Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Annual Meeting of Hungarian Regional Science Association Kaposvár , 21-22 November 2013. Territorial capital: theory, empirics and critical remarks. Tóth Balázs István Assistant Lecturer, PhD candidate University of West Hungary Faculty of Economics. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Territorial capital: theory, empirics and critical remarks
Tóth Balázs IstvánAssistant Lecturer, PhD candidate
University of West Hungary Faculty of Economics
Annual Meeting of Hungarian Regional Science Association
Kaposvár, 21-22 November 2013
Introduction: some ‘preconditions’ of TC
• Why has the concept of TC become remarkable in recent years?– Increasing complexity of world economy, intensification of globalization – Appreciation of local values, endogenous resources (territorial assets),
endogenous growth and path-dependency– Fragile and unequal development (especially in the EU)– Criticism of the cohesion policy of the European Union– Changing concepts of ‘sustainability’– Diversified ideologies of regional science:
• Need for a new interpretation and explanation of regional development• Shift from hard and technical analyses to soft, speculative and critical
examinations• Resurgence of supply-oriented approaches
Finka
Zonne-veld-
Waterhout
Waterhout
Camagni
The ‘evolution’ of TC
1999 2001 2005 2010 2011 2013201220092008
OECDTerritorial Outlook
LEADER EO
Camagni, R.Regional
Competitiveness: Towards a Concept of Territorial Capital
Basic theory and model
Empirical investigations
Application of the concept
Empirics(empirics+theory)
Affuso-Camagni
Capello et al.
Veneri
Camagni et al.
Brasili
Pompili-Martinoia
Casi-Resmini
Caragliu-Nijkamp
Brasili et al.
Percucca
Tóth Tóth
Camagni-Capello
Attractiveness
Servillo et al.
ATTREG
Atkinson
Rural development
V. Berkel-Verburg
Copus et al.
Venturaet al.
Coutney et al.
Kunzmann
Giffinger-Suitner
Territorial governance
2007
Regional growth, territorial
competitiveness
Territorial cohesion
Giffinger
Camagni-Capello
Davoudiet al.
Giffinger-Hame-dinger
Rota
Marsh
Capello
Sarmiento-MirwardtZonne-
veld-Waterhout
ON
LY C
ON
CE
PT
UA
LIS
AT
ION
European Commission
Tóth
Source: own construction
Giffinger-Hame-dinger
Main types of capital in some ‘capital frameworks’: a comparison
Source: own construction
Measuring TC: a comparison
Applied method(s) Case study Period Dimensions of territorial capital
Affuso–Camagni (2010)MASST-model
(econometric model)Provinces of
‘Latin Arc’Long term approach
Infrastructural capital, settlement structure, sectoral and natural specificities, social and relational capital
Brasili (2011) Principal component analysis 118 cities of the EU 2006-2007 Productive capital, cognitive capital, environmental
capital, infrastructural capital, settlement capital
Camagni et al. (2011)Descriptive analysis
Cluster analysisAnalysis of variance
Spatial autocorrelation
Italian provinces (NUTS 3)
2006 (most of the data) Relational capital, human capital
Pompili–Martinoia (2011)Factor analysisCluster analysis
Italian provinces (NUTS 3)
Long term approach
Cultural capital, natural capital, human capital, economic performance, tourism, labour
Veneri (2011) Principal component analysis Italian provinces (NUTS 3)
2001 (most of the data)
Social capital, socio-cultural identity, spatial organization of activities and governance
Brasili et al. (2012)Standardizing
IndexingItalian provinces
(NUTS 3) 2002-2004, 2009Productive capital, cognitive capital, social capital,
relational capital, environmental capital, human capital, settlement capital, infrastructural capital
Mazzola et al. (2012)Descriptive analysis
Panel with fixed and random effects
Italian provinces (NUTS 3) 1999-2011
Social capital, natural capital, physichal capital, human capital, institutional-relational capital, entrepreneurial-
relational capital, cognitive capital, public-private capital
Camagni–Capello (2013)MASST-model
(econometric model)259 regions of the
EU (NUTS 2)2015
(forecast, scenario)Entrepreneurship, creativity, social overhead capital,
receptivity
Perucca (2013)Principal component analysis
Analysis of variance Multiple lin. regression
Italian provinces (NUTS 3) 1999-2008 Public capital, attractiveness, private capital, social
capital, human capital, relational capital
Tóth (2011; 2013a)Factor analysisCluster analysis
Hungarian medium-sized
cities2009; 2010
Profit, added value and income, natural and built environment, supply and services, education and community culture, social features, attractiveness
Tóth (2013b) Discriminant analysis Hungarian sub-regions (LAU 1) 2006-2011 Economic capital, natural capital, built capital, human
capital, cultural capital, social capital
Source: own construction
Measuring TC: a comparison
Source: own construction
Hajdúböszörmény
Törökszentmiklós
Makó
Békés
Orosháza
HajdúszoboszlóJászberény
Baja
KeszthelyKiskunfélegyháza
Nagykőrös
KiskunhalasSzentes
GödöllőSzentendre
Mosonmagyaróvár
Pápa
Ajka
Salgótarján
EsztergomHatvanVác
Tata
Nagykanizsa
Várpalota
Gyöngyös
Hódmezővásárhely
Karcag
Siófok
Gyula
Cegléd
Dunaújváros
Tatabánya
Komló
ÓzdKazincbarcika
Dunakeszi
ÉrdVecsés
GyálSzigetszentmiklós Dunaharaszti
Budaörs
Sopron
Szombathely
Békéscsaba
KaposvárSzekszárd
Szolnok
Zalaegerszeg
Veszprém
Eger
Hubs of significant territorial capital (7)
Medium-sized cities with considerable territorial capital (5)
Medium-sized cities with considerable capacity in tangible assets and with moderate capacity in intangible assets (6)
Medium-sized cities with average (moderate) territorial capital (29)
Developing or territorial capital-deficient medium- sized cities (5)
Types of Hungarian medium-sized cities based on territorial capital
Source: own calculations
Built
cap
ital –
Hum
an c
apita
l +Bu
ilt c
apita
l +H
uman
cap
ital –
Economic capital –Cultural capital –
Economic capital +Cultural capital +
Func
tion
2
Function 1
123Centroid
Sub-regions of lower permanent domestic emigrations
Sub-regions of higher permanent domestic emigrations
Sub-regions of permanent domestic immigrations
Functions Function 1 Function 2Structure matrix
1. Economic capital I. (private fixed capital)
0,807(0,000)*
2. Economic capital II. (income, tax)
0,749(0,000)*
3. Cultural capital (community culture)
0,235(0,037)*
4. Built capital (accessibility, institutions)
0,801(0,000)*
5. Human capital (education, patents)
0,462(0,027)*
6. Natural capital (green public spaces)
-0,203 (0,334)**
7. Social capital (crimes, poverty, aid)
-0,123 (0,813)**
Eigenvalue 0,675 0,156% of Variance 81,3% 18,7%Canonical correlation 0,635 0,367Wilks’ Lambda 0,517 0,865Chi-square; df; Sig.
110,994; 14; 0,000
24,291; 6; 0,000
Attractiveness of Hungarian sub-regions based on some dimensions of territorial capital
Source: own calculations
Some critical remarks
• It is still unclear whether there is a common understanding of TC:– Since OECD (2001) no additional definitions were published– There are problems with the OECD definition: is it a real definition or a list of
territorial assets?
• TC is not adequate for many criteria of ’capital’:– TC is rather not ’capital’ according to e.g. Elster (1997), Adler-Kwon (1999),
Arrow (1999), Solow (1999), Robison et al. (2002)
• Not every component of TC is appropriate for statistical analyses:– There is no consensus which dimensions of TC should be measured– There are great differences concerning the applied methods, the indicators
and case studies– Is it a static or a dynamic phenomenon?
Some critical remarks
• It is still unclear whether there are relations between TC and some other terms used in regional economics / regional (local) economic development:– Competitive advantages, regional specialization, regional development, territorial
competitiveness, location factors, economies of scale, intelligent specialisation etc.
• ‘Territorial capital paradigm’ fundamental research problem:– TC is a new paradigm following the basic meaning of Oxford English Dictionary– TC is not a paradigm following T. Kuhn’s definition (1970) on paradigm– In stead of ‘paradigm’: ‘change in style’ (Hacking 1985), ‘change in the discipline’s
core model of reality’ (Lakatos 1978), ‘evolutionary process’ (Popper 1972), ‘self correcting process’ (Sagan 2002) etc. may be more appropriate
Some critical remarks
• TC concept is still missing from local economic development strategies:– All strategies identify the characteristics of regions well, but do not include
them in the development of vision (Banski 2013): There is a need not only for TC diagnosis, but for TC synthesis as well
Exploration and analysis + formulating vision + defining goals are based on TC
Conclusions and proposals• The concept of TC is of great importance but has not been
researched in the necessary depth yet• Further scientific research needs to be completed:
– Through the concept of TC scientists may get a better picture in relation of the main ideologies and theories in economics and in regional science: TC provides an appropriate analytical framework to study regional economic processes
– TC may be appropriate to explain territorial development more precisely: scientists are able to systemize the endogenous factors of territorial development more accurately
• The approach of territorial capital can widen the visions of territorial development policies, providing new techniques and methods for strengthening territorial competitiveness in Central and South East Europe, also in Hungary
