Territorial Impact Assessment of Governance of Territorial and Urban Policies in ESPON Space ESPON PROJECT 2.3.2: GOVERNANCE OF TERRITORIAL AND URBAN POLICIES.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The political framework
Advertisements

1 The Europe 2020 Strategy and the Challenge of an Integrated Territorial Approach Philip McCann University of Groningen Special Adviser to the European.
Short presentation of PURR Espon 2013 internal seminar, Liege Steinar Johansen Norwegian Institute for Urban and Regional Research (NIBR)
The Robert Gordon University School of Engineering Dr. Mohamed Amish
Intelligence Step 5 - Capacity Analysis Capacity Analysis Without capacity, the most innovative and brilliant interventions will not be implemented, wont.
RESEARCH CLINIC SESSION 1 Committed Officials Pursuing Excellence in Research 27 June 2013.
8-9 October 2009 The ESPON 2013 Programme: Prospects and Achievements Regional and Urban Statistics Working Group meeting.
Improving the added value of EU Cohesion policy Professor John Bachtler European Policies Research Centre University of Strathclyde, Glasgow
1 Final Report Results of the on-line Public Consultation of the Conclusions of the 5th Cohesion Report Peter Berkowitz Head of Unit Conception, forward.
Barbara M. Altman Emmanuelle Cambois Jean-Marie Robine Extended Questions Sets: Purpose, Characteristics and Topic Areas Fifth Washington group meeting.
Territorial Effects of the Structural Funds ESPON FINAL REPORT Presentation at the ESPON seminar May 2005 Consortium: Nordregio/Stockholm,
Workshop on Transportation Corridor Evaluation With a focus on Economic and Community Development.
Crossing Knowledge Frontiers Serving the Territories / Liége, Belgium EU-LUPA European Land Use Patterns Applied Research 2013/1/8.
ESPON 2.1.5: Territorial Impacts of European Fisheries Policy Second Interim Report Prepared for the Luxembourg Seminar May 2005 Ove Langeland, Norwegian.
The evaluation of quality of the training offer at territorial level The evaluation of quality of the training offer within territorial systems Isfol –
SEEA Experimental Ecosystem Accounts: A Proposed Outline and Road Map Sixth Meeting of the UN Committee of Experts on Environmental-Economic Accounting.
Policy coordination process in AttractSEE project and Spatial Plan of Republic of Serbia Jelena Miljković, Siniša Trkulja Republic Agency for Spatial Planning,
Low Carbon South East Europe Daniele Vettorato – European Research Academy of Bolzano Verona – Smart Energy, 08/10/2014 Project introduction.
Local authorities’ role in implementing European Employment Strategy - case Finland Mr. Lauri Lamminmäki, Senior Adviser Association of Finnish Local and.
Urban benchmarking USESPON Workshop „Urban Benchmarking” Katarzyna Wojnar.
Tisa Catchment Area Development TICAD KEY ROLE OF SPATIAL PLANNING IN THE DECISION MAKING PROCESSES - REGIONAL SPATIAL PLAN OF AP OF VOJVODINA - Msc Arch.
Transregional Workshop – Sofia, October 30, 2008 R4R Tools and Methodologies.
Research Quality Assessment following the RAE David Sweeney Director, Research, Innovation, Skills.
ESPON Seminar 15 November 2006 in Espoo, Finland Review of the ESPON 2006 and lessons learned for the ESPON 2013 Programme Thiemo W. Eser, ESPON Managing.
Experimental Research Methods in Language Learning Chapter 1 Introduction and Overview.
European Commission Introduction to the Community Programme for Employment and Social Solidarity PROGRESS
Leonardo da Vinci Partnerships: an opportunity to work together Italian National Agency for LLP - Leonardo da Vinci Sectoral Programme.
Ing. Peter Burger Regional dimension of of the knowledge economy (REDIPE) – the project is supported by Slovak Research and Development.
Introduction to PROGRESS Community programme for Employment and Social Solidarity Finn Ola Jølstad Norwegian Ministry of Labour and Social Inclusion.
Assessment of Regional Coordination Capacities Szepesi Balázs Lead Evaluator Workshop on introducing territorial development evaluations April 25, 2013.
Ministry of the Environment and Territory Directorate for Development and Environmental Research Ministry of Economy and Finance Department for Development.
From Visions to Reality. About Project The project aim is to test models of cooperation between universities and businesses/organisations in the European.
Introduction 1. Purpose of the Chapter 2. Institutional arrangements Country Practices 3. Legal framework Country Practices 4. Preliminary conclusions.
111 Synthesis of Questionnaires. Thematic concentration  Most of the new member states support the suggested principle while maintaining the element.
ESPON / Social Preparatory Study on Social Aspects of EU Territorial Development Status: Interim Report Erich Dallhammer (ÖIR)
2nd Transnational Workshop 11th December Thessaloniki 1.
IRS Institute for Regional Development and Structural Planning Sabine Zillmer ESPON Pre-accession aid impact analysis - Third Interim Report - ESPON.
Integrated Territorial Investment 06 March Draft guidance Based on Presidency compromise text – "nothing is agreed until everything is agreed" The.
Salzbourg, 13th March 2005 Joaquín Farinós Dasí University of Valencia ESPON GOVERNANCE OF TERRITORIAL AND URBAN POLICIES FROM EU TO LOCAL LEVEL.
Changes in the context of evaluation and assessment: the impact of the European Lifelong Learning strategy Romuald Normand, Institute of Education Lyon,
The implementation programme for the 2008 SNA and supporting statistics UNECE special session on National Accounts for economies in transition Geneva,
ESPON 2.1.5: Territorial Impacts of European Fisheries Policy Final Revised Report Prepared for the Espoo Seminar November 2006 Ove Langeland, Norwegian.
ESPON Seminar Luxembourg, 8-9 December Cohesion-and-Urban-Policy-_26-27-November-2015_-Luxembourg-City_/index.php.
EUROPEAN REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT FUND Stakeholder Workshop Brussels – 5 February 2014 INTERREG EUROPE Nicolas Singer | Senior Project Officer INTERREG IVC.
Metropolitan areas within EU Multi-Level Governance Cities of Tomorrow and the future urban dimension European Commission DG for Regional Policy.
ESPON Workshop at the Open Days 2012 “Creating Results informed by Territorial Evidence” Brussels, 10 October 2012 Introduction to ESPON Piera Petruzzi,
ESPON Seminar November 2006 Espoo Chair: Phaedon Enotiades, MC, Cyprus Rapporteur: Janne Antikainen, Ministry of the Interior Workshop 1 – Polycentricity.
"The challenge for Territorial Cohesion 2014 – 2020: delivering results for EU citizens" Veronica Gaffey Acting Director EUROPEAN COMMISSION, DG for Regional.
The FDES revision process: progress so far, state of the art, the way forward United Nations Statistics Division.
ESPON GOVERNANCE OF TERRITORIAL AND URBAN POLICIES FROM EU TO LOCAL LEVEL Luxembourg, 18 May 2005 Joaquín Farinós Dasí University of Valencia.
1 SEMINAR MATERA 6-7 OCTOBER 2003 PRELIMINARY RESULTS AND FIRST POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS BY SEPTEMBER
Territorial impacts of globalization on European Regions Van Hamme Gilles IGEAT-ULB Internal meeting May 2010.
The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies ISMERI EUROPA Ex post evaluation of cohesion policy programmes Work Package 1: Coordination,
EUROPEAN REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT FUND CLUE final conference, 24 September 2014, Turin EU Interregional Cooperation State of play and perspectives Johanna.
Legal Aspects Related to Brownfield Regeneration
Hard Data: Data Collection Mechanisms on Human Trafficking in the Baltic Sea Region Expert Conference on Forced Labour Exploitation and Counter.
Wrap-up of Workshop 2 - Innovation and Competitiveness
Macro-regional strategies Rapporteur: Etele Baráth Dr
A legal framework for Urban Audit – Next steps
Continuing the territorial cohesion agenda: Towards a more coherent approach to EU territorial development Derek Martin Open Days, October 11, 2005.
Eurostat Management Plan 2015 for Regional and Urban statistics
USESPON Workshop „Urban Benchmarking”
…and still actual for a post-2010 strategy!
Workshop 3 – Social and Governance November 2006
Integrated Territorial Investment
Resource Directors Group Introduction
Developing a common dissemination platform
Commission proposal for a new LIFE Regulation CGBN meeting
ESPON POLICY OBJECTIVES
The approved ESPON 2013 Programme
Presentation transcript:

Territorial Impact Assessment of Governance of Territorial and Urban Policies in ESPON Space ESPON PROJECT 2.3.2: GOVERNANCE OF TERRITORIAL AND URBAN POLICIES FROM EU TO LOCAL LEVEL Luxembourg, 14 th October 2005 Joaquín Farinós Dasí University of Valencia

A very particular topic of research Governance is not a policy but a way of design and applies different policies with territorial impact Territorial and urban are spatial based policies Tailored application of TIA, adapted to … unavailability of statistical data and indicators … difficult to define an ‘a priori’ hypothesis … not possible nor convenient to ‘encapsulate’ governance ‘a priori’ … inductive/qualitative approach especially appropriate … integration inductive (hypothesis formulation) and deductive (test) … benchmarking in order to learn about reasons of good and failed examples and their possible transferability Appropriate level: State (National vs. State). Regions/NUTS 3? Original project that uses experience we are gaining as a source and base to help build the theory concerning governance and territorial cohesion

Two ways to understand the topic Territorial Governance can be seen as a simple application in the urban and territorial field of general principles of governance or, As a process with specific features because its object is the territory and its aims to manage territorial dynamics through the pilotage of a multiplicity of actors sharing a common agreed objective (spatial visions to improve territorial cohesion at different levels ) The second one is more strategic but much more difficult to assess for which qualitative data and inductive methods can be very useful We try to cover both perspectives in our project, however constraints of data, time and resources impose limits that only allows, in some cases, to find out hypothesis for future developments

Operational definition of governance and formulation of hypothesis

Primary Hypotheses principles of good governance have positive impact over a territory; that is, governance practices should improve territorial cohesion objective - impacts in GDP/GVA, employment, welfare and public services and sustainability it is possible to recognize and assess factors that characterize good governance (prerequisites, “mechanisms”); they could be “transferables” some specific territorial features and dynamics also as institutional frameworks of territorial and urban policies have positive effects - good governance is mainly to be assessed on a territory-basis

Types of indicators/criteria Context Policies Territorial features and dynamics Favourable territorial preconditions Institutional frameworks of territorial policies Processes To describe To evaluate To describe TGAs To evaluate Results

Methodological Overview

The need of integrating Quantitative – Qualitative Approaches BENCHMARKING COMPARISON: Analyse potential impacts of Good Governance on Urban & Territorial Policies POLICY RECOMENDATIONS Available Data + Data collection SCALESSCALES

Method in National Overviews: Context update NOs and CSs constitute, as sequential steps, the way in which we try to know territorial governance in its three dimensions: as structure (or preconditions for governance), as process and as results. Information from the NOs was exploited and organized in a systematized way, mainly through tabulation in semi-closed tables with limited alternatives for answers. - as a result a Synthesis Report was elaborated - national information was tested in a second round with national writers - this information was placed by countries into a matrix (‘yes/not’) - the matrix was again circulated among TPG members - this matrix was the starting point to mapping

Mapping Exercise *Governance Score calculated summing up the result of the Score components of five headers of National Overviews: 1) official acceptance of governance and principles, 2) changes in formal government in the direction of governance, 3) Experience with participation processes, 4) experience with partnerships, 5) extent of financial dependence of local government on central government.

So, it was followed a continued system of mutual assessment (insider investigator triangulation method) between TPG (broadest in ESPON1), Working Package responsible and Project Coordination Open questions for NOs: - improve systematisation of all amount of information & identify main/key issues - contrast for agreement following a Delphi method (closer to theory triangulation method) between: 232 project, other related ESPON projects and national experts from ESPON Contact Points Limits: time and resources, and previous failed experiences in other ESPON projects. Next research steps concentrated on specific issues considered more consistent (in a comparative way) while others remain for future developments. Method in National Overviews: Context update

Specific Issues from National Overviews for Case Studies  As structural conditions - Changes in formal government in the direction of governance  - Priority emphasis on governance objectives as indicated in NO  - Conditions leading to shifts towards governance: Positive elements are: · long tradition of “working together” and citizens’ participation, · innovations in the field of partnership creation, · reorganization of spatial planning system and · introduction of new instruments and agencies  - Catalysts and barriers to changes to governance  CSs mainly focus in governance as process

Collecting Data from EU and National Statistical Sources (1/2)

Collecting Data from EU and National Statistical Sources (2/2)

Matrix for Case Studies Proposal

Case Studies Map

Guidelines for Case Studies

‘Numeric’ approach towards Case Studies (1/5)

‘Numeric’ approach towards Case Studies (2/5)

‘Numeric’ approach towards Case Studies (3/5)

‘Numeric’ approach towards Case Studies (4/5)

‘Numeric’ approach towards Case Studies (5/5)

Looking for Data and Indicators * Space has to be seen as an encompassing category

Starting set of Indicators

(*) Delta valuates difference between two data or two reference points) ** The indicators on spatial aspects are used to further differentiate the regional situation. Source: IRPUD

LOOKING FOR A REGIONAL TYPOLOGY By combining the structural with the dynamic indicators we might at least achieve a typology of regions

Thank you for your attention!!