1 / 16

Matera Seminar

Matera Seminar. ESPON 2.2.3 The Territorial Effects of the Structural Funds in Urban Areas ECOTEC, ECORYS-Nl; IRS; MCRIT; Nordregio; OIR; SDRU. Structure. Focus Towards a typology of urban areas First policy recommendations Challenges for the next phase. Focus.

mallorie-vincent
Download Presentation

Matera Seminar

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Matera Seminar ESPON 2.2.3 The Territorial Effects of the Structural Funds in Urban Areas ECOTEC, ECORYS-Nl; IRS; MCRIT; Nordregio; OIR; SDRU

  2. Structure • Focus • Towards a typology of urban areas • First policy recommendations • Challenges for the next phase

  3. Focus • Work has concentrated on identifying consistent indicators and methods for identifying those urban areas that might be eligible for Objective 2 style programmes in the future – across the EU 27+2 • Assessing the territorial effects of structural funds in urban areas has not been a priority

  4. Towards a typology of urban areas • Economic trends • Changing employment levels • Changing prosperity • Levels of dependency/vulnerability • Economic structure • Social trends • Education levels • Income levels • Health • unemployment • Environmental conditions

  5. Data availability • Common European data sets at NUTS 3 • Nationally available data at NUTS 4 or 5 • Data that is specific to individual urban areas • Through case study analysis • Awaiting data that will become available through the Urban Audit 2

  6. Initial typology • Building on FUAs – using common data (at NUTS 3 level) • Limited economic data • Employment* • GDP* • Economic structure (estimated) • Limited social data • Unemployment* • Education levels • Population levels

  7. Initial basic typology

  8. Mapping of typology

  9. Accessibility and the typology 1

  10. Accessibility and typology 2

  11. Structural Funds and the typology

  12. Developing the typology • The strength of this typology is that it makes use of comparable datasets enabling robust comparisons to be made across the European territory. • The weakness is that it applies at the NUTS 3 level, is particularly ‘blind’ to sub-urban level difficulties and utilises a limited set of indicators. • An extended typology has been developed, but the data is not available to populate it.

  13. Extended typology The elements of sustainable development – Munasinghe 1993

  14. Components • Multi-criteria analysis • PROMETHEE (Preference Ranking Organization METHod for Enrichment Evaluations) • Status indicators (11) • Performance indicators (17) • But: • from a total of roughly 1,600 FUAs in Europe (including the accession countries and Switzerland) only about 100 FUAs showed a relatively complete set of indicators

  15. First policy recommendations • Urban NUTS 3 areas tend to perform badly in EU 15 (particularly local/regional), an urban focus thus valuable • Not to attempt to undertake a comprehensive assessment of all urban areas in the EU for Structural Fund purposes • To undertake an initial assessment based upon NUTS 3 level data • To use MCA to undertake urban-centred analysis in partnership with urban authorities • To make use of data from Urban Audit 2 to assess the potential role of the Structural Funds in assessing urban–level difficulties

  16. Challenges for the next phase • To assess the effects of the Structural Funds in urban areas • Data from 2.2.1 • Case study analysis • To assess the role of urban typologies in decisions regarding eligibility for Objective 2-style actions • Particularly issues of scale and competence • To test the MCA approach using Urban Audit 2 data • But, resource constraints

More Related