Post on 01-Apr-2015
Salamin – Radvánszki – Ricz: TA Revision
First steps towards the revised Territorial Agenda
Géza SALAMIN head of department
Judit RICZ, Ádám RADVÁNSZKIsenior planers
TA-TSP Drafting Team Váti Nonprofit Ltd.
ESPON Seminar Alcala, 9-10. June 2010
Salamin – Radvánszki – Ricz: TA Revision
Territorial Agenda - Revision 2011Bacground:• Agreed at the Informal ministerial meeting in Leipzig, May 2007• Territorial State and Perspectives of the EU (TSP) – evidence base for policy
making, relied dominantly on the available ESPON results• Revision was explicitly stated in TA, • Responsible: Hungarian Presidency• Hungary has underataken the coordination of update of the TSP too
The approach:Evidence-based (update of the TSP)
• Evaluation of experiences and changing context• Wide professional partnership
Salamin – Radvánszki – Ricz: TA Revision
TA-TSP Working GroupMembers delegated from:
Lead by Hungarian Ministry for National Development
BelgiumCyprusCzech RepublicFranceGermanyGreeceItalyLatviaLuxemburg
NorwayPolandPortugalSlovenia SpainSwedenSwitzerlandESPON CUEC DG REGIO
Salamin – Radvánszki – Ricz: TA Revision
The Drafting TeamCo-ordinated by Váti -HungaryGéza Salamin (HUHU)
Jacek Zaucha (PLPL)Ole Damsgaard (SESE, FI, NO, FI, NO) Iván Illés (HUHU)Marek Jetmar (CZCZ)Tomasz Komornicki (PLPL)Isidro Lopez (ESES)Ádám Radvánszki (HUHU)Peter Schön (DEDE)Volker Schmidt-Seiwert (DEDE)
Silvia Jost (CHCH)Zsuzsanna Drahos (HUHU)Liesl Vanautgaerden (BEBE)Philippe Doucet (BEBE)
VÁTI support team (HUHU):Márton Péti, Judit Ricz, Attila Sütő, Ágnes Somfai, Kyra Tomay, Réka Prokai,
Salamin – Radvánszki – Ricz: TA Revision
Components of TA revision beyond the TSP update
Evaluation of the challenges and priorities:• Relevance of the content of TA2007 to the current situations
(based on TSP results)• External coherence of the document with the changing policy
context• TA assessment exercise by DT and WG experts
Experiences with the implementation of TA:• review of existing reports, documents• member state questionnaire survey• review of implementation actions explicitly named in Ch. IV. of the
TA
Salamin – Radvánszki – Ricz: TA Revision
TSP BACKGROUND ANALYSIS
Mid 2009
TSP DRAFTING
3rd quarter 4th quarter 1st quarter 2nd quarter 3rd quarter 4th quarter 1st quarter
TA EVALUATION
TA WORDING
DISCUSSION, DIALOGUE
20102011
200
9
201
0
201
1
DTM6
DTM5
DTM4
DTM3
DTM2
WG1 WG2
WG3
WG4
PARTNERSHIP – DISCUSSION
WG4WG4
DTM6
Draftint team meetings
Working group meetings
DTM2
Salamin – Radvánszki – Ricz: TA Revision
MilestonesScoping document for the update of TSP and revision of TA (Director General meeting of MS-s) May 2009
1st Progress report to the NTCCP Meeting March 22.2010
Scoping document for the review of the TA for the Director General meeting May 2010
Draft TSP2011 and the first draft of the revised TA presented to the NTCCP October 2010
Drafts of the revised TA and the TSP2011 presented to DGs End of November 2010
Draft final updated TSP and draft final revised TA (NTCCP) February 2011
Final updated TSP and final revised TA (DG meeting) March 2011
Final TSP2011 and final TA2011 (Informal Ministerial meeting) May 2011
Salamin – Radvánszki – Ricz: TA Revision
Motivations of revision: Motivations of revision: NNew challengesew challenges
Recent trends with significant influence on the EU territory in line with results of TSP update
• Economic and financial crisis• Growing complexity of demographic and social issues, including
cultural aspects• Increasing attention and changing approach to climate change• Higher volatility of food and energy prices and challenges of energy
security• Aspects of an enlarged EU territory• Major global and local-regional responses
Salamin – Radvánszki – Ricz: TA Revision
Motivations of revision: Motivations of revision: Changing policy contextChanging policy context
Most important milestones: • Lisbon Treaty: territorial cohesion as third objective of EU• Green Paper on Territorial Cohesion: ‘Turning territorial diversity into
strength’ and following discussion on TC (Kiruna conference)• Discussions on the future of Cohesion Policy (Barca Report, etc.)• EU 2020 and recovery packages of the EU• Revised EU Sustainable Development Strategy
Permanent strategic watch of policy developments is needed
+ ESPON Synthesis Report is coming in autumn 2010
Salamin – Radvánszki – Ricz: TA Revision
EU 2020 – A European strategy for smart, sustainable EU 2020 – A European strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growthand inclusive growth
• EU2020 Strategy does NOT include any section specifically dedicated to territorial issues
• BUT it has a few (rather randomly placed) territorial references, e.g.: – urban and rural development, – cross-border cooperation, – EU in the world, etc.
• AND it definitively will have considerable implications for European territorial development.
EU 2020 and the TA could (should) cross-fertilise.
The three priorities of EU 2020 are as follows:“– Smart growth: developing an economy based on knowledge and innovation. – Sustainable growth: promoting a more resource efficient, greener and more competitive economy. – Inclusive growth: fostering a high-employment economy delivering social and territorial cohesion.”
Salamin – Radvánszki – Ricz: TA Revision
Barca report (2009): Barca report (2009): AN AGENDA FOR A REFORMED AN AGENDA FOR A REFORMED COHESION POLICYCOHESION POLICY
• The Barca Report on future cohesion policy emphasizes the need for a place-based approach in a reformed cohesion policy.
• Its keywords are: multi-level governance, concentration of priorities and resources, accountability, orientating grants to results, etc.
• The following priorities are explicitly mentioned in the Barca report:
CONCENTRATING RESOURCES
3. T
he re
form
1-2 core priorities must have a predominantly “social inclusion” objective:
the social and the territorial agendas must come together in a territorialized social agenda, an agenda aimed at persons and aware that policy effectiveness depends on contexts,
a unique opportunity for the EU to respond to the increasing constraints on Member States’ social policies while respecting the diversity of national social contracts,
a case for migration
1-2 core priorities must have a predominantly “economic” objective:
a case for innovation, by adopting new results-oriented methods
other possibilities: climate change, children, skills, aging
Salamin – Radvánszki – Ricz: TA Revision
Review of EU Sustainable Development Strategy• Renewed EU Sustainable Development Strategy (2006) is an important policy
framework document covering mutually supportive thematic objectives: environmental protection, economic prosperity, social cohesion and global
responsibility. • Mainstreaming of sustainable development, an overarching and long-term goal
of the EU into EU policies (COM, 2009): Review of the EU SDS responding to new challenges like financial and economic crisis
• The EU SDS does NOT include any section espec. dedicated to territorial issues• BUT some territorial indications are explicitly mentioned, e.g.:
urban transport, employment opportunities in rural areas, etc.
The EU SDS being as holistic as it is, has implications basicly to all TA challenges and priorities
7 cross-cutting challenges in EU SDS:1. Climate change and clean energy2. Sustainable transport3. Sustainable consumption and production4. Management of natural resources5. Public health6. Social inclusion, demography and migration7. Global poverty
The EU SDS includes three further horizontal policy issues:1. Education and training2. Research and development3. Financing and economic instruments
Salamin – Radvánszki – Ricz: TA Revision
Main findings of the report of the Swedish presidency on the Main findings of the report of the Swedish presidency on the realization of the First Action Programmerealization of the First Action Programme
• need for strengthening coordination
• greater emphasis on delivery mechanisms and governance aspects
• more visibility and awareness raising
• better communication towards the wider public including all stakeholders
• permanent strategic dialogue on EU, national and subnational level cross-cutting all sectors for a successful territorialisation of EU policy making.
• more focused approach in revised TA
• main target groups have to be clearly addressed
Salamin – Radvánszki – Ricz: TA Revision
TATA assessment – expert exerciseassessment – expert exercise
IMPLEMENTATION– determination of main addressees– clear messages for sectoral policies– increased role for territorial coordination
most challenges and priorities defined in the TA2007 are still valid however their content needs slight modification, more focusing
New CHALLENGES (e.g.) effects of global economic and financial crisis; vulnerable local economies and communities; growing peripherality and discrepancies within EU; rural and depopulating areas
Ideas for new PRIORITIES (e.g.)shrinking regions and unbalanced demography; diversity and utilization of rural territorieslocal responses and local, regional systems
Salamin – Radvánszki – Ricz: TA Revision
Member state exampleMember state example Hungarian EffortsHungarian Efforts
Efforts towards horizontal aspects of territorial cohesion:
Policy: National concept in line with territorial cohesion
Knowledge creation: territorial monitoring, evaluation system
Programmes: horizontal objective in the NSRF 2013
Projects: criteria of selection of projects to be supported
Methodology, awareness raising:
http://www.rtop.hu/handbook_on_territorial_cohesion_mnde_vati_2009_.pdf
http://www.terport.hu/static/Kezikonyv_a_Teruleti_Agenda_hazai_vegrehajtasara_NFGM_VATI_2010.pdf
Salamin – Radvánszki – Ricz: TA Revision
Evidences: Using ESPON projects to the revision of the TSP
TSP Chapters ESPON 2013 projects
ASSESSMENT OF THE STATE, DIVERSITY, DISPARITIES AND DYNAMICS
Europe In the Globalized WorldMETROBORDER, ESPON CLIMATE, DEMIFER
Growth and Innovation – Recovery from the Economic Crisis
CAEE, SURE
Transport, Accessibility TIPTAP
Climate Change ESPON CLIMATE
Energy ReRISK
Nature, Environment and Risk Management
ESPON CLIMATE
Culture
Social Cohesion, Demography DEMIFER
Cross-Border and Broader Neighbourhood
METROBORDER
Territorial Structures and Challenges
EDORA, TeDi, Typology Compilation, SS-LR, EUROISLANDS, METROBORDER
Salamin – Radvánszki – Ricz: TA Revision
TSP Chapters ESPON 2013 projects
EU POLICIES AND THEIR IMPACT ON TERRITORIAL DEVELOPMENT
EU Policies and their Impact
Regional (Structural and Cohesion) Policies
Common Agricultural Policy (especially the second pillar in the scope of development of the rural areas)
TIPTAP, EDORA
Energy and Transport Policy ReRISK
Environmental Policy ESPON CLIMATE
Economic Policy (Competition, R&D policy, EU 2020)
Integrated maritime policy
Strategy for Sustainable Development
Fishery policy
European Urban Development Policy FOCI, METROBORDER
Social Policy DEMIFER
Addressing the Territorial Impact of EU Policies
TIPTAP
+ ESPON database, maps
+ Synthesis Report 2010 Autumn
Contacting lead partners of most relevant projects
Salamin – Radvánszki – Ricz: TA Revision
Scoping towards TA 2011• Compass function:
– Orienting cohesion policy 2014+– Orinentation and co-ordination for member states– Recommendations for EU policies– Clear understanding of territorial matters
• Actors, competences, resources:– Extended ownership (role of EC, European institutions, governments of
member states, etc.)– Partnership with „non-territorial” actors– Strengthening role of MS-s and regions in strengthening territorial
cohesion - legitimate actors– Encourage own activities of the member states
• Character:– Conceptual vs. more tangible ?– More on HOW to put into practice (principles, mechanisms, defining further
tasks to develop methodologies, etc.)– More systematic activities to propose– Follow up, monitoring
Salamin – Radvánszki – Ricz: TA Revision
Understanding the notion of territorial cohesion
• Included in the Lisbon treaty• New paradigm, replacing convergence oriented approach
of territorial policy in many countries• Hard to understand, (regional disparities vs. entire
territoriality as such)• Risk of loosing focus – no common understanding• Need for clear common territorial priorites
Salamin – Radvánszki – Ricz: TA Revision
Levels of understanding Levels of understanding and and iimplementationmplementation
• EU • Member states• Regions – local authorities
If it is about better territorial state:Who has more competence to support territorial cohesion?
Salamin – Radvánszki – Ricz: TA Revision
– Horizontal understanding: Territoriality should be taken into account in every situation
• Territorial capital• Territorial co-ordination• Mechanisms
– Understanding the space: Identifying and forming territorial structures
• Territorial structure of sectors/themes• Territorial structure of development, potentials of
development – sysnthetic types• Institutional territorial structures
Understanding of territorial cohesion Two sides of the coin
„Territorial cohesion/planning is not about money”
Salamin – Radvánszki – Ricz: TA Revision
Territories
• Quantitative term: Giving priority, more resoruces to certain territories Key question: – Who gets support (money), How much?
• Qualitative term: differences of spaces, specific solutions.– Every place is part of one or more type– There are no more and less important types of
territoriesKey question: How and what to do in a certain spaces!
Salamin – Radvánszki – Ricz: TA Revision
Good progress in horizontal realization of territorial cohesion
• Creation of territorial knowledge:- ESPON, Cohesion reports, etc.• Mechanism: Territorial Impact Assesment• Coordination, dialogues:
– NTCCP, – TCUM and its WGs– Green Paper discussion– COM Interservice group
• Activities of the 1st Action Programme of the TA• Efforts of presidencies so far (DE, PO, SLO, FR, CZ, SE, ES)• Instruments: European Terrotorial Cooperation Notions:• Territorial capital (TA, Green Paper on TC)• Place based approach (Barca report)
Salamin – Radvánszki – Ricz: TA Revision
Theoretical models?
Salamin – Radvánszki – Ricz: TA Revision
Regions with special geographic Regions with special geographic characteristicscharacteristics
• sparsely populated territories – northernmost areas• cross-border areas• mountains,• coastal zones• islands• river basins, lakesides, • protected areas (ecologically, culturally, tourism or recreation areas)• Etc.
Unbalanced:•coastal regions – landlocked regions•mountain regions – plain regions•Other handicaps? – e.g. territorrially determined segregation
Lisbon treaty (Article 174):
.. particular attention shall be paid to rural areas, areas affected by industrial transition, and regions which suffer from severe and permanent natural or demographic handicaps such as:
- northernmost, very low population density- island- cross-border- and mountain regions.
..
Salamin – Radvánszki – Ricz: TA Revision
North: -cold climate and post-glacial landscape
- rich in natural resources (water energy, forests, ores, fishery, etc.), clear environment
-knowledge economy, solid human capital, competitive and innovative
- ahead in R&D intensity & information society
-Plenty of space: remote sparsely populated areas
- Climate change brings more precipitation
South:
- climate change makes more vulnerable: growing water scarcity, agriculture, potential desertification,
- economy suffers from the large share of low added value activities
- net migration has changed to positive
- weaknesses in labour force qualifications
- low employment rates
East:-capital regions: driving forces but development is spreading slowly & unequally
-Smaller ecological footprint of the society
- unfavourable demographic changes
- remains handicapped regarding transport and ICT infrastructure
- delayed suburbanization, a boom of urban sprawl
- several vulnerable rural peripheries in crisis
-Socialist heritage
West:- Core: concentration of functions of global/European importance
- developed transport networks, multimodal accessibility
- high level of GDP/capita and household incomes
- highly urbanized area; high pop. density, related environmental problems (urban sprawl)
- positive population changes (immigrants)
Regional Regional synthesissynthesis: Main geographical : Main geographical regionsregions
Salamin – Radvánszki – Ricz: TA Revision
Northern Periphery
Baltic Sea North West Europe
North Sea Atlantic Coast Alpine Space
Central Europe South West Europe
Mediterranean
South East Europe Caribbean Area
Acores-Madeira-Canarias
(Macaronesia)
Indian Ocean Area
Transnational programmes under the European Territorial Cooperation
Objective
•+ European Danube Strategy
•+ Baltic Sea Strategy
- Political character
- Spaces of cooperation with specific profiles
Spaces of transnational Spaces of transnational cooperationcooperation
Salamin – Radvánszki – Ricz: TA Revision
Partnership
• Drafting team: delegated from 10 member states
• Working group: 16 member states +ESPON, +EC
• Network of Territorial Cohesion related Contact Points (NTCCP)
• Director General meetings
• Dialogue with professionals
• Co-operation with ESPON CU and TPG-s
• Consultation from the autumn of 2010
Salamin – Radvánszki – Ricz: TA Revision
PartnershipUpcoming and recent events
Date Place Event Target group
22.03.2010 Madrid, ES NTCCP meeting NTCCPs
10.05.2010 Sevilla, ES DG meeting DGs
22.04.2010 Bonn, DE TA Workshop Regional stakeholders, professionals
26.05.2010 Pécs, HU RSA conference Researchers
9-10.06.2010 Alcala, ES ESPON Open Seminar Researchers, stakeholders
28-29.09.2010 Namur, BE TA Conference EU Sector policies
8.10.2010. Brussels Global challenges in polycentric regions – what role for strategic spatial planning?
Experts, planners, academics
13.10.2010 Namur, BE NTCCP meeting NTCCPs
16-17.11.2010 Liége, BE ESPON Internal Seminar Researchers, stakeholders
02.2011 Warszawa VASAB Annual conference Local, regional stakeholders
Salamin – Radvánszki – Ricz: TA Revision
Thank you for attention!
gsalamin@vati.hu