Assessing and governing Rural-urban interactions web page: Joaquim Oliveira Martins Regional...
-
Upload
jean-robinson -
Category
Documents
-
view
217 -
download
0
Transcript of Assessing and governing Rural-urban interactions web page: Joaquim Oliveira Martins Regional...
Assessing and governing Rural-urban interactions
web page: www.oecd.org/regional/rurban
Joaquim Oliveira MartinsRegional Development Policy Division
GOV OECD
Metz, 16 November 2012
1. Urban-rural interactions and externalities: theory and evidence
2. Beyond urban and rural divide: an integrated approach
3. Towards functional regions: concept and identification
4. Governing rural-urban interactions: a more complex picture
Outline
1- Urban-rural interactions and externalities
• Traditional approaches focus on urban-rural divide There are still differences in socio-economic conditions and performances
between urban and rural areas
20
25
30
35
GD
P p
er
inh
ab
itan
t (t
ho
usa
nd
s U
S$
, P
PP,
co
nst
an
t p
rice
s)
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008
Time
Urban regions Intermediate Rural
Average GDP per inhabitant in OECD TL3 regions, by type of region
GDP per capita is much higher in urban areas than in rural and intermediate areas.
On average, no convergence in terms of GDP per capita
1 - Urban-rural interactions and externalities
U.S., Canada, Chile, Mexico, Israel and Island are excluded from the analysis for reasons of data availability
• However, opportunities for growth are observed in any type of regionIn terms of GDP growth, rural regions show the highest variability
-.2
0.2
.4.6
.8g
dp g
row
th r
ate
200
0-2
009
Urban Intermediate Rural
1 - Urban-rural interactions and externalities
the variability of growth rates is much higher in rural areas than for the other types of region
part of this variability can be explained by looking at the role of the relationships with Urban or Intermediate regions (urban-rural linkages)
-.4
-.2
0.2
.4.6
pop
ulat
ion
gro
wth
ra
te b
etw
een
20
00 a
nd
20
09
Urban Intermediate Rural
Population growth rates (2000-2009) in OECD TL3 regions, by typology
U.S., Canada, Chile, Mexico, Israel and Island are excluded from the analysis for reasons of data availability
• However, opportunities for growth are observed in any type of region In terms of population growth rural regions show the highest variability
1 - Urban-rural interactions and externalities
Strong spatial externalities between urban and rural regions are observed
population rural regions grow more, ceteris paribus, the more connected they are (the smaller the distance) to the closest urban or intermediate region
there positive growth spillovers from urban to rural regions in terms of population. These effects are decreasing with distance
In addition urban areas benefit from rural areas in terms of provision of landscape, recreation, open space, natural resources, etc.
there can be pressures in the use of land from urban to rural areas (e.g. issue of urban sprawl)
The existence of these externalities makes worth shifting the attention from the administrative to the functional organization of the territory (functional regions)
2 – Beyond urban rural divideDeep territorial transformations in the last decades
New patterns of territorial organization
Economic development / structural changes
Improved ICT and transport
Mass diffusion of cars
Increased urbanization
Larger functional regions
Increased integration of places before more independent
Larger distances daily travelled by individuals
New concept of cities and rural areas
The traditional concepts of cities and rural areas, based on administrative boundaries, are not anymore coherent with the actual economic and social organization of the territory
From a socio-economic point of view, territory is organized in functional regions
2 – Beyond urban rural divide
2 – What is a functional region?
Functional regions geographical spaces where the bulk of local economic processes takes place.They are increasingly different from administrative region
Administrative region (smaller level)
Functional region
How it can be identified?Commuting (labour market)
Services
Partnerships
Transport networks
Supply chains
Etc.Administrative region (higher level)
2 – Functional vs. administrative regions
A functional approach makes it possible to highlight two main discrepancies between the administrative structure and the actual organization of the territory
2) Functional regions (e.g. metropolitan areas) vs. administrative regions
1) Core cities (cities de facto) vs. administrative cities
OECD functional metro region
TL3 administrative region
Rennes, France
3 – First step: identification of functional urban regions
Under the guidance of the OECD Working Party on Territorial Indicators, and carried out jointly with the EC and Eurostat
1. OECD has identified functional urban areas beyond city boundaries, as integrated labour market areas (using population density and travel-to- work flows).
2. 1 175 functional urban areas have been identified across 29 OECD countries
3. It allows comparisons among the different forms that urbanisation takes
Website: www.oecd.org/gov/regional/measuringurban
4 – Functional regions and rural-urban interactions: a more complex picture
Urban, peri-urban and rural areas are integrated through a broad set of linkages Different functions may be associated with different boundaries
High complexity of Urban-rural relationships
High variability of spatial boundaries
4 –Governing rural-urban interactions
Functional regions based on labour market interactions are able to catch many types of rural-urban interactions, especially for metropolitan areas
The Rurban project aims at going beyond a statistical definition of functional regions and at understanding the higher complexity of rural-urban interactions and their governance.
For this reason 12 case-study regions are providing evidence on how and at what territorial level different functions are governed.
The role and the structure of partnerships to govern rural-urban interactions are being assessed
4 – Governing rural-urban interactions: preliminary findings from case studies
The case of Rennes: different geographies for different functions (1/2)(metropolitan region)
4 – Governing rural-urban interactions: preliminary findings from case studies
Rennes Métropole (main rurban partnership)
Planning activity at the level of the Pays de Rennes
Different access to public services (e.g. public hospitals)
there are different regions for different functions high discrepancy among administrative regions and functional territories
The case of Rennes: different geographies for different functions (2/2)
4 – Governing rural-urban interactions: preliminary findings from case studies
The case of Forlì-Cesena: different geographies for different functions (1/2)Network of medium-sized cities
Prov. of Ravenna
Prov. of Rimini
Prov. of Forli-Cesena
4 – Governing rural-urban interactions: preliminary findings from case studies
The case of Forlì-Cesena: different geographies for different functions (1/2)Network of medium-sized cities
Labour market areas (LLSs) Chosen rurban partnership (e.g. agro-industry)
Tourism and water: the area of Romagna (territorial identity – soft factor)
Forli
Cesena
different regions for different functions labour market areas are not large enough to catch all the territory involved in the rurban partnership soft factors such as a strong territorial identity (e.g. ‘Romagna”) plays a role for the identification some of the partnerships (tourism, water, etc.)
Governing rural-urban relationships: preliminary findings from case studies
Strong Leadership: leadership plays an important role in bringing Urban and Rural Municipalities together (e.g. Germany, Italy)
Strong partnership buy in: partnership working is viewed as the optimum way to do business (e.g. Italy, Germany, US)
Strong territorial identity: The existence of a territorial identity helps to foster partnerships (e.g. Italy, Germany)
No single model of collaborations and partnerships: complex landscape of Rurban partnerships in some cases result in high transaction costs and partnerships, sometimes engaging large number of players (e.g. Italy)
Shared regional responsibility: Rural- Urban collaborations leads to improved ownership of the region: the responsibility (e.g. Germany) Power sharing inner structure: one-voice one vote approach to power sharing in a Rurban partnership is one way to ensure that the partnership functions (e.g. Germany, Australia)
What we learnt and further steps ahead
Territorial relationships between urban and rural areas are very complex and their governance require an approach on functional regions
The statistical identification of functional regions through the OECD method is a relevant step ahead to provide a geographical representation of territorial relationships and a guide to more integrated policies for urban and rural areas
However, labour market flows alone cannot always catch the whole spectrum of urban-rural relationships, especially in non-metropolitan regions, where labour flows are less intense and representative of actual territorial relationships
A high flexibility should be accepted for both identification and governance of urban-rural interactions
After drawing functional boundaries, it is not easy to organize institutions. There are different models of governance across OECD regions (formal, informal, conflictual, cooperative, etc.). These models are analysed through a set of 12 case-studies