know your regions by espon – some (Swedish) experiences

1. know your regions by espon – some (Swedish) experiences ‘ESPON on the Road’ Event, KTH 25th November 2014 Mats Johansson, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm mats.johansson@abe.kth.se

2. Mats Johansson (KTH and Swedish ECP) presented ESPON – background and some experiences for the Master students

3. ESPON – what’s that?Introduction and background • ESPON 2006 (2002-2006) European Spatial Planning Observation Network • ESPON 2013 (2007-2013): European Observation Network on Territorial Development and Cohesion • Participants: The EU-countries + Norway, Switzerland, Iceland and Lichtenstein • In ESPON 2013 (71 projects) • P1. Applied research (25 projects) • P2. Targeted analyses, client demand based, stakeholder initiated (23) • P3. Scientific platform, data and scientific support (15) • P4. Transnational networking activities, dissemination (8) • News for ESPON 2013/2020: Regional and local actors highlighted

4. ESPON programmes, projects and links ESPON 2006 Programme – The European Spatial Planning Observation Network http://www.espon.eu/main/Menu_Projects/Menu_ESPON2006Projects/Menu_ThematicProjects/ ESPON 2013 Programme – The European Observation Network for Territorial Development and Cohesion http://www.espon.eu/main/Menu_Programme/Menu_Mission/ ESPON 1.1.4 – Spatial Effects of Demographic Trends and Migration (2006 ) EDORA - European Development Opportunities for Rural Areas (2013) DEMIFER- Demographic and Migratory Flows Affecting European Regions and Cities (2013) TOWN – Small and medium-sized towns (2014) SEMIGRA - Selective Migration and Unbalanced Sex Ratio in Rural Regions (Västernorrland one of the stakeholders)(2013)

5. PRIORITY 4 Transnational Networking Activity ESPON on the ROAD • Involves 19 ECPs (ESPON Contact Points) which make it possible to cover the diversity of policy challenges and interest in different parts of Europe. • Has a high level of output based on common material for the ECP activities (the road show) that can be adapted to the transnational/ national/ local context by the Transnational Working Groups (TWGs). • Is built on an appropriate management structure with a Lead Partner and 4 TWGs. • Macro-regional approach as well as strong links with the local level and seeks to involve new users of ESPON. • Includes PR and journalistic support to the outreach activities proposed and intends to make use of translation and social media.

6. Some Swedish and European Experiences Point of departure 1: What can ESPON do for your region? Point of departure 2: A European perspective A regional perspective – a disaggragated approach Here - some Swedish and European experiences

7. Commuting links and regional enlargement in Sweden Based on the ESPON/TOWN project. Case Study: Northern Sweden ‘ESPON on the Road’ Event, KTH 25th November 2014 Mats Johansson Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), Division of Urban and Regional Studies Stockholm

8. The TOWN-project: Objectives • The main objective is to identify small and medium-sized towns that have an urban centre with a population between 5 000 and 50 000 inhabitants. • Provide evidence on the roles and functions of small and medium sized towns in their territorial contexts. The conditions for development and the functions that the small and medium-sized towns perform in these territorial contexts are significantly different. • The analysis will be done by using commuting data in order to identify functional local labour markets.

9. The TOWN-project: Envisaged main results • A methodological framework for studying small and medium-sized towns in their functional area contexts. Commuting flows and links. • Evidence of good practices based on 10 case studies of small and medium sized towns in various territorial contexts that support the functional development of small and medium-sized towns (incl. four towns in Northern Sweden). • Policy considerations based on the findings and evidence from the analyses and case-studies with focus on the development and functions of small and medium sized towns. This is done – at least for Northern Sweden –by interviews with different kinds of policy-makers.

10. The TOWN-project: Policy questions • What kind of roles and functions do small and medium sized towns perform in the European territorial structure, e.g. as providers of employment, growth and services of general interest, that contribute to the Europe 2020 Strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth? • What are the potentials and barriers for development of small and medium sized towns in different territorial contexts, and how can policy at different levels unleash the potentials and diminish the barriers in ways that strengthen their functional character? • What type of governance and cooperation arrangements exist at various levels aiming to support the development of small and medium-sized towns and their territorial context, and how can policy further support these types of arrangements in order to strengthen their contribution to a more balanced territorial development of the European regions?

11. Points of departure:The municipality structures within the ESPON Space • The numbers of municipalities (LAU2) vary largely between the various countries. • France 36683 (max) • Lichtenstein 11 (min) • Sweden 290 (large municipalities in a wide country) • Lithuania 518 • Depending of population size areal size defintions administration and administrative reforms tradition The result with relevance for commuting and functional local labour markets varies thus a lot: In densely populated countries: more commuting over municipality borders In sparsely (and geographically wide) countries the preconditions for commuting is quite different.

12. Functional Urban Areas (FUAs) in EU29 Source: ESPON2006, Project1.1.4 • Pentagon: • densely populated, • many FUAs, • polycentric development • The Nordic periphery (Sweden): • sparsely populated, • only a few large FUAs, • monocentric • development, • weak preconditions for polycentricity • an effect of the wide and sparsely populated country?

13. The extended OECD urban- rural typology 2010Source: Dijkstra & Poelman 2010, EDORA 2010 Pentagon: urban and densely populated areas The Northern Periphery: predominantly rural with few exceptions Long distances – low accessibility - hamper commuting – monocentric structures – asymmetrical commuting flows Be care: the different sizes of the regions (NUTS3: scale problems)

14. Towns in Europe. ‘Degrees of urbanisation’ in Europe are characterised by three main types (TOWN, 2011): • 1) countries with a prevalence of urbanised population clustered in high-density urban centres: Belgium, Switzerland, Greece, the Netherlands, Spain, the UK, as well as smaller island states as Malta and Cyprus; • 2) countries with more balanced repartition of population between classes of high-density urban clusters and small and medium towns: Austria, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Italy, Latvia, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Sweden and Slovenia; • 3) Countries with an overrepresentation of population living in smaller settlements: France, Hungary, Ireland, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Norway and Slovakia.

15. Urban settlement structures across Europe The brown field: In the Northern Periphery: ”Other population settlement as prevailing type” (TOWN) – geographically wide municipalities with small urban centres and villages (Sweden). But also in other settlement structures as France, Ireland, Poland and the Baltic States. The red fields: a few medium-sized towns dominate the settlement pattern but it is different in the south (short distances) and in the north (long distances). Impact on commuting! Blue fields: High density urban clusters – an effect of population concentration Yellow fields: ”Very small towns as prevailing type”. A scattered picture, mostly in the Balkan Countries.

16. Swedish rank-size: Dominance of a few large towns Three large metro areas dominate! Three large functional labour markets. The majority of the towns and municipalities have less than 50 000 inhabitants. Monocentric urban structure

17. (Northern) Sweden in Europe Sweden is a sparsely populated country and Northern Sweden is extremely sparsely populated. Out-migration vs in-migration regions and municipalities This has impact on the urban and municipal structures with large spacious municipalities in the Northern Sweden with few inhabitants and low population density. Depopulation! Important: Compared to the EU – Sweden has only 290 towns/municipalities

18. Swedish NUTS1 regions and the localization of the four case study towns Kiruna Östersund Timrå Avesta

19. A schematic view of community structures in large parts of the EU

20. The Northern Periphery and (Northern) Sweden: Sparsely populated geographically wide communities consisting of both urban and rural areas

21. ”Regional enlargement” in Sweden: Creating functional local labour markets based on commuting flows (only three links!) between municipalities Swedish criteria for “independence”: P1: General condition, total out-commuting less than 20 % P2: Specific condition, out-commuting to a special town less than 7,5 % The chains are broken after three links!!!

22. Construction of Swedish functional labour markets based on commuting flows E.g.: 11 Malmö (metro), 20c Helsingborg (large town), 30c Ängelholm (small town), 50c Båstad (small municipality)

23. offentliga transfereringar f ö r den dagliga verksamheten . Att i dessa omr å den tala om f ö ruts ä ttningar f ö r regionf ö rstoring och flerk ä rniga Figur 7. En schematisk framst ä llning av regionf ö rstoring och olika boendestrukturer faller s å ledes mer eller mindre p å sin egen orimlighet . Stora hierarkiskt polycentriska arbetsmarknader boendem ö nster med flerk ä rniga boendestrukturer Lokala arbetsmarknader, boendem ö nster och regionf ö rstoring – en schematiserad framst ä llning Komplement ä ra polycentriska lokala arbets - marknader med flerk ä rniga boendestrukturer Avl ä gsna och isolerade monocentriska lokala arbetsmarknader med glest boendem ö nster Different types of functional local labour markets in Sweden Asymmetrical commuting structures in metropolitan or big city areas. One dominant town, monocentric structures but regional enlargement. E.g. The Stockholm-region, the Gothenburg-region and the Malmö/Lund-region. Small symmetrical commuting structures. Polycentric settlement structures, small and medium-sized localities in “densely” populated regions. Regional enlargement. E.g. in Southern Sweden, in the corridor Stockholm-Gothenburg. Isolated small towns and municipalities in sparsely populated areas. Too long distances for commuting. Internal monocentric structures. Dependent of on municipal centre. No or weak preconditions for regional enlargement. E.g. Northern Sweden, especially Norrland’s interior. Kiruna is a typical case.

24. Regional enlargement in Sweden 1970-2010. Functional local labour markets (LAU1), numbers Business cycles variations, connections with economic growth Good times – fast regional enlargement, bad times – a slow-down of regional enlargement Reduce the mismatch on the labour market – better internal cohesion Note: the regional enlargement can’t continue in absurdum, break after the third link

25. Functional local labour markets in Sweden, 2010 Geographic pattern The north-south divide!! In the northern part of Northern Sweden the majority of LAU1s consists of only one municipality. Monocentric structures Exceptions: The Bothnia Coast Line Esp. Umeå and Luleå LMs (but also monocentric) In southern part of Sweden (Skåne). More polycentric structures! Why?: Densely vs sparsely populated areas. Wide vs tight municipalities impact on: Distances between urban centres Infrastucture Accessiblity Commuting flows – symmetrical or asymmetrical

26. Summing-up (Sweden): Commuting, functional local labour markets and regional enlargement Preconditions: • Accessibility • Good infrastructure • More commuting • Changing employment and working conditions • Fewer labour market related migratory movements • More settlement related migratory movements Results: • Larger functional local markets • Living and working more separated geographically • Better labour market matching – less segmentation • Stimulate economic growth • Stimulated by economic growth • But: large differences between Southern (leading), where most of the people live, and Northern (lagging) Sweden Problems: • Gender segregation? • Environment problems?

27. Demographic change and urban-rural relationsBased on the EDORA and SEMIGRA projects. ‘ESPON on the Road’ Event, KTH 25th November 2014 Mats Johansson Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), Division of Urban and Regional Studies Stockholm

28. Urban – rural relations in EuropeDemographic change: Based on two typologies The demographictypology (from ESPON 1.1.4, updated 2009/2014, alsoused in EDORA)) Based on the demographicequation: Total population change = (births – deaths) + (in-migration – out-migration) The structuraltypology (from ESPON EDORA) a new urban-rural delimitation of the European regions, based on 13 economic and structural variables. Focused on economic restructuring Five types of urban-rural regions were distinguished: • Predominately Urban, • Agrarian, • Consumption Countryside, • Diversified with Strong Secondary Sector and • Diversified with Strong Market Services Sector

29. The Demographic Typology . A schematic typology with regard to sustainable demographic development. Six types. Point of departure: “The demographic equation” PT=PN+PM PT: total population change, PM: net-migration PN: natural population change, TFR: Total Fertility Rate

30. The DemographicTypology 2003-2008 Type 1 (best case): Pentagon, Ireland and Iceland, Metropolitan areas Spain, France and Italy – today in-migration areas Type 6 (worst case): Northern periphery but better than in the end of the 90s, but still problematic The Baltic States and Eastern Europe, esp. Bg and Ro, and Eastern Germany – more problematic than in the end of the 1990s The divergent processes between East and West have been accentuated! The east-west divide even more highlighted!!! Migration is the prime driver behind regional population changes – both in positive and negative senses! Migration and natural population change reinforced each other – the age structure!

31. Growing and shrinking regions in Europe 2001-2012, N=1294 Source: Johansson M, Nilsson P & Westlund H (2014) Type 1 (best case): Pentagon and Ireland, Southern Spain, Metropolitan areas (even in problematic areas) Spain, France and Italy – today in-migration areas Type 6 (worst case): parts of Sweden but better than in the end of the 1990s, but still problematic The Baltic States and Eastern Europe, esp. Bg and Ro, and Eastern Germany – more problematic than in the end of the 1990s. Accentuated population shrinkage! The divergent processes between East and West have been accentuated! Migration is the prime driver behind regional population changes – both in positive and negative ways! Migration and natural population change reinforce each other – the age structure!

33. Rural or “Non-Urban”? Keep in mind: The EDORA structural typology is not a pure typology of Rural Areas – two reasons: • Rural areas do not function separately from adjacent urban areas – they are connected by a dense web of interactions. • Smallest practicable data units are NUTS 3 and most of these contain sizable towns/cities. It is more a typology of Intermediate and Predominantly Rural Regions. But: It covers the whole “Espon space” (excl Iceland)

34. Some Generalisations which emerge from the EDORA Typologies • Agrarian regions are mainly concentrated in an arc stretching around the eastern and southern edges of the EU27. Agrarian regions are retarding and low performers (depleting). • The rest of the European space is a patchwork of Consumption Countryside, Diversified (Secondary) and Diversified (Private Services). • Diversified (Secondary) regions tend to be relatively low performers, (dual character, matured structure, deindustrialisation, depleting). • The Consumption Countryside (large public services, large consumption) regions and the Diversified (Market Oriented Private Services) group are both high performers, and likely to continue to “accumulate” in the future.

35. Sustainable population change in the four non-urban EDORA Structural types for the period 2001-2012 (NUTS3).Source: Johansson M, Nilsson P & Westlund H (2014) Agrarian: Eastern Europe and Balkan – shrinking, depopulation. Spain and some other parts, expanding (changing structure?) Consumption Countryside: The largest group - split picture Div 3: Old rural industrial regions retarding in Mid-Europe, expanding in the western parts (small group) Div 4: Expanding in western Europe, the “new rurality”, rural gentrification, “knowledge-based” activities?

36. Concluding remarks – demographic change and urban-rural relations • The east-west divide is accentuated!!! • Urban regions – sustainable population development • Some correspondence between the rural typologies at the extremes: • Agrarian = low demographic sustainability, in Eastern Europe. • Diversified (Private Services) = high demographic sustainability, in Western Europe, the New Rural Economy. • Intermediate categories (Consumption Countryside and Diversified –industrial regions) more mixed picture. • Are structural patterns more a function of local preconditions and more fine-grained geographically - the macro-scale patterns replaced by micro-scale variations? • Will patterns of demographic variation follow the same development path? The answer is to be found in more regional disaggregation.

37. SEMIGRA: Formalities and Background SEMIGRA (Selective Migration and Unbalanced Sex Ratio in Rural Regions) is an ESPON Priority2 project. P2-projects: Demand and client oriented projects. SEEMIGRA. Stakeholders and case studies: Region Sachsen-Anhalt (lead stakeholder), GE Region Västernorrland, SE Region Kainuu, FI Region Alföld, HU Region Magyarország, HU Lead partner: IFL, Leibniz Institute for Regional Geography, Leipzig

38. A life cycle approach (from a rural point of view) • Focus: Young women (18-34) in (rural) areas - • three phases with differing migration patterns • Aim: Comparing depopulating Västernorrland (Y-county) with the expanding and dynamic Stockholm region (AB-county). • From a rural point of view • Phase 1: Women leaving home for studies and labour market • entries (18-24 years). Huge out- and in-migration. • Phase 2: Women after finalized studies but in beginning of labour • market careers (25-29 years). Lower migration intensities. • Some return migration. • Phase 3: Women with foothold on the labour market and in the household • creating ages (30-34 years). Dropping intensities. • Return migration. Social networks. “Love and marriage” • Data • Gross Migration Data (Statistics Sweden) • Expert interviews (Y-county) • In-depth interviews with young female in-migrants (newcomers and return migrants) to Y-county • A Youth Survey about the future

39. Swedish experiences (cases) – two differing regions (counties), Stockholm (AB) vs Västernorrland (Y) Y: Stagnating Industrial region High unemployment Unsustainable population development One big city dominates - monocentrism Rural exodus Young people on the run Low reproduction potentials Intra-regional dualism –the big city vs all other ’towns’ AB: Expanding Post-industriell Low unemployment Sustainable population development in all municipalities Monocentric structure Increased dualism in the enlarged Stckholm region

40. Summing-up: Young women on the run – myth or reality? High in-migration in both cases – in metropolitan Stockholm as well as in the ”rural” and sparsely populated industrial Västernorrland! A big difference is the high turnover in Västernorrland. In-migration creates out-migration?Or out-migration creates in-migration some years later? Out-migration creates eroding reproduction potentials The problem is more the high out-migration than low in-migration (that is at the same level as for Stockholm) Another problem is the dual characterof the region – only Sundsvall (the big city withuniversity) has net in-migration. Young women from the interior to the big city (studies, female-friendly labour market, dual labour market coast/interior). Truth : Accentuatesthe dual structure! Reality: huge out-migration in the ages 18-24. Result – net out-migration of younger women (18-34)but not for the ages 25 and over. Myth: Out-migration in the ages 25 and over - false. Reality – in-migration. Result – in-migration in the family creating ages, positive for natural population change (increasing reproduction potentials) Recommendation – stimulate in-migration in the ages 25 and over. Income spin-offs? Increasing reproduction potentials. Precondition: female-friendly diversified labour markets, no “macho” image, good schools, good communications, etc. Important for recruitment of well educated young women (return after studies).

41. Thanks for attention Questions, comments, critics?