Download Territorial Impact Assessment

yes no Was this document useful for you?
   Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Document related concepts

Washington Consensus wikipedia , lookup

Territorial Impact Assessment
Moritz Lennert
Open Days, October 10, 2007
“Territorial futures for Europe – Scenarios,
policies and co-operation”
• Political need for evaluating potential
impacts of policies
• Existing EIA, SEA, IA procedures ignore
• EU territory more complex
• Territory growing concern
• Political desire for concrete tools
• Presentation:
– general issues of IA
– important elements for TIA
– a prototype
Caveat lector
• Scientific impact assessment of policies is
– no control group
– not falsifiable
• Thank you and good bye !
• IA awareness-raising tool, not precise
• IA should support and enhance participation
and debate
• Modelling:
– Ex-post: correlation between cohesion
spending and GDP growth
– Ex-ante: forecasting models
• Qualitative assessments
– Delphi method
– Pool of regional experts
– Participatory stakeholder assessments
• Scenarios for policy packages
Territorial IA
• Territorial cohesion one of the objectives of
the EU
• Supporting a territorially differentiated
approach to policy
• Territories focal points for incoherences of
• TIA = double challenge:
– How to assess impacts ?
– How to differentiate impacts territorially ?
Elements of an “ideal” TIA
• Feasible
• Clear definition of what to assess
• Clear definition of scale or multiscalar
• Force debate and consensus on what to
assess against: What is territorial cohesion
Elements of an “ideal” TIA
• Flexibility and transparency in how to
– allow combination of qualitative and
quantitative means
– avoid black box
• Force debate and consensus on what
constitutes regional specificities
• Support understanding of which elements
determine the results
Issues of Territorialisation
• Over 260 NUTS2 regions and almost 1300
NUTS3 regions, but limited data
• Significant differentiation:
M in
Share of NATURA 2 0 0 0 areas
Pop/km ²
% pop w it h t ert iary educat ion
M ax
5 9 ,9
2 2 0 4 9 4 ,3
4 ,7
3 5 ,8
1105 135571
• The same impacts (growth of GDP, demand
for labour force, loss of green space, etc)
can have different meanings in different
A concrete methodology:
• Two steps:
– generic impact on each criterion (PIMc)
– territorial differentiation of this generic impact
• Territorial differentiation (TIMc) =
– Regional vulnerability and desirability of
impacts for each criterion (Vr,c, Dr,c)
– Policy intensity and applicability in the region
(PIr, PAr)
• Result = one impact measure per criterion,
or weighted average of all criteria:
TIMr = Σc θc . Vr,c. Dr,c . (PIMc . PIr ). Par
• Policy impact assessment necessary for
“rational” policy making
• Territorial differentiation matters
• TIA should support the debate, not close it
• Nothing can replace local expertise
• Need for integrated, but practical tools that
leave room for qualitative and local
• TEQUILA is a first prototype
Thank you !
Moritz Lennert
[email protected]
More info:
ESPON Project 3.2
Final Report - Volume 5 - TIA