Maciej Smętkowski WP6 Territorial dimension of EU integration as challenges for Cohesion policy GRINCOH meeting, Halle 22th-23th November 2012

TASK 1 Harmonized socio-economic regional database for the NUTS3 regions 1.1. Basic indicators (core analysis 2000-2008 – similar GDP growth trajectories) - Population (1995-2011) - GDP (1995-2009) - Unemployment rate (LFS) (1999-2010) 1.2. Thematic indicators (data available: 2002;2006  extension planned 2008-2010) - Structure of economy (GVA, Employment) - Labour market (employment rate, long-term unemployment, micro-firms) - FDIs (companies with foreign shareholdings) - R&D (outlays and personnel) - Human capital (higher education attainment, number of students) - Basic infrastructure (population using sewerage network) - Tourism (number of accommodated tourist) 1.3. Long-term comparisons (70-ties, 80-ties, 90-ties) – GDP per capita with focus on regional convergence trend (source country experts, partners) Remark (1): we propose transfer of Partners PM to Task3 case studies: ASE (1PM), IBS (0,5 PM), UEF (2PM) Remark (2): other thematic indicators might be used depending on data availability by partners (please indicate)

GDP trajectories and GDP per capita differences Fig. Real GDP growth [1989=100] Remark (1): different time frame for certain analysis Solution: 2 sub-periods - pre-crisis fast growth 2000/2002-2007/2008 - post-crisis 2008-2010/2011) Fig. GDP per capita 2005 [EUR, PPS] Remark (2): different stages of development strongly affect regional characteristics and trends Solution: Indicators relativised by national average The next isusses

TASK 2 Quantitative analyses of the socio-economic indicators for NUTS3 regions in the CEECs 2.1. Regional Convergence Analysis at NUTS3 level - cartographic methods, sigma, beta convergence 2.2. Spatial context of economic growth - spatial auto-correlations 2.3. Economic growth factors – exploratory analysis - correlations and regression analysis Remark (1): we propose transfer of Partners PM to Task 6 case studies UEF (3PM) Remark (2): division of work with WP1 task 3  different territorial scales: WP1 (NUTS2) – broader set of indicators; WP6 (NUTS3) limited set of indicators?

TASK 2.1. Regional growth dynamics 2000-2008 (example) Fig. GDP real growth (country average=100) Fig. GDP real growth vs. GDP per capita (country average=100) 2000-2008 GDP per capita GDP real growth

Task 2.2. Spatial autocorrelation 1998-2005 (example) decreasing concentration of separated highly and less developed areas (1), polycentric spatial structure (2), spatial concentration of GDP growth (3), lack of neighbouring regions level of development impact on GDP growth (4), but country context important (5). 3 4 5 Relativised values (N=179) HH – fast growth, highly developed neighbouring regions HL – fast growth, less developed neighbouring regions LH – slow growth, highly developed neighbouring regions LL – slow growth, less developed neighbouring regions

TASK 2.3. Economic growth factors – exploratory analysis 2002-2006 (example)

TASK 3 In-depth comparative analysis of specific territorial cases 3.1. Typology of regions based on principal component analysis 3.2. Thematic analyses - successful restructuring - border location hindering development processes - cumulation of social problems 3.3. Selection of case studies at NUTS3 level - thematic analyses supported by typology of regions 3.4. Case study report Remark (1): selection of case study based on thematic analysis verified by regional typology and analysis of relativised GDP growth Remark (2): analysis of metropolitan areas to be coverd by Task 6

Regional typology (2002-2006) (draft) Principal components of regional differentiation in CEECs: Metropolisation Industrialisation Urbanisation (market services) Dependency (agriculture and public services)

TASK 3.2.1. Successful restructuring Tab. Extreme cases in particular countries: a) industry progress 2002-2008 (increase of share in employment or GVA) b) GDP dynamics 2002-2008 higher than country average

TASK 3.2.2. Border location hindering economic growth Extreme cases selection: a) different types of macroregion’s external borders b) low GDP dynamics in comparison to country average –different periods Remark (1): capital city regions excluded Remark (2): focus on Western and Eastern border

TASK 3.2.3. Social problems Tab. Extreme cases in particular countries: a) high unemployment rate based on Labour Force Survey (LFS) b) sorted by countries (2 extreme cases)

TASK 3.3. Case studies selection According to the regional typology elaborated for 2002-2006: successful restructuring (old industrial region, industrial-agricultural, service/industrial) border location (public service and productive agriculture, agriculture weakly industrialised, agricultural insignificant market service) social problems (agricultural insignificant market service, other, public service and productive agriculture) Remark (1): some of selected cases cover more than one thematic field

TASK 3.4. Case study report - general structure General ddescription (processes, SWOT analysis etc.) Post-transformation development trajectory (WP1) Development factors (exogenous, endogenous, others) (WP2 & WP3) Labour market situation and social problems (WP4 & WP5) Governance – institutional settings, strategies, instruments (WP7) Cohesion policy impact (WP8) Methods: In-depth interviews (ca. 10-15) (city office, regional authorities, RDAs, chambers of commerce, business associations, higher education institutions, labour market & social services, implementing authorities, others) Desk research (statistical data, strategic documents, other) Remark (1): Direct coordination with other WPs (esp. WP8) Remark (2): Any particular nedes for your research?

TASK 6 Metropolis and its region – a challenge for territorial cohesion 6.1. Statistical analysis at macroregional level - intraregional gap in economic development level - factors underpinning the intraregional disparities (economic structure, labour market, demography, human capital, R&D) – expanded in comparison to previous research 6.2. Case studies focused on capital city macroregions (general structure) - (1) metropolises as nodes in global space of flows - (2) regional hinterland – resource based development - (3) metropolis-region relationship – quantitative analysis on settlement structure and labour commuting - (4) metropolis-region relationship – qualitative analysis – in-depth interviews in metropolis as well as in 2 specific locations in regional hinterland that represent both local success & local failure (ca. 20 interviews in total) - (5) assessment of public policy (sectoral, horizontal and regional) in the context of city- region relationship (desk research and in-depth interviews) Remark (1): Selection of case studies based on partners competences: Warsaw (PL) EUROREG, Prague (CZ) EPRC, Budapest (HU) UEF, Tallinn (EST) IBS, Bucharest (RO) ASE Remark (2): we proposer transfer 2 PM EPRC to Task 5

WP 6 Task 4 Assessment of infrastructure construction, its role in regional development Two general aims of infrastructure construction: To support the growth of metropolitan areas and city networking (including bottleneck elimination) To improve the accessibility of the weakest (peripheral) regions List of the major transport investment (EU supported and others, CEEC and neighbouring counties, including regions outside UE) 2000-2006-2012 dynamic analysis Infrastructure as the factor of metropolitan areas development Data base for 30 metropolitan areas (MEGA’s of ESPON 1.1.1) and selected secondary growth poles Mutual relation analysis (between neighbouring MEGA’s): infrastructure investment, connectivity, daily accessibility (road and rail) Correlation/regression analysis (infrastructure development and accessibility versus economic growth of selected MEGA’s) Infrastructure as the factor of peripheral areas development Changes of the accessibility indicators Sources – results of ESPON 1.2.1 and ESPON TRACC projects, Eurostat data, national statistics, information collected by Project partners. Questions to partners: to what extent these goals are being achieved? Examples of most and least successful examples?

WP6 – timeline/deadlines General quantitative analysis (June 2013 -14M) – BUDAPEST CONFERENCE (D7) Elaboration of tools and report templates T3/T6 (June 2013 – 14M) Draft case study reports (December 2013 – 20M) Policy options as input to WP9 (EUROREG and other WP partners), (March 2013 - 24M) Final case study reports and draft report of WP6 (April 2014 – 24M) Final report of WP6 (October 2014 -30M – D29) – LJUBLJANA CONFERENCE (D17) Remark (1): Tools and templates elaboration (a) partner inputs/request/comments expected by December 2012, (b) draft tools and templates will be distributed for comments in February 2013, (c) final comments from partners in March 2013, (d) final tools to be tested April 2013, (e) final versions of tolls/templates available June 2013