Transcript Open Days - Indicators on Territorial Cohesion

Open Days | European Week of Regions and Cities
Regional and Local Economies in a Changing Global Context
Indicators on Territorial Cohesion
The ESPON INTERCO project
Hy Dao, project leader
Indicators on Territorial Cohesion – The ESPON INTERCO project
1
The Transnational Project Group (TPG)
• Partners
– University of Geneva, SWITZERLAND (Lead)
– National Technical University of Athens, GREECE
– Nordregio - Nordic Centre for Spatial
Development, Stockholm, SWEDEN
• Experts
– Spatial Foresight, Heisdorf, LUXEMBOURG
– RRG Spatial Planning and Geoinformation,
Oldenburg i.H., GERMANY
Indicators on Territorial Cohesion – The ESPON INTERCO project
2
Multiple dimensions (project specifications)
Challenges
Global economic competition: Increasing global pressure to restructure and modernise, new emerging markets and
technological development; Climate change: New hazard patterns, new potentials; Energy supply and efficiency:
Increasing energy prices; Demography: Ageing and migration processes; Transport and accessibility / mobility:
Saturation of euro-corridors, urban transport; Geographic structure of Europe: Territorial concentration of economic
activities in the core area of Europe, and in capital cities in Member States of 2004, further EU enlargements.
Policy orientations
Balanced territorial development; Strengthening a polycentric development by networking of city regions and cities;
Urban drivers (large European cities, small and medium sized cities, suburbanisation, inner city imbalances);
Development of the diversity of rural areas; Emphasis on ultra-peripheral, northern sparsely populated, mountain areas,
islands; Creating new forms of partnership and territorial governance between urban and rural areas; Promoting
competitive and innovative regional clusters; Strengthening and extending the Trans-European Networks; Promoting
trans-European risk management including impacts of climate change; Strengthening ecological structures and cultural
resources.
Issues
Population and migration; Economic development and potentials; Social issues; Environmental issues; Cultural
factors. Balance and polycentricity; Urban sprawl; Proximity to services of general interest; Border discontinuities;
Geographical specificities; Sub-regional disparities; (Potential) accessibility; Natural assets; Cultural assets; Land
(sea) use issues; Territorial cooperation options (urban-urban, rural-urban), etc. Climate change impact; Regional
competitiveness; Territorial opportunities / potentials; Innovative creativity; Well-being standards, quality of live, etc.
Indicators on Territorial Cohesion – The ESPON INTERCO project
3
The main dimensions of territorial cohesion
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
focussing on
territorial structure
outcomes (=> well-being)
connection
e.g.
competitiveness
life expectancy
innovation
rather than
health expenditures
inclusion
environment quality
energy
cooperation/governance
Indicators on Territorial Cohesion – The ESPON INTERCO project
4
What makes our indicators territorial ?
• calculated at subnational level;
• calculated by type of areas (e.g. by degrees of
urbanisation);
• showing contexts (intra- and inter-national
comparisons);
• showing trends (directions of change) and
performances, e.g. as measured against the
TA 2020 objectives.
Indicators on Territorial Cohesion – The ESPON INTERCO project
5
Data availability concerns
Category
Indicator
Data availability
NUTS-0
subnational
Evaluation
spatial
temporal
spatial
temporal
NUTS0
subnat
tional
Urban-rural population
























Share of tertiary educated
people

()

()
()
()
Potential accessibility by car
to population

()1

()1
()1
()1
Potential accessibility by car
to GDP

()1

()1
()1
()1
Households with broadband
access

() 4

() 4
() 4
() 4
Access to nearest national
road






Access to nearest railway
station






Energy
Greenhouse gas emission


At risk of poverty rate


Happiness index






Social and
cultural affairs







Economy
GDP per inhabitant






Employment rate






Unemployment rate






Median disposable annual
household income






Employment in transport






Total R&D expenditures






Intramural R&D expenditures

() 4

() 4
() 4
() 4
Renewable energy

() 4


() 4

Demography
Population density
Life expectancy
Population average growth
Transport,
accessibility,
communication
Environment,
hazardson Territorial
consumption
Indicators
Cohesion – The ESPON INTERCO project

Good performance, both
spatial & temporal
Some problems
concerning temporal
dimension
Big problems both with
spatial & temporal
dimensions
Good performance, both
spatial & temporal
6
Happiness index, overall well-being ?
Indicators on Territorial Cohesion – The ESPON INTERCO project
7
Population change as a proxy of satisfaction ?
Indicators on Territorial Cohesion – The ESPON INTERCO project
8
Top indicators (provisional)
Indicators
GDP per capita
Population aged 25-64 with tertiary education
Employment rate 20-64
Unemployment rate, differentiated by female/male
People at-risk-of-poverty or social exclusion
Self perceived personal state of health
Life expectancy at birh
Accessibility of grocery services or to compulsory
Mortality/economic risk from multiple hazards
Natural and environmental assets
Air pollution (e.g. PM10 / Ozone concentrations)
Regional governance indicators (QoG)
Trust in legal system
Polycentricity index
Net migration rate
Desired direction of change














?
increase desired, while lagging regions should
increase desired, while lagging regions should
increase desired, while lagging regions should
decrease desired
reduction of risk to zero desired
incrase desired until everybody´s perception is
expectancy should be at least stable, no
the higher access the better, but minimum level
decrease desired
the higher the assets, the better
pollution to decrease until zero
the higher, the better
increase desired
according to TA 2020, should increase
should be positive, especially when negative
EU
2020



TA
2020









Provisional list
=> To be discussed at the next INTERCO workshop (Brussels, 20 Oct. 2011) !
Indicators on Territorial Cohesion – The ESPON INTERCO project
9
Examples of metrics
Sigma-convergence
Evolution of disparities in GDP per capita between NUTS3 regions
18'000
16'000
St. dev. (EUR/inh.)
14'000
Not a metropolitan region
12'000
10'000
8'000
6'000
Small metropolitan region
Medium size metropolitan
region
Big metropolitan region
4'000
2'000
0
2'000 2'001 2'002 2'003 2'004 2'005 2'006 2'007 2'008
Indicators on Territorial Cohesion – The ESPON INTERCO project
11
Examples of metrics
Gross Domestic Product
(NUTS3 values aggregated by metropolitan regions)
Beta-convergence : States and trends of GDP per capita
Change 2000-2008 (%/year)
3.0%
2.5%
Not a metropolitan region
2.0%
Small metropolitan region
1.5%
Medium size metropolitan
region
1.0%
Big metropolitan region
0.5%
0.0%
20'000
22'000
24'000
26'000
28'000
30'000
Average of NUTS3, 2008 (EUR/inh.)
Indicators on Territorial Cohesion – The ESPON INTERCO project
13
Thank you for your attention
http://www.espon.eu/main/Menu_Projects/Menu_ScientificPlatform/interco.html
Indicators on Territorial Cohesion – The ESPON INTERCO project
14