Regional Intermediate Report Franche-Comté

Région Franche-Comté

Laure Falempin (Regional Council) Louis-Pierre Mareschal (Pays du Haut-Jura) Yannick Nancy(Pays Horloger) Table of Contents

Table of Contents 2

Table of Figures and Maps 4

1. Introduction 5 1.1. ACCESS: Project Background 5 1.2. Work Package 5 Regional Studies: Goals, Objectives and Activities 6

2. Country Profile: France 9 2.1. Territorial Organisation 9 2.2. Spatial Policies in France 9 2.3. Roles and Responsibilities in Services of General Interest(SGI) Themes 9 2.3.1. Public Transport 9 2.3.2. Information and Communication Technology (ICT): Internet 10 2.3.3. Every Day Needs 10

3. Regional and Test Areas Profile 10 3.1. Geographical Situation 10 3.1.1. Topographical Specifics of the Test Areas 10 3.1.2. Settlement Pattern 10 3.1.3. Role of the Major Settlements 12 3.2. Demography Demographic Development 12 3.2.1. Region Franche-Comté 12 3.2.2. Test Area 1 Pays Horloger 12 3.2.3. Test Area 2 Pays du Haut-Jura 13 3.3. Socio-Economic Situation 14 3.3.1. Economic Structure 14 3.3.2. Commuting to and from Work 15 3.4. Development of Tourism 16 3.4.1. Region Franche-Comté 16 3.4.2. Test Area 1 Pays Horloger 16 3.4.3. Test Area 2 Pays du Haut-Jura 16 4. Services of General Interest (SGI) in the Test Areas: Description, Evaluation, Problems and Perspectives 17 4.1. Methodology of Evaluation of Services of General Interest 17 4.2. Situation Transport: Public Transport 17 4.2.1. Overview Region Franche-Comté 17 4.2.2. Test Area 1 Pays Horloger 18 4.2.3. Test Area 2 Pays du Haut-Jura 18 4.3. Situation Information and Communication Technology (ICT): Internet 19 4.3.1. Overview Region Franche-Comté 19 4.3.2. Test Area 1 Pays Horloger 19 4.3.3. Test Area 2 Pays du Haut-Jura 20 4.4. Situation Every day Needs: Food Stores 20 4.4.1. Overview Region Franche-Comté 20 4.4.2. Test Area 1 Pays Horloger 20 4.4.3. Test Area 2 Pays du Haut-Jura 21 4.5. Assessment of Services of General Interest– Barriers and Main Problems 21 4.5.1. Barriers and Main Problems Public Transport 21 4.5.2. Barriers and Main Problems ICT 22 4.5.3. Barriers and Main Problems Every Day Needs 22

Regional Intermediate Report page -2- Franche-Comté 5. Good practice examples as a pool of ideas for pilot projects and identification of gaps 23 6. Conclusion and Outlook on Pilot Activities (Synthesis of framework conditions, problems of SGI and best practice examples and foreseen pilot activities) 26 6.1. Conclusions on the Regional Level 26 6.2. Outlook on Pilot Activities 27

7. Appendix I: Good Practice Examples (long version) 30

8.Appendix II: Maps (resolution on municipality level) and Statistical Data 36

Regional Intermediate Report page -3- Franche-Comté Table of Figures and Maps

Fig. 1: Work packages and time schedule of the ACCESS project 6 Fig. 2: Old age and Young age ratios, local settlement concentration ratio 14 Fig. 3: Development of enterprises 15 Fig. 4: Regional reachability individual traffic 19 Fig. 5: number of food shops per town 21 Fig. 6: presence of public services 27

Regional Intermediate Report page -4- Franche-Comté 1. Introduction

1.1. ACCESS: Project Background

ACCESS is an INTERREG IV B project developed in the framework of the Alpine Space Programme. It involves nine partners from Austria, France, Germany, Italy and Switzerland. The partners have come together to improve the accessibility to services of general interest (SGI) in sparsely populated mountain regions. Problems to be addressed The maintenance of a spatially and socially equal accessibility to SGI is a core issue to the functionality of mountain areas and any regional development strategy both on a national as well as on a transnational level. Already in the third Cohesion Report of the European Commission it is specified that the equality of access to basic facilities, essential services and knowledge for everyone, wherever they happen to live, is a key condition for territorial cohesion. However the INTERREG III B project PUSEMOR confirmed that sparsely populated areas in all alpine countries are facing difficulties to maintain existing services due to their poor profitability and due to the need to respond to new or changing needs of the local population. The ongoing territorial concentration of SGI leads to a vicious circle of further deterioration in the quality of provision which in turn causes a decreasing demand in the existing services. This process has many negative consequences for the affected regions. In fact the withdrawal of SGI causes a reduced functionality, competitiveness and a higher amount of motorised mobility in communities of sparsely populated areas. Furthermore it aggravates social inequalities – persons who do not dispose of a car, not having the knowledge to use ICT etc. face problems to reach services. Often these areas are characterised by important population losses and/or excessive ageing. The main challenge for the concerned communities and regions is therefore the furthering of the access to demand-oriented and flexible SGI with innovative cooperation structures in order to capitalise best the potentials of sparsely populated areas. Mobility is an important issue in the whole framework. Contrary to a still widespread opinion this must not necessarily mean in every case physical transport of goods or persons but implies the promotion of integrated mobility systems (Report on the state of the Alps, Alpine Convention). Objectives of the Project The PUSEMOR project identified a major challenge and urgent need for action in the field of public transport and the accessibility of SGI. ACCESS therefore aims at improving the accessibility to SGI in sparsely populated mountain areas by finding 1) new forms of organisation of SGI (e.g. substitute stationary services with mobile ones, improving governance) 2) using ICT (e.g. broadband internet access) and 3) fostering demand oriented, integrated mobility systems. The project is guided by the following objectives: a) Improve the competitiveness and the quality of life in sparsely populated areas – as a precondition for maintaining and attracting new inhabitants and SMEs by making use of the potentials of these areas (environmental quality, heritage, culture).

Regional Intermediate Report page -5- Franche-Comté b) Develop models that will contribute to regional development and spatial planning, (e.g. efficient use of infrastructures, networks and cooperation between centres and rural areas). c) Mitigate social inequalities in the access of SGI and reduce environmental pollution. d) Test and apply various elements of the concept of governance in order to empower the population and to ensure that society owns the process. e) New approaches to providing services will be tested and put into practice in all test areas. They will be based on the demands of the local population and Enterprises and be developed together with the service providers. Workpackages and time schedule ACCESS is structured along eight workpackages with specifically defined objectives, activities and outputs. Fig. 1 gives an overview on workpackage themes and time schedule, WP 5 will be described in detail in the following section. This report constitutes the final product of WP 5.

WP 6 WP 8 Transnat. Comparison Synthesis

WP 7 WP 5 Regional Pilot projects and models Studies

WP 2 - 4 Project Management and Information / Publicity

Sep 08 Apr 09 Sep 09 Apr 10 Sep 10 Apr 11 Aug 11

Fig. 1: Work packages and time schedule of the ACCESS project

1.2. Work Package 5 Regional Studies: Goals, Objectives and Activities

General Objective This workpackage aims at clarifying the degree of accessibility and the users need with regard to SGI in selected areas (1 – 3 test areas per participating region). Furthermore, an inventory of best practices to improve the provision of SGI in sparsely populated areas is drawn up. This WP also benefits from the results and experiences gained in the regional analysis of the preceeding PUSEMOR project. Activities The activities taking place within WP 5 can be structured as follows:

Regional Intermediate Report page -6- Franche-Comté  To elicit methodologies how to approach best local actors in order to assess their needs and to mount projects (largely based on the PUSEMOR approach)  Improvement of the approach of regional studies used for PUSEMOR and to analyse demand and supply as well as the accessibility of SGI in selected test areas  Search for best practices  Data collection, based on (a) evaluation of available literature / materials, (b) expert interviews in order to draw a picture of the economic, political and institutional framework  Elaboration of Regional Intermediate Reports

The envisaged outputs are:  Output 1: Identification of Test Areas: When identifying the test areas, the general guidelines and criteria of the project have to be complied with (e.g. with regard to organisational aspects, test area size etc.). Primarily areas were chosen which are considered less- favoured from a regional viewpoint. With regard to SGIs, the test areas have to be coherent functional, administrative and organisational units. A comparison within the region is possible by the application of statistical indicators. The identification of the test areas is the responsibility of the regional project partners.

 Output 2: Common Methodology to Approach Local Stakeholders: Internal communication is guaranteed by the continuous involvement of important institutions such as local regional development agencies, representatives of the local authorities (mayors) and representations of interest groups (chambers) as well as providers of SGIs. There are regular working group meetings at the regional level and in the test areas. Expert interviews are conducted to obtain the opinion of important individual stakeholders.

 Output 3: Current Standard of SGIs: The current standard of SGIs is mainly the result of national or even regional decisions and practices. Therefore, the legal, organisational and actual criteria of access to SGIs may differ considerably when the project partners are compared. These differences can be highlighted by drawing up thematic maps using uniform classification systems at the transnational level.

 Output 4: Assessment of Users Needs: Access to SGIs is determined by the relationships between supply and demand. Major factors are the spatial situation (location – reachability), the social context (services provided – demands) and the economic situation (price – income). Data collection and conclusions on consumer behaviour have to be as differentiated as possible, e.g. with regard to social aspects according to age, gender and income.

 Output 5: Detailed Description of Good Practices (form): The questionnaire employed to describe good practice examples is a standardised transnational instrument.

 Output 6: Outline of the Relevant Framework Conditions: The answer the question of access to SGIs, the fields of public transport, ICT and every day needs have to be investigated. With regard to organisation, the positions of the public authorities awarding contracts for

Regional Intermediate Report page -7- Franche-Comté SGIs and the (sometimes private) providers of SGIs are relevant. A reaction to the expected differences in the situation of the users when it comes to access to SGIs is to include interest group representations and local stakeholders.

Regional Intermediate Report page -8- Franche-Comté 2. Country Profile: France

2.1. Territorial Organisation

There are 3 administrative levels in France called “local authorities”: 22 Regions, 100 Départements and 36,000 towns (formerly it was said that one can reach the municipality and return home in a day by foot, the Departement in a day with a horse and definitions of Regions appeared with modern transports such as bus/car) . Each has different areas of competence, which have been transferred from the State and its Ministries. This has been called the “Décentralisation”. Regions have in charge aspects in Education (high school), apprenticeship, lifelong learning, economic development, regional transports, environment, spatial planning… In contrary to other countries, Regional Councils in France don’t make laws, they implement them. They carry out programmes, activities, but the competences have been given by the State. Départements are in charge of road, social and health care policies, Education (pupils from 11 to 15), school transport… Municipalities are responsible for urban quality and environment, town police, primary schools… There are other organisational levels in France but they are not listed as “local authorities”: groups of municipalities, big town communities and “Pays” for instance.

2.2. Spatial Policies in France

A 1995 law modified by a 1999 law have set up new forms of territorial organisation called “Pays” and “ trengthening ” (= big towns). From 15,000 to 300,000 inhabitants they can be rural or urban territories in which common projects and networks can be set up. These new territorial organisations may have a significant role in service development and provision as they have a larger overview of their territory and as they can impulse large projects. A very important feature of this new form of territory is the implementation of development councils which organise partnerships between elected people, people from associative and socio- professional spheres. Members have taken an active part in the setting up of Pays or Agglomérations and follow the implementation of local projects. “Pays”, which are our 2 test areas in ACCESS, are organisations for discussion, mutualisation of means between groups of municipalities. They are called “territories of projects”. They work with tools such as charters, territorial analyses and assessments and often conclude agreements with local authorities or the French state.

2.3. Roles and Responsibilities in Services of General Interest (SGI) Themes

2.3.1. Public Transport

Competences and responsibilities are shared between the State and the other levels of local authority. The State is in charge of railway transports and national road. Regions are responsible for regional trains (investments and lines network).

Regional Intermediate Report page -9- Franche-Comté Departments are in charge of roads, engineering services and school transports outside the cities. Municipalities or “agglomerations” are in charge of public transport in their area.

2.3.2. Information and Communication Technology (ICT): Internet

ICT infrastructures were under the responsibility of the State and local authorities, which invested in to build the ICT network (broadband) and to avoid inequalities between territories (especially between urban and rural areas). But the state relied on competition between Internet providers to develop infrastructures, it occurred partially in urban and concentrated areas (= many customers) but rural areas have encountered difficulties and depend on the good will of the providers to come. They are several Internet providers in France such as Orange, SFR, Free…

2.3.3. Every Day Needs As far as postal services are concerned, they are under the responsibility of the national company “la Poste” which has a 5-year contract until 2012 with the State to ensure its public activities. Groceries are mainly privately-held. In rural areas there are initiatives to widen their services; they become “multi-services points” which gather bank, postal services, Interent access for example.

3. Regional and Test Areas Profile

3.1. Geographical Situation

3.1.1. Topographical Specifics of the Test Areas

 Pays horloger: The territory covers 760km² and is located near Switzerland and at the East of Franche-Comté. 37% of the territory is covered by forests, with a succession of valleys and medium mountains.  Pays du Haut-Jura: Located in the highest part of the Jura Mountains, 70% of its territory is covered by forest, which constitutes the 1st environmental resources. It is also located at the frontier with Switzerland.

3.1.2. Settlement Pattern

3.1.2.1. Region Franche-Comté The regional population density is 71 inh/km² which is significantly lower that the national average (113 inh/km²) with some disparities between the 4 Départements (from 44 to 231 inh/km²). Among major towns one can distinguish 2 major settlements: one in the North of Franche- Comté with 300,000 inhabitants and the regional capital, Besançon, in the central part of the

Regional Intermediate Report page -10- Franche-Comté territory with 120,000 inhabitants. There are a lot of middle-sized towns in the North-western part, along the Swiss frontier and in the South. Finally 95% of towns/villages count less than 2,000 inhabitants and 10% of the regional population lives in mountainous areas far from basic services.  Indicator 5 Local Settlement Concentration Ratio : 77% of population living in compact trengtheni larger than 500 inhabitants  Data: Most actual Area (km²): 16 202 km²  Data: Most actual resident Population : 1 150 624  Data: Most actual Number of Households : 492 401  Data: Resident Population living in compact settlements larger 500 inhabitants : 881 116  Data: Resident Population living in compact settlements larger 1.000 inhabitants : 739 767

3.1.2.2. Test Area 1 Pays horloger 78 municipalities 42,556 inhabitants (population density: 55 inh/km²) 3 main towns (less than 7,000 inhabitants) concentrate services and equipments and some secondary poles concentrates 31.8% of the area population with shops and some services. As far as public services are concerned, problems arise for isolated small villages because main and secondary towns concentrate everything. Population is mostly rural.  Indicator 5 Local Settlement Concentration Ratio : 76% of population living in compact trengtheni larger than 500 inhabitants  Data: Most actual Area (km²): 760 km²  Data: Most actual resident Population : 42 556  Data: Most actual Number of Households : 18 010  Data: Resident Population living in compact settlements larger 500 inhabitants : 32 247  Data: Resident Population living in compact settlements larger 1.000 inhabitants : 26 740

3.1.2.3. Test Area 2 Pays du Haut-Jura 66 municipalities 51 734 inhabitants (population density: 54 inh/km²) There is a balanced settlement with small urban poles and an active rural area : one big town (12,000 inhabitants) and 5 secondary poles located throughout the territory concentrate the provision of public services.  Indicator 5 Local Settlement Concentration Ratio : 79% of population living in compact trengtheni larger than 500 inhabitants  Data: Most actual Area (km²): 962 km²

Regional Intermediate Report page -11- Franche-Comté  Data: Most actual resident Population : 51 734  Data: Most actual Number of Households : 21 937  Data: Resident Population living in compact settlements larger 500 inhabitants : 40 840  Data: Resident Population living in compact settlements larger 1.000 inhabitants : 33 525

3.1.3. Role of the Major Settlements

Major settlements are due to industrial activities (mainly North of the region and in the Jura Mountains) and high technologies (car, aeronautics and railway subcontracting). During the last decades population growth underwent 3 phases: in the 70s-growth occurred mainly in the 3 main towns of the region and along the Doubs axis. In the 80s it concentrated on the regional capital Besançon and along the Swiss frontier before moving towards the central part of the region in the 90s. Even nowadays Besançon and its surroundings accounts for half of the regional population growth.

3.2. Demography Demographic Development

3.2.1. Region Franche-Comté

Demography: at the regional level since the 90s the population has kept on growing as a constant level. This growth is due to a surplus in natural balance (+ 0.37% p.a.), while migratory balance is stabile (0.0% per year). Human potential: a national study in 2004 showed that 89% of the regional inhabitants are attached to Franche-Comté and 65% are confident about its future. Local identity is attached to the mountains and the quality of life.  Indicator 1 Population Development : + 0.37  Indicator 2a Old-age dependency ratio : 26 %  Indicator 2b Indicator Young-age dependency ratio : 29%  Data: Most actual resident Population : 1 150 624  Data: Resident Population 10 to 20 years before actual census :1 117 257 (1999)  Data: Most actual Population younger than 15 years : 218 830  Data: Most actual Population elder than 65 years : 192 812

3.2.2. Test Area 1 Pays horloger

Despite the ageing of population, the demographic growth is mainly linked to the natural balance whereas migratory balance follows the regional trend. Thus even though many new inhabitants arrive due the attractiveness and the proximity with Switzerland, it cannot compensate the leaving of people, youngsters notably.

Regional Intermediate Report page -12- Franche-Comté There is an heterogeneity within the Pays. The evolution of population is facing the same trend as at the national level: the ageing of population. Since 1982 the proportion of under 20 year old people has been decreasing in the contrary to the percentage of 60 years old and above.  Indicator 1 Population Development : + 0.63  Indicator 2a Old-age dependency ratio : 24%  Indicator 2b Indicator Young-age dependency ratio : 30%  Data: Most actual resident Population : 42 556  Data: Resident Population 10 to 20 years before actual census : 40 476 (1999)  Data: Most actual Population younger than 15 years : 8 335  Data: Most actual Population elder than 65 years : 6 591

3.2.3. Test Area Pays du Haut-Jura

The demographic growth has been slowing for 15 years and it’s due to the surplus in natural balance. The territory has difficulty to attract and maintain new inhabitants. A few young people who left for higher studies come back for finding work. For 4 or 5 years due to economic difficulties among subcontractors, young and high-skilled people leave the territory to find a job, this has increased the population ageing.  Indicator 1 Population Development : + 0.22  Indicator 2a Old-age dependency ratio : 23  Indicator 2b Indicator Young-age dependency ratio : 31  Data: Most actual resident Population : 51 734  Data: Resident Population 10 to 20 years before actual census : 50 847 (1999)  Data: Most actual Population younger than 15 years : 10 407  Data: Most actual Population elder than 64 years : 7 780

Regional Intermediate Report page -13- Franche-Comté Fig 2: Old age and Young age ratios, local settlement concentration ratio (source INSEE) 3.3. Socio-Economic Situation

3.3.1. Economic Structure

3.3.1.1. Region Franche-Comté  Indicator 3 Maximum Population Ratio : 100  Indicator 4 Development of Enterprises : + 0.02  Data: Most actual Number of Enterprises :42 597  Data: Number of Enterprises (10 to 20 years before actual census) : 37 170 (2000)

3.3.1.2. Test Area 1 Pays horloger  Indicator 3 Maximum Population Ratio : 99  Indicator 4 Development of Enterprises : + 0.02  Data : Most actual Number of Enterprises : 1 601  Data: Number of Enterprises (10 to 20 years before actual census) : 1 396

Regional Intermediate Report page -14- Franche-Comté The economy of the test area is characterized by numerous SMEs in the field of horology and microtechnics. Jobs are mainly concentrated in the industrial sector with also a proportion of cross-border workers. Thus the unemployment rate is on of the lowest in Franche-Comté. 3.3.1.3. Test Area 2 Pays du Haut-Jura  Indicator 3 Maximum Population Ratio : 103  Indicator 4 Development of Enterprises : + 0.01  Data : Most actual Number of Enterprises : 2 326  Data: Number of Enterprises (10 to 20 years before actual census) : 2102 3rd economic area in the region, jobs and activities are mainly concentrated in the industrial sector. Due to the geographic situation (proximity to Switzerland), unemployment rate is lower than the regional one. The test area is heavily impacted by the current economic crisis (enterprises close down, outsourcing…), local actors have to think about diversification of their activities to stop the trend.

Fig. 3 : Development of enterprises (source INSEE)

Regional Intermediate Report page -15- Franche-Comté 3.3.2. Commuting to and from Work

3.3.2.1. Region Franche-Comté  Data: Commuters coming to work from another Municipality: non available  Data: Commuters leaving for work to another Municipality: N/A

3.3.2.2. Test Area 1 Pays horloger  Data: Commuters coming to work from another Municipality [POP_WORK_IN] : 9240  Data: Commuters leaving for work to another Municipality [POP_WORK_OUT] : 10260

3.3.2.3. Test Area 2 Pays du Haut-Jura  Data: Commuters coming to work from another Municipality [POP_WORK_IN] : 12026  Data: Commuters leaving for work to another Municipality [POP_WORK_OUT] : 12026

3.4. Development of Tourism

3.4.1. Region Franche-Comté

Data: Annual Over Night Stays in Tourism : 1 948 000

3.4.2. Test Area 1 Pays horloger

 Data: Annual Over Night Stays in Tourism : 241 540 Pays Horloger has a strong potential based on natural and human specificities regarding landscapes, cultural and technical heritage. Neighborhood with Switzerland, attractive sites and well-known local products also strengthens the tourist development. There is a lot of offers regarding “green tourism”, leisure (winter sports, nautical sports, nature activities), high quality gastronomic opportunities, agro-tourism products and activities link with industrial techniques. As far as commercial accommodations are concerned, the capacity is nearly 4000 beds in a wide range of categories: hotel, camping, gîte, B&B, resort.

3.4.3. Test Area 2 Pays du Haut-Jura

 Data: Annual Over Night Stays in Tourism : 657 895 The territory is a famous destination for tourists. A well-known resort is located on the territory. It offers a wide range of accommodation and services for winter (cross-country and downhill ski) and summer tourism (hiking, mountain biking…). But accomodation capacity isn’t sufficient and has to be renewed.

Regional Intermediate Report page -16- Franche-Comté 4. Services of General Interest(SGI) in the Test Areas: Description, Evaluation, Problems and Perspectives

4.1. Methodology of Evaluation of Services of General Interest

In 2008 the 2 test areas carried out a study (= scheme) concerning a wide range of services (administrative, daily needs, health care, culture, sports, children, transports, ICT…) in order to assess the current state of the art, the demographic evolution, the needs of local population, the priorities to make and the projects to implement in their territory. - In Pays Horloger: the work was done by the local project manager in close collaboration with the “services” committee of the Pays. This committee gathers representatives from local service providers such as kindergartens, local hospital, associations… It helped in the collection of information for the state of the art, in the choice of priorities and emergence of projects. The scheme was presented to and agreed by the elected representatives of the Pays in March 2008. - In Pays du Haut-Jura: it also worked with its « services » committee to define the methodology, the services to assess and to make the priorities. It also asked students to carry out a survey among the local population (350 questionnaires, 5% of the population) to assess their needs, their habits (place, frequency of service uses…). The scheme was adopted early 2008. As far as the pilot projects are concerned (videoservices see point 6.2), the test areas jointed together to carry out a study to define the projects’ characteristics: existing services, technical features, localisation of future videoservice points… This 6-month work will be complete by the end of WP5 and still has to be presented to local elected representatives and actors concerned.

4.2. Situation Transport: Public Transport

4.2.1. Overview Region Franche-Comté

As far as railway is concerned, the region has fairly good connections with its neighbouring regions (Burgundy, Alsace) and has 5 daily connections with Paris. The instalment of the eastern branch of the Rhine-Rhone TGV will have positive economic and tourist effects for the region. Regionally speaking the train network is quite effective but some lines may be stopped or stations closed and are partially compensated by bus stations. However there are lacks of connections between bus lines and train lines. The evolution of public transport use such as buses and trains remains a question as roads are generally in good conditions and there are few traffic jams. Nevertheless due to relief constraints some areas, especially the rural and mountainous ones, feel a real and urgent need to improve the system and running-up of such services.

Regional Intermediate Report page -17- Franche-Comté 4.2.2. Test Area 1 Pays horloger

There’s only one railway station in Pays Horloger, located in Morteau at the South end of the territory. There are really few public transports by bus for a few years; transport on demand has been developed, mostly for elderly people. Indicators regarding time to reach regional center are really subject to high variation regarding the weather conditions and high levels of snow in winter season (November to March). A large part of the active population is working out of the territory, mostly in Switzerland, that leads to large traffic jams on roads to and from Switzerland. Except a railway connection between Morteau and la Chaux-de-Fonds (CH), there’s no public transport. Solutions of car sharing are promoted by identification of car park.

 Indicator 6a Regional Reachability Individual Traffic : 64 minutes  Indicator 6b Regional Reachability Public : 90 minutes  Indicator 7 Maximum Frequency Public Traffic : 8 daily departures  Data: Time to reach Regional Centre (Besançon outside the test area) by motorized individual Traffic : 64 minutes  Data: Time to reach Regional Centre by Public Traffic : 90 minutes  Data: Daily Departures of Public Bus at the best served Station : 8

4.2.3. Test Area 1 Pays du Haut-Jura

Road isolation and access to the territory in general remain a huge problem. The Pas decided to implement a scheme for transport, which will aim at trengthening existing transport systems, improving frequency of public transport and especially the multimodality between regional trains, buses…

 Indicator 6a Regional Reachability Individual Traffic : 27 minutes  Indicator 6b Regional Reachability Public : 33 minutes  Indicator 7 Maximum Frequency Public Traffic : 4 daily departures  Data: Time to reach Regional Centre (St Claude in the test area) by motorized individual Traffic : 27 minutes  Data: Time to reach Regional Centre by Public Traffic : 33 minutes  Data: Daily Departures of Public Bus at the best served Station : 8

Regional Intermediate Report page -18- Franche-Comté Fig. 4 : Regional reachability individual traffic (sources Pays horloger, Pays Haut-Jura)

4.3. Situation Information and Communication Technology (ICT): Internet

4.3.1. Overview Region Franche-Comté

As soon as 1994 the Regional council implemented the broadband network E BELIN, which enables all university and R&D poles, as well as hospitals and secondary schools to be linked to each other. Moreover Besançon, the regional capital, was the 1st French town to set up a metropolitan network with broadband. However, due to its size and potential regarding effectiveness rates, the region is not an attractive market for operators and service providers: the problem of ICT equipment in peripheral territories remains and ICT use is inegal (see point 2.3.2)  Indicator 9a Private Broadband ACCESS : 47%  Indicator 9b Private Internet Usage : N/A  Data: Number of Households with Internet Broadband Access : 213 428  Data: Population using Internet [POP_INTUSE] : N/A 4.3.2. Test Area 1 Pays Horloger

Although the coverage is better than some years ago, large areas remain uncovered by high- speed broadband such as ADSL. In late 2006, 15 municipalities out of 78 was identified as uncovered by ADSL. Within the Departemental programme of broadband access

Regional Intermediate Report page -19- Franche-Comté empowerment, a number of municipalities have decided to build a broadband access network by themselves.

 Indicator 9a Private Broadband ACCESS : N/A  Indicator 9b Private Internet Usage : N/A  Data: Number of Households with Internet Broadband Access : N/A  Data: Population using Internet : N/A

4.3.3. Test Area 2 Pays du Haut-Jura

In 2009 only the 6 biggest towns of the territory have an access superior to 8 Mo/s. Most all rural municipalities have very limited broadband access (512 Ko/s, even 56 Ko/s). By the end of 2009, following a Departemental action (with Regional and State support) all communes should have access to a 2 Mo/s Internet.

4.4. Situation Every day Needs: Food Stores

4.4.1. Overview Region Franche-Comté

Food and non-food items: the trend is an increasing concentration of those services in medium sized villages, which already gather administrative services and others. Postal services area managed by the national public Company “la Poste”. Some closures in very rural areas have occurred; some dispositions are taken so that other facilities (such as groceries) may undertake postal services.  Indicator 8 Food Shop ACCESS : N/A  Data: Number of Shops offering Food (also baker and butcher but no petrol station) : N/A

4.4.2. Test Area 1 Pays Horloger

Most of the commercial offer has become concentrated in supermarkets which is weakening city center offers of traditional shops. Most of small shops in small villages are closing because of the low profitability which threatens creation and companies’ buy-out. High purchasing capacity of commuters and Swiss mostly goes to supermarket.

Regional Intermediate Report page -20- Franche-Comté  Indicator 8 Food Shop ACCESS : 655  Data: Number of Shops offering Food (also baker and butcher but no petrol station) : 65

4.4.3. Test Area 2 Pays du Haut-Jura

Some big towns and villages with more than 600 inhabitants still have local shops (often one). Moreover cheese cooperatives (around 15 on the Pays) can also be salespoints for daily needs and/or bread.  Indicator 8 Food Shop ACCESS : 609  Data: Number of Shops offering Food (also baker and butcher but no petrol station) : 85

Fig. 5 : number of food shops per town (source : Pays Haut-Jura) 4.5. Assessment of Services of General Interest– Barriers and Main Problems

4.5.1. Barriers and Main Problems Public Transport

Pays Horloger : - weak connections with Switzerland especially for commuters,

Regional Intermediate Report page -21- Franche-Comté -undersized railway connections of the territory with regional capital and Switzerland, -no public transport inside the territory except transport on demand.

Pays Haut-Jura : - topographic difficulties, - few connections between Region, Departement and Swiss transport systems, - failures lead to under-use of services, - long distance between home and job places.

4.5.2. Barriers and Main Problems ICT

Pays Horloger: - large uncovered areas for mobile phone, - low development of broadband internet connection - a large part of population without internet access Pays du Haut-Jura : the Pays focuses its action on use development. It deals with many thematics such children, culture, transport, access to information (yearbooks,…), statistical and observation tools,… ICT are tools which must support or strengthen uses, facilitate access to services, resolve mobility difficulties (transports and/or geographic and/or climatic mountain conditions)

4.5.3. Barriers and Main Problems Every Day Needs

Pays Horloger: - a decreasing number of proximity shops, - difficulty to have an efficient medical coverage, - public services concentrated in main towns - an insufficient elderly and young children services offer Pays du Haut-Jura: services are concentrated in big towns at the expense of smaller towns, especially as far as social, children services and leisure equipments are concerned. Social services are located only in 2 towns along with few temporary branchs with no link with the central office. Moreover local authorities have no word to say on the maintenance of those services on the territory. To the contrary there is a good level of organisation as far as services for elderly people are concerned. Dedicated structures work in network and this is efficient.

Regional Intermediate Report page -22- Franche-Comté 5. Good Practice Examples as a Pool of Ideas for Pilot Projects and Identification of Gaps

Good practice example 1: TADOU

1. Domain(s) of public services involved

ICT x Public transport Every day needs

Others:

2. Locality / Region / Country

Pays Doubs Central / Région Franche-Comté/ France

3. Territorial level / extent

Territory of 700 km², 26 589 inhabitants

4. Target Groups

Local population

5. Basic Idea / Aims / How does it work

Transport on request in partnership with local taxi cabs. People phone to book a journey (day, hour and place), the cost varies according to the date, the number of carried people and number of km this is a door-to-door service

6. Why it is considered innovative

Public-private partnership between elected representatives and taxi companies, feasibility study carried out with 2 Universities to define the service (assessment of running modalities, costs, tools to be implemented…), TADOU was the very first transport on request covering this size of area. It is often given as good practice and demands for information come from all over France

7. Start / How long it has been running

Since 2006

8. Costs / Funding

Costs : depending on number of journeys Funding : until 2008 : EU programme Leader+ and Doubs Departement, since 2009 : Doubs Departement

9. Transferability to other regions / conditions for a transfer (Please give also an estimation 1) good 2) medium 3) not transferable

Good transferability

10. More information (website, contact person)

Website : www.doubscentral.org Contact person : Emmanuelle Petit (project manager) : [email protected]

Regional Intermediate Report page -23- Franche-Comté Good practice example 2: health network

1. Domain(s) of public services involved

X ICT Public transport X Every day needs

Others:

2. Locality / Region / Country

Pays du Haut-Jura / Région Franche-Comté/ France

3. Territorial level / extent

962 km² , 51 734 inhabitants

4. Target groups

Family of elderly people, local population

5. Basic idea / Aims / How does it work

Three main objectives : creating a yearbook with access to large audience, which registers homes for elderly people and their main features, having a 2nd and more detailed level of information, accessible only to doctors and authorised people only, designing, in addition, a database of social actors, listed by fields and actions. Finally this system should strengthen local actors’ networks and give an easier access to information.

6. Why it is considered innovative

Work with the “services” committee: to have a good analysis of demand, to define the technical procedures, to guarantee the follow-up and the assessment of first tests Today new needs appear : to have an extranet for confidential content, to extend the partnership to other fields of intervention (social integration, literacy campaign)

7. Start / How long it has been running

Since 2007

8. Costs / Funding

Investments 15 000 euros Running costs : 6000 € training was done by a local provider Co-financing: Région Franche Comté (15%), State (15 %) and ERDF (50 %) (Interreg IIIB PUSEMOR)

9. Transferability to other regions / conditions for a transfer (Please give also an estimation 1) good 2) medium 3) not transferable Good transferability because :  simple technical tools (databases)  simple use  no need of high broadband access (classic ADSL is enough)  simple implementation for managers  it can be adapted to other needs  new demands from beneficiaries 10. More information (website, contact person)

http://www.parc-haut-jura.fr/fr/social/index.php

Regional Intermediate Report page -24- Franche-Comté Contact : [email protected]

Good practice example 3: c@mionet

1. Domain(s) of public services involved

X ICT Public transport Every day needs

Others:

2. Locality / Region / Country

Jura department/ Région Franche-Comté/France

3. Territorial level / extent

5000 m², 257 401 inhabitants, 15 773 enterprises

4. Target groups

Enterprises, youngsters associations

5. Basic idea / Aims / How does it work

To give access to high speed Internet (1 Mbit/s connection). A small van is equipped with 10 laptops and runs throughout the department, the power is provided with the vehicle’s battery. It is mainly used in jobs or economic events.

6. Why it is considered innovative

There aren’t many ICT services aimed at enterprises especially in terms of high speed Internet. There is a person in charge of helping the customers while using c@mionet, thus he can directly listen to problems or propositions of improvement made by the users, this is very useful. As it is used during job events it can give a connection for young people to the economic world more easily.

7. Start / How long it has been running

Since 2008

8. Costs / Funding

Cost : 65 000€ (vehicle, satellite system, laptops, WIFI system) Funding : Jura Departement, State and ERDF

9. Transferability to other regions / conditions for a transfer (Please give also an estimation 1) good 2) medium 3) not transferable

Good transferability : in addition to existing service to offer a comprehensive and extended range of ICT services. Being careful with ICT material (good quality) and expertise of the manager (technical but also networking and corporate skills)

10. More information (website, contact person)

Website : www.juratic.com Contact person :[email protected]

Regional Intermediate Report page -25- Franche-Comté 6. Conclusion and Outlook on Pilot Activities (Synthesis of framework conditions, problems of SGI and best practice examples and foreseen pilot activities)

6.1. Conclusions on the Regional Level

The phase of regional studies was a preliminary step to the development of our pilot projects: statistics and indicators give a clear and updated (most data have less than 3 years) view of the demographic, economic conditions and evolutions of our test areas. Moreover the feasibility study directly related to the pilot projects gave the opportunity to set relationships between local authorities and service providers (such as employment/health/family allowances agencies), in order to both adapt local demands to the reality and possibilities of service providers and to share the vision of a good, efficient and locally strengthened access to public services for local populations.

Regional Intermediate Report page -26- Franche-Comté Fig. 6: presence of public services (sources : Pays Horloger, Pays Haut-Jura) 6.2. Outlook on Pilot Activities

The following table should help to explain, why the chosen pilot activities are innovative.

Pilot Activity 1: setting-up video-services in pays Horloger

Demand Orientation: Does the pilot action respond to an existing or potential demand?

The study phase allowed to identify expectations of rural populations about accessibility to services; notably in terms of getting closer services to population (distance and travel time) but also by adapting them to lifestyles by offering greater opening hours.

Participatory Approach: Was the pilot action developed together with local stakeholders? How are they integrated into the implementation of the pilot activity?

Regional Intermediate Report page -27- Franche-Comté months by local areas about their feasibility study. The 2 test areas have collaborated (common steering committee) to carry out a detailed diagnosis at the beginning 2009 in order to find out potential geographic implementation, requested technical and human means and conditions. During Summer 2009 they defined technical requirements and features for the settlement of the videoservices.

Technical Innovation: Does the pilot action encompass any technical innovation?

Use of ICT and notably virtual appointments are not very common. Technical solutions must be “open”, i.e. to allow as many services as possible to use the videoservices. One will have to adapt or have existing systems evolved.

Organizational Innovation: Does the pilot action encompass any organisational innovation?

At the regional level the regional council and service providers signed an agreement in July 09 to define the commitments of all partners and the conditions to make this system successful.

Implementation: Can the pilot activity be implemented in the Test Area within the given timeframe of ACCESS?

Yes, given the results of the feasibility study, first video-services points should be ready for mid-2010

Financial Sustainability: Can the pilot activity be financed over the long term after the end of the ACCESS-project?

This issue was discussed with municipalities during the study phase. Beyond the investment costs, it is necessary to get a local involvement (in terms of human resources and ADSL cost) Assessment is planned after one running year to know how running costs could be gathered within groups of municipalities or at the Pays level.

Transferability: Can the lessons learnt from the pilot activity be transferred to other regions?

Yes, according to institutional and services organization among the different counties the implementation can be different but here are some elements that can be seen as “good practice”: Discussion at the territorial level by taking account of population habits can give the basis for a network among the territory The willingness of the territory to explore this field of services and to do it generally The significance of integrating and matching a pilot project with a more regional approach (in order to guarantee the continuity of the project) The significance of meeting all major stakeholders and to take time for the project to mature The significance of benchmarking The significance of working together with the service providers which will be integrated into the videoservice system to get to know their wishes in terms of geographic settlements, of experimentation and transfer of services on these tools. One has to be very careful on this point (to meet local population but also service providers expectations) otherwise the videoservice will remain empty.

Pilot Activity 2: setting up video-services in Pays du Haut-Jura

Demand Orientation: Does the pilot action respond to an existing or potential demand?

Regional Intermediate Report page -28- Franche-Comté them to lifestyles by offering greater opening hours.

Participatory Approach: Was the pilot action developed together with local stakeholders? How are they integrated into the implementation of the pilot activity?

At regional level, a committee was set up in late 2008 with regional services providers (such as employment/health/family allowances agencies) to define institutional and technical conditions to the implementation of videos-services in the region. The test areas will experiment the system before it is generalised for other territories. Thus regular reporting to the regional committee has been made for 8 months by local areas about their feasibility study. The 2 test areas have collaborated (common steering committee) to carry out a detailed diagnosis at the beginning 2009 in order to find out potential geographic implementation, requested technical and human means and conditions. During Summer 2009 they defined technical requirements and features for the settlement of the videoservices.

Technical Innovation: Does the pilot action encompass any technical innovation?

Organizational Innovation: Does the pilot action encompass any organisational innovation?

At the regional level the regional council and service providers signed an agreement in July 09 to define the commitments of all partners and the conditions to make this system successful.

Implementation: Can the pilot activity be implemented in the Test Area within the given timeframe of ACCESS?

Yes, given the results of the feasibility study, first video-services points should be ready for mid-2010

Financial Sustainability: Can the pilot activity be financed over the long term after the end of the ACCESS-project?

Transferability: Can the lessons learnt from the pilot activity be transferred to other regions?

Regional Intermediate Report page -29- Franche-Comté Appendix I: Good Practice Examples

Good Practice Examples 1 : TADOU

1. Domain(s) of public services involved

ICT x Public transport Every day needs

Others:

2. Target group

Local population

3. Territorial level or extent

Territory of 700 km², 26 589 inhabitants

4. For how long it has been running / operating?

Since 2006

5. Basic idea and aim of your good practice in the provision of public services?

To give the opportunity to everyone to travel easily in a rural area and at cheap costs Transport on request in partnership with local taxi cabs

6. Background / main reasons for implementation of this particular service and how did the operation emerge?

No public transport on the territory. One had to find solutions especially for young and elderly people

7. Who was the initiator?

Elected representatives of the Pays (following the work on their territorial charter which pointed out the problem)

8. How does it work / function?

Service runs from Mondays to Saturdays (6am to 7.30 pm). Customers have to be living within the Pays boundaries and book their journey the day before at least. Discounts can be given if booking is done 4 days in advance. (this measure aims at favourising early bookings in order to organise gathering of travellers in the same car). The service is limited to 20 journeys/user/month. Cost for user is very low since financial support is significant.

9. Who is the provider?

Pays Doubs Central

10. Why is it considered innovative?

11. Has the provision required special institutional arrangements?

No institutional arrangements but technical ones : a specific software was created to manage the bookings and one person was hired.

Regional Intermediate Report page -30- Franche-Comté 12. What were the initial costs (in €) and how was it financed? 13. What are the annual running costs (in €) and how are they financed?

Costs : depending on number of journeys Funding : - until 2008 : subsidies from EU programme Leader+ and Doubs Departement +contribution of groups of municipalities and municipalities themselves according to the number of travelers living in each area + financial participation of users, since 2009 : increased subsidies from Doubs Departement (end of Leader+ programme), support from local authorities should increase and as well as cost for users

14. Are there any problems / obstacles encountered / identified so far?

Issue of current financing and capacity to face the increasing use of the service

15. Any feedback and/or evaluation available? Do you plan to asses the operation? How?

A steering comity has been set up to follow the service evolution.

16. Future plans

It is foreseen to enlarge the service to other territories, notably to connect TADOU to other existing public transports. It is also planned to offer a specific service to disabled people

17. Do you think that this good practice is transferable to other regions? (Please give also an estimation 1) good 2) medium 3) not transferable)

Good transferability

18. Do you think that this good practice is transferable to other areas of domain in public services? (Please give also an estimation 1) good 2) medium 3) not transferable)

Difficult to assess

19. Contact information

Website : www.doubscentral.org Contact person : Emmanuelle Petit (project manager) : [email protected]

Good Practice Examples 2 : Health network

1. Domain(s) of public services involved

ICT x Public transport Every day needs

Others:

2. Target group

Family of elderly people, local population

3. Territorial level or extent

Pays du Haut-Jura (962 km², 51 734 inhabitants) / Région Franche-Comté/ France

Regional Intermediate Report page -31- Franche-Comté 4. For how long it has been running / operating?

Since 2007

5. Basic idea and aim of your good practice in the provision of public services?

6. Background / main reasons for implementation of this particular service and how did the operation emerge?

1/ discussion among members of the « services » committee 2/ assessed need to find solutions to difficult access to information 3/ Pays Haut-Jura willing to have ICT as a territorial development tool and to strengthen new local actors’ networks

7. Who was the initiator?

Pays du Haut-Jura, via its « services » committee, which gathers local actors and elected representatives. Many times the issue of difficult access to information was pointed out in this committee.

8. How does it work / function?

- A 2-year project, internally carried out with 1 project manager and an assiatnt - one referee in each institution Training to staff of homes to put information and data, regular updating is made now directly by the staff The assistant of the Pays is responsible for updating information on social actors’ profiles (yearly update)

9. Who is the provider?

The service is available on the Pays/Parc Haut-Jura website

10. Why is it considered innovative?

11. Has the provision required special institutional arrangements?

No special arrangements. An agreement between the Pays and the homes was signed, every home is committed to update information

12. What were the initial costs (in €) and how was it financed?

Investments 15 000 euros (maîtrise d’ouvrage Parc) Running costs (6000 €) training was done by a local provider The whole project (investment + training) was supported by Région Franche Comté (15%), French State (15 %) and ERDF (50 %) (Interreg IIIB PUSEMOR)

Regional Intermediate Report page -32- Franche-Comté 13. What are the annual running costs (in €) and how are they financed?

Plateform is hosted by the internet hardware of the Pays, i.e no cost Every partner pays its own ADSL subscription and updating costs are financed by the homes (staff costs, several days p.a)

14. Are there any problems / obstacles encountered / identified so far?

Some difficulties to contact independent practicians, given their individual organisation. Information is to be simple and concrete and files have to harmonised. One should begin “small” and progress step by step in the organisation and information collection. The work in committee is very important for that part.

15. Any feedback and/or evaluation available? Do you plan to asses the operation? How?

At the beginning 58 « actors » profiles, currently 205 10 homes’ detailed presentations Public use : 800 to 900 monthly connections wihch give a monthly consultation of 1700 to 2500 “home” profiles and 2 000 “social actors” profiles. (for a territory of 21 937 households)

16. Future plans

Following the homes’ request : strengthening of the interactivity with families of elderly people living in homes Following the request of social actors : setting up of a new information level (a private area on the website)

17. Do you think that this good practice is transferable to other regions? (Please give also an estimation 1) good 2) medium 3) not transferable) Good transferability because :  simple technical tools (databases)  simple use  no need of high broadband access (classic ADSL is enough)  simple implementation for managers  it can be adapted to other needs new demands from beneficiaries

18. Do you think that this good practice is transferable to other areas of domain in public services? (Please give also an estimation 1) good 2) medium 3) not transferable)

See n°17

19. Contact information

http://www.parc-haut-jura.fr/fr/social/index.php Contact : [email protected]

Regional Intermediate Report page -33- Franche-Comté Good Practice Examples 3 : c@mionet

1. Domain(s) of public services involved

ICT x Public transport Every day needs

Others:

2. Target group

Enterprises, youngsters associations

3. Territorial level or extent

Jura departement : 5000 m², 257 401 inhabitants, 15 773 enterprises

4. For how long it has been running / operating?

Since 2008

5. Basic idea and aim of your good practice in the provision of public services?

6. Background / main reasons for implementation of this particular service and how did the operation emerge?

It was set up during the programme for economic support in Haut-Jura

7. Who was the initiator?

Jura Département

8. How does it work / function?

A small van is equipped with 10 laptops and runs throughout the department, the power is provided with the vehicle’s battery. It is mainly used in jobs or economic events.

9. Who is the provider?

Association called Jur@tic

10. Why is it considered innovative?

11. Has the provision required special institutional arrangements?

12. What were the initial costs (in €) and how was it financed?

Cost : 65 000€ (vehicle, satellite system, laptops, WIFI system) Funding : Jura Departement, State and ERDF

13. What are the annual running costs (in €) and how are they financed?

Regional Intermediate Report page -34- Franche-Comté Not indicated

14. Are there any problems / obstacles encountered / identified so far?

15. Any feedback and/or evaluation available? Do you plan to asses the operation? How?

C@mionet has been used for more than 120 events. Half was related to raising ICT awareness among enterprises. The other half was for events with the economic chamber and social organisations. Geographically speaking, the van has been on almost every part of the department Good satisfaction from enterprises

16. Future plans

Presentation of Internet uses in rural area, service towards local authorities

17. Do you think that this good practice is transferable to other regions? (Please give also an estimation 1) good 2) medium 3) not transferable)

Good transferability: in addition to existing service to offer a comprehensive and extended range of ICT services. Being careful with ICT material (good quality) and expertise of the manager (technical but also networking and corporate skills)

18. Do you think that this good practice is transferable to other areas of domain in public services? (Please give also an estimation 1) good 2) medium 3) not transferable)

good

19. Contact information

Website : www.juratic.com Contact person : [email protected]

Regional Intermediate Report page -35- Franche-Comté Appendix II: Maps (resolution on municipality level) and Statistical Data

A Social Data – Population Structure and Area

population resident number of area development Population households from 1999 to year 2006 Year 2006 2006 in percent in unit person Number of in square km Indicator 1 POP_ACT HOHO_ACT AREA_ACT NUTS_2 Franche-Comté 0.37 1 150 624 492 401 16 202 NUTS_3 Doubs 0.42 516 158 221 545 5 234 Test Area 1 Pays Horloger 0.63 42 556 18 010 760 LAU_Nat Bonnétage 1.15 739 274 17.7 LAU_Nat Brétonvillers -0.64 228 105 13.7 LAU_Nat Chamesey 1.40 113 43 6.4 LAU_Nat Grand’Combe des 1.49 98 38 11.9 Bois LAU_Nat la Bosse 1.76 76 30 5.1 LAU_Nat la Chenalotte 2.74 356 124 4.9 LAU_Nat Laval-le-Prieuré -0.36 34 14 5.3 LAU_Nat le Barboux 2.09 227 83 11.3 LAU_Nat le Bélieu 0.63 286 106 10.7 106LAU_Nat le Bizot 2.51 242 87 7.9 LAU_Nat le Luhier 2.48 178 79 5.2 LAU_Nat le Mémont 2.95 38 15 3.2 LAU_Nat le Russey 0.24 1954 758 24.2 LAU_Nat les Fontenelles 1.63 499 173 8.4 LAU_Nat Longevelle-les- 1.04 50 19 2.6 Russey LAU_Nat Montbéliardot 2.07 85 33 3.8 LAU_Nat Mont-de-Laval 2.77 171 60 8.4 LAU_Nat Narbief -0.55 67 23 3.5 LAU_Nat Noel-Cerneux 1.4 330 115 6.4 LAU_Nat Plaimbois-du-Miroir 1.27 165 64 11.7 LAU_Nat Rosureux 1.99 95 43 6.1 LAU_Nat St Julien-les-Russey 3.14 144 52 10.0 LAU_Nat Battenans-Varins -0.45 54 23 6.4 LAU_Nat Belfays 2.51 99 39 3.2 LAU_Nat Belleherbe 0.30 588 245 16.1 LAU_Nat Cernay-l’Eglise 0.05 259 100 6.0 LAU_Nat Charmauvillers 1.80 239 103 10.5 LAU_Nat Charmoille 0.21 302 135 10.1 LAU_Nat Charquemont 0.97 2387 1088 21.4 LAU_Nat Cour-St-Maurice 1.50 177 73 4.5 LAU_Nat Damprichard 0.13 1787 774 21.9 LAU_Nat Ferrières-le-lac 5.54 134 48 2.5 LAU_Nat Fessevillers 2.22 166 64 6.2 LAU_Nat Fournet- 2.79 320 137 13.1 Blancheroche

Regional Intermediate Report page -36- Franche-Comté LAU_Nat Frambouhans 1.50 691 268 10.1 LAU_Nat Goumois -0.45 189 96 5.8 LAU_Nat la Grange 0.33 77 32 6.2 LAU_Nat les Bréseux 0.34 415 165 7.4 LAU_Nat les Ecorces 1.59 570 211 9.5 LAU_Nat Maîche -0.06 3959 1827 17.4 LAU_Nat Mancenans-Lizerne 0.80 162 58 6.1 LAU_Nat Mont-de-Vougney 1.72 156 61 7.0 LAU_Nat Orgeans- -1.50 47 19 4.8 Blanchefontaine LAU_Nat Provenchère -1.32 108 45 7.0 LAU_Nat Thiébouhans 2.22 221 81 5.8 LAU_Nat Trévillers 1.07 477 197 10.7 LAU_Nat Urtière 3.60 8 4 2.2 LAU_Nat Vaucluse 4.64 100 34 5.0 LAU_Nat Vauclusotte -1.07 101 41 7.6 LAU_Nat Grand’Combe- 0.72 1341 529 21.5 Chateleu LAU_Nat les Combes 1.86 694 241 17.6 LAU_Nat les Fins 1.00 2807 1119 25.4 LAU_Nat les Gras 1.22 721 290 15.0 LAU_Nat Montlebon 1.14 1873 720 27.3 LAU_Nat Morteau -0.16 6293 2979 14.1 LAU_Nat Villers-le-lac 0.42 4339 1901 30.2 LAU_Nat Peseux 0.13 96 35 6.6 LAU_Nat Rosières sur -1.35 105 43 5.3 Barbèche LAU_Nat Bief -0.73 116 54 3.8 LAU_Nat Burnevillers 1.14 46 12 6.7 LAU_Nat Chamesol 1.27 363 150 10.2 LAU_Nat Courtefontaine 0.84 230 97 7.7 LAU_Nat Dampjoux -1.11 140 58 2.3 LAU_Nat Fleurey 2.46 84 38 8.0 LAU_Nat Froidevaux -1.96 59 28 4.0 LAU_Nat Glère -.018 205 87 15.9 LAU_Nat Indevillers 1.50 221 85 22.8 LAU_Nat les Terres de Chaux 0.93 125 52 14.5 LAU_Nat les-Plains-et- -0.43 173 63 10.4 Grands-Essarts LAU_Nat Liebvillers 2.03 220 83 3.0 LAU_Nat Montancy -0.94 141 58 8.9 LAU_Nat Montandon -0.12 319 129 12.7 LAU_Nat Montéchéroux 0.52 568 242 13.1 LAU_Nat Montjoie le Château 1.09 24 11 5.4 LAU_Nat St Hippolyte -1.36 936 446 11.0 LAU_Nat Soulce-Cernay 1.14 103 44 8.6 LAU_Nat Valoreille 1.56 102 41 7.6 LAU_Nat Vaufrey -1.47 144 69 9.4

NUTS_3 Jura 0.32 257 401 111 277 4 999 Test Area 2 Pays Haut-Jura 0.22 51 734 21 937 962 LAU_Nat Avignon les St 1.23 341 137 7.8 Claude LAU_Nat Bellecombe -0.14 91 33 12.2 LAU_Nat Bellefontaine 2.06 534 205 24.7 LAU_Nat Bois d’Amont 0.84 1622 685 12.1

Regional Intermediate Report page -37- Franche-Comté LAU_Nat les Bouchoux 1.71 321 135 21.7 LAU_Nat Chancia 5.13 214 78 2.4 LAU_Nat Charchilla -1.27 225 101 6.8 LAU_Nat Chassal -0.30 497 197 5.2 LAU_Nat Chateau-des-Prés 0.59 174 73 8.6 LAU_Nat Chatel de Joux 0.51 50 23 14.1 LAU_Nat la Chaumusse 1.70 331 129 10.6 LAU_Nat Chaux des prés 1.07 183 71 7.8 LAU_Nat la Chaux du 1.13 534 205 21.7 Dombief LAU_Nat Choux 2.49 144 58 8.3 LAU_Nat Coiserette -0.56 44 18 5.9 LAU_Nat Coyrière -2.41 61 25 4.1 LAU_Nat Coyron 1.99 68 27 5.5 LAU_Nat Crenans 0.88 236 94 8.8 LAU_Nat les Crozets 0.54 211 94 7.6 LAU_Nat Cuttura 0.84 369 136 6.0 LAU_Nat Etival 0.77 303 140 13.8 LAU_Nat Fort du Plasne 0.97 429 165 12.9 LAU_Nat Grande rivière -0.44 417 169 30.6 LAU_Nat Jeurre 0.20 257 108 7.0 LAU_Nat Lac des Rouges 0.59 347 140 19.7 Truites LAU_Nat Lajoux 1.75 253 106 23.7 LAU_Nat Lamoura 2.53 534 230 22.3 LAU_Nat Larrivoire -0.96 100 45 6.5 LAU_Nat Lavancia-Epercy 0.51 645 238 10.6 LAU_Nat Lavans les St -0.15 1878 771 11.7 Claude LAU_Nat Lect 0.86 377 149 11.9 LAU_Nat Leschères 4.71 223 72 8.3 LAU_Nat Lézat -0.32 191 71 5.8 LAU_Nat Longchaumois 0.43 1130 471 57.6 LAU_Nat Maisod 1.52 306 125 7.4 LAU_Nat Martigna 0.69 204 84 8.8 LAU_Nat Meussia 0.10 385 160 13.6 LAU_Nat Moirans en 0.73 2248 931 26.6 Montagne LAU_Nat Molinges 1.70 683 281 2.6 LAU_Nat les Molunes 0.39 129 52 20.5 LAU_Nat Montclusel 0.14 174 67 9.6 LAU_Nat Morbier 0.15 2252 931 41.6 LAU_Nat Morez -1.47 5462 2546 9.7 LAU_Nat la Mouille 0.09 289 115 8.1 LAU_Nat les Moussières 1.64 187 87 17.0 LAU_Nat la pesse 2.68 326 137 24.3 LAU_Nat les Piards 0.21 179 75 5.3 LAU_Nat Ponthoux 0.90 86 33 2.2 LAU_Nat Pratz 2.85 569 205 9.9 LAU_Nat Prémanon 4.22 931 402 28.2 LAU_Nat Prénovel 0.54 309 125 8.2 LAU_Nat Ravilloles 1.62 460 177 7.8 LAU_Nat la Rixouse -0.41 208 83 12.6 LAU_Nat Rogna -0.12 207 80 10.5 LAU_Nat les Rousses 0.38 3018 1355 38.0

Regional Intermediate Report page -38- Franche-Comté LAU_Nat St Claude -0.36 12296 5284 70.2 LAU_Nat St Laurent-en- -0.35 1740 740 17.6 Grandvaux LAU_Nat St Lupicin 0.84 2225 890 9.5 LAU_Nat St Pierre 0.39 326 125 16.4 LAU_Nat Septmoncel -0.21 648 279 19.4 LAU_Nat Vaux les St Claude 0.34 703 278 9.4 LAU_Nat Villard St Sauveur -0.12 649 275 9.1 LAU_Nat Villards d’Héria -0.43 460 186 9.9 LAU_Nat Villard sur Bienne 4.22 185 63 10.4 LAU_Nat Viry 0.85 885 357 25.4 LAU_Nat Vulvoz 0.76 17 10 4.5

Regional Intermediate Report page -39- Franche-Comté A Social Data – Age Pattern

old age young age population population dependency dependency elder younger ratio ratio 65 years 20 years year 2006 year 2006 year 2006 year 2006 in percent in percent in unit person in unit person Indicator 2a Indicator 2b POP_OLD POP_YOUN NUTS_2 Franche-Comté 26 29 192 812 218 830 NUTS_3 Doubs 23 28 79 899 95 973 Test Area 1 Pays Horloger 24 30 6 591 8 335 LAU_Nat Bonnétage 25 34 115 160 LAU_Nat Brétonvillers 57 30 69 37 LAU_Nat Chamesey 28 48 18 31 LAU_Nat Grand’Combe des Bois 33 45 18 25 LAU_Nat la Bosse 14 35 7 18 LAU_Nat la Chenalotte 4 35 11 89 LAU_Nat Laval-le-Prieuré 24 38 5 8 LAU_Nat le Barboux 18 48 24 66 LAU_Nat le Bélieu 14 34 27 66 106LAU_Nat le Bizot 12 47 18 72 LAU_Nat le Luhier 25 32 28 36 LAU_Nat le Mémont 40 50 8 10 LAU_Nat le Russey 25 39 300 461 LAU_Nat les Fontenelles 23 30 74 97 LAU_Nat Longevelle-les-Russey 30 37 9 11 LAU_Nat Montbéliardot 29 48 14 23 LAU_Nat Mont-de-Laval 30 46 29 45 LAU_Nat Narbief 32 49 12 18 LAU_Nat Noel-Cerneux 9 39 21 86 LAU_Nat Plaimbois-du-Miroir 24 38 24 39 LAU_Nat Rosureux 33 33 19 19 LAU_Nat St Julien-les-Russey 26 52 21 42 LAU_Nat Battenans-Varins 33 30 11 10 LAU_Nat Belfays 14 43 9 27 LAU_Nat Belleherbe 30 33 109 118 LAU_Nat Cernay-l’Eglise 16 31 28 55 LAU_Nat Charmauvillers 23 33 35 51 LAU_Nat Charmoille 40 33 70 57 LAU_Nat Charquemont 26 26 412 407 LAU_Nat Cour-St-Maurice 37 30 39 32 LAU_Nat Damprichard 29 28 328 321 LAU_Nat Ferrières-le-lac 12 44 10 38 LAU_Nat Fessevillers 8 32 9 38 LAU_Nat Fournet-Blancheroche 15 34 33 73 LAU_Nat Frambouhans 15 34 71 159 LAU_Nat Goumois 21 22 28 29 LAU_Nat la Grange 37 30 17 14 LAU_Nat les Bréseux 11 33 32 95 LAU_Nat les Ecorces 14 36 54 137 LAU_Nat Maîche 29 25 752 636 LAU_Nat Mancenans-Lizerne 15 31 17 34 LAU_Nat Mont-de-Vougney 17 35 17 36

Regional Intermediate Report page -40- Franche-Comté LAU_Nat Orgeans-Blanchefontaine 22 25 7 8 LAU_Nat Provenchère 45 29 28 18 LAU_Nat Thiébouhans 17 47 23 63 LAU_Nat Trévillers 21 29 57 91 LAU_Nat Urtière 20 40 1 2 LAU_Nat Vaucluse 11 21 8 16 LAU_Nat Vauclusotte 24 18 17 13 LAU_Nat Grand’Combe-Chateleu 24 33 202 283 LAU_Nat les Combes 14 38 62 175 LAU_Nat les Fins 22 30 403 560 LAU_Nat les Gras 22 35 102 162 LAU_Nat Montlebon 22 34 263 409 LAU_Nat Morteau 26 24 1088 1023 LAU_Nat Villers-le-lac 23 29 647 826 LAU_Nat Peseux 40 26 23 15 LAU_Nat Rosières sur Barbèche 30 20 21 14 LAU_Nat Bief 26 19 21 15 LAU_Nat Burnevillers 15 21 5 7 LAU_Nat Chamesol 22 32 52 75 LAU_Nat Courtefontaine 28 35 40 49 LAU_Nat Dampjoux 16 30 15 29 LAU_Nat Fleurey 49 30 23 14 LAU_Nat Froidevaux 25 23 10 9 LAU_Nat Glère 21 28 29 39 LAU_Nat Indevillers 20 43 27 58 LAU_Nat les Terres de Chaux 18 25 16 22 LAU_Nat les-Plains-et-Grands- 16 36 18 41 Essarts LAU_Nat Liebvillers 20 32 29 46 LAU_Nat Montancy 18 32 17 30 LAU_Nat Montandon 16 26 35 59 LAU_Nat Montéchéroux 24 29 88 107 LAU_Nat Montjoie le Château 46 38 6 5 LAU_Nat St Hippolyte 32 26 191 156 LAU_Nat Soulce-Cernay 14 29 10 21 LAU_Nat Valoreille 27 46 16 27 LAU_Nat Vaufrey 31 24 29 22

NUTS_3 Jura 30 30 48 846 47 416 Test Area 2 Pays Haut-Jura 23 31 7 780 10 407 LAU_Nat Avignon les St Claude 21 27 49 62 LAU_Nat Bellecombe 25 40 14 22 LAU_Nat Bellefontaine 18 34 62 119 LAU_Nat Bois d’Amont 20 33 208 351 LAU_Nat les Bouchoux 36 34 68 64 LAU_Nat Chancia 8 38 12 56 LAU_Nat Charchilla 22 21 35 33 LAU_Nat Chassal 25 28 81 92 LAU_Nat Chateau-des-Prés 21 23 25 28 LAU_Nat Chatel de Joux 20 23 7 8 LAU_Nat la Chaumusse 16 33 35 74 LAU_Nat Chaux des prés 24 35 28 40 LAU_Nat la Chaux du Dombief 16 40 55 136 LAU_Nat Choux 27 20 26 20 LAU_Nat Coiserette 33 30 9 8

Regional Intermediate Report page -41- Franche-Comté LAU_Nat Coyrière 14 8 7 4 LAU_Nat Coyron 17 45 7 19 LAU_Nat Crenans 12 26 21 45 LAU_Nat les Crozets 37 32 46 40 LAU_Nat Cuttura 19 27 47 69 LAU_Nat Etival 51 31 85 52 LAU_Nat Fort du Plasne 15 31 44 91 LAU_Nat Grande rivière 24 33 63 88 LAU_Nat Jeurre 17 26 31 46 LAU_Nat Lac des Rouges Truites 18 34 41 77 LAU_Nat Lajoux 23 42 35 64 LAU_Nat Lamoura 15 29 55 109 LAU_Nat Larrivoire 14 17 11 13 LAU_Nat Lavancia-Epercy 15 34 66 147 LAU_Nat Lavans les St Claude 25 30 304 364 LAU_Nat Lect 23 41 52 94 LAU_Nat Leschères 17 46 23 63 LAU_Nat Lézat 16 33 21 42 LAU_Nat Longchaumois 24 35 170 247 LAU_Nat Maisod 15 32 32 66 LAU_Nat Martigna 25 44 30 53 LAU_Nat Meussia 35 30 81 71 LAU_Nat Moirans en Montagne 25 29 364 420 LAU_Nat Molinges 23 42 94 175 LAU_Nat les Molunes 21 40 17 32 LAU_Nat Montclusel 16 37 18 42 LAU_Nat Morbier 21 28 324 417 LAU_Nat Morez 21 27 778 1010 LAU_Nat la Mouille 19 26 38 51 LAU_Nat les Moussières 29 32 34 37 LAU_Nat la pesse 23 35 47 73 LAU_Nat les Piards 30 36 32 39 LAU_Nat Ponthoux 26 36 14 19 LAU_Nat Pratz 16 41 58 148 LAU_Nat Prémanon 10 34 67 220 LAU_Nat Prénovel 24 42 44 78 LAU_Nat Ravilloles 18 36 54 107 LAU_Nat la Rixouse 15 29 22 42 LAU_Nat Rogna 18 34 24 46 LAU_Nat les Rousses 16 30 328 613 LAU_Nat St Claude 29 31 2186 2330 LAU_Nat St Laurent-en-Grandvaux 30 28 333 309 LAU_Nat St Lupicin 22 32 323 457 LAU_Nat St Pierre 20 38 42 78 LAU_Nat Septmoncel 37 34 141 129 LAU_Nat Vaux les St Claude 26 29 119 131 LAU_Nat Villard St Sauveur 19 19 58 90 LAU_Nat Villards d’Héria 24 32 72 93 LAU_Nat Villard sur Bienne 8 52 9 60 LAU_Nat Viry 20 31 118 180 LAU_Nat Vulvoz 86 57 6 4

Regional Intermediate Report page -42- Franche-Comté B Socio-Economic Data – Maximum Population Ratio (with commuters and tourists)

maximum commuters commuters overnight population coming in leaving out stays in ratio to work for work Tourism year 2006 year 2006 year 2006 year 2007 Indicator 3 WORK_IN WORK_OUT OVNSTAY_T NUTS_2 Franche-Comté 100 N/A N/A 1 948 000 NUTS_3 Doubs 101 N/A N/A 971 000 Test Area 1 Pays Horloger 99 9240 10260 241 540 LAU_Nat Bonnétage N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Brétonvillers N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Chamesey N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Grand’Combe des Bois N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat la Bosse N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat la Chenalotte N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Laval-le-Prieuré N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat le Barboux N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat le Bélieu N/A N/A N/A 106LAU_Nat le Bizot N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat le Luhier N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat le Mémont N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat le Russey N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat les Fontenelles N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Longevelle-les-Russey N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Montbéliardot N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Mont-de-Laval N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Narbief N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Noel-Cerneux N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Plaimbois-du-Miroir N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Rosureux N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat St Julien-les-Russey N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Battenans-Varins N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Belfays N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Belleherbe N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Cernay-l’Eglise N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Charmauvillers N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Charmoille N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Charquemont N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Cour-St-Maurice N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Damprichard N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Ferrières-le-lac N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Fessevillers N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Fournet-Blancheroche N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Frambouhans N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Goumois N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat la Grange N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat les Bréseux N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat les Ecorces N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Maîche N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Mancenans-Lizerne N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Mont-de-Vougney N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Orgeans-Blanchefontaine N/A N/A N/A

Regional Intermediate Report page -43- Franche-Comté LAU_Nat Provenchère N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Thiébouhans N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Trévillers N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Urtière N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Vaucluse N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Vauclusotte N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Grand’Combe-Chateleu N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat les Combes N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat les Fins N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat les Gras N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Montlebon N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Morteau N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Villers-le-lac N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Peseux N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Rosières sur Barbèche N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Bief N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Burnevillers N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Chamesol N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Courtefontaine N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Dampjoux N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Fleurey N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Froidevaux N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Glère N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Indevillers N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat les Terres de Chaux N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat les-Plains-et-Grands- N/A N/A N/A Essarts LAU_Nat Liebvillers N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Montancy N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Montandon N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Montéchéroux N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Montjoie le Château N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat St Hippolyte N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Soulce-Cernay N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Valoreille N/A N/A N/A LAU_Nat Vaufrey N/A N/A N/A

NUTS_3 Jura 100 N/A N/A N/A Test Area 2 Pays Haut-Jura 103 12 026 12 026 657 895 LAU_Nat Avignon les St Claude LAU_Nat Bellecombe LAU_Nat Bellefontaine LAU_Nat Bois d’Amont LAU_Nat les Bouchoux LAU_Nat Chancia LAU_Nat Charchilla LAU_Nat Chassal LAU_Nat Chateau-des-Prés LAU_Nat Chatel de Joux LAU_Nat la Chaumusse LAU_Nat Chaux des prés LAU_Nat la Chaux du Dombief LAU_Nat Choux LAU_Nat Coiserette LAU_Nat Coyrière

Regional Intermediate Report page -44- Franche-Comté LAU_Nat Coyron LAU_Nat Crenans LAU_Nat les Crozets LAU_Nat Cuttura LAU_Nat Etival LAU_Nat Fort du Plasne LAU_Nat Grande rivière LAU_Nat Jeurre LAU_Nat Lac des Rouges Truites LAU_Nat Lajoux LAU_Nat Lamoura LAU_Nat Larrivoire LAU_Nat Lavancia-Epercy LAU_Nat Lavans les St Claude LAU_Nat Lect LAU_Nat Leschères LAU_Nat Lézat LAU_Nat Longchaumois LAU_Nat Maisod LAU_Nat Martigna LAU_Nat Meussia LAU_Nat Moirans en Montagne LAU_Nat Molinges LAU_Nat les Molunes LAU_Nat Montclusel LAU_Nat Morbier LAU_Nat Morez LAU_Nat la Mouille LAU_Nat les Moussières LAU_Nat la pesse LAU_Nat les Piards LAU_Nat Ponthoux LAU_Nat Pratz LAU_Nat Prémanon LAU_Nat Prénovel LAU_Nat Ravilloles LAU_Nat la Rixouse LAU_Nat Rogna LAU_Nat les Rousses LAU_Nat St Claude LAU_Nat St Laurent-en-Grandvaux LAU_Nat St Lupicin LAU_Nat St Pierre LAU_Nat Septmoncel LAU_Nat Vaux les St Claude LAU_Nat Villard St Sauveur LAU_Nat Villards d’Héria LAU_Nat Villard sur Bienne LAU_Nat Viry LAU_Nat Vulvoz

Regional Intermediate Report page -45- Franche-Comté B Socio-Economic Data – Economic Structure

develop- actual number of number of ment of number of enterprises enterprises enterprises enterprises before before year 2000 to year 2007 year 2007 year x 2007 Indicator 4 ENT_ACT ENT_BACK ENT_BACK NUTS_2 Franche-Comté 0.02 42 597 37 170 NUTS_3 Doubs 0.02 18 661 16 059 Test Area 1 Pays Horloger 0.02 1601 1396 LAU_Nat Bonnétage 0.02 27 23 LAU_Nat Brétonvillers 0.04 12 9 LAU_Nat Chamesey 0.09 6 3 LAU_Nat Grand’Combe des Bois 0.00 3 3 LAU_Nat la Bosse 0.01 1 0 LAU_Nat la Chenalotte 0.14 3 1 LAU_Nat Laval-le-Prieuré 0.01 1 0 LAU_Nat le Barboux 0.02 8 7 LAU_Nat le Bélieu 0.03 22 18 106LAU_Nat le Bizot 0.02 7 6 LAU_Nat le Luhier -0.03 4 5 LAU_Nat le Mémont 0.04 4 3 LAU_Nat le Russey 0.02 90 76 LAU_Nat les Fontenelles 0.04 15 11 LAU_Nat Longevelle-les-Russey 0.14 3 1 LAU_Nat Montbéliardot -0.09 1 2 LAU_Nat Mont-de-Laval 0.14 3 1 LAU_Nat Narbief 0.02 2 0 LAU_Nat Noel-Cerneux 0.07 9 5 LAU_Nat Plaimbois-du-Miroir 0.01 1 0 LAU_Nat Rosureux 0.00 3 3 LAU_Nat St Julien-les-Russey 0.00 3 3 LAU_Nat Battenans-Varins 0.00 2 2 LAU_Nat Belfays 0.00 1 1 LAU_Nat Belleherbe 0.05 39 27 LAU_Nat Cernay-l’Eglise -0.05 2 3 LAU_Nat Charmauvillers 0.00 9 9 LAU_Nat Charmoille 0.06 5 3 LAU_Nat Charquemont 0.00 75 75 LAU_Nat Cour-St-Maurice -0.01 9 10 LAU_Nat Damprichard 0.01 60 56 LAU_Nat Ferrières-le-lac 0.04 4 3 LAU_Nat Fessevillers 0.14 3 1 LAU_Nat Fournet-Blancheroche -0.09 3 6 LAU_Nat Frambouhans 0.01 21 20 LAU_Nat Goumois -0.03 9 11 LAU_Nat la Grange 0.00 1 1 LAU_Nat les Bréseux -0.02 6 7 LAU_Nat les Ecorces 0.01 9 8 LAU_Nat Maîche 0.00 194 188 LAU_Nat Mancenans-Lizerne -0.05 2 3 LAU_Nat Mont-de-Vougney -0.05 2 3

Regional Intermediate Report page -46- Franche-Comté LAU_Nat Orgeans-Blanchefontaine 0.00 0 0 LAU_Nat Provenchère 0.07 7 4 LAU_Nat Thiébouhans 0.02 7 6 LAU_Nat Trévillers 0.08 26 14 LAU_Nat Urtière 0.00 0 0 LAU_Nat Vaucluse 0.00 6 6 LAU_Nat Vauclusotte 0.02 2 0 LAU_Nat Grand’Combe-Chateleu 0.01 51 46 LAU_Nat les Combes 0.03 21 16 LAU_Nat les Fins 0.03 128 97 LAU_Nat les Gras 0.01 19 17 LAU_Nat Montlebon 0.01 52 48 LAU_Nat Morteau 0.02 358 302 LAU_Nat Villers-le-lac 0.01 119 114 LAU_Nat Peseux -0.06 3 5 LAU_Nat Rosières sur Barbèche 0.00 3 3 LAU_Nat Bief 0.14 3 1 LAU_Nat Burnevillers 0.00 0 0 LAU_Nat Chamesol -0.02 6 7 LAU_Nat Courtefontaine -0.02 5 6 LAU_Nat Dampjoux -0.09 1 2 LAU_Nat Fleurey 0.02 2 0 LAU_Nat Froidevaux 0.00 1 1 LAU_Nat Glère 0.00 5 5 LAU_Nat Indevillers -0.02 5 6 LAU_Nat les Terres de Chaux 0.04 4 3 LAU_Nat les-Plains-et-Grands- 0.06 5 3 Essarts LAU_Nat Liebvillers 0.02 2 0 LAU_Nat Montancy -0.09 1 2 LAU_Nat Montandon 0.02 6 5 LAU_Nat Montéchéroux 0.02 7 6 LAU_Nat Montjoie le Château 0.00 1 1 LAU_Nat St Hippolyte 0.02 54 46 LAU_Nat Soulce-Cernay 0.02 2 0 LAU_Nat Valoreille -0.04 3 4 LAU_Nat Vaufrey -0.05 2 3

NUTS_3 Jura 0.01 11 168 9 972 Test Area 2 Pays Haut-Jura 0.01 2326 2102 LAU_Nat Avignon les St Claude -0.02 6 7 LAU_Nat Bellecombe 0.03 5 4 LAU_Nat Bellefontaine 0.03 31 25 LAU_Nat Bois d’Amont 0.02 67 57 LAU_Nat les Bouchoux 0.02 8 7 LAU_Nat Chancia 0.31 12 1 LAU_Nat Charchilla 0.1 11 10 LAU_Nat Chassal 0.01 1 0 LAU_Nat Chateau-des-Prés 0.03 5 4 LAU_Nat Chatel de Joux -0.17 1 4 LAU_Nat la Chaumusse 0.37 19 1 LAU_Nat Chaux des prés 0.09 6 3 LAU_Nat la Chaux du Dombief 0.01 22 20 LAU_Nat Choux -0.03 4 5 LAU_Nat Coiserette 0.00 2 2

Regional Intermediate Report page -47- Franche-Comté LAU_Nat Coyrière 0.00 3 3 LAU_Nat Coyron 0.00 3 3 LAU_Nat Crenans 0.03 10 8 LAU_Nat les Crozets -0.01 12 13 LAU_Nat Cuttura 0.04 7 5 LAU_Nat Etival 0.04 17 12 LAU_Nat Fort du Plasne 0.04 12 9 LAU_Nat Grande rivière -0.07 8 14 LAU_Nat Jeurre 0.03 9 7 LAU_Nat Lac des Rouges Truites 0.04 18 13 LAU_Nat Lajoux 0.04 21 15 LAU_Nat Lamoura 0.06 45 28 LAU_Nat Larrivoire 0.04 4 3 LAU_Nat Lavancia-Epercy 0.02 25 22 LAU_Nat Lavans les St Claude 0.02 63 53 LAU_Nat Lect -0.02 12 14 LAU_Nat Leschères 0.05 3 2 LAU_Nat Lézat -0.09 1 2 LAU_Nat Longchaumois -0.03 31 38 LAU_Nat Maisod 0.08 13 7 LAU_Nat Martigna 0.09 4 2 LAU_Nat Meussia -0.03 9 11 LAU_Nat Moirans en Montagne 0.03 122 94 LAU_Nat Molinges 0.01 26 24 LAU_Nat les Molunes 0.05 16 11 LAU_Nat Montclusel 0.00 4 4 LAU_Nat Morbier 0.01 106 97 LAU_Nat Morez 0.01 252 227 LAU_Nat la Mouille 0.00 9 9 LAU_Nat les Moussières 0.03 16 13 LAU_Nat la pesse 0.00 34 34 LAU_Nat les Piards 0.06 5 3 LAU_Nat Ponthoux -0.01 0 1 LAU_Nat Pratz 0.11 17 7 LAU_Nat Prémanon 0.01 51 48 LAU_Nat Prénovel 0.07 12 7 LAU_Nat Ravilloles 0.05 6 4 LAU_Nat la Rixouse 0.02 6 5 LAU_Nat Rogna 0.09 6 3 LAU_Nat les Rousses 0.00 233 225 LAU_Nat St Claude 0.01 547 519 LAU_Nat St Laurent-en-Grandvaux 0.00 91 91 LAU_Nat St Lupicin 0.00 77 76 LAU_Nat St Pierre -0.01 17 19 LAU_Nat Septmoncel 0.03 41 33 LAU_Nat Vaux les St Claude -0.03 29 38 LAU_Nat Villard St Sauveur -0.03 18 23 LAU_Nat Villards d’Héria 0.00 14 14 LAU_Nat Villard sur Bienne 0.00 2 2 LAU_Nat Viry 0.01 38 36 LAU_Nat Vulvoz 0.00 1 1

Regional Intermediate Report page -48- Franche-Comté C Spatial Data - Settlement

local local population population settlement settlement living in living in concentra- concentrat- compact compact tion Ratio ion Ratio settlements settlements larger 500 larger 1.000 larger 500 larger 1.000 year 2006 year 2006 year 2006 year 2006 in percent in percent in unit person in unit person Indicator 5 a Indicator 5b SETT_L500 SETT_L1000 NUTS_2 Franche-Comté 77 64 881 1116 739 767 NUTS_3 Doubs 84 74 433 151 381 667 Test Area 1 Pays Horloger 76 63 32 247 26 740 LAU_Nat Bonnétage - - 739 - LAU_Nat Brétonvillers - - - - LAU_Nat Chamesey - - - - LAU_Nat Grand’Combe des Bois - - - - LAU_Nat la Bosse - - - - LAU_Nat la Chenalotte - - - - LAU_Nat Laval-le-Prieuré - - - - LAU_Nat le Barboux - - - - LAU_Nat le Bélieu - - - - 106LAU_Nat le Bizot - - - - LAU_Nat le Luhier - - - - LAU_Nat le Mémont - - - - LAU_Nat le Russey - - 1954 1954 LAU_Nat les Fontenelles - - - - LAU_Nat Longevelle-les-Russey - - - - LAU_Nat Montbéliardot - - - - LAU_Nat Mont-de-Laval - - - - LAU_Nat Narbief - - - - LAU_Nat Noel-Cerneux - - - - LAU_Nat Plaimbois-du-Miroir - - - - LAU_Nat Rosureux - - - - LAU_Nat St Julien-les-Russey - - - - LAU_Nat Battenans-Varins - - - - LAU_Nat Belfays - - - - LAU_Nat Belleherbe - - 588 - LAU_Nat Cernay-l’Eglise - - - - LAU_Nat Charmauvillers - - - - LAU_Nat Charmoille - - - - LAU_Nat Charquemont - - 2387 2387 LAU_Nat Cour-St-Maurice - - - - LAU_Nat Damprichard - - 1787 1787 LAU_Nat Ferrières-le-lac - - - - LAU_Nat Fessevillers - - - - LAU_Nat Fournet-Blancheroche - - - - LAU_Nat Frambouhans - - 691 - LAU_Nat Goumois - - - - LAU_Nat la Grange - - - - LAU_Nat les Bréseux - - - - LAU_Nat les Ecorces - - 570 - LAU_Nat Maîche - - 3959 3959

Regional Intermediate Report page -49- Franche-Comté LAU_Nat Mancenans-Lizerne - - - - LAU_Nat Mont-de-Vougney - - - - LAU_Nat Orgeans-Blanchefontaine - - - - LAU_Nat Provenchère - - - - LAU_Nat Thiébouhans - - - - LAU_Nat Trévillers - - - - LAU_Nat Urtière - - - - LAU_Nat Vaucluse - - - - LAU_Nat Vauclusotte - - - - LAU_Nat Grand’Combe-Chateleu - - 1341 1341 LAU_Nat les Combes - - 694 - LAU_Nat les Fins - - 2807 2807 LAU_Nat les Gras - - 721 - LAU_Nat Montlebon - - 1873 1873 LAU_Nat Morteau - - 6293 6293 LAU_Nat Villers-le-lac - - 4339 4339 LAU_Nat Peseux - - - - LAU_Nat Rosières sur Barbèche - - - - LAU_Nat Bief - - - - LAU_Nat Burnevillers - - - - LAU_Nat Chamesol - - - - LAU_Nat Courtefontaine - - - - LAU_Nat Dampjoux - - - - LAU_Nat Fleurey - - - - LAU_Nat Froidevaux - - - - LAU_Nat Glère - - - - LAU_Nat Indevillers - - - - LAU_Nat les Terres de Chaux - - - - LAU_Nat les-Plains-et-Grands- --- - Essarts LAU_Nat Liebvillers - - - - LAU_Nat Montancy - - - - LAU_Nat Montandon - - - - LAU_Nat Montéchéroux - - 568 - LAU_Nat Montjoie le Château - - - - LAU_Nat St Hippolyte - - 936 - LAU_Nat Soulce-Cernay - - - - LAU_Nat Valoreille - - - - LAU_Nat Vaufrey - - - -

NUTS_3 Jura 66 52 171 170 133 775 Test Area 2 Pays Haut-Jura 79 65 40 840 33 525 LAU_Nat Avignon les St Claude - - - - LAU_Nat Bellecombe - - - - LAU_Nat Bellefontaine - - 534 - LAU_Nat Bois d’Amont - - 1622 1622 LAU_Nat les Bouchoux - - - - LAU_Nat Chancia - - - - LAU_Nat Charchilla - - - - LAU_Nat Chassal - - - - LAU_Nat Chateau-des-Prés - - - - LAU_Nat Chatel de Joux - - - - LAU_Nat la Chaumusse - - - - LAU_Nat Chaux des prés - - - - LAU_Nat la Chaux du Dombief - - 534 -

Regional Intermediate Report page -50- Franche-Comté LAU_Nat Choux - - - - LAU_Nat Coiserette - - - - LAU_Nat Coyrière - - - - LAU_Nat Coyron - - - - LAU_Nat Crenans - - - - LAU_Nat les Crozets - - - - LAU_Nat Cuttura - - - - LAU_Nat Etival - - - - LAU_Nat Fort du Plasne - - - - LAU_Nat Grande rivière - - - - LAU_Nat Jeurre - - - - LAU_Nat Lac des Rouges Truites - - - - LAU_Nat Lajoux - - - - LAU_Nat Lamoura - - 534 - LAU_Nat Larrivoire - - - - LAU_Nat Lavancia-Epercy - - - - LAU_Nat Lavans les St Claude - - 645 - LAU_Nat Lect - - 1878 1878 LAU_Nat Leschères - - - LAU_Nat Lézat - - - LAU_Nat Longchaumois - - 1130 1130 LAU_Nat Maisod - - - - LAU_Nat Martigna - - - - LAU_Nat Meussia - - - - LAU_Nat Moirans en Montagne - - 2248 2248 LAU_Nat Molinges - - 683 - LAU_Nat les Molunes - - - - LAU_Nat Montclusel - - - - LAU_Nat Morbier - - 2252 2252 LAU_Nat Morez - - 5462 5462 LAU_Nat la Mouille - - - - LAU_Nat les Moussières - - - - LAU_Nat la pesse - - - - LAU_Nat les Piards - - - - LAU_Nat Ponthoux - - - - LAU_Nat Pratz - - 569 - LAU_Nat Prémanon - - 931 - LAU_Nat Prénovel - - - - LAU_Nat Ravilloles - - - - LAU_Nat la Rixouse - - - - LAU_Nat Rogna - - - - LAU_Nat les Rousses - - 3018 3018 LAU_Nat St Claude - - 11950 11950 LAU_Nat St Laurent-en-Grandvaux - - 1740 1740 LAU_Nat St Lupicin - - 2225 2225 LAU_Nat St Pierre - - - - LAU_Nat Septmoncel - - 648 - LAU_Nat Vaux les St Claude - - 703 - LAU_Nat Villard St Sauveur - - 649 - LAU_Nat Villards d’Héria - - - - LAU_Nat Villard sur Bienne - - - - LAU_Nat Viry - - 885 - LAU_Nat Vulvoz - - - -

Regional Intermediate Report page -51- Franche-Comté C Spatial Data – Individual Traffic and Public Transport

regional regional maximum distance reachability reachability frequency to next regional individual public public traffic center traffic transit year 2009 year 2009 year 2009 in minutes in minutes number of in km Indicator 6a Indicator 6b Indicator 7 optional ! NUTS_2 Franche-Comté / / / NUTS_3 Doubs / / / Test Area 1 Pays Horloger 64 90 8 LAU_Nat Bonnétage 57 - - LAU_Nat Brétonvillers 55 - - LAU_Nat Chamesey 55 - - LAU_Nat Grand’Combe des Bois 69 - - LAU_Nat la Bosse 51 - - LAU_Nat la Chenalotte 57 - - LAU_Nat Laval-le-Prieuré 50 - - LAU_Nat le Barboux 60 - - LAU_Nat le Bélieu 49 - - 106LAU_Nat le Bizot 54 - - LAU_Nat le Luhier 50 - - LAU_Nat le Mémont 54 - - LAU_Nat le Russey 59 - - LAU_Nat les Fontenelles 57 - - LAU_Nat Longevelle-les-Russey 56 - - LAU_Nat Montbéliardot 51 - - LAU_Nat Mont-de-Laval 50 - - LAU_Nat Narbief 56 - - LAU_Nat Noel-Cerneux 54 - - LAU_Nat Plaimbois-du-Miroir 56 - - LAU_Nat Rosureux 59 - - LAU_Nat St Julien-les-Russey 60 - - LAU_Nat Battenans-Varins 65 - - LAU_Nat Belfays 80 - - LAU_Nat Belleherbe 55 - - LAU_Nat Cernay-l’Eglise 71 - - LAU_Nat Charmauvillers 81 - - LAU_Nat Charmoille 58 - - LAU_Nat Charquemont 68 - - LAU_Nat Cour-St-Maurice 60 - - LAU_Nat Damprichard 75 - - LAU_Nat Ferrières-le-lac 78 - - LAU_Nat Fessevillers 82 - - LAU_Nat Fournet-Blancheroche 73 - - LAU_Nat Frambouhans 61 - - LAU_Nat Goumois 88 - - LAU_Nat la Grange 58 - - LAU_Nat les Bréseux 70 - - LAU_Nat les Ecorces 66 - - LAU_Nat Maîche 66 - - LAU_Nat Mancenans-Lizerne 68 - -

Regional Intermediate Report page -52- Franche-Comté LAU_Nat Mont-de-Vougney 67 - - LAU_Nat Orgeans-Blanchefontaine 64 - - LAU_Nat Provenchère 56 - - LAU_Nat Thiébouhans 72 - - LAU_Nat Trévillers 74 - - LAU_Nat Urtière 85 - - LAU_Nat Vaucluse 59 - - LAU_Nat Vauclusotte 65 - - LAU_Nat Grand’Combe-Chateleu 60 - - LAU_Nat les Combes 54 - - LAU_Nat les Fins 52 - - LAU_Nat les Gras 66 - - LAU_Nat Montlebon 66 - - LAU_Nat Morteau 59 90 8 LAU_Nat Villers-le-lac 66 - - LAU_Nat Peseux 60 - - LAU_Nat Rosières sur Barbèche 56 - - LAU_Nat Bief 65 - - LAU_Nat Burnevillers 92 - - LAU_Nat Chamesol 74 - - LAU_Nat Courtefontaine 82 - - LAU_Nat Dampjoux 63 - - LAU_Nat Fleurey 69 - - LAU_Nat Froidevaux 63 - - LAU_Nat Glère 85 - - LAU_Nat Indevillers 87 - - LAU_Nat les Terres de Chaux 68 - - LAU_Nat les-Plains-et-Grands- 81 - - Essarts LAU_Nat Liebvillers 69 - - LAU_Nat Montancy 93 - - LAU_Nat Montandon 75 - - LAU_Nat Montéchéroux 70 - - LAU_Nat Montjoie le Château 78 - - LAU_Nat St Hippolyte 69 - - LAU_Nat Soulce-Cernay 72 - - LAU_Nat Valoreille 65 - - LAU_Nat Vaufrey 79 - -

NUTS_3 Jura / / / Test Area 2 Pays Haut-Jura 27 33 4 LAU_Nat Avignon les St Claude 10 30 2 LAU_Nat Bellecombe 30 - - LAU_Nat Bellefontaine 40 - - LAU_Nat Bois d’Amont 45 - - LAU_Nat les Bouchoux 20 50 1 LAU_Nat Chancia 35 - - LAU_Nat Charchilla 35 45 3 LAU_Nat Chassal 15 15 3 LAU_Nat Chateau-des-Prés 30 - - LAU_Nat Chatel de Joux 35 - - LAU_Nat la Chaumusse 35 - - LAU_Nat Chaux des prés 35 - - LAU_Nat la Chaux du Dombief 40 - - LAU_Nat Choux 30 - -

Regional Intermediate Report page -53- Franche-Comté LAU_Nat Coiserette 15 15 2 LAU_Nat Coyrière 15 20 2 LAU_Nat Coyron 35 88 3 LAU_Nat Crenans 35 - - LAU_Nat les Crozets 20 - - LAU_Nat Cuttura 15 40 1 LAU_Nat Etival 35 - - LAU_Nat Fort du Plasne 40 - - LAU_Nat Grande rivière 40 - - LAU_Nat Jeurre 20 40 1 LAU_Nat Lac des Rouges Truites 45 - - LAU_Nat Lajoux 20 40 1 LAU_Nat Lamoura 20 30 1 LAU_Nat Larrivoire 20 25 2 LAU_Nat Lavancia-Epercy 20 - - LAU_Nat Lavans les St Claude 15 25 8 LAU_Nat Lect 40 - - LAU_Nat Leschères 30 40 1 LAU_Nat Lézat 30 - - LAU_Nat Longchaumois 15 40 1 LAU_Nat Maisod 35 150 5 LAU_Nat Martigna 35 - - LAU_Nat Meussia 35 50 3 LAU_Nat Moirans en Montagne 30 55 5 LAU_Nat Molinges 15 20 3 LAU_Nat les Molunes 25 25 1 LAU_Nat Montclusel 30 - - LAU_Nat Morbier 30 - - LAU_Nat Morez 30 25 6 LAU_Nat la Mouille 25 - - LAU_Nat les Moussières 25 30 1 LAU_Nat la pesse 30 40 1 LAU_Nat les Piards 25 - - LAU_Nat Ponthoux 15 - - LAU_Nat Pratz 15 30 5 LAU_Nat Prémanon 30 - - LAU_Nat Prénovel 25 - - LAU_Nat Ravilloles 20 50 1 LAU_Nat la Rixouse 15 35 1 LAU_Nat Rogna 20 - - LAU_Nat les Rousses 30 - - LAU_Nat St Claude 0 - - LAU_Nat St Laurent-en-Grandvaux 40 - - LAU_Nat St Lupicin 15 20 7 LAU_Nat St Pierre 35 - - LAU_Nat Septmoncel 15 30 1 LAU_Nat Vaux les St Claude 15 30 3 LAU_Nat Villard St Sauveur 10 25 5 LAU_Nat Villards d’Héria 25 35 5 LAU_Nat Villard sur Bienne 30 40 1 LAU_Nat Viry 25 - - LAU_Nat Vulvoz 30 - -

Regional Intermediate Report page -54- Franche-Comté C Spatial Data – Every Day Needs and ICT

food shop food shops private private access broadband internet access usage year 2008 year 2008 year 2007 year x number of number of in percent in percent Indicator 8 FOOD_SHO Indicator 9a Indicator 9b NUTS_2 # Franche-Comté N/A N/A 47 N/A NUTS_3 # Doubs N/A N/A 47 N/A Test Area 1 Pays Horloger 655 65 N/A N/A LAU_Nat Bonnétage LAU_Nat Brétonvillers LAU_Nat Chamesey LAU_Nat Grand’Combe des Bois LAU_Nat la Bosse LAU_Nat la Chenalotte LAU_Nat Laval-le-Prieuré LAU_Nat le Barboux LAU_Nat le Bélieu 106LAU_Nat le Bizot LAU_Nat le Luhier LAU_Nat le Mémont LAU_Nat le Russey LAU_Nat les Fontenelles LAU_Nat Longevelle-les-Russey LAU_Nat Montbéliardot LAU_Nat Mont-de-Laval LAU_Nat Narbief LAU_Nat Noel-Cerneux LAU_Nat Plaimbois-du-Miroir LAU_Nat Rosureux LAU_Nat St Julien-les-Russey LAU_Nat Battenans-Varins LAU_Nat Belfays LAU_Nat Belleherbe LAU_Nat Cernay-l’Eglise LAU_Nat Charmauvillers LAU_Nat Charmoille LAU_Nat Charquemont LAU_Nat Cour-St-Maurice LAU_Nat Damprichard LAU_Nat Ferrières-le-lac LAU_Nat Fessevillers LAU_Nat Fournet-Blancheroche LAU_Nat Frambouhans LAU_Nat Goumois LAU_Nat la Grange LAU_Nat les Bréseux LAU_Nat les Ecorces LAU_Nat Maîche LAU_Nat Mancenans-Lizerne LAU_Nat Mont-de-Vougney

Regional Intermediate Report page -55- Franche-Comté LAU_Nat Orgeans-Blanchefontaine LAU_Nat Provenchère LAU_Nat Thiébouhans LAU_Nat Trévillers LAU_Nat Urtière LAU_Nat Vaucluse LAU_Nat Vauclusotte LAU_Nat Grand’Combe-Chateleu LAU_Nat les Combes LAU_Nat les Fins LAU_Nat les Gras LAU_Nat Montlebon LAU_Nat Morteau LAU_Nat Villers-le-lac LAU_Nat Peseux LAU_Nat Rosières sur Barbèche LAU_Nat Bief LAU_Nat Burnevillers LAU_Nat Chamesol LAU_Nat Courtefontaine LAU_Nat Dampjoux LAU_Nat Fleurey LAU_Nat Froidevaux LAU_Nat Glère LAU_Nat Indevillers LAU_Nat les Terres de Chaux LAU_Nat les-Plains-et-Grands- Essarts LAU_Nat Liebvillers LAU_Nat Montancy LAU_Nat Montandon LAU_Nat Montéchéroux LAU_Nat Montjoie le Château LAU_Nat St Hippolyte LAU_Nat Soulce-Cernay LAU_Nat Valoreille LAU_Nat Vaufrey

NUTS_3 Jura N/A N/A 46 N/A Test Area 2 Pays Haut-Jura 609 85 N/A N/A LAU_Nat Avignon les St Claude 0 0 LAU_Nat Bellecombe 0 0 LAU_Nat Bellefontaine 0 0 LAU_Nat Bois d’Amont 811 2 LAU_Nat les Bouchoux 0 0 LAU_Nat Chancia 0 0 LAU_Nat Charchilla 0 0 LAU_Nat Chassal 0 0 LAU_Nat Chateau-des-Prés 0 0 LAU_Nat Chatel de Joux 0 0 LAU_Nat la Chaumusse 0 0 LAU_Nat Chaux des prés 0 0 LAU_Nat la Chaux du Dombief 267 2 LAU_Nat Choux 0 0 LAU_Nat Coiserette 0 0

Regional Intermediate Report page -56- Franche-Comté LAU_Nat Coyrière 0 0 LAU_Nat Coyron 0 0 LAU_Nat Crenans 0 0 LAU_Nat les Crozets 0 0 LAU_Nat Cuttura 0 0 LAU_Nat Etival 0 0 LAU_Nat Fort du Plasne 0 0 LAU_Nat Grande rivière 0 0 LAU_Nat Jeurre 0 0 LAU_Nat Lac des Rouges Truites 347 1 LAU_Nat Lajoux 253 1 LAU_Nat Lamoura 534 1 LAU_Nat Larrivoire 0 0 LAU_Nat Lavancia-Epercy 0 0 LAU_Nat Lavans les St Claude 626 3 LAU_Nat Lect 0 0 LAU_Nat Leschères 0 0 LAU_Nat Lézat 0 0 LAU_Nat Longchaumois 565 2 LAU_Nat Maisod 0 0 LAU_Nat Martigna 0 0 LAU_Nat Meussia 0 0 LAU_Nat Moirans en Montagne 562 4 LAU_Nat Molinges 0 0 LAU_Nat les Molunes 0 0 LAU_Nat Montclusel 0 0 LAU_Nat Morbier 751 3 LAU_Nat Morez 390 14 LAU_Nat la Mouille 0 0 LAU_Nat les Moussières 62 3 LAU_Nat la pesse 326 1 LAU_Nat les Piards 0 0 LAU_Nat Ponthoux 0 0 LAU_Nat Pratz 0 0 LAU_Nat Prémanon 931 1 LAU_Nat Prénovel 0 0 LAU_Nat Ravilloles 460 1 LAU_Nat la Rixouse 0 0 LAU_Nat Rogna 0 0 LAU_Nat les Rousses 377 8 LAU_Nat St Claude 598 20 LAU_Nat St Laurent-en-Grandvaux 249 7 LAU_Nat St Lupicin 445 5 LAU_Nat St Pierre 326 1 LAU_Nat Septmoncel 648 1 LAU_Nat Vaux les St Claude 352 2 LAU_Nat Villard St Sauveur 649 1 LAU_Nat Villards d’Héria 0 0 LAU_Nat Villard sur Bienne 0 0 LAU_Nat Viry 885 1 LAU_Nat Vulvoz 0 0

Regional Intermediate Report page -57- Franche-Comté Description of ACCESS Statistical Data ACCESS Statistical Data contains data about region, subregion(s) and local units referring to test area(s)

Data Definition Description is following columns of Excel sheet Obligatory content in boldface

NUTS_2 Identifier of NUTS_2 Region European Type NUTS_3 Identifier of NUTS_3 Region European Type DISTRICT Identifier of Political or Administration Unit between NUTS_3 and Local Unit Level ASS_LAU Identifier of Political or Administration Association of Local Units LAU_NAT Identifier of Local Unit National Type PUB_ORG Description of Public Organisation from NUTS_2 to Local Unit National Type NAME_NAT Name of Public Organisation National Type AREA_ACT Most actual Area Unit Square Kilometre 2 decimal places POP_ACT Most actual Resident Population Unit Person POP_BACK Resident Population 10 to 20 years before actual census Unit Person POP_OLD Most actual Population elder than 64 years Unit Person POP_YOUNG Most actual Poulation younger than 15 years Unit Person HOHO_ACT Most actual Number of Households POP_WORK_IN Commuters coming to work from another Municipality Unit Person POP_WORK_OUT Commuters leaving for work to another Municipality Unit Person OVNSTAY_TOUR Annual Over Night Stays in Tourism Unit Person ENT_ACT Most actual Number of Enterprises (without agricultural ones) ENT_BACK Number of Enterprises 10 to 20 years before actual census POP_SETT_L500 Resident Population living in compact settlements larger 500 Inhabitants Unit Person POP_SETT_L1000 Resident Population living in compact settlements larger 1.000 Inhabitants Unit Person REACH_REG_IT Time to reach Regional Centre by motorized individual Traffic Unit Minutes REACH_REG_PT Time to reach Regional Centre by Public Traffic Unit Minutes FREQ_PTRAF Daily Departures of Public Bus at the best served Station (line-stops only in one direction) FOOD_SHOP Number of Shops offering Food (also baker and butcher but no petrol station) HOHO_BBAND Number of Households with Internet Broadband Access POP_INTUSE Population using Internet Unit Person

Regional Intermediate Report page -58- Franche-Comté ACCESS Indicators

The Indicators of ACCESS represent statistical characteristics of preconditions for the establishment, the establishment itself and the impact of SGI. On one hand the indicators will be able to reveal disparities on a local level on the other they will also serve for the transnational comparison. It is important to mention that indicators are designed to get a clear picture of a sometimes complexe process influenced by society, economy etc. It is not always possible to capture all components of such a process. In the following 2 indicators in the sphere of society, socio-economy and spatial development completed by indicators for ACCESS core themes (goods of daily need, Mobility and ICT).

The information for the indicators shall be collected on the municipality level (example Tyrol: Gemeinden), test area (example Tyrol: Bezirk Landeck) and region (example Tyrol: Bundesland Tirol). The indicators themselves will be calculated automatically on the basis of the statistical data filled in. Calculations of (regional) averages follow equal rules. A recommendation of transnational classification of indicators values is raised finally.

A Social Indicators Indicator 1 Population Development Annual average of the relative change in resident population for a time period of 10 – 20 years POP_DEV = (fx LN POP_ACT – fx LN POP_BACK) / YEARS Percent 2 decimal places fx LN Logarithmus Naturalis Indicator 2a Old-age Dependency Ratio The ratio of the number of the most actual Population elder than 64 years generally economically inactive divided by the number of persons of working age (15 – 65 years). POP_OLD_RATE = POP_OLD / (POP_ACT – POP_OLD – POP_YOUNG) * 100 Percent 0 decimal places

Indicator 2b Young age Dependency Ratio The young-age dependency ratio is the ratio of the most actual Poulation younger than 15 years divided by the number of persons of working age (15 – 65 years). POP_YOUNG_RATE = POP_YOUNG / (POP_ACT – POP_OLD – POP_YOUNG) * 100 Percent 0 decimal places

B Socio-economic Indicators Indicator 3 Maximum Population Ratio The ratio of the total of resident and working population as well as the number of touristic overnight stays (entire year) divided by the number of the resident population.

Regional Intermediate Report page -59- Franche-Comté POP_MAX_RATE = (POP_ACT + POP_WORK_IN – POP_WORK_OUT + OVNSTAY_TOUR / 365) / POP_ACT * 100 Percent 0 decimal places Indicator 4 Development of Enterprises Average annual change in the number of enterprises (not including farms) for a time period of 10 – 20 years. ENT_DEV = (fx LN ENT_ACT – fx LN ENT_BACK) / YEARS Percent 2 decimal places

C Spatial Indicators Indicator 5a Settlement Concentration Ratio 500 Ratio of the resident population living in compact settlements larger than 500 inhabitants divided by the most actual resident population. SETT_CONC_L500 = POP_SETT_L500 / POP_ACT * 100 Percent 0 decimal places Indicator 5a Settlement Concentration Ratio 1.000 Ratio of the resident population living in compact settlements larger than 1.000 inhabitants divided by the most actual resident population. SETT_CONC_L1.000 = POP_SETT_L1.000 / POP_ACT * 100 Percent 0 decimal places Indicator 6a Regional Reachability Individual Traffic Time spent in order to reach the next regional center (appoint name in data set and if it is outside or inside of testarea) by individual motorised traffic. Calculation of regional average is to weight on (local) resident population numbers without regard to that value of the regional center. REACH_REG_IT Minutes 0 decimal places Indicator 6b Regional Reachability Public Transit Time spent in order to reach the next regional center (appoint name in data set and if it is outside or inside of testarea) by public transport. Calculation of regional average is to weight on (local) resident population numbers without regard to that value of the regional center. REACH_REG_PT Minutes 0 decimal places

D Special Indicators (optional) Indicator 7 Maximum Frequency Public Traffic Daily departures of public transport on best served stopping points (line stops only in one direction). Calculation of regional average is to weight on (local) resident population numbers without regard to that value of the regional center. FREQ_PTRAF_MAX Number 0 decimal places Indicator 8 Density of Groceries by Resident Population The number of most actual resident population divided by the number of groceries (incl. bakeries and butcheries)

Regional Intermediate Report page -60- Franche-Comté DENS_GROC_POP = POP_ACT / FOOD_SHOP Person 0 decimal places Indicator 9a Private Broadband Access The ratio of the number of households with broad band access divided by the most actual number of households. BBAND_PRVACC_RATE = HOHO_BBAND / HOHO_ACT * 100 Percent 0 decimal places Indicator 9b Private Internet Usage The ratio of the population using internet divided by the most actual resident population. INTERNET_PRVUSE_RATE = POP_INTUSE / POP_ACT * 100 Percent 0 decimal places

E Classification Similar legend of classification Indicator Very low mean high very high low Color dark blue yellow pink red blue

Value Ranges

1 POP_DEV < -0,99 -0,99 to -0,25 -0,24 to 0,25 0,26 to 1,00 > 1,00

2a POP_OLD_R. < |21 21 - 25 26 -30 31 - 35 > 35

2b POP_YOUNG_R. < 16 16 - 20 21 - 25 26 - 30 > 30

3 POP_MAX_RATE < 75 75 - 94 95 - 109 110 - 150 > 150

4 ENT_DEV < -0,99 -0,99 to -0,00 -0,01 to 1,00 1,01 to 2,00 > 2,00

5a SETT_CONC_L500 < 21 21 - 40 41 - 60 61 - 80 > 80

5b SETT_CONC_L1.000 < 21 21 - 40 41 - 60 61 - 80 > 80

6a REACH_REG_IT > 59 59 - 45 44 - 30 29 - 15 14 – 0

6b REACH_REG_PT > 59 59 - 45 44 - 30 29 - 15 14 – 0

7 FREQ_PTRAF_MAX 0 1 - 6 7 - 12 13 - 24 > 24

8 DENS_GROC_POP 0 > 1.000 501 – 1.000 251 – 500 1 - 250

9a BBAND_PRVACC_R. 0 -19 20 - 39 40 - 59 60 - 79 80 - 100

9b I.NET_PRVUSE_R. 0 -19 20 - 39 40 - 59 60 - 79 80 - 100

Regional Intermediate Report page -61- Franche-Comté