Reinforcing territorial impact assessments in Czechia: policy agendas and future scenarios

ABSTRACT

This paper reveals the current state of territorial impact assessments (TIAs) and place-sensitive policymaking in Czechia, a Central European country that joined a pilot action intended to contribute to the territorial priorities of the strategic framework, the ‘Territorial Agenda 2030’. We traced the steps that were gradually taken at the national level towards the implementation of the Territorial Agenda and TIAs, including the identification of obstacles. We explored and described newly implemented mechanisms that should contribute to strengthening TIAs. We argue that the essential factors for successful implementation include a sound methodology without an administrative burden, the adjustment of institutional settings and environment, a strengthening of trust among all responsible actors and a willingness to deal with the territorial impacts of sectoral policies. Moreover, we establish that place-sensitive tools are still rather underutilized and call for an increased effort to present the best practices and results of impact evaluations from various regional contexts and environments.

KEYWORDS:

• Place-based approach
• territorial impact assessment
• Czechia
• Territorial Agenda 2030

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1. A municipal administrative district, Jeseník’s power extend over 24 municipalities. The rural region on the periphery of Czechia in the Czech-Polish borderland has experienced population decline as younger people move away for jobs and opportunities in larger cities. This has led to an aging population. The economy relies heavily on tourism, agriculture and the manufacturing industry, which, however, mainly produces simpler products with lower added value.

2. The term refers to the usual practice of sectoral ministries focusing exclusively on their agenda and not cooperating with each other enough to solve cross-sectoral issues.

3. At least in a sense that is binding to explain why certain recommendations stemming from a TIA were not taken into account.