ESPON 2013 Programme – Open Seminar “European Territorial Evidence for EU Cohesion Policy and Programming” 13-14 June 2012 - Aalborg, Denmark A.P. Russo.

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

THANKS FOR YOUR ATTENTION!

[email protected]@asro.kuleuven.be