Transcript Diapositive 1
Bologna, 15 novembre 2011 Facoltà di Scienze Politiche - Sala dei Poeti Palazzo Hercolani - Strada Maggiore, 45
Associazione Europea degli Eletti della Montagna
AEM : European network of regional and local authorities with mountain territories
1991: creation of AEM: from CoE to UE Institutions 2 main Status Objectives: sensibilisation and networking Direct and non direct Members Every political levels from Mayors to MEP (intergroup) with a majority of Regional actors Democratic Legitimity and political positions (policy makers and policy managers) Territorial stake in European debate , challenge of European governance (now based on Lisbon Treaty & Art 174 ) EP, CoR, CoE, Alpine convention, etc.
MountainS of Europe : unity in diversity
Europe is a mountainous territory ! Mountain is a European continental challenge !
EU with 27 Member states: 21 concerned MS 35, 69% of its superficy 17,73% of its population 30 744 municipalities
From study NordRegio DG Regio 2004 (critère de pente, altitude, topographie et climat)
But with a great diversity increased by enlargement Alps, Mediterranean, Nordic, Carpates, Balkans, Apennini, Iberic, Pyrenees, etc.
The Lisbon treaty should support a new deal to valorize mountain assets Article 174: "In order to promote its overall harmonious development, the Union shall develop and pursue its actions leading to the strengthening of its economic, social and territorial cohesion. In particular, the Union shall aim at reducing disparities between the levels of development of the various regions and the backwardness of the least favoured regions. Among the regions concerned, particular attention shall be paid to rural areas, areas affected by industrial transition, and regions which suffer from severe and permanent natural or
demographic handicaps such as the northernmost regions with very low
population density and island, cross-border and mountain regions.“ Article 175 (ex Article 159 TEC) : Member States shall conduct their economic policies and shall coordinate them in such a way as, in addition, to attain the objectives set out in Article 174. The formulation and implementation of the Union’s policies and actions and
the implementation of the internal market shall take into account the objectives set out in Article 174 and shall contribute to their achievement.
European framework for an integrated approach Territories with geographic specificities have a potential to deliver EU2020: Smart growth specific innovation potential Green growth Inclusive growth high potential for green economy community strength, quality of life They are facing specific constraints and need adapted policies to develop their potentialities articles 170/174/175 of EU treaty to be addressed in all policies Integrated approach of different policies: Cohesion, CAP, Transport, Energy, Infso, Environment… and Competition HOW TO CROSS OVER A COMPENSATION LOGIC TO A STRATEGY OF VALORISATION OF TERRITORIAL ASSETS?
European economic crisis openning the way to a renewed multilevel govenance
Strategic challenge : deep economic crisis but also a European governance crisis
Political challenge
governance ?
: to build up Euro zone
economic governance but with what political
Efficiency challenge : to bring closer European policies and territorial realities and assets; Citizenship challenge : to bring closer European institutions and citizens; Climatic challenge: to adapt economic activities to climate change.
To reach coherence respecting diversity:
AEM answers to consultation on State aids regulations and cohesion policy • Additional costs of mountain economy should be better taken into account.
• Specific socioeconomic organisation (i.e. PPP, public procurement, etc.) should be better recognised as key element of mountain economy.
• Services of General interest are a framework component of mountain economy.
• Some sectors are strategic and can not face a « pure and perfect » global competition.
• Environmental and climate change dimensions should be part of public economy (TEEB study on economic valorisation of ecosystem services).
• De minimis ceilar should be rised at 800 000€ over 3 years, only for art. 174 territories.
• State aids regulations should take into account functionnal areas and not indicators at NUTS III or NUTS II levels.
• National policies should take into account the opportunities openned by EU regulations regarding art. 3C (foot note).
• National and regional policies should take into consideration the role of EU policies in their territorial policies to develop integrated/place based policies
Challenges: going over permanent handicaps to valorise assets
• A clear need of multiregional adaptation of the European strategies at a coherent territorial level : the range (massif) level challenges and assets; (cross-border or not) : where to give coherence to public policies by adaptationg them to territorial specificities, by identifying main • A clear need of a close operationnal level for action and mobilsation of assets: district / valleys level at NUTS IV or V level (= a place based policy as def. in Barca’s report) : could support a « state aids » mapping regarding strategic sectors in an integrated local strategy of sustainable development (ESF, ERDF, EARDF + national and regional ressources).
Special attention to initiative opinion of Luis Durnwalder voted by the CoR in June 2008 : a European strategy for mountain regions should be based on functionnal areas !
What scale for a specific attention to mountain regions ?
Could geography help policy making ?
The territorial issue is a analysis of the organic link between environment and humain being activities (place based policy).
From a European point of view, ranges give a capacity of political action considering mountain specificities.
An exemple of existing experiences and exciting debates regarding mountain macroregional strategies (« massifs » or ranges).
An exemple of integrated policy in favor of mountain ranges (French massifs): POMAC & POIA : From a national law (1985) to the creation of interregional operationnal programmes for Massif central and for the Alps; Coherence between national, regional, local and European political actions.
Some details.
What internal governance for an added value of political action ? (Comité de massif) What scales of policy definition and intervention?
The opportunity of macroregional strategies (Baltic sea, Danube, …)
During the last months, the Alps are structuring some poposals to be one of the next Macroregional strategy.
A wide debate is open between Regional authorities, Alpine convention, Alpine space program and National authorities.
Last meeting 8th of November Brussels Bayern representation & Next meeting in Grenoble 13 January 2011.
Opportunities: to developp a coherent strategy at Alpine transnational level on several topics.
Elements for analysis and for action 1. macro-regional strategies are key elements for MultiLevelGovernance : from Baltic sea level to an Alpine model (EU-AlpineConv° -euroregions crossborder coop – valleys) that could become a strengthen territorial cooperation in the Eurozone between Italy, France, Germany, Austria Slovenia and Switzerland.
2. Economic crisis, sovereign debt crisis , recovery plans and modification of general philosophy regarding competition and Internal market could open a wider debate of Euro zone political governance.
3. A dynamic European networking to exchange best practices at local and regional level which the various associations, institutions (EGTC) and the CoR are the visible part of interregionality (still out of the European core decision process).
Association européenne des élus de montagne
Nicolas Evrard Secrétaire général [email protected]
-- http://www.promonte-aem.net/ ---
AEM - siège technique
Maison des Parcs et de la Montagne 256, Rue de la République F-73 000 Chambéry -- Tél.: +33 (0)4 79 71 42 30 Fax: +33 (0)4 79 71 50 16 ---
AEM - délégation UE
Avenue Boileau, 16 B-1040 Bruxelles -- Tél.: +32 (0)2 739 15 45 Fax: +32 (0)2 739 15 39 ---