Date post: | 23-Dec-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | alban-greer |
View: | 213 times |
Download: | 0 times |
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)
ATTREG Project (ESPON 2013/1/7)“The Attractiveness of Regions and Cities for Residents and Visitors” (2010-2012)
LEAD PARTNERUniversity Rovira i Virgili (ES)
PROJECT PARTNERSKU Leuven (BE)Univ. of Venice Ca’ Foscari (IT)EURICUR Rotterdam (NL)Univ. of Coimbra (PT)
Centre for Tourism Research (DK) IGSO (PL)Univ. of Ljubljana (SI)Univ. of West England (UK)
RESEARCH SUBCONTRACTORIstanbul Technological University (TR)
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
Average net migration and visiting flow rates
Low 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
Retentiveness
Brussels
País Vasco
Île-de-France
Attiki (Athens)
Hovedstaden (Copengahen)
Noord Holland (Amsterdam)
Istanbul
Inner London
Slovenia
Zuid Holland (Rotterdam)
Nord-Pas-de-Calais (LKT)
Lubelskie
Eastern Finland
Van (Eastern Turkey)
Vienna
CyprusCatalonia
VenetoDevon
Prague
Trento
Algarve
Cornwall
Salzburg
Balearic Isl.
Iceland
Vis
itor
att
racti
on
“Revolving doors” regions – High attractiveness for fast mobilities as a potential “knowledge capitalisation” strategy
Should be looking to retain more human capital?
“Miracle” regions – Very good at retaining what they attract
Possibly a template for problem regions?
“Risk” regions – have capitalised on their attractiveness but possibly overheating
“Slow down” approach needed?
Problem regions – Not attractive nor retentive
Do they need a kick in terms of attractiveness, followed by a long term strategy to retain?
What attracts whom? Outcome measure for regression analysis
Net migration rates 2001-07 Visitor arrival rates 2001-04
Total annual
flow
Flow of 15-24 year olds
Flow of 25 to 49
year olds
Flow of 50 to 64
year olds
All visitors
‘Foreign” visitors
Domes-tic
visitors
an1 Monuments index (+) * (+) *** (-) ** (+) *** (+) *** (+) ***
an2 Gross population density (+) *** (-) ***
an3 Airport rank (-) ** (-) *** (-) ** (-) ** (-) **
an4 Bedplaces in collective establishments (+) *** (+) *** (+) *** (+) *** (+) *** (+) *** (+) ***
an5 Accessibility (-) *
an6 Metropolitan areas (+) *
ec1 GDP per capita (+) * (-) *** (+) ** (+) *
ec2 Highly educated residents (+) *** (+) ** (+) *** (+) *** (+) ** (+) ***
ec3 Employment in consumption sectors (+) *** (-) ***
env1 Climate stability (-) *** (-) *** (-) *** (-) ***
env2 Share of Natura 2000 landscape designation
env3 Coastal regions (-) *** (-) ** (-) **
env4 Island regions (-) * (-) * (-) ** (-) **
in1 Satisfaction with health services
in2 Employment in public sector (-) *** (-) *** (-) *** (-) ** (-) **
in3 N. of NUTS2 regions in country (+) ** (+) ***
soc1 Share of university students registered in local universities on young age cohort
(+) *** (+) ***
soc2 Satisfaction with life (+) *** (+) **
soc3 Dependency rate (+) * (+) *** (-) ** (-) ***
Significant at 10%: *, Significant at 5%: **, Significant at 1%: ***
ANTROPIC CAPITAL
ECONOMIC-HUMAN CAPITAL
ENVIRONMENTAL CAPITAL
INSTITUTIONAL CAPITAL
SOCIO-CULTURAL CAPITAL
Less attractive than what expected from territorial endowments
Much 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