Short-term territorial investment for Europe’s long-term future

A huge number of geographical and economic theories and applied researches’ experiences inspire the adopting of common (semi-standardised) processes for sustaining long term territorial development (employment, inclusion, GPD growth). It appears like a urgent European Union need in order to stabilise appropriate territorial integrated strategic investments overcoming shock and sectorial measures of austerity (Junker plan). At the same time, it seems the unique solution for having to react to a pseudo global financial and economic war (geoeconomic and geopolitical play at no summa zero), focusing resources to maintaining the status quo. Starting from a critical review of literature positions, the paper discusses what modelling the European policy action should follow in order to not invalidate the efforts implemented by austerity measures. Multilevel experiences (benchmarking at different geographical scales) from several 2013 programs (mainly ESPON, URBACT, ENPICiBMED) are resumed to demonstrate this thesis. In order to assess and to measure this aim, territorial cohesive capability is considerate the main vehicle for transforming European challenges in common geopolitical goals. So the paper considers the Europe 2020 pillars and flags as a first turning point to be related to the territorial regional capability of transforming its diversity in cohesive and competitive development. Some words will be spent about the real compliance between Structural Funds objectives, declared priorities of investment, territorial regional capability, including complex and multidisciplinary variables as cohesion, sustainability and subsidiarity confidence in this evaluation. Example of place evidence and economic-social trends from countries, regions and cities are mentioned and compared for fixing the distance among symbolic expected priorities and real potentials at the short time. At this scope the 2020 political addresses by government declarations and obligations, the regional potential attractive capital, the city potential public and private investments are illustrate with particular regard to the Italy position in the Southern of Europe future. The dissertation in the whole pays particular attention to relate the significant of European territorial evidence with the European policy and funds (e.g. the programming for internal areas distinguished respect to the inner areas ones). This permits to better clarify the different impacts and effects produced from European addresses when the national/regional interpretation does not take in account the relationship between territorial evidence and programming obligations that should increase employment and income. Finally, a set of feasible recommendations are launched on the short time providing viable, flexible, proper, effective and resilient answers to existing needs of territorial investments. These are due because expectations of citizens in front of the current period of economic stagnation. The strategic investment, in principle, should help territories (mainly cities) in having major perspective to realise a territorial regeneration accessing to mainstreaming financing linked to the new Structural Funds, which define the perspective horizon of long term European challenges. They imply joint capitalization, which means not just a(nother) prêt-a-portrait concept, and triggers a multifaceted approach ("quick & dirty" ideas / solutions). Drawbacks so far relate to fragmented territorial intelligence and the need for a certain critical mass willing to get involved. We mean the creating models for strategic integrated sustainable planning by addressing the efficiency of technology across various sectors (energy, climate change, public services, accessibility and transport, etc.) in different typologies and dimension of territory. It means supporting territories with the development of ambitious and innovative challenges embedded in comprehensive territorial agenda.