RURAL-URBAN PARTNERSHIPS: AN INTEGRATED APPROACH TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT William Tompson Head of the Urban Development Programme OECD Public Governance and Territorial Development Directorate JAHRESTAGUNG DER EUROPÄISCHEN METROPOLREGION NÜRNBERG 2013 AMBERG, 1 JULY 2013 Why are we interested in urban-rural partnerships? Rural and urban areas are interconnectedthrough different linkages (commuting, provision of amenities, transportation, economic transactions etc.) The way these linkages are governedhas an impact on the economic development and people s wellbeing both in urban and rural communities Better understanding of interdependencies (unit of analysis = selfcontained space of relationship, functional region) Design governance solutions to facilitate an integrated approach that improves the outcome of the rural-urban partnerships 2 1
Main objectives of the project Understand the relationships between urban and rural areas in OECD countries and their potential implications Assess the role of rurban partnerships to respond to the specific needs of urban and rural areas, to strengthen the economic conditions of regions and the delivery of services to urban and rural dwellers Understand the role of public policy to improve the outcome of these partnerships 3 Beyond urban rural divide: Territorial transformations in the last decades Economic development / structural changes Improved ICT and transport Mass diffusion of cars Increased urbanization New patterns of territorial organization Larger distances daily travelled by individuals Increased integration of places before more independent New concept of cities and rural areas Larger functional regions 4 2
Urban and rural areas are increasingly integrated Urban and rural areas have different assets that are important for economic development and people well being. These areas are increasingly integrated in self-organising spaces called functional regions. Integration between urban and rural areas is important for socioeconomic performance role of spillovers and inclusive institutions. Distance matters An analysis on 206 small rural TL3 regions show that: rural regions grow more the smaller the distance to the closest urban place; positive spillovers emerge from growth in close urban regions; and proximity matters also for ruralrural relationships. 5 Rural regions show the highest variability in population growth Population growth rates (2000-2009) in OECD TL3 regions, by typology population growth rate between 2000 and 2009 -.4 -.2 0.2.4.6 The variability of growth rates is much higher in rural areas than for the other types of region. Part of this variability can be explained by looking at the role of the relationships with Urban or Intermediate regions (urban-rural linkages). What happens in emerging economies? Urban Intermediate Rural U.S.,Canada, Chile, Mexico, Israel and Iceland are excluded from the analysisfor reasons of data availability 6 3
OECD identification of functional urban areas Under the guidance of the OECD Working Party on Territorial Indicators, and carried out jointly with the EC and Eurostat: 1. It identifies urban areas beyond city boundaries, as integrated labour market areas (using population density and travel-to- work flows). 2. It isappliedto28oecdcountries and identifies 1 148 urban areas of different size: small urban, medium-sized urban, metropolitan and large metropolitan 3. It allows comparisons among the different forms that urbanisation takes (densely populated centres and their hinterlands, sprawling, polycentric connected cities, etc.) Website: www.oecd.org/gov/regional/measuringurban 7 OECD identification: how does the new approach change our view of cities? 1) Functional core cities vs.. administrative cities The core areas are composed by single municipalities with more than 50% of population living within a high density urban cluster (contiguous dense grid cells above 1,500 people per km 2 ) 4
OECD identification: how does the new approach change our view of cities? 2) Administrative regions vs.. functional regions The hinterland areais identified by all those municipalities that send to the core area at least 15% of their workforce. 9 Functional vs. administrative boundaries: contrasting cases 10 5
Functional regions: Framework for urban-rural linkages Urban and rural areas are interlinked through a broad set of linkages, which are different on the base of the characteristics of the whole functional region 11 Functional regions and rural-urban interactions Urban-rural relationships have a high spatial and functional complexity and a high variability of spatial extent. Labour market flows are a specific type of linkage that does not necessarily catch the whole space of rurban interactions. OECD statistical definition of functional areas are able to catch in many cases the most part of rural-urban interactions, especially for metropolitan regions. The Rurban project aims at going beyond a statistical definition of functional regions and at understanding the higher complexity of ruralurban interactions. For this reason it is organized around 12 case-study regions across different OECD countries The aim is not to provide a new definition of functional regions, but to understand how rural and urban areas are linked in functional termsand how these linkages are governed through partnerships, institutional collaborations, etc. 12 6
Rural-urban partnership are driven by functional linkages Partnership helps managing urban-rural linkages beyond administrative boundaries at a functional region scale in order to reach common objectives. Rurban partnerships operate at different functional scales, depending on the purpose of the partnership and the type of territorial relationships. (Flexibility/variable geometry is important.) Example: Nuremberg Metropolitan Region The partnership covers a poly-centric geography that extends well beyond labour markets. Land-based economic complementarities, innovation, public transport network and common territorial identity are functional linkages underlying the partnership boundaries. 13 How does Nuremberg stand out? Polycentrism: a potential network economy, offering advantages of scale while maintaining a more balanced territorial development. Clear mandate to manage rural-urban relationships (Bad WindsheimDeclaration). The governance system: one voice-one vote. The second is the elaborate system in place to manage stakeholder input. Transition from being largely a politically led body to one that now has a mix of political and business stakeholders making key decisions together. Now transitioning to a second phase: from an inward focused partnership to a global brand with an international focus. 14 7
Category of benefit observed Rurban partnership can help reaching development objectives Production of public goods (or club goods) Achieve higher economies of scale Example of benefit Higher external visibility and attractiveness Exploiting local productive linkages (e.g. agro-industry) and economic complementarities Easier access to natural resources (incl. renewable energies) Strengthen territorial identity and social capital Network economies (e.g. overcoming limits of small-size business environments) Higher political power, financial resources and better dialogue with other government levels Improving quality, access or economic viability of services provision Capacity building Account for negative externalities Overcoming coordination failures Improving local government capacity to carry out tasks Coordinating land use policy (e.g. sprawl issues) Limiting zero-sum competition among municipalities (e.g. tax competition) Setting and aligning priorities for economic development Improving local knowledge through social learning and information sharing Governing interdependencies Urban areas Rural areas Functional region Administrative region The governance of these interactions should take into account several coordination gaps: Actors, levels of government, incentives to cooperate, capacity etc. 16 8
Challenges to adopt a functional approach to policy making Lessons learned a) Overcoming institutional fragmentation Potential conflicts with other existing government levels Different political and economic weight of different partners b) Reforms and stability Combining efficiency with legitimacy Financial sustainability and incentive dependency c) Balancing transaction costs and human resources costs d) Accountability towards citizens Galvanise actors towards clear, relevant and measurable objectives Data challenge 17 When do rurban partnerships work? The formation and the effectiveness of the partnership is affected by some main enabling and hindering factors. Main enabling factors: Clearly defined objectives High awareness of interdependence between urban and rural areas Democratic participation Leadership Main hindering factors: Regulatory and political barriers Lack of trust and social capital Policy fragmentation 18 9
Characteristics that shape rural-urban partnership Institutional factors Political environment Legislative environment External factors Catalytic event e.g. Globalisation And Mutual understanding of the need to collaborate Rural-urban Partnership Process and Dynamics Partnership Type Partnership Structure Partnership Scope Partnership Membership mix 19 GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE Advantages and disadvantages of the different governance models ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES Intentional with delegated functions More unified rural-urban action; greater access to resources; influence on national/ regional policy makers Less flexibility; threat to local autonomy; less citizen and private sector engagement. Intentional with no delegated functions Same as above but also more scope for citizen, academia and private sector participation. Fewer resources (e.g. funding)and implementation instruments; Potential for discord between urban-rural stakeholders. Unintentional with delegated functions Facilitates a bottom-up process of ruralurban collaboration; can promote a territorial approach on rural-urban issues (multiple purpose) Indirect management of rural-urban issues(and more complex); Needs legitimacy,good evidence and comprehension of rural-urban issues. Unintentional with no delegated functions Maintains local autonomy; can address challenges on a service by service basis; can bring in relevant stakeholders as needed. Fewer resources; No one voice: no regionwide coordination; more opportunities for sectoral vs. integrated rural-urban strategies 10
A strategy to build effective and sustainable rurban partnerships National levels of government could: 1) promote institutional and functional integrationbetween urban and rural areas; 2) overcome fragmentation among different sectoral policies; 3) encourage territories to self-determine their integrated strategies and projects around flexible functional geographies; 4) set a framework for a better dialogueamong levelsof government; and 5) establish platforms to share experiences and good practices of ruralurban partnership. Sub-national levels of government could: 1) help in setting strategic orientation (and coordinate with local levels); 2) facilitate co-operation between public and private actors; and 3) monitor the progress of rural-urban partnership. 21 Thank you for your attention www.oecd.org/regional/rurban 22 11