Se ha denunciado esta presentación.
Utilizamos tu perfil de LinkedIn y tus datos de actividad para personalizar los anuncios y mostrarte publicidad más relevante. Puedes cambiar tus preferencias de publicidad en cualquier momento.

Promoting integrated development in the context of demographic change

1.328 visualizaciones

Publicado el

Presentation on promoting integrated development at the XIV All-Russian Forum "Strategic Planning in the Regions and Cities of Russia", 19-20 October 2015, St Petersburg,, Russian Federation, by William Tompson, Senior Counsellor, OECD Regional Development Policy Division.
St Petersburg, 19 October 2015

  • Sé el primero en comentar

  • Sé el primero en recomendar esto

Promoting integrated development in the context of demographic change

  1. 1. PROMOTING INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT IN A CONTEXT OF DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGE XIV All-Russian Forum «Strategic Planning in the Regions and Cities of Russia» St Petersburg, 20 October 2015 Bill Tompson, Senior Counsellor & Deputy Head Regional Development Policy Division
  2. 2. • The population pyramid is increasing inverted. • The age structure of the early stages of the demographic transition was uniquely favourable for economic growth. • It coincided with important productivity- enhancing changes in economy and society. • Productivity growth grows more difficult even as it becomes more important. The demographic dividend is past 20 Oct 2015 XIV All-Russian Forum, St Petersburg 2
  3. 3. • Concentration continues but in the context of slow or negative population growth. • Many rural areas are losing population. • Rural areas tend to age faster than cities. • Concentration offers productivity benefits but at a cost in terms of key rural functions. • Technology offers new opportunities for well- connected rural areas with good amenities. Changing settlement patterns generate increasing challenges 20 Oct 2015 XIV All-Russian Forum, St Petersburg 3
  4. 4. New patterns of territorial organization Economic development / structural changes Improved ICT and transport Mass diffusion of cars Increased urbanisation Larger functional regions Increased integration of places before more independent Larger distances daily travelled by individuals New concept of cities and rural areas 20 Oct 2015 XIV All-Russian Forum, St Petersburg 4 Beyond urban rural divide: Territorial transformations in the last decades Growth spill-overs extend further
  5. 5.  Rural and urban areas are interconnected through different linkages (commuting, provision of amenities, transportation, economic transactions etc.) The way these linkages are governed has an impact on the economic development and people’s wellbeing both in urban and rural communities  Better understanding of interdependencies (unit of analysis = self- contained space of relationship, functional region) Design governance solutions to facilitate an integrated approach that improves the outcome of the rural-urban partnerships 20 Oct 2015 XIV All-Russian Forum, St Petersburg 5 Why are we interested in urban-rural partnerships?
  6. 6. Category of benefit observed Example of benefit Production of public goods (or “club” goods) Higher external visibility and attractiveness Exploiting local productive linkages (e.g. agro-industry) and economic complementarities Easier access to natural resources (incl. renewable energies) Strengthen territorial identity and social capital Achieve higher economies of scale Network economies (e.g. overcoming limits of small-size business environments) Higher political power, financial resources and better dialogue with other government levels Improving quality, access or economic viability of services’ provision Capacity building Improving local government capacity to carry out tasks Account for negative externalities Coordinating land use policy (e.g. sprawl issues) Limiting zero-sum competition among municipalities (e.g. tax competition) Overcoming coordination failures Setting and aligning priorities for economic development Improving local knowledge through social learning and information sharing Rurban partnership can help reaching development objectives 6
  7. 7. a) Overcoming institutional fragmentation  Potential conflicts with other existing government levels  Different political and economic weight of different partners b) Reforms and stability  Combining efficiency with legitimacy  Financial sustainability and incentive dependency c) Balancing transaction costs and human resources costs d) Accountability towards citizens  Galvanise actors towards clear, relevant and measurable objectives  Data challenge Lessons learned 20 Oct 2015 XIV All-Russian Forum, St Petersburg 7 Challenges to adopt a functional approach to policy making
  8. 8. • The formation and the effectiveness of the partnership is affected by some main “enabling” and “hindering” factors. • Main enabling factors: • Clearly defined objectives • High awareness of interdependence between urban and rural areas • Democratic participation • Leadership • Main hindering factors: • Regulatory and political barriers • Lack of trust and social capital • Policy fragmentation 20 Oct 2015 XIV All-Russian Forum, St Petersburg 8 When do rurban partnerships work?
  9. 9. GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES Intentional with delegated functions More unified rural-urban action; greater access to resources; influence on national/ regional policy makers Less flexibility; threat to local autonomy; less citizen and private sector engagement. Intentional with no delegated functions Same as above but also more scope for citizen, academia and private sector participation. Fewer resources (e.g. funding) and implementation instruments; Potential for discord between urban-rural stakeholders. Unintentional with delegated functions Facilitates a bottom-up process of rural- urban collaboration; can promote a territorial approach on rural-urban issues (multiple purpose) Indirect management of rural-urban issues (and more complex); Needs legitimacy, good evidence and comprehension of rural-urban issues. Unintentional with no delegated functions Maintains local autonomy; can address challenges on a service by service basis; can bring in relevant stakeholders as needed. Fewer resources; No one voice: no region- wide coordination; more opportunities for sectoral vs. integrated rural-urban strategies Advantages and disadvantages of the different governance models 9
  10. 10. National levels of government could: 1) promote institutional and functional integration between urban and rural areas; 2) overcome fragmentation among different sectoral policies; 3) encourage territories to self-determine their integrated strategies and projects around flexible functional geographies; 4) set a framework for a better dialogue among levels of government; and 5) establish platforms to share experiences and good practices of rural- urban partnership. Sub-national levels of government could: 1) help in setting strategic orientation (and coordinate with local levels); 2) facilitate co-operation between public and private actors; and 3) monitor the progress of rural-urban partnership. 20 Oct 2015 XIV All-Russian Forum, St Petersburg 10 A strategy to build effective and sustainable rurban partnerships
  11. 11. СПАСИБО ЗА ВНИМАНИЕ 20 Oct 2015 XIV All-Russian Forum, St Petersburg 11