3. Gilles Van Hamme - TIGER

7/29/2019 3. Gilles Van Hamme - TIGER

1/16

Territorial impacts of globalization on European

Regions

Van Hamme Gilles

IGEAT-ULB

Liege meeting

November 2010


2/16

2/25

The team

Lead partner : IGEAT-ULB

Partners

Pp2 (UK): School of real estate and planning. University of Reading

Pp3 (France): CNRS (mainly Universit de Normandie)

Pp4 (Italy): Dpto Studi Europei e Interculturali, Sapienza Universit diRoma

Pp5 (Sweden): Internationella Handelshgskolan i Jnkping AB

Pp6 (Bulgaria): Institute of Geography BAS


3/16

3/25

Major questions and objectives

1. Objective 1: to assess how Europe, its regions and citiesparticipate in the global flows and networks and how the globalprocesses impact on the territorial structures of Europe.How can territorial policies help to improve the position of the differenttypes of regions in the world and ensure the objectives of social andterritorial cohesion despite the potentially unequal impacts of

globalization on European territories?

2. Objective 2: : to analyse the impacts of territorial structures onEuropean performancesHow can territorial policy improve European competitiveness? Forexample, should we invest mainly in the global cities to improveEuropes position in the world?

3. Objective 3:to analyse how Europe and its territories positionthemselves in the world through cooperation and networkingwith other parts of the world.

How this positioning participates in achieving the objectives ofimproving competitiveness as well as social and territorial cohesion?


4/16

4/25

The architecture of the Project


5/16

5/25

WP 2.2. Territorial structures in a comparative perspective

1. To provide updated divisions of the world (WUTS)

2. To Compare Europe with other parts of the world according tothe main political objectives of EU: competitiveness, social andterritorial cohesion

3. To assess the territorial structures of Europe in a comparative

3-D approach: level of concentration (density),inequalities/mobility (distance) and internal mobility(divisions):

- To assess the contemporary urban structure in Europe, including therole of gateways. More precisely, to assess the position of Europeancities in the global networks in a comparative perspective;

- To assess the internal mobility in the European space (people, goodsand capital)

- To assess the territorial inequalities of Europe in a comparative andlong term perspective.


6/16

6/25

1. European Urban structure in a comparative perspective

1 - Elaboration of a database of all cities with more than 500000inhabitants which include: Population (1990-2007), GDP (six sectors1995-2006), airflows and Fortune indicators (2005)

2 Databases and analyses will be completed with original data comingfrom Flows and Networks WP (2.3). This should include GAWC

(2000,2004, 2008), port gateways, financial data (cross-listings andreal estates), airflows (1990-1999-2008-2010), Fortune,..

3 The analysis should privilege the dynamic aspects since I guess weunderstand sufficiently well why urban structure is more concentratedin USA. Main questions relate to the dynamics of concentration(metropolitanization? At which scale? National- macro-regional -

global) of:- population;

- GDP;

- High level services;

- Air and port networks.


7/16

7/25

Basic resultsTable 1. Population of major cities in US and Europe in 2006

Europe (ESPON space) USA

Share of Share ofRank of the cities Total the cities

population

The whole

population

Total the cities

population

The whole

population

1 to 5 41 012 300 17% 8% 52 818 471 27% 18%

1 to10 61 055 900 25% 12% 78 639 292 40% 27%

1 to 20 87 813 300 37% 17% 112 803 829 58% 38%

1 to 50 139 554 600 58% 28% 160 919 486 83% 54%

Source: FOCI, Urban Audit, US Census Bureau

Map 1. Population of cities (functional areas) with more than 500000 inhabitants in US and ESPON space,2006


8/16

8/25

Basic results : airflows (2)


9/16

9/25

The GAWC data to assess Urban network dynamics in a comparativeperspective

Top 12 - 2000 Top 12 -20081. LON 100.00

2. NY 97.10

3. HK 73.08

4. TOKYO 70.64

5. PARIS 69.72

6. SINGAPORE 66.61

7. CHICAGO 61.18

8. MILAN 60.44

9. MADRID 59.23

10. LOS ANG 58.75

11. SYDNEY 58.06

12. FRANKFURT 57.53

1. NY 100.00

2. LON 99.32

3. HK 83.41

4. PARIS 79.68

5. SINGAPORE 76.15

6. TOKYO 73.627. SYDNEY 70.93

8. SHANGHAI 69.06

9. MILAN 69.05

10. BEIJING 67.65

11. MADRID 65.95

12. MOSCOW 64.85

- NY and LON are now near equivalent

- All US cities except New York drop out of top rankings

- Citieslinking to the WCN from the semi-periphery increase their WCNconnectivity, e.g. Shanghai, Beijing, Moscow

- Half the top 20 global service centres are now in the Asia Pacific region


10/16


11/16

11/25

Europe and countries in the world trade: a long term perspective

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

Share of extra-West European trade in the world trade

excluding intra-block trade

Share of intra-West European trade in the world trade

1968 1978 1988

1995 2005

The declining position of Europe


12/16

12/25


An integrated and not so open economy

INTRA-BLOCK trade (%) Ratio Exports (extra)/GDP by blocks (%)

1987 1995 2000 2006 1987 1995 2000 2006

EU-27 63.4 65.5 65.3 66.6 7.5 8.9 8.0 10.9

NAFTA 47.8 45.7 55.4 53.7 3.4 5.2 4.5 4.7

China 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.6 5.6 6.5 9.9

Japan 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.3 15.1 15.1 16.2


13/16

13/25


A stable role in the international division of labour

US67

germany67

Italy67

UK67

Spain67

Greece67 West Europe67

Japan67

cameroon67

Korea67 Hungary67

Romania67

China67

US77

germany77

Italy77

UK77

Spain77

Greece77

West Europe77

Japan77

cameroon77

Korea77

Hungary77

Romania77

China77

US87

germany87

Italy87

UK87

Spain87

Greece87

West Europe87

Japan87

cameroon87

Korea87

Hungary87

Romania87

China87

US97

germany97

Italy97

UK97

Spain97

Greece97

West Europe97

Japan97

cameroon97

Korea97

Hungary97

Romania97

China97

US07

germany07

Italy07

UK07

Spain07

Greece07West Europe07

Japan07

cameroon07

Korea07

Hungary07Romania07

China07

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

-2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2

labour intensive

primary

M

a

nu

f

a

c

t

u

r

i

ng

Capital intensive


14/16

14/25


The changing geographical pattern of Europes position in the worldtrade


15/16

15/25

WP 2.4. Political cooperation and networks

1) To analyse the different forms of cooperation between Europe and therest of the world and to assess which vision of Europe of the world itsupports

2) To focus on neighbourhood policies to see whether there is a realintegration between Europe and neighbouring regions

3) To assess the new regionalism by the analysis of network cooperationand networks of excellence between European actors, including publicbodies such as regions, and the rest of the world


16/16

16/25

Conclusion

1. Identifying the key-driving forces of globalization and its impact onEuropean territories at different scales in relation with the main politicalquestions

2. To classify European cities and regions according to their position in theglobal space of flows.

On this basis, we can produce:

- Prospective results: how globalization trends will impact on Europeanterritories

- Policy options differentiated according to the city/regionss position in

the world economy.

Documents

3. Gilles Van Hamme - TIGER