“European Enlargement, Territorial Cohesion and ESDP” Paper Presented by Prof. P. Getimis email: pget@panteion.gr

1. Research University Institute of Urban Environment and Human Resources (U.E.H.R.) – Panteion University, http://www.uehr.panteion.gr “European Enlargement, Territorial Cohesion and ESDP”Paper Presented by Prof. P. Getimisemail: pget@panteion.gr International Conference “Present and future of the European Spatial Development Perspective” Torino, 5 Marzo 2004 Castello del Valentino - Salone d’Onore

2. EUROPEAN ENLARGEMENT • Challenge of the future of the internal cohesion of E.U. • Enlargement : • is expected to increase the growth and competitiveness • implies the widening of economic development gap, a geographical shift of income and regional disparities to the east and southeast • EU27 socioeconomic disparities will double and the average GDP of the Union will decrease by 12.5%. • Socio-economic macro trends as a result of globalization, liberalization of markets, opening of trade, increasing competition, ageing population: lead to an increase of existing economic and social disparities

3. EUROPEAN ENLARGEMENT • Adequate structural policies are needed in order to counteract market liberalization • Cohesion policy is the only policy of the E.U. which has a redistributive character addressing economic and social inequalities, transferring resources from rich to poor regions and countries (Not only passive transfer of funds but mainly an active support system of investment)

4. EUROPEAN ENLARGEMENT • However: • Arguments proposing the reduction of EU policies only in the field of regulatory policies, the abandonment of the cohesion policy as a redistributive policy and the transfer of its responsibility to the national / domestic institutions (Majone 1994,1996) • Arguments proposing the transfer of community funds from regional policy to the transport infrastructure, education and R + D policy areas (Sapir Report 2003) • Such scenarios would lead to a dramatic increase of regional and income inequalities • The importance of cohesion policyas one of the pillars of the enlarged Europeremains uncontested. • Need to increase financial resources (danger to decrease fro 1.17% to 1% of the GDP). Negotiation phase 2004-2005

5. EUROPEAN ENLARGEMENT EC third report on economic and social cohesiondoes express the willingness of the Commission not to abandon cohesion policy, but proposes a reformed cohesion policy after 2006, incorporating the Lisbon and Gothenburg objectives. Three priorities: • Convergence • Regional competitiveness • Territorial cooperation

6. EUROPEAN ENLARGEMENT • The Question is whether this reformed cohesion policy will lead to the economic, social and territorial cohesion and the real convergence of the enlarged Europe, or it will have only limited impact on the increase of inequalities, polarisations and discontinuities. • Danger that the cohesion policy, will act with a very limited influence, because of the dominance of the neo-liberal economic and monetary paradigm that impedes real convergence (stability pact) • Contradictions between the goals of cohesion policy and those of other sectoral policies at the community and at the national level (e.g. transportation policy, agriculture policy). Lack of synergies • The cohesion policy needs to give priority to: • The neglected aspects of social integration and cohesion, such as social exclusion, poverty, racism and long-term unemployment that need to be tackled through redistributive policies • The territorial cooperation and balanced spatial development between the member states of the EU27 and the new neighbours at the external frontiers

7. ΙΙ. TERRITORIAL COHESION, ESDP AND NEW SPATIAL TRENDS • Territorial cooperation and cohesion is a key concept for intergraded and holistic solutions • Combines and integrates diverse frameworks of values in a wide range of territories: social inclusion and equity, parity of access, innovation, competitiveness, entrepreneurship, environmental protection of natural and cultural resources, partnership and cooperation. The complementarily of these values is however not given. It is always a difficult goal to be fulfilled, through new forms of multi-level governance • Although the effectiveness of the ESDP territorial objectives is contested, is taken as a reference background for several European programmes and actions (e.g. SPESP, ESPON e.a.)

8. ΙΙ. TERRITORIAL COHESION, ESDP AND NEW SPATIAL TRENDS • Despite the considerable progress made in reducing regional inequalities and the positive impact of European policy financed by the Structural and Cohesion Funds, disparities remain and are being reproduced in new forms: • Average income per capita of the 10% of the population living in the most developed areas is 2.6 times higher than the average income per capita of the 10% of the population living in lagging regions • Wide disparities with regard to unemployment and poverty and at the regional level is more polarized pattern • In Portugal and Greece 20-25% of the population had an income below the poverty line, while in Denmark and the Netherlands this percentage was small (11-12%). • New Problems in metropolitan areas, ( social exclusion, segregation of immigrants, women, and old aged people e.a), new forms of urban poverty and long-term unemployment. • Regions with geographical handicaps: rural mountainous areas, islands suffer from isolation, migration and loss of jobs because of economic restructuring

9. ΙΙ. TERRITORIAL COHESION, ESDP AND NEW SPATIAL TRENDS • The Commission expects that, although regional disparities will grow after the Enlargement, the cohesion policies and especially the territorial co-operation policies will strengthen the economic growth, productivity and competitiveness in the middle term, and will develop a new spatial transformation towards a more polycentric structure of the European territory • However it is still an open question if these goals can be fulfilled, concerning the available limited financial resources. (340 billion Euro, 0.41% GDP).

10. ΙΙ. TERRITORIAL COHESION, ESDP AND NEW SPATIAL TRENDS • Trends: Major spatial transformations in the EU 27, challenges for the territorial policies • Expansion of the European Core towards the East, (major urban agglomerations e.g. Budapest, Prague, Bratislava, Warsaw, Poznan and Krakow). The emergence of new potentials and the concentration of the capital investment simultaneously deepens spatial disparities between the enlarged European Core and the peripheral countries and regions • Deepening of the production specialization in a more limited number of sectors, in the peripheral and more remote countries / regions of the European territory, (such as Greece, South Italy, eastern borders of EU, Balkan countries, etc.). Sectorswith comparative advantage (e.g. Tourism) • An increase of spatial disparities is expected in interrelation with environmental pressure upon coastal areas and islands of the periphery • In order to minimize negative impact of trends, there is a need for a framework of complementary goals, which combines competitiveness, and innovation with social inclusion and territorial cohesion and co-operation. Need for specific spatial measures focused on the less favored countries of the new European periphery (central and east Mediterranean countries, objective one region, statistical effect)

11. ΙII. CHALLENGES OF THE EUROPEAN TERRITORIAL POLICY IN VIEW OF THE ENLARGEMENT: THE NEED FOR A ESDP+ • Regional development and reduction of the old and new spatial disparities are related to the accomplishment of the basic targets of the ESDP • However, issues concerning the social aspect of cohesion and in particular concepts of social equity and social justice were neglected in the formation and implementation of regional policies. There is a need to upgrade social and environmental aspects of territorial cohesion in order to minimize social discriminations and safeguard social stability in the perspective of a new ESDP+ for the enlarged Europe.

12. ΙII. CHALLENGES OF THE EUROPEAN TERRITORIAL POLICY IN VIEW OF THE ENLARGEMENT: THE NEED FOR A ESDP+ • Necessity for some crucial policy recommendations: • Implying tailor-made policies more appropriate to the diversity of territorial needs (Second Cohesion Report , Third Report on Economic and Social Cohesion) • Supporting border regions through EU integration and cohesion policy • Improving transportation networks (especially in the accession countries) • Reinforcing polycentric development and strengthening urban growth poles outside the pentagon • Promoting the process of trans-national functional regions – macro regions

13. IV. CONCLUSIONS • A) Reinforcing Cohesion policies • European Enlargement, is expected to increase the growth and competitiveness of the European territory activating new investments fields, but also imlies the widening of economic development gap between regions by doubling the socioeconomic disparities in EU27. • Cohesion policy, as an active support system of investment in physical and human capital, is the only redistributive policy of the E.U, addressing economic and social inequalities. Financial resources for redistribution should be increased (%of the EU GDP) • Need for adequate structural policies and accompanying measures in order to counteract market liberalization and its negative impact on economic and social cohesion of the enlarged Europe. The cohesion policy needs to give priority to the: • Territorial cooperation and balanced spatial development between the member states of the EU27 and the new neighbours at the external frontiers. • Neglected aspects of social integration and cohesion (social exclusion, poverty, racism, long-term unemployment that need to be tackled through redistributive policies)

14. IV. CONCLUSIONS • B) ESDP+ goals elaboration within the territorial and cohesion policies: The importance of Political Institutions • Strengthen the new political role of the EU as a multilevel governance structure with the building of new institutions • The new ESDP+ should not be just a loose framework • More spatial oriented criteria in the framework of a new ESDP+. • A more permanent macro-regions structure • Building of institutions and geographical and thematic cooperation networks • The establishment of Espon Programme as a permanent institute (Observatory structure with peripheral branches at a macro-regional and national level, D.G. Regio)

15. IV. CONCLUSIONS • C. Reinforcing civil society of the Enlarged EU • Principles and goals for the reorganization and strengthening of the civil European society: • Combat democratic deficit and weaken control and demand policy procedures, centralization, bureaucracy. • Promote partnership, networks and trust • Participation of citizens at all levels of governance, enhancement the role of NGO’s, promote social, political and environmental rights/citizenship, safeguarding social stability and conflict resolution through consensus building, negotiation and institutional learning

16. LITERATURE To be completed