The OECD report Urban-Rural Linkages in Poland analyses the potential of urban and rural territories for development and improved well-being. Urban and rural areas have different yet often complementary assets, and their better integration is important for socio-economic and environmental performance. The report argues that local governments need to engage in partnerships where all parties are equal, as a higher form of urban-rural co-operation. Building urban-rural partnerships in Poland would help territories enhance the production of public goods; achieve economies of scale in public service provision; co-ordinate decisions where cross-boundary effects are important and increase the capacity of the partners. Yet a lack of trust and of policy integration hinder the effectiveness of partnerships. The report found that the main incentive for Polish local governments to enter into a partnership is access to EU funds. However, while Poland has developed solid experience in the management of EU funds, it would benefit from deepening the integration and complementarity among funding streams. Moreover, the report argues that strengthening metropolitan governance will underpin efforts to facilitate the formation and management of urban-rural partnerships.
Urban-Rural Linkages in Poland
Abstract
Executive Summary
After surpassing its pre-pandemic GDP level in December 2021, Poland’s real GDP is expected to grow by 4.4% in 2022 and 1.8% in 2023, higher than the OECD average (2.7% and 1.6% in the same period), according to the OECD Economic Outlook of June 2022. However, Poland is grappling with a shrinking and ageing population, low productivity levels in small and medium-size enterprises (SMEs), environmental degradation, and regional socioeconomic disparities, such as digital and transport infrastructure gaps across regions (e.g. fixed download peak speed is 40% faster than the national average in cities and 40% slower in rural areas). The country is now confronting the significant challenge of the refugee crisis triggered by Russia’s unprovoked large scale aggression against Ukraine, with more than 3.5 million people (as of 22 May 2022) equivalent to around 10% of Poland’s population, fleeing to Poland. Large cities such as Warszawa and Kraków have seen their populations increase by 17% and 20%, respectively – testing their capacities to the limits and reinforcing in turn the crucial role that can be played by urban-rural collaboration in facing national challenges.
Key findings
Poland is slightly less urbanised than the OECD average (56% of the national population lives in a Functional Urban Area (FUA), against an OECD average of 66%). It has a relatively dispersed pattern of settlement, with only 27% of its population living in cities (vs. an OECD average of 50%), 40% in rural areas (vs. 24%), and the remaining 33% in towns and semi-dense areas (vs. 26%) according to the Degree of Urbanisation.
Poland has gone through a marked process of suburbanisation. Between 1990 and 2015, core cities lost 8.6% of their population, while semi-dense areas (suburbs) grew by 5.2%. Moreover, 43% of residents of Functional Urban Areas (FUA) live in the commuting zones, far above the OECD average (25%), which is an additional indicator of suburbanisation. Factors that may have contributed to this process of suburbanisation in Poland include the lack of high-quality and affordable housing in core cities, large amounts of farmland made available for housing development in suburban areas, and increased car ownership.
Labour markets show the presence of some urban-rural linkages, albeit not fully exploited. Around two-thirds (65%) of total commuting flows in Poland are directed towards FUAs. Cities receive 46% of commuting flows, but only generate 19% of them. In contrast, rural areas only receive 20% of commuting flows. In addition, 24% of Poland’s population lives in the catchment area of an FUA (i.e. clusters of mainly rural municipalities issuing significant commuting towards an FUA) and can benefit from urban amenities and opportunities. However, FUA catchment areas in Poland are not experiencing higher population growth than the areas outside FUAs, suggesting that agglomeration economies do not necessarily extend beyond FUA boundaries.
Local governments have engaged in urban-rural partnerships in domains such as public transport (e.g. Lublin, Warszawa, Jelenia Góra and Bydgoszcz), business promotion (together with the private sector) (e.g. Grudziadz and Bydgoszcz), tourism (e.g. Jelenia Gora agglomeration) and food supply chains (with non-governmental organisations) (e.g. Warszawa Consumer Cooperative). Partnerships have also been formed to accelerate the digitalisation of public services (e.g. e-services provision in the Jelenia Góra Agglomeration) and to deliver some public services jointly (e.g. nursing homes in Grudziądz FUA, and a metropolitan senior card programme in Bydgoszcz FUA). Some local governments have formed inter-municipal companies for water management (e.g. the Union of the Upper Raba River Basin – Kraków) and signed inter-municipal agreements for waste collection (e.g. Bydgoszcz FUA).
While co-operation among local governments for investment projects has occurred on a voluntary basis, EU funds have offered a key incentive for creating territorial partnerships in Poland. In line with the principle of local autonomy, bottom-up collaboration has taken place through inter-municipal associations, inter-municipal agreements, and municipal unions, without any legal or institutional arrangement. However, the use of EU territorial development instruments, such as Integrated Territorial Investments (ITIs), which is compulsory in voivodeship (regional) capital cities, and Community-Led Local Development (CLLD), has been central to Poland’s territorial strategy. Almost half (47.6%) of Poland’s population has benefited from ITIs, and CLLD have been applied in 90% of the Polish area eligible for support.
Urban-rural partnerships in Poland still face a number of barriers. Bottlenecks include competition among municipalities to attract investments; a narrow view of regional development, as municipalities outside FUAs are rarely included in partnerships; administrative burdens and a lack of regulatory clarity on partnerships; a shortage of human and financial capacity in local governments; and limited participation of private or non-governmental actors. Moreover, the National Strategy for Responsible Development, the National Regional Development Strategy and the National Urban Policy only indirectly promotes the formation of urban-rural partnerships, for example by supporting integrated infrastructure projects and introducing mechanisms of co-operation within FUAs. The complexity of the procedure to use EU Cohesion policy instruments, and in some cases, the lack of a strategic vision shared between territories have hindered the capacity of local authorities to take full advantage of EU instruments.
Metropolitan governance arrangements exist and could enable more urban-rural joint planning, but remain largely underused. Although Poland has pushed metropolitan reforms forward through different legislative proposals over the past two decades, there is currently only one statutory metropolitan area (Górnośląsko-Zagłębiowska Metropolia, with Katowice as its core city). Since 2020, local governments have the possibility to adopt a supra-local development plan, but only the Metropolis Krakowska Association (with Kraków as core city) has adopted one so far.
Main recommendations, by level of government
The national government is encouraged to:
Mainstream urban-rural linkages in the urban, rural and regional development policy frameworks. This can be implemented through a better understanding of different types of urban-rural linkages across the country, including by documenting them through data at the appropriate spatial level, and shifting from project-based funding towards supporting integrated actions in metropolitan areas. Both national urban and rural policies should encourage urban-rural collaboration by setting common goals, strategies and financial incentives. Developing legal and financial regulations for the implementation of supra-local development strategies should also be a priority.
Further leverage EU Cohesion policy to strengthen urban-rural partnerships. This would include increasing the territorial orientation of national and regional programming documents in Poland, and utilising the Partnership Agreement (PA), the national and regional Operational Programmes (OP), and the National Strategic Plan for the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), to increase co-ordination and integration of the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) and the Rural Development Fund (RDF), with the specific goal to foster urban-rural partnerships.
In addition, both national and local governments are encouraged to:
Build trust among local governments by starting with small-scale, short-term win-win projects; setting up partnership structures that offer equal voice and vote to all partners, regardless of their size and financial capacity; making more efficient use of proven drivers in establishing and developing partnerships such as joint public service delivery; and ensuring flexible partnerships.
Enhance digital connectivity in rural areas and incentivise remote working from rural municipalities or cities at risk of marginalisation. Such programmes could, for example, compensate relocation expenses or provide support in finding housing in these areas.
Improve the use of Integrated Territorial Investments (ITI) and Community Led Local Development (CLLD) by expanding the powers of ITI unions beyond the designation of strategic projects. They should also have the authority to conduct the full procedure of holding open calls for proposals and deciding on membership, taking into account the challenges that are specific to urban and rural areas. Local governments could produce a dedicated CLLD communication plan to promote its use at all levels (including outside rural areas), increasing the understanding of its potential (e.g. in term of investment projects) and showcasing best practices.
Strengthen metropolitan governance structures by creating inter-municipal joint authorities in metropolitan areas through a voluntary partnership model such as the “territorial co-operation team” proposed by the Association of Polish Cities; and issuing a Metropolitan Union Act that could encourage the creation of other statutory metropolitan unions with responsibility for spatial planning, public transport, strategic development planning, and business promotion, and ensuring their access to national level sources of funding.
Reinforce the capacities of smaller municipalities to develop and manage urban-rural partnerships by upgrading the skills of the local public workforce; addressing their financial limitations; providing specific consulting and technical assistance to local governments to implement EU and national policy instruments; and diversifying participation mechanisms in local action groups (public-private organisations in rural areas representing different socio-economic sectors) for the implementation of small-scale investment projects.
Local governments should:
Scale up urban-rural partnerships both within FUAs and, in particular, beyond FUA boundaries to allow isolated municipalities to benefit from the opportunities provided in large agglomerations (e.g. access to public services). This can be done by exploring new forms of urban-rural partnerships (e.g. CLLD-inspired co-operation) and a process of experimentation supported by regional and national funds. Partnerships should involve the local private sector as well as the voluntary sector and civil society.
Accelerate the adoption of supra-local development strategies and co-ordinate strategic and land use planning among municipalities within FUAs through inter-municipal associations or agreements and ensure their alignment with national strategic objectives.
