Alpcity

WP8 Rhône-Alpes

Experiences of little towns in different mountain in Rhône-Alpes (Alpes, Jura, Massif central)

Case-project abstract

Valorisation experiences of development after invitation to candidate (Major of little towns) to exchange at level RA, Alpcity and Europe

Reasons for the choice of this case-project

Much experiences in Rhône-Alpes in the territorial policies (contract territorial, regional parks)

Adopted methodology

Call of candidatures at some 200 little towns in mountains (return 8/12/04) : rural pole, service pole, proximity pole (definition Insee/france). Experiences in services, activities, quality of life, environment, TIC, travelling...

Expected benefits (local and regional levels)

Help the little towns in sustainable environment

Are follow-up activities foreseen ?

Yes

Expected value added (other than financial) from the participation to an INTERREG project

The accumulation of precious experience of technical assistance

Output indicators

Interest for exchange experiences through the AlpCity website Alpcity and with other countries (number of exchanges)

Impact indicators

Interest of exchange experiences in Rhone-Alpes

Name of the town/s concerned

Names after selected candidature and analysis of the 200 little towns in mountain (dominating functions, the specificity and advantages of the mountain development, distance/proximity to a medium or large sized town, primarily geared to industrial farming, tourism or service activities , function with the regard to nearby areas.

Demographic, social and economic situation of the town/s concerned and specifically identified problems

Most of the territory is surrounded by medium-sized towns and cities, forming a particularly dynamic economic network with communication routes that enable rapid internal and external links

Role of the mountain resource within the local development chances of the town/s concerned (positive or negative)

The urban environment is balanced by exceptional natural spaces, which make a huge contribution to the living space . Altogether, Rhône-Alpes has six Regional Nature Parks, which represent half of the natural spaces in France. In addition there are two National Parks and thirty nature reserves

Expected contribution of the foreseen actions towards the development of the town/s concerned

Participation of exchange

Who is the responsible for the concrete development of the project?

Piloting group : university, Insee, association of development, directions state and region...

How are activities sub-contracted? ? (if it is the case)

Call candidature

Beside the partner, which administrative authorities are involved in the project? How?

Major of towns, of community of communes and other association (communes, community of communes...)

Call candidates

Who are the main local/regional project actors?

Political actors

Are there important actors who are not integrated or are opposing the project ?

Analysis after call candidate

The case is isolated or integrated within a broader frame/ programme of activities? How? How are these activities being financed?

Half year 2005

Financed by Region

Timetable for the project development (July 2004 - May 2006)

Call candidature in November O4, return December

Beginning 2005: piloting group and after meeting with little towns candidate

First half year : writing experiences in web site

End 2005: meeting with little towns candidate

Final conference in Piedmont: delegate major of little towns

Are experts (non SSC) involved into the case and research activities undertaken for the case? What is their role?

Contract with Insee and student : analysis 200 little towns