ENTER.HUB_Baseline study PDF, 6 Mo - Urbact

More documents

Recommendations

Info

EUROPEAN UNION European Regional Development Fund Based on these assumptions and aims ENTER.HUB proposed for the development phase 10 themes were proposed for cities to choose from and the initial 5 cities made indicated preliminary preferences The URBACT evaluators made the following remark: While it is good that a range of 10 sub-themes are identified to frame the exchange for the implementation phase, this framework must not be applied too rigidly and some flexibility needs to be maintained so that new partners joining the project can contribute ideas or themes which they may wish to focus on. Where relevant it also needs to be possible for more than one partner to focus on a particular theme. As for the final phrase, it was clearly intended in our proposal that several cities work on several themes, that themes may be regrouped to macro themes and to form for - for each theme or macro theme – clusters of cities – the cities themselves with different roles (and never a city to be alone for one given theme – the essence of URBACT being the cooperation and benchmarking and learning from others) In the Kickoff meeting, the 10 themes were presented and the cities present made comments and provisional choices as for what themes they might be interested. During the site visit in Creil, an interesting exercise was made with the members of the URBACT Local Support Group (ULSG): the themes were presented, commented and doubts declared; also some hypothesis of grouping themes. Then 4 working groups formed from the project team and the members of the ULSG end each workgroup for half an hour reflected on their theme or group of themes; then each group presented their thoughts to the plenary of the ULSG members. Then ULSG members filled in the theme matrix (see example below) Similar exercise exercises (in groups or with the whole ULSG) were done in all further site visits! Then the city, in discussion with the ULSG condensed their choice for the city’s position on each Theme, where each city signals for each of the proposed 10 themes the theme where they would like to be lieder of a cluster for this theme (working group) among those cities selecting that theme ENTER.HUB Baseline study 2012.10.31 68
EUROPEAN UNION European Regional Development Fund themes where they would like to be included in the respective clusters as tutor/contributor for this theme (because they have already sizeable experience) themes that they would like to join as followers/learners for this theme themes which they are not interested to participate in this cluster By filling in this matrix, we then will find out what themes to retain, group (or abandon) or add and form the groups/cluster of cities, for each theme (or macro theme/ group of themes), indicating the leader, tutor or follower role The 10 themes – in a different order than in the proposal for the development phase - the theme “economy” is a horizontal cross cutting theme and as such moved to the 10 th place- are the following (for a description of the scope of each theme see below): 1. Synergy between hub and city 2. Synergy between hub and hinterland 3. Urban and environmental insertion 4. Tourism and culture 5. Communication / Participation / Governance 6. Creation of networks (among HUB or polycentric citiescities) 7. New planning tools and toolkits 8. Railway - railway networking 9. Railway – road networking 10. among and overall: economy Theme 7 was commented by Creil Agglomeration unclear and they mentioned that all “planning figures” were determined by national law; we were not thinking of such instruments (like master plan etc.) but rather of toolkits or checklists or procedures to organize the planning process around the ENTER.HUB questions – like how to define stakeholders, caption areas, sequences of actions etc. to achieve the interaction. The condensed matrix where each partner in conversation with the respective ULSG presents their preferences is shown below. ENTER.HUB Baseline study 2012.10.31 69
Page 1 and 2:
EUROPEAN UNION European Regional De
Page 3 and 4:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18: EUROPEAN UNION European Regional De
Page 27 and 28: One good example: Euralille good ex
Page 55 and 56: €/capita EUROPEAN UNION European
Page 61 and 62: Creil Agglo Ulm Gdynia EUROPEAN UNI
Page 63 and 64: Łódź Lugano EUROPEAN UNION Europ
Page 65 and 66: Preston Rostock EUROPEAN UNION Euro
Page 67: EUROPEAN UNION European Regional De
Page 71 and 72: REGGIO EMILIA CIUDAD REAL CREIL ULM
show all

ENTER.HUB_Baseline study PDF, 6 Mo - Urbact

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?