Download Report

PROPOSAL FOR AN OECD METROPOLITAN REVIEW OF THE METROPOLITAN
REGION ROTTERDAM–THE HAGUE (MRDH)
Many governments are searching for new ways to unlock the growth potential of their economies.
This has focused attention on why some cities and regions grow faster than others, and what public
policies can do to maximise the performance of each region for the benefit of national economies. To
make good policy choices, there is a need to understand regional competitiveness better and how
regional policies contribute to structural economic policies at national level. The OECD Regional
Development Policy Committee (RDPC) is a unique international forum for this debate, drawing on
innovative statistical work to understand the key challenges of urban and rural regions. As a leading
international organisation in the field of regional and urban development, the OECD can provide a
valuable contribution to the development of policy from an international comparative perspective.
The purpose of this document is to propose collaboration between the OECD and the
Netherlands’ Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations together with the Metropolitan Region
Rotterdam-The Hague for an OECD Metropolitan Review of the Metropolitan Region Rotterdam-The
Hague (MRDH). The project will be conducted by the Regional Development Policy Division of the
OECD’s Directorate for Public Governance and Territorial Development (GOV). This document aims
to provide the necessary background for the authorities. The details of the project would be adapted to
meet the needs and interests of the Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations and, in particular,
of the MRDH itself.
What is an OECD Metropolitan Review?
In the field of regional and urban development, the OECD stands at the forefront of research and
analysis. The OECD works directly with senior public officials in charge of regional policies from 34
member countries, mayors, and regional leaders. The organisation has developed an extensive
programme of work related to regional, rural and urban development which encompasses both
competitiveness and governance. As part of this programme of work, the OECD has launched a series
of OECD Metropolitan Reviews, which have covered more than a score of cities, including, most
recently, Chicago (USA), Johannesburg (Gauteng, South Africa) Venice (Italy), Guangdong (China)
and Toronto (Canada). Forthcoming reviews include Antofagasta (Chile) and Puebla-Tlaxcala
(Mexico).
Why a Review of the MRDH?
The formation of a new metropolitan region on the basis of collaboration between Rotterdam,
The Hague and 22 smaller municipalities around them represents an important development for the
affected cities and the Dutch economy as a whole. The second-largest of the Netherlands’ major
conurbations, the cities comprising the MRDH have come together in a bottom-up approach to
collaboration in an effort to address a number of common challenges identified in the OECD’s
Territorial Review of the Netherlands (2014) and in its earlier review of the Randstad (2007). While
the Netherlands’ polycentric urban structure is in many ways a source of economic strength, there is
evidence that its major urban areas have been performing below their potential and are outperformed
by similar urban regions in other OECD countries. In particular, Dutch urban areas often fail to realise
fully the potential benefits of agglomeration (Table 1), and this appears to be linked at least in part to
fragmented governance arrangements.
Table 1.
The “urban premium” in the Netherlands and OECD-wide
Netherlands
OECD
GDP per capita “PU” 2010
36 766
30 390
Ratio to all regions
104%
124%
Ratio to “IN” regions
109%
128%
Productivity “PU” 2010
72 370
72 136
Ratio to all regions
102%
118%
Ratio to “IN” regions
105%
122%
Note: IN: intermediate regions; PU: predominantly urban regions.
Source: OECD (2013), OECD Regional Statistics (database), http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/region-data-en.
Fragmentation and co-ordination challenges in the Netherlands are somewhat unusual in certain
respects. While the municipalities that make up Dutch functional urban areas are not, on average,
particularly small by OECD standards (the country is close to the OECD average), the polycentric
character of the Dutch urban system is both a potential strength and a complicating factor, as is the
relatively small size of Dutch conurbations (the largest, Amsterdam, ranks 50th by population in the
OECD; Rotterdam and The Hague together would be almost as large). Moreover, some urban areas
(including Rotterdam and The Hague) have more complex spatial structures than are typically found
elsewhere: the density of settlement means that inter-municipal boundaries often run through densely
built areas and that the core-peripher structure charactertistic of most OECD metros is less
pronounced. This, too, is a potential advantage, but it requires good co-operation at a metropolitan
scale to realise the benefits.
For the Netherlands as a whole, a Review offers the opportunity to explore deeply some of the
policy and governance challenges underlie the comparative weakness of agglomeration benefits in the
Netherlands, particularly those linked to metropolitan governance. A review would allow the MRDH
to see itself in the context of the Dutch urban system and also in comparison to metros across the
OECD area. It will yield insights and proposals of relevance for national urban policies, for the
MRDH itself and for other Dutch metropolitan regions. Moreover, Rotterdam and The Hague have
been doing less well than some other Dutch metros on a wide range of indicators. It also offers and
opportunity for the new MRDH authority to explore key policy challenges facing it.
A review of the MRDH would be of great interest to other OECD members, many of which are
also pursuing metropolitan governance reforms with varying degrees of success. The issue of
governance at metropolitan scale has received increasing attention in recent OECD work and is
growing in salience on the policy agendas of many OECD members and non-members alike.
Moreover, the MRDH experience is particularly striking, because it has been created from the bottom
up by the 24 local authorities involved, rather than being imposed from above or created at the
instigation of a more senior level of government. OECD work on metropolitan governance reforms
suggests that this is relatively unusual, and the means by which the 24 municipalities overcome the
barriers to collective action could well contain important lessons for others.
2
What themes might be addressed in an OECD Review of the MRDH?
The focus of each metropolitan review can be tailored to the needs and interests of the requesting
authority. An OECD Metropolitan Review of Rotterdam-The Hague would follow the common OECD
conceptual framework by addressing the three following sets of issues:
•
Analysis of socio-economic trends, growth potential and untapped opportunities, featuring
international comparisons using the OECD Regional and Metropolitan Areas Databases, the
OECD Regional Well-being Database, as well as a selection of benchmark metropolitan
regions from non-OECD countries.
•
Policies and strategies to enhance regional competitiveness, social inclusion and sustainable
development, e.g. regional innovation systems; the role of higher education in human capital
formation, attraction and retention, workforce development strategies and their related
governance arrangements; physical infrastructure; transport and land use; attractiveness and
tourism, foreign direct investment; social capital and social cohesion; sustainable development
policies, including water management, compact spatial development and climate change
policies; and green growth.
•
Governance, including metropolitan governance, vertical and horizontal institutional
relationships between layers of governments, partnerships with the private sector and civil
society, fiscal issues, decentralisation, and strategic planning.
Specific sub-themes for the Review of the MRDH would be agreed with the authorities. They
could include the following:
•
Socio-economic challenges requiring co-operation at metropolitan scale. These include, inter
alia: increasing productivity growth and employment creation; reducing congestion and
ensuring effective provision of public transport and transport infrastructure; improved
housing-market performance; and stimulating innovation.
•
The challenges of forming and governing an effective metropolitan region, including
instruments and institutions to foster better co-ordination of public authorities both vertically
(across levels of government) and horizontally (across both jurisdictions and policy sectors).
•
Effectively engaging other societal actors (companies, research institutes and higher education
institutions, civil society organisations, etc.) in the creation of a cohesive, competitive MRDH:
the issue of mobilising private finance (e.g. via various forms of public-private partnership) for
some projects is particularly salient, but one should not overlook the importance of drawing
such actors, as appropriate, into active participation in metro-level planning and decisionmaking.
The above-mentioned themes provide only a broad overview of the study’s agenda. Greater
precision in thematic focus will be an important task in the scoping phase of the work (see Table 1
below). In view of the broad range of issues to consider, a possible outline for the Review might, at
this stage, be envisaged to include four chapters:
1)
Socio-economic trends: an analysis of the main social, economic and environmental
outcomes seen in the MRDH over the recent past and a diagnosis of the most urgent
problems to tackle in order to foster sustainable and inclusive growth across the metro
region.
3
2)
Confronting the policy challenges: based on the diagnosis presented in chapter 1, this
chapter would look at areas where enhanced co-operation at the level of the MRDH might
facilitate more effective action in addressing the kinds of policy challenges that its
municipalities have in common and that may require metro-level co-ordination to tackle –
above all, internal and external transport connectivity and traffic congestion (e.g. via the
creation of a Transport authority); land-use and environmental challenges; and also issues
related to economic development, including human capital and labour-market performance.
It will seek to identify key investment needs that may help to strengthen and knit the region
together and to explore potential means for mobilising the finance needed to address those
needs (e.g., effectively tapping pensions funds and other institutional investors). It would
seek to identify best practices from other metros that might be adapted to the circumstances
of the MRDH.
3)
Achieving effective metropolitan governance: a comparative analysis of the MRDH and its
formation in the context of OECD work on similar reforms elsewhere, looking at (1) the
evidence concerning the costs of metropolitan fragmentation and the potential benefits of
new governance arrangements at metropolitan scale, (2) the institutions, instruments and
powers associated with metropolitan governance reforms, as well as questions of democratic
legitimacy and coherence with the overall governance/administrative structure of the
country. This chapter would also draw on recent OECD work exploring the obstacles to, and
benefits of, deeper co-ordination of policy and governance at metropolitan scale, particularly
as it affects quality of life and competitiveness at national and global levels.
4)
Governing the MRDH: this chapter would build on Chapter 2’s discussion of policy
challenges and Chapter 3’s bench-marking of the MRDH in governance terms in order to
focus, finally, on implementation – specifically, on the mechanics of governance in the
MRDH area: managing relations among municipalities, co-ordinating tasks with provincial
and national governments and co-operating with key private-sector and societal interests.
This chapter would look, inter alia, at the instruments the MRDH will require to address the
policy challenges outlined above and at the relationship between the MRDH and both other
levels of government and with societal actors. One crucial challenge will be defining the
relationship between the MRDH and its constituent municipalities, in order to ensure that
they all benefit from co-operation and, in particular, so that the formation of the new
authority serves to empower rather than undermine them.
Policy dialogue
The study process provides a number of steps which allow for in-depth policy dialogues between
local policy makers, central government officials and other key actors shaping the MRDH’s
development. Throughout the Review process, national, provincial and city officials and policymakers
will interact and exchange directly with policymakers from OECD countries, either during the OECD
missions to the MRDH, or during their participation in the meetings of the OECD Regional
Development Policy Committee (RDPC) and the Working Party on Urban Areas, including during the
final presentation of the report. They will also have the opportunity to take part in several OECD
network platforms, including the meetings of the OECD Urban Roundtable of Mayors and Ministers
(http://www.oecd.org/urban/roundtable/). This process is based on the OECD principle of mutual
learning: the policy dialogues will enable officials to learn from the experiences of other cities and
countries; equally important is the potential learning in other OECD cities from the MRDH’s
experience.
4
How would an OECD Review of Rotterdam-The Hague be conducted?
The OECD Metropolitan Review of Rotterdam-The Hague will be organised as follows:
•
Initiating the process. After discussions with the OECD Secretariat, the Dutch and MRDH
authorities would request an OECD Metropolitan Review by sending an official letter of
commitment (or multiple letters, in the case of multiple donors), expressing an interest and a
commitment to co-finance the Review (a model letter of commitment can be provided by the
OECD Secretariat upon request).
•
Appointing local co-ordinators. In order to ensure that the Review is in-depth and timely, the
MRDH must set up a local team in charge of the project, with whom the OECD can work and
co-ordinate on a regular basis. The local team may include or be supervised by a steering
committee, composed of key actors (representatives of different layers of governments,
academia, private actors such as the chamber of commerce, major entrepreneurs, etc.).
•
Gathering information. The local team will prepare a background report presenting the main
socio-economic trends, unused potentials, challenges, policies and strategies, and governance
framework of Rotterdam-The Hague. The report is essentially descriptive and consists of
responses to a detailed questionnaire and data request provided by the OECD Secretariat. On
the basis of the questionnaire responses and the data received, the OECD Secretariat will
conduct two study missions to the MRDH with the help of the local team in order to interview
key actors (local/regional/national government-level policymakers, academicians, the business
community, and civil society groups such as NGOs). The second such mission will also
involve the participation of peer reviewers (public officials from other OECD cities), who will
apply their expertise and knowledge about other international experiences to deepen the
assessment and policy recommendations.
•
Producing the report. The OECD Secretariat will draft an interim report and send it to the
local team for fact-checking. During a final mission, the OECD Secretariat and the local team
will discuss the main conclusions of the report.
•
Presenting the results. The final report will be presented by the OECD Secretariat and
discussed by representatives of all OECD member countries during a Session of the OECD
Regional Development Policy Committee (RDPC) or the Working Party on Territorial Policy
in Urban Areas. Representatives of the Dutch government and the MRDH are invited to
introduce the case to the committee. Upon the approval of the delegates, the report will be
published as an OECD Metropolitan Review. At the end of the process, the Ministry of the
Interior and Kingdom Relations or the authorities in the MRDH may organise an international
conference to debate the key topics and recommendations of the Review. This may coincide
with the release of the official OECD publication.
5
Time-frame and budget
Once the financing is secured, the entire process, from the reception of the letter of commitment
(or letter of interest) to the official approval of the Study by the OECD Regional Development Policy
Committee (RDPC), will last for roughly 12 months. The indicative timeline presented in Table 2
reflects the desire of the MRDH to receive a full draft of the report as quickly as possible.
Table 1. Indicative time-frame for the Review
Phase
Initiation
Scoping the issues
Questionnaire
Data and policy
background report
First mission
Preparation of a first draft
report
Follow-up mission
Sharing the draft report
Finalisation of report and
recommendations
Presentation to OECD
Committee*
Final report publication
Approx.
Timeline
OctoberNovember
2014
November
2014
November
2014
December
2014January
2015
February
2015
FebruaryJune 2015
April 2015
July 2015
AugustOctober
2015
November
2015
Following
OECD
approval
Milestones
Contract signed and nomination of a local Project Coordinator and Local Team participants.
Preliminary discussion on key topics for the report.
The OECD prepares and sends to the local team a
detailed questionnaire and data request.
Preparation by the local team of responses to the
questionnaire and data request covering the main trends
and current policies in the country.
Review mission of 3-5 days by OECD team to conduct
interviews with key actors of the country.
Preparation of a first draft report.
Follow-up mission by the OECD.
The OECD sends the draft to the Local Team; the Local
Team sends detailed comments to the first draft.
Finalisation of report by the OECD.
Presentation to OECD Committee for comments by
member countries and approval.
Finalisation of report with presentation of the results and
official publication available; possible launching to be held
in the Region.
*The final report must be approved by the OECD Regional Development Policy Committee (RDPC)
or one of its Working Parties. The Committee meets semi-annually (generally June and December)
therefore exact timing of the final report is subject to this calendar.
The contribution from the requesting authorities for an OECD Metropolitan Review of
Rotterdam-The Hague has been estimated at approximately EUR 290,000, with the breakdown set out
in Table 3.
Table 2. Estimated budget
Category
Total Estimated Cost, EUR
Staff costs, incl. overheads (office space, IT, etc)
Experts - fees
6
216,807
22,000
Mission Costs (OECD Staff)
Mission Costs (Peer reviewers)
Miscellaneous (e.g. printing, photocopies,
publications)
OECD Grant Administration Charge (6.3%)
TOTAL COSTS
17,925
9715
5,000
18,251
289,698
Note: any overspend on one budget line may be compensated by an underspend on another budget
line while remaining within the overall budget
This budget corresponds to the cost related to the OECD Secretariat’s preparation of the study. It
should be noted that this budget does not cover the following:
•
Financing the organisation and work of the Local Team.
•
In-country logistics/organisational costs of the missions (except for accommodation, travel to
and from the MRDH, and subsistence for the OECD team, all of which are covered by the
budget).
•
The cost of any launch event(s) in the MRDH (post-review presentations or conferences),
apart from the mission costs for OECD staff participating in the launch.
•
The travel of Dutch national or local representatives to meetings at the OECD.
•
The cost of spending on interpreters for the Secretariat team during the study missions.
•
Translation and publication of the Review in Dutch.
The official working languages of the OECD are English and French. The working language for
co-operation between the OECD and the MRDH will be English.
Role of the local team
The Local Team will be designated by the MRDH authorities and the ministry of The Interior and
Kingdom Relations. The local team will be in charge of the following:
•
Appointment of a main responsible person in charge of co-ordinating the work with the OECD
on a daily basis for practical issues.
•
Production of the background report (in English), including main indicators of social,
economic and environmental trends and presenting the main policies and strategies of the
central government, along the lines of a detailed questionnaire provided by the OECD. The
background report will reflect views from key actors in the MRDH and could be published as
a report from the authorities from the region after the publication of the OECD report.
•
Organisation of study missions for the OECD team in the MRDH, including arranging
interviews between the OECD and key actors involved in policies having an impact in the
region (policymakers from local/regional/national governments, academics and researchers,
business community, NGOs, etc.), and providing room facilities and, if necessary,
simultaneous interpretation.
7
•
Assist with the organisation of thematic seminars with logistical support, contacting and
mobilising participants and stakeholders from the MRDH, onsite support and help preparing
field activities.
•
Mobilisation of senior officials from the MRDH to attend the Regional Development Policy
Committee (RDPC) meeting to be held in Paris, and to participate in the session where the
final report will be presented and published. The Local Team will arrange interpreters, if
necessary.
•
Publication of the OECD Metropolitan Review of Rotterdam-The Hague in Dutch after
completion of the copyright agreement with the OECD, if the MRDH or the Ministry of the
Interior and Kingdom Relations are inclined to publish a Dutch version.
OECD Contact
William Tompson
Head of the Urban Development Programme
Regional Development Policy Division, OECD
Tel. +33 1 45 24 15 76
E-mail: william.tompson@oecd.org
Marissa Plouin
Policy Analyst
Regional Development Policy Division, OECD
Tel. +33 1 45 24 88 65
E-mail: marissa.plouin@oecd.org
8