put in place to support cross-border cooperation. Work on climate and environmental issues needs to go beyond national and regional governments and make room for local and regional initiatives that are already leading – and must continue to lead – the hands-on work.

The Danish version of this article was published in Jysk Fynske Mediers Erhverv+ on Thursday 3 October 2024