Diapositiva 1

1

2

• Anna Soci
• The state of the Project
• an assessment
• Aberdeen
• May 12th/13th, 2008

3
In terms of WPs..

• WP5 Meeting in Riga
• Evaluation of results from our two (three) TERA
  models
• CGE and NEG (and New-NEG)
• i.e.
• ?
• The evaluation of the degree of influence of
  territorial factors on the growth and development
  of enterprises in remote rural areas

4
TERRITORIAL FACTORS......(list of possible
definitions)(see MfD 7.1.1 and 7.1.2 on-line)

• a factor of production a good or service used
  to produce output, e.g. land(s), labour(s),
  capital(s)
• a process e.g. agglomeration, location,
  specialization vertical/horizontal
  integration competition innovation
• an active cause of an effect (on economic - or
  enterprise? - development)
• any characteristic of the region likely to affect
  (i.e. help to determine) economic devt.
• a process (see 2. above), a feature (e.g. result
  of a process), or a relationship?

5
TERRITORIAL FACTORS.....(issues for
discussion)

• 1 Restrict TFs to actively causal ones, or
  include characteristics, e.g. resources,
  physiography, population density, etc.?
• 2 Exclude policies (EU, national and local)?
• 3 Are processes themselves factors?
• 4 Exclude non-area-specific factors (common to
  all or some other areas)?
• 5 Timescale(s)? some TFs may not be changeable
  (in short/long run? by policy?)

6
The TASK for WP5

• The main operative task was the choice of which
  TFs to look at
• Two supply-side factors
• Change in the internal side of production
• Change in the external conditions of
• production
• ? One demand-side factor
• ? An external factor EU policy (meaningful
  for TERA)

7
More specifically? in the CGE model

• SUPPLY
• Change in the internal conditions of
• production ? Labour
• Change in the external conditions of
• production ? Infrastructure
• DEMAND
• Tourism
• POLICY
• Agricultural subsidies

8
More specifically ? in the NEG model

• SUPPLY
• Change in the internal conditions of
• production ? Labour
• - internal migration (urban-rural)
• - external migration (from a third region)
• Change in the external conditions of
• production ? Infrastructure

9
In our NEG model.

• DEMAND
• No demand-composition effect is possible (though
  some demand-effect is present through the change
  in the labour force)
• POLICY
• No policy action is possible (though the tax
  collection to build infrastructure IS a policy)

10
Comparison

• Useful comparison between the two typologies of
  models as far as the supply side is concerned
• ?
• This comparison should be done
• (with the warnings specified in Deliverable 11)

11
What about the New-NEG model?

• In a nutshell
• Trade integration has a positive impact on
  aggregate productivity through the selection of
  the best firms (Bernard et al., 2003 Melitz,
  2003). The reason is a combination of import
  competition and export market access.
• Since international trade integration eliminates
  the least productive firms, average productivity
  grows through the reallocation of productive
  resources from less to more efficient producers.

12
The point for policy

• There is a positive correlation between the
  export status of a firm and its productivity (the
  exceptional exporter performance, Bernard and
  Jensen, 1999), but the direction of causality is
  not clear.
• This is a crucial issue for trade policy.
• Causation going from export status to firm
  performance would reveal the existence of
  learning by exporting and therefore call for
  export promotion. The reverse causation in the
  form of selection into export status (firms
  that already perform better have a stronger
  propensity to export than other firms) would call
  for more specific firm-to-firm (sector to sector)
  industrial policy.

13
THUS.

• We calibrated a model of endogenous productivity
  and costly trade between the study area and its
  trading partners.
• We consider two alternative scenarios.
• - In the first counterfactual we simulate the
  increase in productivity steaming from a 5 trade
  costs reductions between the trading regions.
  This experiment aims at guiding regional policy
  makers in designing optimal integration policies.
  
• - The second counterfactual consists in an
  exogenous increase of the local population of the
  study area. Again, this simulation is meant to
  guide policy makers in the choice of the best
  local development strategy.

14
AGAIN

• SUPPLY
• Change in the internal conditions of
• production ? Labour
• (with no distinction between intra- and
• inter-regional migration)
• Change in the external conditions of
• production ? Infrastructure

15
AGAIN

• Useful comparison between the results from this
  model and from the previous two typologies of
  models still on the supply side
• ?
• Also this comparison should be done
• (with the warning that this is not a
  core-periphery type of model)

16
DELIVERABLES of WP5 (on-line)

• 5 DELIVERABLES
• Deliverable No. 8 Application and results of
  individual CGE analysis
• Deliverable No. 9 Application and results of CGE
  analysis (comparative analysis)
• Deliverable No. 10 Application and results of
  individual NEG analysis
• Deliverable No. 11 Application and results of
  NEG analysis (comparative analysis)
• Additional Deliverable Productivity and firm
  selection an application to regional trade
  within the TERA project

17
We are now under the .

• Objective 2
• Assessing the extent to which current and recent
  EU, national and regional development policies,
  programmes and projects take account of these
  territorial factors.
• We will compare the weight of these factors, as
  measured by our empirical results, with the
  effective relevance they have (if any) in the
  actual policies.

18
THUS.

• From the previous slide, I expect we now
• - evaluate how strong - and robust our
• results are
• ? i.e., we find out which TFs are
• relevant for our study-areas
• - check whether current policies do or do
• not consider these TFs

19
Work in progress

• The second part of our task has been almost
  entirely anticipated.
• In the RIGA meeting we had the individual
  presentations of the complete (i.e. at each level
  of governance) review of current policies.
• WP6 is over.

20
WP6 Materials for Deliverables (on line)

• MfD6.1 - Latvian teams .ppt presentation (in
  Archanes)
• First ideas on WP6 appraisal of current
  structural development policies"
• MfD6.2 a) - Latvian teams .ppt presentation (in
  Riga) EU policy review
• MfD6.2 b) - Latvian teams paper EU policy
  review
• MfD6.3 a) - Italian teams .ppt presentation (in
  Riga) National and study-area policy review
• MfD6.3 b) - Italian teams paper Local
  development in the area of Basso Ferrarese an
  overview

21

• MfD6.4 a) - Scottish teams .ppt presentation (in
  Riga) National and study-area policy review
• MfD6.4 b) - Scottish teams paper Review of
  structural development policies in East
  Highlands, Scotland
• MfD6.5 a) - Finnish teams .ppt presentation (in
  Riga) National and study-area policy review
• MfD6.5 b) - Finnish teams paper Policy review,
  Finland
• MfD6.6 a) - Greek teams .ppt presentation (in
  Riga)National and study-area policy review
• MfD6.6 b) - Greek teams paper Review of
  structural development policies in Greece and
  Archanes

22

• MfD6.7 a) - Czech teams .ppt presentation (in
  Riga)National and study-area policy review
• MfD6.7 b) - Czech teams paper Outline of
  research paper on the relevance of structural
  policies in district Bruntal
• MfD6.8 a) - Latvian teams .ppt presentation (in
  Riga)National and study-area policy review
• MfD6.8 b) - Latvian teams paper Country
  report policy review

23
DELIVERABLES of WP6 (1/2 on-line)

• Relevance of Structural
• Development Policies
• Deliverable No. 12 Relevance of
• Structural Policies and Territorial Factors
• (Study-Area Specific) (done)
• Deliverable No. 13 Relevance of Structural
• Policies and Territorial Factors (Comparative
• Analysis) (done and on-line)
•  

24
Work in progress

• What we should do now is to check whether our
  results are taken into account by the policies
  reviewed in WP6.
• ?
• Task for the Aberdeen meeting

25
Further work for the same task

• In order not to neglect the possibility that
  current policies are fully taking into account
  important TFs that WE DID NOT take into
  account, we decided to go on with the research
  leaving the choice of further steps to each
  partner.
• (see MfD 7.2.2 on-line)

26
THUS Possible additional analyses in WP7

• Additional, region-specific quantitative analyses
  with CGE models
• with NO changes in the actual CGE model
• structures as such, but simulations with
• changes in the intensities of the applied
• shocks and/or combinations of shocks
• (e.g. reduction in agricultural subsidies
  and
• change in labour supply simultaneously)
• with changes simulations with totally
• different shocks, or even slightly different
  
• structure of the CGE (e.g., closure rules)

27
Moreover.

• Additional, region-specific qualitative analyses
  (e.g. via additional region-specific information
  and knowledge acquired through well-targeted
  interviews of regional/local experts).
• Special attention should be paid to causal
  relationships and interdependences
• (which are not explained by and/or not visible in
  the model results as such).

28
And here we are..The Aberdeen meeting

• Partner No. 3 who is leading the last WP7
• is expected to present a comparative comment
  on the
• first part of the job (the so called
  minimum
• requirement)
• The others with the exception of Latvia, who
• decided to stop at the first stage are
  expected to
• present the second stage of their research
• A thorough discussion would then allow
  Partner No. 3 to be able to gather all the
  results and to reach the ultimate goal of the
  project, which is

29
Objective 3

• The assessment of the extent to which current
  and recent EU, national and regional development
  policies, programmes and projects take account of
  these territorial factors would allow
• ? to specify new policy interventions which can
  better promote the development of European remote
  rural areas.
• ?
• GAND CONFERENCE

30
Activities (see the PAR for the third year)

• Partners participated in the TERA
• meetings with contributed papers.
• Some Deliverables are in progress
• to receive a peer review for the
• publication on academic journals.

31
CONFERENCE

• The medium-project Conference was successfully
  organized in Ferrara in October 2007
• Scholars went from abroad and actively
  contributed to the works of the Conference
• A large amount of materials from the Conference
  is on-line

32
Relationships and Visits

• The exchange of information has been efficient
  and full collaboration among the partners has
  always been present
• The quality of the internal scientific debate was
  good and stimulating
• In the third year too some researchers went and
  visit other TERA teams. This activity will be
  duly recorded in the future PAR.

33
DisseminationSee future PUDK (as a part of PAR)

• MAIN TOOLS
• The TERA web-site www.dse.unibo/tera,
• which has been continuously modified,
• improved, and up-dated.
• The TERA Working Paper series,
• which is ready and can be circulated

34
Media relations

• a press release has been provided
• for each meeting
• a press-survey has been obtained from
• articles published during the meetings
• (many articles have been published in
• local newspapers). The press-survey is
• available on the TERA web site
• a press conference has been organized
• where possible

35
Printed matters

• Newsletters to promote scientific results and
  dissemination actions had been prepared. Two
  yearly Newsletters are already available on the
  web site
• Flyers and programs for the meetings have been
  standardized, and the EU, FP6, and TERA logo were
  added everywhere
• Printed matters (flyers, brochures, covers) and
  Presentation-supporting tools (templates, headed
  writing-paper) were provided to the Consortium
  for the dissemination activity

36
Steps forward ()

• Scientific
• Finalization of WP7
• Final Conference in Gand
• Dissemination
• Organizational
• Reporting Activities