Feasibility report on alignment of the Republic of Moldova to EU NUTS statistical territorial...
-
Upload
myles-mcdonald -
Category
Documents
-
view
226 -
download
0
Transcript of Feasibility report on alignment of the Republic of Moldova to EU NUTS statistical territorial...
Feasibility report on alignment of the Republic of Moldova to EU
NUTS statistical territorial classification
Strengthening the National Statistical System Joint UN Project
Component on “Improvement of availability and reliability of regional statistics
for decision-makers of the Republic of Moldova”
Content1. Framework of NUTS classification
and EU best practices2. Situational analysis in Moldova3. Identification and of NUTS options4. Assessment of NUTS options5. Recommended TOP options
I Framework of NUTS classification and EU best practices
NUTS 3 in EU
Requirements for NUTS (1)Basic criteria• Administrative units - geographic area which operates under administrative authority that has
the power to take administrative or policy decisions for that area•Population threshold - persons who have their usual residence in the particular area
Level Minimum Maximum
NUTS 1 3 million 7 million
NUTS 2 800 000 3 million
NUTS 3 150 000 800 000
Requirements for NUTS (2)• If for a given level of NUTS no
administrative units of a suitable scale exist, this level shall be constituted by existing smalles administrative units
• Non-administrative units may devite from population treshold becouse of particual geografical, socio-economic, historical, cultura or enviromental circumstances
Case studies• New member states - Baltic countries (Latvia, Estonia,
Lithuania)• Similar by size and population• EX-USSR countries (only member states of EU as ex-USSR) • Also have boarder regions with Russian speaking minority
• Older member states – Ireland and Denmark• Similar by size and population• Ireland – fastest growth after joining EU• Denmark – have made several administrative reforms
Denmark (population 5 627 235; area 42 915)
• Exceptions• NUTS 2 - Nordjylland 581 057 (also defined as NUTS 3 one
regions)• NUTS 3 – Bornholm 40 305
Ireland (population 5 627 235; area 42 915)
• Exception – Dublin is bigger in terms of population (1.2 million) than any other NUTS 3 regions of Ireland.
• NUTS 2 – devided only in two regions
Lithuania (population 2 944 459; area 42 915)
• NUTS 2 as whole country, but theoretically as largest country in Baltics with two similar cities could form two NUTS 2 regions
• Exceptions in NUTS 3 - four regions doesn't meet criteria (104-149 000)
Estonia (population 1 315 819; area 45 227)
• NUTS 2 as whole country• Exceptions – two regions doesn't meet criteria (128 – 147 000)
Latvia (population 2 023 825; area 64 573)
• NUTS 2 – whole country• Latvia has FIVE planning regions (SIX NUTS 3) - Riga
municipality and Pieriga ( “surrounding” region) are part of one Riga Planning regions (consist of two NUTS 3 regions)
• Only Latvia don’t have any exceptions
Use of NUTS regions
• EU fund’s planning • NUTS 2 Cohesion policy• NUTS 3 cross boarder cooperation
• Service planning
│ 14
Cohesion policy
3 categoriesof regions
< 75 % of EU averageGDP/capita*
*index EU27=100
75-90 % > 90 %
Canarias
Guyane
Réunion
Guadeloupe/Martinique
Madeira
Açores
Malta
Less developed regions (182 bil. EUR)
Transition regions (35 bil. EUR)
More developed regions (54 bil. EUR)
Regional GDP figures: 2006-07-08© EuroGeographics Association for the administrative boundaries
│ 14
Difference in NUTS 2
*Cross borader cooperation is not included
• Whole country single NUTS 2 region (Baltic countries )
• Capital-regions are out of «Less-developed» category (PL, CZ, RO, HU, SL)
Cross border cooperation (1)
Cross boarder cooperation (2)• As larger regions as more population is counted in
allocation• Baltic countries:
• Latvia and Estonia – all country is as eligible region for cross boarder
• Lithuania – Kaunas reg. is not cross boarder region (participate as «adjoining» region)
• Adjoining regions - options for adjacent region means that no more than 20% of the Programme total eligible public funds will be granted to projects from this area
Planning of services (1)
Formation of regions (before 1997) Planning regions (2014)
Planning of services (2)
The Centre for Disease Prevention and ControlRegional Court
State Plant Protection Service State Labour Inspectorate
Planning of services (3)
The State Police of Latvia State Fire and Rescue Service
State Emergency Medical Service The State Land Service
II Situational analysis in Moldova
Administrative divisions
• Moldova has in total 982 local administrative units
• Moldova does not have any regional administrative units as regions are not elected as local governments.
Regions in Moldova• By the Law No. 438 of
28.12.2006 on regional development there are six development regions: North, Center, South, ATU Gagauzia, Chisinau and Transnistria
• RDA are for 3 functional regions
• Development regions are not administrative regions
Territorial approach in service planning
Other use of regional division
• Decentralization strategyoStrategy for educationoStrategy for social services
• Investment planning = territorial approach used in investment planningoEach ministry is planning the funding
of investment activities by the territorial distribution of their services
Organization of statistics• Statistics is organized:o by 5 of 6 development regions (in conformity with the Law No.
438 of 28.12.2006 on regional development of the Republic of Moldova);
o by districts/rayon (in conformity with the law No. 764 of 27.12.2001 on administrative and territorial division of the RM);
o by statistical regions (slightly different than regional development regions).
• Statistic of Tranistria is not included in NBS statistical organization - at this moment statistics about Transnistria is not collected by NBS.
III Identification of NUTS options
Discussions with stakeholders• Topics in discussions:
Use of current regional division in policy planning ( investment planning and service planning)
Possible expectations on NUTS division and most appropriate models for NUTS regions
• Participants: Ministry of Regional Development and Construction, National Bureau of Statistics, GIZ, State Chancellery, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Economy, Ministry of Environment, Ministry of Transport and Road Infrastructure, Organisation for Development of SME, Regional Development Agencies, Regional Development Councils and representatives of Gagauzia Region.
I Model – NUTS 2 whole country • NUTS 2 level: whole country• NUTS 3 level:
A. 5 regions – North, Centre, South, Gagauzia, Transnistria;B. 6 regions – North, Centre, South, Chisinau, Gagauzia,
Transnistria;C. 4 regions – North, Centre, South, Transnistria;D. 5 regions – North, Centre, South, Gagauzia, Chisinau;E. 3 regions – North, Centre, South;F. 4 regions – North, Centre, South, Chisinau;G. 11 regions - 9 ex-counties, Gagauzia and Transnistria.
II Model - NUTS 2 consist of 3 regions• NUTS 2 level :3 regions North, Centre, South • NUTS 3 level:
A. 7 regions – North, Balti, Centre, Chisinau, South, Gagauzia, Transnistria
B. 6 regions – North, Balti, Centre, Chisinau , South, Gagauzia
Criteria for evaluation• Regional integration • Operational feasibility• EU funding benefits• Administrative Costs • Regional services • EC criterion on population for NUTS regions• Balanced urban development
IV Assessment of NUTS options
How to evaluate (1) ?
How to evaluate (2) ?
Different criteria – different result
Unit of measurement
High 3 points
Medium 2 points
Low 1 point
+
0
-
Weight of criteria
Group of criteria and weights Evaluation Criteria ant weights
Political stability in regions
35%
Regional integration 15%
Operational feasibility 25%
EU funding benefits
25%EU funding benefits 25%
Implementation of options
35%
Administrative Costs 10%
Regional services 10%EC criterion on population for NUTS regions - 10%
Balanced urban development 5%
100% 100%
Comparable result – NUTS 2
Comparable result – NUTS 3
V Recommended TOP options
NUTS 2 – whole country
Evaluation of option
Regional integration
Operational feasibility
EU funding and econ. benefits
Admin. costs
Regional services
EC criteria
for NUTS regions
Balanced urban
development
+ + + + - - +
NUTS 2 – whole country
• Similar experience to Balic countries - whole country as one NUTS 1 and NUTS 2 region
TOP options for NUTS 3
By the score of the criteria index there could be ranged TOP 3 options of regions at NUTS 3 level:• e) with 3 regions (value of all criteria index 2.2) • a) with 5 regions and c) with 4 regions (each of both have index 1.95).
Option “E” with 3 regions – North, Centre, South
Evaluation of option
Regional integration
Operat. feasibility
EU funding
and econ. benefits
Admin. costs
Regional services
EC criteria
for NUTS regions
Balanc. urban devel.
+ - + + 0 - +
Option “A” with 5 regions – North, Centre, South, Gagauzia, Transnistria
Evaluation of option
Regional integration
Operat. feasibility
EU funding
and econ.
benefits
Admin. costs
Regional services
EC criteria for NUTS regions
Balanc. urban devel.
- + 0 0 0 - -
Option “C” with 5 regions – North, Centre, South, Transnistria
Evaluation of option
Regional integration
Operat. feasibility
EU funding and econ. benefits
Admin. costs
Regional services
EC criteria
for NUTS regions
Balanc. urban devel.
0 0 0 + 0 - -
TOP options for NUTS 3
• Major difference is in «understaning» Policical stability
Compare of TOP 3 - EU funding
• Equal potential allocation of EU funding – all 3 are best of all evaluated options
• Different number of municipalities in elagible regions – best options E with all Moldova
Compare of TOP 3 - NUTS population criteria
• All 3 have highest offsets beatween all evaluated options• The highset offset is for options «E» as thereticly it is possible to
formulate at least 2 NUTS 2 regions in place of Centre region
Compare of TOP 3 – administrative costs
• Smallest increase of costs for «E» (16% from base) and C (27% from base) – both in category of cheapest options
• Option «A» has increas of 38% from base and is in medium category of costs
Compare of TOP 3 – economical advantage
• The most appropriate option is “E”, then comes “C” with “A” as they have limited amount of resources
• In «E» main “driving” industries have better support with specialists as well as infrastructure
• Smaller regions:• Can’t be so flexible and have less chances to have
fast shift on growing industry demand (especially Transnistria, as it tries to produce all specialists for itself)
• Has huge influence of TOP 10 largest companies• Has huge influence of public sector - regions
limited competitiveness of private sector• Can compensate lack of specialists by labour
mobility.
Drivers of region
TOP sectors and TOP Companies and FDI investors
in TOP sectors
Resources
Business space (industrial areas), human resources
Overall recommendations• Short term (current year)
• Continue discussions with stakeholders in Moldova to choose the final option, considering a potential administrative territorial reform
• Start discussions with Eurostat and EC about implementation of NUTS regulation
• Medium term (next 3 years)• Prepare Moldova’s Government’s decision on implementation of NUTS
regulation• Gradual adjustment of the planning of deconcentrated services and
investments through application of a common approach on territorial units used (NUTS3 regions)
• Conduct reforms (including descentralisation) in accordance with national NUTS regions
• Long term (next 7 years)• Regional development programmes on NUTS 3 regions • Establishment of new Regional Development Agencies
Recommendations from statistics perspective• Short term (current year)• Initiation of the formal discussions with Eurostat and EC regarding the optimal option of the NUTS
National Statistical Classifier• Gradual harmonization of the regional statistics in compliance with EU requirements (continuous
activity)
• Medium term (next 3 years)• The adjustment of the draft of the National NUTS Classification, given the results of the 2014
Population and Housing Census• Obtaining the formal approval of the National NUTS Classification from part of Eurostat • Preparation and approval of the regulatory framework on the implementation of the NUTS
Regulation in national statistics• Gradual integration of Transnistria’s statistics in the national statistics of Republic of Moldova• Gradual harmonization of regional statistics in compliance with EU requirements (continuous
activity)• Assign a special role to NBS within the administrative-territorial reform process, through its
mandatory consultation at the establishment of territorial division and size based on the population number of the future administrative units (following the discussions with Eurostat)
• Long term (next 7 years)• Production of regional statistics in accordance with EU requirements to ensure the comparability
with the EU member countries• Gradual integration of Transnistria’s statistics in the national statistics of Republic of Moldova
Recommendations from regional development perspectiveShort term (current year)• Prioritization of regional development policy of RM to ensure its intra -ministerial character and
its role in implementation of sector policies at regional level
Medium term (next 3 years)• Realization of the (potential) territorial administrative reform, which might influence the final
shape of NUTS regions options for Moldova, being compliant with EC Regulation • The approval of NUTS 3 regions as territorial - administrative units would ensure a greater
flexibility in the formation of these regions and their approval by Eurostat (following the discussions with Eurostat)
Long term (next 7 years)• Elaboration of policy documents in regional development at NUTS 3 regions level • Identification of a new approach regarding the institutional framework creation• Identification of new selection methodologies of regional development projects, based on
regions’ development needs study realization and not on the own local authorities’ initiatives • The development of institutional capacities of regional development institutions and
modification of project implementation principle, so that RDA monitors the implementation of projects, and does not implement them directly
Thank You!