1. Territorial Cohesion – where are we?
Corinne Hermant-de Callataÿ ‘Urban Development and Territorial Cohesion’ Unit
May 2008

2. The territorial agenda
Overview of the preparation process of the Green Paper
Report on the questionnaire on territorial cohesion

3. 1. The territorial agenda

4. The new Treaty
The Treaty adopted in Lisbon on 18 October explicitly adds territorial cohesion as a third dimension of regional policy (beside the social and economic dimensions)

5. The inclusion of Territorial Cohesion
… makes the territorial dimension explicit, which was only implicit in cohesion policy so far, as a “place-based” policy
… provides an opportunity to strengthen cohesion policy:
Better targeting of territorial challenges
Better coherence between sectoral and regional policies
Reinforcing territorial cooperation and networking
Deepening multi-level governance

6. The territorial Agenda
In Leipzig (May 2007) the European Ministers responsible for spatial planning agreed on a strategic document called the Territorial Agenda for the European Union.
This is an action-oriented political framework for future cooperation developed together with the European Commission and has strong implication on territorial cohesion
Basis : Territorial State and Perspective of the EU (TSP) ESPON

7. Priorities of the Territorial Agenda
Polycentric development and innovation through networking of city regions and cities
New forms of partnerships and territorial governance, namely between urban and rural areas
Regional clusters of competition and innovation
Trans-European networks strengthening and extension
Trans-European risk management including the impacts of climate change
Strengthening of ecological structures and cultural resources as potential for development

8. 1st Action Programme …
Agreed in Azores, Portugal, 23 November Five lines of action between
To implement the Territorial Agenda in the areas of competence of the Ministers at European Union and Member States level;
To influence EU key-dossiers and to give a territorial/urban dimension to sectoral policies;
To strengthen multi-level territorial governance at European Union and Member States level;

9. … for the Implementation of the Territorial Agenda
To compare and assess the territorial state, perspectives, trends and policy impacts in the European Union and Member States from the point of view of territorial cohesion and sustainable spatial development;
To coordinate and monitor the First Action Programme implementation, assess and review the Territorial Agenda and the First Action Programme and to develop a communication and awareness-raising strategy on territorial cohesion and sustainable spatial development.

10. Slovenian Presidency
The Slovenian Presidency has selected two specific actions within this Action Programme that will have priority during this first half of 2008 (these actions will of course be developed on a longer period):
Action 1.1: Fostering more integration between urban and territorial development, and
Action 2.2: Scoping the territorial impact of selected sectoral policies (led by the Netherlands).

11. 2. Overview of the preparation process of the Green Paper

12. Preparation process
Recurrent discussions on the meetings of the COCOF Sub-committee on Territorial and Urban Matters (TCUM):
Questionnaire on Territorial Cohesion
Territorial dimension in programming documents
Interservice Group on Territorial Cohesion
Expert consultation
Stakeholder consultation
2. to analyze the territorial dimension and territorial effect of different community policies as well as to get to a common understanding of the concept;
3. to ensure that all relevant aspects related to territorial cohesion are taken on board
4. to have a comprehensive overview of the different ways in which different actors approach territorial cohesion

13. Content
The framework for the Green Paper and the concept of territorial cohesion (COM)
An updated analysis on the disparities and challenges of the European territory and on specific territorial features
The definition and implementation of the concept at the Member State level (on the basis of both the questionnaire and of an analysis of the territorial dimension of the programming documents)
Key questions for debate (conceptual but also operational in terms of possible tools)

14. The aim of the questionnaire
To understand the concept of territorial cohesion and its practical implementation within Member States
To have clearer common understanding of the concept of territorial cohesion
Background
Questionnaire sent to MS a year ago (May, 2007)
From the September deadline (5 replies) long process of waiting and updating
Two interim reports so far: TCUM October (13 replies) and March (25) + Commissioner Hübner also presented first impressions in Azores
Now: 26 replies on stock

15. Synthesis of replies on the concept of territorial cohesion
Based on the analysis of the 26 replies received so far it seems that
A distinction should be made between territorial cohesion policy and territorial development policy as well as regional development policy
The relation between territorial cohesion policy and spatial planning (including land-use) policy should be also clarified
A clear concept (e.g. LT): Territorial cohesion might be seen as one of the overarching objectives of territorial development policy and spatial planning is one of the most important instruments of formulating a territorial development policy

16. Synthesis of replies on the concept of territorial cohesion
The objective of territorial cohesion is complementing economic and social cohesion
Most Member States analyse policies which are related to territorial cohesion as
Moving away from a subsidy-oriented, redistributive policy that targets lagging regions only
Towards a notion of sustainable use of specific territorial potentials to increase competitiveness and reduce disparities
Point 2: ESDP, Terriotial Agenda, Territorial State and Perspective - Cohesion Reports, Community Strategic Guidelines, Treaties
There is a strong European policy influence on the concept of territorial cohesion

17. Synthesis of replies on the key components of the territorial cohesion concept (1)
Respect of territorial diversity, development of territorial potentials, and territorial competitiveness (almost all mentioned)
Sustainability (almost all)
Territorial specificities (9) (natural handicaps but also "marginalised" areas)
Accessibility (almost all): a very traditional and significant "building block" of territorial cohesion - through infrastructure and access to public services
Components of territorial cohesion policy are diverse, but there are a few common ones –
components and tools are mixed in most of the cases:
The last three components (poles, cooperation, governance) are more of the nature of tools

18. Synthesis of replies on the key components of the territorial cohesion concept (2)
Polycentric territorial development and growth/competitiveness poles (one third)
Territorial cooperation and networking (12) including urban-rural (10), European Territorial Cooperation (8)
Appropriate governance instruments (almost all MS mentioned it): multi-level, cross-sectoral, urban-rural, metropolitan

19. Synthesis of replies on the key tools for territorial cohesion policy
The most important institutional aspects and tools for territorial cohesion policy
Spatial plans and strategies
Multi-level governance systems
The territorial dimension of sectoral policies
These are interlinked, sometimes overlapping themes

20. Spatial plans and strategies
Almost all Member States produce some kind of spatial plans and these are strongly influenced by EU level policies
BUT only few indicate concrete territorial cohesion relevant aims or elements in these plans
In the replies there is more emphasis on NSRF and their general territorial dimensions
The influence of the administrative structure and its evolution is important
In some cases planning is the strongest coordination tool
exceptions BE, ES due to the competencies of their regions on this issue
European influence: ESDP, TA, adjusted time frame for SF programming
2. The most comprehensive (at least in presentation) spatial planning system: Greek example
National and Regional Frameworks for Spatial Planning and Sustainable Development,
Specific Spatial Frameworks – renewable energy, tourism, industry,
Specific frameworks for mountainous and coastal areas +
NSRF with a strong regional dimension and spatial development aims 4.
DK example: local government reform linked to more coherent spatial planning (planning authority for both urban-rural areas)
Finnish case: municipal and service structure reform aimed at cost efficient service supply in peripheral areas and smaller municipalities
5. Between actors of different sectors and territorial administrative levels e.g. ‘schema directeur’ (masterplan) in the Brussels Capital Region)

21. Multi-level governance systems
There is a need to clarify the nature of this term compared to others, like partnership or stakeholder consultation
It should include the processes of vertical and horizontal coordination
Generally there is limited information on the way how this is implemented in national policies (some exceptions e.g. France)
The evolution of the administrative structures (territorial organisation) might have a strong influence
2. The most complex and comrehensive system in place is in France
interministerial committees (horizontal) and delegations (vertical)
the system of “contrats”: state-region planning contracts and urban contracts for social cohesion (verticals) + contract of “pays” – rural district contract, conurbation contract (horizontal - intermunicipal)
4. structures crossing administrative and institutional boundaries (e.g. Italian territorial platforms, Danish growth coalitions) to better reflect functional realities.

22. Territorial dimension of sectoral policies
The cohesion policy programming exercise contributes to enhanced territorial thinking in sectoral policies + better cross-sectoral coordination
The most “territorialised” MS policies are transport, telecommunication, sustainable development and environment policies
Some MS use the concept of development poles representing territorially integrated sectoral and regional policies
The most comprehensive and complex picture from a territorial cohesion perspective is delivered by Spain: national territorial and sectoral policies contain strong territorial (cohesion) dimensions
Water policy, coastal planning, infrastructure and transport, broadband development, local and urban sustainability, rural development,
+ some autonomous regional examples (Andalucia, Communidad Valenciana)

23. Thank you for your attention!