Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
ATTREG Project (ESPON 2013/1/7) “The Attractiveness of Regions and Cities for Residents and Visitors” (2010-2012) ESPON 2013 Programme – Open Seminar “European Territorial Evidence for EU Cohesion Policy and Programming” 13-14 June 2012 - Aalborg, Denmark A.P. Russo (URV, LP) and L. Servillo (KUL) LEAD PARTNER University Rovira i Virgili (ES) PROJECT PARTNERS KU Leuven (BE) Univ. of Venice Ca’ Foscari (IT) EURICUR Rotterdam (NL) Univ. of Coimbra (PT) RESEARCH SUBCONTRACTOR Istanbul Technological University (TR) Centre for Tourism Research (DK) IGSO (PL) Univ. of Ljubljana (SI) Univ. of West England (UK) The ATTREG project • Objectives of the project – – – – • Understanding the attractiveness of territorial assets to different “audiences”, looking into the 2001-07 period Explaining mains spatial trends, classifying regions accordingly Investigate these relations at different spatial scales, and focusing on idiosyncrasies and “immeasurable” facts Developing an analytic framework to asses different policy options Achievements – – – 30+ indicators and 5 regional typologies of potential and realised attractiveness, providing inputs for place-based attraction strategies 8 case studies illustrating “mobilisation” mechanisms in a variety of contexts and territorial scales 18 scenarios to assess the potential impacts of different policy options (“inclusive”, “smart”, “sustainable”) Unretentive for young and mid-career age groups, moderately retentive for the older age group Moderate retentiveness for all working age groups High retentiveness for all working age groups Highly retentive for younger age group, moderately retentive for mid-career age group, unretentive for older age group Low net migration and visiting flow rates Average net migration and visiting flow rates High net migration rate, average visiting flow rate Average net migration rate, high visiting flow rate Main trends with attraction/retention of populations • 2001-2007 (study period) – – – – • Global population shift from North-East to South-West, with dominant role of Western Mediterranean arc regions Within countries, ongoing polarisation towards national capitals in the periphery; in the core, stratification by age groups with “alarming” signals from larger and wealthier urban areas (gentrification?) Increasing retentiveness of rural and mountain regions Attractiveness for visitors generally correlates strongly with retentiveness – with some interesting variations 2008-2009 (peeking forward) – – Very attractive tourist regions as well as very retentive regions (mature tourist attractions and “tigers”) have been strongly affected by the financial crisis Moderately retentive regions that have maintained their population mix have been more resilient Visitor attraction “Revolving doors” regions – High attractiveness for fast mobilities as a potential “knowledge capitalisation” strategy Balearic Isl. Salzburg Algarve Trento Cornwall Should be looking to retain more human capital? Van (Eastern Turkey) Iceland Inner London Prague Noord Holland Devon Cyprus (Amsterdam) Veneto Catalonia Brussels Vienna Île-deEastern Finland France “Risk” regions – have capitalised on their attractiveness but possibly overheating “Slow down” approach needed? Nord-Pas-de- Slovenia Hovedstaden Calais (LKT) Zuid Holland País Vasco (Copengahen) Attiki (Athens) (Rotterdam) Istanbul Lubelskie Problem regions – Not attractive nor retentive Do they need a kick in terms of attractiveness, followed by a long term strategy to retain? Retentiveness “Miracle” regions – Very good at retaining what they attract Possibly a template for problem regions? What attracts whom? Outcome measure for regression analysis Net migration rates 2001-07 Total annual flow ANTROPIC CAPITAL an1 Monuments index an2 an3 Gross population density an4 Bedplaces in collective establishments an5 Accessibility an6 Metropolitan areas ec1 GDP per capita ECONOMIC-HUMAN ec2 CAPITAL ENVIRONMENTAL CAPITAL INSTITUTIONAL CAPITAL SOCIO-CULTURAL CAPITAL Airport rank Highly educated residents Visitor arrival rates 2001-04 Flow of 15-24 year olds Flow of 25 to 49 year olds Flow of 50 to 64 year olds All visitors ‘Foreign ” visitors Domestic visitors (+) * (+) *** (-) ** (+) *** (+) *** (+) *** (-) ** (+) *** (-) *** (-) *** (-) ** (+) *** (+) *** (+) *** (-) ** (+) *** (+) *** (-) ** (+) *** (+) *** (-) * (+) * (+) *** (+) * (+) ** (+) *** (-) *** (-) *** (-) *** (-) * (-) *** (-) * (-) ** (-) *** (-) *** (-) *** (+) *** ec3 Employment in consumption sectors env1 env2 Climate stability env3 env4 Coastal regions in1 in2 Satisfaction with health services in3 N. of NUTS2 regions in country soc1 Share of university students registered in local universities on young age cohort (+) *** soc2 soc3 Satisfaction with life (+) *** (+) * (-) *** (+) ** (+) *** (+) * (+) ** (+) *** (+) *** (-) *** (-) *** Share of Natura 2000 landscape designation Island regions Employment in public sector Dependency rate (-) ** (-) ** (-) ** (-) ** (-) ** (+) ** (+) *** (+) ** Significant at 10%: *, Significant at 5%: **, Significant at 1%: *** (+) *** (-) ** (-) *** Much less attractive than what expected from territorial endowments Less attractive than what expected from territorial endowments As attractive as predicted through territorial endowments More attractive than what expected from territorial endowments Much more attractive than what expected from territorial endowments Main policy insights from the ATTREG analysis • Place-based approach – Demand-led: adapting territorial assets to existing audiences in order to enhance their impacts – Supply-led: identifying strategic audiences which may fit to the regions’ characteristics • Governance – The importance of a multi-level governance system – The role of the EU policy – The time factor • EU territorial cohesion and human mobility – – – – Effects of inclusive, smart and sustainable ‘policy bundles’ in … … convergence / overheating regions … … in terms of population / GDP / export jobs … …. in target / neighbouring / other regions …. – with respect to baseline (DEMIFER) scenarios “Inclusive” policy in overheating regions – predicted change over baseline POPULATION P.C. GDP Role of creativity? • As “audience” involved in processes of place restructuring – mobile creative workers: net migration rate of the 25-49 y.o. – mobile consumers: tourists / ERASMUS students • As territorial asset (‘cultural capital’) which attracts audiences – students in local universities (as % of young age cohort) – creative workforce (as % of act. pop.) as economic-human capital (from TO5) • Cross-project analysis of creative workforce, mobility and territorial assets over ‘00 decade (pre-crisis) Trends in creative workforce / attractiveness THANKS FOR YOUR ATTENTION! [email protected] [email protected]