econdary cities in Central and Eastern Europe The role and possibilities of functional urban areas

Transcription

1 econdary cities in Central and Eastern Europe The role and possibilities of functional urban areas Iván Tosics Metropolitan Research Institute Budapest Medium Sized Towns in European Spatial Structure Hungarian Central Statistical Office Budapest 17 October 2018

2 I. Pecularities of urban development in the east-central European countries II. Consequences on the urban structures III. Metropolitan areas around European cities IV. Benefits of metropolitan cooperation V. EU accession a great opportunity VI. Institutional and political barriers to metropolisation in east-central European countries

3 difficult historical trajectories in the 20th century big backlog in infrastructure development unprecedented quick market-led change from socialism to capitalism negative tendencies in population development

4 Capital cities of independent countries in East-Central Europe Before 1914 After 1920 After 1945 After 1992 Vienna Belgrade Bucharest Sofia Cetinje (Montenegro)

5 Capital cities of independent countries in East-Central Europe Before 1914 After 1920 After 1945 After 1992 Vienna Vienna Belgrade Belgrade Bucharest Bucharest Sofia Sofia Cetinje (Montenegro) Budapest Warsaw Prague Tirana Tallinn Riga Vilnius

6 Capital cities of independent countries in East-Central Europe Before 1914 After 1920 After 1945 After 1992 Vienna Vienna Vienna Belgrade Belgrade Belgrade Bucharest Bucharest Bucharest Sofia Sofia Sofia Cetinje Budapest Budapest (Montenegro) Warsaw Warsaw Prague Prague Tirana Tirana Tallinn Riga Vilnius

7 Capital cities of independent countries in East-Central Europe Before 1914 After 1920 After 1945 After 1992 Vienna Vienna Vienna Vienna Belgrade Belgrade Belgrade Belgrade Bucharest Bucharest Bucharest Bucharest Sofia Sofia Sofia Sofia Cetinje Budapest Budapest Budapest (Montenegro) Warsaw Warsaw Warsaw Prague Prague Prague Tirana Tirana Tirana Tallinn Tallinn Riga Riga Vilnius Vilnius Bratislava Ljubljana Zagreb Sarajevo Podgorica Pristina Skopje Minsk Kiev Chisinau

8

9

10

11

12 Give-away housing privatization as one of the cornerstones of the changes freeing up the public sector of the responsibility for paying for the decadeslong default in the maintenance of the older multi-family housing stock allowing the residents to survive the changes: housing was shock absorber instead of agency of change

13

14 Countries Old EU countries Social (public) rental housing Poverty rate NL, S, A % % D, F, UK % % ES, P, EL 1 5 % % Transition countries CZ, POL % % H, EST 3 4 % % ALB, BUL, ROM 1 3 % %

15 I n t h o u s a n d s EU27 Net migration Natural increase Population change Source: United Nations Migration Natural increase P opulation change EU10

16 Source: The ESPON 2013 Programme DEMIFER (Demographic and migratory flows affecting European regions and cities) Reference scenarios, 2010:28) STQ Scenario: Status quo scenario: the demographic trends remain the same as currently The map below displays an East-West gap in demographic terms

17 capital city led development growing gaps between capital and secondary cities relatively good spatial distribution of medium sized cities

18 Top Secondary Outperforms Capital: Germany, Austria, Italy, Belgium, Ireland

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

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

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

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

23 Productivity Capitals and Secondaries , ,000 90,000 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 Cluj-Napoca Sofia Varna Bucharest Timisoara Unitary centralised former socialist Riga Daugavpils Vilnius Poznan Tallinn Katowice-Zory Klaipeda Warsaw Tartu Budapest Lisbon Prague Bratislava City Case study Country Capital Unitary Unitary Unitary Unitary Unitary Unitary Unitary Federal Unitary Unitary Unitary centralised regionalised regionalised Decentralised Decentralised former Unitary Federal Federal Nordic Cork Nordic Luxembourg socialist Decentralised Nordic Zagreb Llubljana Athens Odense Valletta Nicosia Thessalonica Split Maribor Gyor Porto Kosice Ostrava Bilbao Copenhagen Madrid Barcelona Munich Berlin Lyon Vienna Stockholm Helsinki Edinburgh Milan Rome Salzburg Turin Turku Gothenburg Tampere London Paris Bradford-Leeds Antwerp Brussels Dublin Randstad South Randstad North 110, ,000 90,000 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 10,000

24 Most European metropolitan areas are growing OECD, Metro population growth, The BUSINESS of CITIES 24

25 In Europe the administrative system of municipalities is historically rooted and does not correspond to the present realities of urban life Europe has 21st century economy, 20th century governments, 19th century territorial systems

26 Analysis: areas with different functions around cities Morphologic area (MUA): built up continuously Functional Urban Area (FUA): day to day connections Larger economic area: the territory which can be reached within one hour from the airport

27

28 Exploring and measuring functional areas around cities Two databases: ESPON research determining MUA and FUA areas around all medium and larger European cities recent OECD attempt to determine metropolitan (FUA) areas around larger cities in the OECD countries No common understanding/definition exists for all cities on what a FUA is.

29 CITIES Admin city (million) MUA/city FUA/city London 7,43 1,1 1,8 Berlin 3,44 1,1 1,2 Madrid 3,26 1,5 1,6 Paris 2,18 4,4 5,1 Lisbon 0,53 4,4 4,9 Manchester 0,44 5,0 5,8 Warsaw 1,69 1,2 1,7 Vienna 1,60 1,0 1,6 Budapest 1,70 1,2 1,5 Prague 1,17 1,0 1,4 Brno 0,38 1,0 1,4 Bratislava 0,43 1,0 1,7 AVERAGE (40 cities) mill 1,7 2,3 Sources: ESPON, 2007: Study on Urban Functions. ESPON Study IGEAT, Brussels. Final Report March City population:

30 OECD delimitation of functional urban areas OECD identification of FUAs population grid from the global dataset Landscan (2000). Polycentric cores and the hinterlands of FUAs identified on the basis of commuting data, including all settlements from where at least 15% of the workers commute to any of the core settlement(s). OECD defined four categories (total functional urban area): small urban areas with a population of thousand; medium-sized urban areas ( thousand), metropolitan areas (500 thousand 1,5 million); large metropolitan areas (above 1,5 million population). 29 OECD countries: 1175 functional urban areas. Public database: European OECD countries: 659 functional urban areas (29 large metropolitan areas and 88 metropolitan areas).

31 OECD Countries metropolitan area area (0,5 mill-1,5 sized urban area area (50 th 200 population in FUAs (%) (1,5 mill - ) m) (200 th 500) th) Austria ,5 Belgium ,9 Czech Rep ,6 Denmark ,8 Estonia ,3 Finland ,7 France ,8 Germany ,3 Greece ,8 Hungary ,7 Ireland ,3 Italy ,8 Luxembourg ,2 Netherlands ,1 Norway ,5 Poland ,2 Portugal ,9 Slovak Rep ,9 Slovenia ,1 Spain ,7 Sweden ,7 Switzerland ,6 UK ,0 SUMM

32

33

34

35

36

37 Source: GerQházi, É Hegedüs, J SzemzQ, H Tosics, I Tomay, K Gere, L (2011) The impact of European demographic trends on regional and urban development. Synthesis report. Hungarian Presidency of the Council of the European Union. Budapest, April 2011

38 Coordination between neighbouring municipalities in functional urban areas is crucial to avoid the negative effects of competition (investments, services, taxes) between local authorities help to integrate policies economic, environmental and social challenges can best be addressed at once on broader urban level reach the economy of scale size matters in economic terms and in services in shrinking urban areas manage shrinking in sustainable way The metropolitan area is the appropriate spatial level for effective integrated approaches to sustainable development, helping to bridge urban-rural issues and achieve more balanced development.

39 ANALYSIS OF THE METROPOLITAN AREAS Functions and institutional forms of collaboration around 40 European cities explored by EUROCITIES, Metropolitan Areas In Action (MAIA ) survey : content/functions of cooperation: from loose talks through single or more functions till strong joint multifunctional planning institutional forms of cooperation: from no form or statistical unit through weak delegated council till strong (elected or delegated) council spatial dimension of collaboration compared to FUA 39

40 Metropolitan functions and organizations: European examples Functions Institution No organization Delegated organization Networking Brussels, Brno Some functions Vienna Strong planning Bratislava Amsterdam Frankfurt Elected organization Stuttgart

41 Good practices of metropolitan coordination: governance and planning solutions Successful metropolitan organizations New Metropolitan City (2014) gets EU funding: Bari. Pact signed with government on 230 mill, plus another 40 mill in the Open peripheries project. New ringroad, metropolitan platform on jobs, public transport development. Metropolitan area formed and gets funding: AMB around Barcelona. Third largest budget after Catalunya and Barcelona city. 30 mill ERDF project was signed between AMB and Catalunya. This was success as there were many enemies and also the MA and Brussels had to be convinced. Cohesion Policy ITI measure initiates metropolitan cooperation in PL, CZ, RO

42 Barcelona Metropolitan Area Population: Barcelona 1,6 mill, First Zone 1,6 mill, Second Zone 1,5 mill BMA was created by a law of Catalan Parliament in BMA has 36 municiplaities, 3,2 million population. BMA gets its 1,5 bn budget from the municipalities and not from national or regional level. Functions: providing public services in the metropolitan area, promoting affordable housing, approving the Metropolitan Urban Mobility Plan, preparing Metropolitan Urban Master Plan. Metropolitan Council: 90 metropolitan councillors, each of the 36 municipalities represented proportionally to their demographic weight. Governing Board: the AMB president (mayor of Barcelona) and the metropolitan councillors appointed by the president at the proposal of the Metropolitan Council. Meets at least twice a month.

43 Planning in flexible space for implementing in fixed space Old: fixed action space New: flexible action space European Union Central states Transborder & macro-regions Provinces Metropolitan areas Administrative cities Neighbourhoods Adapted from Jacquier, 2010

44 Planning cooperation to implement cooperation ideas on elected government level: ZÜRICH Switzerland defined metro areas and prescribed mandatory cooperation within these Zürich (415 th) is center of the metro area (1,9 mill), including 8 cantoons and 122 settlements It took 7 years to build up cooperation, with regulation of growth and working out how to compensate those whose growth is limited. The agreement was achieved in the informal level of planning conference, the resolution of which is not binding but will be gradually taken over by the 8 cantoons which make binding decisions. Strategic spatial planning as metagovernance tool.

45 Planning cooperation to implement cooperation ideas on elected government level: HAMBURG

46 Planning cooperation to implement cooperation ideas on elected government level: HAMBURG Hamburg Metropolitan Region: 4 federal states (Mecklenburg- Vorpommern, Niedersachsen, Schleswig-Holstein and the city state of Hamburg), 17 districts ("Landkreise") and 3 cities share the belief in urban-urban and urban-rural cooperation within the metropolitan region. The 4 federal states run first cluster policies jointly. The next big challenge will be that each actor does not invest into digital transition just for himself, but that governments understand that they can only be successful, if they cooperate with their neighbours. Source: Rolf-Barnim Foth

47 2004: post-socialist countries became new member states EU accession opened up of a huge pot of money for development Equally important: new system of planning with compulsory elements to assure integration between policy areas and participation of affected people EU Cohesion Policy: 1/3 of EU budget, concentrated heavily on poorer countries

48

49 EU Cohesion Policy: a promising attempt towards more integrated urban development Early 2010s: the raising of a locally lead integrated approach to sustainable urban development. Method: ringfencing financing for integrated development with Integrated Territorial Investment (ITI) as compulsory tool for it. ITI was promising from many aspects: to put strategic thinking ahead of project based actions, to support functional area approaches both on neighbourhood and on city-region level as opposed to the administrative territories, to push for integration between policy fields and between funds, to acknowledge the local/metropolitan level as direct client in Structural Funds policy (delegation) No wonder that many cities became excited and raised high expectations (getting block grant) towards the post-2014 Structural Funds.

50 Sustainable urban development: A priority for At least 5% of European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) should be invested in integrated sustainable urban development at national level Integrated urban development strategies developed by cities to be implemented as Integrated Territorial Investment (ITI), a multi-thematic priority axis or a specific Operational programme. Projects are selected by the cities in line with the strategies. Urban-rural linkages have to be taken into account. Use of community-led local development approaches possible (CLLD): consulting local citizens' organisations. 50

51 ITI: Combination of funds and programmes Regional ERDF-OP National ERDF-OP ESF-OP INTERMEDIATE BODY + complementary funding from EAFRD and/or EMFF I T I (urban) territory 51

52 ITI Teritorial definition of the Warsaw Functional Area surface: sqkm. (8% of the surface of the region) population: inhabitants (50,3% of the population of the region) 40 communes including Warsaw (within 11 counties)

53 Unwilling Member States, cautious Commission, hesitating Parliament The brave proposals of the Commission have been substantially watered down during the debates with the Member States the broad application of multi-fund financing was irrealistic as not even the Commission itself could achieve better cooperation between ERDF and ESF the delegation to the city level was a wish of the EC and EP but the national and regional level was completely against it the simplification was only a dream: the Commission was pushed by the Court of Auditors into more control with ever more administrative conditionalities: ERDF ESF; thematic concentration, transition regions the new ideas for integrated approach would have needed clear explanations but the Commission was in serious delay with documents helping to operationalize ITI As a conseqence the resulting regulation-compromise proved to be too weak to achieve the originally aimed strong position of the European cities

54 National level frameworks Good examples of national policies to promote metropolitan areas can be found e.g. in Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Switzerland France: urban communities Italy: 14 metropolitan cities (joining provinces) Poland: metropolitan level planning (EU) Germany: metropolitan regions

55 Metropolitan initiatives 1. Countr y FR FR IT Initiative Municipal associations: series of laws since 1999 to initiate collaboration Regional reform (2015) and thinking about the future of departements Metropolitan cities initiative: 1990, 2000, 2012, 2014; thinking about the future of provinces Topdown Botto m-up? TD BU TD TD Gatekeeper level (Region) Region DE Metropolitan regions initiative: from the 1990s BU Lander

56 Metropolitan initiatives 2. Country Initiative Topdown Botto m-up? PL Regional reform in 1990s. Metropolization of regional seats since 2007, based on EU resources (ITI) RO Municipal associations since 2004, Growth Poles to allocate EU resources since 2007 TD BU TD CZ Metropolitan law since 2015 TD Gatekeeper level Region

57 All large cities of the Central East European countries can deliver shiny brochures about dynamic metropolitan development In reality progress is limited to economic development, due to the activities of private economic actors most of the conditions of metropolization (leadership, incentives from higher tears of government, evolving governance structures, strong and cooperative personalities, institutions, research and expertise) are weak or missing

58 Budapest: suburbanization tendencies BudapestrQl Pest megyébe költözqk száma (szuburbanizáció) illetve Pest megyébql Budapestre való költözqk számának alakulása között fq Pest megyébql Budapestre költözés BudapestrQl Pest megyébe költözés Forrás: KSH adatok alapján szerkesztés: Schuchmann Júlia (PhD dolgozat) 58

59 Planning in the Budapest metropolitan area Large differences in level of development between the city (1,7 mill), the agglomeration (800 th) and the periphery of the county (400 th) Development is largely determined by private market actors. The public sector is fragmented, local municipalities around Budapest have large independence. Positive initiatives for cooperation in the 2000s: Creation of Budapest Agglomerational Council (BAFT), supporting joint planning Establishment of Budapest Transport Association Creation of multi-functional territorial associations between neighbouring municipalities Budapest and Pest County together as NUTS 2 region

60 Együttmqködés kialakítása a metropolisz térségben 60

61 Stratégiai kapcsolatok szerkezete 61

62 Since 2010: dissolution of all cooperation mechanisms The 7 NUTS 2 regions have lost importance (development councils dissolved), the 19 counties became actors of territorial development (without capacities) Multi-functional territorial associations have been dissolved and replaced by administative units All agglomerational institutions (BAFT, Budapest Transport Association) have been dissolved, replaced by ad-hoc agreements Early 2016: Budapest and Pest County separated, Central Hungarian Region to be dissolved in 2020

63 Centralization: against regional and metropolitan cooperation Regional planning and development has been downplayed in Hungary, sectorial planning became dominant by strong ministries The elimination of all agglomerational and regional cooperation mechanisms in the Budapest area shows that politics lost its interest in long-term steering of difficult territorial mechanisms with the involvement of all stakeholders In the largest cities of Hungary most of the major development questions are directly influenced by the central government, and there is little attention paid to functional area linkages and planning in this regard Hungary is different from PL and CR

64 Conclusions I. Metropolitan coordination is a very urgent challenge in growing, dynamic urban areas housing in growing cities can not be solved without metropolitan planning cooperation transport issues and coordination of investments are crucial topics on metropolitan level Metropolitan coordination is also important to manage shrinking in a sustainable way Metropolitan governance/planning could become a key factor in the development of secondary cities in the CEE region, if politics would support it

65 Conclusions II. The cities of the Central and East European countries have shown quick economic restructuring in the last 28 years The secondary (medium) cities are not the winners of the restructuring Their development depends mainly on national policies, through which EU money is allocated Relatively good examples can be found in PL and CR where ITI was used for development and the national level supports metropolitan areas Integrated metropolitan development would help secondary cities but this would require stronger EU framework and more determined national policies

66 Iván Tosics