Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions — Territorial classification and typologies
Date: 2017-07-13
Institutions: Commission for Territorial Cohesion Policy and EU Budget, European Committee of the Regions
Subjects: EU statistics, administrative unit, classification, data collection, regional statistics, statistical method, statistical nomenclature








C_2017342EN.01007401.xml










12.10.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 342/74





Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions — Territorial classification and typologies
(2017/C 342/11)












Rapporteur:



Mieczysław Struk (PL/EPP), President of the Pomeranian Region





Reference document:



Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 1059/2003 as regards the territorial typologies (Tercet)
COM(2016) 788 final








I.   RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AMENDMENTS


Amendment 1

COM(2016) 788 final
Article 1
Amend paragraph 1






Text proposed by the Commission


CoR amendment




Article 1


Article 1




Regulation (EC) No 1059/2003 is amended as follows:


Regulation (EC) No 1059/2003 is amended as follows:










(1)


Article 1 is replaced by the following:












(1)


Article 1 is replaced by the following:








‘Article 1


‘Article 1




Subject matter


Subject matter




1.   This regulation establishes a common statistical classification of territorial units (NUTS), in order to enable the collection, compilation and dissemination of harmonised statistics at different territorial levels of the EU.


1.   This regulation establishes a common statistical classification of territorial units (NUTS), in order to enable the collection, compilation and dissemination of harmonised statistics at different territorial levels of the EU.




2.   The NUTS classification is set out in Annex I.


2.   The NUTS classification is set out in Annex I.




3.   Local administrative units (LAU), as referred to in Article 4, shall complement the NUTS classification.


3.   Local administrative units (LAU), as referred to in Article 4, shall complement the NUTS classification.




4.   Statistical grids, as referred to in Article 4a, shall complement the NUTS classification. They shall be used to calculate 
population-based
 territorial typologies.


4.   Statistical grids, as referred to in Article 4a, shall complement the NUTS classification. They shall be used to calculate territorial typologies 
based on population distribution and density
.




5.   Union territorial typologies, as referred to in Article 4b, shall complement the NUTS classification by attributing types to the territorial units.’;


5.   Union territorial typologies, as referred to in Article 4b, shall complement the NUTS classification by attributing types to the territorial units.’;






Reason


More precise formulation.

Amendment 2

COM(2016) 788 final
Article 1
Amend paragraph 5






Text proposed by the Commission


CoR amendment




(5)   the following articles 4a and 4b are inserted:


(5)   the following articles 4a and 4b are inserted:




(…)


(…)





Article 4b




Article 4b





Union territorial typologies


Union territorial typologies




(…)


(…)




3.   The following typologies shall be established at LAU level:


3.   The following typologies shall be established at LAU level:










(a)


degree of urbanisation (DEGURBA):












(a)


degree of urbanisation (DEGURBA):














 








—


‘Urban areas’:
















 








—


‘Urban areas’,


















 








—




‘Cities’ or
‘Densely populated areas’,
















 








—


‘Densely populated areas’,


















 








—




‘Towns and suburbs’ or
‘Intermediate density areas’,
















 








—


‘Intermediate density areas,


















 








—




‘Rural areas’ or ‘Thinly
 populated areas’;
















 








—


‘
Sparsely
 populated areas’,


















(b)


functional urban areas:












(b)


functional urban areas:














 








—


‘
Cities
’ plus their ‘Commuting zones’;
















 








—


‘
Urban areas’
 plus their ‘Commuting zones’;


















(c)


coastal areas:












(c)


coastal areas:














 








—


‘Coastal areas’,
















 








—


‘Coastal areas’,


















 








—


‘Non-coastal areas’.
















 








—


‘Non-coastal areas’.












If there is more than one administrative level of LAU in a Member State, the Commission (Eurostat) shall consult that Member State to determine the administrative level of LAU that shall be used for the attribution of typologies.


If there is more than one administrative level of LAU in a Member State, the Commission (Eurostat) shall consult that Member State to determine the administrative level of LAU that shall be used for the attribution of typologies.




4.   The following typologies and labels shall be established at NUTS level 3.


4.   The following typologies and labels shall be established at NUTS level 3.










(a)


urban-rural typology:












a)


urban-rural typology:














 








—


‘Predominantly urban regions’,
















 








—


‘Predominantly urban regions’,


















 








—


‘Intermediate regions’,
















 








—


‘Intermediate regions’,


















 








—


‘Predominantly rural regions’;
















 








—


‘Predominantly rural regions’;


















(b)


metropolitan typology:












b)


metropolitan typology:














 








—


‘Metropolitan regions’,
















 








—


‘Metropolitan regions’,


















 








—


‘Non-metropolitan regions’;
















 








—


‘Non-metropolitan regions’;


















(c)


coastal typology:












c)


coastal typology:














 








—


‘Coastal regions’,
















 








—


‘Coastal regions’,


















 








—


‘Non-coastal regions’.
















 








—


‘Non-coastal regions’;












 










d)






island typology:








—




‘Island regions’,












—




‘Non-island regions’;


















e)






mountain typology:








—




‘Mountain regions’,












—




‘Non-mountain regions’;


















f)






border typology:








—




‘Border regions’,












—




‘Non-border regions’;


















g)






population typology:








—




‘Sparsely populated regions’,












—




‘Not sparsely populated regions’;












—




‘Ageing regions’












—




‘Non-ageing regions’












—




‘Depopulating regions’












—




‘Not depopulating regions’


















h)






periphery typology:








—




‘Peripheral regions’;












—




‘Non-peripheral regions’
















Reason


Territories with specific (geographic, economic, social and demographic) features will be able to use relevant indicators to support the implementation of public policies addressing challenges they are facing

Amendment 3

COM(2016) 788 final
Article 1
Amend paragraph 5






Text proposed by the Commission


CoR amendment




(5)   the following articles 4a and 4b are inserted:


(5)   the following articles 4a and 4b are inserted:




(…)


(…)





Article 4b




Article 4b





Union territorial typologies


Union territorial typologies




(…)


(…)




5.   The Commission shall, 
by means of implementing acts
, set out uniform conditions for the harmonised application of the typologies across Member States and at Union level. 
Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 7.




5.   The Commission shall, 
in consultation with Member States and Regions
, set out uniform conditions for the harmonised application of the typologies across Member States and at Union level.




 




6.
   
The typologies mentioned under paragraph 3 and 4 above could be complemented by new ones, if there is a justified need identified by Member States or by the Committee of the Regions and confirmed by the Commission.








Reason


Territories with specific (geographic, economic, social and demographic) features will be able to use relevant indicators to support the implementation of public policies addressing challenges they are facing
II.   POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

THE EUROPEAN COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS (CoR)








1.


underlines the importance of European regional statistics as an important instrument for targeted policy-making and a useful tool for understanding and quantifying the impact of political decisions in specific territories. These statistics are used for a wide range of purposes by a number of public and private users, including regional and local authorities, and provide an objective base to support decision-making processes in many areas of public intervention, such as SME support, innovation policy, education, labour market, transport, tourism and maritime industries;












2.


confirms that territorial typologies stemming from European statistics play an important role in regional policy as they can contribute to evidence-based policy interventions and more integrated territorial approaches that reflect the diversity of EU regions;












3.


notes the European Commission's initiative to amend Regulation (EC) No 1059/2003 as regards the territorial typologies (Tercet). Codification of these typologies in one single legal text could make it possible to aggregate data for different types of territories, ensuring harmonised and transparent application of existing methodologies at both EU and Member State levels. This must not lead, however, to the new Tercet classification being translated into eligibility rules for any EU policies, including Cohesion Policy;












4.


concludes that the legislative proposal to amend Regulation (EC) No 1059/2003 complies with the principle of subsidiarity, since the objective of establishing, coordinating and maintaining harmonised statistical classifications for statistical purposes at EU level cannot be achieved sufficiently by the Member States acting alone. On the other hand, however, subsidiarity can only be safeguarded, if the territorial typologies are coordinated in an intensive dialogue with the Member States and regions. Moreover, the legislative proposal does not in principle go beyond what is necessary to achieve its objectives and therefore could be regarded as compliant with the principle of proportionality;












5.


stresses the need for closer dialogue between the national statistical offices and regional (local) authorities to ensure that the development of the new Tercet classification takes due account of the socio-economic, spatial and administrative specificities of different territories;












6.


stresses the importance of addressing the specific situation of territories with particular geographic, economic, social and demographic features, which should be adequately covered within the framework of European regional statistics with the aim of strengthening economic, social and territorial cohesion as set out in Article 174 TFEU;












7.


in this respect, draws attention to:






a)


Article 174 of the TFEU stipulating that particular attention shall be paid to rural areas, areas affected by industrial transition and regions which suffer from severe and permanent natural or demographic handicaps such as the northernmost regions with very low population density and island, cross-border and mountain regions;










b)


the Green Paper on Territorial Cohesion (COM(2008) 616 final) and the accompanying Commission staff working document (SEC(2008) 2550), which mention territorial typologies such as border regions, mountain regions, island regions and sparsely populated regions. These typologies have already been used within the context of the Fifth report on economic, social and territorial cohesion (published in November 2010);










c)


the CoR opinion on the abovementioned green paper (COTER-IV-020), which calls on the European Commission to extend its research to develop relevant indicators for the particular socio-economic problems faced by specific types of regions such as mountains, islands, areas with low population density and border areas, and to significantly improve statistical data and its cartographic representation so as to reflect the real situation;










d)


the CoR opinion on the Sixth report on economic, social and territorial cohesion (COTER-V-052), which calls for better respect to be given to Article 174 of the TFEU;










e)


the CoR opinion on Indicators for territorial development — GDP and beyond (COTER-VI-009), pointing out the lack of quantitative information on the various territories with particular (geographic, environmental, economic and social) features influencing their development, as well as suggesting that the Commission (Eurostat) adopt the territorial categories identified by the Treaty in order to contribute to the proper implementation of EU policies with a territorial dimension;










f)


the CoR draft opinion on Entrepreneurship on islands: contributing towards territorial cohesion (COTER-VI/022), which suggests adding islands as an additional category in the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending the Tercet regulation;
















8.


regrets that the Commission's proposal includes a limited number of territorial typologies and does not take account of other typologies related to the territories with specific geographic, economic, social and demographic features that have already been developed and used, namely the typologies on island regions, mountain regions, border regions and sparsely populated regions or outermost regions. Adoption of territorial typologies providing statistical evidence of diversity and complexity of these regions is considerably important in order to capture these territories better. The CoR therefore recommends including references to the abovementioned territorial typologies when modifying the Tercet regulation with involvement of the Member States and regions.





Brussels, 13 July 2017.


The President of the European Committee of the Regions

Markku MARKKULA