Policy for Cities in the Age of Austerity: Why Invest Beyond the Capitals? SGPTDE Project Professor...

Policy for Cities in the Age of Austerity: Why Invest Beyond the Capitals?

SGPTDE ProjectProfessor Michael Parkinson CBE

ESPON Seminar, Krakow 2011

Answer 3 Questions

1.WHO ARE WE?

2. WHAT POLICY QUESTIONS TRYING ANSWER HOW?

3. WHAT EMERGING POLICY STORY?

1. Who Are We?

Partners

• EIUA

• MRI Budapest

• University of Tampere

Advisers

• University College London

• University of Paris

2. What Policy Questions Trying Answer ?

• Contribution capital & secondary cities national, EU performance

• Which secondaries punching weight nationally & Europe, how and why?

• Who doing what to help?

• What works policy?

• What impact & implications crisis?

• Who does what policies better, differently in future?

And How?

• Research & policy literature – performance, policies, prospects

• Quantitative data 124 secondaries, 31 capitals

• Interviews - European, national policy makers, private sector

• E-questionnaire

• 9 case studies – Tampere, Cork, Leeds, Lyon, Turin, Munich, Barcelona, Katowice, Timisoara

3. What Emerging Policy Story ?

• Contribution capital & secondary national economies varies

• Historical, economic, institutional reasons capital dominate national economy even more in east than west

• Capitals dominate - but size gap varies & some cases falling

• Many secondaries growing contribution national prosperity

• Some secondaries outperform capital


Gap capitals & secondaries big

Few Exceptions - Top Secondary Outperforms Capital:Germany, Austria, Italy, Belgium, Ireland

Munich

Stuttga

rt

Nuremberg

Cologne-B

onn

Bremen

Bielefe

ld

Leipzig

Lin

z Graz

Bologna

Brescia

Turin

Bari

Palerm

o

Naples

Brusse

ls

Gent M

R

Charlero

i MR

Dublin0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

45,000

50,000

National Secondary CityGDP per capita PPS, 2007

Top Secondary Lags Capital by 5-20%:Spain, UK, Netherlands, France

Madrid

Bilbao

Barcelo

na

Valencia

Coruna

Murcia

Sevilla

Cad

iz

Malaga

London

Edinburgh

Bristol

Belfast

Leices

ter

Glasgo

w

Manch

ester

Birmingh

am

Bradford-Le

eds

Nottingham

Newcas

tle upon Ty

ne

Cardiff

Sheffi

eld

Liverp

ool

Randsta

d North

Randsta

d South

Eindhoven

Heerlen

Arnhem

Ensch

ede

Paris Lyo

n

Toulouse Nice

Bordeaux

Nantes

Marseill

e

Rennes

Strasb

ourg

Rouen

Grenoble

Montpellier

Toulon

Lille

Metz

Lens -

Lievin

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

45,000


Top Secondary Lags Capital by 20-30%:Denmark, Poland, Sweden, Finland, Portugal

Copenhag

en

Aarhus

Aalborg

Odense

Wars

aw

Poznan

Wro

claw

Kraków

Gdansk

Bydgo

szcz

Katowice

-Zory

Szczec

inLó

dz

Lublin

Kielce

Wlocla

wek

Stockh

olm

Gothenburg

Malmö

Helsinki

Turku

Tampere

Lisbon

Porto

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

45,000


Top Secondary Lags Capital by 30-45%:Hungary, Romania, Lithuania, Greece, Czech Republic, Slovenia, Croatia

Gyor

Pecs

Miskolc

Buchare

st

Cluj-Nap

oca

Craiova

Klaiped

a

Thess

alonica

Prague

Plzen

Ostrav

a

Ljublja

na Sp

lit 0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000


Top Secondary Lags Capital by 50-65%: Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Slovakia

Sofia

Varna

Plovdiv

Tallin

n Ta

rtu Riga

Dauga

vpils

Bratisla

va

Košice

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

45,000



Territory matters


Governance matters

Productivity Capitals and Secondaries 2007

Varna

Cluj-Napoca

Daugavpils

Klaipeda

Poznan

Tartu

Gyor Porto

OstravaKosice

Split Maribor Thessalonica

Odense

Bilbao Milan

Salzburg

Gothenburg

Turku

Edinburgh

Antwerp

Randstad South

Timisoara

Katowice-Zory

Barcelona

Munich

Turin Tampere

Bradford-Leeds

Lyon

Cork

Sofia

Bucharest

Riga

Vilnius

Warsaw

Tallinn

Budapest Lisbon

Prague

Bratislava

ZagrebLlubljana

Valletta Nicosia

Athens

CopenhagenMadrid

Berlin

Rome

Vienna Stockholm Helsinki

London

Paris

Brussels

Dublin

Randstad North

Luxembourg

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

90,000

100,000

110,000

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

90,000

100,000

110,000City Case study Country Capital

Unitary regionalised


Federal Federal

Federal Unitary

Unitary

Unitary

Unitary

Unitary

Unitary Decentralised

Nordic


Nordic


Nordic

Unitary centralised

former socialist

Unitary centralised

former socialist


Places can improve

Capitals and Secondaries Total GDP - % Change 2000-7

-2

-

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

National Capital City Case study



Unitary

Unitary Unitary Unitary Unitary Unitary Federal Federal


Nordic


Nordic


Nordic


Nordic Unitary centralised

former socialist

Unitary centralised

former socialist

Unitary centralised

former socialist

Unitary centralised

former socialist

Unitary centralised

former socialist


But crisis is hurting

Change Unemployment Rates % NUTS 2 2007-10

Source: Bubbico & Dijkstra, 2011

3. What Emerging Policy Story?

Significant risk


RISK:

• Economic, fiscal crises undermine achievements secondaries

• Competition public & private sector investment widen gaps within secondaries

• Competition widen gap between secondaries & capitals

• Increased inequality across Europe & failure hit EU 2020 targets

3. What Emerging Policy Story?

Policy matters


• Countries typically concentrate attention, resources capitals at expense secondaries

• Little explicit policy debate relationship. Most focus cohesion

• But some beginning focus economic performance secondary

• Some have national policies promote urban competiveness - innovation, diversity, skills, connectivity, place quality, governance.

• Some policies made difference & helped secondaries grow

• Cities seem do better countries less administrative centralisation & economic concentration, where cities more powers, resources

• Some cities helped their national economy perform better


Policy implications and prospects:

• Relationship capital secondary not zero sum but win-win

• Diseconomies scale suggest governments encourage development secondary cities complement capital

• Secondaries could absorb growth when costs growth start outweigh benefits to capital

• Little demand artificially limit capitals contribution national prosperity

• Trick increase national economic pie - encouraging secondaries not kill golden goose capital

3. What Emerging Policy Story ?Policy implications & prospects – investment age austerity:

• Number secondaries country sustain depends size, level development

• Smaller countries and currently East less scope develop secondary cities complement capital

• But policy aim should still be more high performing secondaries

• Economic governance at scale crucial

• Government territorial investment decisions - leading or lagging, bigger or smaller, capital or secondary - must be more explicit

• Deconcentration, decentralisation, policy focus secondaries can help

• EU future policy needs greater focus territory - economic place making

Policy for Cities in the Age of Austerity: Why Invest Beyond the Capitals? SGPTDE Project Professor...

Documents

Transcript of Policy for Cities in the Age of Austerity: Why Invest Beyond the Capitals? SGPTDE Project Professor...