ESPON 2.3.2 GOVERNANCE OF TERRITORIAL AND URBAN POLICIES FROM EU TO LOCAL LEVEL

1. ESPON 2.3.2 GOVERNANCE OF TERRITORIAL AND URBAN POLICIES FROM EU TO LOCAL LEVEL Salzbourg, 13th March 2005 Joaquín Farinós Dasí University of Valencia

2. Context Territorial features and dynamics To describe Favourable territorial preconditions To evaluate Policies Institutional frameworks of territorial policies To describe TGAs Processes To evaluate Results Key Findings

3. Indicators Domains and Features of Governance represented by indicators

4. DRAFT Shift from government to governance? Indicators: • Official acceptance of governance concepts and principles • Changes in formal government in the direction of governance • Experience with participation processes • Experience with partnerships • Extent of financial dependence of local government on central government • Basic laws regulating urban development/land use and regional development • Devolution of powers to 1st tier local authorities • Centralization / decentralization / devolution • Number of conditions leading to shifts towards governance • Number of factors operating in favour of adoption of governance approaches • Number of forms of cross-border co-operation Interpretation (on basis of three classes only): • 11 – “clearly advanced” • 9 – “neutral” • 8 – “development challenge”

5. DRAFT Weighted additive combination of Regulatory Quality and Government Effectiveness Weighted additive combination of . Regulatory Quality . Government Effectiveness Interpretation: strong development challenge for Romania, Bulgaria to catch up by and large advanced experiences in > third of EU countries C1 – development challenge C6 - advanced

6. DRAFT Multi-level Governance:States groups

7. Definition of Models of Governance: Policies ESPON Project 2.3.2 Classification Classification in ECSP 1. Styles of Planning: Mixture to the Comprehensive one 4 countries shifted 3 countries shifted 2 countries shifted *Indirectly mentioned in ECSP **not mentioned in ECSP

8. ESDP ES SD Levels Levels Territorial Lisbon Cohesion ‘ soft’ Supranational Strategy National Sustainable Spatial Regional ‘ hard’ Development vs. Supra-local /sub-regional - Environmental ‘soft’ Economic Focus of Local Focus of Physical planning planning Comprehensive Land Regional Urbanism Use Economic Integral ‘ soft’ ‘ hard’ Spatial planning style Spatial planning style Definition of Models of Governance: Policy 1.1 Styles Mixture also intra-State : Options for Spatial Development Planning FARINÓS, J. (2006): from author’s presentation on ‘Methods of Territorial Analysis’ Workshop, Department of Geography, Urbanism and Spatial Planning, University of Cantabria, Santander 18 Febrary. Adapted.

9. EU Policies National or sub-national legislation and policy Tradition Tradition of informal procedures Access_Fund - Economic interests of participants Public reaction to government policy and public projects Pol_Strategy - Political reasons Partnership formation and Co-operation: Catalysts

10. Undeveloped civil society and hierarchical decision-making Limitations on powers and activity potential of partnership Other Lack of funds and external dependence Complexity Communication problems between participants, antagonisms, mutual suspicions, etc. Reluctance to share power Undermining from external sources Partnership formation and Co-operation: Barriers

11. Build a Consensus To agree on the contribution of each stakeholder Obstacles and Barriers To go on with implementation To achieve negotiated and shared rules To reach a common Spatial Vision To achieve integration of territorial action (T9; n=45) Running of TGA Failures and Success (T9; n=45)

12. Integrated Planning Specific governance modes Territorial Policy Coordination Capacity to integrate local interests Helping EU Cohesion All Case Studies (T9; n=45) Results of TGA Outcomes

13. Conclusions and recomendations • Slow but continuous –incremental- process to governance practices: it takes time and resources • Incremental changes better than radical • Differences in points of departure in a same time: Importance of tradition and history (political culture and territorial conflicts). Situation and Dynamics. • Governance not applies in case of strong conflictual relations (usual in Mediterranean spatial planning styles) • Key challenge, how change ‘conflict’ by ‘consensus’ (trough more traditional instruments: Master Plans, technical public research…) avoiding trends to judiciary ways to solve problems (possible?) • ‘Elite’ Governance vs. ‘civil’ governance; accountability fragmentation vs. unrealistic situations; Visioners vs. ownership. • Necessary involvement of public actors: central/federal not impositive with financial support key role ; conflictual relations between sub-national if hierarchic relations; better strong meso-levels without hierarchy • Economic interests prevail on sustainability, not so obvious on social • Groups of interest better than individual citizens • Participation depending on Openness. Necessary info (intellectual capital) and mechanisms of involvement (i.e. Conseil de dévelopement –Lyon Metrop. Area)

14. Incremental Process to Governance Practices GOVERNMENT T1 Tn Formal (rules) SUSTAINABLE Progressive ‘Elite’ Governance Radical Levels TERRITORIAL DEVELOPMENT Top Territories Accountability,Coord. – Coop. Up Cooperation GOVERNANCE T4… GOVERNANCE T2 Openness, Information Down Informal (soft) Progressive Coherence Bottom Radical Groups, Citizens Participative Gov. Sectoral Policies Adapted (Formalisation) GOVERNMENT T3…

15. Further research • Complete indicators • Complete ranking exercise for horizontal (between policies, territories and participation) + Identification new intermediate levels on spatial planning • Finalisation analysis and synthesis on CS info • Definition of governance models and typologies • Presentation of best practices and added-value of governance, as well as limits, in relation to specific territorial or policy context. • Final conclusions and policy recommendations

16. Thank you for your attention!! Ximo Farinós University of Valencia Joaquin.Farinos@uv.es