FOR REGIONAL D EVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "FOR REGIONAL D EVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT"

Heather Johnston
7 years ago
Views:

1 OECD Competitiveness FOR REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT

2 REGIONAL COMPETITIVENESS 1. Trends 2. A new paradigm for regional policies

3 TRENDS IN REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT Disparities Persisting But Changing gprofile

4 GDP per capita in Italian provinces ( ) Years

5 LLMAs by employment rate dynamic areas

6 TRENDS IN REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT Disparities Concentration Persisting May help But Changing profile But Is it sufficient?

OECD Metropolitan database Population - 5,000,000 10,000,000 15,000,000 20,000,000 25,000,000 30,000,000 35,000,000 Tokyo Seoul New York Mexico City Osaka Rhine-Ruhr Los Angeles United Nations

Sydney San Francisco Ankara Athens Brussels Rome Phoenix Melbourne Guadalajara Montreal Izmir Seattle Monterrey Minneapolis Naples Warsow San Diego Budapest St.

7 OECD Metropolitan database Population - 5,000,000 10,000,000 15,000,000 20,000,000 25,000,000 30,000,000 35,000,000 Tokyo Seoul New York Mexico City Osaka Rhine-Ruhr Los Angeles United Nations Istanbul Chicago Aichi Megacities Randstad-Holland London OECD Philadelphia Dallas Madrid Frankfurt Miam i OECD Average Houston Washington Fukuoka Barcelona Atlanta Toronto Hamburg Detroit Boston Sydney San Francisco Ankara Athens Brussels Rome Phoenix Melbourne Guadalajara Montreal Izmir Seattle Monterrey Minneapolis Naples Warsow San Diego Budapest St. Louis Lisbon Stuttgart Baltimore Tampa Bay Birmingham Lille Daegu Manchester Zurich Pittsburgh Copenhaguen Denver Prague Valencia Turin Vienna Stockholm Krakow Cleveland Puebla Leeds Portland Vancouver Helsinki Oslo Lyon Auckland A common OECD Definition for metro-regions based on functional areas 78 metro-regions with more than 1.5 million inhabitants

8 Key messages from the horizontal report 5,000 4,500 Rural Population Urban Population Urbanization: the Challenge of the New Century 4,000 3,500 Millions of People 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1, By 2007, the world will have more urban residents than rural residents for the first time in history (United Nations, 2003) Metropolitan regions: Key actors of national economies 1990 Higher GDP per capita Higher productivity Higher employment Size matters: Positive correlation between population size and income -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% 140% 160% Warsow Monterrey Istanbul Budapest London San Francisco Izmir Washington Prague Mexico City Ankara Lisbon Boston Guadalajara Puebla Seattle Stuttgart Minneapolis New York Stockholm Denver Vienna Philadelphia Auckland Madrid Dallas Rome Frankfurt Lyon Brussels Helsinki Toronto Turin Atlanta Houston San Diego OECD Average Chicago Los Angeles Hamburg Tokyo Barcelona Copenhaguen Aichi Sydney Detroit Randstad Vancouver Baltimore Cleveland Athens Portland Melbourne Osaka St. Louis Rhein-Ruhr Montreal Phoenix Krakow Seoul Zurich Pittsburgh Oslo Valencia Birmingham Leeds Tampa Bay Miami Manchester Fukuoka Lille Naples Daegu -20.0% 0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0% 120.0% Monterrey Warsow Boston London San Francisco Mexico City Lisbon Istanbul New York Prague Puebla Budapest Vienna Washington Guadalajara San Diego Seattle Ankara Los Angeles Houston Philadelphia Hamburg Dallas Lyon Frankfurt Rome Izmir Denver Stuttgart Turin Atlanta Stockholm Chicago Detroit OECD Average Auckland Brussels Minneapolis Rhein-Ruhr Tokyo Portland Baltimore Zurich Osaka Mdid Madrid Aichi Copenhaguen Helsinki Phoenix Randstad-Holland Birmingham Miami Sydney St. Louis Cleveland Barcelona Toronto Melbourne Seoul Manchester Tampa Bay Leeds Vancouver Montreal Fukuoka Athens Oslo Naples Krakow Valencia Lille Pittsburgh Izmir Ankara Istanbul Budapest Guadalajara Monterrey Puebla Mexico City Warsow Turin Rome Seoul Daegu Krakow Brussels Athens Madrid Prague Stuttgart Lyon Barcelona Aichi Valencia Frankfurt Tokyo Helsinki Sydney Washington Tampa Bay Miami Fukuoka Hamburg Osaka Melbourne Lille San Diego Rhein-Ruhr Lisbon Vienna Baltimore San Francisco Minneapolis Seattle Phoenix Philadelphia Boston Los Angeles Atlanta Dallas Naples NewYork Portland Denver St. Louis Houston Chicago Cleveland Manchester Pittsburgh* Randstad Leeds Auckland Vancouver Detroit Stockholm Birmingham Toronto Zurich London Oslo Copenhaguen Montreal 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% Than the national average - USD) Per Capita GDP in PPPs (U 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 Denver Leeds Puebla Krakow Seattle Lyon Copenhagen San Francisco Phoenix Sydney Lille Athens Monterrey Ankara Boston Atlanta Detroit Washington DC Philadelphia Madrid Barcelona Fukuoka London Chicago Randstad-Holland Aichi - 2,000,000 4,000,000 6,000,000 8,000,000 10,000,000 Population

9 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% -5% Key messages from the horizontal report But Metro-regions regions not Always Synonymous With Success!! GDP and productivity growth not always higher than national averages National productivity grow th Metro-region productivity grow th 6% 4% 2% 0% -2% -4% -6% Krakow Budapest Seoul Vienna Stuttgart Helsinki Daegu Hamburg Brussels Osaka enhaguen Fukuoka Tokyo Izmir Athens Aichi Frankfurt Lyon Ankara Oslo Rhine-Ruhr Turin Lille Rome Naples Barcelona ad-holland Istanbul Stockholm Valencia Madrid Prague Productivity Growth Osaka Vienna Istanbul Rhine-Ruhr Barcelona Athens Izmir Krakow Daegu Budapest Ma Bi Co Randsta London Prague Leeds anchester irmingham Naples Stockholm Rome Lyon Warsow Turin Stuttgart Helsinki Tokyo Fukuoka Lisbon Valencia Madrid penhagen Aichi Frankfurt Lille Brussels Seoul Oslo Ankara Hamburg ad-holland R Cope Randsta 50,000 45,000 40,000 35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 London Chicago Los Angeles Randstad-Holland Aichi Rhine-Ruhr Osaka Seoul Tokyo Bigger means richer but not after 6 million inhabitants apita GDP in PPPs (USD) 15,000 Mexico City 10,000 Istanbul 5,000 5,000,000 10,000,000 15,000,000 20,000,000 25,000,000 30,000,000 35,000,000 Population - Per Ca

10 Key messages from the horizontal report The Urban Paradox Growth and Unemployment Persistence of high pockets of unemployment 12% 10% On third of metro-regions have higher unemployment rate than their national averages Lower activity rates in urban regions (44.3%) than intermediate (49.7%) and rural (44.5%) 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% -2% -4% -6% Wealth and Poverty -8% Naples Lille Vienna London Detroit Birmingham Montreal Osaka Fukuoka Lisbon Daegu Seoul Pittsburgh Cleveland Rhine-Ruhr Brussels Houston Chicago Tokyo St. Louis Oslo Auckland Melbourne Randstad-Holland Leeds Valencia Hamburg Portland Denver Toronto Manchester Copenhaguen OECD Average New York Lyon Rome Dallas Barcelona Atlanta Los Angeles Stockholm Aichi Sydney Boston Philadelphia Seattle Phoenix San Francisco Minneapolis Baltimore Athens Vancouver Budapest San Diego Turin Zurich Frankfurt Miami Helsinki Tampa Bay Washington Krakow Stuttgart Prague Madrid Warsow High level of poverty in all types of metro-regions regions (e.g. g about 50% in Mexico City, 22% in Rotterdam, 15% in ) Criminality (30% higher in urban regions) Predominantly Urban Intermediate predominantly Rural 4 4 g=1) Spatial polarisation (in 10 OECD me against persons (country avg countries, up to 10% of the population live in distressed areas) Exclusion l i of immigrants i 1 0 United States Korea Sweden United Kingdom France OECD Average Denmark Japan Switzerland Netherlands Austria Italy Mexico Spain Slovak Rep Poland Hungary Australia Greece Cri

11 Initial GDP per capita and annual average growth rates in GDP per capita among 78 metro-regions, regions, 1995 and II San Francisco Washington I Atlanta n PPP per capita GDP i Initial III Detroit San Diego Turin Athens Budapest Mexico City Puebla Guadalajara Krakow Daegu -3.0% -2.0% -1.0% 0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% IV Average annual growth rates in GDP per capita in PPP Source: OECD metropolitan database

12 TRENDS IN REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT Disparities Concentration Concentration Persisting May help May help But Changing profile But Is it sufficient? But Is it necessary?

13 Initial GDP per capita and annual average growth rates in GDP per capita among urban and rural regions, 1995 and 2005 per capita GDP in PPP Initial II III Sterea Ellada Bruxelles Inner London - West Oslo Hauts-de-Seine Luxembourg Border Komárom- Esztergom I Miasto Warszawa South-West 0-4.0% -3.0% -2.0% -1.0% 0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0% IV Predominantly Rural Predominantly Urban Average annual growth rates Source: OECD Regional database

14 TRENDS IN REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT Possibilism To enhance the competitiveness of The real economy

15 REGIONAL COMPETITIVENESS 1. Trends 2. A new paradigm for regional policies

16 PARADIGM SHIFT IN REGIONAL POLICIES Objectives Strategies Traditional Regional Policies Balancing economic performances by temporarily compensating for disparities Sectoral approach Competitiveness Enhancing Policies Tapping under-utilised regional potential for competitiveness Integrated development projects Tools Subsidies and state aids Soft and hard infrastructures At Actors Central government Different ee levels es of government

WIRE: Week of Innovative Regions in Europe Granada, 15th 17th March 2010

WIRE: Week of Innovative Regions in Europe Granada, 15th 17th March 2010 Staying Competitive in a Changing World : Regional Innovation and Cohesion Policies Present and Future Brussels 14 September 2010