The Development of the Islands European Islands and Cohesion Policy (EUROISLANDS)

1. The Development of the Islands European Islands and Cohesion Policy (EUROISLANDS) Pr. Ioannis Spilanis – University of the Aegean – Greece Mariehamn, 7 October 2011

2. European SPatial Observatory Network (www.espon.eu) ESPON is a partnership between EU Commission, the 27 Member States plus Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland. It runs within the framework of the Territorial Agenda as decided by the Council of Ministers for Territorial Planning – Territorial Cohesion objective Its role is to focus in the different European territories in order to provide “comparable information, evidence, analysis and scenarios to decision makers revealing territorial capital and potentials for development of regions…..”

3. UNIVERSITY OFTHE AEGEAN modern studies in the cradle of knowledge Since 1984 17 departments 11.000 students www.aegean.gr PUBLIC- INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS & PUBLICATIONS 2011

5. Laboratory for Local and Island’s Development Operating since 1992 Scientific responsible: I.Spilanis Participation in many national and international studies and research programs – publications on island and tourism analysis, assessment and planning http://www.aegean.gr/lid

6. Objective of the Study The objective of the study was: to evaluate the level of divergence of islands from EU-27 average as well as the national entities to analyze the islands’ future potential form a European perspective to analyze the policy option that can be adopted in order to face Weaknesses and to exploit Strengths and Opportunities

7. Basic assumption An area that is not (any longer)attractivefor establishing (competitive) economic activities and attracting or retaining (active) population will witness a reduction of its socioeconomic base and its overall viability The questions to respond: • why somebody will create an enterprise in Aland • Why someone will stay in Aland

8. Islands are characteristic regions Insularity is affecting permanently “classic” attractiveness as it influences negatively production and living cost. Islands –compared to the mainland- cannot have: • economies of scale and agglomeration externalities due to limited variety and quantity of resources(small size, limited population and resources) • good accessibility and low transport costdue to remoteness and isolation

9. General Conclusions (1) • The performance of the islands is generally lagging behind EU-27 considering most of the key development indicators*; this low performance may be attribute to the low attractiveness of the islands (map) • Islands’ Attractivenessis directly influenced by insularity: low Accessibility*, low quality and high cost Public Interest Services*, low external economies • Lisbon’s strategy and EU 2020 goalsare by far not met in islands as secondary effects of insularity (employment rate, R&D expenditure, education attainment*, ITC penetration, resource efficiency etc)

10. General Conclusions (2) • Vulnerability is a characteristic of islands’ economy (monoactivity/tourism – public intervention) and environment (low availability of resources - fragility); • Attractiveness and performance is even lower for small islands and archipelagos; vulnerability is higher • Natural and cultural assets constitute a prominent potential for a significant number of islands.

11. General Conclusions (3) Insularity has to be considered as a permanent, natural feature that affects negatively, directly and indirectly, islands’ attractiveness and subsequently places obstacles to their performance in terms of sustainable development. Insularity creates unequal opportunities between these territories and the rest of the European Union. EU has to stress on attractiveness parameters in order to address the different characteristics and the different costs of insularity by a differentiated policy

12. Recommendations for EU Policy (1) Principles to be respected: • Lisbon Treaty provisions: mainly article 174 referring to regions with permanent natural or demographic handicaps • Subsidiarity principle: policy adaptation at different levels (European, national, regional) as all territories are not the same. Need for a common european framework • Promotion of the sustainable endogenous development • Equal Opportunities provision for all european citizens • Proportionality Principle for the application of european policies – different costs to different places

13. Recommendations for EU Policy (2) A. Adaptation and better coordination of European policies • Design and implementation of integrated multi-sectoral and multi fund programs • Ex-ante Impact Assessment for different territories • A specific subgroup within the Inter-Service Group on Territorial Cohesion • Use State and Attractiveness Indexes as a base for eligibility criteria for Cohesion Policy

14. Recommendations for EU Policy (3) B. Adaptation of European Sectoral Policies with an explicit spatial dimension • Transport Policy (multimodal policy – maritime and sea corridors – financing fix and mobile infrastructures – territorial continuity principle) • Energy Policy (energy efficient islands, green energy, connection with EU network) • Environmental Policy (resource efficient islands, mitigation of climate change impact, valorization of natural assets) • Rural Development Policy (quality and high value added products, reinforce LFAs’ concept) • State aid (given based on attractiveness index)

15. Recommendations for EU Policy (4) C. Compensation of insularity cost concerning: • The construction and the operation of the General Interest Services • The creation and the operation of (specifically the very small) insular enterprises • The creation of permanent structures and networks • The cost of living and acquisition of services for all the inhabitants • The training and the life long learning system • The traditional sectors and activities associated to island’s particular characteristics and cultural identity

16. Islands’ strategy within a European perspective

17. How to implement this strategy to Aland Islands (1) Need for good knowledge of Aland’s situation: Strengths: • particular natural environment (low artificialization) and quality of life, • cultural environment, • high (female) activity rate, • low unemployment, • labor qualification lower than Finland but high enough with very high level of life long learning, • ICT very high, • good local autonomous governance, • high level of Public Interest Services for population and companies.

18. How to implement this strategy to Aland Islands (2) Weaknesses: • small population (small local market) and archipelagos with very small islands, • GDP creation (84,5% services, transport – duty free) and recent negative evolution, • population evolution & structure (concentration on main island and rather ageing), • mediocre accessibility from out the area, • low R&DI. • bad quality of sea environment

19. How to implement this strategy to Aland Islands (3) …. and of the external environment Opportunities: • good national governance, • demand of high quality of life, • islands’ networking (political-CPMR, economic-INSULEUR, scientific-RETI) Threats: • crisis and budgetary restrictions, • diminution of the presence of state, • abolishment of fiscal concession, • accruing competition of low cost countries, globalization,

20. Thank you for your attention ispil@aegean.gr www.aegean.gr/lid http://geo-ellanikos.aegean.gr/espon User name: sc , password: obseurisles

21. Schematic presentation of islands’ classification