Cpmr in the world from periphery to interface communication at cpmr conference bayonne 3 oct 2008
Download
1 / 64

Claude GRASLAND & the members of the project ESPON 3.4.1” Europe in the World” - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 78 Views
  • Uploaded on

Claude GRASLAND & the members of the project ESPON 3.4.1” Europe in the World”

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Claude GRASLAND & the members of the project ESPON 3.4.1” Europe in the World”' - merrill-donaldson


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Cpmr in the world from periphery to interface communication at cpmr conference bayonne 3 oct 2008

Claude GRASLAND

&

the members of the project

ESPON 3.4.1” Europe in the World”

RIATE : B. Corminboeuf, C. Didelon, N. Lambert, I. Salmon, C. Dupuy-Levy - IGEAT : L. Aujean, G. Van Hammes, P. Medina, C. Vandermotten - ITPS: M. Johansson, D. Rauhut -LADYSS : P. Beckouche, Y. Richard, G. Motte -UMR Géographie-cités : N. Cattan, C. Grasland, C. Grataloup, G. Lesecq, C. Zanin - CRS HAS: G. Barta - TIGRIS O. Groza, ETH Zurich : M. Keiner -GRUPO SOGES : A. Vanolo – ORMES : M. Charef, A. Whabi – NORDREGIO : C. Smith

CPMR IN THE WORLD : From Periphery to Interface ?Communication at CPMR conferenceBayonne, 3 Oct. 2008


Introduction 2 questions about cpmr
INTRODUCTION2 questions about CPMR


Question 1 what is a peripheral region
Question 1 : What is a “peripheral” region ?

So … a peripheral region is a region of EU located out of the « pentagon », but …


Question 1 what is a peripheral region1
Question 1 : What is a “peripheral” region ?

"We in Poland make a distinction between the southern dimension and the eastern dimension [of the ENP] and it consists in this -- to the south, we have neighbors of Europe, to the east we have European neighbors," Sikorski said.


Question 2 what is territorial cohesion
Question 2 : What is «territorial cohesion » ?

  • « Territorial cohesion is related to mechanism of solidarity between territories at different spatial scales:

  • States belonging to the same political entity

  • Regions belonging to the same political entity

  • Regions of the same state

  • Territories of the same region

  • Places of the same urban territory »

  • Technical note of the general secretary of CPMR about « Territorial cohesion », May 2008


Question 2 what is territorial cohesion1
Question 2 : What is «territorial cohesion » ?


Question 2 what is territorial cohesion2
Question 2 : What is «territorial cohesion » ?


Question 2 what is territorial cohesion3
Question 2 : What is «territorial cohesion » ?


Question 2 what is territorial cohesion4
Question 2 : What is «territorial cohesion » ?


Question 2 what is territorial cohesion5
Question 2 : What is «territorial cohesion » ?


Question 2 what is territorial cohesion6
Question 2 : What is «territorial cohesion » ?


PLAN

  • Mental maps & Political visions

  • European « Neighbourhood »

  • Proposals for EU & CPMR

Jan. 2008 Dec. 2008


Part i mental maps and political visions
PART IMENTAL MAPS AND POLITICAL VISIONS


Question 1 draw on the following map a line defining your delimitation of europe
Question 1 : Draw on the following map a line defining YOUR delimitation of Europe ?




Question 2 draw on the following map lines defining your division of the world in 2 to 15 regions
Question 2 : Draw on the following map lines defining YOUR division of the World in 2 to 15 regions



Groënland

Russia

Turkey

Northern

Africa


Part II

DEFINITION OF

ESPON (EU27+2) NEIGHBOURHOOD












Type a integration ukrainia tunisia russia turkey
Type A : Integration(Ukrainia, Tunisia, Russia, Turkey, …)

  • States localised in the immediate neighbourhood of EU+2 whose trade and air relations are strongly polarised by EU+2.

  • They do not necessary share a common language or religion but they are fully integrated to EU+2 from functional point of view and their delimitation fit to the area of the neighbourhood policy

  • What is at stake is not the question of membership to EU or belonging to “Europe” but the existence of an area of cooperation based on proximity and complementarities.


Type b responsability cameroon nigeria senegal congo
Type B : Responsability(Cameroon, Nigeria, Senegal, Congo, …)

  • States for which EU+2 has a great responsibility in their future development.

  • First because the historical responsibility of colonization and exploitation of African countries.

  • Second because Africa could be a major centre of the World production in the future and its young population will be an opportunity.

  • Many other world powers are actually investing in this area (Japan, China, Brazil, USA, …) and the historical influence of Europe is decreasing very quickly.


Type c opportunity usa australia brazil india isra l
Type C : Opportunity(USA, Australia, Brazil, India, Israël, …)

  • Countries located at relatively long distance from EU+2 but sharing a common language or a common history.

  • They could be very precious allies for EU+2 in a global World were services represented the major part of added value and where scientific and cultural innovations are major factors of long term development.

  • Concern English speaking developed countries like USA, Canada, Australia or New Zealand which has always been in strong relation with European countries (both politically and economically),

  • But also emerging countries (India, Brazil, Mexico) which are crucial strategic partners for the future of Europe as they are actually relatively independent from the influence of other major competitors of European Union (China, Japan, USA).


Type d challenge china japan saudi arabia iran iraq
Type D : Challenge(China, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq…)

  • Countries on which EU+2 is less able to have an influence or to develop easily relations because of differences of languages, geographical distance, weakness of historical relations...

  • But those countries are located in a space where energetic resources are great and the economies are the most dynamic.

  • EU+2 countries and firms are actually very attracted and fascinated by this part of the World where they try to invest and to gain positions.

  • But we can really ask if it is a reasonable strategy in long term. The geopolitical and cultural influence of EU+2 countries is indeed particularly week in this part of the world and they have no controls on what could happen in case of economic and political crisis.


Part iii which proposals for eu in general and for peripheral regions in particular
PART IIIWHICH PROPOSALSFOR EU (in general) AND FOR PERIPHERAL REGIONS (in particular)?
















Expected impact of the continent vision
Expected impact of the European territory“Continent vision”

  • Territorial assets:(i) Trans European Networks implemented at a large European scale(ii) Central & Eastern European benefit from Western subsidies and FDI(iii) The Regional Policy focuses on CEEC’s less developed areas

  • Shortcomings:(i) negative impact on EU’s peripheral territories (Eastward, e.g. Baltic States are no more the interface between Russia and UE; and Southward)(ii) Eastern markets are not sufficien per se for Western investors(iii) Europe as a « great Swiss »



Expected impact of the centre periphery vision
Expected impact of the EU / neighbourhood pattern “Centre-Periphery” vision

  • Assets:(i) a greater euromediterranean integration, despite dissymmetrical (2010 FTZ)(ii) Mediterranean European territories are boosted(iii) Europe catches up with Asian and American counterparts (although not on the high-tech base of the Lisbon strategy)

  • Shortcomings:(i) the relocation of the environmental burden on the southern shore of the Mediterranean is not sustainable(iii) no de-pollution of the Mediterranean(iii) no change in the migration mix: lowly educated migrants toward mediterranean Europe(iv) Southern brain drain is not stopped(v) North Africa as the Europe’s gatekeeper against poor African migrants



Expected impact of the archipelago vision
Expected impact of the polarisation “Archipelago” vision

  • Assets:(i) major European cities become highly internationalized metropolitan areas(ii) Western countries benefit much from such international metropolis(iii) these Wetern metropolis are most integrated in a top urban network

  • Shortcomings:(i) increase of territorial disparities in Europe(ii) Eastern member states rapidly loose their competitive advantage (rise of costs in their capital cities)(iii) dramatic destabilisation of the Med neighbours (rough 2010 liberalisation)(iv)Border: toward the « continent » vision



Expected impact of the north south region vision
Expected impact of the pro-active scenario“North-South Region” vision

  • Assets:(i) Complementarity between Europe (capital, know how) and its neighbours (markets, labour forces)(ii) a regulated relationship (trade agreements but also environment, labour rights, …)(iii) Europe peripheral territories are boosted(iv) the European region becomes the major one in the World

  • Shortcomings: 0 (it’s politics, stupid !)


Conclusion 2 answers to cpmr
CONCLUSION pro-active scenario2 answers to CPMR


TERRITORIAL COHESION ? pro-active scenario

Toward multiscalar governance

GLOBAL/ EUROPEAN

CONTEXT

+

EUROPEAN / NEIGHBOURHOOD

CONTEXT

+

EUROPEAN/ NATIONAL/REGIONAL CONTEXT

+

NATIONAL/REGIONAL/ LOCAL CONTEXT


RETHINKING CPMR ? pro-active scenario

From peripheries to interface


Thank you for your attention
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION ! pro-active scenario


ad