tourism development policies in rural areas: what makes them green? a comparison between tuscany and...
TRANSCRIPT
Tourism Development Policies in Rural Areas: what makes them green? A comparison between Tuscany and Umbria 2000-2013
Elena Gentilini PhD
Recent policies for rural areas in Tuscany and Umbria 2000-
13 with reference to tourism
Tourism and sustainability in rural areas: landscape,
policentrism, integration primary/other sectors, quality of
life.
What is rural? OECD definition: a community is defined as rural if its population density is
below 150 inhabitants p/kmq + a region is classified as predominantly rural if
more than 50% of its population lives in rural communities and intermediate if it
has an urban centre of more than 200.000 inhabitants representing no less than
25% of the regional population.
Ministry of Agriculture (and PSN): population densities + altitude + degree of
local specialisation in farming activities (gives account of the north-south divide)
= Rural regions with specialised intensive agriculture, Intermediate rural regions,
Rural regions with development problems
Reform of Structural Funds + Ministry of Economic Development: accessibility and population density (OECD “revised”). Rural regions are divided
in three categories; peri-urban, intermediate and outlying rural areas (the
accessibility indicator is calculated as the average time needed to reach the
closest major town by train and by car) + a region is classified as predominantly
rural if more than 50% of its population lives in rural communities
OECD vs MoA
Local System of Rural Development
“To recognise the link between the rural area and the development process the expression “local system of rural development” could be useful, the social and economic context of which is characterized by a set of production and development activities related to local renewable environmental resources (Basile and Romano, 2002). (…) To implement a development process it is necessary to consider not only the primary sector, but also other facets. In fact, the rural development concept is wide-ranging: it provides the opportunity to diversify local economic activities (i.e. handicrafts, small industries, rural tourism, etc.), improve infrastructure connecting extensive rural areas, increase the supply of services for local residents, further equal opportunities between genders, maintain environmental resources, etc. (…). “ (Cislino et al, 2010)
“In order create an environment fostering the local development it is essential the actors' ability to co-operate and create goods that enhance local assets, but also are valuable to external economies: a mix of public sector and private sector abilities, local governance and an ability to repond to everybody' s needs” (Fulvio Pellegrini, in AUR&S, 2005)
Local System of Rural Development 2• In fact, only some Italian Regions have officially recognised rural and
quality agro-food districts. For example, a significant number of rural districts belong to Lazio and Tuscany, while the definition process is still in progress for Umbria and Marche see http://www.distrumarcheumbria.eu/. In spite of the highly dissimilarity among those districts, they share some features: the rural areas involved show a marked agricultural vocation and a significant relationship both with landscape/environmental resources and local popular traditions. Agriculture is characterised by multifunctional items and its integration with tourism is very significant, too. Nevertheless, the population density is low.
• the importance of the district tool to encourage rural development has been acknowledged by Decree no. 228 of 18th May 2001, which created the rural and quality agro-food districts. While the definition of agro-food district is similar to that used for industrial districts, the definition of rural districts is novel as it entails the integration of agriculture with other economic activities. (Cislino et al, 2010)
Rural Italy
• Italy = a large number of dense networks of small and medium-sized cities are interlinked with rural regions
• Italian rural regions produce a higher GDP than the average of rural OECD regions
• 170 products (OECD, 2008) listed in the two EU’s categories Protected Geographical Indication (PGI) and Denomination of Protected Origin (DPO)
• More than 80.000 firms in 2007 were involved in the production of PGI and DPO products; 20% more than in 2006
• The National Institute of Statistics (ISTAT) identifies 352 cities of historical and artistic interest in rural regions, 41 of which are listed by UNESCO as World Heritage Sites
Rural Italy 2
• Tuscany hosted more than 1.2 million foreign tourists in its agriturismo in 2003 (Regione Toscana, 2004);
• Bolzano, Siena, Perugia, Florence and Grosseto are, in decreasing order, those with the highest concentration of farms with a guesthouse, together accounting for 41% of the national total (ISTAT, 1998). In Siena the increase has led to a situation where agri-tourism offered already 32% of the areas tourist beds (in1998);
• Another important example of rural tourism is Albergo Diffuso; an extended hotel with guestrooms around the village. The concept for Albergo Diffuso developed in Italy in the early1980s;
Threats and challenges
• process of depopulation in peripherical regions, small cities and “borghi” situated in the less connected areas have lost their young population almost within a generation;
• key priorities for future rural policy should include a focus upon stronger territorial analysis, and more emphasis upon rural quality of life and enhanced access to services, particularly for women, young people, and the elderly. More investment in the environment and the “new environmental economy”, particularly to exploit sustainable forest management and to promote renewable energy generation in rural areas, is warranted, enhance the landscape, diversify the economy and link economical, social and environmental assets.
Rural Development Policies in Italy
• Agenda 2000 (2000-2006): market policies and rural development (since 2009 also to non-agricultural matters, e.g. connectivity in rural areas)
• National Strategic Plan (NSP) coordinates the Rural Development Plans 2007-2013 and set the landscape as a priority: actions for the enhancement of the landscape across all policy axes. Monitoring of the effects required.
• NSP axes:
1 – Agricultural and Forestry sector competitiveness
2 – Environment and rural areas
3 - Quality of life in rural areas and a diversified economy
4 - Leader
Tuscany – an overview (Regione Toscana, 2010)
• Early de-industrialization at the end of the 80s, importance of tertiary sector, but with low investment and productivity rates.
• Mid-high rank of wealth
• Strong regional disparities (high coefficient of variation of GDP): centre+coast/rural+mountain, but recently decreased
• Diverse rural territories – interesting phenomenum of policentrism and devolution of functions, not expansion of the metropolitan area. 60% rural areas, 52% mountain – reflected in the governance
• Tourism 12%; 40,94 mil arrivals in 2006; higher increase of tourists overnight stays until 2007 than average Italy, except Pistoia, Massa and Livorno (+74% 5 stars, +67% agriturismo 2000-6), but decrease of added value since 2001. 32% of surface covers 80% of tourist accomodation
• organic agriculture 9%; denomination-of-origin product 15% (2003), 3rd in Italy for ECOLABEL
• Weak in infrastructures
• Leader of the project NECSTOUR
LR n.763 07/09/2009 “Progetto Speciale di interesse regionale Toscana Turistica Sostenibile e Competitiva”
Tuscany – rural areas
• A Urban poles
• Intensive agriculture
• C1 Intermediate transitional rural areas
• C2 Intermediate declining rural areas
• Rural areas with overall development problems
Tuscany - governance
Regional Laws 53/1997 and 41/1998 on local development plans –innovative*
DocUp 2000-6 (FSE+FESR) Single Programming Document
POR 2007-13 Regional Operational Programme
PSR (Provinces + Mountain communities + Councils networks)
PSRL (2000.6: 30, 2007.13: 25 still more than one per province)
PISL Integrated planning of rural development
Interreg, URBAN, FAS, Leader
Negotiated planning:
Round table for regional planning
Round table for Institutional planning
Green table (rural)
= *Innovation (institutional and territorial devolution) but redundancy and weak co-ordination (Rete rurale 2011)
Axis LEADER in PSR and Axis V of POR specifically for rural areas (with development problems) – NEW TERRITORIAL CRITERIA
Umbria – an overview (Agenzia Umbria Ricerche, 2005).
• Lower than average Italy for income, investment and productivity rates, but higher than Toscany for investment and productivity and lower for income; on avergae for education and R&D
• Characterised by “employment (64.4 2007 compared to 58.6 Italy) without growth”, which slows down productivity ( for the tourist sector 24.45 thou/euro compared to 30,83 Italy)
• Low export rates (except metals and agricultural products)
• 70% intermediate rural areas + 29% rural ares with development problems
• Tourist arrivals +6% 2002-2007, 6,14 mil arrivals in 2006; 900 agriturismi in 2007; 62% of surface covers 80% of tourist accomodation
• Organic agriculture (7% in mountain areas, 4% in other areas; 850 farms in total in 2007 +27% 2004-7) and DGP high
• 9% higher than average Italy for infrastructures and efficiency in public expenditure for infrastructures, but problems of accessibility; problems in waste disposal and water system.
Umbria – rural areas
• C Intermediate rural
• D Rural areas with overall development problems
Umbria governance
• Piano Strategico Nazionale
• Patto per l'Umbria (agreement with multinationals and new specialized research centres):
1- investments in infrastructures and transports, enterprises competitiveness, energy
2- protection and development of the territory, environment, urban ares, rural areas
3- welfare
4- intergration of education system and employment opportunities
• PSR, 5 PLSR in 2007-13
• POR (Regione Umbria)
• Leader II and +
• Community Initiatives PIC Retex and Programma Integrato di Recupero mainly in rural villages under 5000 inhabitants (earthquake) and Resider II (metallurgy)
Tuscany DocUp 2000-6
• Programmed expenditure % per axis on total expenditure
Axis 1 – SME Development 389,060 42.2% Axis 2 – Territorialnhancement 378.864.4 41.% Axis 3 – Environment 155,294.8 16.8% Total objective 2 923,219.7
• 45,2% of projects are in rural areas, 4,3% in partially rural areas, 53,6% are in urban areas (over 20.000 inhabitants)
2.2.1 Infrastructures for cultural activities 129 projects2.1.2 Infrastructures for commerce 1022.4.1 Industrial and premises 952.2.3 Integrated services for education and archiving of cultural resources 462.1.1 Non-hotel touristic accomodation 412.5.2 Nurseries 393.8 Parks and natural areas 252.6.2 Infrastructures for work centres 172.5.1 Social centres 143.4 Infrastructure for garbage disposal 113.9 Soil protection103.1 Energy System and renewable sources 83.6 Soil reclaimation 72.8.4 ICT for SMEs 62.4.3 Promotion of local products 42.6.1 Work centres 22.8.2 Infrastructures for metereology 22.7.2 Territorial marketing 1 (out of 244!)3.3.1 Water systems infrastructures 1
Tuscany DocUp 2000-6 (ReteRurale11)
Umbria DocUp 2000-6
• Programmed expenditure % per axis on total expenditure (all rural)
Axis 1 – Improve the spatial, economical and social integration of areas 133.519.269 33.3% Axis 2 – Innovation in the productive sector: diversify and integrate 145.657.010 36,3%, Axis 3 – Territorial development 112.393.900 28,1% Total 400.201.037
Across themes: women and environmental sustainability. Autorità Ambientale monitored projects + 3.1 support to reduce the environmental impact of enterprises, of regeneration projects and of industrial sites + 2.2.1 environmental certification
1.2 territorial marketing 466 projects higher than expected1.3 regeneration of urban areas 250 ha/ 27 projects with touristic value1.4 ICT in 500 enterprises2.1 support for local development systems (new enterprises culture-environment-tourism) 2440 enterprises (of which
15,2% tourist) + 57 agriturismi 2.2 services to enterprises 3253 enterprises (50 for ecolables) - more than forseen3.1 support to enterprises for environmental protection 200 enterprises3.2 enhancement of natural and cultural assets 100 sites, but only 2,5% in restored structured (expected 3%) ->POR3.3 environmental infrastructures 47 projects + 110 km of water system (less then foreseen)3.4 tourist promotion of cultural and natural assets 80 campaigns higher than expected
arrivals: expected +3% real +5,8%, stays: expected 0 real +0,1, foreign arrivals expected 4%, real 4,4%
POR 2007-13 Tuscany
• Development of the natural policentrism + devolution
• Innovation in tourism and services (e meno autoreferenzialità)
• Axis1 Research and development• 1.3c Acquisition specialized services • 1.3d Development tourist enterprises• Axis2 Environmental sustainability (no
longer a theme across all others)• Axis3 Sustainable energy system• Axis4 Accessibility and transport system• Axis5 Enhancement of endogenous
resources 5.5b environmental monitoring of tourist enterprises
Among priorities: • Enhancement of natural assets 2,9%• Enhancement of cultural assets 2,5%• Integrated projects of urban and rural
renewal 3,6%New territorial criteria:• Mountain areas 6,1%• Rural Areas 18,3• Islands 1,9%
EXPECTED RESULTS AT 2013
• Sustainable tourism projects 2700-3000
• Increase of tourist stays in rural areas from current 10,9 to expected 13,3
• Cultural heritage restored 130 (of which 30 in rural areas)
• Increase no of visitors 33.037.000
• % high/low season 97%
• Projects in disadvantaged areas 30-35
• Projects for the enhancement of natural and cultural assets 130
• Integrated planning of sustainable urban cenetres 20
NECSTOUR in Axis V POR V 5.5b Environmental monitoring according to NECSTOUR findings + Axis I for Tourism SMEs innovation and enterprise consortia
POR 2007-13 Umbria
PRIORITIES:
Axis1 Competitivness
Axis2 Quality of life and attractivity, preserving and enhancing the cultural and natural resources (fragile and protected areas mainly)
Axis3 Energy sustainability
Axis4 Regional and urban transport system (urban systems mainly)
Since all territory is rural, a strong co-ordination between FESR (POR) and FEASR (PSR) is required
EXPECTED RESULTS AT 2013:
Axis1
Eco-innovation projects: 70
Axis2
Tourism arrivals +6000 +0,1%Visitors in restored venues/areas from 50.000
to 100.000Low/high season rate from 77 to 97Projects for the enhancement of natural and
cultural assets 80 (of which 30 in Natura2000 areas)
LEADER+ Tuscany
LEADER + is applicable to: • mountain areas;
• municipalities with a density inferior to 120 inhabitants per km2; • employment rate in agriculture at least double than the Community average;
• urban areas with not more than 15 000 inhabitants; • the total population included in the area of interest should be between
35 000 and 100 000 people. The programme is divided in the following three main axes of action:
1) support to integrated rural development, 2) inter-territorial and trans-national co-operation
3) creation of EU-wide networks
Tuscany’s LAGs are more oriented to projects of valorisation of their own local products.
LEADER+ Umbria
Precursor of negotiated planning.
Positive outcomes: partnerships, innovative projects, participation of both residents
and tourists in environmental protection initiatives.
Examples: “Quality local breeding”
“Ecomuseum in Valnerina”“ValleUmbra territorial trademark”
“Circuit of watermulino”
PSR Tuscany 2000-2013 (map)
• 2000-6
• Axis 1 Agricultural and Forestry sector competitiveness:
• Axis 2 Environment and rural areas: 55%
• Axis 3 Quality of life in rural areas and a diversified economy: 19% (13,3 a consuntivo)
• LEADER (local economic development projects): 4,2%4
• 2007-13
Axis1 Competitivness of enterprises 39%95.606.672 at 2010;Objectives: +516 new GDP.
• Axis2 Improve the environment and rural space 40% (PSN 43%)
109.251.456 at 2010landscape 170.000 ha; +15% non agricultural
activities
• Axis3 Multifunctionality of enterprises, integrated development and quality of life 19% (PSN 14%)
11.154.918 at 2010+3% tourists, +2% internet
• Axis4 LEADER+ 10% (PSN 6,7%)
Development of local products and their promotion concentrated in LEADER projects
PSR Umbria 2000-13
2000-6
• Axis 1 Modernization of the economy: 33% +14% DOP, bio agriculture• Axis 2 :Protection and enhancement of the
environment and rural space 57%• Axis 3 Multifunctionality of enterprises, integrated
development and quality of life: 10%• LEADER (local economic development): 4,2%4
Promotion of local agricultural products throughout the plan and link with tourism
RERU (Rete Ecologica della Regione dell’Umbria – database of ecosystems) Umbria first in Italy
106 Natura 2000 sites, 2 service centres for agriturismo, 57 agriturismo
2007-13
• Axis 1 Support to the economy: 40% • Axis 2 Improve the environment and rural
space: 43% • Axis 3 Multifunctionality of enterprises,
integrated development and quality of life: 14%
• LEADER (local economic development): 5%
3.1.3 Support to tourist enterprises for innovation (digital divide, renewal energy) 110
3.2.2 Renovation of villages 20 3.2.3 Regeneration of rural heritage 603.4 new tourist products and services link with
local agricultural products
4.2 Local economic development to foster a diverse economy and the quality of life in rural areas
5 GAL for 110 projects
Tuscany' Rural Development Plan and Landscape (Mipaaf ,2010)
• Landscape quoted repeteadly but in a generic way
• No landscape mentioned in Axis I: no link agriculture/traditional food/tourism
• Duality forestry and re-naturalization/technical productivity of agricultural
• Underestimates cultural and historical aspects (except measure 323: “protection and renovation of rural heritage and assets”).
• Reference to tourism in measure 311: “non agricultural activities to diversify the economy – help farms to develop leisure activities linked to natural resources and rural traditions”
Umbria' Rural Development Plan and Landscape (Mipaaf, 2010)
• On the contrary, this plan highlights the importance of agricultural activities (e.g. olive trees..) in the protection and enhancement of the landscape, to mantain the biodiversity of mediterranean regions, against the homogenization of the natural assets
• Still lacking measures in Axis I: link traditional food/rural tourism, but measure 413: “cultural value of the landscape, link traditional cultivation with the products, the landscape and the image of the area”
• Tourism: 323 restoration of rural heritage
PSR and landscape
Tuscany
Umbria
Marche
ER
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
measure for landscape preservationmeasure with likely negative ef-fectsn/a
Conclusions
Tuscany:
• More diverse territory and economy, stronger regional disparities + stronger urban/rural focus
• Innovative planning and devolution, but less coordination
• Need for innovation and investements in tourism and SMEs, but more results for highly qualified services and integrated policies for tourism
• Less sensitive to the integration of natural/cultural/landscape assets as an economic drive
Umbria:
• Entirely rural, more diffuse tourist structure
• More coordinated governance, at an early stage for participation
• Need for innovation and investement in tourism and SME, still far from highly qualified services and integrated policies for tourism
• More sensitive to the integration of natural/cultural/landscape assets as an economic drive
