Posts Tagged ‘Cohesion Policy’

European Cities play a key role for economic recovery, Interview with Andrea Cozzolino

Tuesday, February 5th, 2013

For the first time in recent years, the European Parliament is calling for more attention to be given to the urban centres in the next financial period, guaranteeing adequate investments and the new approach already in the planning stage at National and regional level.

Simone d’Antonio for Cittalia-ANCI, URBACT National Dissemination Point for Italy, interviewed the Member of the European Parliament Andrea Cozzolino, who presented to the Committee on Regional Development a report on urban re-development as contribution to economic growth in the framework of the European Union Cohesion Policy approved on 15th January in Strasbourg.

(more…)

Call for evidence – More Jobs, Better Cities

Monday, May 14th, 2012

Europe needs a return to economic growth. To achieve our goal we need more economically successful cities as well as more, and better, jobs for their citizens. Why? Because well over a quarter (29%) of Europeans live in cities of more than 100,000 people and over two thirds ( 67%) live in cities and towns of up to 100,000. We will only achieve growth and jobs in Europe if our cities secure growth and jobs.

But where will the new jobs in cities come from? How well prepared are our citizens to get and keep these jobs? What are the opportunities and threats? Most important of all, what can cities actually practically do to support jobs growth and to support their citizens’ chances of getting a job, keeping a job and getting a better one?

This workstream of the URBACT Capitalisation process aims to learn the lessons, both from the 300 URBACT cities and their networks, and from across the world. It will develop practical ideas, advice and recommendations to support Europe’s cities in their quest for ‘More Jobs – Better Cities’. What can cities do to get more successful results from their actions? In an age of austerity, how can they best help to grow their economies and achieve job-rich growth?

It also aims to inform the urban dimension of the 2014-20 European Union Cohesion Policy (Investing in Growth and Jobs) within the framework of the Europe 2020 Growth agenda, and to help cities prepare for the new regulations and financial instruments. Our draft findings will be based upon URBACT materials; the experience of a core group of experts and practitioners; the literature; and a series of evidence hearings. They will be presented and then discussed with you at the URBACT Annual conference in Copenhagen on 3 and 4 December and published early in 2013.

CALL FOR EVIDENCE FROM YOU

BUT we need your help NOW! We want to hear from you: your thoughts, your experiences (both good and bad), of trying to help create more jobs in YOUR city! This is an important part of the evidence on which we need to draw if we are to learn from each other what we should, and should not, do! So, please send us your views: A single page or short email will do, or you can send us existing documents / material or just links to material on the web. Whatever works for you. The important thing is that we hear from you and you share your experience with us so as to inform our work. We are particularly interested in hearing about innovative approaches and experiments. Please reply to alison@aurora-ltd.eu by FRIDAY 29 JUNE. Many thanks. Follow us on Twitter. Look for the hashtag: #morejobsforbettercities and soon we will have our own account: @Jobsforcities

Alison Partridge,
Coordinator: More Jobs: Better Cities
alison@aurora-ltd.eu

 

The European urban fabric in the 21st century – Interesting discussions

Thursday, March 29th, 2012

1Some 300 people came together in Copenhagen on 22-23 March at the Fifth European Summit of Regions and Cities. The Summit titled as “The European urban fabric in the 21st century” was organized by the Committee of the Regions (COR), partly for politicians (mayors and presidents of regions from EU countries), partly for leading architects, urban planners and researchers.

Many people criticize such large meetings saying that these are dominated by pompous but empty statements. With enough patience and open ears, however, interesting statements can be “angled out” from the ocean of words. The following aims to be a collection of statements which I found interesting.

In the opening speech of Mercedes Bresso, President of the Comity of the Regions (COR), strong words were used against the Urban Platform (which is one of the novelties planned by the Commissioner for the post 2013 Cohesion Policy regulation). The COR was unhappy about the idea that the Urban Platform would be organized for 300 nominated cities, emphasizing that this plan is not on terms with modern participation practices (open to all cities). According to Bresso’s view the European Parliament also shares these worries. These statements resembled a power game between two institutions (the COR and the Commission) regarding domination over the links to the European cities.

The political importance of the Summit could be seen from the presence and speech of José Manuel Barroso, the President of the European Commission. In an unusually emotional speech Barroso urged for smart and green, sustainable and inclusive growth instead of artificial growth, fuelled by irresponsible financial behaviour. As metropolitan population (living in urban areas over 250 thousand people) makes up 59% of European population, urban areas have to play vital role in the fulfilment of the new types of growth targets. The knowledge based, resource efficient, carbon free economic development of the cities is of key importance, and must be in accordance with the positive valuse of the European model of urban development. Barroso argued strongly for the inclusion of the regional and local level into the discussions over the multi-annual financial framework, even if the national governments are reluctant towards this proposal. The audience could be very satisfied with the arguments used by the president of the Commission with the hope that these were not only compliments towards the regional and local leaders but real priorities to which the Commission will insist in the upcoming difficult negotiations about the future of Cohesion Policy.

While in the debate many COR members (from the regional level and rural areas) questioned or even  opposed the accentuated role planned to be given to the urban areas, Jan Olbrycht, leader of the Urban Intergroup of the European Parliament emphasized the importance of the 5% as a special ringfencing for urban areas and made it clear that this should only be the minimum, i.e. the investments into cities should be much higher.

The second panel (and in my taste the thematically most interesting part of the meeting) was the debate about the involvement of the citizens in regional and local projects. The mayor of Bratislava described the euphoria of people 23 years ago, after the collapse of socialism. This euphoria has turned into apathy in the last years, due to many corruption cases people have lost their trust in elected politicians. Nowadays a new euphoria seems to develop among young people who argue for a new type of policy – they claim that participatory democracy has to be involved into decision making. The mayor of Ghent mentioned many types of social innovations, such as the employment of full time neighbourhood organizers, frequent neighbourhood debates, collection of locally suggested projects, etc. which are frequently and successfully used in his city. According to the mayor of Athens people argue much easier against something than to give positive opinion. It took a lot of work for the council to convince with arguments people about the need of underground parking in dense urban areas! The local leadership has to take enough time and efforts to inform, debate and convince people about new ideas to win their support. This is even more difficult in complex issues, such as area regeneration, where many strategic details have to be decided and it is much more difficult to take different interests and opinions into account. In his summary Simon Güntner expressed his reservations about direct democracy. In his view participative methods do not pay attention to many important aspects, to minority interests, to financial questions … these can only be discussed in the usual structure of political parties, as these represent certain interests (workers, middle class, etc.) . In his view the reactivation and modernization of party politics is needed.

Closing the conference Mercedes Bresso, President of the CoR, said that cities must be in the front line also in the efforts to change mindset about lifestyles and consumption; they present the lowest but finest level of solidarity.

Read more:

Iván Tosics
URBACT Thematic Pole Manager

What can we take away from the Cohesion forum?

Thursday, February 17th, 2011

forumThe Cohesion Forum was held in Brussels from 31 January to 1 February 2011. It was organized by the European Commission and the main goal was closure the public consultation launched last November on the future, post-2013 Cohesion Policy. A number of European policy makers, ministers, regional presidents and heads of operational programmes participated in the work, which was opened by Commissioner Barroso and the Hungarian and Polish Prime Ministers. Commissioner Hahn, who is in charge of regional policy, led the forum from beginning to end.

What can we take away from this forum? First, a physical impression that Europe really exists with, of course, its differences and divergences. The audience listened attentively to the presentations, which were for the most part of a very high level and constructive. Commissioner Hahn’s conclusions gave a glimpse of the negotiations in the upcoming months. The key role cities play in the Cohesion Policy was reaffirmed and, as a result, so was the necessity that they be involved in developing operational programmes, along with the importance of integrated development. Yet, one must recognize that cities, as key players in development and inclusion, did not get special treatment at the Forum.

The Commission clearly insisted on the necessity of choosing limited objectives on which the Cohesion Policy should focus, while hoping for tailoring of each operational programme rather than have a uniform approach.

I will end with the objectives of method that will resonate particularly well for URBACT partners: effectiveness, results and impact. And to these three goals can be added another requirement everyone agreed on: simplified procedures. The margin for progress in this area is great, both on a European and a national level. Negotiations over Cohesion Policy content and how it will be implemented are now entering their active phase.

Jean-Loup Drubigny
Head of the URBACT Secretariat

“Behind the Front Door” – outreaching social support in the Netherlands

Thursday, May 27th, 2010

behind-the-front-door

In the Netherlands there is one form of outreaching social support that has increasingly been applied in the past few years. It is generally addressed as the ‘behind the front door’ method. Professionals using this method actively and directly approach marginalised people to find and help them with their
most important problems. This new method has been widely applied in the Dutch ‘neighbourhood approach’. It is supposed to encourage cooperation within the social sector. In a recent literature study of Nicis Institute, commissioned by the Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, different experiences within the ‘behind the front door’ approach have been collected.

Behind the front door

The ‘behind the front door’ method is applied in a wide variety of projects and policy fields. This study includes the following working areas:

  • Housing
  • Debts, nuisance and abusive situations
  • Education
  • Family support
  • Elderly people living independently
  • Domestic violence  

Main conclusions

  • There is a growing tendency in the Netherlands to use a certain degree of force when it comes to preventing people from falling down the social ladder;
  • Discussion about the ‘behind the front door’ approach mainly concern accountability and home visits. These visits should always be legitimate and well-founded;
  • Most of the professionals using and clients ‘receiving’ the ‘behind the front door’ method are very positive about it;
  • For multi-problem families the ‘behind the front door’ method has turned out to be very useful, because they often do not ask for help or do not know where to go;
  • The ‘behind the front door’ method is a good way to spot social problems. However, the method does not seem to be the answer ;
  • The ‘behind the front door’ method can only deliver lasting effects if the entire structure of social support is improved.

For more information, download the report (NL) about the ‘behind the front door’ method here

Read more:

 Simone Pekelsma
 
Nicis Institute

The Untapped potential of cultural heritage – a Catalyst for Sustainable Urban Development and an Internationally Competitive Europe

Tuesday, February 23rd, 2010

hero-paperURBACT has its HERO.  A clever name for an ambitious URBACT Project which  has published a strategy paper entitled “The Untapped potential of cultural heritage – a Catalyst for Sustainable Urban Development and an Internationally Competitive Europe”. The document makes the case for a strong urban dimension as part of EU Cohesion Policy with a special focus on cultural heritage and historic urban landscapes. It calls for support and investment in integrated and sustainable urban development. The aim :  to ensure Europe’s historic towns and cities are attractive places to live, work and invest in, fully able to respond to the global challenges of the 21st century and beyond.

In order to give input for the next EU funding period, the HerO partner cities Graz, Naples. Vilnius, Sighisoara, Liverpool, Lublin, Poitiers, Valletta and Regensburg have conjointly submitted the document to the EU Commission. Indeed, Hero project urge the EU to adopt several recommendations as:

  • Priority should be given to securing integrated urban development with urban cultural heritage at its heart.
  • Urban cultural heritage should be an integral part of the European Cohesion Policy and programs as well of the national and regional operational programs
  • Priority should be given to the integration of European Funding Schemes and National Funding Programs.
  • Stronger participation and involvement of historic cities in policy development and evaluation of programs addressing cultural heritage.

We wish that these recommendations will  hold the Commission’s interest…

 Anne-Laure Guignard

Debate on the future of cohesion policy: distributive vs allocative policy?

Wednesday, January 13th, 2010

richerregionWhithin the framework of the current debate on the future of the European Cohesion policy it is important to look at the goals that cohesion policy should pursue to meet the challenges of the 21st century. One of the difficult policy issues is whether relatively richer regions should be eligible for expenditure from the Structural Funds, especially if these richer regions also happen to be in relatively prosperous Member States. That is the contentious question raised by the latest working paper on regional research and indicators produced by the European Commission’s DG REGIO. Much of the debate turns on whether Cohesion Policy is understood as being predominantly about distributive transfers or as a policy that is intended to promote economic change and development.  What is the primary role of Cohesion Policy, distributive, allocative?  The question remains open…

Laura Caldironi, URBACT Communication Officer

A new kind of European cooperation: macro-regional strategies?

Wednesday, October 14th, 2009

Eu Strategy for the baltic Sea RegionOn 17 and 18 September, European Commissioner Paweł Samecki attended a ministerial conference in Stockholm, Sweden on the European Union’s strategy for the Baltic Sea Region. This strategy, which is a first at European level, is set to be adopted officially by the Member States at the end of October. The 27 ministers discussed the possibility of other macro-regions following the Baltic example. On this occasion, Commissioner  Samecki presented a new discussion paper on this subject that contains proposals for definitions, fields of application and objectives for other macro-regional strategies.

It is explained in the document’s conclusion that a macro-regional strategy can provide a useful structure and approach for addressing the challenges and opportunities of a region. Could the concept of macro-regional strategies become a model for EU cooperation in other regions and also  an important medium for programming and delivering EU funding? This question may well be a key issue in the broader debate on the future EU Cohesion Policy post-2013…

 Laura Caldironi