OECD Territorial Reviews: Copenhagen, Denmark 2009

OECD Territorial Reviews: Copenhagen, Denmark 2009

-

Livres
292 pages

Description

The Copenhagen metropolitan region accounts for nearly half of Denmark's national output and plays a key role for the country as a whole. Nevertheless, it has witnessed only modest economic growth over the last decade. This review of metropolitan area policy for Copenhagen examines key challenges including modest economic growth, scarcity of skilled workers and barriers to research and development. The report also examines how public institutions affect regional economic growth. Issues considered include: inter-municipal co-operation, local finance, public management, political leadership, and coordination mechanisms between the central government and the region.


Sujets

Informations

Publié par
Date de parution 26 mars 2009
Nombre de visites sur la page 62
EAN13 9789264060036
Licence : Tous droits réservés
Langue English

Informations légales : prix de location à la page  €. Cette information est donnée uniquement à titre indicatif conformément à la législation en vigueur.

Signaler un problème
O ECD Ter r i t or i al Revi ew s: Copenhagen, Denm ar k
Collective
OFO R RG ANI SATI O N CO -ECO NO M I C O PERATI O N AND DEVELO PM ENT
The OECD is a unique forum where the governments of 30 democracies work together to address the economic, social and enviro nmental challenges of globalisation. The OECD is also at the forefront of efforts to understand and to help governments respond to new developments and concern s, such as corporate governance, the information economy and the challen ges of an ageing population. The Organisation provides a setting where governments c an compare policy experiences, seek answers to common problems, identify good prac tice and work to co-ordinate domestic and international policies.
The OECD member countries are: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece , Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Korea, Luxembourg, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, the Slovak Republic, Spain, Swede n, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States. The Commission of th e European Communities takes part in the work of the OECD.
OECD Publishing disseminates widely the results of the Organisation’s statistics gathering and research on economic, social and envi ronmental issues, as well as the conventions, guidelines and standards agreed by its members.
This work is published on the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD. The opinions expressed and arguments empl oyed herein do not necessarily reflect the official views of the Organisation or of the governments of its member countries.
Corrigenda to OECD publications may be found on line at: www.oecd.org/publishing/corrigenda.
© OECD 2009
9789264060029
You can copy, download or print OECD content for yo ur own use, and you can include excerpts from OECD publications, databases and multimedia products in your own documents, presentations, blogs, websites and teach ing materials, provided that suitable acknowledgment of OECD as source and copyright owner is given. All requests for public or commercial use and translati on rights should be submitted to rights@oecd.org.Requests for permission to photocopy portions of this material for public or commercial use shall be addressed directl y to the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) atinfo@copyright.comor the Centre français d’exploitation du droit de copie (CFC)contact@cfcopies.com.
For ew or d
Across the OECD, globalisation is increasingly testing the ability of regional economies to adapt and exploit their competitive ed ge, even as it offers new opportunities for regional development. This is lea ding public authorities to rethink their strategies. Moreover, as a result of decentralisati on, central governments are no longer the sole provider of development policies. New co-o peration between different levels of government is now required in order to improve publ ic service delivery.
The objective of pursuing regional competitiveness and governance is particularly relevant in metropolitan regions. Although they pro duce the bulk of national wealth, metropolitan areas often the focus of unemployment and economic distress and do not always exploit opportunities for growth. Effective policies to enhance their competitiveness need to address a functional region as a whole and thus call for metropolitan governance.
In 1999, responding to a need to study and dissemin ate innovative territorial development strategies and governance in a more sys tematic way, the OECD created the Territorial Development Policy Committee (TDPC) and its Working Party on Urban Areas (WPUA) as a unique forum for international ex change and debate. The TDPC has developed a number of activities, including a s eries of specific case studies on metropolitan regions. These studies, following a standard methodology and a common conceptual framework, allow countries to share thei r experiences, and are intended to help formulate and diffuse horizontal policy recomm endations.
Acknow l edgem ent s
This Review was elaborated by the Directorate of Public Governance and Territorial Development (GOV) of the OECD, with the support and cooperation of the City of Copenhagen and the Capital Region of Denmark. Special thanks are due to the Lord Mayor of the City of Copenhagen, Ritt Bjerregaard, and the Chair of the Regional Council, Vibeke Storm Rasmussen, as well as city an d regional officials Elisabeth Kongsmark, Mette Broholm Olsen, Karoline Amalie Ste en, Kristian Johnsen, Michael Ryan Andersen, Helen Lundgaard, Claus Schøsler, Cla us Juhl and Jens Christian Sørensen, and numerous other individuals and organi sations that provided invaluable input and contributions.
Valuable comments were provided by a reference grou p consisting of Jørgen Lotz (chair), Niels Jørgen Mau, Niels Østergaard, Anders Hoffmann, Professor Peter Maskell, Professor Jens Blom-Hansen and Professor P eter Munk Christiansen.
A team of international peer reviewers participated in the Review process: United States: Benjamin Erulkar, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Economic Development, Chief Operating Officer, Economic Deve lopment Administration, United States Department of Commerce; Canadaitiatives, Cities and: Adam Ostry, Head of Unit, Policy and Strategic In Communities Branch, Infrastructure Canada, Chair of the OECD Working Party on Territorial Policy in Urban Areas; United Kingdomrtment for: Keith Thorpe, Head of the Urban Policy Unit, Depa Communities and Local Government Germanyderal Ministry of: Gesa Miehe-Nordmeyer, Deputy Head of Division, Fe Economy and Technology.
The Review similarly benefited from the insight of international experts: Professor Graeme Evans (Director of the Cities Institute at L ondon Metropolitan University) and Professor Peter Kresl (of Bucknell University in Le wisburg, Pennsylvania).
The OECD Territorial Review of Copenhagen is part o f a series of OECD Territorial Reviews produced by the OECD Division of Regional Competitiveness and Governance, directed by Mario Pezzini, Deputy Direc tor of the Directorate of Public Governance and Territorial Development.
This Review was co-ordinated and drafted by Olaf Me rk, Administrator, under the supervision of Lamia Kamal-Chaoui, Head of OECD’s Urban Development Programme. Individual contributions were provided by Ian Halvd an Hawkesworth (governance chapter), Michael G. Donovan (housing and sustainab ility), Kazuko Ishigaki (infrastructure and land use planning) and Elsa Pil ichowski (local capacity). Erin Byrne prepared the Review for publication.
Tabl e of Cont ent s
Title Page ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT Copyright Page Foreword Acknowledgements List of Tables Table of Figures Assessment and Recommendations Chapter 1 - The Competitiveness of Copenhagen Chapter 2 - Policies to Strengthen Competitiveness Chapter 3 - Metropolitan Governance in Copenhagen Annex 1 - Conceptual Framework Bibliography
Li st of Tabl es
Table 1.1 Table 1.2 Table 1.3 Table 1.4 Table 1.5 Table 1.6 Table 1.7 Table 1.8 Table 1.9 Table 1.10 Table 1.11 Table 1.12 Table 3.1
Tabl e ofFi gur ES
Figure 1.1 Figure 1.2 Figure 1.3 Figure 1.4 Figure 1.5 Figure 1.6 Figure 1.7 Figure 1.9 Figure 1.10 Figure 1.12 Figure1.13 Figure 1.14 figure 1.15 Figure 1.16 Figure 1.17 Figure 1.18 Figure 1.19 Figure 1.20 Figure 1.21 Figure 1.22 Figure 1.23 Figure 1.24 Figure 1.25 Figure 1.26 Figure 1.27 Figure 1.28 Figure 1.29 Figure 1.30 Figure 1.31 Figure 1.32 Figure 1.33 Figure 1.34 Figure 2.1 Figure 2.2 Figure 2.3 Figure 2.4 Figure 2.5 Figure 3.1 Figure 3.2 Figure 3.3 Figure 3.4 Figure 3.5 Figure 3.6 Figure 3.7