ULYSSES

1. ULYSSES Using applied research results from ESPON as a yardstick for cross-border spatial development planning ESPON Open Seminar Aalborg, Denmark 14 June 2012 European Territorial Evidence for EU Cohesion Policy and Programming

2. Using applied research results from ESPON as a yardstick for decentralised cross-border spatial development planning. • Targeted analysis: use of existing ESPON results with different stakeholders from 13 cross-border areas: • 7 data fact sheets • 6 multi-thematic territorial analyses • Greece-Bulgaria • Extremadura-Alentejo • Pyrenees • Upper Rhine • Pomerania • Karelia ULYSSES overview

3. Methodology - Territorial analysis (T 2.2) 3

4. Task 2.2 – Pyrenees case study Rank-size distribution of the FUA population • Demographic attractiveness (immigration). • Hierarchic distribution of urban areas. • Decreasing of primary activities, also in land cover. Relevant natural assets. • Peripheral regions in terms of accessibility, poor internal connectivity. • Different economic orientation on both sides of the border / medium income. • Border effect: fertility rate; urban network; accessibility (train-road vs. air); GDP (catching-up analysis 1997-2008 in Spanish regions steady or slow catching –up regions, while all French are as diverging); economic downturn latter in France.

5. Results - Spatially explicit conclusions from territorial analyses (T 2.2) Working Community of the Pyrenees 5

6. Task 2.2 –Upper Rhine Case Study • High demographic attractiveness of the CBR but strong intra-regional disparities. • Polycentric urban system. • Marginal but solid added value of agricultural activities. • High GPD per capita and low unemployment (accessibility, R&D, industry and patents) • Great potential forcross-border research and educational activity • High share of commuters. • Development mainly in plain parts of the Rhine Valley  conflicts in land-use • Border effect visible in commuter patterns (LAU level; FR  DE) • Intra-regional accessibility, esp. regarding public transport, to be enhanced (bound to national networks)

7. Trinational Metropolitan Area Upper Rhine Results - Spatially explicit conclusions from territorial analyses (T 2.2) 7

8. Task 2.2 – Karelia case study • Data gaps on the Russian side. • Only 9 FUAs. A relatively polycentric urban structure concerning population, large differences in GDP. • Sharp socio-economic differences between the Finnish and Russian regions of the CBA. • All the regions are classified as predominantly rural, but the share of agricultural areas is significantly lower than European average (forests). • Very low accessibility by land transport. • Demographic analysis on LAU 1 (annual population growth between 2001-2010, population density and distance to the border), with no significant ”border effect”. • Migration on LAU 1 and LAU 2 show that Finnish border regions are attracting population from Russia.

9. Results - Spatially explicit conclusions from territorial analyses (T 2.2) Greece-Bulgaria CBA 9

10. Differences among CBAs appear to be very much a consequence of their overall EU location and not so much of their border position. • Borders keep playing a major role in explaining the behaviour of the different regions by dividing different national realities. • The border condition seems to be more relevant at the regional than at the local level. • Cross border commuting levels between different regions still tend to be low. • Borders seem to keep functioning as a limit for the diffusion effects of development poles Results - General conclusions from the territorial analysis (T 2.2) 10

11. Methodology - Institutional Performance Analysis (T 2.3) • Dimensions covered within Task 2.3 - Institutional Performance Analysis: • Structural dimension • Political Status of the border • Planning system • Physical status • Languages • Activity dimension • Historicity of cross-border cooperation in general • Maturity of cross-border cooperation • Institutional thickness in cross-border cooperation 11

12. Results - Spatially explicit conclusions from the governance analysis (T 2.3) 12

13. The internal EU borders are, from a structural point of view, still more favourable for cross-border governance than, for example, external EU borders. • the degree of institutionalisationcannot be directly linked to any specific status or socio-economic level. • Socio-economic development alone does not determine cross-border governance. • All regions have to develop their own ways and mechanisms in order to exploit their cross-border potential. Results - General conclusions from the governance analysis (T 2.3) 13

14. Methodology - Integrated analysis and policy recommendations (T 2.4 6 2.5) SWOT Conclusions and policy recommendations at EU level Integrated analysis and scenarios 14

15. Objectives of Task 2.4: • To Integrate the outputs of tasks 2.2 and 2.3: • Territorial profile analysis (task 2.2) • Territorial performance analysis (task 2.2) • Institutional analysis (task 2.3) • To overlay ULYSSES results with scenarios developed by ESPON 3.2 - Spatial Scenarios and Orientations: • The integrated baseline scenario. • The cohesion-oriented scenario. • The competitiveness-oriented scenario Methodology - Integrated analysis and scenarios – SWOT (T 2.4) 15

16. Derived from a qualitative feedback with stakeholders • CBAs Conclusions: • a summary of different issues analysed, presented as key findings; • a summary of the main challenges detected at different scales and policy options for each CBA (crossed SWOT: strategies phase). • Inputs to the Practical guide, including: • Guidelines for future implementation (transferability), reflecting on the obstacles that emerged along the way in this project; • Policy recommendations at other scales. Methodology - Conclusions and policy recommendations (T 2.5) 16

17. Silicon Rhine Valley: Innovative urban centres as the basis for further economic development pivoting around knowledge driven technologies of the existing SMEs and research centres and universities, the enhanced communication channels and integrated cross-border transport systems. Christaller 2.0: The polycentric structure of the CBA should be enhanced based on the principle of decentralised concentration. By providing a dense network of settlements, the provision of goods and services in the whole region can be secured also in rural areas. These areas profit from gastro-, agro- or wellness tourism as well as using the potentials of renewable energies as additional forms of Added Value. Trademark Upper Rhine: The Upper Rhine shall be marketed as a recognisable image/trade mark, focussing on few, but recognisable strengths of the Upper Rhine. This marketing is targeted internally within the CBA, as well as external by coherent external presentation. The aim is to foster attractiveness and cross-border cooperation and bind human and social capital into the region through active network management and identity building. Example of the proposed strategies for the Upper Rhine (T 2.5) 17

18. Example of strategies related to demographic change: Retain and/or consolidate acceptable levels of demographic dynamism, social cohesion and wellbeing in the WCP, both within urban and rural contexts though: (i) the application of family and smart migration policies aimed at retaining demographic dynamism and attracting young population, (ii) the promotion of the integration of minorities, in particular in metropolitan areas, and (iii) the adoption of a proactive approach towards existing social welfare systems. Lastly, (iv) the exploitation of new business opportunities related to population ageing. Example of the proposed strategies for Working Community of the Pyrenees (T 2.5) 18

19. Cross-border trade and the provision of services should be intensified, obstacles in the legal workforce mobility should be removed, labour market legislation over the CBA should be gradually harmonised and cross-border exchanges in the field of research, education and vocational training should be promoted. Cross-border health care provisions should be introduced for the citizens living at the border areas. All economic activities especially at the rural and environmentally-sensitive CBA parts should diminish their ‘environmental footprint’, intensive agriculture, forestry and mass tourism should be penalised and living quality standards should be harmonised over the CBA. Climate change risks as water shortage, forest fires, floods and animal stock diseases should be confronted in an integrated and combined manner involving authorities from both sides of the border. Local traditions and cultural exchanges should be promoted. Example of the proposed strategies for Greece-Bulgaria CBA (T 2.5) 19

20. Adaptation of many of the ESPON data and concepts to lower geographical scales: many of the ESPON projects have been established at the European level and are not easily suited for evaluating local or even regional realities out of the broader context. Data updates. Much of the ESPON data has been produced by the 2006 projects and uses data from the late nineties and early two thousand. Further improvement of the data coverage on some of the main themes that have been analysed by ULYSSES. As the ESPON programme is not focused on primary data collection, data insufficiency cannot really be attributed to the programme, but is more related: (i) to general difficulties in guaranteeing uniform procedures in data collection and treatment at the European level; (ii) the simple absence of data on some themes even at the national levels, and; (iii) difficulties in getting major agents to share the data they possess Issues and drawbacks emerged from the analysis 21

21. Economic flows that occur between the different sides of the border Significance, direction and motivation of cross-border commuting at low geographical scales Urban-rural relationship at a cross border level Further data on joint public service provision Additional data needs 22

22. Contribution of ESPON programme to cross-border cooperation - lessons learnt from ULYSSES project: ESPON offers relevant concepts and comparable data at the European level, which serves as reference to understand how specific cross-border areas are positioned. ESPON contributes to the development of a shared view of cross-border reality, by means of: • The achievement of a common understanding of key aspects of territorial cooperation through policy and academic discussion. • The generation of a basic consensus on the main challenges currently faced by cross-border areas and those expected in the years to come. ESPON allows identifying those topics that require further analysis and specific focus at lower spatial levels Value added of ESPON programme for cross-border cooperation 23

23. Project experience (policy and territorial dimension) • Data limitations (scale, covera, time series, updated …) • Unequal existence of regional analysis and data within the same CBA. • Need for more detailed analysis. • Different interest about specific topics among CBAs. • Are we providing new knowledge? Or ….. • ….. good systematisation and organizing it in a coherent way …… • …. as a starting point for cross-border territorial strategic processes.

24. Thank you for your attention 25