Transcript The Future for Rural Areas of Europe

Rural regions in Europe:
Territorial potentials and main challenges
December 15th 2010, Luxembourg
EDORA
(European Development Opportunities in Rural Areas)
II: The Future for Rural Areas of Europe
Introduction and Objectives
The earlier presentation proposed appropriate generalisations
about rural change and rural differentiation – based upon data
and information relating to the second half of the ‘noughties’
decade. In this presentation I will describe the work carried out
by David Meredith (TEAGASC), which considered what the
future might hold for different kinds of rural area in Europe.
Objective:
To consider how future developments may reconfigure the
territorial capital and socio-economic development of different
types of rural regions over the next two decades.
Approach:
Foresight techniques used to consider how a range of different
“shocks” might impact on the four Structural Types i.e.:
–
–
–
–
Agrarian regions
Consumption Countryside
Diversified (Secondary) regions
Diversified (Private Services) regions
Future Perspectives
Future
Past
Future
Fear
Future
Present
Future
Possible
What is Foresight?
(As distinct from forecasting)
– Foresight = systematic activities embracing:
• critical thinking concerning long-term developments;
• debate and effort to create wider participation in
decisions; and
• shaping the future, especially by influencing public
policy and strategic decisions (Grol, 2005; Faroult,
2006).
– Foresight exercises are used to:
• develop perspectives of the future,
• attain consensus on which perspectives are likely to
come to pass, and
• to highlight critical issues that need to be considered if
preferred perspectives are to be realised.
Evolution of Foresight
• Contemporary foresight exercises move beyond
technological / linear considerations in terms of the range
of issues considered
• There is an emphasis on identifying a number of possible
or alternative futures.
• Such foresights use systematic, critical and integral
methods:
• … more qualitative in approach
• socio-economic development not considered
predictable beyond a broad generic level
• narrative scenarios used to sketch out potential
implications of current trends, possible future
events…
Foresight Scenarios, (AKA Future Perspectives):
(alternative descriptions of possible futures)
• Snapshot scenarios (rather than chain scenarios)
– They do not consider the individual, and highly complex, processes
that bring about these futures.
– They are not predictions of the future based on analysis and
extrapolation from past trends,/these types of activities are more in
keeping with linear forecasting activities.
– Predicated on the concept of uncertainty which is inherently
unquantifiable and gives rise to the prospect of several plausible
alternative futures which cannot be ranked by probability and
through numbers, but all have to be prepared for or anticipated in
some way. (Richard O'Brien, 2009).
• Future perspectives are tools that assist reflection on the
implications of contemporary and known issues within a
medium – longer-term perspective.
EDORA Scenario Development
A multi-stage process:
•
Stage 1: Definition of the key challenges facing rural Europe
•
Stage 2: Exploration of contemporary (high level) trends
•
Stage 3: Futures Framework
•
Stage 4: Preliminary Scenarios
•
Stage 5: Expert Assessment
•
Stage 6: Final Scenarios
(differentiating four structural types)
We will not follow this sequence step by step, but describe
Stages 1-3, and then 4-6.
Challenges facing Rural Europe:
(Based upon expert discussion)
Meta-narratives – incremental processes driven by “endogenous
processes”.
Looking into the future we need to take account of “exogenous
shocks”, causing more rapid/radical change…
The two most important/likely exogenous shocks form the
structuring elements of the EDORA Future Perspectives
analysis.
These are:
1. Responses to Climate Change (rapid-gradual).
2. “Repositioning” of the state/EU, (intensity of
regulation/support) in response to:
o
o
o
Long-term ongoing restructuring of the primary and secondary sectors.
Shifting demands for, and cost of, local service delivery
Financial/Sovereign Debt Crisis and Austerity/disengagement of state
from the provision of direct supports to rural regions (limited resources
/increased demands).
The Structure of the Future Perspectives Analysis:
The Structure of the Future Perspectives Analysis:
Rapid response to
climate change +
low levels of
State/ EU support
(S4)
Gradual response
to climate change
+ high levels of
State/EU support
(S2)
Rapid response to
climate change +
high levels of
State/EU support
(S3)
Gradual response
to climate change
+ limited State/EU
support (S1)
Scenario 1: Gradual climate change + deregulated market
economy
• In many ways this is close to a “business as
usual” scenario.
• Current processes of change continue, except:
 Shift of agriculture towards the paraproductivist model.
 Substantial growth in new forms of energy
production.
 Manufacturing concentrates on research,
design and development (rather than
production)
 Probably be associated with continued increase
in regional differentiation.
Scenario 2: Gradual climate change + highly regulated economy
•Impact of the credit crunch  cautious and regulated
forms of economic governance.
•Capital shortage inhibits private/public sector
responses to gradual climate change effects.
• Limited CC mitigation  even gradual CC has
significant impacts upon rural economic activity and
QoL  intensified out-migration from agrarian/sparsely
populated regions.
•Energy costs rise but development of renewables
modest,  increasing dependence on nuclear power.
• Increasing freight costs provide some import
protection,  slower decline of manufacturing in
Europe.
•Reduced consumer spending and capital shortage
inhibits expansion of the tertiary sector.
Scenario 3: Rapid Climate Change + deregulated market
economy
•Rapid/disruptive climate change attaches premium
to land as a basic resource underpinning both
adaption and mitigation measures.
•Food prices rise.
•Renewable energy production and bio-technology
industries expand rapidly.
•Agricultural production intensifies and increasingly
adopts bio-technology.
•Concentration of control of the (rural) means of
production in corporate hands.
•Tertiary sector buoyed up by expansion of financial
services, and private investments in research and
development, but the benefits largely restricted to
accessible rural areas.
Scenario 4: Rapid Climate Change + highly regulated economy
•Rapid onset of climate change  coordinated
consensus-based public policy response.
•Rapid public investment in new forms of nuclear
power.
•Careful regulation of the use of rural land, to ensure
food supplies.
•Strong/selective migration flows from S. E. and C.
Europe into the N. and W., and towards major cities.
•Public transport systems, using low/zero emissions
technologies  compact urban growth.
•Fossil fuel use reserved for food production.
•Cropping regulated to reduce the production of GHGs.
•Primary and secondary sectors reinvigorated by public
policy focus on sustainability.
•Expansion of tertiary sector slows or is reversed.
Combining the Scenarios and the Structural Typology
Reykjavik
!
Canarias
!
Guadeloupe Martinique
!
!
Helsinki
!
Tallinn
Oslo
!
!
Stockholm
Guyane
!
•
!
Réunion
!
+
An expert panel was used to assess the likely outcome of the four
scenarios on the four Structural Types.
Riga
!
Madeira
!
København
Vilnius
!
!
Minsk
!
Dublin
!
Acores
Warszawa
Berlin
Amsterdam
!
!
!
!
London
Kyiv
!
!
Bruxelles/Brussel
!
Praha
!
Luxembourg
!
Paris
!
Kishinev
Wien ! Bratislava
!
Budapest
!
!
Bern
!
Vaduz
!
Ljubljana Zagreb
!
Bucuresti
!
Beograd
!
!
Sarajevo
!
Sofiya
!
Podgorica
!
Roma
Skopje
Ankara
!
!
Tirana
!
Madrid
!
!
Lisboa
!
Athinai
!
Nicosia
!
El-Jazair
!
Tounis
!
!
Valletta
•
There is no ‘right’ or ‘correct’ scenario, but one may be more likely
than another...
•
Scenario impact on rural types reflects a very complex interaction
between a range of environmental, political, social, economic and
cultural factors.
•
The expert’s assessments of the spatial implications of the
scenarios varied considerably, reflecting differences in individual
perspectives of the evaluators, informed by personal milieu,
lifetime experiences etc.
•
Taking an “average” is dangerous!
•
An informative (pilot) exercise – proof of concept – would be
rewarding to extend it…
The Structure of the Future Perspectives Analysis:
Rapid response to
climate S4
change +
lowAG+
levels CC+
of
State/ EU support
DS- DPS(S4)
Gradual response
S2change
to climate
+ high
levels
AGCC-of
State/EU support
DS+ DPS(S2)
Rapid response to
climate S3
change +
highAGlevelsCCof
State/EU support
DS+ DPS+
(S3)
GradualS1
response
to climate change
AG- CC+
+ limited
State/EU
DS+ (S1)
DPS+
support
The Structure of the Future Perspectives Analysis:
Rapid response to
climate S4
change +
low
levels
of likely
AG+
CC+
The
most
State/ EU support
DSDPS-likely
The
most
(S4)
Gradual response
S2change
to climate
+ high
levels
AGCC-of
scenario.
State/EU support
DS+ DPSscenario.
(S2)
Points to the need for policy
Points
to the
need forAgrarian
policy
measures
to support
measures
regions? to support Agrarian
regions?
Policy impact limited by low
levels of intervention.
Rapid response to
climate S3
change +
highAGlevelsCCof
State/EU support
DS+ DPS+
(S3)
GradualS1
response
to climate change
AG- CC+
+ limited
State/EU
DS+ (S1)
DPS+
support
The Structure of the Future Perspectives Analysis:
Rapid response to
climate S4
change +
lowAG+
levels CC+
of
State/ EU support
DS- DPS(S4)
Gradual response
S2change
to climate
+ high
levels
AGCC-of
State/EU support
DS+ DPS(S2)
Next most likely scenario.
Rapid response to
response
S1
Only S3
the regions
with Gradual
a strong
climate
change
+
to climate change
high
levelsCCof
AGAG- CC+
secondary
sector show
positive
+ limited
State/EU
State/EU support
DS+
DPS+
DS+
DPS+
support
(S1)
impact – low redistributive effect.
(S3)
High levels of intervention mean
that much depends on the policy
institutions and governance.
The Structure of the Future Perspectives Analysis:
Diversified regions prosper,
Agrarian and Consumption
Countryside stagnate/decline
Rapid response to
Gradual response
S4
S2change
climate
change
+
to climate
Perhaps
points
to particular
lowAG+
levels CC+
of
+ high
levels
AGCC-of
policy
to
strengthen U-R
State/ EU support
State/EU support
DS- DPSDS+ DPS(S4)
(S2)
linkages?
Low intervention limits policy
impact.
Rapid response to
climate S3
change +
highAGlevelsCCof
State/EU support
DS+ DPS+
(S3)
GradualS1
response
to climate change
AG- CC+
+ limited
State/EU
DS+ (S1)
DPS+
support
The Structure of the Future Perspectives Analysis:
Rapid response to
climate S4
change +
lowAG+
levels CC+
of
State/ EU support
DS- DPS(S4)
Gradual response
S2change
to climate
+ high
levels
AGCC-of
State/EU support
DS+ DPS(S2)
Agrarian and Consumption
Countryside
Rapid
response to prosper, Diversified
GradualS1
response
S3
climate
change
+
regions
stagnate/decline.
to climate change
highAGlevelsCCof
AG- CC+
+ limited
State/EU
State/EU support
DS+ DPS+
DS+ (S1)
DPS+
Potential
convergence?
support
(S3)
Some Concluding Observations
•
•
•
•
•
•
None of the future scenarios foresees positive outcomes for all
regions.
There are however scenarios that seem to have a “balancing”
affect on regional development and thereby give rise to greater
territorial cohesion within the EU.
Equally there are scenarios that would give rise to further
imbalanced development.
The former are not necessarily preferable since reducing
disparities may also slow down aggregate growth/development.
Need to explore in more detail the way in which the different
scenarios allow different types of regions to fulfil their
potential…
Of course territorial cohesion could occur at a number of spatial
scales. A key challenge is to understand how cohesion at local,
national and EU scales interact.
Thank you for your attention.
Further detail is to be found in
EDORA Working Paper 26 (www.nordregio.se/EDORA)
[email protected]