URBAN AND RURAL NARRATIVES AND SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT TRENDS IN EUROPE

Transcription

1 Esca moncom URBAN AND RURAL NARRATIVES AND SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT TRENDS IN EUROPE Mcrit SL, Barcelona, Spain

2 REPORT INFORMATION Title: Authors: Urban-rural narratives and spatial trends in Europe: the State of the Question. Andreu Ulied, Oriol Biosca, Rafael Rodrigo (Mcrit SL) Version: FINAL VERSION PROJECT INFORMATION Project Acronym: Project Name: URNSTE Urban-rural narratives and spatial trends in Europe: the State of the Question. Duration: December 2009 June 2010 Commissioned by: Lead Partner: Ministry of Environment, and Rural and Marine Affairs Mcrit SL, Barcelona, Spain 2

3 URBAN AND RURAL NARRATIVES AND SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT TRENDS IN EUROPE 1. Objective Methodology Urban and rural typologies in the European territory Based on density of population (OCDE, 1994) Based on urban influence and human intervention (ESPON 1.1.2, 2004) Based on remoteness (Dijkstra, Poelman, 2008) Based on Grand Narrative (ESPON EDORA, 2010) The scientific debate in relation to urban and rural narratives Europe 2000 study program The SPESP: Study Program on European Spatial Planning The ESPON 1.1.2: Urban-rural analysis, typologies and policies ESPON 3.2. Urban-rural implications of territorial scenarios ESPON EDORA. Opportunities and challenges facing rural areas DGRegio Seminars The Kiruna Conference on Cohesion Policy and Territorial Development Urban and development sprawl, in the frame of action 2.1 of the TA The political debate in Europe The ESDP: European Spatial Development Perspective (1999) Reports on economic and social cohesion ( ) The Territorial Agenda of the European Union (2007) Green Paper on Territorial Cohesion (2008) EU 2020 Strategy (2010) Synthesis of the political and scientific debates Questions in the Implementation of the Territorial Agenda Debate on urban-rural narratives and spatial trends in Europe List of questions Synthesis of expert answers Detailed results List of experts participating in the survey Conclusions Thematic conclusions on narratives and trends The current state of the debate Bibliography Reference documents on urban-rural partnerships Bibliographic references

4 1. Objective This report was developed in the frame of the Spanish Presidency of the European Union, during the first semester of It is a contribution to the ongoing works of implementation of Action 1.1a 1 ( ) of the Urban-rural relations Agenda, within the framework of EU s Territorial Agenda., and leaded by the Ministry of Regional Development of the Czech Republic with the participation of several Member States delegations 2. The object is the analysis of the urban and rural concepts today as they are defined in key scientific studies and European policy documents. The outputs of this report will be: a comprehensive synthesis of all major recent works related to the rural and urban concepts, in the context of contemporary spatial trends in Europe. the definition of key trends on rural and urban dynamics in Europe. the validation of the trends by European experts, including authors of main relevant recent scientific works on rural and urban relations. Needless to say, the debate on urban and rural concepts, and urban-rural relationships, provides particularly relevant insights to analyse spatial development policies. 1 Action 1.1a. Prepare and promote guidelines and policy measures to foster coordination between territorial and urban development in the light of the TA and the LC at EU and MS level. Urban-rural relations. 2 Austria, Cyprus, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Latvia, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Turkey and representatives of the EC (DG Regio), CEMR, AEBR and University of Economics in Prague, and the Union of Towns and Municipalities of the CR 4

5 2. Methodology The report is based on the following methodology: Literature review on spatial dynamics and policy evolutions. Political and scientific documents considered as a reference. Those included in the 1st Action Programme of the TA: Action on urban spatial relations (Action 1.1 led by Slovenia), Action on rural-urban relations (Action 1.1a led by the Czech Republic), and sub-action on urban sprawl (included in the Action 2.1 led by Belgium) The results of research projects in the ESPON Program: Rural urban relations (1.1.2 ESPON, 2006) and the current EDORA (ESPON 2013) The approaches and results of the seminars on rural-urban relations organized by the European Commission between Sep 08 and July 09. Those associated with the future cohesion policy, mainly the EU Green Paper on Territorial Cohesion of the European Commission, and the many Reports on Social and Economic Cohesion of the European Commission as well. Others, developed by other institutions and agencies for rural urban relations (i.e. OECD). Review of studies concerning typology definitions. Among them, OECD, ESPON 1.1.2, L.Dijkstra and H.Poelman, and EDORA. Definition of hypothesis on spatial trends and key policy-relevant questions. From these trends, a number of questions for further discussion and research are presented. Survey to key experts. The questions were submitted to 65 experts, researches and policy-analysts from the European Commission and Member States All the relevant documents and outputs from this paper will be gathered together for online public consultation at 5

6 3. Urban and rural typologies in the European territory Typologies are understood as territorial classifications based on applying indicators both scientifically sound and politically relevant. Most typologies developed at European scale are based on regions (NUTS2) or sub-regions (NUTS3). Based on detailed territorial analysis at National and regional level, using statistics at local level and land-use information, many subtle urban and rural typologies have been developed in Europe (see for instance the following map produced by the Group Prospective Environment DATAR in France in 1995). Figure 1. Rural areas in France according to DATAR 6

7 Urban and rural narratives and spatial development trends: State of the Question 3.1 Based on density of population (OCDE, 1994) OECD proposed a classification between urban (OECD 1994), intermediate and rural regions based on the share of a region s population living in rural local units. In rural regions, more than 50% live in rural local units; in intermediate regions, between 15% and 50% live in rural local units; in urban regions, less than 15% live in rural local units. If a region has an urban centre, a rural region may be reclassified as intermediate, or an intermediate region as urban, depending on the size of the urban centre. Rural local units in Europe are defined as local administrative units with a population density below 150 inhabitants/km2. The criterion is reasonable but has some limitations and produce unexpected results that depend on the delimitation of communal boundaries, in particular for large, heterogeneous NUTS3 units, for which attributing the same label of rurality to the whole NUTS3 unit may be unfair (F.J.Gallego, 2005). Figure 2. OECD regional typology applied to Europe (DG Agri, 2008) 7

8 3.2 Based on urban influence and human intervention (ESPON 1.1.2, 2004) ESPON defined in 2004 a European typology of urban-rural relationship to provide a better understanding of the diversity of European regions. The elaborated typology was based on the idea of two main dimensions, that is, degree of urban influence on the one hand, and degree of human intervention on the other hand. The two classes of urban influence and the three classes of human intervention were combined into a six-type model where the main division is in two classes of urban influence, that is, high and low, and a three-class subdivision into high, medium and low human intervention of the two main classes. The distribution of regions across the six regional types was uneven. As many as 691 NUTS3 areas belong to type 1 (high urban influence, high human intervention). The rest is distributed more evenly among the types. Figure 3. Urban-rural typology based on population density, FUA ranking and land cover 8

9 3.3 Based on remoteness (Dijkstra, Poelman, 2008) L.Dijkstra and H.Poelman used OECD classification combined with remoteness to propose a complementary contribution (2008). This new approach combined a new classification of remoteness, based on driving time to the closest city (close to a city implying that at least 50% of the population lives closer than a 45min drive to a city larger than inhabitants), with the OECD classification of regions into predominantly urban, intermediate and predominantly rural regions. Figure 4. Urban-rural typology of NUTS3 regions (L.Dijkstra, H.Poelman 2008) 9

10 Figure 5. Accessibility by road to cities with at least people (L.Dijkstra, H.Poelman 2008). 10

11 3.4 Based on Grand Narrative (ESPON EDORA, 2010) Espon-Edora is currently working on the proposal of a new typology of urban and rural areas, which is not intended to have a direct connection to the defined Grand Narratives, although the latter play an important background role through the rationale for its classification methodology. The typology is an elaboration of the Dijksta-Poelman urbanrural classification, representing a range of rural socio-economic environments which act as starting points for individual highly differentiated pathways of change. The typology adopts a relatively simple hierarchical multi-criteria approach, in which rural regions are first distinguished from urban, then depleting from accumulating, and those in which the primary sector is still important from those which are more diversified. The agricultural regions are then classified into Semisubsistence, Para- and Peri- Productivist. The diversified regions are divided into New Rural Economy and Declining Fordist regions. 11

12 4. The scientific debate in relation to urban and rural narratives This Chapter presents a brief synthesis of Europe 2000 and Europe 2000+, SPESP, ESPON 1.1.2, ESPON 3.2, ESPON-EDORA and thematic workshops and conferences of the DG Regio ( ) on the subject. 4.1 Europe 2000 study program Already in the late eighties and nineties, the spatial development studies made by DGRegio (then DGXVI), like Europe 2000 and Europe 2000+, were the first systematic attempts to analyse the European territory as whole. The two dominant themes of spatial planning in Europe, as reflects the Europe 2000 study programme, were the urban and regional, and the centre and periphery dichotomies. The integration between urban-rural, as well as between centre-periphery has always been the European narrative to overcome territorial unbalances. The necessary links to integrated urban and rural zones were included into the wider concept of partnership, later on by the ESDP. On the other hand, solving missing links in the networks of transport and communication was an important issue in the definition of the Trans- European Transport Networks, and the creation of integration zones, polycentric and cross-border development areas, between central and more peripheral regions. Since the sixties, there was a tendency of people and economic activities to move from rural areas to cities, as well as from peripheral regions to more central ones. These tendencies created territorial unbalances, with the risk of environmental, social and political conflicts. Strong public policies to support the development of rural and peripheral areas were developed since the fifties and sixties, both to support agriculture and less developed areas in the periphery, compensating the cost that these regions faced to access the central more developed markets. Nowadays, European agricultural and Structural funds, which are most of European Union s budget, are becoming more complex and diversified that they used to be, but still are focused on supporting agriculture, land-use management and development activities in rural areas, as well providing basic infrastructure and services to peripheral regions. 12

13 Figure 6. From the Blue Banane (European Core) to integration zones and macroregions (DATAR, ) 4.2 The SPESP: Study Program on European Spatial Planning 4 Following the European Spatial Development Programme (ESDP), the Study Program on European Spatial Planning (SPESP), carried out a number of specific researches on urban and rural partnership and urban structures. The ESDP introduced the concept of urbanrural partnership, and identified a number of policy areas of significance for spatial development, but a closer examination of these areas revealed that there were few links between policies addressing development of rural areas and those addressing the development of urban areas. Among the most important trends shaping spatial patterns were the varying growth impulses which affect the regions through processes linked with globalisation, liberalisation and the spatial concentration of innovative milieux: aging population, urban culture spreading to all types of regions, growing differences between various subgroups of population. It was considered necessary to systematize and typologise the various degrees of urbanity/rurality characterizing different regions and to look closely at the trends which are currently relevant for the development of this relationship. The traditional dichotomy between the urban and the rural was already becoming less and less significant, as functional regions become ever more expansive and various new types of functional relationships were developed. Therefore, a specific typology was developed for the European territory, based on urbanisation rate; rural population density; the degree of contrast in the distribution of settlement size; average distance to any urban settlement; the primacy of the largest city; and the size of the largest centre: regions dominated by a large metropolis polycentric regions with high urban and rural densities polycentric regions with high urban densities rural areas under metropolitan influence rural areas with networks of medium-sized and small towns remote rural areas 3 Aménager la France 2020, DATAR Study Programme on European Spatial Planning (SPESP), Nordregio and others for the European Commision,

14 Sometimes, the development of rural areas limits urban development, but more often the development of rural areas depends on economic activities and facilities located in cities and urban areas. When analyzing urban-rural interaction, it was therefore important to distinguish, according to SPESP, between urban-rural relationships, which refer to the actually operating, functional linkages between urban and rural areas, and urban-rural partnerships, which refer to initiatives to formulate, adapt and implement an integrated policy. Different typologies of urban-rural relationships were presented as well. home-work relationships central place relationships relationships between metropolitan areas and urban centres in rural and intermediate areas relationships between rural and urban enterprises rural areas as consumption areas for urban dwellers rural areas as open spaces for urban areas rural areas as carriers of urban infrastructure rural areas as suppliers of natural resources for urban areas Redefining urban rural relationships demands new forms of urban-rural partnerships, through which a joint development potential can be defined and implemented. Only by applying a bottom-up principle in shaping partnerships can the synergy and added value inherent in such co-operation be obtained. This is a task for the regions themselves. Urban-rural partnerships objectives were classified into four categories: Balanced settlement structure and improvement of accessibility (concerning land use and development of public transportation networks). Diversification of the economy in a wider urban-rural context: economic restructuring (i.e. joint regional marketing, stimulation of cluster formation), and diversification of farming (i.e. developing niche production in agriculture). Conservation and development of natural resources and heritage. Promotion of culture and of cultural heritage in economic development strategies as a potential inherent in regional culture. Partnerships can have different form and composition, involving exclusively institutional/public actors, or being based on public administrative structures but accompanied by informal advisory bodies involving private partners, or being only based on informal structures involving private and/or public bodies. The most important constraints and obstacles working against efficient urban-rural partnerships would appear to be a weakly developed sense of common purpose between the various actors in the regions themselves. Policies need to take into account the specific regional contexts, which naturally differ considerably from country to country and region to region. Four specific policy areas are pinpointed for particular attention: accelerating agricultural restructuring and diversification of the economy in rural areas; mobilising and enhancing endogenous resources not least through valuing natural and cultural amenities; developing the economies of small and medium-sized towns; 14

15 promoting sustainable development in metropolitan and other highly urbanized regions. 4.3 The ESPON 1.1.2: Urban-rural analysis, typologies and policies 5 The ESPON program followed SPESP. Two different specific ESPON studies have until now analysed urban-rural relationships: ESPON and ESPON EDORA. Additionally, ESPON 3.2 traced a set of prospective scenarios (baseline, competitive and cohesive) having implications on rural-urban issues. According to ESPON it was not easy anymore to argue in favour of the traditional split between the two domains of urban and rural Europe. In most countries, urban centres have long since lost their particular privileges and there is no longer a clear difference in administrative status between town and countryside, or it is blurred. The rural life is urbanised by transcending commodity relations and life styles are appropriated according to mass consumption patterns regardless location 6. The evolution of the concept of rurality since the 1950s was presented as: 1) rural areas understood as areas with non-urban characteristics or with elements of rural identity (open spaces, small settlements ); 2) a following depreciation of the concept of rurality (change in rural areas was often seen originated in national and international economy on non-spatial basis) 3) rurality perceived as a social construct: instead of single rural space it was suggested that a number of different social spaces overlap the same geographical space 4) a deconstructionist approach: how the socially constructed rural space becomes increasingly detached from the geography of every day life in the rural areas. In the developed market economies changes seem to bring rural areas increasingly towards the so-called post-productivist countryside. New demands related to the interactions between rural and urban areas can be identified, and it is claimed that if policies are to meet diverse needs and circumstances, the mobilisation of the local communities and partnerships of various kinds are essential for successful rural areas. Urban-rural relationships could be stated to both be of a structural nature and of a functional nature: Structural urban-rural relationships are of a physical nature, ruled by land and resources availability, often being concurrential between urban and rural (competition for water, energy and land availability). Functional urban-rural relations are connected to the processes of socio-economic diversification and the interconnectedness of different functions located in urban and rural areas (tourism, real-state). 5 Urban-rural relation in Europe. ESPON project Center for Urban and Regional Studies at the Helsinki University of Technology and others for the ESPON program, There is way for nuances in this matter, as it is not the same all over in Europe, especially in very sparse areas or in areas where this deep cultural mutation has not taken place yet. 15

16 Urban-rural relationships have evolved from primitive 1) food production - markets trade relationships to 2) an increased dependence of rural areas on urban environments with industrialization (generating unidirectional flows of people from country to cities) and finally to 3) more complex bidirectional visible and invisible flows between urban and rural of people, capital, goods, information and technology in more recent times. Increased urban-rural relationships are allowed not only by improvements in physical infrastructure and accessibility but also depending on the possibilities offered by the developing communication technology. High quality environments occur as magnets not only for residents but also for enterprises. The less accessible rural areas seem to find it harder to diversify their economic base when the agricultural sector at the same time is becoming increasingly marginal According to the theory of differential urbanisation, poly-centricity is inherent in particular phases of any urbanisation process in any country, but probably hard or impossible to steer. Medium sized town development is to allow better urban-rural relationships on regional level. The analysis of the development trajectories of urban regions indicates a tendency towards an increasing wealth of the medium-sized towns. The case study evidence shows that the accessible and attractive areas close to diversified urban centres get the greatest gain of the increasing urban-rural interaction. Tourism, both as day-trip recreation and as longer stays, is certainly a key sector that can help in preserving the viability of the rural areas. (However, it can also mean that rurality actually vanishes as part-time urban residents move into the area and as the development of the service sector is increasingly guided by the needs of outsiders.) The Interreg has offered a ground for the active promotion of the ESDP aims concerning urban-rural partnership. Various actors representing regions and localities have been very active in the Interreg context in trying to integrate urban-rural aspects in their work. 4.4 ESPON 3.2. Urban-rural implications of territorial scenarios The main objective of the ESPON 3.2 project was to develop spatial scenarios. The time horizon for the spatial scenarios was set to 2015 (mid term) and 2030 (long term). An integrated baseline scenario showed the probable evolution of the European territory in a situation of no major changes (political or external). Two prospective policy scenarios explored the effects of EU policy in a cohesion-oriented scenario (policies formulated with the goal of social, economic and territorial cohesion as top priority) and in a competitiveness-oriented scenario (overall global competitiveness of EU economy being the major objective). A proactive scenario provided an attempt at translating policy goals into an image of how Europe should look like territorially in The urban-rural implications of baseline (trend) scenario were shown in a trend towards marginalisation of various rural areas, already observed in the early 2000s, but with 7 Spatial Scenarios and Orientations in relation to the ESDP and Cohesion Policy, ESPON project 3.2, IGEAT, AETS and others for the ESPON Program,

17 regional variation. A remarkable concentration of strong metropolitan areas in the former pentagon was perceivable, but also in less central regions. The basic characteristics of settlement systems in terms of polycentricity were not fundamentally changed. The cohesion-oriented scenario showed that the number of areas at risk of marginalization and of declining activities was comparable to that prevailing in the baseline scenario, but their size was reduced and their intensity lower. The final image 2030 of the cohesionoriented scenario revealed a less concentrated, but more widespread pattern regarding attraction and polarization potential of metropolitan areas in Urban settlements are characterized by a more polycentricity, stretching over larger parts of the territory than in the baseline scenario. The competitiveness-oriented scenario indicated a much more intense risk of rural marginalisation than in the baseline scenario. The final image 2030 of the competitiveness-oriented scenario showed that, by 2030 the attraction and polarisation potential of metropolitan areas was powerfully concentrated in the traditional pentagon. Very few metropolitan areas outside of this area generated significant attraction and polarisation effects. The area of concentration of flows and activities was much more limited than in the baseline scenario. These areas covered only parts of the traditional Pentagon, although it too extended outwards along a few major corridors. 4.5 ESPON EDORA. Opportunities and challenges facing rural areas. 8 The aim of the ESPON EDORA project (still on-going) is to develop a better understanding of the development opportunities and challenges facing diverse types of rural areas in Europe. The underlying demand for such knowledge is to support targeted policy development, relating (inter alia) to job creation and social change. In particular, insights should support the practical implementation - across a range of policy fields of spatial development principles which have evolved out of perspectives presented in the Cohesion Reports, and elaborated in the recent Territorial Cohesion Green Paper. In particular the project should support the further integration of the Lisbon and Gothenburg agendas into the post-2013 Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). Three Grand Narratives of rural change have been identified. These may be defined as overarching social and economic trends which play a role in the differentiation of rural areas. The Grand Narratives are, according to ESPON EDORA: The Agri-centric narrative, which charts a slow transition from productivism to a variety of, para-, or peri-productivist orientations. It constructs and deconstructs the narrative that rural areas are inextricably linked to agriculture. The declining importance of the weight of the GDP of agriculture is a continuing 8 The on-going EDORA project belongs to the first strand of the ESPON 2013 programme: Applied research on territorial development, competitiveness and cohesion: Evidence on European territorial trends, perspectives and policy impacts. As such it is intended to create information and evidence on territorial challenges and opportunities for success for the development of regions. 17

18 trend in most member states as their prosperity grows, but this is differentiated by region with productivist activity concentrated in the most productive areas, and those on marginal land retrenching and, where possible, diversifying. For the first time, it is mentioned an incipient trend towards ethic agriculture leaded by neorurals sometimes, and by locals in other cases. The urban-rural narrative relating to processes of urbanisation, counterurbanisation, regional enlargement, and evolving forms of peripherality. The narrative considered the shift of some people from rural areas to the cities, the processes of counter-urbanisation and commuting patterns, and the impacts of these on other areas of life, such as service delivery. The differences were drawn between the accessible rural areas where commuting and employment counterurbanisation are common, and the remote areas of some of the EU. The Capitalist Penetration narrative which reveals a variety of local-global tensions as rural areas seek to adapt to new configurations of economic power. It is essentially about power and the lack of power of some rural regions to control their own futures. A fourth overarching theme; Connexity is also proposed by ESPON-EDORA. This is a generic term for the increasingly (spatially) interlinked nature of many aspects of life: Economic Connexity. For example, chains that cross the rural boundary linking them to distant places, and the out-commuting that takes place from rural areas of Europe where counter-urbanisation has taken place. Social Connexity. For example, the exodus of young people to cities for higher education, and the need for a critical mass of population in order to deliver services would be examples in this category Ideas and Innovation Connexity. Businesses to network and cluster, including making links with higher education institutions Policy Connexity. Policies emanate from world, EU and national sources and impact on the development of rural areas. Environment Connexity. Rather than being an extra-rural /rural relationship, what rural man does to the environment, and how climate change impacts on rural areas, is spatially indiscriminate. Figure 7. Connexity Scheme (EDORA, 2009) 18

19 These connexities can be related to an additional three concept set presented below. The relative remoteness of rural areas Rural Settlement Patterns and Connexity Rural areas were also defined by territorial governance. Figure 8. New paradigms in rural connexities (EDORA, 2009) 4.6 DGRegio Seminars DGRegio organized a set of 3 expert seminars between September 2008 and July 2009 on Urban-rural issues. These seminars were Economic implications of urban-rural linkages ( ), Urban-Rural links fostering sustainable development ( ) and Social implications of urban-rural linkages ( ). The 1 st seminar expressed the opinion that urban and rural development had been conceived, for decades, as separate strands of spatial policies, and that increased interaction was needed in all policies. The recent increase of attention attributed to urbanrural linkages was perceived as a positive factor to raise the visibility of rural areas. Urbanrural relationships were stated more complex now in globalised world, with all kinds of new flows and new relational spaces, and not following Central Place Theory anymore. The endogenous potentiality of rural areas was pointed, regretting that policies would too often obviate it, adding that when potentialities were exploited rural economies very much successfully. For that, transport, IT and social infrastructure appeared fundamental, European rural policy needing therefore to include measures enabling rural regions to equip themselves so as to be economically competitive. It was pointed that rural development and cohesion policies needed to go together to ensure coherence and development of synergies. The 2 nd seminar pointed out the importance to safeguard a rural environment through rural-urban partnerships. Urban and rural would naturally compete for resources (energy, water, land) and thus needed to collaborate. Preserving rural areas from urban sprawl was pointed of most importance, farmers needed to be perceived as providers of environmental and ecosystem services. 4 basic conditions for such partnerships to be effective were stated: equality and independence of partners, voluntary participation, recognition of diversity of administrative agents, and partnerships being built on principles of common responsibility and common benefit. Leader Programs were stated to be a very operative tool, implementing measures relating to competitiveness and sustainability. The 3 rd seminar reminded that the rural-urban gap still exists, but that the issue of poverty in rural areas suffers from a lack of visibility both in national and EU policies. Social 19

20 inclusion and anti-discrimination policies need to become more central in the implementation of cohesion and territorial programmes, particularly in rural areas. In fact, policies addressing rural-urban linkages have a strong potential for social innovation. The opportunities offered by the partnerships were pointed a reduced polarization, the ability to address regional issues, the intelligence of local concerns at strategic level, the inclusion of multiple stakeholders, the increased global competitiveness and the increased capacity to provide fiscal relief for revitalisation. On the other hand, the constraints caused by the partnerships were the political and cultural differences, the difficulties in crosscollaboration and building trust, the lack of regional policy frameworks and ambiguous structures, the operational complexity of process, the lack of resources, the competition between local authorities. 4.7 The Kiruna Conference on Cohesion Policy and Territorial Development The background document to the Conference on Cohesion Policy and Territorial Development: Make Use of the Territorial Potential (10-11 December 2009, Kiruna, Sweden) contains a number of useful insights in relation to cohesion, spatial development, polycentrism and urban-rural partnership. Discussions in the Conference underlined the need for cohesion policy work within a framework based on a Local Development Methodology (LDM) model, characterized by being of a strategic and multidimensional nature; based on local partnerships, and; where networking and capacity building are important building blocks. However, the study of experiences in integrated urban development within the cohesion policy, following the LDM approach, based on the experience of Leader, revealed some weaknesses of the current system, being mentioned the difficulty to sub-delegate the implementation and administration of the programs to the local level, a strong tendency towards sectoral investment with often the omission of necessary capacity building and guidance, and the not willingness of managing authorities to support integrated operations following the LDM-approach if easier ways to spend the funds exist. With reference to the Cohesion Policy support for the development of rural areas, it was stated that the absence of a clear target of cohesion policy in rural areas tended to lead to a lack of visibility for ERDF interventions, and that difficulties in coordinating the various funds (ERDF, ESF, cohesion funds and EAFRD) were reported high by many Member States. Granting visibility to the actions of the ERDF, as well as working out synergies between different funds, especially with the EAFRD, were stated key elements of the discussion. Regarding the issue of the linkages between urban and rural areas, it was accepted that they had not been specifically addressed by cohesion policy yet. The development of these urban-rural relations was said to be dependent on the diversity of contexts such as the differences between old and new Member States or the difference between Member States with very many local authorities (where urban-rural cooperation is about finding ways for local administrations to start working together at the level of functional areas) and Member States with fewer local authorities (where the issue is more about coordinating stakeholders and public agencies within a given administrative area). 20

21 To maximise the positive impacts of different policies on specific territories and to minimise sometimes contradictory effects, a "Territorial Impact Assessment (TIA)" appeared as a central policy option. Achieving greater policy coherence required improving existing instruments and the inclusion/reinforcement of the territorial dimension in the (economic, social, environmental) assessment of different policies, rather than the creation of new instruments. Better policies also rely on a solid knowledge base on territorial development across the EU. 4.8 Urban and development sprawl, in the frame of action 2.1 of the TA 9 The draft technical report prepared by the Belgian delegation (Walloon Region - Directorate general Spatial planning, Housing, Heritage and Energy) within Thematic subgroup in Urban and development sprawl, states that sprawl process affects territories that extend far beyond urban areas: Peri-urban areas are now regarded as one of the major common challenges facing urban Europe. While the significance of the theme sprawl is clearly acknowledged, the issue remains very open in terms of policy answers. This means that there is a need to have a better view of the aspects that make sprawl undesirable In short, what are the problems with urban and development sprawl? Migration trends are increasing the importance of intermediate areas and leading to more complex urban-rural linkages than the simple one-way exchange between market towns and their surrounding rural areas. Population growth in urban areas is increasing congestion and land prices, while the demand for quality food, local produce and a rural way of life, on the one hand, and space for housing, public amenities and increased environmental protection, on the other, is giving rise to development opportunities and pressure on land at the same time. The arrival of increasing numbers of people from towns and cities can alter the rural character of areas. While it might push up income and tax receipts and so help to maintain public services and expand the local market, it can lead to widening social disparities and new tensions by increasing house prices to levels that locals cannot afford or by access to services. While the diagnostic underlines to a wide range of domains, the implemented tools mostly belong to the scope of spatial planning. But the issue may not be dealt with by acting with spatial planning tools alone. Often mentioned links with transport, environment, housing, heritage, risks management, justify integrated approaches. A very important point exists also with funding and fiscal provisions, which have been shown to have much impact on sprawl issues. Sprawl is generally a local issue with broader causes and consequences, therefore appropriate multi-level governance is at the heart of any durable and effective solution. Relationships between different types of areas, such as urban and rural areas, are 9 Urban and development sprawl, Territorial Cohesion and Urban Matters Workgroup, prepared by the Belgian delegation (Walloon Region Directorate general Spatial planning, Housing, Heritage and Energy in the implementation of action 2.1 of the Territorial Agenda Cooperate with the EC to use the activities of the TCUM thematic working groups to analyse keydossiers, policies and legislation at MS and EU level in the light of the Territorial Agenda and the Leipzig Charter,

22 particularly relevant when considering the link between sprawl and the evolution of cities, with interests not being necessarily convergent. Arbitration between them by higher authorities, through financing mechanisms for example, does not appear as the easiest option. Better results may be expected if partnerships can be built, on basis of common / complementary challenges and opportunities. This emphasizes the necessary complementarity between urban policy and territorial policy. It is important to involve relevant stakeholders (notably private actors and citizens) in the search for appropriate attitudes and solutions. 22

23 5. The political debate in Europe This chapter introduces the political debate in relation to spatial development and more specifically urban and rural concepts and urban-rural partnership as it is presented nowadays in a number of relevant documents, including the ESDP: European Spatial Development Perspective, the Green Paper on Territorial Cohesion, the several Reports on economic and social cohesion, the results of the Kiruna Conference on Cohesion Policy and Territorial Development, and the Territorial Agenda of the European Union. 5.1 The ESDP: European Spatial Development Perspective (1999) 10 ESDP, the reference document concerning Spatial Planning in Europe, introduced the concept of urban-rural partnership. ESDP states the need to take spatially differentiated measures for different kinds of territories taking advantage of the opportunity presented by European integration to achieve sustainable and territorially balanced development of the EU. It states as main goals the following: The Development of a polycentric and balanced urban system, and the strengthening of the partnership between urban and rural areas The Promotion of integrated transport and communication concepts to support this polycentric development of the EU territory. The development and conservation of natural and cultural heritage to contribute to preservation of identities in the EU, and to be used as economic assets increasingly important for regional development. With respect to urban-rural linkages, ESDP states that it is essential to ensure that town and country can formulate and successfully implement regional development concepts in partnership based collaboration. A key function of spatial development is to achieve a better balance between urban development and protection of the open countryside. Urban and rural areas are closely interconnected, especially in densely developed regions. Rural areas benefit from private and public services of cities, while the cities benefit from the leisure and recreation value of rural areas. Town and country are, therefore, partners rather than competitors. Many local problems cannot be solved without an integrated way of looking at towns and countryside. Practical partnership expresses itself through cooperation and co-ordination. Related to polycentrism and urban-rural partnership, the following specific policy aims were stated, with corresponding policy actions. 10 This chapter summarizes the view presented by the ESDP Report. (European Spatial Development Perspective: Towards Balanced and Sustainable Development of the Territory of the European Union, EC 1999) 23

24 Polycentric balanced spatial development in the EU Specific policy recommendations: Strengthening of several larger zones of global economic integration in the EU, through transnational spatial development strategies. Strengthening a polycentric and more balanced system of metropolitan regions, city clusters and city networks Promoting integrated spatial development strategies for city clusters, including corresponding rural areas and their small cities and towns. Strengthening co-operation in the field of spatial development Dynamic, attractive and competitive cities and urbanised regions Specific policy recommendations: Improvement of economic, environment and services of cities in order to increase their attractiveness for mobile investment Promotion of an economic diversification strategy Promotion of integrated urban development strategies sensitive to social and functional diversity Promotion of better accessibility in cities and metropolitan regions through an appropriate location policy and land use planning Support for effective methods of reducing uncontrolled urban expansion Indigenous development, diverse and productive rural areas Specific policy recommendations: Promotion of diversified development strategies sensitive to the indigenous potentials through support of rural areas in education, training and in the creation of non-agricultural jobs. Strengthening small and medium-sized towns in rural areas as focal points for regional development Securing sustainable agriculture,. Promotion of co-operation and information exchange between rural areas. Use of the potential for renewable energy in urban and rural areas Exploitation of the potential of environmentally friendly tourism 24

25 Urban-rural partnership Specific policy recommendations: Maintenance of a basic supply of services and public transport in small and medium-sized towns in rural areas Promotion of co-operation between towns and countryside aiming at strengthening functional regions. Integrating the countryside surrounding large cities in spatial development strategies for urban regions, aiming at more efficient land use planning, Promotion and support of partnership-based cooperation between small and medium-sized towns Promotion of company networks between small and mediumsized enterprises in the towns and countryside. 5.2 Reports on economic and social cohesion ( ) The 1 st cohesion report s 11 Objective 5b, restoring the rural economy marked the importance of safeguarding rural areas as essential to a more balanced development of the Union and called for economic development of rural areas. Around 70% of EU funding was directed in 1996, according to the report, to the development of the economic base of rural areas (ERDF and EAGGF Guidance altogether), with three main priorities: Development and diversification of agriculture (promotion of quality products, restructuring of production), Development of new SMEs through the support of the establishment of industrial sites and the creation of services for assisting businesses, and Development of rural tourism. Partnership between public and private sectors were needed and the involvement of local people and organizations to exploit the particular economic potential of individual areas, including their natural and cultural potential. The 2nd report on economic and social cohesion 12 referred to the ESDP and highlighted the main territorial imbalances within the EU, particularly between regions of the same country and at the infra-regional level; it presented the difficulties experienced by frontier areas and regions affected by geographical constraints (ORs 13, mountains, islands). It distinguished three types of rural areas according to the extent of their integration into the rest of the economy and their links with urban centers and large centers of activity: Areas integrated into the global economy Intermediate rural areas. Isolated rural areas. 11 First cohesion report, EC Second report on economic and social cohesion: Unity, solidarity, diversity for Europe, its people and its territory, EC Outer-most regions of the EU: the Canary Islands, Madeira, the Azores, Réunion, French Guyana, Guadeloupe and Martinique. 25

26 The 3rd report on cohesion 14 stated that future of rural areas was becoming increasingly tied with the development of the rural economy as a whole, and that this required a real change in the economic and social base, in physical infrastructure, access to ICT and other new technologies, the growth of new sources of employment (such as in SMEs or rural tourism) and the maintenance of public services. Such policies needed to be integrated into a regional strategy involving the development of economic relations and cooperation with urban areas. The 4 th report on economic and social cohesion 15 stated that cohesion was not confined to avoiding excessive disparities across the EU as a whole or between regions within countries but extended to minimizing those which exist within regions, especially between urban and rural areas or between towns and cities of different sizes. Specifically concerning to urban-rural linkages, it introduced the following hypothesis: There was a major trend towards suburbanization in major EU cities. Suburbanisation means increasing pressure on the surrounding environment. Significant outward migration from rural areas was still prevailing in large parts of the EU, but in many countries, there was a net inward migration into a significant number of rural areas (older people moving for retirement, late career working ): OECD Intermediate rural areas having the highest population growth. Decline of agriculture s GDP (agrarian industries account for industrial GDP), economic diversification and reconverting of obsolete industrial activities in most intermediate rural areas. Newcomers moving into rural areas are an important asset for diversification (new ideas and business know-how). Diversification can come from increasing renewable energy exploitation, production of biomass and biofuels, through tourism. Improved infrastructure and accessibility bring new kinds of rural-urban linkages. Improvements in infrastructure and communication technology tend to encourage growth of urban areas in most parts of Europe, while improved accessibility creates new job opportunities for rural as well as urban populations, as long as they can commute (close to cities). The fifth progress report on economic and social cohesion 16 stated the need for competitiveness in order to achieve convergence, and the priority that investments in innovation, skills and education, sustainable development and transeuropean infrastructures were developed. Policy needed to have a coherent integrated approach, particularly between cohesion policy and rural development. The 6th progress report on economic and social cohesion 17 stated that cohesion policy required an integrated approach, multilevel governance, and partnership, with a fundamental role to be played by local stakeholders. The EU should facilitate territorial 14 Third report on economic and social cohesion: Towards a new partnership for growth, jobs and cohesion, EC Forth report on economic and social cohesion: growing regions, growing Europe, EC Fifth progress report on economic and social cohesion, report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council, Sixth progress report on economic and social cohesion, report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council,

27 governance (urban-rural partnerships, city-regions, networks of towns) to develop projects of common interest through strategic process of development, and facilitate exchanges of experiences and best practices. 5.3 The Territorial Agenda of the European Union (2007) 18 With respect to territorial priorities and urban-rural issues, the Territorial Agenda of the European Union builds upon the following main aims: To Strengthen Polycentric Development and Innovation through Networking of City Regions and Cities: cities which function as regional centres should cooperate as parts of a polycentric pattern to ensure their added value for other cities in rural and peripheral areas as well as for areas with specific geographic challenges and needs. To facilitate this process, infrastructure networks within and between regions in Europe need to be extended and updated on a continuous basis. New Forms of Partnership and Territorial Governance between Rural and Urban Areas. Urban-rural partnerships respond to the need of authorities of rural and urban areas, as inter-dependent partners, to identify common assets and elaborate joint regional and sub-regional development strategies with the implication of private stakeholders as well, in order to increase their attractivitty for investment decisions both by the private and public sector. To Promote Regional Clusters of Competition and Innovation in Europe: the creation of suitable and innovative clusters where the business community, the scientific community and administrations work together is called to be an essential tool for economic development of less dynamic areas. Strengthening their international identity and specialisation may be a way of becoming more attractive for investment. The Strengthening and Extension of Trans-European Networks: it is important to secure integrated and sustainable development of multi-modal transport systems in order to meet the requirements for mobility in a polycentric European territory, including neighbouring countries. Access to information and communication technologies is prioritary in all regions and with high standards. Energy infrastructure is also fundamental. To promote Trans-European Risk Management including the Impacts of Climate Change: Joint transregional and integrated approaches and strategies should be further developed in order to face natural hazards, reduce and mitigate greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to climate change The Strengthening of Ecological Structures and Cultural Resources as the Added Value for Development: the values of European ecological structures and cultural and natural heritage (cultural landscapes and architecture, as well as the built environment), should constitute the foundation for environmentally and culturally oriented development offering development perspectives and safeguarding diverse 18 Territorial Agenda of the European Union: towards a more competitive and sustainable Europe of diverse regions, Agreed on the occasion of the Informal Ministerial Meeting on Urban Development and Territorial Cohesion, Leipzig