Urban Regeneration and Social Sustainability

Best Practice from European Cities

Andrea Colantonio, Tim Dixon

• Publisher: Wiley-Blackwell
• Year: 2011
• Print ISBN: 9781405194198
• eBook ISBN: 9781444329469
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Architecture
• Subtopic: Urban Planning & Landscaping

Urban regeneration is a key focus for public policy throughout Europe. This book examines social sustainability and analyses its meaning. The authors offer a comprehensive European perspective to identify best practices in sustainable urban regeneration in five major cities in Spain, Italy, Netherlands, Germany, and the UK. This authoritative overview of the scholarly literature makes the book essential reading for researchers and post-graduate students in sustainable development, real estate, geography, urban studies, and urban planning, as well as consultants and policy advisors in urban regeneration and the built environment.

Part I
Social Sustainability and Urban Regeneration

1
Introduction

Background and context

In 2007, for the first time in history the majority of the people in the world lived in cities (EC, 2007). This is the direct result of the rapid growth not only of the world’s largest cities (where conurbations of more than 10 million people predominate), but also the growth of smaller and medium-sized cities (UN Habitat, 2006).

In the wider global context of accelerating urbanisation Europe’s cities are amongst some of the oldest in the world, and today more than 60% of people live in urban areas with a population of more than 50 000. However, with the exception of London and Paris, Europe is also characterised by a unique polycentric structure of large, medium-sized and small cities (EC, 2006).

If cities are to succeed as engines of economic growth then it is important that policies founded on economic, social and environmental issues are fully integrated. In other words that there should be a balance between promoting economic competitiveness and social cohesion and tackling environmental issues, because it is generally agreed that these, alongside other issues relating to inadequate governance and leadership, are the most pressing challenges to the economic performance, attractiveness and competitiveness of cities (EC, 2006; European Institute for Urban Affairs, 2007).

Today cities face change brought about by a series of structural forces, including globalisation, economic restructuring, increasing competition from other cities and restructuring of the welfare state (European Institute for Urban Affairs, 2007). Furthermore, by their very nature, of course, cities are often characterised by substantial spatial and/or group polarisation in economic and social opportunities, and, moreover, these differences can be even more extreme between neighbourhoods in the same city than between cities. The challenges faced within our cities can also vary significantly ranging from increasing population, through to rising house prices, lack of development land or a poorly resourced public sector. In some cities depopulation, dereliction, lack of jobs or poor quality of life may be problematic, while in others urban sprawl and suburbanisation may be an issue. At an urban scale, therefore, tackling transport, accessibility and mobility; improving access to services and amenities; improving the physical and natural environments and developing a city’s cultural focus are key to improving its attractiveness (EC, 2006).

Set in this recent context of an integrated approach to cohesion policy, previous research on sustainability has, sadly, often been limited to environmental and economic concerns. However, in recent years, social sustainability has gained increased recognition as a fundamental component of sustainable development, and has begun to receive political and institutional endorsement within the sustainable development agenda, and the sustainable urban regeneration discourse.

In the 1980s, urban regeneration projects focused mainly on the physical and economic renewal of degraded inner-city areas. However, since the 1990s across the EU, this approach to urban regeneration, which emphasised the environmental and economic spheres of regeneration, has been replaced by a more integrated approach to urban redevelopment, which links the stimulation of economic activities and environmental improvements to wider social and cultural elements.

There has therefore been a shift in emphasis from ‘urban renaissance’ to ‘city competitiveness’. Essentially the key drivers for urban competitiveness include (EC, 2006; European Institute for Urban Affairs, 2007):

• Innovation in processes and products;
• economic diversity;
• skilled people;
• connectivity and communications;
• place quality; and
• strategic capacity (or decision making, political processes and leadership).

Barcelona is a key example of this change in emphasis. During the 1990s, the city’s strategy was founded on urban regeneration that focused on infrastructure, the physical environment, city centre, waterfront and key projects like the Olympics. However, the limits of this hitherto successful approach were recognised as its GDP growth and knowledge base lay relatively undernourished. More recently, therefore, the city has focused on the promotion of the knowledge sector, and developing a much stronger innovation base to underpin job creation (European Institute for Urban Affairs, 2007).

The emergence of ‘community’ as a focal point for the delivery of sustainable urban development has also moved to the heart of European urban policy. For example, in 1998 the report ‘Urban Sustainable Development in the EU: A Framework for Action’ (CEC, 1998) combined the twin themes of sustainable development and urban governance, and encouraged and promoted partnerships between the public and private sectors. Moreover, in 2005 the ‘Bristol Accord’, which focused on the theme of sustainable communities, was approved amongst member states (ODPM, 2006). The Accord set out what is meant by a ‘sustainable community’ and highlighted eight characteristics of such places, which are discussed in more detail in Chapter 2 of this book.

Sustainable development was in fact enshrined in the EU’s Sustainable Development Strategy, where it was seen as being (EU, 2006: 2):

… about safeguarding the earth’s capacity to support life in all its diversity. It is based on the principles of democracy and the rule of law and respect for fundamental rights including freedom and equal opportunities for all. It brings about solidarity within and between generations. It seeks to promote a dynamic economy with a high level of employment and education, of health protection, of social and territorial cohesion and of environmental protection in a peaceful and secure world, respecting cultural diversity.

This effectively underpinned and linked with key objectives at an urban level in the EU, which sought to promote economic prosperity, social equity and cohesion and environmental protection.

There was also a strong feeling that integrated strategies and co-ordinated actions were needed at an urban level in Europe (EC, 2009). More recently, therefore, building on the Bristol Accord, in May 2007 European Ministers signed the ‘Leipzig Charter on Sustainable European Cities’ (EU Ministers, 2007), which itself built on the ‘Urban Acquis’ of 2004 (Ministry of Kingdom and Interior Relations, 2005) (see Chapter 12).¹ For the first time, therefore, all of the 27 member states outlined an ideal model for the ‘European city of the 21^st century’, and agreed on common principles and strategies for policy related to urban development. The Leipzig Charter lays the foundation for a new integrated urban policy in Europe, focusing on addressing urban challenges related to social exclusion, structural change, ageing, climate change and mobility.

The broad approach to urban policy promoted recently at EU level has also advocated integrated area-based regeneration initiatives which combine economic, social, cultural and environmental aspects, and are managed through partnerships with strong civic involvement. As a result, the concept of ‘partnership’ has been woven into recent EU urban initiatives such as URBAN I and URBAN II, with proposals for good practice based on partnerships involving the public, private and voluntary sectors. This has also encouraged the establishment of an increasing number of Public Private Partnerships (PPPs) in urban regeneration programmes, which are one facet of the drive towards sustainable financing for cities and the development of a complex array of investment vehicles, involving local authorities, institutional investors, private developers and banks, for example.

There has therefore been a changing emphasis from a ‘compartmentalised’ approach to urban regeneration in Europe to a more ‘integrated’ approach that brings together the physical, economic and social dimensions of urban development and ties it strongly into the sustainable development agenda (URBACT, 2009). Key to this is the concept of a long-term consistent vision for urban areas. As the European Commission suggest (EC, 2006: 26):

Cities should have a long term, consistent plan for all the different factors promoting sustainable growth and jobs in urban areas. Actions in one field must be consistent with those in another. Notably, economic measures must be sustainable in social and environmental terms. Monitoring and evaluation systems should be in place to verify results on the ground.

This integrated approach focuses on the following elements therefore (Franke et al., 2007):

• Identifying the strengths and weaknesses of the city and of particular neighbourhoods.
• Formulating realistic goals for particular areas.
• Increasing the impact of public intervention measures through early co-ordination and pooling of public–private funds.
• Integrating planning for particular areas, sectors and technical support.
• Empowering citizens and promoting corporate social responsibility.
• Supporting inter-municipal co-ordination to harmonise and link the city’s development aims with its hinterland.

Many areas that are the focus of regeneration include some of Europe’s most deprived neighbourhoods, which have entered a spiral of decline often through forces of globalisation and structural change. These may, for example, be areas that have been previously characterised by manufacturing industry and are now brownfield sites (Dixon et al., 2007); inner city areas with stagnating economies; residential neighbourhoods with defunct urban structures; or residential areas that have concentrated social and economic problems (LUDA, 2003; Franke et al., 2007).

The emphasis given to urban policy issues, however, varies among EU member states and there is a wide variation in policies at a national level. Nonetheless, eight policy challenges also continue to hold true at a national and city level (Franke et al., 2007):

• Developing the labour market for all sections of the population;
• ensuring adequate income and wealth for all;
• overcoming educational disadvantage;
• fostering family cohesion and equal rights for men and women;
• guaranteeing adequate housing for all; and
• promoting equal rights of access to services.

There is also a perception amongst many commentators that the need for urban investment is greater than ever if cities are to become more ‘investable’ and ‘investment-ready’ (Clark, 2007). Innovative forms of partnership financing (public private partnerships or PPPs) and joint ventures between the public and private sector are therefore becoming of paramount importance. Indeed, this is even more important in the current economic recession, which began towards the end of 2007, and is likely to trigger a broad process of financial restructuring that will prompt cities to explore and test additional financial tools and revenue-raising options (IPF, 2009; APUDG, 2009; ULI, 2009).

Nonetheless, despite these recent developments in the policy and practice of urban regeneration, our understanding of the social dimension of sustainable urban regeneration is still limited, especially from an assessment and measurement point of view. There is therefore a clear need for further research in this field.

Urban regeneration and social sustainability

A variety of definitions of the term ‘regeneration’ exist depending on particular perspectives (IPF, 2006). In the UK the government has defined regeneration as a set of activities that reverse economic, social and physical decline in areas where the market will not resolve this without government support (CLG, 2009). An alternative and perhaps broader definition of urban regeneration, is provided by Roberts (2000: 17) who provides an initial definition of urban regeneration as: ‘a comprehensive and integrated vision and action which leads to the resolution of urban problems and which seeks to bring about a lasting improvement in the economic, physical, social and environmental conditions of an area that has been subject to change’.

However, recent policy initiatives in the UK have also sought to highlight the distinction between ‘economic development’ and ‘regeneration’ (CLG, 2008). For example, whilst development is seen as focusing on profit and being commercially viable in its focus, regeneration should also incorporate elements of social and economic diversity to benefit existing communities (IPF, 2009).²

Broadly speaking, according to key commentators, the main thematic narratives (although not necessarily mutually exclusive) to area-based regeneration and renewal, have included the following:

• Property-led physical approach, where, for example, a major retail-led or mixed-use scheme is expected to have multiplier effects in the local economy (for example, Dixon & Marston, 2003; DTZ, 2009).
• Business-driven approach, which highlights the importance of ‘underserved markets’ particularly in inner-city areas as important foci for regeneration through business investment (for example, Porter, 1995).
• Urban form and design perspective, which highlights the importance of the relationship between sustainable development (SD) and urban form (for example, Burton et al., 1997).
• Cultural industries approach, which stresses the importance of creative and cultural media industries as vehicles for regeneration (for example, Florida, 2004).
• Health and well-being perspective, which highlights the role that well-designed spaces can have on neighbourhood health and liveability (for example,...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Contents
• Halftitle page
• Series page
• Title page
• Copyright
• Acknowledgements
• Serious Editors
• Books in the serious
• Dedication
• The Authors
• Contributing Authors
• Foreword
• PART I: SOCIAL SUSTAINABILITY AND URBAN REGENERATION
• PART II: SOCIALLY SUSTAINABLE URBAN REGENERATION IN EUROPE
• PART III: BEST PRACTICES IN URBAN REGENERATION: CONCLUDING PERSPECTIVES
• Appendices
• Bibliography
• Index