Smart interconnections and urban growth – the Polish case* Tomasz Komornicki Institute of Geography and Spatial Organization Polish Academy of Sciences.

Smart interconnections and urban growth – the Polish case*

Tomasz KomornickiInstitute of Geography and Spatial OrganizationPolish Academy of SciencesWarsaw

0 50 100 200 km150

Legenda:

granica państwa

granice powiatów

granice województw

liczba wspólnie realizowanych projektów

21 - 64

7 - 214 - 73 - 42 - 31 - 2

Presentation partly based on the results of Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education project: Functional linkages between Polish metropolises (T.Komornicki, P.Śleszyński, P.Korcelli, D.Światek, P.Siłka)

Is Poland a polycentric country?

• According to ESPON 1.1.1. and 1.4.3 Projects Poland is one of the most polycentric countries in UE. Is it true?

• YES on the basis of rank/size and location criteria

• Probably NO on the basis of connectivity criteria

Internal linkagescompanies relations migrations ICT

(internet)

• The level of connectivity in Polish polycentric settlement network is low

• The system is still hierarchical and the position of Warsaw is growing after 1989

• Smaller centers established direct social and economic links to the capital city (it was not the case before 1989)

3

Source: IGSO PAS, Project: Functional linkages between Polish metropolises, P.Śleszyński, P Siłka

0 50 100 200 km150

Legenda:

granica państwa

granice powiatów

granice województw

liczba połączeń

1 840 - 4 910

320 - 1 84090 - 32030 - 9010 - 300 - 10

Internal „smart” linkages PHD thesis EU framework projects

• Co-operation between R&D institution is much more decentralized

• Changes towards knowledge-based economy could support the return to polycentricism

0 50 100 200 km150

Legenda:

granica państwa

granice powiatów

granice województw

liczba wspólnie recenzowanych prac doktorskich

166 - 277 (20)68 - 166 (36)29 - 68 (56)11 - 29 (78)4 - 11 (110)1 - 4 (254)

4

0 50 100 200 km150

Legenda:

granica państwa

granice powiatów

granice województw

liczba wspólnie realizowanych projektów

21 - 64

7 - 214 - 73 - 42 - 31 - 2

External relations• Warsaw has the strongest but not

dominant position in foreign relation

• In the case of exports and tourism linkages are decentralized

• EU accession support decentralization of exports

• Organizational linkages remains concentrated in capital city

• Biggest centers („Big Five”) developed interactions with more distance European countries (including Western not Eastern part of Germany)

• Other regional centers are connected mainly with Germany or other neighboring countries (including Scandinavia)

Exports

Foreign Tourism

Accessibility

• After EU accession the synergy effect is limited by a relatively low spatial accessibility between the major cities.

• Warsaw is poorly accessible from some regional centres • The western centres improved their accessibility on the European level.

Some of them are better connected by rail or road with Berlin than Warsaw• Transborder transport linkages improved mainly on the German direction

(Berlin, Dresden). Czechia (Prague and Brno) remains not accessible on the daily basis

How to overcome transport-connected barriers for growth and polycentric development?

• In Poland interactions between regional capitals are very weak. Lack of transport infrastructure is one of the factors determining the situation

• Investment in transport and ICT network is the necessary condition of development of real polycentric settlement system

• Social and economic interactions are monocentric, infrastructure is internationally (transit) or locally oriented, only R&D connections are more polycentric

• Transport development accelerate in Poland after 2004 but the investment process is concentrated mainly on international TEN network and on the local infrastructure (ERDF – small parts of local roads mainly – political reason)

• Local investment includes the intra-metropolitan projects. The bottlenecks between urban and long distance systems remains unchanged (same in road and in public transport)

• Evaluation of the transport investment for programming period 2004-2006 shows the need of investment concentration (as well as the concentration of the EU support)

What are priorities of the infrastructure development?

• Priorities are still different in old and new member states

• Western European countries developed the high speed infrastructure (motorways and rail>200 km/h) firstly on the national level

• Some new accession countries (including Poland) try to established firstly the transit routes (partly basing on the plans from the COMECON times)

• Old (transit oriented ) paradigm of transport development should be changed for the new one (network and accessibility oriented)

• New EU Territorial Agenda followed this way of thinking

• In Poland the goals of Spatial Development Concepts are going to be changed

• The priority is given to roads and rails supporting interactions between main and secondary national centers, as well as interactions with neighboring centers in Germany and Czech Republic