socioeconomic development of cities & towns in latvia (riga, 2010)

10
The evaluation of socioeconomic The evaluation of socioeconomic development of Latvian cities and development of Latvian cities and towns using development level- towns using development level- rate matrix rate matrix Alise Vītola Riga Technical University Zintis Hermansons Ministry of Regional Development and Local Government Riga, September 2010

Upload: alise-vitola

Post on 07-Nov-2014

457 views

Category:

Education


1 download

DESCRIPTION

 

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Socioeconomic Development of Cities & Towns in Latvia (Riga, 2010)

The evaluation of socioeconomic The evaluation of socioeconomic development of Latvian cities anddevelopment of Latvian cities and towns towns

using development level-rate matrixusing development level-rate matrix

Alise VītolaRiga Technical University

Zintis HermansonsMinistry of Regional Development

and Local Government

Riga, September 2010

Page 2: Socioeconomic Development of Cities & Towns in Latvia (Riga, 2010)

• High degree of urbanisation – 70% of inhabitants live in cities and towns• Wide network of 76 small and medium sized towns• Monocentric development - dominancy of capital city Riga and it’s

surroundings• Alternative growth poles - Liepaja, Ventspils, Jelgava, Daugavpils,

Rezekne, Valmiera

Cities and towns in LatviaCities and towns in Latvia

The evaluation of socioeconomic development of Latvian towns and citiesusing development level-rate matrix

Incomes of inhabitants (2009) Changes in number of inhabitants (2005-2010)

Source: SRDA Source: SRDA

Page 3: Socioeconomic Development of Cities & Towns in Latvia (Riga, 2010)

Promotion of polycentric development by strengthening:• competitiveness of growth poles• functional networking of cities and towns• urban-rural partnership

Preconditions for polycentric development:• specialisation• cooperation• concentration of resources

Spatial perspective of “Latvia 2030” stipulates• levels of growth poles• functional networks of growth poles

Regional policy in Latvia*Regional policy in Latvia*

* Sustainable Development Strategy for Latvia till 2030 (2010) National Development Plan 2007-2013 (2006)

The evaluation of socioeconomic development of Latvian towns and citiesusing development level-rate matrix

Source: Latvia 2030

Page 4: Socioeconomic Development of Cities & Towns in Latvia (Riga, 2010)

The studyThe study• Purpose: to analyse socioeconomic development of major cities

and towns in Latvia in 10 years period (1999-2008)

• Object:– 10 major cities – Riga (capital city), Daugavpils, Liepaja,

Jelgava, Jurmala, Ventspils, Rezekne, Valmiera, Jekabpils and Ogre

– 12 towns with more than 10 000 inhabitants, four of them – amalgamated municipalities

• Methodology: calculation of indexes and graphical analysis using development level-rate matrix

• Data: local level statistics - income of inhabitants, unemployment level and density of inhabitants

The evaluation of socioeconomic development of Latvian towns and citiesusing development level-rate matrix

Page 5: Socioeconomic Development of Cities & Towns in Latvia (Riga, 2010)

Indexes and matrixIndexes and matrix

Matrix:• x axis represents development

level and y axis – development rate• horizontal axis crosses vertical axis

at 0,5• “bubbles” represent the number of

inhabitants in cities and towns

The evaluation of socioeconomic development of Latvian towns and citiesusing development level-rate matrix

Indexes :• covering 10 year period • separate development level and

rate indexes for each indicator (1)• aggregated indicator for the

overall socioeconomic development rate and level (2)

minmax

min

ii

iii xx

xxI

n

II i

(1)

(2)

Page 6: Socioeconomic Development of Cities & Towns in Latvia (Riga, 2010)

The evaluation of socioeconomic development of Latvian towns and citiesusing development level-rate matrix

Results: incomeResults: income

• Leader positions are taken by Riga and cities and towns in 50 km radius around it, as well as Valmiera, Cēsis and Talsi

• Also some cities and towns with lower income level have high income increase rates – Saldus, Jēkabpils

• Special attention should be paid to Kuldiga where the income increase rate is lower than average, but the income lewel is rather low

Page 7: Socioeconomic Development of Cities & Towns in Latvia (Riga, 2010)

The evaluation of socioeconomic development of Latvian towns and citiesusing development level-rate matrix

Results: unemploymentResults: unemployment

• Higher unemplyment decrease rates are in the largest cities, except Riga (with the lowest unemployment level), and in Kraslava (with the highest unemployment level)

• Higher unemplyment decrease rates are in cities and towns with higher unemployment level and vice versa

• Exeptions – Dobele, Bauska and Kuldiga with moderate level of unemployment and lower unemployment decrease rates

Page 8: Socioeconomic Development of Cities & Towns in Latvia (Riga, 2010)

The evaluation of socioeconomic development of Latvian towns and citiesusing development level-rate matrix

Results: density of inhabitantsResults: density of inhabitants

• Higher density increase rates - in cities and towns in 70 km radius around Riga, as well as Tukums, Saldus and Cēsis

• N.B.! The number of inhabitants increased only in Tukums, Sigulda and Jelgava. In Jurmala, Ogre and Salaspils it remained unchanged

• Special attention should be paid to Ventspils which is rapidly loosing it’s inhabitants while it’s density of inhabitants is very low

Page 9: Socioeconomic Development of Cities & Towns in Latvia (Riga, 2010)

Results: overal developmentResults: overal development

• Leaders - cities and towns located in 70 km radius around capital city Riga, as well as Valmiera, Dobele, Cesis and Saldus

• Special attention should be paid to:– further exploration of growth potential of Jekabpils, Liepaja, Daugavpils and Kraslava (low

development level, high development rate)– strengthening of growth potential of Kuldiga (low development rate and level) – effective usage of existing resources in Ventspils (high development level, but the lowest

development rate)

The evaluation of socioeconomic development of Latvian towns and citiesusing development level-rate matrix