Download Antonio Russo, University Rovira i Virgili, Spain and Loris

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]