Stakeholder Dialog Stratgie-Entwicklung Für

STAKEHOLDER DIALOG

STRATGIE-ENTWICKLUNG FÜR DEN ALPENRAUM

Lindau, Deutschland, 14. November 2012

WORKSHOP Documentation

Participants: 49 German speaking participants from administration, science, enterprises, associations, NGO´s from Germany, Switzerland, Liechtenstein and Italy.

Participants by Organisation:

0 l) l) a a s s rs s n n e ie e O io io is t t g r si b G a e rp r m N (n (r e a te iv h n n n n C tio tio E U a a tr tr is is in in m m d d a a lic lic b b u u P P

Participants by background:

0 t rt t y r s a n g r y o n g e m n e e n re e m p e r t is i r i u h o s m e a r ta a m n lt t n n n n u n l p n u o o o E W o u a lo la c c ra ir T o r e ri E T v ru v l P g n M e a A E d ti n a a p rb S U

Welcome speeches by:

Axel Schnell, Stv. Vorstandsmitglied Sparkasse MM-LI-MN Elmar Stegmann, Landrat des Landkreises Lindau Dr. Peter Eggensberger, Bay. Staatsministerium für Umwelt und Gesundheit

Introduction speeches:

Dr. Peter Eggensberger, Bay. Staatsministerium für Umwelt und Gesundheit: Three initiatives - one aim: „A Strategy for the Alpine Space“

Prof. Dr. Thomas Bausch, Alpenforschungsinstitut: The Expert Study „Strategy development for the Alpine Space“

First reactions from the audience to the introduction: • Question of the relationship of a new strategy paper and the Alpine Convention, which exists since 20 years, however with many fields of activities which have not been implemented yet. Reference to the Alpine Convention as a protective convention for the geographical Alpine perimeter, which is not sufficient for the scale of a regional development strategy • Landowners should be included as actors, without them no strategy can be implemented. Chapter 4 should emphasize this aspect more. • Does the macro region bring unnecessary complexity in the Alpine Space Programme? It is hoped that the process of this new approach of the new discussion also brings a new momentum. • The role of the expert report for the 2014-2020 programming process is seen as incompatible in comparison with the EU objectives and targets. -> While the study has been assigned before publication of the EU draft regulations, the results are actually very close to the 11 thematic objectives. The exact adjustment is in the responsibility of the programme. • Hint that only 80% of the future funding should be dedicated to only 4 thematic objectives: the expert study had the task to explicitly think ahead -> an analysis of the matching fields with EU requirements is already included. • Does a funding programme need to have strategic objectives anyway? -> The Alpine Space Programme as a mere vicarious agent does not make sense, in case of a macro-regional strategy the macro region should be considered for the funding.

First Session with three parallel Workshops:

Workshop I - Spatial development, Connectivity, Transport • A wish for an “Alpine Transport Strategy” has been expressed. • Mobility is one of the drivers

Workshop II - Sustainable use of Resources • The relevance and need for an alpine-wide cooperation is considered to be high in all thematic fields. • The study is too close to economic interests. Environmental aspects must be addressed much stronger. • The topic of energy efficiency must be strengthened, the trans-alpine knowledge transfer is important. • Best practice examples from regional level should be transferred. • Climate targets should be reflected in energy indicators, especially within alpine- relevant topics (e.g. energy and water consumption in skiing areas, wood for construction, wood manufacturing tradition).

• Macro regional strategy could form an organisational framework of bottom-up and top- down approaches within the topic of resources. A vertical cooperation throughout the different levels is necessary. • Sustainability in energy production (efficiency, storage), participation is important. Not all potentials are suitable for usage. • Public participation must be considered seriously and not only as a necessary must. • The question of sharing responsibilities is open (e.g. are the Alps ready and willing for the storage of energy?), which compensation models exist? • Question of implementation under current market and competition situation. • Water is considered as resource mainly, must be considered as habitats as well. • The principle of integration must be considered (Art. 11 of AEUV): The requirements of environmental protection must be integrated into the definition and implementation of the Union policies and activities, in particular with a view to promoting sustainable development.

Workshop III - Innovation of the Alpine Economy • What is meant here: alpine economy or the economy in the Alpine Space? For the latter, also global players with HQ in the Alpine Space must be considered! • Industry sector seems not to be considered in the study, but has a strong influence. • The current change in the ownership structure which tends to develop to large land ownership implies various impacts and needs to be considered by the study (e.g. non-existent deer hunt leads to tuberculosis of red deer; loss of cattle and changes in agriculture, avalanche danger by over grazing) • Value chain as key element for an increased demand of cooperation (e.g. raw material wood: usage of local resources and knowledge) • High importance of qualification processes to address lack of knowledge and lack of innovation within SME and to enable clustering of SMEs • The value of landscape aesthetics is missing in the report. • The issue of risk capital should be integrated to enhance transnational innovations. • There is a high demand of alpine wide knowledge management and knowledge transfer between research institutions and SME. This calls for structures, institutions, funding. • Why is the issue of tourism mentioned explicitly, even though its economical added value is rather limited (only 5% in Bodensee region). Innovation should not be limited to tourism only. Chapter must be renamed eventually. • Urban-rural cooperation for the marketing of local products. • This Working Group should be renamed into competiveness, innovation and economical added value in the Alpine economy. • Connection to demographic change: economy must accept DC, e.g. approach of residential economy (added value by private consume, tax income by modification of second homes into first residents, development of high quality services requested by new residents).

Second Session with three parallel Workshops:

Workshop IV - Strengthening of the regional economy • This topic should gain more relevance, as green economy is one of the three strategic main objectives. • There is the problematic of missing funding for the regionalisation of the economy despite of known demand of cooperation. An Alpine fund is necessary (see WS III) • Items 11 & 12 should be considered jointly (e.g. wood and economic value chain). • Ad 13: alternative lifestyles and financial models for structures of public interest must be considered beyond regions. • The consideration of skills shortage is missing in the report. There is an alpine specific problem of high competition of the regions, which needs to be addressed. • New ways of economical development should be sought, not only focus on the existing resources.

• A strong overlapping with WS III was detected: regional cycles, demographic change, skills shortage and brain drain, urban-rural relationship related problems are issues in each Workshop. These topics must be clustered. The fields of actions are too broad but at the moment too sectorial. • Cooperative competition region as one approach: cooperation to the outside, competition to the inside.

Workshop V - the future alpine society • The social action ability should have the highest importance. All further issues are sub issues. • It has been proposed to develop a standard for living quality. • The cooperation of urban regions is of high importance especially in this field.

Workshop VI - Ecology and Sustainable Development • Alternative phrasing for action field 18: sustainable land use in the EU eligibility area. The phrasing for action field 19 is questioned due to its unclear term of growth and economy. Proposal: management of the ecological pressure due to growth. Generally, nature protection should be enhanced. • Action field 17: based on the counter current principle, it is not only necessary to sensitise the EU for the local level but also to raise more awareness and understanding of EU objectives at the local level and by the local actors. • Action field 20: preservation of alpine river systems shall be included. • Proposal for a new action field 21: climate protection and adaption (as cross-cutting action field over all action fields). • Action field 17 is of high importance. Very important is the alpine specific implementation of the EU environmental objectives on local level. The European responsibility of the Alps should be highlighted. Furthermore, urban-rural relationships are of high importance as well. • Action field 18: the spatial pressure has been identified as important issue. • Action field 19: it has been noted that the preservation of the landscapes is unrealistic. The management of landscape changes and the safeguarding of ecosystem services are much more realistic (Action field 20). • Further transnational cooperation is seen within the management of hunting (adaption of ecological potentials) and in the creation of green infrastructure. • Overall, a strong connection to Workshop 2 (resources) was identified.

Summary of the Workshops In the single workshops, similar topics were raised repeatedly. This should be considered within the clustering.

Which direction for the Alpine Space? Panel discussion on three chosen key topics (see attachements): 1. The Alpine Space is part of an alpine Governance. 2. A macro regional strategy must focus on a limited number of concrete transnational issues. 3. the Alpine Space Strategy can be based on three topics.

Dr. Christian Salletmaier, Managing Authority of the Alpine Space Programme Remo Looser, National Coordinator Alpine Space Programme Liechtenstein Roland Scherer, Forschungszentrum Regionalwissenschaft St. Gallen Dr. Florian Ballnus, Priority Area Coordinator Biodiversity, EU Strategy for the Danube Region.

Is the Alpine Space one actor among several actors? The programme itself is not a political actor, but wants to highlight deficits in the governance by the expert study and its contribution to the macro regional strategy.

The programme is thus an important player by providing “opportunity structures”, by giving impulse and by acting as an example for the entire region. This role must be transferred though - by means of a knowledge transfer which directly addresses people. It should not be underestimated that project holders are observing the development of the Alpine Space Programme. Especially in such a small country as Liechtenstein, the close collaboration of top-down and bottom-up is revealed as an alpine specific characteristic.

Is it thinkable that doors for private funding of the programme will be opened? Discussion on this issue are going on in the programme committee for considerable time, currently there is no sign for a common sense. Such an opening is complex, e.g. considering the question of

What can we learn from the Danube Strategy? The situation in the Danube Region is very different from the Alpine Space and some of the Priorities are not relevant for the Alpine Space as for the Danube Region. Furthermore there is a high density of networks already existing in the Danube Region (as well as in the Baltic Sea Region). Considering this, the Alpine approach is appropriate. The actors nevertheless should consider that a macro regional strategy actually influences the use of funding, if you consider the funding programmes as one instrument to implement the Strategy. The funding programme Alpine Space is offering a variety of possibilities, e.g. as a forum for alpine discussions.

Can the Alpine Strategy be based on three objectives? The direction is right. However, the objectives (strengthening the resilience of the Alpine Space, Green Economy, cultural heritage and social solidarity) are not alpine specific. A further coordination with further actors and programmes from the Alpine Space therefore is necessary. Very important is also the feedback from events like this one.

Outlook The participants expressed the wish for a common vision and for guidance together with participation.

The results of the workshop will be included into the expert study. The final conference on 21. February 2013 in Milan will present the concrete outcome.