1. Workshop 1.3: From TeDi to GEOSPECS Development potentials in areas with geographic specificities
Internal Seminar
Evidence-based Cohesion policy: Territorial Dimensions
29-30 November 2011
Kraków, Poland
Erik Gloersen –University of Geneva
Michiel van Eupen - Alterra
With a focus on how policies focusing on territories with geographic specificities could contribute
- to improve the overall economic performance and resilience of the European economy
And
- to create perspectives of more balanced and harmonious territorial development
The question is: if we move away from a regional policy whose purpose is to create cohesion, in order to facilitate integration within a single European market
to a policy that also ambitions to exploit regional potentials better, and to promote more balanced, harmonious and sustainable territories
Can “geographic specificities” become useful categories for policy making ?
If yes, how should they be understood ?
What type of knowledge do we need ?
Could they help building more robust economies, that would be more resilient facing economic crises such as the ongoing one?
How to position a territorial cohesion policy focusing on “territorial diversity” in economic theory debates?
How to justify public interventions in areas with geographic specificities? Should they necessarily been seen as an alternative to a focus on metropolitan regions and growth centres?

2. Construction of policy relevant maps and figures
What are the criteria of policy relevance?
- Meaningful to policy makers and others?
- Easy to communicate?
- Reflecting actual development processes?
- Focusing on territorial units that are deemed relevant?
- Able to guide policy design and contribute to policy evaluation?
- Appropriate for benchmarking of administrative regions?

3. ESPON TeDi project team: a targeted analysis
- Island Consulting Services, Malta
- University of Akureyri, Iceland

4. Case study areas Overlay of case study areas
Characterised in terms of access to urban nodes
Overlay of case study areas
and zones within 45 minutes
of Functional Urban Areas with more than 50,000 inhabitants

5. Demographic trends

6. Age structure Pronounced ageing in many localities,
but also significant over-representations of young people
High age dependency ratios are a shared feature of most areas

7. Economic activities
Main deviations from average profile of case study areas
 Diversity of situations

8. Recurring issues A number of recurring issues in the TeDi areas:
Income
Gender balance
Focus on youth as a basis for economic development
Branding, self-perception
Symbolic role of knowledge-intensive activities
Minimal requirements in terms of services
Diversity of lifestyles as a European value
The main issues are however related to small and (relative) isolation of settlements

9. Ensuring a sustainable development based on regional comparative advantages
Identification of situations where the market fails to take proper advantage of an identified resource.
Insufficient regional returns on the exploitation of natural resources
 Acknowledging the existence of conflicting interests at different territorial scales
Multiplicity of development models that needs to be recognised
 Challenging the monolitical character of the Lisbon agenda
 Challenge for GEOSPECS: How to approach this at the pan-European level?

10. ESPON GEOSPECS project team
Lead Partner: Department of Geography, University of Geneva
Mountain areas
Centre for Mountain Studies, Perth College UHI, UK
Islands
E-cubed consultants, MT
Sparsely populated areas
Nordregio, SE
Coastal areas
Coastal and Marine Resources Centre, University College Cork, IE
Inner periphery
Alterra, Wageningen University, NL
Outermost regions
Louis Lengrand & associés, FR
Covering a large part of the European territory
Combining geographic specificities of different natures:
- physical (e.g. mountains, islands, coasts)
- based on settlement-patterns (sparsely populated areas)
- institutional (borders, outermost regions)
Border regions
Thomas Stumm, Eureconsult, LU
Metropolitan border regions
CEPS/INSTEAD, LU
New and old external borders
Leibniz-Institut für ökologische Raumentwicklung Dresden (IÖR), DE
+ Umweltbundesamt/Federal Environment Agency, AT

11. Mountain areas

12. from a socio-economic point of view?
What is a mountain area
from a socio-economic point of view?
Criteria of altitude, slope, terrain and relief
LAU 2 area defined as mountainous if more than 50% of territory is classed as mountainous
Majority of people live in valleys / at lower altitudes
Many economic processes strongly linked to nearby urban centres

13. Mountain areas: a question of scale
Voir «mountain areas in Europe»
Pour explications
Ce qui est important, c’est qu’on a choisi les seuils et les méthodes pour coller à une pérception générale de la montagne
Ce qui est premier, ce n’est pas la mesure mais la catégorie mentale

14. Mountain areas and mountainousness
Voir «mountain areas in Europe»
Pour explications
Ce qui est important, c’est qu’on a choisi les seuils et les méthodes pour coller à une pérception générale de la montagne
Ce qui est premier, ce n’est pas la mesure mais la catégorie mentale

15. Mountain areas and mountainousness
Where are the Alps, the Jura, the Balkan mountain areas? Are the Pyrenees discontinu ous?

16. Islands and insularity
Is this an island?

17. Islands and insularity
Insular regions

18. Islands and insularity

19. Challenges working at the LAU2 level
Only Macedonia and Bosnia and Herzegovina not yet mapped Only LAU1 units available in Turkey units

20. Potential daily mobility areas as a basis for mapping European territorial patterns

21. Access to urban nodes Built-up area Commuting area
Potential daily mobility area

22. 11/06/2018

23. 11/06/2018

24. 11/06/2018

25. 11/06/2018

26. GEOSPECS Method: Inner peripheries
11/06/2018
GEOSPECS Method: Inner peripheries
Population potential <

27. 11/06/2018
Thank you!
© Wageningen UR

28. Improving the foundation of development
Overcoming the duality in local development strategies,
Seeking to assert their uniqueness
While also aspiring to mainstream development objectives-
Question of the institutional capacity to formulate strategies: The case study regions have developed variable solutions to design a development strategy based on their unique characteristics;
The relative isolation of many TeDi areas limits the capacity to see opportunities and think out of the box.
The value of wide ranging, incremental approaches of innovation could be further recognised;
Self-perception and identity need to be further highlighted as central factors of local development.

29. Inputs to European policy debates
Conceptual clarifications needed:
(1) Level of performance ≠ Structural obstacles to growth
 More than average scores ≠ good scores
 Geographically specific area ≠ Lagging area
(2) Economic importance ≠ Economic weight
(3) Balanced, harmonious and sustainable development requires more than economic growth
 geographic specificities may help identifying contradictions and mutually beneficial effects of different types of policies

30. Inputs to European policy debates
Dealing with geographic specificities is often about creating new types of connections between areas
- Within regions
- Across regional and national boundaries
Compensating for imbalances in flows
Creating alliances through which actors can strengthen the robustness and resilience of their local communities
Gaining greater weight in economic and political systems dominated by main urban areas
At the European scale, a change of focus of territorial policies, incorporating the sub-regional scale is required to encourage and accompany these processes.
The focus should be on potentials rather than on relative performance

31. GEOSPECS Method: Islands
11/06/2018
GEOSPECS Method: Islands
Scale of used data is
Very important

32. Cross-delineation