Version 06/05/09 The ESPON 2013 Programme The Development of the Islands – European Islands and Cohesion Policy (EUROISLANDS) Targeted Analysis 2013/2/8 Inception Report EUROPEAN UNION Part-financed by the European Regional Development Fund INVESTING IN YOUR FUTURE ESPON 2013 1 This report presents a more detailed overview of the analytical approach to be applied by the project. This Targeted Analysis is conducted within the framework of the ESPON 2013 Programme, partly financed by the European Regional Development Fund. The partnership behind the ESPON Programme consists of the EU Commission and the Member States of the EU27, plus Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland. Each partner is represented in the ESPON Monitoring Committee. This report does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the members of the Monitoring Committee. Information on the ESPON Programme and projects can be found on www.espon.eu The web site provides the possibility to download and examine the most recent documents produced by finalised and ongoing ESPON projects. This basic report exists only in an electronic version. © ESPON & University of the Aegean, 2009. Printing, reproduction or quotation is authorised provided the source is acknowledged and a copy is forwarded to the ESPON Coordination Unit in Luxembourg. ESPON 2013 2 List of authors Leader Partner - University of Aegean, Mytilini, Greece Ioannis SPILANIS Department of Environment, Laboratory of Local and Insular Development Thanasis KIZOS, Department of Geography Michael BIGGI, Laboratory of Local and Insular Development Michalis VAITIS, Department of Geography, Laboratory of Geo- informatics Giorgos KOKKORIS, Department of Marine Sciences Maria LEKAKOU, Department of Shipping, Trade and Transport, Laboratory of Shipping and Port Management Thanassis PALLIS, Department of Shipping, Trade and Transport Laboratory of Shipping and Port Management Lena VAYANNI, Laboratory of Local and Insular Development, Maria KOULOURI, Laboratory of Local and Insular Development Konstantinos MARGARIS, Laboratory of Local and Insular Development Nikoletta KOUKOUROUVLI, Laboratory of Geo-informatics Giorgos VANGELAS, Laboratory of Shipping and Port Management Evangelia STEFANIDAKI, Laboratory of Shipping and Port Management Centre for Regional and Tourism Research, Bornholm, Denmark Peter BILLING Mikkel TOUDAL Dimitri IOANNIDIS University of Malta Godfrey BALDACCHINO, Faculty of Arts- Department of Sociology- Centre for Labour Studies Rose Marie AZZOPARDI, Faculty of Economics, Management and Accountancy ESPON 2013 3 Table of Contents List of authors _____________________________________ 3 Table of Contents ___________________________________ 4 1 Insularity and Attractiveness: the general approach _____ 6 1.1. Territorial cohesion and sustainability: the overall goal ____ 6 1.2. Areas’ attractiveness and territorial cohesion ____________ 7 1.3. Islands characteristics as permanent obstacles for attractiveness ________________________________________ 9 1.4. Islands’ policy in order to exploit islands characteristics ___ 11 2 Methodology and hypothesis for further investigation ___ 14 2.1. Sustainability and attractiveness estimation. The islands’ atlas and the islands’ monitoring system _______________________ 16 a) Analysis of the situation of islands ________________________________19 b) Causes of existing problems _____________________________________26 c) Policy Recommendation and Assessment ___________________________30 d Data and Qualitative information collection from stakeholders and local surveys _______________________________________________________31 2.2. Delphi Method for classification of Attractiveness parameters __________________________________________________ 33 2.3. Cluster analysis for Islands’ typology _________________ 41 2.4. SWOT analysis of islands clusters ____________________ 42 2.5. Islands’ Impact Assessment for evaluation of Islands’ policy. From TIA to IIA ______________________________________ 44 The case studies ________________________________________________46 3 Analysis of the relevant Literature __________________ 48 3.1 Insularity ________________________________________ 48 3.2. The Attractiveness Concept _________________________ 51 3.3. Island Impact Assessment __________________________ 55 4 Use of existing ESPON results relevant for this project __ 56 5 Project organisation, expected deliverables and dissemination plan _________________________________ 57 6 Project specific part _____________________________ 58 ESPON 2013 4 7 Overview of more detailed deliveries and outputs envisaged by the project and envisaged dialogue with stakeholders in that respect __________________________________________ 60 8 Indication of likely barriers that the project implementation might face: Data availability __________________________ 62 9 Orientation of the project previewed towards the Interim report ___________________________________________ 65 Annexes _________________________________________ 66 Annex 1: Islands characteristics – the “insularity” concept ________________67 Annex 2: Islands’ challenges _______________________________________72 Annex 3: List of very small islands __________________________________76 Annex 4: Islands’ case studies. Selection methodology __________________80 Annex 5: Information System ______________________________________88 Annex 6: Sustainability Variables and Indicators _______________________92 Annex 7: Attractiveness variables and indicators _______________________96 Annex 8: Accessibility ____________________________________________99 Annex 9 Policy Recommendations and Assessment _____________________101 Annex 10 Analysis of the work packages _____________________________106 Annex 11 References ____________________________________________113 ESPON 2013 5 1 Insularity and Attractiveness: the general approach 1.1. Territorial cohesion and sustainability: the overall goal “Territorial cohesion is about ensuring the harmonious development of all the European places and about making sure that their citizens are able to make the most of inherent features of theses territories. As such, it is a means of transforming diversity into an asset that contributes to the sustainable development of the entire EU”, was communicated from European Commission to the other European Institutions (EU, Turning territorial diversity into strength, 2008, p.3). European Commission also underlines that “many of the problems faced by territories cut across sectors and effective solutions require an integrated approach and cooperation between the various authorities and stakeholders involved. In this respect, the concept of territorial cohesion builds bridges between economic effectiveness, social cohesion and ecological balance, putting sustainable development at the heart of the policy design”. The concept of a territorial dimension within the European Union is hardly a novel idea. After all, the various structural policies that have been issued over the years by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), the European Social Fund (ESF) and other agencies have aimed, at least in part, to rectify regional imbalances and reduce core- periphery disparities. However, the traditional thinking of dealing with such issues through the twin aims of social and economic cohesion simply did not go far enough. Most importantly, the top-down sector-specific policies and programmes that were issued within the framework of the search for economic and social cohesion were often contradictory, reflecting minimal coordination between the various agencies responsible for these actions. This meant that all too often, in the past, the attainment of balanced forms of development within various regions throughout the European Union has remained an unattainable objective. Moreover, the dominant approach until now has been one that has implicitly treated the issue of regional inequities as one between advantaged and disadvantaged places, failing to recognize that territorial diversity can actually be a key strength, one that can lead to ‘sustainable development of the entire EU’ as mentioned above. The underlying principle behind territorial cohesion is that all regions throughout the EU should improve their competitiveness and through this, enhance the quality of life of their citizens whilst ensuring ESPON 2013 6 that environmental (natural and human built) resources are not compromised. EU has already accepted that “The concept of territorial cohesion extends beyond the notion of economic and social cohesion by both adding to this and reinforcing it. In policy terms, the objective is to help achieve a more balanced development by reducing existing disparities, preventing territorial imbalances and by making both sectoral policies which have a spatial impact and regional policy more coherent” (CEC, 2004, p. 27). What this could mean for regions with specific geographical features and particularly the islands? Answering this question is the main goal of the present study. 1.2. Areas’ attractiveness and territorial cohesion The settlement pattern of the European Union is unique (EU, Turning territorial diversity into strength, 2008, p.4) but uneven; it is even more intense concerning economic activities. Territorial cohesion asks for more “balanced development” as there is ascertained “the excessive concentration of economic activity and population in the European “pentagon”, the imbalance between the main metropolitan areas and the rest of the countries, the growing congestion and