KNOW YOUR REGIONS BY ESPON – SOME (SWEDISH) EXPERIENCES ‘ESPON on the Road’ Event, KTH 25th...

KNOW YOUR REGIONS BY ESPON –

SOME (SWEDISH) EXPERIENCES

‘ESPON on the Road’ Event, KTH 25th November 2014

Mats Johansson,Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Mats Johansson (KTH and Swedish ECP) presented ESPON – background and some experiences for the Master students

ESPON – what’s that?Introduction and background

• ESPON 2006 (2002-2006) European Spatial Planning Observation Network

• ESPON 2013 (2007-2013): European Observation Network on Territorial

Development and Cohesion

• Participants: The EU-countries + Norway, Switzerland, Iceland and Lichtenstein

• In ESPON 2013 (71 projects)• P1. Applied research (25 projects) • P2. Targeted analyses, client demand based, stakeholder initiated (23) • P3. Scientific platform, data and scientific support (15)• P4. Transnational networking activities, dissemination (8)

• News for ESPON 2013/2020: Regional and local actors highlighted

ESPON programmes, projects and links

ESPON 2006 Programme –

The European Spatial Planning Observation Network

http://www.espon.eu/main/Menu_Projects/Menu_ESPON2006Projects/Menu_ThematicProjects/

ESPON 2013 Programme –

The European Observation Network for Territorial Development and Cohesion

http://www.espon.eu/main/Menu_Programme/Menu_Mission/

ESPON 1.1.4 – Spatial Effects of Demographic Trends and Migration (2006 )

EDORA - European Development Opportunities for Rural Areas (2013)

DEMIFER- Demographic and Migratory Flows Affecting European Regions and Cities (2013)

TOWN – Small and medium-sized towns (2014)

SEMIGRA - Selective Migration and Unbalanced Sex Ratio in Rural Regions

(Västernorrland one of the stakeholders) (2013)

http://www.espon.eu/main/Menu_Projects/Menu_ESPON2006Projects/Menu_ThematicProjects/

http://www.espon.eu/main/Menu_Programme/Menu_Mission/

PRIORITY 4 Transnational Networking Activity ESPON on the ROAD

• Involves 19 ECPs (ESPON Contact Points) which make it possible to cover the diversity of policy challenges and interest in different parts of Europe.

• Has a high level of output based on common material for the ECP activities (the road show) that can be adapted to the transnational/ national/ local context by the Transnational Working Groups (TWGs).

• Is built on an appropriate management structure with a Lead Partner and 4 TWGs.

• Macro-regional approach as well as strong links with the local level and seeks to involve new users of ESPON.

• Includes PR and journalistic support to the outreach activities proposed and intends to make use of translation and social media.

Some Swedish and European Experiences

Point of departure 1: What can ESPON do for your region?

Point of departure 2: A European perspective

A regional perspective – a disaggragated approach

Here - some Swedish and European experiences

Commuting links and regional enlargement in Sweden Based on the ESPON/TOWN project. Case Study: Northern Sweden


Mats Johansson Royal Institute of Technology (KTH),

Division of Urban and Regional Studies Stockholm

The TOWN-project: Objectives

• The main objective is to identify small and medium-sized towns that have an urban centre with a population between 5 000 and 50 000 inhabitants.

• Provide evidence on the roles and functions of small and medium sized towns in their territorial contexts. The conditions for development and the functions that the small and medium-sized towns perform in these territorial contexts are significantly different.

• The analysis will be done by using commuting data in order to identify functional local labour markets.

The TOWN-project: Envisaged main results

• A methodological framework for studying small and medium-sized towns in their functional area contexts. Commuting flows and links.

• Evidence of good practices based on 10 case studies of small and medium sized towns in various territorial contexts that support the functional development of small and medium-sized towns (incl. four towns in Northern Sweden).

• Policy considerations based on the findings and evidence from the analyses and case-studies with focus on the development and functions of small and medium sized towns. This is done – at least for Northern Sweden –by interviews with different kinds of policy-makers.

The TOWN-project: Policy questions

• What kind of roles and functions do small and medium sized towns perform in the European territorial structure, e.g. as providers of employment, growth and services of general interest, that contribute to the Europe 2020 Strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth?

• What are the potentials and barriers for development of small and medium sized towns in different territorial contexts, and how can policy at different levels unleash the potentials and diminish the barriers in ways that strengthen their functional character?

• What type of governance and cooperation arrangements exist at various levels aiming to support the development of small and medium-sized towns and their territorial context, and how can policy further support these types of arrangements in order to strengthen their contribution to a more balanced territorial development of the European regions?

Points of departure:The municipality structures within the ESPON Space

• The numbers of municipalities (LAU2) vary largely between the various countries. • France 36683 (max)• Lichtenstein 11 (min)

• Sweden 290 (large municipalities in a wide country)• Lithuania 518

• Depending of population size areal size defintions administration and administrative reforms tradition

The result with relevance for commuting and functional local labour markets varies thus a lot:In densely populated countries: more commuting over municipality borders

In sparsely (and geographically wide) countries the preconditions for commuting is quite different.

Functional Urban Areas (FUAs) in EU29Source: ESPON2006, Project1.1.4

Pentagon:

•densely populated,

•many FUAs,

•polycentric development

The Nordic periphery (Sweden): •sparsely populated,•only a few large FUAs, •monocentric development, •weak preconditions for polycentricity•an effect of the wide and sparsely populated country?

The extended OECD urban- rural typology 2010

Source: Dijkstra & Poelman 2010, EDORA 2010

Pentagon: urban and densely populated areas

The Northern Periphery: predominantly rural with few exceptions

Long distances – low accessibility - hamper commuting – monocentric structures – asymmetrical commuting flows

Be care: the different sizes of the regions (NUTS3: scale problems)

• 1) countries with a prevalence of urbanised population clustered in high-density urban centres: Belgium, Switzerland, Greece, the Netherlands, Spain, the UK, as well as smaller island states as Malta and Cyprus;

• 2) countries with more balanced repartition of population between classes of high-density urban clusters and small and medium towns: Austria, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Italy, Latvia, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Sweden and Slovenia;

• 3) Countries with an overrepresentation of population living in smaller settlements: France, Hungary, Ireland, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Norway and Slovakia.

Towns in Europe. ‘Degrees of urbanisation’ in Europe are characterised by three main types (TOWN, 2011):

Urban settlement structures across Europe

The brown field: In the Northern Periphery: ”Other population settlement as prevailing type” (TOWN) – geographically wide municipalities with small urban centres and villages (Sweden). But also in other settlement structures as France, Ireland, Poland and the Baltic States.

The red fields: a few medium-sized towns dominate the settlement pattern but it is different in the south (short distances) and in the north (long distances). Impact on commuting!

Blue fields: High density urban clusters – an effect of population concentration

Yellow fields: ”Very small towns as prevailing type”. A scattered picture, mostly in the Balkan Countries.

Swedish rank-size: Dominance of a few large towns

Three large metro areas dominate! Three large functional labour markets.

The majority of the towns and municipalities have less than 50 000 inhabitants.

Monocentric urban structure

(Northern) Sweden in Europe

Sweden is a sparsely populated country and Northern Sweden is extremely sparsely populated.

Out-migration vs in-migration regions and municipalities

This has impact on the urban and municipal structures with large spacious municipalities in the Northern Sweden with few inhabitants and low population density. Depopulation!

Important: Compared to the EU – Sweden has only 290 towns/municipalities

Swedish NUTS1 regions and the localization of the four case study towns

Avesta

Timrå

Östersund

Kiruna

European community structure consisting of urban and rural municipalities.

Urban

Urban Rural

Urban

Rural

A schematic view of community structures in large parts of the EU

Swedish community structure consisting of municipalities with both urban and rural areas.

Small villages

Urban

Rural

Urban Rural

U Rural

Rural

The Northern Periphery and (Northern) Sweden: Sparsely populated geographically wide communities consisting of both urban and rural

areas

”Regional enlargement” in Sweden: Creating functional local labour markets based on commuting flows (only three links!) between municipalities

Swedish criteria for “independence”:

P1: General condition, total out-commuting less than 20 %

P2: Specific condition, out-commuting to a special town less than 7,5 %

The chains are broken after three links!!!

Figur 1. Exempel på en flerkärnig lokal arbetsmarknad

11 30c 20c 50c

30b

30b

20a 20a

20a

20b

E.g.: 11 Malmö (metro), 20c Helsingborg (large town), 30c Ängelholm (small town), 50c Båstad (small municipality)

Construction of Swedish functional labour markets based on commuting flows

Different types of functional local labour markets in Sweden

Asymmetrical commuting structures in metropolitan or big city areas. One dominant town, monocentric structures but regional enlargement.E.g. The Stockholm-region,the Gothenburg-region and the Malmö/Lund-region.

Small symmetrical commuting structures. Polycentric settlement structures, small and medium-sized localities in “densely” populated regions. Regional enlargement.E.g. in Southern Sweden, in the corridor Stockholm-Gothenburg.

Isolated small towns and municipalities in sparsely populated areas. Too long distances for commuting. Internal monocentric structures. Dependent of on municipal centre. No or weak preconditions for regional enlargement.E.g. Northern Sweden, especially Norrland’s interior. Kiruna is a typical case.

Regional enlargement in Sweden 1970-2010.

Functional local labour markets (LAU1), numbers

Business cycles variations, connections with economic growth

Good times – fast regional enlargement, bad times – a slow-down of regional enlargement

Reduce the mismatch on the labour market – better internal cohesion

Note: the regional enlargement can’t continue in absurdum, break after the third link

Functional local labour markets in Sweden, 2010 Geographic pattern

The north-south divide!!

In the northern part of Northern Sweden the majority of LAU1s consists of only one municipality. Monocentric structures

Exceptions: The Bothnia Coast LineEsp. Umeå and Luleå LMs (but also monocentric)

In southern part of Sweden (Skåne). More polycentric structures!

Why?:Densely vs sparsely populated areas.

Wide vs tight municipalities impact on:

Distances between urban centres

Infrastucture

Accessiblity

Commuting flows – symmetrical or asymmetrical

Summing-up (Sweden): Commuting, functional local labour markets and regional enlargement

Preconditions:• Accessibility• Good infrastructure• More commuting• Changing employment and working conditions • Fewer labour market related migratory movements• More settlement related migratory movements

Results:• Larger functional local markets• Living and working more separated geographically• Better labour market matching – less segmentation• Stimulate economic growth• Stimulated by economic growth• But: large differences between Southern (leading), where most of the people live,

and Northern (lagging) Sweden

Problems:• Gender segregation?• Environment problems?

Demographic change and urban-rural relationsBased on the EDORA and SEMIGRA projects.


Mats Johansson Royal Institute of Technology (KTH),

Division of Urban and Regional Studies Stockholm

Urban – rural relations in EuropeDemographic change: Based on two typologies

The demographic typology (from ESPON 1.1.4, updated 2009/2014, also used in EDORA))

Based on the demographic equation:Total population change = (births – deaths) + (in-migration – out-migration)

The structural typology (from ESPON EDORA)a new urban-rural delimitation of the European regions, based on 13 economic and structural variables. Focused on economic restructuringFive types of urban-rural regions were distinguished:• Predominately Urban, • Agrarian, • Consumption Countryside, • Diversified with Strong Secondary Sector and • Diversified with Strong Market Services Sector

The Demographic Typology . A schematic typology with regard to sustainable demographic development. Six types.

Point of departure: “The demographic equation” PT=PN+PM

PT: total population change, PM: net-migration

PN: natural population change, TFR: Total Fertility Rate

1 PT>0 PM>0 PN>0

In-migration and young population/ ”high” TFR. High sustainability both in short and long term. The most favourable case.

2 PT>0 PM>0 PN<0

In-migration of people with low TFR. Natural population decrease because of lopsided age structure and/ or low TFR. Dependent of in-migration. No sustainability in long term – weak reproduction potential.

3 PT>0 PM<0 PN>0

Out-migration and young population/ ”high” TFR. Short term – sustainability. Long term – eroding sustainability because of lopsided age structure (out-migration).

4 PT<0 PM<0 PN>0

Out-migration but still young population/ ”high” TFR. Traditionally high fertility regions.Falling TFR -> low sustainability.

5 PT<0 PM>0 PN<0

In-migration and old population/ ”low” TFR. In-migration of elderly people and/ or singles, low reproduction potential. Dependent on in-migration. Low sustainability both in short and long run.

6 PT<0 PM<0 PN<0

Out-migration and old population/ ”low” TFR, depopulation. No sustainability both in short and long term. The worst case.

11 PT>0PT>0 PM>0PM>0 PN>0PN>0



22 PT>0PT>0 PM>0PM>0 PN<0PN<0

In-migration of people with low TFR. Natural population decrease because of lopsided age structure and/ or low TFR. Dependent of in-migration. No sustainability in long term – weak reproduction potential.

I n-migration of people with low TFR. Natural population decrease because of lopsided age structure and/ or low TFR. Dependent of in-migration. No sustainability in long term – weak reproduction potential.

33 PT>0PT>0 PM<0PM<0 PN>0PN>0



44 PT<0PT<0 PM<0PM<0 PN>0PN>0



55 PT<0PT<0 PM>0PM>0 PN<0PN<0



66 PT<0PT<0 PM<0PM<0 PN<0PN<0



The DemographicTypology 2003-2008

Type 1 (best case): Pentagon, Ireland and Iceland, Metropolitan areas

Spain, France and Italy – today in-migration areas

Type 6 (worst case): Northern periphery but better than in the end of the 90s, but still problematic

The Baltic States and Eastern Europe, esp. Bg and Ro, and Eastern Germany – more problematic than in the end of the 1990s

The divergent processes between East and West have been accentuated! The east-west divide even more highlighted!!!

Migration is the prime driver behind regional population changes – both in positive and negative senses!

Migration and natural population change reinforced each other – the age structure!

Growing and shrinking regions in Europe 2001-2012, N=1294Source: Johansson M, Nilsson P & Westlund H (2014)

Type 1 (best case): Pentagon and Ireland, Southern Spain, Metropolitan areas (even in problematic areas)

Spain, France and Italy – today in-migration areas

Type 6 (worst case): parts of Sweden but better than in the end of the 1990s, but still problematic

The Baltic States and Eastern Europe, esp. Bg and Ro, and Eastern Germany – more problematic than in the end of the 1990s. Accentuated population shrinkage!

The divergent processes between East and West have been accentuated!

Migration is the prime driver behind regional population changes – both in positive and negative ways!

Migration and natural population change reinforce each other – the age structure!

!

! ! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

Acores

Guyane

Madeira

Réunion

Canarias

MartiniqueGuadeloupe

Zagreb

Valletta

Budapest

Bratislava

Roma

Riga

Oslo

Bern

Wien

Kyiv

Vaduz

Paris

Praha

Minsk

Tounis

Lisboa

Skopje Ankara

MadridTirana

Sofiya

London

Berlin

Dublin

Athinai

Tallinn

Nicosia

Beograd

Vilnius

Kishinev

Sarajevo

Helsinki

Warszawa

Podgorica

El-Jazair

Ljubljana

Stockholm

Reykjavik

København

Bucuresti

Amsterdam

Luxembourg

Bruxelles/Brussel

Structural Types (Intermediate andPredominantly Rural NUTS 3 Regions)

No Data

PU Regions

Agrarian

Consumption Countryside

Diversified (Strong Secondary Sector)

Diversified (Strong Private Services Sector)

Rural or “Non-Urban”?

Keep in mind: The EDORA structural typology is not a pure typology of Rural Areas – two reasons:

(a)Rural areas do not function separately from adjacent urban areas – they are connected by a dense web of interactions.

(b)Smallest practicable data units are NUTS 3 and most of these contain sizable towns/cities.

It is more a typology of Intermediate and PredominantlyRural Regions.

But: It covers the whole “Espon space” (excl Iceland)

Some Generalisations which emerge from the EDORA Typologies

• Agrarian regions are mainly concentrated in an arc stretching around the eastern and southern edges of the EU27. Agrarian regions are retarding and low performers (depleting).

• The rest of the European space is a patchwork of Consumption Countryside, Diversified (Secondary) and Diversified (Private Services).

• Diversified (Secondary) regions tend to be relatively low performers, (dual character, matured structure, deindustrialisation, depleting).

• The Consumption Countryside (large public services, large consumption) regions and the Diversified (Market Oriented Private Services) group are both high performers, and likely to continue to “accumulate” in the future.

Sustainable population change in the four non-urban EDORA Structural types for the period 2001-2012 (NUTS3).

Source: Johansson M, Nilsson P & Westlund H (2014)

Agrarian: Eastern Europe and Balkan – shrinking, depopulation. Spain and some other parts, expanding (changing structure?)

Consumption Countryside: The largest group - split picture

Div 3: Old rural industrial regions retarding in Mid-Europe, expanding in the western parts (small group)

Div 4: Expanding in western Europe, the “new rurality”, rural gentrification, “knowledge-based” activities?

Concluding remarks – demographic change and urban-rural relations

• The east-west divide is accentuated!!!

• Urban regions – sustainable population development

• Some correspondence between the rural typologies at the extremes:– Agrarian = low demographic sustainability, in Eastern Europe.– Diversified (Private Services) = high demographic sustainability, in

Western Europe, the New Rural Economy.

• Intermediate categories (Consumption Countryside and Diversified –industrial regions) more mixed picture.

• Are structural patterns more a function of local preconditions and more fine-grained geographically - the macro-scale patterns replaced by micro-scale variations?

• Will patterns of demographic variation follow the same development path? The answer is to be found in more regional disaggregation.

SEMIGRA: Formalities and Background

SEMIGRA (Selective Migration and Unbalanced Sex Ratio in Rural Regions) is an ESPON Priority2 project.

P2-projects: Demand and client oriented projects.

SEEMIGRA. Stakeholders and case studies:Region Sachsen-Anhalt (lead stakeholder), GERegion Västernorrland, SERegion Kainuu, FIRegion Alföld, HURegion Magyarország, HU

Lead partner: IFL, Leibniz Institute for Regional Geography, Leipzig

A life cycle approach (from a rural point of view)

Focus: Young women (18-34) in (rural) areas - three phases with differing migration patterns

Aim: Comparing depopulating Västernorrland (Y-county) with the expanding and dynamic Stockholm region (AB-county).

From a rural point of viewPhase 1: Women leaving home for studies and labour marketentries (18-24 years). Huge out- and in-migration.

Phase 2: Women after finalized studies but in beginning of labourmarket careers (25-29 years). Lower migration intensities.Some return migration.

Phase 3: Women with foothold on the labour market and in the household creating ages (30-34 years). Dropping intensities.Return migration. Social networks. “Love and marriage”

DataGross Migration Data (Statistics Sweden)Expert interviews (Y-county)In-depth interviews with young female in-migrants (newcomers and return migrants) to Y-countyA Youth Survey about the future

AB:ExpandingPost-industriell

Low unemployment

Sustainable population development in all municipalities

Monocentric structure

Increased dualism in the enlarged Stckholm region

Y:StagnatingIndustrial region

High unemployment

Unsustainable population development

One big city dominates - monocentrism

Rural exodusYoung people on the runLow reproduction potentials

Intra-regional dualism –the big city vs all other ’towns’

Swedish experiences (cases) – two differing regions (counties), Stockholm (AB) vs Västernorrland

(Y)

Summing-up: Young women on the run – myth or reality?

High in-migration in both cases – in metropolitan Stockholm as well as in the ”rural” and sparsely populated industrial Västernorrland! A big difference is the high turnover in Västernorrland. In-migration creates out-migration? Or out-migration creates in-migration some years later?

Out-migration creates eroding reproduction potentials

The problem is more the high out-migration than low in-migration (that is at the same level as for Stockholm)

Another problem is the dual character of the region – only Sundsvall (the big city with university) has net in-migration. Young women from the interior to the big city (studies, female-friendly labour market, dual labour market coast/interior). Truth : Accentuates the dual structure!

Reality: huge out-migration in the ages 18-24. Result – net out-migration of younger women (18-34)but not for the ages 25 and over.

Myth: Out-migration in the ages 25 and over - false.

Reality – in-migration. Result – in-migration in the family creating ages, positive for natural

population change (increasing reproduction potentials)

Recommendation – stimulate in-migration in the ages 25 and over.

Income spin-offs? Increasing reproduction potentials.

Precondition: female-friendly diversified labour markets, no “macho” image, good schools,

good communications, etc. Important for recruitment of well educated young women (return after studies).

Thanks for attention Questions, comments, critics?

KNOW YOUR REGIONS BY ESPON – SOME (SWEDISH) EXPERIENCES ‘ESPON on the Road’ Event, KTH 25th...

Documents

Transcript of KNOW YOUR REGIONS BY ESPON – SOME (SWEDISH) EXPERIENCES ‘ESPON on the Road’ Event, KTH 25th...