Transcript Territorial Impact Package for Transport and Agricultural

ESPON Workshop at the Open Days
Brussels, 5 October 2010
Cooperation: the benefits of cooperating across
internal and external borders
TIPTAP – Territorial Impact Package for
Transport and Agricultural Policies
Roberto Camagni – Politecnico di Milano
The Team
Project Leader: DIG – Politecnico di Milano
Roberto Camagni, Roberta Capello, Camilla Lenzi, Andrea Caragliu,
Nicola Dotti, Paola Bolchi
Partners and subcontractors:
Centre for Rural Economy, School of Agriculture, Food and Rural
Development, Newcastle University
Mark Shucksmith, Marian Raley, Guy Garrod
Department of Spatial Economics, Free University Amsterdam
Ron Vreeker, Frank Bruinsma, Peter Nijkamp
MCRIT SL, Barcelona
Andreu Ulied, Efrain Larrea
The model: from TEQUILA to TIPTAP
TEQUILA 1
TIPTAP
(TEQUILA 2)
T erritorial
E fficiency
QU ality
I dentity
L ayered
A ssessment
Model
T erritorial
I mpact
P ackage for
T ransport and
A gricultural
P olicies
(Camagni, 2006; ESPON 2006)
(ESPON 2013)
What is TEQUILA?
1. A Multicriteria Model for Territorial Impact Assessment of EU policies:
modelling + expert judgements
2. Territorial impact = impact on the territorial cohesion principle
3.
S.D.I.- Single Dimension Impacts: regional impacts:
- on economy (GDP, GDP per capita)
- on competitiveness (productivity, accessibility, congestion)
- on society (unemployment, safety, social deprivation)
- on sustainability and climate change (emissions, soil erosion)
- on landscape and local identities (landscape fragmentation, ext.
visitors, heritage products)
4. S.I.- Summative impacts: impacts on the three components of Territorial
Cohesion: Territorial Efficiency, T. Quality, T. Identity
What is TEQUILA?
5. The 3 main components of territorial cohesion:
Territorial Efficiency:
resource-efficiency with respect to energy, land and natural resources;
competitiveness and attractiveness; internal and external accessibility
Territorial Quality:
the quality of the living and working environment; comparable living
standards across territories; fair access to services of general interest and
to knowledge
Territorial Identity:
“social capital”; landscape and cultural heritage; creativity; productive
“vocations” and “uniqueness” of each territory
6. General, Summative Impact = weighted impact (when allowed)
7. Relative importance of the single impacts: assessed by experts and by
policy makers (questionnaire)
The Model
TIMr = Σc θc . PIMr,c . Sr,c
TIM = territorial impact
θc = weight of the c criterion
PIM = potential impact of policy
Sr,c = sensitivity of region r to criterion c
Sr,c = Dr,c . Vr,c
Dr,c = desirability of criterion c for region r
Vr,c = vulnerability of region c to impact PIMc (receptivity for positive impacts)
Two alternative ways of computing PIMs:
- Through econometric and simulation modelling (transport case)
- Through statistical elaborations on indicators (agriculture case)
Impact of CAP: indicators
Criterion
E1
TE
E2
Efficiency
E3
TI
Unemploy- Cost
ment
Tourism
Diversificat. Benefit
Definition
Measurement
Modulation/Total GDP; Modulation = [(regional
increase in P2) – (regional cut in P1)]
% change in GDP
(Unemployment rate) * (Share of
agricultural employment)*(PIM_E1 normalised)
% change in unempl. rate
(Number of beds in rural areas/Km2 in
agriculture) * (PIM_E2 normalised)
new tourism beds per Km2
((Total agricultural area entered into agrienvironm. schemes under Pillar2 of Cap) /
Total agricultural area)*100
% of agricultural areas into
agri-environmt. schemes
Q1
Environment.
Benefit
quality
Q2
Community
Cost
viability
Q3
Emissions
Cost
Q4
Risk of soil
erosion
Cost
I1
Landscape
diversity
Cost
Areas at risk of soil erosion (ton/ha/year)*(5% of
areas of farms <10ha/total agricultural
areas)*100
(5% of areas of farms <10ha / total agricultural
areas)*100
I2
Community
Cost
identity
[(0,1*(Share of people aged >15 and <65) +
(share of employment in agriculture) + (unempl.
rate))*(PIM_E1 normalised)]*100/3
outmigration probabil. (%)
I3
Heritage
products
[(Employment in agriculture/ Gross Fixed
Capital Formation in agriculture)*(PIM_E1
normalised)] / Max value
product diversification
and innovation probabil.
TQ
Quality
Sub-criter. Type
Economic
Benefit
growth
Identity
Benefit
[((Share of areas occupied by farms <10 ha)
+(share of population aged >65)+(share of
employment in agriculture))*(PIM_E1
normalised)]/3
Variation in livestock emissions (Tons CH4 per
year)
social deprivation
emissions
% of abandoned areas
+ erosion probability
% of abandoned /incorpor.
agricultural areas
Impact on Tourism diversification
Impacts are mainly positive, and
the strongest conditions are found in
Algarve, some Spanish regions
along the Pyrenees, Auvergne and
Franche-Comtée in France,
Trentino-Alto Adige, Friuli, Marche,
Abruzzo and Calabria in Italy, in
many regions along the Baltic Sea
in Germany, Poland and Latvia and
in many internal regions in New
Member countries like southern
Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia
and Romania. Eastern Countries
regions on the Black and the
Adriatic seas could also benefit
strongly from such diversification in
economic activities.
Impact on Environmental Quality
Positive outcomes are mainly
visible in southern and western
European regions, with strong
country effects due to the
national management of funds
allocation among axes of Pillar 2.
Most important impacts are
forecasted in Southern Ireland,
southern and western Austria and
Attiki, but very good performances
are shown by mainly all regions in
Spain, France, UK, Italy and
Greece. The lowest impacts are
visible on New Member Countries.
Impact on Territorial Efficiency
Different
weighting
systems
may change
“Summative
Impacts”
Policy makers’ weights
Experts’ weights
The Transport Scenario: new infrastructure
New roads
New rail
Transport impact indicators
Sub- c riterion
Productivity of inland
transport infrastructure
Productivity of airports
Economic growth
Congestion costs
Landscape fragmentation
Exposure to external
visitors
Productivity of inland
infrastructure
Productivity of airports
GDP per Capita
Congestion cost
Density of high capacity
road and rail
infrastructure
External passengers (all
outside NUTS3) at more
than 3h
Type
Definition
Mea
Benefit
Benefit
Benefit
Cost
total traffic/km road and rail
pax noEU/ total pax
GDP variation
time on congestion/total time
pass
dime
€/ca
dime
Cost
km of motorway + km of 2track
rail / surface (km/km2)
km/k
Cost
Traffic passing through
Regional road
connectivity
Road freight crossing
the region borders
Emissions
CO2 emissions per
usable land
Safety
Traffic separation in
different infrastructure
levels
Benefit
Market opportunities
market accessible
Benefit
Regional integration
Benefit
Cost
Cost
All passengers reaching the
NUTS3 at more than 3h
average time by road to other
NUTS3 capitals in the same
NUTS2
non-intraNUTS2 road freight
traffic/total freight traffic (no
Road emissions for cars and
trucks in MTonnesCO2 / usable
land
traffic on motorways / (traffic 2lane road + traffic on motorways)
GDP at less than 3 hours
(multimodal)
pass
time
dime
milli
dime
milli
Impact on Economic growth – Baseline Scenario
A generalized positive impact,
though limited, is found
throughout Europe, and in
Eastern Countries in particular,
thanks to new infrastructure
provision and to processes of
growth diffusion.
Impact on congestion costs – Pricing Scenario
The
negative
sign
is
pervasive in the Baseline
Scenario, in particular in many
major northern metropolitan
areas.
However, pricing policies
will
reduce
congestion
overall and in particular in
already heavily congested
areas;
exceptions
regard
mainly southern Italian and a
few Spanish regions.
The FLAG Model:
Baseline Scenario
New Infrastructure Scenario
Pricing Scenario
Thanks!
Many thanks for your attention!
Roberto Camagni
BEST- Politecnico di Milano
Piazza Leonardo da Vinci 32 - 20133
MILANO
tel: +39 02 2399.2744 - 2745 secr.
fax: +39 02 2399.9477
[email protected]
www.economiaterritoriale.it