1. RTPI Workshop: The Future of Competitive European Cities/ Manchester 2 December 2010 New ESPON Project (SGPTDE) Secondary Cities: Performance, Policies and Prospects Richard Meegan EIUA/ JMU

2. 5 Questions 1.WHO ARE WE? 2.WHAT ARE WE TRYING TO DO? 3.HOW ARE WE DOING IT? 4.WHAT WILL WE PRODUCE? 5.HOW WELL ARE WE DOING?

3. 1. Who Are We? Partners EIUA lead – Parkinson, Meegan, Evans, Jones, Karecha MRI Budapest – Ivan Tosics, Antal Gertheis, Andrea Tonko University of Tampere – Markku Sotarauta, Olli Ruokolainen Advisers University College London – Sir Peter Hall University of Paris - Christian Lefevre

4. 2. What Are We Trying to Do? Explore common assertions: Economic & institutional deconcentration lead more territorially balanced economic development Europe. Relationship capital & secondaries win-win, not zero sum More secondaries perform better, national and European economies better National policies for secondaries crucial – competition, cohesion, environment Leadership & governance matters - cities path dependent but room for manoeuvre Territory & place matters more not less globalised economy

5. 2. What Are We Trying To Do? Specifically assess Secondaries’ actual & potential contribution to more balanced European territorial development Performance on critical success factors – innovation, human capital, connectivity, place quality, strategic capacity Policy impact & implications – European, national, regional Territorial prospects secondaries – European, national, regional

6. 2. What Are We Trying to Do? Reflecting policy concerns Cohesion Report & DG Regio Secondaries are larger non-capital cities which make major contribution to national performance – positive or negative What performance secondaries, what gap with capitals, what direction of change? What policy debate member states - how gap & urban hierarchy seen, competitiveness or cohesion, explicit or implicit, any concern territorial impact? What effect debate on national policy secondaries - greater targeting, increased capacity & skills, more powers & resources, fewer constraints?

7. 2. What Are We Trying to Do? Answers Which kind secondaries punching weight nationally & Europe, how and why? Who doing what to help? What works? What impact & implications crisis? Who does what better, different in future?

8. 3. How Are We Doing It? Qualitative & quantitative, breadth & depth Triangulate Research & policy literature – performance, policies, prospects Quantitative data 124 secondaries, 30 capitals Interviews - European, national policy makers, private sector E-questionnaire – ESPON family, policy makers, researchers, EUROCITIES, Core Cities, URBACT, EUKN 9 detailed case studies

9. 124 SECONDARY & 30 CAPITAL CITIES

10. How Selected Case Study Cities? Mix - size, economic performance, national governance, territorial role location North Europe Tampere - Finland West Europe Cork - Ireland Leeds – UK Lyon - France Central Europe Munich- Germany South Europe Barcelona - Spain Turin - Italy East, Central East and South Central Europe Katowice - Poland Timisoara - Romania

11. 4. What Will We Produce? Big picture for policy makers Accessible short report - key policy messages role secondaries & balanced territorial development Europe More detailed picture for researchers Literature review Extensive quantitative data analysis, maps & tables Case study reports Questionnaire results

12. 5. How Well Are We Doing? So far, so good – interest & support policy makers Inception report well received Literature mixed – quality, territory, focus - but developing Data analysis - much progress made Case studies – great support, methodology agreed, literature scoped, initial visits soon Questionnaire – great interest, piloted, already circulated 150 researchers policy makers, more to come

13. 5. How Well Are We Doing? Some initial context: relationships capitals and secondaries (GDP per capita) Big variations in balance capitals & secondaries New Member States most centralised, biggest gaps Do secondary cities perform better in less centralised systems? Does a more balanced urban system potentially offer better national economic performance?

14. Top Secondary Outperforms Capital: Germany, Austria, Italy, Belgium, Ireland

15. Top Secondary Lags Capital by 5-20%: Spain, UK, Netherlands, France

16. Top Secondary Lags Capital by 20-30%: Denmark, Poland, Sweden, Finland, Portugal

17. Top Secondary Lags Capital by 30-45%: Hungary, Romania, Lithuania, Greece, Czech Republic, Slovenia, Croatia

18. Top Secondary Lags Capital by 50-65%: Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Slovakia