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 work of 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