Transcript 1 mission report

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”
Feasibility report on alignment of
the Republic of Moldova to EU NUTS
statistical territorial classification
Content
1. Framework of NUTS classification
and EU best practices
2. Situational analysis in Moldova
3. Identification and of NUTS options
4. Assessment of NUTS options
5. 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 (104149 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
Cohesion policy
GDP/capita*
< 75 % of EU average
75-90 %
> 90 %
*index EU27=100
3 categories
of regions
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




Canarias



Madeira
Guyane
Réunion
Guadeloupe/
Martinique
Açores
Malta
│
14
Difference in NUTS 2
Cohesion policy 2014-2020*
• Whole country single
NUTS 2 region (Baltic
countries )
2500
2354
2000
1762
1500
• Capital-regions are out
of «Less-developed»
category (PL, CZ, RO,
HU, SL)
1000
500
0
Average PL, CZ, RO, HU, SL Average in Baltic states
Average EUR per capita
Average Easten Europe (1 947)
*Cross borader cooperation is not included
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 Control
State Plant Protection Service
Regional Court
State Labour Inspectorate
Planning of services (3)
The State Police of Latvia
State Emergency Medical Service
State Fire and Rescue 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 strategy
oStrategy for education
oStrategy for social services
• Investment planning = territorial
approach used in investment planning
oEach 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.
B.
5 regions – North, Centre, South, Gagauzia, Transnistria;
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) ?
Different
ranking by
difrent criteria ?
What is summ
of criteria ?
How to evaluate (2) ?
Different criteria – different
result
Unit of measurement
+
High
3 points
0
Medium
2 points
-
Low
1 point
Weight of criteria
Group of criteria and weights
Political stability in regions
35%
Evaluation Criteria ant weights
Regional integration
15%
Operational feasibility 25%
EU funding benefits
25%
Implementation of options
35%
EU funding benefits
25%
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
Regional
integration
Operat.
feasibility
+
-
Evaluation of option
EU
funding
Admin.
Regional
and econ.
costs
services
benefits
+
+
0
EC
criteria Balanc. urban
for NUTS
devel.
regions
-
+
Option “A” with 5 regions – North, Centre,
South, Gagauzia, Transnistria
Regional
integration
Operat.
feasibility
-
+
Evaluation of option
EU
funding
Admin.
Regional
and
costs
services
econ.
benefits
0
0
0
EC criteria
for NUTS
regions
Balanc.
urban
devel.
-
-
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
0
0
0
+
0
-
Balanc. urban
devel.
-
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 perspective
Short 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!