Indicators and perspectives for services of general interest

1. Indicators and perspectives for services of general interest in territorial cohesion and development (SeGI). Preliminary findings on ICT services ESPON OPEN SEMINAR 2012 ESPON territorial evidence meeting the thematic objectives of the draft “Common Strategic Framework 2014-2020” Parallel workshop session 2 Dariusz Swiatek, IGSO PAS

2. Indicators and perspectives for services of general interest in territorial cohesion and development (SeGI) • Applied Research Projects, conducted under Priority 1 of the ESPON 2013 Programme • TGP: • Royal Institute of Technology – Sweden (Lead Partner), • Universitat Wien - Austria, • Das Bundesinstitut für Bau-, Stadt- und Raumforschung (BBSR) - Germany, • Centro Estudos Geograficos, Universidade de Lisboa – Portugal, • University of Akureyri - Iceland, • NorskInstitutt for by- ogregionforskning (NIBR) – Norway, • Institute of Geography and Spatial Organization PAS – Poland, • PlanIdea Knowledge Centre - Hungary, • Academy of Economic Studies of Bucharest - Romania, • Navarra de Suelo y Vivienda S.A.U. –Spain, • University of the West of England - UK. • The aim of the project is to deliver an overview of the current territorial situation of services of general interest in Europe, in particular focusing on: • existing definitions and classifications • indicators • mapping the current situation (e.g. studying the distribution). • studying territorial development potentials and constraints, focusing on current trends, as well as different territorial development paths of services of general interest.

3. Indicators and perspectives for services of general interest in territorial cohesion and development (SeGI) – case studies • nine differentiated case studies • two levels (national; regional)

4. Services of General Interests – ICT National context • The disparities in the level of provision of SGI in the studied countries and regions present the challenge for cohesion in the European Union (regarding the SGI subject). • ICT services are differentiated however in some countries differentiation is larger on countries level (e.g. Scandinavia) and in the others in regional level (new accession countries) • Territorial aspects as mountainous or remote areas influence the distribution of ICT mainly due to the relation with demographic density. Agglomerations and counties/towns centres retain higher levels of access to this type of services. • Conditioning the proper access to services appears to be the achievement of a complementarity between services provided by public and private entities. This happens in some countries, while in others, the two types of entities are rather competing instead of complementing each other (Poland, Romania).

5. Agenda Services of general interest ICT (Mazowsze) Number of IP numbers per 1000 inhabitants No. of people who submitted tax declaration per 1000 inhabitants Providers of broadband Internet per 1000 inhabitants

6. Agenda Services of general interest ICT (Mazowsze) – questionnaire survey • Subjective perception of quality and availability/accessibility to ICT services is slightly different than statistical data (generally worse) • No difference between provision of ICT services for households/individuals and businesses (question of affordability and competences) • Even though infrastructure is present in the region it does not mean that provision on local scale is sufficient (e.g. quality problem) • IDI: • - ‘Demand for ICT services is increasing, the possibilities of supply from the public sector is decreasing’ • - ‘Need for locally/regionally shaped mechanisms which should insure provision of ICT services on less populate areas’ Quality of existing Internet connection • ICT infrastructure needs: • building the network (green) • renovating and building (blue) • lack of needs (yellow) • no answer (gray)

7. Agenda Services of general interest ICT (Mazowsze) – preliminary conclusions • Quality of ICT services does not depend highly on traditional determinants of quality of services of general interests: geographical, historical, institutional, living standard & competences, accessibility / infrastructure • ICT infrastructure is developing however accessibility to ICT is also determined by affordability and competences • In some examples local contextual ‘bottlenecks’ create access barriers for ICT services even if they are evenly spread in the space • ICT infrastructure is successfully complementing or substituting other services of general interests (e.g. transport, education, health care) however economic conditions and competences need to be taken to consideration in this process • Need for coordination of ICT development with various types of services (particularly such as public transport).

8. Agenda Thank you