Innovation-in-Europes-Cities_Bloomberg-Mayors-Challenge1

Innovationin Europe’s CitiesA report by LSE Cities on Bloomberg Philanthropies’ 2014 Mayors ChallengeKirkleesYorkLisbonMadridOuluTrondheimUmeåBarcelonaRomeStockholmTallinnEdinburghHelsingborgCopenhagenNewcastle SunderlandFrederiksberg MalmöKaunasBlackpool Kingston-upon-HullGdyniaLiverpoolGroningenAmsterdamGdanskDublin ManchesterSheffield Amersfoort HamburgBirmingham NottinghamLeicesterPeterboroughUtrecht s-HertogenboschCardiffCambridgeThe Hague Enschede Berlin PoznanRotterdam Herne HalleBristolLondonŁódzBruges AntwerpGelsenkirchenBournemouthLeipzig WrocławPlymouthGhentDortmundSouthampton BrusselsDabrowa GórniczaCologneBrighton & Hove Amiens CharleroiGliwiceMaastrichtKrakówCaen ParisSchaerbeekLiègeBrnoBoulogne-BillancourtBrestKošiceRennesMannheimBratislavaMulhouseBaia MareBotoșaniNantesCluj-NapocaLausanneBergamoLyonLjubljanaSaint-Étienne MilanGrenoble Verona Venice Rijeka Novi SadGenoaFerraraBilbaoBolognaSantanderMontpellier FlorenceRuseSan SebastiánPratoNišVitoria-GasteizLeónAnconaBurgosSabadellZaragozaBragaMataróPlovdivGuimarãesValladolidTarragonaLatinaTiranaLüleburgazPorto Torrejón de ArdozCoimbraOdivelasSintraCascaisParlaValènciaAlicanteElcheMurciaGranadaCádiz MalagaPalma de MallorcaMessinaPalermoCataniaSiracusaTampereWarsawBydgoszczIoanninaHelsinkiSofia VarnaBurgasStara ZagoraAthensLarissaAcharnesChania1Sub headingLimassol

ContentsAbout this report 5Foreword5An Urban Age 6Europe: an urban continent 82014 European Mayors Challenge 16Participation in the Mayors Challenge 18Five Core Themes 20Economy: doing more with less 22Civic Engagement: facilitating citizen action 24Social Inclusion: building trust and value 26Health and Well-being: aiding healthy living 28Environment: securing the future 30Winners32Barcelona (Grand Prize Winner) 34Athens36Kirklees38Stockholm40Warsaw42Reflections44Tools and approaches 44Innovation and collaboration 44Conclusion45About46Bloomberg Philanthropies 46LSE Cities 46The Mayors Challenge 47International Jury 47Finalist Proposals 48Bibliography49

With its dense urban fabric, iconic monuments and continuallyevolving cityscape, Barcelona epitomises the European city.Sub heading4

About this reportInnovation in European Cities sets out the context forBloomberg Philanthropies’ European MayorsChallenge. It gives an overview of the key themesfacing European cities today and provides anindependent analysis of the 155 submissions to theaward and a detailed review of the five winningproposals. It has been carried out by LSE Cities,a research centre based at the London School ofEconomics and Political Science, which specialisesin understanding the dynamics between the urbanform and urban society.Throughout 2014, researchers from LSE Citiesprovided input to Bloomberg Philanthropies onthe political and demographic make-up of selectedEuropean cities, and carried out an objectiveassessment of the level of innovation shown by theshortlisted proposals. In writing this report, we alsointerviewed representatives from the winning cities.The report draws on this work as well as researchon the social, economic and political dynamicsof cities at a global and European level, a widerlens through which to better view and understandthe themes uncovered by the European MayorsChallenge.The report is organised into four parts. The firstoffers an overview of global dynamics in an urbanage, the second identifies the key themes addressedby the submissions for the award and the thirdfocuses on the five winning proposals. The reportconcludes by offering a series of reflections on whatthe European Mayors Challenge tells us about someof the key issues facing city governments acrossEurope today, and what lessons might be drawnfrom the Challenge, worldwide.Foreword James AndersonGovernment Innovation Programme Lead,Bloomberg PhilanthropiesOne of the many things that comes acrosspowerfully in this LSE Cities report is the nearuniversal need for local governments to adapt.Whether a result of the continued fall-out ofthe economic crisis, changing demographics orthe widening trust gap between citizens and theirleaders, Europe’s cities are today being asked tochange what they do, change what they fund andchange how they work.It is against this backdrop that BloombergPhilanthropies launched the European MayorsChallenge, a competition for bold ideas that solvemajor challenges and improve city life and have thepotential to spread to other cities. The programmeis a celebration of the tremendous creativity thatexists within local governments, as well as a callto arms for cities to push further and faster toanticipate the changing needs and expectations oftheir citizens.And push they did. In generating newapproaches, cities utilised open innovation strategiesthat broadly engaged organisations, industry andindividual citizens to define problems and co-createsolutions. They thought strategically about buildingsupport for their innovations, developed robustmetric and measurement plans, and took advantageof Europe’s strong intra-city networks by leveragingthe experience of other people in other places whenconsidering new approaches. One of the notable(and inspiring) themes observed is that practicallyevery solution was concerned with connectingpeople to each other, either through the institutionsof local government or through the better use ofpublic spaces.We are grateful to have partnered with LSE Citieson the competition and this report. We benefitedgreatly from the rigorous analysis provided by LSECities' researchers and from the strategic guidanceof its leadership.The final pages of this report conclude thatthe Mayors Challenge “confirms that at a time ofgeneral disillusionment with systems of governance,local government has the capacity to be resilientand pro-active in ways that national governmentsand international institutions find difficult.”We couldn’t agree more. In times of greatchange, that’s a capacity we want to continue toelevate, celebrate and support.5

An Urban AgeCities are growing larger at an unprecedented rate,but the pattern of growth is unequally distributedacross the surface of the globe. Europe and NorthAmerica had their major growth spurt in the19 th century; Latin American and Japanese citiesgrew exponentially at the end of the 20 th century.Over the next 15 years, Asia will see a dramaticexpansion in urban populations, followed bysub-Saharan Africa (where income levels are stillvery low). At the same time, European and NorthAmerican cities are adapting to different challengescaused by deindustrialisation, globalisation and – insome cases – shrinking urban populations.Cities have always been based around the flowof people, goods and capital. The informationage has accelerated the process of urbanisation,rather than reducing its pace. We know that over50% of the world’s people are urban dwellers.But together they punch well above their weight,generating about 80% of global Gross DomesticProduct (GDP). Cities are the engines of the globaleconomy and contribute significantly to povertyalleviation, but risk becoming seething cauldrons ofsocial inequality. At the environmental level, citiesare responsible for around 60% of global energyconsumption and over 70% of global greenhousegas emissions.Whether they are growing or shrinking, citiesand their governments have always shown resiliencein finding new solutions, adapting quickly to aSeattleLos Angeles50% of population is urban80% of GDP is produced by cities70% of energy is consumed by citiesfast-changing world. Some Asian cities are modelsof sustainable growth. Some North American citiesare leading the field in environmental planning andeconomic regeneration. Certain Latin Americancities in particular have demonstrated innovation bypioneering new transport and governance systems.European cities are responding to a variety ofpolitical, social and economic conditions that reflecta period of uneven growth and varying stability.Across the globe, cities are reinventing models ofurban governance and civic engagement that reflectthe major environmental, social and economicchallenges of our time. Bloomberg Philanthropies’Mayors Challenge has been designed to captureand encourage innovation in cities, starting withcities in the United States in 2012-2013 and movingto European cities in 2013-2014.Mexico CityDallasChicagoHavanaBogotáLimaNew YorkSantiagoFortalezaBrasíliaSão PauloBuenos Aires6

Patterns ofCity Population (2012)global changePopulation (2012)38m20m10mMoscow0.5mLondonAverage annual populationgrowth forecast 2012-2030 (%)MadridCairoIstanbulRiyadhTehranKarachiÜrümqiDelhiDhakaKolkataMumbaiBeijingShanghaiChongqingHong KongTokyo-2-10123456Ho Chi Minh CityManilaLagosKuala LumpurKinshasaDar es SalaamJakartaJohannesburgBrisbaneCape TownSydney7

An Urban AgeEuropeAn urban continentA unique urban traditionBloomberg Philanthropies has focused its lens ona region of the world where the majority of citieshave long and established histories. At differentperiods over the last 2,500 years, Athens, Rome,Venice, Istanbul, Vienna, Madrid and Londonwere all centres of vast empires that stretched acrossthe Continent and beyond. Europe also witnessedthe consolidation of the city-state which for manycenturies dominated the political and economicdynamics of the Continent – especially in Italy,Germany and the Netherlands – leaving a distinctimprint on the structure and identity of urbanregions today.Though united by tradition and geography, therecent past of European cities is a very chequeredone. Two World Wars, the creation and gradualexpansion of the European Union (EU) to cultivateunity, the collapse of the Berlin Wall only 25years ago and the re-construction of post-Sovieteconomies in eastern Europe have all left their markon the Continent in different ways. The 2008 globalrecession hit many European nations hard, andthe ongoing Euro-Crisis can still be felt in manydifferent regions.Fragmented scenariosWhile it is difficult to generalise, northern andwestern European countries – like Sweden,Denmark, the Netherlands, Britain and Germany– have stabilised and grown in confidence, whilesome southern and eastern European countriesare dealing with weakening economies, highunemployment and shrinking populations. Theentire Eurozone has been affected by globalisationand increased competition from Asia, requiringa process of political, economic and socialrestructuring which is currently in full swing. Atthe heart of this transformation is a debate onthe importance of cities as economic engines,the autonomy of urban governance, the need forincreased citizen participation in problem-solvingand a growing awareness that European cities mustinnovate and work together if they are not to beleft behind.The towns and cities of Europe reflect andoften concentrate these national, regional andglobal trends. Many are still undergoing a processof deindustrialisation, leading to structuralunemployment and increasing the need to investin research and development to improve on lowproductivity levels, and also the need to grownew industries. This is the case across Europe.However, southern and eastern European nationstend to perform poorly in terms of regionalentrepreneurship and competitiveness.Economic performanceCities, especially globally connected ones,frequently out-perform their national contextsfor productivity, competitiveness, innovation andeconomic growth. Evidence from the EU suggeststhat cities with high R&D spend have reapedthe benefits of such investment, in the form ofsustained growth and higher levels of job creation.However, R&D spending is not the only driver: aflexible workforce matters too. Cities in states withconsistently higher proficiency in mathematics,science and reading generally showed greaterresilience against the economic crisis.The 2008 global recession wiped out many ofthe gains made in previous decades and reversed along trend of converging GDP. Unemployment rateswithin the EU, affecting in particular regions insouthern Europe. Between 2008 and 2011, regionaldisparities widened and unemployment figures arenow worse than in 2000; youth unemployment isparticularly high, exceeding 60% in some southernEuropean cities. This slow recovery also means thatunemployment remains persistent in some areas,further aggravating the associated negative socialimpacts of the economic crisis.8

Where Europe livesNorth and South America are the mosturbanised continents on the globe,with more than 80% of people livingin towns and cities. Europe also hasa very high urbanisation level withnearly 73% of people living in townsand cities. The patterns of urbanisationwithin Europe vary significantly – witha large number of highly connectedsmaller cities and towns across partsof northern Italy, Germany and theBenelux countries reflecting thestrong tradition of the city-state. Otherareas, including Spain, France andScandinavia are still dominated bylarge expanses of rural or unpopulatedland. England and the Randstadregion in Holland stand out as some ofthe densest urban areas in the world.Population density(people/km 2 )RuralUrban02005001,00010,00030,00063,000DublinManchesterLondonAmsterdamHamburgCopenhagenBerlinStockholmWarsawCologneParisBudapestMilanSofiaBarcelonaRomeIstanbulMadridLisbonAthens9

An Urban AgeGrowing EU voter apathy: voter turnout in national elections 1990-2014100%90%Denmark80%70%60%50%40%30%EuropeanAverageGreeceSlovakiaSwitzerlandEU ParliamentLithuania20%10%0%1990199419982002200620102014Lack of trustAusterity measures have led to further job lossesbut have also forced citizens to take on moreresponsibility within their communities. This shiftin dependency and loss of certainty has had a deepeffect on many European urban dwellers who havehad to learn to rely less on government and more ontheir own resources to survive the tough economiccircumstances.This has in turn led to an increased sense ofmistrust in government institutions – at all levelsacross the EU – leading to low voter turn-outs,wide-spread disillusionment with conventionalpolitical parties and the growth of extremist groupsthat are effective in vocalising feelings of angerand vulnerability. However, local governmentsable to bridge this trust gap may be able to partnerwith citizens to solve many of the local challengesaffecting European cities.Ageing and welfareMost noticeably, Europeans are ageing. By 2030, athird of the population will be over 60 – a situationthat is mirrored in Asian countries like Japan andSouth Korea. London and Istanbul, perhaps themost global of European cities, stand out for thehigh numbers of young people who make up thelocal population. Fertility rates are generally belowthe replacement rate, and an insufficient supplyof migrant labour means the dependency ratioacross Europe is on the rise. This places enormousstrain on funding benefits, especially in countriesthat have established and expensive national healthand welfare systems, including state pensions andfree health care. Reduced tax revenues and longerlife expectancies contribute to a highly volatilesituation across European cities. As low fertilityresults in population shrinkage in many Europeancountries, migration becomes the main source ofpopulation growth.HealthLoneliness and social disconnection, traditionallyassociated only with old age, are on the rise. Highunemployment has particularly affected youth,negatively impacting mental and physical healthand increasing the burden on welfare budgetsand the provision of health services. Another byproductof inactivity and reduced income – andpoor levels of medical prevention – is the increasein obesity and diabetes amongst European urbancitizens, fuelled by poor diet and a lack of exercise.While obesity increases the risk of diseases of thecirculatory system, (the most common cause ofdeath in the EU), diabetes has become the fourthmost devastating killer disease. Roughly one in tenEuropeans lives with diabetes and the Continenthas the highest prevalence in the world of Type-1diabetes in children, suggesting that alreadyburdenedhealthcare budgets will be furtherstretched in the future.10

An ageing world: the projected percentage of citizens over 60 by 2050Portugal and Bosnia and Herzegovina are projected to have the highest percentage of seniors in Europe. Severalother countries in the European region have comparable projections.40%Bosnia and HerzegovinaItalyAn Urban Age35%Europe30%25%20%IrelandNorth AmericaTurkeyLatin AmericaAsiaWorld15%10%Africa5%0%195019701990201020302050EnvironmentThe connection between environmental sustainabilityand quality of life is intrinsic to the DNA ofmany European cities. At one end of the scale, thecompact, well-connected European city model –epitomised by Copenhagen, Stockholm, Vienna,Barcelona and, to a degree, London and Berlin –provides positive exemplars of how to manage theenvironment and promote economic growth. Inthese cities, public transport takes precedence overthe car, urban sprawl is contained and a mix of usesis promoted as a way of reducing the environmentalfootprint and optimising urban vitality. At the otherend of the scale, many post-industrial cities likeLiverpool, Turin, Gdańsk and Bilbao have had toreinvent themselves to cope with the vicious cycle ofjob losses, shrinking populations and urban decay.While levels of pollution in Europe are well belowAsian, African and American standards, there hasbeen a concerted effort – promoted by the EU at thepolicy level and championed by a number of greencity leaders – to change the behavioural patterns ofEuropean urban citizens. Reducing car dependencyand the need to find affordable, environmentallyfriendly techniques to retrofit old buildings remainsignificant challenges. Zero-carbon growth,collaborative consumption, renewable energygeneration, district heating systems, congestioncharging, bike-sharing and priority bus lanes aretransforming the metabolism of some Europeancities, leading to a ‘decoupling’ of the trajectory ofeconomic growth and energy consumption.11

An Urban AgeAn unequal continentThe range of GDP per capita inEurope is so broad that cities ineastern Europe are far closer to manydeveloping African and Asian citiesthan to those situated in western andnorthern Europe. Groningen in theNetherlands (€53,810); London inthe UK (€54,600); Dublin in Ireland(€55,330); and Copenhagen inDenmark (€56,100) are significantlywealthier in per capita terms thanRomania’s Botoșani (€2,260) andCluj-Napoca (€5,840), or Bulgaria’sBurgas (€3,100), Stara Zagora(€3,500) and Varna (€3,610). Citieswith GDP per capita over €50,000are concentrated in northern andwestern Europe. Regionally, therelationship between city and countrylevelGDP growth varies. In the east,cities are growing slower than thecomparatively high growth seen atnational level, while in the south thistrend is largely reversed. However,the general pattern for Europe overallis that cities either match or exceednational growth, with the clear outlierbeing Italy, where several individualcities are contracting more rapidlythan the level shown by the state.Eastern Europe continues to growmore quickly than the rest of theContinent despite the rate of growthhaving slowed since 2009. However,the relatively low base of theseeconomies and the poor performanceof many Mediterranean statesmean Europe will continue to havesignificant regional disparities.GDP growth% average annual growth(2003 -2013)-2%-1%01234567PortugalIrelandCoimbra -0.5%SpainCity GDP per capita (€)(2013)80,00040,00020,0002,300United KingdomYork -0.2%FranceNetherlandsBelgiumLuxembourgFinlandNorwaySweden Stockholm 3.2%EstoniaLatviaDenmarkLithunaniaKaunas 3.8%Gdańsk 5.6%BelarusPolandWarsaw 4.5%GermanyHalle -0.5%Gliwice 5.2%Czech RepublicMannheim -0.3%SlovakiaAustria Bratislava 5.2%SwitzerlandSloveniaHungaryMoldovaCluj-Napoca 4.1%CroatiaRomaniaFerrara -1.2%SerbiaBosnia and HerzegovinaMontenegroSofia 6.9%BulgariaKosovoLatina -1%MacedoniaItalyAlbaniaLarissa -1.7%Messina -1.7% GreeceAthens -0.9%UkraineRussiaTurkeyCyprus12

Europe’s lost labour potentialNine in ten cities face higheryouth unemployment than generalunemployment, although overall youthunemployment varies significantly,even within individual countries.Southern states generally havethe greatest difficulty integratingyoung adults into the labour market,although there are several exampleswhere more advanced economieshave consistently high figures. Theseinclude, Charleroi, Belgium (44%);Dublin, Ireland (43%); Schaerbeek,Belgium (38%); the UK cities ofSheffield (35%), Cardiff (33%) andKirklees (30%); and Stockholm,Sweden (30%). None of these are ashigh as Athens, Greece (60%) andBarcelona, Spain (58%), and theyalso compare favourably to Rome,Italy; Limassol, Cyprus; Niš, Serbia;Lisbon, Portugal and Košice, Slovakia,which hover around 40%. As theregion emerges from the financialcrisis (and faces the challenge ofsustaining welfare for Europe’s ageingand shrinking working populations),absorbing young people into theworkforce – many of whom havetertiary qualifications – becomesa key issue, with a pressing needfor innovation at the local level.Nevertheless, some towns and citieswith established university populationsor highly developed apprenticeshipschemes go against the trend ofhaving higher youth unemployment.Youth unemployment rate(most recent year available)0%10%20%30%40%50%63%PortugalIrelandSpainUnited KingdomDenmarkEdinburgh 2.5% Copenhagen 5.9%Plymouth 4.8%NetherlandsCambridge 1.3%Rennes 7.3%FranceBelgiumLuxembourgBarcelona 58.8%NorwayGermanySwitzerlandTrondheim 4.9%SwedenHamburg 7.3%Czech RepublicMannheim 4.2%AustriaSloveniaItalyCroatiaPolandSlovakiaHungarySerbiaBosnia and HerzegovinaMontenegroAlbaniaFinlandEstoniaLatviaLithunaniaKaunas 5.3%KosovoMacedoniaGreeceHelsinki 6.3%RomaniaBelarusBulgariaMoldovaAthens 60%UkraineRussiaTurkeyAn Urban AgeMálaga 55%Cyprus13

An Urban AgeGrowing on aborrowed populationOn the whole, eastern Europeancountries are experiencing markedlylower population growth than the restof Europe even though their fertilityrates are comparable. The outlieris Poland, which – despite relativeeconomic success in the region andmarginal population growth at thenational level – is still experiencingdecline in many of its bigger cities asresidents migrate to opportunities inricher countries. However, citizens arenot only being ‘lost’ to foreign states.In most countries, only smaller citiesare shrinking – for example Brest,France; Sunderland, United Kingdomor Bilbao, Spain – suggesting thatresidents also leave for larger citieswithin their country. Athens, Greece– where recent economic shocks haveled to reduced opportunities – is oneof the few examples of a shrinkingcapital city. In contrast, Tirana, theneighbouring capital city of postcommunistAlbania, is growing rapidlydespite general depopulation atcountry level. Acharnes, a suburbantown adjoining Athens, is growing,highlighting how growth and declinecan differ even at a local level. TheEuropean Union’s overall fertilityrate has been below the replacementrate of 2.1 live births per woman forseveral decades, and almost 2.4million fewer babies were born in2011 than in 1961. Since 2000,none of the countries highlightedabove have achieved a replacementbirth rate, swelling the proportion ofolder people and increasing the needfor migration to support growth.Population growth% average annual growth(most recent available range)-1.6%-1.0%-0.5%0.0%0.5%1.0%1.5%2.0%2.5%3.0%Dublin 1.4%IrelandCoimbra -1.6%PortugalSpainCity population(most recent year available)United Kingdom8.3m3.0m1.0m0.1mNorwayDenmarkManchester 2.1%Utrecht 2.1%NetherlandsHerne -0.4%Brussels 2.1%Belgium GermanyLuxembourgFranceSaint-Étienne -0.5%Murcia 1.8%SwitzerlandFinlandSweden Stockholm 1.9%EstoniaLatviaMalmö 1.8%LithunaniaKaunas -0.8%BelarusPolandŁódź -0.8%Czech RepublicUkraineSlovakiaBratislava -0.5%AustriaHungaryMoldovaSloveniaRomaniaCroatiaRijeka -1.1%SerbiaBosnia and HerzegovinaRuse -0.7%MontenegroBulgariaKosovoItalyMacedoniaTirana 2.8%AlbaniaLarissa 2.2%GreeceAcharnes 3%Athens -1.6%RussiaTurkeyCyprus14

Migrating north-westMigration is largely to the wealthierparts of the Continent, suggestingemigration is partly responsiblefor shrinking populations in thecomparatively poorer cities of theeast. Recession-induced increasesin unemployment and youthunemployment rates in this region,particularly in the south-east of Europe,have further contributed to the trend.Germany’s growing cities (within ashrinking country) are sustained partlyby migration. The same impact is felt inseveral other western European cities.In London, United Kingdom; Lausanne,Switzerland and Mannheim, Germanyforeign-born residents make up morethan 40% of the population, providingincreased opportunities for these citiesto link to global markets. In easterncities, the foreign born percentageof the population number does notexceed 5%. This means there is a moreacute need to retain local talent, andperhaps even attract migrant talentto become more globally competitive.The percentage and scale of theforeign-born populations in westerncities, and even as far north asStockholm, Sweden also highlight howthese cities have managed to betterintegrate into global population flows.London, Europe’s most global city, hasresidents from almost every country onthe planet.% foreign-born residents(most recent year available)0%10%20%30%40%42%IrelandPortugalCity migrant population(most recent year available)Porto 3.7%SpainUnited Kingdom3,000,000500,000100,00010,000500Newcastle 2.8%London 36.7%FranceNetherlandsNorwayDenmarkAmsterdam 28.5%SwedenHalle 3.9%Brussels 35% GermanyBelgiumCzech RepublicLuxembourgMannheim 38.7%SwitzerlandLausanne 41.9%Malmö 30.0%AustriaSloveniaItalyCroatiaStockholm 28.7%PolandFinlandLithunaniaSlovakiaBratislava 1.2%HungarySerbiaBosnia and HerzegovinaMontenegroKosovoEstoniaKraków 1%LatviaWarsaw 1%RomaniaMacedoniaTirana 3.1%AlbaniaGreeceBelarusBulgariaMoldovaUkraineVarna 1%RussiaTurkeyAn Urban AgeSiracusa 2.7%Cyprus15

2014 EuropeanMayors ChallengeIt is into this multifaceted European context thatBloomberg Philanthropies' 2013-2014 EuropeanMayors Challenge enters. It was designed toencourage cities to develop bold ideas that solvemajor problems and improve city life – and thatcould be shared with other cities. European citiesare some of the most innovative in the world,routinely looked to by other global cities forinspiration. Yet with tighter budgets, higher citizenexpectations and national gridlock, many cityleaders must become more agile and resourcefulin responding to local challenges. The MayorsChallenge encourages city leaders to do just that.Submissions for the award require a degree ofbacking and promotion from municipal leadersin order to qualify, ensuring political buy-in anddeliverability.The programme was especially timely forEurope; the 2008 crisis prompted an extensiveprocess of rethinking urban governance throughoutthe region. The diverse range of proposals discussed“The 2008 crisis prompted anextensive process of rethinkingurban governance.”in these pages demonstrate not only how localgovernments across Europe are developing newsolutions to innovate out of the financial crisis –addressing large problems with less money – butalso how they are responding to many social,environmental and economic concerns relevant tothe region today.Following the inaugural competition in theUnited States, the European Mayors Challengewas launched in September 2013 and was opento cities across Europe (not just the EU) withpopulations of at least 100,000 residents. * 155cities from 28 countries responded to the call forsubmissions. From Amiens to Zaragoza, theycollectively represent over 71 million Europeans,roughly 10% of the total population. 49% of thesubmissions came from cities with populationsof between 100,000 and 250,000 residents, 28%had populations between 250,000 and 500,000residents, and 23% came from cities with more than500,000 residents. The participation rate exceededthat of the Mayors Challenge in the US, with 26%of eligible cities submitting applications in Europeversus 24% in the US. Participating cities spannedthe continent: 35% from southern Europe, 25%from western Europe, 19% from eastern Europe,15% from the British Isles and 6% from northernEurope. 19 European capital cities submitted ideasto the competition, from Stockholm to Athens, Paristo Warsaw.21 cities from 11 countries were shortlisted inApril 2014, and five winners, including the winnerof the grand prize of €5 million, were announcedin September 2014. An independent jury of 13international experts evaluated the proposalsagainst the four key criteria: vision, potentialfor impact, quality of implementation plan andpotential for transferring the scheme to other cities.When considering the full range of submissionsto the European Mayors Challenge, a numberof key themes, identified in this report, begin toemerge. This report also focuses on the 21 cities thatwere invited to develop their initial ideas further.These shortlisted cities, highlighted on pages22-31, took part in an Ideas Camp organised byBloomberg Philanthropies in Berlin in July 2014, inan effort to refine their ideas. The proposals of thefive winning cities are described on pages 34-43.*Five of the countries represented by the applicants are not part of the European Union (EU):Norway and Switzerland are both closely associated with the EU; Serbia, Albania andTurkey are candidate countries to join the EU. For more details on the Mayors Challenge,please refer to page 47.16

United KingdomIrelandDenmarkNetherlandsNorwaySwedenFinlandEstoniaLatviaLithunaniaPolandBelarusUkraineRussiaMoldovaCzech RepublicGermanyBelgiumLuxembourgSloveniaAustriaSwitzerlandCroatiaBosnia and HerzegovinaMontenegroKosovoMacedoniaSlovakiaHungaryRomaniaBulgariaAlbaniaGreeceMaltaItalySpainFrancePortugalTurkeyCyprusSerbiaFrederiksbergNišUmeåYorkBrnoLyonRomeOuluŁódźCaenRuseLeónMalmöSofiaMilanParisVarnaPortoBrestGhentLiégeBragaPratoParlaElcheCádizHalleHernePoznańKrakówGdańskKaunasVeronaWarsawBerlinRijekaVeniceAmiensAthensTiranaBilbaoMadridLisbonLondonDublinKošiceBrugesBurgasAnconaMurciaNantesRennesSintraLatinaGenoaMataróMálagaBurgosGdyniaChaniaCascaisFerraraBergamoBristolAntwerpWrocławLeipzigUtrechtBolognaCoimbraCardiffTallinnHamburgColognePalermoGliwiceMessinaCataniaLarissaTamperePlovdivGranadaNovi SadEnschedeSiracusaSabadellAlicanteBotoșaniLausanneBrusselsIoanninaFlorenceZaragozaHelsinkiDortmundValènciaMulhouseGrenobleMannheimLimassolKirkleesAcharnesPlymouthNewcastleCambridgeTarragonaCharleroiBydgoszczLjubljanaStockholmGroningenThe HagueAmsterdamTrondheimLiverpoolEdinburghSheffieldBaia MareRotterdamSantanderGuimarãesLeicesterBlackpoolSunderlandNottinghamLüleburgazBratislavaCopenhagenValladolidBirminghamMaastrichtHelsingborgBournemouthCluj-NapocaSouthamptonMontpellierPeterboroughStara ZagoraSaint-ÉtienneGelsenkirchenSan SebastiánVitoria-GasteizDąbrowa GórniczaBrighton & HovePalma de MallorcaTorrejón de ArdozKingston-upon-HullBoulogne-BillancourtOdivelasBarcelonaSchaerbeekManchesterAmersfoorts-HertogenboschParticipating cities

2014 European Mayors Challenge18Participation in thePopulation ofparticipating cities(only for cities with all comparabledata available)Total population growth(over ten year period)-1.6%-1.0%- 0.5%1 in 10 Europeans represented0.0% in the Mayors Challenge0.5%1.0%1.5%2.0%2.5%3.0%MigrantsMayors ChallengeLimassolParticipating and eligible cities by countrySpainUnited KingdomItalyFranceNetherlands1 in 4 Poland eligible citiesparticipated GermanyPortugalBelgiumBulgariaGreeceSwedenFinlandRomaniaDenmarkSerbiaSlovakiaAlbaniaCroatiaCyprusCzech RepublicEstoniaIrelandLithuaniaNorwaySloveniaSwitzerlandTurkeyAustriaBosnia and HerzegovinaHungaryIcelandLatviaMacedoniaMoldovaMontenegroFrederiksbergBotoșaniChaniaCaenHalleIoannina0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80ApplicationsMulhouseBoulogne-BillancourtUmeåSiracusaLatinaBergamoCambridgeDąbrowa GórniczaOther Eligible CitiesRijekaSchaerbeekFerraraHelsingborgTarragona1 One in 10 in ten Europeans Europeans represented representedin in the the Mayors Challenge1 One in 4 in eligible four eligible cities citiesparticipatedAmiensApplicationsOther eligible citiesStara ZagoraLüleburgazCoimbraLausanneBrestGrenobleEnschedeHerneBrusselsSaint-ÉtienneTrondheimPeterboroughBournemouthGroningenYork1 in 10 Europeans representedin the Mayors ChallengeCharleroiSabadellRennesCascaisTamperePortoKošiceVitoria-GasteizGhentVeronaGelsenkirchenKingston-upon-HullMontpellierPlymouth

DevolutionPressure to shift fiscal and political power from state to lower tiers of government, in order to strengthenlocal democracy, is increasing. Cities in turn are under pressure to provide citizens with increasedopportunities for participation in local governance. These trends can result in conflicting policies that reflectdivergent local, regional and state aspirations. Directly elected mayors, especially in large cities, may havea significant political mandate, providing greater legitimacy to their decisions.DenmarkSwedenFinlandPolandNetherlandsItalyUnited KingdomRomaniaLatviaCzech RepublicNorwayEstoniaLithuaniaBulgariaFranceHungarySloveniaSlovakiaGermanySpainAustriaBelgiumIrelandLuxembourgGreeceCyprusMaltaFive in ten participatingFive mayorsFive in in ten areten participating directly electedparticipatingmayors are directly electedSix in ten participating local governments are politicallyalignedSix in ten participating localwith their nationalgovernments are politicallygovernmentaligned with their nationalgovernmentPopulation ofparticipating cities(only for cities with all comparabledata available)Total population growth(over ten year period)-1.6%-1.0%-0.5%0.0%0.5%1.0%1.5%2.0%2.5%3.0%Migrants8.3M5M4M3M2M2014 European Mayors Challenge0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%Revenue raising powers of local government:local revenue as a percentage of overall tax revenue1MVeniceBrighton & HoveSunderlandLjubljanaNantesNewcastleMannheimKaunasNottinghamMalmöValladolidUtrechtLeicesterAlicanteVarnaCardiffBilbaoBydgoszczFlorenceBrnoBolognaBratislavaTallinnKirkleesBristolMurciaGdańskLiverpoolLyonEdinburghThe HagueAntwerpManchesterLeipzigLisbonPoznańSheffieldCopenhagenMálagaDortmundHelsinkiGenoaWrocławAthensZaragozaŁódźKrakówTiranaValènciaAmsterdamStockholmCologneBirminghamDublinMilanBarcelonaWarsawHamburgParisRomeMadridBerlinLondon019

Five Core ThemesThe submissions from 155 cities demonstrateda predictably wide spectrum of responses to thecall for innovation in urban governance aimed atsolving local challenges and improving quality oflife. In order to better understand the key issuesaddressed by each city and to support the processof evaluation, LSE Cities identified five core themesthat captured the concerns of European citizensand local governments in this self-selected groupof cities. These themes are: the economy; civicengagement; social inclusion; health and wellbeing;and the environment. The themes provideimportant insights into the perspectives of theleaders who participated in the European“Practically every solution wasconcerned with connectingpeople to each other.”Mayors Challenge, but it is important to rememberthat they do not represent the full range of urbanthemes prioritised across Europe’s towns and cities.Across the broad range of submissions, whatstands out is that practically every solution wasconcerned with connecting people to each other –either through the institutions of local governmentor by the (better) use of urban spaces. The issue ofconnection becomes particularly acute when theindividuals who are at the heart of the significantprocesses of urban change and growth feel leftbehind or isolated. This applies equally to young orolder citizens who lack jobs or a sense of purpose,and to new migrant communities who have notyet settled in their host environments. The questfor improved communication, the simplification ofobtuse bureaucratic language, and greater opennessand transparency of municipal institutions cutacross many of the initiatives, with the potential ofnew technology, apps and gamification techniquesplaying a key role in forming new alliances andconnections across many layers of Europeanurban society.EconomyDoing more with less25%Civic EngagementFacilitating citizen action16%Social InclusionBuilding trust and value33%Health and Well-beingAiding healthy living12%EnvironmentSecuring the future14%12%11%2%10%6%16%10%7%6%4%2%6%5%3%Youth developmentUrban redevelopmentProductivityParticipating in governanceCommunity involvementEqualisingStabilisingSharingExercise & well-beingObesity & foodDistributed healthcareEnergy efficiency & green buildingsClean energy & transportResilience & safety20

OuluParticipating citiesEconomyTrondheimUmeåFinlandCivic EngagementSocial InclusionHealth and Well-beingNorwaySwedenTampereHelsinkiEnvironmentStockholmTallinnEstoniaUnited KingdomLatviaRussiaSintraCascaisBragaPortoPortugalOdivelasLisbonDublinIrelandGuimarãesCoimbraDenmarkCopenhagenFrederiksbergBlackpoolKingston-upon-Hull AmersfoortLiverpoolHamburgSheffieldGroningenManchester Nottingham AmsterdamNetherlandss-HertogenboschBirminghamPeterborough UtrechtEnschedeLeicester CambridgeThe HagueHerneCardiff Bristol London RotterdamDortmund HalleBruges AntwerpBournemouthGelsenkirchenGhentPlymouthCologne GermanyBrussels BelgiumSouthamptonAmiens Charleroi MaastrichtBrighton & HoveSchaerbeek LiégeMannheimCaenBoulogne-Billancourt ParisBrestRennesMulhouseSantanderCádizLeónMadridParlaSpainNewcastleKirkleesBurgosValladolidEdinburghSunderlandYorkBilbaoSan SebastiánVitoria-GasteizMurciaGranadaMálagaNantesZaragozaTarragonaTorrejón de ArdozValènciaAlicanteElcheFranceSaint-ÉtienneSabadellMataróBarcelonaSwitzerlandLausanneLyonMilanGrenobleMontpellierPalma de MallorcaVeronaGenoaBergamoPratoHelsingborgMalmöBerlinLeipzigVeniceFerraraBolognaFlorenceCzech RepublicRomeLatinaAustriaSloveniaLjubljanaCroatiaRijekaAnconaItalyPalermoGdyniaPoznańWrocławGliwiceBrnoGdańskPolandŁódźSlovakiaHungarySerbiaBosnia and HerzegovinaMessinaCataniaSiracusaBydgoszczBratislavaMontenegroKrakówWarsawDąbrowa GórniczaKosovoLithunaniaMacedoniaTiranaAlbaniaKošiceNovi SadIoanninaNišGreeceKaunasBaia MareAthensCluj-NapocaRomaniaSofiaPlovdivLarissaBelarusAcharnesBotoșaniMoldovaRuseVarnaBulgariaBurgasStara ZagoraLüleburgazUkraineTurkeyChaniaCyprusLimassol21

Five Core ThemesEconomyDoing more with lessOne in five proposals to the European MayorsChallenge identified youth or youth unemploymentas key areas of concern for the city administration.A significant number of cities suggested schoolleveltraining to prepare students for employmentand connect them to the future job market(including Dąbrowa Górnicza, Poland and Rijeka,Croatia). Other cities, including Newcastle,United Kingdom and Herne, Germany proposedtraining opportunities in deprived or migrantareas. Košice, Slovakia wanted to promote accessto the local job market in an effort to reverse thebrain drain to western Europe. The challengesof deindustrialisation led the famous port city ofPlymouth, United Kingdom to propose an app tohelp youths from families who had worked in the(now redundant) docks for generations access thebroader labour market, while Kaunas, Lithuaniaplanned to include young people in generatingsolutions.In general, these proposals aimed to providesupport where national government and EU policiesand programmes have not sufficiently tackledyouth unemployment in cities. These innovativeapproaches largely focused on providing cityspecificskills that are not supplied by the nationalcurriculum. Many suggested reducing the structuralskills deficit (retaining and growing talent) byproviding training, entrepreneurship advice, andlanguage and local-market specific coaching.There was a strong focus on the need to interveneearly in the education process, before it’s too late.Rather than seeing this as a post-schooling issue,many cities proposed creative add-ons to traditionaleducation by drawing on local resources to supportyoung people throughout their formative years. Aperceived ‘generation gap’ was also defined as a keyconcern by many cities; programmes to link theyoung and old looked to provide potential solutionsto this, as did approaches using new technologies to‘speak the language’ of young people.A number of submissions provided evidence thatthe economic crisis may not have left Europe yet,given the emphasis on re-using vacant lots of emptyurban land – a classic indicator of pervasive urbandereliction. Adapting space for social and economicbenefit featured regularly across the proposals,demonstrating a growing recognition by Europeancities that smart and sustainable urban planningcan help to solve a range of structural issuessimultaneously. Prato, Italy proposed developingan urban park to integrate an immigrant enclave.Amiens, France suggested giving new life toabandoned public spaces by introducing shared,self-navigated river transport; Zaragoza, Spainproposed to negotiate bulk supplier contractsto regenerate entire neighbourhoods, whileparticipatory design was seen as a tool to involveunemployed youth in redeveloping a deprivedsuburb of Tampere, Finland.Proposals to temporarily use abandonedbuildings or vacant lots, or programmes tore-invigorate post-industrial or post-Sovietneighbourhoods with new activities all demonstrate“The proposals indicate agrowing recognition amongstmunicipal governments thatmore needs to be done locallyto foster economic prosperitythrough the efficient managementof resources, peopleand time.”a growing appetite among city administrationsto invest in sustainable initiatives that bolster theeconomy, improve connectivity and keep the cityhealthy.While some cities put forward projects thatprioritised the need to participate meaningfullyin a globally competitive world, others specificallytargeted productivity within the city. Liège,Belgium and Maastricht, the Netherlands bothidentified the negative impact of the lack of foreignlanguage skills on their economies, and proposedteaching native populations foreign languages toincrease global competitiveness. Gliwice, Polandproposed using mathematical modelling toreorganise public and private transport resources toefficiently manage capacity and routes on demand.Across the board, the proposals indicatea growing recognition amongst municipalgovernments that more needs to be done locallyto foster economic prosperity through the efficientmanagement of resources, people and time. In thisregard, cities in Europe are taking matters intotheir own hands in areas that were traditionally theresponsibility of regional and national government.In an era of reduced budgets and increasedresponsibility, innovative responses are enablingcities to do more with less.Finalist proposalsBologna, ItalyWith a youth unemployment rate of 17.5%,Bologna identified the rise in the numberof NEETs (Young People Not in Education,Employment or Training) as one of the corechallenges to its economic revitalisation.#Angels4Bologna is a mentorship schemedesigned to increase the capacity of schoolgoingstudents (aged 8-16) to enter the jobmarket or become entrepreneurs. Around 3,500students would receive extra-curricular trainingfrom a broad range of private and public expertsto target a structural skills mismatch, but also togrow relationships with people in industry. Theinitiative shows how local authorities can respondto the need to develop specific local skills,supplementing knowledge and skills acquiredthrough the national education curriculum.22

Amsterdam, the NetherlandsAmsterdam has a growing population ofeducated youths who are unable to find workdespite their skills being in demand. Play2WorkEurope aims to positively disrupt traditionaldigital recruitment by providing a platformthat measures important qualities outside ofwork experience and knowledge – includingcharacter, talent and ambition – throughgaming. A further innovation is the use of moresophisticated gaming to develop skills. Jobseekers would then be linked to opportunitiesthat match their qualifications and character,reducing the potential for job seeker fatigueand helping the city reduce its 15.3% youthunemployment rate. The city hopes to expandthe platform into a Europe-wide network to tapinto a larger job market and encourage greateremployment mobility for young job entrants.Stara Zagora, BulgariaLike other eastern European cities, Stara Zagorahas the challenge of retaining talented youth in aglobal market. Over 90% of Bulgarian graduateswho emigrate never return home due to a lack oflocal employment opportunities and high youthunemployment (nearly 19%). I Succeeded in MyTown! falls into the broad category of nurturingcreative cities to retain, attract and grow localtalent. The city plans to provide financial support,directly and via a crowd-sourced platform, tolocal start-ups to not only reverse the youth braindrain, but also to incentivise young entrepreneursto locate businesses in Stara Zagora. The ideaenvisages a network that would link youngerpeople to local employment opportunities. For aneastern European nation, this proposal is novelin bringing together the municipality, privatesector and research centres to support a citywideentrepreneurship competition and providefunding and start-up support at this scale.Florence, ItalyDespite its unique heritage and touristic appeal,Florence has high vacancy rates in historic areasaround its city centre, and a shrinking artisanalindustry. The Third Millennium Urban Workshopis an idea to map vacant spaces across the cityin order to connect artisans to landlords. Thecity government plans to modify local planningand employment regulations to facilitate andencourage new business activity. 200 aspiringentrepreneurs would receive small businesssupport services and €15,000 start-up vouchersto improve work-spaces and repair buildings.Florence’s proposal builds on similar initiativeselsewhere, but its scale is ambitious, and it standsout for being municipality-driven rather than ledby an NGO or private organisation.Cardiff, United KingdomThe Welsh capital’s performance across a rangeof economic measures tends to be below averagefor the UK. Push Our Productivity aims to increasethe city’s productive capacity by 10%, andconstitutes a major effort to improve the skills ofresidents by training community connectors andtheir networks to identify small improvements,and then implement them. Most programmes toincrease productivity are led by the private sectoror focus only on a very specific demographic;the innovation of Cardiff’s proposal is to improveproductivity in the entire population through acomprehensive city-wide approach based oncitizens’ voluntary participation. It is expectedto add €1.3 billion to the local economy, whileincreasing educational and health outcomesbased on the concept of ‘aggregation ofmarginal gains’.Five Core Themes23

Five Core ThemesCivic EngagementFacilitating citizen actionAs the layer of government closest to citizens, cityauthorities are best positioned to build partnershipsand encourage greater involvement in improvingthe quality of life in cities. Cities are investing inthis opportunity. At the same time, civil societyhas played an increasingly important role in cocreatingand implementing solutions that formpart of a growing movement of citizen engagementacross Europe. Many proposals reflect this widermovement, with novel ideas to give citizens andresidents the tools to collaborate more effectivelywith each other and with government to strengthenlocal democracy, and also to unlock latent citizencapacity as a resource for solving city problems.Despite very different socio-economic contexts,Ruse, Bulgaria; Gdańsk, Poland and Oulu,Finland proposed using smartphone applicationsto enable citizens to vote on projects or proposesolutions that could then be voted on, while Athens,Greece aimed to encourage a volunteer cultureto reform local government from the bottom up.The Hague, the Netherlands suggested ways ofallowing citizens to allocate taxes by direct voting,while Berlin, Germany and Wrocław, Polandconsidered using gamification to encourage citizensto invest in democratic opportunities. Milan, Italylooked at incorporating public input to improvepublic services, while Ghent, Belgium focused onco-creation projects between citizens and localgovernment. Sponsoring start-ups to solve cityproblems in València, Spain and Messina, Italywere suggested as ways of bringing organisationsand citizens closer to local government. Umeå,Sweden proposed using open data to increase thepotential of citizens and NGOs to participate inareas of government, while Dublin, Ireland andPeterborough, United Kingdom sought to provideinfrastructure to enable participation. An approachthat went across municipal borders in Catania, Italyimagined effectively linking to neighbouring townsto share solutions and resources.A significant proportion of cities requiredsome form of resident participation to successfullycomplete city projects. Several ideas focusedspecifically on how to galvanise citizens to takeresponsibility for projects normally in the domainof local government. These tended to be localisedefforts to beautify the area, improve communitysafety or support local voices. Genoa, Italydeveloped proposals to use community brainpowerto find new functions for the former port and heavyindustrial areas with the aim of retaining youngresidents in the city, while Montpellier, France“Resident participation isnecessary to successfullydeliver ambitious city projects,involving residents to reducecosts, improving user experienceand creating an increasedsense of public ownership.”planned to use public garden improvements asa way of integrating more young people into thecity’s social life. Collaboration projects like themunicipal WebTV proposed by Botoșani, Romaniawere designed to increase citizen input in localpolitics, and Novi Sad, Serbia investigated the selfdigitisingof historical materials to promote residentawareness and the preservation of local culture.These examples confirm the growingrecognition that resident participation is necessaryto successfully deliver ambitious city projects, atthe same time as capitalising on local resources,involving residents to reduce costs, improving userexperience and creating an increased sense of publicownership of spaces and projects.Finalist proposalsGdańsk, PolandGdańsk is trying to improve public trust andinvolvement in local government and communityprojects. Democracy Accelerator is a websitethat will allow citizens to submit ideas forenhancing the city. It envisages trainingassistance, which may include offers of financialsupport or volunteered time, to increase thestrength of proposals before allowing the publicto further develop projects and ultimately tovote on their inclusion in the city budget. As anexample of co-governance, this project wouldrequire the city council to vote on the projectsproposed by citizens and subsequently workwith them to implement the most popular ideas.City employees would also receive training tobetter engage with citizens to help successfullyimplement promising solutions.The Hague, the NetherlandsThe Hague is keen to reverse growing apathytowards government and has suggested Citizensin Action – Democracy 3.0 as a tool to givecitizens power over the allocation of 2-3% oflocal taxes by allowing citizen proposals tobe subject to vote. Unlike an individual taxbreak, this idea would encourage citizens toengage with each other to influence how theircity develops. Additional revenue could begenerated through crowd-funding or crowdsourcing,further encouraging ownership andcollaboration. The capacity to implement thisproject is supported by DIGID (Digital Identity),which helps identify Dutch citizens on the Internetand is mandatory for electronic tax returns,highlighting how local governance innovationmay require national support and infrastructure.24

York, United KingdomYork believes a lack of involvement and mistrustof local government stems from residents’perceptions that they are not empowered topartake in addressing the issues faced by thecity. GeniUS! Right to Solve proposes to addressthis by enabling citizens to play a pro-activerole in identifying and solving city problems.Procurement would also be opened up, allowingcitizens to co-create solutions. Training wouldfurther increase the potential for citizens toengage with the platform and the government.Austerity measures have significantly reducedthe council’s budget, increasing the challenge offinancing city projects. Apart from facilitating amore direct council-citizen relationship to reversedependency, this scheme aims to speed up andreduce the cost of procurement.Brno, Czech RepublicBrno wants to increase real and perceivedsafety levels in its large-scale housing estates bytransforming their role to promote social cohesionand inclusivity of neighbourhoods across thecity. This bottom-up crime prevention approach isdesigned to train local residents living on at-riskestates, extending community policing initiativesfound elsewhere. Systematically trainingconcierges who are already embedded in localcommunities to more capably respond to andmanage risks sets up the opportunity for this SafeAddress programme to rebrand the community ina way that could result in a decrease in insurancepremiums while increasing the desirability ofthe area. Concierges who are familiar withthe neighbourhood are more likely to properlyinterpret risk, increasing their effectiveness.Five Core ThemesSofia, BulgariaThe city government of Sofia is keen to bringcolour and beauty to the large-scale post-World War II residential blocks that define itspoor quality public spaces. DIY Sofia wouldencourage residents to take ownership of theseefforts by mobilising them to identify need andthen to improve areas. Use of a van equippedwith tools for the community to use to implementcivic beautification projects would be supportedby access to artists and experts. The innovationaims to affect how people relate to their spacesand to each other, reducing urban isolation,increasing communication and trust betweenresidents and the municipality, and improving theurban environment for the community. This wouldbe achieved partly by collaborating with existinglocal initiatives, like neighbourhood associationsand community centres, and by using events toredefine public space.25

Five Core ThemesSocial InclusionBuilding trust and valueAmongst all 155 submissions, the most pervasiveambition was to increase the capacity of individualsor communities that are socially excluded toparticipate in society at the same level as everyoneelse. These innovations generally target ‘at-risk’groups – for example, elderly citizens, individualssuffering from mental health disorders, highaccessibility needs or loneliness – to encourage themto remain an active part of society. Projects rangefrom balancing resources like housing, energy ordental care, to re-habilitating former drug users,integrating migrants or staging able-bodied anddisabled sports events. These initiatives suggest thatlocal governments in Europe have recognised theneed to reduce the negative social and economicimpact of inequality and exclusion in order tocreate strong and resilient communities. Nationalgovernments are not well-equipped to respondto these, often complex, local challenges. Citygovernments, however, are trying to turn areas ofweakness into strengths by building connections toalienated groups and isolated individuals.Utrecht, the Netherlands recognised that foreignlanguage speakers from migrant communities facea range of prejudices, and proposed measures topromote language diversity as a valuable resource,while Varna, Bulgaria suggested introducinglife-long learning opportunities. Valladolid, Spainsuggested that greater inclusivity might be promotedby crowd-sourcing interpreters to make publictexts more accessible, while Braga, Portugal aimedto reduce isolation and increase employabilityfor residents with dental conditions by providingfree dental care. To reduce the disadvantagesto children from deprived homes with minimaladult supervision, Mannheim, Germany proposed‘smart bags’ containing everything required tomeaningfully participate at school. Cluj-Napoca,Romania proposed to make public spaces feel saferfor children to increase accessibility. Beyond school,Malmö, Sweden planned to target inequalities inhealth – life expectancy can differ by up to 6.5years across the city. Warsaw, Poland wanted tomake cities more accessible to blind residents, whileBarcelona, Spain sought to strengthen connectionsboth within and to their ageing population.Reflecting the general trend of an ageingEurope, the European Mayors Challenge hasprovided concrete evidence that municipalgovernments have deep concerns for the wellbeingof large elderly populations. Łódź, Polandand Sintra, Portugal came up with fresh ideas onhow to use retired residents’ skills to train youngerpeople. Sunderland, United Kingdom co-creatednew products that enable seniors to retain anindependent lifestyle, and Helsingborg, Swedendeveloped ways of keeping its elders active and“Local governments haverecognised the need to reduceinequality and exclusion inorder to create strong andresilient communities.”involved in the community. Gelsenkirchen,Germany imagined neighbourhood-levelconnecters, residents who would actively providelinks between the young and the old, and toimmigrant communities. Amersfoort, theNetherlands and Liverpool, United Kingdomsuggested using technology to connect peoplestruggling with loneliness, while Cascais, Portugalproposed that previously employed people could beeasily re-integrated into the job market by using anapp that would keep them socially active with dailytasks.Several cities proposed ideas based on theemerging concept of the collaborative or sharingeconomy, where the city provides a platform ornetwork for a range of services or resources that canbe shared. This marks a societal shift away fromindividual ownership and towards a shared modelof consumption. These developments have beenfacilitated by the rise of the Internet and mobiletechnologies, which make it easier for people tobuy, trade, rent, share or simply give away goodsand services. While numerous initiatives areassociated with transport-share schemes, manyothers focus on the sharing of social capital toencourage collaboration, or even on making cityassets available to the public when not in use. Forexample, Latina, Italy; Sabadell, Spain and Paris,France developed schemes to share electric bicyclesand electric vehicles, while Venice, Italy focused onsharing electric boats. Kirklees, United Kingdomconceived a platform to broadly share municipaland private resources, while Copenhagen, Denmarkand Antwerp, Belgium suggested investing inopen data systems that would provide access toinformation that could improve the development ofcity services.26

Five Core Themes27

Five Core ThemesHealth and Well-beingAiding healthy livingCities across Europe are increasingly concernedthat the health and well-being of their residents doesnot live up to what might fairly be expected of oneof the most economically advanced regions of theworld. A number of proposals focused on promotingimprovements in physical and mental health toenable a better quality of life and – at the same time– reduce healthcare costs and increase productivity.Cities like Saint-Étienne, France wantedto stimulate demand for exercise by installinginfrastructure to support more active lifestyles.Sheffield, United Kingdom proposed distributingfree activity-monitoring devices and runningmass events with prizes to encourage walking andsocial cohesion. Lyon, France planned to providepersonalised walking routes via a website, whileLarissa, Greece proposed using NFC (near-field“Improvements in physicaland mental health enable abetter quality of life, reducehealthcare costs and increaseproductivity.”communication) technology to track and developbetter walking routes. Brighton & Hove, UnitedKingdom even suggested a smartphone applicationthat could be used to avoid mental health problemsby encouraging positive behavioural changesin at-risk people. A slightly different approachto improving happiness was Limassol, Cyprus’sMinistry of Laughter, a dedicated department thatwould increase well-being by helping people tolaugh more.Prevailing concerns about obesity, increasinglevels of diabetes and a lack of access to healthyfood is reflected in a series of proposals for growyour-ownschemes and partnerships with localfarms to increase access to affordable and healthyfood. Programmes often featured an educationalcomponent that would increase the uptake ofhealthy menus or improved eating habits. Coimbra,Portugal planned to teach children how to eat wellin social, family-style environments, while Gdynia,Poland wanted to use experimental gardens to helpchildren develop a taste for fresh produce. Otherideas to promote the benefits of a healthy diet wereput forward by San Sebastián, Spain and Leicester,United Kingdom, which suggested ways of tacklingfood security through local growing which – as theplans put forward by Alicante, Spain confirmed –could help grow the local economy.Several cities proposed measures that wouldfocus on the requirements of individuals withspecial needs. This would save lives while alsosaving money by reducing the cost burden onwelfare services. Elche, Spain presented an ideaof training 50% of the population in cardiopulmonaryresuscitation to reduce the risk of dyingfrom cardiac arrest outside hospitals. Bruges,Belgium and Edinburgh, United Kingdom madeplans to use technology and citizen support to maketheir cities dementia-friendly by helping patientsnavigate the city. Helsinki, Finland sought to allowpsychiatric patients to fill in their own ‘transferticket’ when transferring to out-based care. Thiswould give patients more control over an oftendifficult process.Finalist proposalsBristol, United KingdomBristol identified a lack of access to quality foodas a major source of inequality, and is concernedabout the consequences of increasedobesity in poorer areas. The Learn, Grow, EatRevolution proposes encouraging local foodproduction and the establishment of healthyfood shops at existing community project sites,and also new food outlets and pop-up shops indeprived areas. Local growing decreases ‘foodmiles’, reducing carbon emissions and alsoincreasing the number of people who eat foodgrown by themselves or by people they know.This feeds into plans to partner with local chefsand school growing projects to teach residentshow to cook healthier meals. While someelements of the idea are fairly established inother cities, the scale and complexity proposedin Bristol would increase the innovativeness ofthis comprehensive farm-to-fork programme.London, United KingdomHalf of Londoners are clinically obese andthe next generation is showing signs thatthe trend will worsen. This will likely increase therisk of Type-2 diabetes, and place additionalstrain on an already stretched healthcaresystem. London Lives is a home-based careprogramme that proposes using technologyalready available in people’s homes to developa hyper-local understanding of chronic andat-risk patients, including children. This willreduce the cost of treating patients and reducethe likelihood that the technology implementedwill become obsolete. It will also targetprevention and use data collection to improvethe quality of treatment. An open sourceplatform is expected to make it easier to expandthe programme to include other at-risk groupsin future. While many cities have establisheddiabetes prevention programmes that workwith the families of diabetes sufferers, few havestarted to comprehensively integrate thesenew technologies into municipal healthcarestrategies at the scale that London proposes.28

Five Core Themes29

Five Core ThemesEnvironmentSecuring the futureSome European cities have pioneered sustainablesolutions to planning, transport and energy, oftendoing more than their respective nation-statesto achieve a greener future. Despite the factthat cities consume a major percentage of worldenergy and contribute heavily to pollution, it isat the metropolitan level that more direct actioncan be taken to have an immediate impact on theenvironment, reduce risks and combat climatechange. Consequently, it is city governments –many of them across Europe – that have led theway in introducing programmes to encouragereduced consumer energy consumption,investment in smart grids to enforce efficiencies,the implementation of green forms of transportand the retrofitting of buildings with sustainablematerials and technologies. While it is politicallydifficult for national governments to introducemeasures required to combat climate change,many cities have managed to aggressivelyimplement local programmes.In this vein, Groningen, the Netherlandsproposed changing consumer behaviour throughsmart grids, Boulogne-Billancourt, Francepromoted smart metering and community votingon energy policies, while Brest, France plannedto co-design an interface with citizens to trackindividual carbon emissions and to incentivisebehavioural change. Bilbao, Spain even suggestedthat energy ‘savings’ may be helpful in dealingwith fuel poverty. Torrejón de Ardoz andMataró, Spain looked at new low-energy lightingtechnologies but also targeted inefficient housingtypologies, much like Hamburg, Germany’splans to deal with single tenement houses, or theproposal to restore heritage buildings in Siracusa,Italy using sustainable materials.Other cities focused less on reducing energy useand more on generating and consuming it in moresustainable ways. Cities concentrated on variousrenewable energy sources, with ideas that mostlyfocused on collecting or recycling energy thatwould otherwise be wasted. Birmingham, UnitedKingdom and Palma de Mallorca, Spain plannedto reuse waste to generate electricity, while“Despite the fact that citiescontribute heavily to pollution,it is at the metropolitan scalethat more direct action can betaken to have an immediateimpact on the environment.”Stockholm, Sweden sought to use resident biowasteto produce biochar for carbon sequestration.Niš, Serbia developed plans to use concentratedsolar power to generate municipal savings thatcould be reallocated toward social investment.Málaga, Spain promoted greening its existingpublic transport system, while Kraków, Polandconsidered personalised incentives and a unifiedpayment system to entice more people to usepublic transport. All these initiatives haveclear environmental benefits and would alsoimprove residents’ health and promote economicproductivity.Tallinn, Estonia’s proposed extension to itsexisting free public transport for residents is anattempt to get residents to abandon cars, not justto improve air quality but also to reinvigorate thecity centre, while Ljubljana, Slovenia's proposedeffort to use park-and-ride facilities to keep motorvehicles away would not only reduce congestionand pollution, but also to free up public space.Burgos, Spain addressed the question ofsustainable living by parking private cars undera green park with non-motorised transport paths,while Guimarães, Portugal proposed a green,non-motorised transport path to link nine villagestogether, strengthening economic ties and socialcohesion to neighbours beyond municipal borders.Ancona, Italy and Frederiksberg, Denmarkproposed increasing livability in their cities bycreating new green recreation spaces as buffersagainst environmental shocks; a false coastalisland to reduce landslide risk and city-widedeployment of ground level reservoirs to protectagainst floods. Expanding non-motorisedtransport is central to most cities’ sustainabilityplans too: Bournemouth, United Kingdom andBurgas, Bulgaria sought to use radio-frequencyidentification (RFID) technology to alert motoriststo the presence of cyclists, disabled pedestriansand children.30

Finalist proposalsSchaerbeek, BelgiumGreenovate plans to make it easier for ownersto recognise how heat-inefficient their buildingsare by using drones and cars equipped withthermal cameras to map the energy efficiencyof buildings. Other cities have also started usingthermal mapping as a way to identify heatlosses and ensure more targeted retrofittinginterventions. What makes Shaerbeek’s ideainnovative is this combination of comprehensive3D thermal mapping with a free online servicethat provides detailed data and personalisedconsultations to homeowners which willaccelerate the process of energy retrofitting in thecity. Tax incentives will support the installation ofotherwise expensive energy reduction measures.Madrid, SpainE+ Subterra is an idea that would turn theSpanish capital into a specialist in the area ofharvesting energy from underground resources,effectively turning the need for sustainability intoa business case. This includes tapping into naturalgeothermal resources, but also investigatingthe potential to exploit the underground builtenvironment. The Mediterranean city cites thepossibility of recycling hot air from subways orgenerating hydroelectricity from water supplyand sewage flows. Many cities have similarprogrammes focused on one particular type ofunderground energy. Madrid’s innovation aims tobreak down barriers related to the exploration ofthis form of renewable energy by investigating itsbroader potential.Lisbon, PortugalLisbon has developed plans to harvestunexploited energy, while reducing its citizens’reliance on motorised private transport and theassociated congestion. Movement by Energyis envisaged to capture kinetic energy fromcar road ramps to power assisted walkwaysand electric bikes, making the hilly city moreaccessible to cyclists and pedestrians. Lisbon’sinnovation combines various mobility solutions ata currently untested scale with a unique financingscheme sustained by the energy savingsgenerated from ‘recycling’. The idea highlightshow cities are seeking to pro-actively reconfigurethe built environment to not only encourageenvironmental savings, but to also reduce journeytimes.Kraków, PolandThe city is keen to encourage sustainable mobilityby making public transport the mode of choice.Smart Urban Mobility Services is an integratedapplication that would allow registered usersto not only plot public transport routes, but toalso estimate the savings, as well as health andfitness gains from walking or cycling part of thejourney, and the contribution toward cleaner cityair created by the resultant reduction in carbonemissions. This plan is expected to improve thecommuting experience while generating greatercity revenues from public transport. The city isinnovating on top of existing transport planningapplications and contactless smartcard systemsto incentivise public transport by incorporatingpayment options with loyalty points generatedthrough green savings.Five Core Themes31

WinnersFive cities – Barcelona, Athens, Kirklees,Stockholm, Warsaw – were rewarded for puttingforward innovative ideas and visions that, accordingto the jury members, could be implemented, wouldhave a significant impact and could potentially betransferred to other cities in Europe or across theworld. The judges were impressed by how relativelysimple initiatives could have transformative effectson the way governments and people connect,with measurable impacts on the daily lives ofurban dwellers who share common problems.The relatively small Metropolitan Borough ofKirklees, United Kingdom aimed to harness thepotential capacity of the shared economy to buildsocial cohesion, while the historic yet fragile cityof Athens, Greece wanted to use collaborativeengagement to address the negative socialconsequences of reduced budgets and governmentinefficiency. Stockholm, Sweden targeted thechallenges of climate change, suggesting newtechniques for generating green energy. BothBarcelona, Spain, the winner of the Grand Prize,and Warsaw, Poland focused on at-risk groups,proposing innovative approaches to improvingquality of life for, respectively, the elderly andthe blind.32

33BrnoSofiaKrakówWarsawAthensLisbonBristolLondonBolognaCardiffFlorenceKirkleesStockholmThe HagueAmsterdamStara ZagoraBarcelonaSchaerbeekYorkGdanskMadridNišUmeåLyonRomeOuluCaenRuseLeónMalmöMilanParisVarnaPortoBrestGhentLiègeBragaPratoParlaElcheCádizHalleHerneKaunasVeronaBerlinRijekaVeniceAmiensTiranaBilbaoDublinKošiceBrugesBurgasAnconaMurciaNantesRennesSintraLatinaGenoaMataróBurgosGdyniaChaniaCascaisFerraraBergamoAntwerpWrocławLeipzigUtrechtCoimbraTallinnHamburgColognePalermoGliwiceMessinaCataniaLarissaTamperePlovdivGranadaNovi SadEnschedeSiracusaSabadellAlicanteBotoșaniLausanneBrusselsIoanninaZaragozaHelsinkiDortmundValènciaMulhouseGrenobleMannheimLimassolAcharnesPlymouthNewcastleCambridgeTarragonaCharleroiBydgoszczLjubljanaGroningenTrondheimLiverpoolEdinburghSheffieldBaia MareRotterdamSantanderGuimarãesLeicesterBlackpoolSunderlandNottinghamLüleburgazBratislavaCopenhagenValladolidBirminghamMaastrichtHelsingborgBournemouthCluj-NapocaSouthamptonMontpellierPeterboroughSaint-ÉtienneFrederiksbergGelsenkirchenSan SebastiánVitoria-GasteizDabrowa GórniczaBrighton & HovePalma de MallorcaTorrejón de ArdozKingston-upon-HullBoulogne-BillancourtOdivelasManchesterAmersfoorts-HertogenboschŁódzPoznanMalagaParticipating citiesWinnerFinalistParticipant

WinnersBarcelonaGrand Prize Winner1,620,243Population (2012)0.27%Population growth per annum(2009-2012)€22,720GDP per capita (2013)0.49%Annual GDP growth (2003-2013)Winning proposalSpanish andCatalanOfficial languagesIndirectlyelected mayor(four-year term)Metropolitan governanceVincles BCN: building a social medianetwork to support senior citizensBarcelona, Spain estimates that one in four of itscitizens will be over 65 by 2040. The citybelieves that dependence on fragile informalnetworks results in an increasingly isolatedageing population. This not only reduces qualityof life, but also creates a healthcare burden:lonely individuals are more likely to develophealth complications. Vincles BCN: CollaborativeCare Networks for Better Ageing aims to use acustomised social media application on webenabledtablet computers to more tightly connectthe senior population. Vincles means ‘social ties’in Catalan – ties to family, caregivers, neighbours.While many existing initiatives across Europefocus on tapping into local support networks inorder to reduce the isolation of the elderly,Vincles adds to this by providing a dedicated citywideplatform that facilitates the activation ofthese existing networks in a way that significantlyincreases the well-being of – and support for –both the person being cared for and their carers.By connecting older citizens to informal andformal caregivers at scale, the project has thepotential to support other vulnerable individuals,and also to be exported to other cities.The capital of Catalonia and Spain’s second city,Barcelona is internationally recognised for itsdynamic and forward-looking governance, whichhas pioneered innovation since the mid-1980s.Despite being hit by the recent economic crisis, thecity has, over the last three decades, transformedits economy into one of Europe’s most productive,capable of attracting foreign direct investment. Ithas also actively promoted entrepreneurship andtourism. In 2014, it became the first EuropeanCapital of Innovation.VisionAccording to Josep Mari, Barcelona’s Directorof Social Innovation Projects, when BloombergPhilanthropies launched the European MayorsChallenge, the city was already exploring thepotential use of Vincles to build a stronger carenetwork for its ageing population. Barcelonabelieves isolation is a fertile breeding ground forpoor health, and plans to use Vincles to distributehealthcare across the city’s population, thusreducing some of the associated costs of caringfor the aged. With its human-centred approach,the social initiative stood out as a project that“puts people at the centre of technology-basedinnovation,” by creating care networks made up ofinformal and formal caregivers for the elderly. Itwas also recognised that Vincles had the potentialto encourage synergies between public health andsocial service units, effectively networking localgovernment departments that frequently operate inisolation.ImpactCurrently, 20% of Barcelona’s population isover 65 years old. As people age, their socialconnections weaken, as peers pass away and asmobility decreases. Vincles aims to make socialnetworks more robust by connecting elderly peopleto individuals who are physically close to them, likefamily members and neighbourhood volunteers.It also uses the same tablet-based platform (whichalso supports video calling) for professional care,thus reducing the burden on walk-in facilities andproviding more regular monitoring. Evidenceshows that loneliness, often related to isolation,increases the likelihood of developing healthcomplications, including depression, dementia andobesity. Sharing care of the elderly across familymembers and community members increases thepotential for contact.ImplementationBarcelona’s project is designed to keep costs downby negotiating bulk discounts with tablet providersand encouraging neighbours to share Wi-Fi. Thecity also plans to identify individuals who findadopting technology difficult and link them toformal and community-based systems of support,which might include ‘second-degree access’ (e.g.going online with a relative). The Vincles appwill be available to anyone who requires it but theprogramme targets citizens over 65 who live alone.It will take three years of usability testing andpiloting before Vincles scales up to support 20,000citizens with tablets and free connectivity.TransferabilityThe challenges associated with an ageingpopulation extend far beyond Barcelona. ManyEuropean countries are ‘getting older’ as birth ratesdecline and people live longer. In Europe, fertilityrates are generally below the replacement rate, andthere is an insufficient supply of migrant workers –meaning that the dependency ratio across Europeis on the rise. In Spain, it is projected that by 2050every 10 taxpayers will support nine economicallyinactive seniors. This places enormous strain onfunding welfare benefits, particularly pensionsand health care, threatening their very viability.To encourage other cities to engage with theseproblems, Barcelona will license Vincles and offerits services to national and international municipalgovernments.34

Ageing population in numbersOver 300,000 residents are 65+ (20%);88,000 live alone.Over 100,000 residents are 80+.One in four of Barcelona's citizens will be over65 by 2040.By 2050, Spain will have the fourth highestpercentage (38%) of seniors globally.Interview with Josep Mari, Directorof Social Innovation Projects, City ofBarcelonaQ Why did you enter the Mayors Challenge?A We were looking for opportunities to launchsocial innovation projects already underdevelopment in the city.Q Were there any other ideas?A Yes, a project aimed at ensuring localcitizens maintain their identity, local customsand habits despite the growth of masstourism in the city.Q Most beneficial aspect of the challenge?A Being encouraged to not only stretch ouridea, but also to explain it clearly andconcisely with qualitative data.Q If you hadn’t won?A We planned to go ahead regardless. Theprize allows us to go bigger and faster,while the international recognition is asignificant encouragement.Q Impact on your city after five years?A We’re building infrastructure in the hopethat it’ll pave the way to a more connectedcitizenry. The challenge is to innovatetogether as one city government bythinking about proposals that go acrossdepartmental structures.Winners35

WinnersAthens664,046Population (2012)-1.58%Population growth per annum(2002-2012)€18,770GDP per capita (2013)-0.92%Annual GDP growth (2003-2013)Winning proposalGreekOfficial languageDirectlyelected mayor(five-year term)Metropolitan governancesynAthina: changing governmentfrom the bottom up by encouraginga volunteer culturesynAthina is an initiative aimed at the entirecity. Austerity measures hit Greece harderthan any other European nation, significantlyreducing the operational capacity of Athens.SynAthina is supported by a central municipalplatform and a new department that will promotesocial innovation. The initiative supports andencourages community and business-sponsoredprojects, while aiming to reduce the distancebetween citizens and government throughcitizen participation in problem-solving. Opendata is expected to facilitate transparency andprovide tangible measurements of the project’ssuccess, increasing residents’ levels of trust. As isthe case with many applicant cities, discussionsare already being developed to export thetechnology to other European cities, highlightinga desire to not only participate in city innovation,but profit from it too.Six years of GDP contraction has seen Greece’seconomy shrink by almost a quarter, but a recordtourist season in 2014 helped push the countryback into the black. During this time, Greecehas undertaken the biggest government debtrestructuring in history, with bailouts far largerthan annual GDP. With a high debt-to-GDP ratioand unemployment rate, especially amongst theyouth who represent significant lost potential,Greece is unable to fund many projects at anational or local level. Health care budgets, forexample, have been reduced by 40% as part ofausterity measures. In this environment, regularprotests have shown a growing mistrust betweencitizens and government; Greeks are the most likelyin Europe to believe their government is corrupt.VisionIn this environment, synAthina is an attempt torebuild Europe’s oldest capital city from the bottomup by employing citizen engagement as a lever forpromoting government transparency and reform.The project is supported by a website, whichallows citizens to list (on a map) projects aimedat improving the quality of city life in categoriesranging from urban improvements to education,culture and children. A matchmaking service linksvolunteers and funders, which can be made up ofcitizens, NGOs or private businesses. However,this masks the big steps Athens has had to takepolitically. Many of the informal activities, likegardening abandoned plots or street exchangebazaars, are technically illegal, and Athens is usingthe suggestions as feedback to rewrite a “complexsystem of administrative obstacles that repeatedlyinhibits citizens”. By providing official recognitionto community efforts, no matter how small, themunicipality wants to build a relationship of trustbetween local government and citizens whilefostering volunteerism.ImpactAthens hopes the project will give visibility andcoordination to volunteer efforts as the capitalpositions itself to benefit from the potential ofco-created solutions. Amalia Zepou, an activistturned-civil-servant,has been championing theproject for more than a year. Her inclusion inthe city’s government already signals a desire toexperiment with new forms of governance and anopenness to partner with citizens.ImplementationAthens has already worked to create a networkof activists operating within the city, and themunicipality plans to increase the sustainabilityof the project by hiring external experts to traincity staff and by involving city officials morebroadly. A pilot phase has shown some positiveresults and, in the future, open data will be usedto increase transparency by allowing citizensto measure the success of specific projects. Thecreation of a department for civil society furtherhighlights the municipality’s desire to have citizensdrive government innovation. In doing so, localgovernment wants to connect with citizens, butZepou believes that Athens also benefited from“being part of, and seeing itself as equal to, a groupof other cities from other European countries.”TransferabilitysynAthina contributes to resolving the challenge ofinadequate operational capacity at the municipallevel, particularly when it comes to responding tothe smaller scale day-to-day needs of its citizensin an open and transparent way. The perceiveddistance between citizens and government is aproblem affecting many European cities, as isthe need to find alternative methods to fund localprojects and services. However, the feedbackloop of using citizen proposals to impact by-laws,regulation and policy is relatively rare and suggestsopportunities to involve citizens in local governancein ways that go beyond initiatives to expand voting.36

Volunteering in numbersOnly 13% of Greek citizens trust public institutionswhile 98% consider corruption a major problemand take government inefficiency as a given.Transparency International ranks Greece lowestin the EU on its Corruption Barometer; onlyUkraine is ranked lower in Europe.Greece (along with Bulgaria, Italy and Lithuania)has the EU’s lowest volunteering rate.Volunteering contributes less than 0.1% to GDP inGreece.The Athens 2004 Olympics attracted 45,000volunteers.Interview with Amalia Zepou, AthensDeputy Mayor for Civil SocietyQ Why did you enter the Mayors Challenge?A The competition coincided with a strategyto use Cities of Service to encouragevolunteerism because it is easier for Atheniansto accept something that has already beendone abroad and is recognised.Q Were there any other ideas?A We asked members of our team for ideas, themost interesting of which were incorporatedinto synAthina.Q Most beneficial aspect of the challenge?A It gave us the tools to develop a clearlythought-out and robust application, andalso to see Athens as equal to so many otherEuropean cities and part of providing asolution.Q If you hadn’t won?A The idea would continue to focus on smallscale sponsorships; the prize money allows forincreasing the impact by expanding the team.The application gave us the tools...we knew that even if we didn’t win, thiswould work.Q Impact on your city after five years?A Contributing and sharing makes citizens feelcloser to other Europeans... Not closer to thegovernment maybe, but closer to the othercitizens from other countries. That is veryimportant to reinforce their European identity.Winners37

WinnersKirklees425,517Population (2012)0.95%Population growth per annum(2001-2012)€23,160GDP per capita (2013)1.26%Annual GDP growth (2003-2013)Winning proposalEnglishOfficial languageIndirectlyelected mayor(one-year term)Metropolitan governanceComoodle: a municipal platformto collaboratively share public andprivate resourcesComoodle is a comprehensive platform designedto disrupt the traditional economy in Kirklees,United Kingdom by allowing private, municipaland NGO assets and skills to be shared. Thescheme is an extension of a wider sharedeconomy movement. It includes various privatesector and community-based initiatives, andrepositions the local authority as a facilitatorrather than simply as a provider of services.Collaborative consumption is imagined as a wayof making better use of municipal resources, andencouraging citizens and businesses to solvelocal problems, reducing demand on increasinglylimited tax resources.The UK government wants to become a leader inthe sharing economy and has recently launcheda review to better understand how to be part ofa booming market. The annual global sharingeconomy is expected to grow from €12 billionin 2014 to €300 billion by 2025. Initiatives likeAirbnb, Uber and Hailo have caused controversybecause of their disruptive impact on traditionaloperating systems. Governments have tried toupdate policy to either legalise or ban sharingservices while several countries have left it to thecourts to decide. Unlike French and German cities,UK local governments have generally chosen notto oppose ride and house-sharing services, allowingopportunities for the sharing economy to grow.VisionKirklees is a metropolitan borough in the northof England made up of three towns and severalvillages. The city council intends to be oneof the first urban areas in the UK to build acomprehensive public sharing platform. Accordingto Kirklees’ Innovation Hub Project Officer DuggsCarre, “We are, as an authority, quite ambitious.”Being a winner alongside major European citiesconfirms that smaller towns have an innovationrole to play, too. Kirklees believes that a singlemunicipal platform will not only help to sharesurplus public and private resources, but will alsobuild a sense of community. For the platform tosucceed, it “needs to be everybody sharing andputting some equity in,” says Cath Bottomley, Headof Area Working and Safety, Kirklees Council.ImpactFor Kirklees, Comoodle will encourage citizensto use public assets like tools or buildings tolook after and improve public spaces or providecommunity support services that are increasinglyoutside budget capacity. Carre says, “We knewwe were trying to do something quite brave anddifferent. It’s quite difficult to know what impactit’s ultimately going to have.” A collaborativeconsumption platform at a municipal level mayhelp citizens and businesses to tap into the benefitsof agglomeration more easily, whilst simultaneouslytesting an economic model that may limit the needto accumulate. Carre believes that the disruptivequalities of Comoodle will ultimately benefittraditional businesses by increasing demand fortheir services.ImplementationIt will take three years to have full city coveragefor Comoodle. Kirklees will provide a criticalmass of physical resources, while citizens, NGOsand businesses will also need to contribute these,plus their time and/or skills. A time-bank allowsopportunities for trade through virtual paymentin instances where services or assets cannot beprocured or provided for free. While user trustand reputation will limit abuse, Kirklees is alsoengaging with new partners to overcome insuranceand regulatory issues. However, the team struggledmost with a non-technical aspect of implementation:branding. Kirklees outsourced the branding to anagency that came up with the name and helpedspeed up the process. Carre says the name thecouncil came up with, ‘Kirklees Shares’ “wasn’ta strong enough brand to sell to the public orultimately internationally which is where we wantthis to go.”TransferabilityThe Mayor of Kirklees has already spokento organisations like Airbnb, who are keen tounderstand how a public sharing platform mightinfluence the collaborative economy. Kirkleeshas developed a non-UK prototype, aimed atdemonstrating its global potential, and plans toengage with several European cities in the nearfuture to investigate how to effectively exportComoodle. There is potential to scale up Comoodlefor neighbouring cities, creating a significantopportunity for collaborative consumption in theregion and beyond. If successful this would notonly disrupt traditional business models but alsopositively impact how cities work.38

Sharing economy in numbersUK sharing economy: €0.7 billion (2014).Global sharing economy: €12 billion (2014),but could reach €300 billion by 2025.Interview with Duggs Carre,Innovation Hub Project Officer,Kirklees Council and Cath Bottomley,Head of Area Working and Safety,Kirklees CouncilWinnersThe UK sharing economy is expected to reach50% market share in holiday accommodationand car rental by 2025.In the UK, the average car sits unused for 23hours a day and a power drill is used for anestimated 12 to 13 minutes over its entirelifetime.Q Most beneficial aspect of the challenge?A Our coach encouraged us to focus more onthe problem and less on the [technological]solution, which helped us respond to whatpeople want and how we connect people.Q If you hadn’t won?A We included the project in our budget beforewe knew we’d won; we’d put the time andeffort into developing the Comoodle brandand knew we wanted to use it.Q Impact on your city after five years?A We’ll be more of a facilitator than a provider.The residents of Kirklees – supported byshared stuff, spaces and skills – will have moredirection about what happens on their streetsand housing estates. The Borough Council willbe less distant: I’d like to think in five years timeif somebody has an idea they’ll say, “I shouldgo and speak to the council; I’m sure they’ll beable to help.”39

WinnersStockholm881,235Population (2012)1.92%Population growth per annum(2004-2013)€51,560GDP per capita (2013)3.2%Annual GDP growth (2003-2013)Winning proposalSwedishOfficial languageIndirectlyelected mayor(four-year term)Metropolitan governanceGrow Stockholm: converting citizenbio-waste into biochar to remove CO 2The Biochar Project developed by Stockholm,Sweden aims to reduce carbon emissionsby enabling citizens to be part of carbonsequestration (CO 2‘removal’). Residents canprovide plant waste for the city to producebiochar – a stable, solid charcoal product, richin carbon which can endure in soil for thousandsof years – which encourages plant growth byenhancing the soil’s capacity to retain waterand nutrients. An e-service allows citizens tocalculate how much biochar they need to usein their soil to ‘offset’ their carbon footprint –impacting positively on behaviour. A municipalbiochar facility will add to the Swedish capital’sexpanding waste and recycling capacity. Whilethere are many examples of biochar use acrossEurope, Stockholm’s proposed use of biocharfor its urban storm water purification andmanagement system appears to be unique,as does its large-scale collaboration betweenlocal authorities and citizens in the generationof the product.Sweden has already reached its EU 2020 target forrenewable energy and is also on track to achieve thegreenhouse gas 2020 reduction target. Stockholm’sVision 2030 is directed at becoming entirely fossilfuel-free, and being the green capital of the worldby 2050. During the 1950s, the city was heavilydependent on fossil fuels and air pollution was high.Since then, strategic planning has been put in placeto simultaneously improve the city’s environmentalperformance and help the city transition into alow-carbon economy. This plan has been supportedby stringent new building codes and retrofittingstandards. The availability of new technology,coupled with the willingness of the business andresidential communities to become early adopters,increases opportunities for green innovation in thecity.VisionStockholm’s local government wants to change thecity’s ecological footprint by revitalising an ancientbut effective technology. The city plans to collectbio-waste from residents to produce biochar, whichcan then be used in public and private gardens.Biochar is an organic substance produced fromplant waste, which can be used to increase plantgrowth, sequester carbon and purify storm waterrun-off. The process will have positive side effects:a by-product of the biochar production process issynthesis gas, which will be used to generate energyfor the city’s district heating system.ImpactAssuming that the waste collection and distributionsystems remain carbon neutral, Stockholm believesthat every tonne of biochar will sequester 3.6 tonnesof CO 2. The local government will weigh outputto build a very public and visible evidence base forhow such innovations can promote greener living.Malin Parmander, the city’s International AffairsOfficer, believes the project will further increasecitizens’ awareness of climate change issues, andalso increase happiness. City surveys show thateight in 10 residents desire to be more active in thefight against climate change, and this project plansto expand e-services, allowing citizens to calculatehow much biochar needs to be produced to ‘offset’personal emissions, such as going on holiday orchoosing to drive to work. This helps increase thesense of tangibility for individual citizen action.ImplementationStockholm already has significant greeninfrastructure in place and is in the process ofdeveloping a municipal eco-plant for recycling andwaste; a biochar facility will be added to this. Thefacility will be partly funded by selling biochar (foruse in soil production) and excess gas (to producebio-fuel). To promote urban farming, the city willprovide professional advice and start-up gardeningkits to citizens who provide bio-waste.TransferabilityMany cities may not have the infrastructure tosupport a city-wide biochar project; however, it isfairly easy to develop small-scale projects. This mayhelp to overcome the trend of richer cities investingmore in being green than poorer ones. Recognisingthe difficulty of measuring the local benefits ofgreen projects, Stockholm is eager to export thebiochar scheme to other cities to raise globalawareness of the need for every city to contribute toreducing the risks associated with climate change.40

Green economy in numbersGlobal market for green goods and servicescurrently estimated at €5 trillion.The city expects using biochar in plant bedswill increase plant growth by up to 30% inthe Swedish climate and up to 200% in morefavourable conditions.One tonne of biochar is expected to sequester3.6 tonnes of carbon dioxide.Interview with Malin Parmander,International Affairs Officer, Cityof StockholmQ Why did you enter the Mayors Challenge?A It’s part of the City Visibility Strategy to applyto good, strategic competitions or awards –and hopefully win – gaining profile as a greenleader.Q Were there any other ideas?A Yes, there were four other projects to choosefrom, three of which have now been or are inthe process of being implemented.Q If you hadn’t won?A We would have funded the project as a city,however, on a smaller scale.Q Impact on your city after five years?A Stockholm will be greener and healthier; a citywhere more citizens are engaged with climatechange issues.WinnersQ Most beneficial aspect of the challenge?A Hearing other cities’ ideas and winning aninternational award helps persuade localpoliticians of the importance of thinkingglobally.41

WinnersWarsaw1,715,500Population (2012)0.08%Population growth per annum(2003-2012)€26,100GDP per capita (2013)4.54%Annual GDP growth (2003-2013)Winning proposalPolishOfficial languageDirectlyelected mayor(four-year term)Metropolitan governanceVirtual Warsaw: giving the visuallyimpaired greater access to the cityVirtual Warsaw aims to give the visually impairedgreater freedom of movement across the city,particularly in the use of public transport andpublic facilities. Thousands of Bluetooth LowEnergy (BLE) beacons will be installed aroundthe Polish capital to provide indoor and outdoormicro-navigation by communicating locationdata to smartphones. Using technology toimprove universal access at an individual levelhighlights the city’s capacity to make uniformpublic transport more specific to the needs ofits users. This freedom of movement is designedto reduce unemployment amongst the city’sblind population, currently at 81%. Warsawwill provide an application program interface(APIs make it easier for technologies to ‘talk’ toeach other) to increase the potential for furtherinnovation by residents and businesses aroundthe infrastructure. The project borrows technologygenerally used by the private sector at asignificantly smaller scale, scaling it up to coveran entire city.Since joining the EU in 2004, Poland has movedtowards policy and economic convergence withthe rest of Europe. While real GDP per capita isstill catching up with western European countries,it more than doubled between 1989 and 2013,following the revolutions that toppled communismin central and eastern Europe. In 2012, Poland’sR&D investment budget was 0.9% of GDP, whilethe EU average was 2%, with only Finland andSweden above 3%, the European 2020 target.Poland is the only EU member to have escapedrecession following the 2008 financial crisis and hasidentified innovation as critical to further closingthe wage gap with richer nations and reachingsustainable income growth for the bottom 40%of its population. To achieve this, Poland plans toincrease its research spend to 1.7% of GDP as partof its Europe 2020 target, but also recognises theneed to use government funds to strategically igniteits lagging private sector. Poland plans to use €10billion in EU structural funds, upgraded researchinfrastructure and international partnerships tostimulate commercially oriented innovation. Aswages rise, Poland’s low-cost manufacturing modelneeds to be replaced with more skilled andproductive jobs to remain competitive.VisionVirtual Warsaw is an ambitious plan to use Bluetoothtechnology to make the Polish capital moreaccessible to the visually impaired. Micro-navigationbeacons will communicate changes in theurban environment to increase safety and improveaccess to public transport, leisure facilities likeparks and theatres, and public buildings. Careertraining and employer awareness programmes willfurther improve the independence and employabilityof people with visual impairments; currently81% of the blind population is without work. Theinnovation fits with the adopted Europe 2020Strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growthby reducing the degree of social exclusion whilefostering new skills.ImpactThe city hopes more than half of visually impairedresidents will make use of Virtual Warsaw. Reduceddependency will not only liberate citizens tomore freely access Warsaw, it is likely to reducethe burden of care, enabling family helpers orvolunteers to access employment opportunitiesthat otherwise wouldn’t be available to them.Importantly, the project also plans to improvethe quality of e-government services by adoptingWCAG 2.0, which aims to increase the robustnessof assistive technologies, and create a centralsupport line for the visually impaired. For TomaszPactwa, Director of Welfare and Social Projects, itis about teaching employers to “trust the element ofself-sufficiency for blind people,” allowing visuallyimpaired individuals to move, enjoy and operatemore freely in Warsaw “in a more holistic way”.ImplementationA successful indoor pilot with blind users in anadministrative building has already demonstratedthe feasibility of the scheme. The city will install thetechnology in public transport, public buildings,leisure and cultural sites across the city, each ofwhich will be preceded by a smaller scale pilot andextensive testing with users. The technology willthen be tailored to suit the significantly differentoperating environments, which include indoor andoutdoor, churches and theatres.TransferabilityWarsaw then hopes to use what it has learnt tohelp other cities ensure accessibility for peoplewith visual disabilities. This includes combiningtechnology with employment and skills training todevelop best practice. The city will also provide anopen API to enable local organisations to createother uses for the BLE infrastructure. Witnessingthe government spending more on innovation isan open invitation to encourage the tertiary andprivate sectors to invest their own time and effort.In the future, Pactwa believes that “anybody who42

enters the city will get information in theirown language,” echoing a strong desire to makeWarsaw more accessible not only to citizens, butalso to visitors.Interview with Tomasz Pactwa,Director of Welfare and SocialProjects, City of WarsawWinnersVisual impairment in numbersGlobally, 285 million people are visuallyimpaired; 39 million are blind.About 90% of the world’s visually impairedpeople live in low-income environments.Visual impairment is on the decrease despite theageing world population.40,000 people with visual impairment live inWarsaw.81% unemployment in Warsaw’s blindpopulation – 20% above Europe’s highest youthunemployment statistic.Q Why did you enter the Mayors Challenge?A We wanted an external institution to judgeour idea to find out whether or not it wasinnovative at an international level.Q Were there any other ideas?A Yes, there were several other innovations inplanning and implementation: looking atincreasing citizen participation; a greenertransport by cycling to work initiative; andtelemedicine to increase the quality ofhealthcare, while reducing its cost.Q Most beneficial aspect of the challenge?A Realising that other cities face similarchallenges, but respond with different solutions:the methodology, including thinking the problemthrough with research and a pre-launch pilot,will make future projects quicker to implement.Q If you hadn’t won?A It would have been less easy to finance, butwe would have proceeded. Winning makesit much easier to access other grants anddonations.Q Impact on your city after five years?A We will use Virtual Warsaw to improve thequality of life for not only the visually impaired,but for other groups too.43

ReflectionsTools and approachesDespite targeting a range of different urban social,structural and economic problems, the tools andapproaches proposed by the 155 cities demonstrateda number of commonalities. Innovation was seldomabout pure invention and more about consideringhow existing systems or technologies might berepurposed to improve the quality of urban life.As with most sectors of society, local governmentshave responded to the promise of the digitalrevolution. 63% of all cities intended to directlyexploit new information technology to supporttheir innovations. Democratising and evolvingdata was found in 15% of applications in the formof open data (transparently opening up data forre-use in any way) and big data (which aims to findrelationships between large amounts of seeminglyunrelated data). Gamification, which uses gamingtechniques in the ‘real’ world to encourage citizensto solve problems and increase awareness to changebehaviour, also featured regularly.All the winning proposals make use ofsmartphones and information technology,recognising that the world is more digitallyconnected than ever before. Co-design, a toolthat involves people in highlighting and solvingspecific problems, played a key role in 20% ofthe applications. A significant number of citiesplanned to use crowd-sourcing and crowdfunding,highlighting their desire to benefit fromthe unconventional approaches to supportinginnovation and democracy that the Internetpotentially facilitates.Yet, even with a strong focus on finding waysto use citizens as a resource (43% of applicationsincluded citizens as implementation partners or asvolunteers), traditional partnerships dominated.This included private sector funding and expertise(75%), expert knowledge and support fromuniversities (73%) and non-profit partnerships(50%). In addition, the European Union was oftenreferred to as a potential source for funding orimplementation support.Innovation and collaborationInnovation is a process – every city’s need forinnovation and capacity to innovate is based onunique circumstances. Despite this, every localgovernment was able to suggest new approachesto improve the quality of life in their cities. Theshortlisted and winning cities felt that the MayorsChallenge gave them the time and focus to developthe potential of their innovations in a more matureway. In particular, the stimulus to engage withprivate sector tools and find partners to facilitatedelivery was appreciated and absorbed by manyof the finalist cities. More importantly, the processhelped cities to more clearly and concisely articulatetheir concepts, encouraging citizens to trust andsupport brave ideas.Collaboration and partnership matter to localgovernments, and as they try to build strongernetworks with residents, (and other local and nonlocalpartners, including other cities), the potentialto share ideas grows. However, the value lies notonly in sharing innovations and know-how, butalso in helping cities to identify problems that theymay not have been aware of and in encouragingcities to believe that these problems can be solved.Strategically using the media to extend thisdialogue increases awareness of the challenges facedand provides more opportunity for transferringideas. It also gives citizens the chance to providefeedback. One of the greatest benefits of moreopen local government innovation is the potentialfor greater input from citizens in solving city-levelproblems, and possibly even in affecting howgovernment works.A common – and welcome – trend within thesubmissions is the way in which several projects reframedvulnerable individuals as valuable resourcesfor the city rather than as burdens on society,while others ensured resources were available tofacilitate ‘normal’ living. In the face of continuedcuts to pensions and other welfare benefits, andthe rise in the dependency ratio across Europe,applicant cities proposed creative responses tothe issues of loneliness and isolation. The strongemphasis on community as a way to deal with theseissues underscore the benefits of urban density andproximity of individuals as an asset in combatingisolation and solving complex social issues.44

ConclusionThe Mayors Challenge is itself an innovation. Byconsidering bottom-up initiatives at the city level,it confirms that at a time of general disillusionmentwith systems of governance, local governmenthas the capacity to be resilient and pro-active inways that national governments and internationalinstitutions find difficult. The Mayors Challengeprovides an opportunity for cities to recognise theneed to think through potential innovations clearlywithout immediately closing down the conversationby considering only the budget implications. Timeis another scarce commodity in budget-strappedlocal councils, and many of the finalist cities felt thecompetition freed up the time and space needed tothink through ideas. The encouragement to workacross government departments that, by their ownadmission, seldom interacted further enriched theseideas. The whole application process – includingthe feedback, coaching sessions and Ideas Camp –is a carefully constructed practice that helps citiesembrace new innovation techniques. Examplesfrom the private sector provided important andhelpful design models for some.The process itself yields an in-depthunderstanding that, despite the extent to whichexisting political systems place limitations on localgovernment, cities still have significant potentialto be innovative. When trying to do more withless, having a good idea of what has already beenshown to be possible certainly helps, and the mediaexposure and sharing of information through thenetwork of finalists works to support this. All scalesof government can benefit from exploring newapproaches to solving problems, and competitionslike the Mayors Challenge can play a significantrole in encouraging new types of relationshipsbetween local governments and their citizens.However, widely sharing best practices through acompetition like the Mayors Challenge requirestime to produce results. Many of the projects fromthe American and European challenges may onlyproduce tangible outcomes in a number of years.As the Mayors Challenge plans a third roundof the competition, the choice of geographywill provide valuable insight into the capacityto transfer innovations not only between citieswithin a given region, but also between cities insignificantly different political, social, economicand environmental contexts. It will undoubtablycontinue to provide an invaluable platform for localgovernments to influence how regional and nationalgovernments engage partnerships to improve thequality of life for their citizens.45

AboutAboutBloomberg PhilanthropiesBloomberg Philanthropies’ mission is to ensurebetter, longer lives for the greatest number ofpeople. The organisation focuses on five keyareas for creating lasting change: Public Health,the Environment, Education, GovernmentInnovation and the Arts. Bloomberg Philanthropiesencompasses all of Michael R. Bloomberg’scharitable activities, including his foundationand his personal giving. In 2014, BloombergPhilanthropies distributed $462 million (€409m).The Government Innovation programmepromotes public sector innovation capacity andspreads proven and promising solutions amongcities worldwide. Through diverse initiatives,Government Innovation tests and refines urbaninnovations, equipping mayors and local leaderswith practical tools and approaches to tackle toughissues and enable civic innovation.LSE CitiesLSE Cities is an international centre at the LondonSchool of Economics and Political Science thatcarries out research, education and outreachactivities in London and abroad. Its missionis to study how people and cities interact in arapidly urbanising world, focusing on how thedesign of cities impacts on society, culture andthe environment. Through research, conferences,teaching and projects, the centre aims to shape newthinking and practice on how to make cities fairerand more sustainable for the next generation ofurban dwellers, who will make up 70% of the globalpopulation by 2050.LSE Cities is one of a small number of researchcentres that contribute to the LSE’s reputation asone of the foremost social science universities inthe world. With the support of Deutsche Bank’sAlfred Herrhausen Society, the centre buildson the interdisciplinary work of the Urban AgeProgramme, an international investigation ofcities around the world that since 2005 has studiedthe social and spatial dynamics of metropolitanareas such as Istanbul, São Paulo, Mumbai,Johannesburg, New York City and London.46

The Mayors ChallengeAfter an inaugural competition in the United Statesin 2012, Bloomberg Philanthropies replicated theMayors Challenge in Europe in 2013-2014. Thepotential for a third round is being investigated,but the location has yet to be confirmed. Thecompetition is designed to strengthen localgovernance innovation. Bloomberg Philanthropiessees innovation to tackle the pressing social andeconomic issues at a city-level as strategic. Theintention is to use the competition to encouragecities to actively solve problems and also toincrease public awareness of the potential for localgovernments to seek new ways to improve city lifefor residents.The competition uses a range of incentives toencourage participation, including cash prizes,publicity for short-listed and winning cities andopportunities to engage with peers in other cities.While only five cities receive funding, 16 othercities received input from experts and privatesector coaches, and the application process, whichincludes strong technical assistance from theMayors Challenge team, is intended to help localgovernments consider innovation in a structuredmanner, increasing the potential for every city tobenefit from participating. This includes askinghow the idea is a new approach to solving aproblem in a city, clarifying how it will have ameaningful impact, demonstrating how it can beimplemented and contextualising how the ideamight be transferred to other cities. A significantportion of this task involves teaching cities to pitchand explain ideas clearly so that the best ideas canbe shared as broadly as possible.City governments identify challenges andsolutions as part of their application and arerequired to research whether a similar innovationexists in other cities. Local partners – in thisinstance Nesta, EuroCities and LSE Cities –provided further input on this. Behind the scenes,the challenge is supported by a selection committeemade up of urban, technology and governanceexperts, leveraging Bloomberg Philanthropies’extensive network. The committee is responsiblefor selecting the 21 finalists and picking the overallwinners.Strategy consultants from Monitor Deloittewere tasked with helping finalist cities to thinkthrough their theory of change, discussing theirimplementation options and challenging theirassumptions to increase the quality of the finalconcept. Before submitting an updated application,finalists took part in an Ideas Camp, a two-dayworkshop during which cities received inputfrom each other and from experts to expandand strengthen their ideas. This was designedto produce more focused, stronger applications.The five winning cities receive implementationgrants, as well as intensive assistance to accelerateimplementation. Bloomberg Philanthropies alsoprovides the group of 16 finalists with training andother support to encourage their progress. Acrossall of these efforts is a commitment to capturinglessons learnt and sharing that information withother cities.International JuryChristian Bason, Director of MindLab (Denmark)Till Behnke, Founder of betterplace.org and Headof The Millicom Foundation (Germany)Ricky Burdett, Professor of Urban Studies at theLondon School of Economics and Political Scienceand Director of LSE Cities (United Kingdom)Ron Daniel, Board Member, BloombergPhilanthropies and Former Managing Partner,McKinsey & Company (United States)Bruno Giussani, European Director of TED(Switzerland)Lamia Kamal-Chaoui, Advisor to theSecretary-General and Former Head of the UrbanProgramme at the OECD (Organisation forEconomic Co-operation and Development) (France)Maria Manuel Leitão Marques, FullProfessor at the Faculty of Economics of theUniversity of Coimbra and Former Secretary ofState for Administrative Modernisation (Portugal)Christine Leitner, Senior Policy Advisor at theAustrian Federal Ministry for Science, Researchand Economy (Austria)Geoff Mulgan, Chief Executive of Nesta(United Kingdom)Bertin Nahum, President and CEO of MedtechSA (France)Carlo Ratti, Director of MIT Senseable City Laband Founder of Carlo Ratti Associati (Italy)Silvija Seres, Independent Investor and BoardMember and Managing Director of TechnoRocks(Norway)Iván Tosics, Managing Director of MetropolitanResearch Institute (Hungary)About47

AboutFinalist ProposalsAmsterdam, the Netherlands - Play2WorkEurope is a platform seeking to disrupt traditionalrecruitment by matching skilled but inexperiencedyouth with job opportunities.Athens, Greece - synAthina is a platform toencourage community volunteering and businesssponsoredprojects to increase the municipality’soperational capacity.Barcelona, Spain - Vincles BCN: CollaborativeCare Networks for Better Ageing uses social mediato more tightly network the senior population tofamily, caregivers and neighbours.Bologna, Italy - #Angels4Bologna is amentorship training programme designed toincrease the capacity of school students (aged 8-16)to enter the job market or become entrepreneurs.Bristol, United Kingdom - The Learn, Grow,Eat Revolution targets obesity by encouraginglocal food production and establishing healthy foodshops. Chefs will help residents cook healthier food.Brno, Czech Republic - Toward a Safer andEngaged Community wants to increase real andperceived safety levels in Brno’s large housingestates by employing a trained concierge in eachbuilding.Cardiff, United Kingdom - Push OurProductivity plans to train 10% of the populationto identify small improvements, and thenimplement them in order to improve the entirepopulation’s productivity.Florence, Italy - The Third Millennium UrbanWorkshop is an urban regeneration project toconnect artisans to vacant properties in the historiccity centre.Gdańsk, Poland - Democracy Acceleratorincreases public involvement in city improvementby allowing citizens to propose, develop andvote on projects. Training assistance is given tostrengthen the quality of their proposals.The Hague, the Netherlands - Citizens inAction – Democracy 3.0 is a tool to give citizensthe power to decide on how 2-3% of their localtaxes are spent.Kirklees, United Kingdom - Comoodle is acomprehensive platform designed to disrupt thetraditional economy by allowing private, municipaland NGO assets and skills to be shared.Kraków, Poland - Smart Urban MobilityServices estimates savings, health and fitness gainsfrom walking or cycling part of a public transportjourney, and the contribution made towardscleaner city air.London, United Kingdom - London Livesuses existing technology to facilitate at-homemonitoring of at-risk and diabetes patients.Integrating this into healthcare is expected toreduce costs.Lisbon, Portugal - Movement by Energy willcapture kinetic energy harvested from car roadramps to power assisted walkways and electricbikes to reduce reliance on motorised privatetransport.Madrid, Spain - E+ Subterra will broadlyexplore the potential of harvesting energyfrom underground resources. This includesnatural geothermal resources, but also the builtenvironment.Schaerbeek, Belgium - Greenovate willuse 3D mapping to show owners how thermallyinefficient their buildings are. An online serviceand personalised consultations will help accelerateretrofitting.Stara Zagora, Bulgaria - I Succeeded inMy Town! is a financial incentive to reverse theyouth brain drain and to encourage talentedentrepreneurs to locate their businesses in the city.Stockholm, Sweden - Grow Stockholmreduces carbon emissions by using residents’ plantwaste to produce biochar, which both sequesterscarbon and encourages plant growth.Sofia, Bulgaria - DIY Sofia is project tobring colour and beauty to poor quality publicspaces. Use of a van equipped with tools for thecommunity to use will be supported by artists andexperts.Warsaw, Poland - Virtual Warsaw will enablegreater freedom of movement for visually impairedresidents, particularly in the use of public transportand public facilities.York, United Kingdom - GeniUS! Right toSolve empowers citizens to play a pro-active role inidentifying and solving city problems. Procurementis opened up, allowing citizens to co-createsolutions.48

BibliographyBeard, J. R., Biggs, S., Bloom, D.E., Fried, L. P., Hogan, P., Kalache,A., Olshansky, S J. (Eds.) (2011)Global Population Ageing: Peril or Promise?Geneva: World Economic Forum.http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GAC_GlobalPopulationAgeing_Report_2012.pdfDepartment for Business, Innovation& Skills (2014) Sharing economy review:terms of reference. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/sharing-economy-review-terms-ofreference/sharing-economyreview-terms-of-referenceDepartment for Business, Innovation& Skills (2014) Move to make UK globalcentre for sharing economy. 29 September2014. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/move-to-makeuk-global-centre-for-sharing-economyEuropean Commission (2010)Europe’s Digital CompetitivenessReport. Brussels. https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/sites/digital-agenda/files/european_competitiveness_report_2010.pdfEuropean Commission (2011)Cities of Tomorrow - Challenges, visions,ways forward. Luxembourg:Publications Office of the EuropeanUnion. http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/studies/pdf/citiesoftomorrow/citiesoftomorrow_final.pdfEuropean Commission (2012) SpecialEurobarometer 374: Corruption. http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_374_en.pdfEuropean Commission (2014)Investment for jobs and growth: promotingdevelopment and good governance in EUregions and cities. Brussels. http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docoffic/official/reports/cohesion6/6cr_en.pdfEurostat (2013) Voter turn-out innational and EU parliamentaryelections. http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/tgm/table.do?tab=table&init=1&plugin=1&language=en&pcode=tsdgo310Eurostat (2014) Government revenue,expenditure and main aggregates.http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=gov_a_main&lang=enEurostat (2014) Real GDP growthrate. http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/table.do?tab=table&init=1&language=en&pcode=tec00115&plugin=1Eurostat (2014) Total fertility rate,1960–2012. http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Fertility_statisticsEurostat (2014) Eurostat regional yearbook2014. http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/productsstatistical-books/-/KS-HA-14-001Floater, G., Rode, P., Zenghelis, D.(2013) Stockholm: Green Economy LeaderReport. LSE Cities, London Schoolof Economics and Political Science.http://files.lsecities.net/files/2013/06/LSE-2013-Stockholm-Final-Reportwebhighres.pdfFloater, G., Rode, P., Robert,A., Kennedy, C., Hoornweg, D.,Slavcheva, R., Godfrey, N. (2014)Cities and the New ClimateEconomy: the Transformative Role of GlobalUrban Growth. LSE Cities, LondonSchool of Economics and PoliticalScience. http://files. lsecities.net/files/2014/12/The-Transformative-Role-of-Global-Urban-Growth-01.pdfLópez Pintor, R., Gratschew, M.(Eds.) (2004). Voter Turn-out inWestern Europe Since 1945:A Regional Report. Stockholm:International Institute for Democracyand Electoral Assistance.Mladovsky P., Allin S., Masseria C.,Hernández-Quevedo C., McDaidD., Mossialos E. (2009) Health in theEuropean Union: trends and analysis. Copenhagen:European Observatory onHealth Systems and Policies.OECD (2010) OECD Factbook 2007.http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/economics/data/oecd-factbookstatistics/oecd-factbook-statistics-2007_data-00375-enOECD (2014). PISA 2012 Results:What Students Know and Can Do (VolumeI): Student Performancein Mathematics, Reading andScience. OECD Publishing.http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/content/book/9789264208780-enOffice for National Statistics (2013).2011 Census: Aggregate data(England and Wales).PWC (2014) Five key sharing economysectors could generate £9 billionof UK revenues by 2025. 15 August2014. http://pwc.blogs.com/press_room/2014/08/five-keysharing-economy-sectors-couldgenerate-9-billion-of-uk-revenuesby-2025.htmlSchwab, K. (Ed.) (2013). The GlobalCompetitiveness Report 2013–2014.Geneva: World Economic Forum.http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GlobalCompetitivenessReport_2013-14.pdfStroke, K., Clarence, E., Anderson,L., Rinne, A. (Eds.) (2014). MakingSense of the UK CollaborativeEconomy. London: Nesta. http://www.nesta.org.uk/sites/default/files/making_sense_of_the_uk_collaborative_economy_14.pdfWorld Health Organisation (2014)Visual impairment and blindness. http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs282/en/About49

AboutMaps and Graphsp.6-7 Patterns of global changeTotal population (2012)Average annual population growth forecast(2012-2030)LSE Cities analysis based on UN DESA World UrbanisationProspects, 2014 Revision http://esa.un.org/unpd/wup/default.aspxp.14 Growing on a borrowedpopulationPopulation growth (percentage average annualgrowth, 2004-2013)City population (most recent years available)Map based on LSE Cities analysis of Eurostat populationstatistics at country and city level.p.9 Where Europe livesPopulation Density (people/km 2 )LSE Cities analysis based on LandScan 2010TM HighResolution Global Population Data Setp.10 Growing EU voter apathyVoter Turn-out (1990-2014)Eurostat (2013). IDEA Voter turn-out database (IDEAInternational Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance)http//epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/table.do?tab=table&init=1&plugin=1&language=en&pcode=tsdgo310p.11 An ageing worldProjected percentage of citizens over 60 by 2050World Economic Forum (2012). Global Population Ageing:Peril or Promise? Geneva, Switzerlandhttp://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GAC_GlobalPopulationAgeing_Report_2012.pdfp.12 An unequal continentGDP growth (percentage average annual growth atcountry and city level, 2003-2013)City GDP per capita (€, 2013)Map based on LSE Cities analysis of Oxford Economics andEurostat data, using NUTS3 regions as a proxy for each city.p.13 Europe’s lost labour potentialYouth unemployment rate (most recent yearsavailable)Map based on LSE Cities analysis of Eurostat unemploymentstatistics and multiple other official sources.p.15 Migrating north-westPercentage of foreign-born population at countryand city level (most recent years available)City migrant population (most recent yearsavailable)Map based on LSE Cities analysis of Eurostat migrationstatistics and multiple other official sources.p.19 DevolutionLocal revenue as a percentage of overall revenueOECD Revenue Statistics Database (2014)http://stats.oecd.org/index.aspx?DataSetCode=REV50

Sub heading51

Sub heading52