1 / 10

Peter Schmitt and Lisa Van Well (Nordregio, Stockholm) ESPON Open Seminar 13 / 14 June 2012

ESPON TANGO: Territorial Approaches for New Governance. Peter Schmitt and Lisa Van Well (Nordregio, Stockholm) ESPON Open Seminar 13 / 14 June 2012 Aalborg, DK. ESPON TANGO (Priority 1 – Applied Research). Time frame: Inception Report – Dec 2011 Interim Report – June 2012

yeva
Télécharger la présentation

Peter Schmitt and Lisa Van Well (Nordregio, Stockholm) ESPON Open Seminar 13 / 14 June 2012

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ESPON TANGO: Territorial Approaches for New Governance Peter Schmitt and Lisa Van Well (Nordregio, Stockholm) ESPON Open Seminar 13 / 14 June 2012 Aalborg, DK

  2. ESPON TANGO (Priority 1 – Applied Research) Time frame: Inception Report – Dec 2011 Interim Report – June 2012 Draft Final Report/Draft Final Handbook – June 2013 Final Report and Final Handbook – Nov 2013 • Nordregio (Lead Partner) • Delft University of Technology / OTB Research • Politecnico di Torino • University of Newcastle upon Tyne • Centre for Regional Studies of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences • University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Civil and Geodetic Engineering

  3. Key objectives of ESPON TANGO Develop sound typologies of contemporary ‘Territorial Governance’ (TG) practices Examine different forms of “good” TG within 12 in-depth case studies Develop framework and explore conditions for transferability of ‘good TG practices’ Develop user-friendly handbook of good TG practices Demonstrate policy relevant options for creating better performing mechanisms for future Cohesion Policy/EU 2020

  4. (Territorial) Governance – a fuzzy concept “Still in a state of creative disorder” (Jordan) an organizing framework to understand processes, new constellations of actors, institutions and interests… (Stoker, Gualini) MLG as problematising responsibilities and competencies (Hooghe and Marks, Faludi) normative approach (EU White Paper, OECD) TG as an EU policy consideration in particular in vie w of striving for territorial cohesion (Janin Rivolin, Faludi) …

  5. TANGO working definition of Territorial Governance (TG) Territorial governance is the formulation and implementation of public policies, programmes and projects for the development* of a place/territory ** by integrating relevant policy sectors, co-ordinating the actions of relevant actors and institutions by considering in particular the multi-level interplay, mobilising stakeholder participation, being adaptive to changing contexts addressing the place-based/territorial specificities and characteristics. We consider 1) to 5) as “dimensions” of Territorial Governance (TG) which provide added value to achieving territorial cohesion. * We define development as balanced improvement in the efficiency, equality and environmental quality of a place/territory (in line with the Europe 2020 strategy). **Territory/place is a social construct and is not necessarily limited by jurisdictional boundaries

  6. Exploring Territorial Governance Handbook on TG

  7. The ESPON TANGO Research Design in a Nutshell • Exploratory case study work  hypotheses of good/bad TG • Literature review on Governance Typologies  ’European-wide Expert Survey’: To what extent matters the Five TG Dimensions?  Testing the robustness of TG working definition  identifying TG styles  shall help to contextualise Case Studies and their Transferability  defining indicators of “good” TG  weighting of indicators (Delphi-Method)  “testing” indicators in second phase of Case Studies Work  Filtration of good TG practices in case studies  Transferability check of TG features (based on a specific framework)  Implications/Policy Options (Stakeholder WS/Policy Seminar)  Handbook  Revisiting Notions and Theories  Future Research

  8. Tracing good Territorial Governance Practices • working definitions of indicators • defining their cross-linkages • weighted by using the Delphi-Method in autumn 2012 • each Indicator divided into elements/characteristics to investigate in Case Studies !

  9. The 12 TANGO case studies • Selection criteria – broad range of: • Geographical coverage/ Territorial Scope • Anticipated mode(s) of governance (Howlett 2009) (legal, market, network, corporatist, hierarchical) • EU 2020 Priority/Targets or Flagship initiatives/Territorial policy areas addressed • Territorial Governance challenges to be overcome / Hypothesized “good” governance elements

  10. Expected (Territorial) Evidence in view of the future Common Strategic Framework (CSF) • ESPON TANGO is concerned with Practices/Processes ! • Focus on actors/institutions – instead of e.g. performance of territories • ESPON TANGO goes beyond Public Administration ! • Cases Studies aligned to EU 2020, but do not look necessary at e.g. management of Cohesion Funds (except for one case) Key words/notions of envisaged CSF, which will be explored in ESPON TANGO: • ‘transparancy, integrity and accountability’ (in particular TG Dimension 3) • ‘integrated’ and ‘cross-sectoral’ (and multi-level coordination) is imperative to (territorial Governance) (here TG Dimension 1 and 2) • ‘Strategic Planning Capacity’ and ‘Institutional Capacity’ (here in particular TG Dimension 4)

More Related