Participatory Session of ET2050 Project: Meeting with ESPON MC and CU on Territorial Impact Assessment of Scenarios by Roberto Camagni Paphos, 4th December 2012 ESPON Internal Seminar 2012 “Territorial Development Opportunities in Europe and its Neighbourhood to Foster Global Competitiveness”

The use of TIA in order to assess territorial impact of 2030 and 2050 Scenarios is considered an essential part of the ET2050 project, in the view of properly defining the 2050 Vision. Aim of the presentation: Presenting the way a Territorial Impact Assessment of the different Scenarios will be carried out, Animate a participatory debate on some relevant issues concerning the TIA procedure and consequent decisions Aims of the presentation 2

Three main elements, previous to any operational procedure, have to be discussed, namely: A.defining the main “Driving Forces” inside each scenario, due to generate territorial impacts, B. defining the “Impact Fields” (the criteria of Multicriteria Analysis) on which impacts will be assessed, C. defining the “Weights” to assign to each type of impact, when a “summative”, generalized impact is due to be calculated. Elements A and B mainly imply a validation of what is proposed by the TPG Element C requires a full decision by the MC. Specific goals 3

Territorial Impacts will be calculated for: - the Baseline Scenario, at 2030 and 2050, - the 3 Exploratory Scenarios, at 2030 and 2050, - the possible alternative Baseline Scenario (“EU fragmentation”), in case it is accepted by the CU and MC. Impacts will be mapped for the main Impact Fields and for the “Summative” impact, in each Scenario. This will imply a large number of elaborations and mappings: an important effort is therefore needed since the beginning in order not to expand excessively the number of Impact Fields, Driving Forces and Scenario alternatives. Methodology 4

The methodology is similar to the one utilised in the previous Espon Projects TEQUILA (Espon 3.2.) and simplified in the ARTS Project. Therefore, there is no need to further improve the existing TIA methodology and software support, but, instead, to: - adapt it to the new goal of calculating Territorial Impacts of Scenarios (and not of more specific policies or EU Directives, as in past experiences within ESPON), and - adapt it to import results from the forecast and foresight models utilised in ET2050 Project. Methodology 5

The TEQUILA model utilised in the project is a Multicriteria model, addressed to provide quantitative figures on impacts in different fields for all regions in the Espon space. Results are mapped at NUTs 2 level. In terms of impact indicators, most of the necessary inputs will be provided by the simulation procedures of the quantitative models utilised in the project. Where this will prove unfeasible, sets of complex indicators will be provided,built on the basis of experts judgement, group work and discussion inside the TPG. Models and/or experts judgements provide the Potential Impact in all regions and all impact fields; these indicators are coupled by a set of Regional Sensitivity indicators, defining the different priorities attached to each impact field in each region Methodology 6

The assessment process of each Scenario 7

The participatory process on TIA 8 Participatory discussion has to focus on three elements, preliminary to any operational procedure,: A.defining the main “Driving Forces” inside each scenario B. defining the “Impact Fields” (the criteria of Multicriteria Analysis) C. defining the “Weights” to be assigned to each type of impact, when a “summative”, generalized impact is due to be calculated.

Driving Forces help summarising the main hypoteses underlying each Scenario and their Potential Territorial Impact (an operational and technical aim) - Economy (macroeconomic elements, international trade, FDI,...) - EU Integration and internal solidarity - Technological change (ICTs, green economy, new production paradigms,...) - Climate change - Transport policies - CAP policies - Cohesion policies - Neighbourhood policies / migration policies 8 Driving Forces proposed by Steering Committee 9

4/20 Impact Fields proposed by the Steering Committee 10 ECONOMYENVIRONMENT GDPLand consumption Employment (manufact.+ services)Emissions/pollutants in the air InnovationCongestion TourismFlood hazard AccessibilityLand erosion SOCIETYTERRITORIAL IDENTITY UnemploymentLandscape fragmentation Disposable income per capitaCreativity Road accidentsCultural heritage Risk of povertyNatural heritage Net migrationMulticulturality

20 Impact Fields proposed by Steering Committee 11 Economy (Smart growth) 5 fields GDPGDP per capita Employment (manufacturing + services) % of employment in manufacturing and services Innovation % of firms introducing product and/or process innovation TourismNights on population AccessibilityMultimodal accessibility Society (Inclusive growth) 5 fields UnemploymentUnemployment rate Disposable income per capita Road accidentsRoad fatalities Risk of povertyPoverty index Net migrationNet migration balance Each Impact Field has its own (existing) indicator (sources in the text)

20 Impact Fields proposed by Steering Committee 12 Environment (Sustainable growth) 5 fields Land consumption% discontinous urban fabric Emissions/pollutants in the air ((vehicles per 1000 inhab)+(dens pop))/2 or Concentration of PM10 Congestion Flood hazardRisk of flood hazard Land erosion% areas at risk of soil erosion Territorial Identity 5 fields Landscape fragmentation Creativity(Museums+Theatres)*accessib. Cultural heritagen° of TCI 3-stars monuments Natural heritage% natural areas Multi-culturality??? To debate: - How to reduce, if possible, the number of Impact Fields (5+20 maps per Scenario!) - Whether to keep the “Multiculturality” field (politically sensitive?)

When a “summative” impact of a Scenario on each EU region is considered relevant, beyond single impacts in specific fields (on GDP, employment, emissions,..), one needs to compare the relative importance/priority of the different fields/goals/criteria: e.g.: GDP vs. innovation vs. accessibility..... ; unemployment vs. road accidents, etc. Therefore one has to define a system of “weights”, assessed in political and policy terms. The point of view should be the European one (as specific priorities at the regional scale are already taken into consideration by the Regional Sensitivity Matrix). The “Weights” issue 13

Outcomes of today’s discussion could be either: -a single system of weights, agreed among MC members - a series of personal indications on the attached Questionnaire, which will be subsequently elaborated by the project team. The “Weights” issue 14

The Questionnaire: first step 15 A two-steps procedure for answers: weigths of single fields inside each Macro-field and weights of Macro-fields Question n. 1 Please indicate what you think is the relative importance of the impact fields listed below in their contribution to the economic development of Europe in Impact fields of Economy GDP Employment (manufacturing + services) Innovation Tourism Accessibility TOTAL = 100

The Questionnaire: first step 16 Question n. 2 Please indicate what you think is the relative importance of the impact fields listed below in their contribution to the social development of Europe in Impact fields of Society Unemployment Disposable income per capita Road accidents Risk of poverty Net migration TOTAL = 100

Question n. 3 Please indicate what you think is the relative importance of the impact fields listed below in their contribution to the environmental development of Europe in The Questionnaire: first step 17 Impact fields of Environment Land consumption Emissions/pollutants in the air Congestion Flood hazard Land erosion TOTAL = 100

Question n. 4 Please indicate what you think is the relative importance of the impact fields listed below in their contribution to the territorial identity of Europe in The Questionnaire: first step 18 Impact fields of Territorial identity Landscape fragmentation Creativity Cultural heritage Natural heritage Multi-culturality TOTAL = 100

Question n. 5 Please indicate what you think is the relative importance of the four major development fields listed below in their contribution to the overall welfare of Europe in The Questionnaire: second step 19 Development fields Economy – Smart growth policy objectives Society – Inclusive growth policy objectives Environment – Sustainable growth policy objectives Territorial Identity policy objectives TOTAL = 100

20

Many thanks indeed for your attention and inspiring collaboration !! THANKS 21