Territorial impacts of globalization on European Regions

1. Van Hamme Gilles IGEAT-ULB Info day of the DG Regio October 2011 Territorial impacts of globalization on European Regions

2. The TIGER project: General objective • This project intends to assess the position of Europe in the world and especially tries to deal with how European territories (regions and cities) participate to the global economy. • Lead partner : IGEAT-ULB • Partners • Pp2 (UK): School of real estate and planning. University of Reading • Pp3 (France): CNRS (mainly Université de Normandie) • Pp4 (Italy): Dpto Studi Europei e Interculturali, Sapienza Università di Roma • Pp5 (Sweden): Internationella Handelshögskolan i Jönköping AB • Pp6 (Bulgaria): Institute of Geography BAS

3. Objective 1: to assess how Europe, its regions and cities participate in the global flows and networks and how the global processes impact on the territorial structures of Europe. How can territorial policies help to improve the position of the different types of regions in the world and ensure the objectives of social and territorial cohesion despite the potentially unequal impacts of globalization on European territories? 2. Objective 2: to analyse the impacts of territorial structures on European performances How can territorial policy improve European competitiveness? For example, should we invest mainly in the global cities to improve Europe’s position in the world? 3. Objective 3:to analyse how Europe and its territories position themselves in the world through cooperation and networking with other parts of the world. Major questions and objectives

4. The architecture of the Project

5. Some Key points (1): Flows and networks versus structures and performances • To cross structures and networks is one of the main added value of the project: •  It is important that flows and networks analyses do not « float in the air ». Position in networks are both influenced and impact the territorial structures. •  European regions and cities, notably big cities are still relatively closed economy. Hence, it is vital to understand how urban internal structures interact with global flows and networks, nobaly to explain cities’ competitiveness • Territorial structures include different scales of analysis: • The urban economic structures, including infrastructures, labour force composition etc. • The importance of the Nation-States and their persistent regulatory power, even if we may argue that since 30 years the balance of power is not in their favour; • The territorial structures at continental scales (level of concentration, mobility, and inequalities) .

6. How do we achieve this objective? • At urban scale: •  Elaboration of a database at urban level is under achievement which cross for US and the ESPON space the urban structures (economic sectors, qualification), the position in networks through various indicators and economic performances. • Testing the relationships between structures, position in networks and performances At continental scale:  Comparison of territorial structures between Northern America, Europe and Eastern Asia.

7. Some key points (2): Europe and its regions in the global economy • The hegemony of the « network/globalization » paradigm has a bit obscured some basic features of today’s global economy. • This is why I recall some basic facts and figures here: • Europe is still a closed and integrated economy. • Globalization is also « a political process » (the result of political decisions), not an unavoidable « natural » process •  We know little about the importance of participation to global flows and networks to explain economic wealth.

8. Europe is an integrated economy still moderately open • The map shows that EU is the most integrated international economic area in the world: intra block trade reaches 43% of total GDP; • EU has an openness rate (ratio extra-EU Trade on GDP) of 21%, which makes it the closest large economy in the world after NAFTA; • This rate has significantly increased, also as the result of POLITICAL DECISIONS (free trade and investment have been promoted by the EU).

9. European regions are not concerned to the same extent by globalization • The map shows the extra-EU openness (only exports on GDP) of European regions around 2008; • This openness is extremely variable from 0.2% (Corsica) to 31% (Flanders); • Metropolitan areas do not appear because their role in the global economy is related to the service economy (not included on the map) and their central role in global networks. •  Intensity and nature of embeddedness in the global economy very much varies spatially

10. Some key points (3): The vital importance of the multi scale analysis • Multi scale has become a platitude of territorial analysis (However, far from the theory to the practice) • To understand how cities and regions evolve and perform, it is decisive to take into consideration their embeddedness at larger scales and the dynamics occuring at these different scales: • The global scale, because global trends resonate very differently across territories  we need to know the key-drivers of globalization; • The continental scale, which is the EU/ESPON scale  EU is an integrated economy with a regulatory power; • The national scales, because States are still major regulatory powers and an essential interface between the global and the city and regions.

11. Europe in the world trade: a long term perspective The changing geographical pattern of Europe’s position in the world trade

12. European geography of trade hides national and regional differences China Northern America Middle East EU and neighbours

13. Europe and countries in the international division of labour

14. European regions in the division of labour Volume and asymmetry of trade in Machinery 2007-2009

15. European cities in the service economy

16. Conclusion • To understand how European cities and regions participate in the global economy is an absolute necessity for territorial development policies • 2. Most of the literature supposes that the higher the participation to the global economy the better it is. However: • Regional and cities economies are still relatively closed and most of their exchanges take place within the EU; • We know little about how this participation impact the competitiveness and social cohesion at regional and city level. Of course, we know about London but what about other cities and regions?  They might be other ways than a global-oriented economy to achieve EU objectives in terms of competitiveness or social cohesion