Spotlight on Integrated Territorial Investments in rural areas: insights from the EPRC

A recent EU-wide study by the European Policies Research Centre (EPRC) on the use of territorial tools in the 2014-2020 programme period shows how ITIs can bring significant added value. Territorial instruments can contribute to more effective territorial development in three ways: first, by applying a functional lens to territories when designing and implementing a territorial strategy; second, through an integrated, multi-sectoral approach to the use of funding; and finally, by mobilising local governance in a multi-level delivery system. 

Amongst the different types of territorial instruments available to policymakers, ITIs are arguably the most versatile tool, as they can be implemented in all types of territories. This is also the case for the other widespread territorial instrument, Community-led Local Development (CLLD). But a key difference is that there is no explicit requirement to include community-led mechanisms in the implementation of ITIs. Also, the use of ITIs in rural areas is voluntary: while there is an obligation to channel a minimum of cohesion funding to urban areas, there is no equivalent rural compulsory element.  

Nevertheless, countries and regions made extensive use of territorial instruments in rural areas in 2014-2020 and continue to do so in the current programme period. Data collection is still ongoing, and in some countries the selection of territories is still not finalised. Yet, just under half of the territorial instruments implemented in 2021-2027 are rural, with about 80 of the recorded ones being ITIs, according to STRAT-Board (a European Commission tool for exploring Europe’s integrated territorial strategies). 

Rural ITIs from large to small 

ITIs vary widely in terms of their size and funding envelopes. In 2014-2020, the population coverage of the 127 rural ITIs ranged from over 17 million people in the case of ITI Azul, which included six Atlantic regions in Spain, to many small rural cases in Italy, Greece and Lithuania with less than 50 000 inhabitants. In 2021-2027, there is a wide range of ITIs that cover smaller rural areas, for instance in Greece, Italy and Portugal.  

The funding envelopes of ITIs are typically comparatively large, averaging EUR 49 million per ITI in 2014-2020. These budgets allow for infrastructural interventions that CLLD is usually not capable of. The Danube Delta in Romania, for example, had an EU budget of EUR 1.25 billion.  

The ‘rurality’ of rural ITIs is not always obvious and can express itself in different ways. In 2014-2020, just over a third of all EU-funded ITIs were formally labelled as ‘non-urban’. In practice, though, many ITIs are still designed with an urban rationale, focusing on functional urban areas. However, these are mostly small-scale, typically aiming at supporting small towns that act as important ‘development anchors’ as well as their surrounding rural areas (e.g. Lithuania, France, Poland).  

Features and focus of ITIs 

A widespread objective of many ITIs is boosting urban-rural linkages, for which the ITI tool is well-suited due to it not being tied to either rural (such as LEADER) or urban (e.g. sustainable urban development frameworks) territorial categories.  

There are also ITI territories that are defined in a thematic way, based on a common challenge (e.g. forest fire risks in Portugal) or a common opportunity (e.g. cultural tourism in Greece). These models can be particularly attractive for sparsely populated and peripheral contexts. At the same time, there are also examples of ITI configurations that are still mainly driven by administrative boundaries, such as provinces, districts or other administrative regions.  

A characteristic feature of ITIs is their focus on the integration of different funding streams and policy areas. Each ITI has a strategy that provides a framework through which programme managers can implement EU funding in a way that is not only thematically integrated, but place-based, i.e. taking into account the specific conditions of a locality, such as challenges and opportunities.  

The thematically integrated character of ITIs comes from their design as frameworks that address multiple themes at the same time: either by covering multiple thematic areas of a single programme or of multiple programmes. Although there are examples of urban ITIs covering only single local authorities or parts of one, all rural ITIs show some degree of territorial integration.  

When ITIs are suited for rural areas 

ITIs can be suitable instruments for rural or peripheral areas if there is a clear common territorial or geographical challenge that requires an integrated policy response. Research has shown that the use of ITIs benefits from the presence of a regional-level institution that has the capacity to take on the intermediate managing role.  

This is how some ITIs have operated in rural areas, e.g. with a regional development agency acting as the intermediary body taking on management tasks. There are of course factors that determine the suitability of using ITIs, such as the levels of local administrative capacity or the availability of equivalent domestic frameworks. 

Finally, it is also important to bear in mind the current debate on the next Multiannual Financial Framework after 2027. The future of these instruments is very much part of the discussions around the extent to which the territorial character of EU policies can be preserved. However, as rural and cohesion funding will be moving closer together, this can also open opportunities for more coherent territorial policies.  

Discover good practices of territorial tools from the Rural Pact Policy Action Lab on territorial development for the green transition and from the Good Practice Webinar on LEADER/CLLD, Integrated Territorial Investments and Smart Villages.  

Find out more about a territorial instrument in rural Portugal that addresses climate challenges through coordinated investments and place-based solutions. 

Explore the latest Rural Pact resources on the topic of LEADER/CLLD. 

Author: Stefan Kah, European Policies Research Centre