programme booklet - towards a metropolitan project (international roundtable paris, 2016))

ROUNDTABLE PARIS | MAY 25TH 2016

TOWARDS A METROPOLITAN PROJECT

2

METRO IN PROGRESS

Deltametropolis Association is a broad public organisation that focuses on shaping sustainable development in Randstad Holland.Apply for membership: www.deltametropool.nl/membership

INTA is a global membership association where public and private policy-makers and urban practitioners come together to share knowledge, experience and performing tools for integrated urban development. www.inta-aivn.org

L’Atelier International du Grand Paris (AIGP) implements research, development, enhancement and animation related to the challenges of Greater Paris, particularly through its Scientifi c Council. It is a place both for experimentation, creation and dissemination.www.ateliergrandparis.fr

For more roundtable information and downloads visit:www.metroinprogress.org

COLOPHON Projectteam

INTA

Lola [email protected]

Benoît [email protected]

00 33 1 58 30 34 52

Deltametropolis Association

David [email protected] 6 18 47 35 70

PICTURES

Front and backcover:

Brussels: Luc Mercells Stockholm: Marko CvejicBordeaux: Jon MokoroaParis: Vincent BrassineWarsaw: Guiseppe MiloThe Hague: Christopher A. DominicEindhoven: Maciek Lulko

Source: Flickr

3


Introduction Roundtable Paris, May 25th 2016

BackgroundFollowing a first series of meetings and interviews with a range of stakeholders

from around the globe on metropolitan challenges and dilemmas (Metro in Progress), INTA and Deltametropolis Association decided to focus on the socio-economic development and governance of metropolitan regions in Europe.

Paris RoundtableFollowing the success of the Metro in Progress - Brussels Roundtable (MIP

Brussels), the Deltametropolis Association, INTA and Atelier International du Grand Paris are pleased to invite you to the Metro in Progress - Paris Roundtable (MIP Paris) on May 25.

The MIP Paris is an invitation only roundtable that brings regional authorities, provinces, municipalities or economic actors who are dealing with the construction and/or implementation of metropolitan strategies. The MIP Paris Roundtable is an opportunity to learn and share experiences through the vivid examples of governance mechanisms and policies of European metropolises. Selected urban stakeholders are also invited to join and contribute to a stimulating debate.

Right after the Paris conference (organised by INTA and the City of Paris on May 23-24) with its focus on the European Metropolises, the Roundtable will focus on the overall theme of the stakeholder involvement (citizens, entrepreneurs, universities) and the Roundtable will be organised with three sessions:

- metropolitan governance - investments instruments - quality of life

These topics give participants the freedom to present strategies and projects concerning infrastructure, housing, amenities, and economic growth... An increasing metropolitan process demands global and transversal strategies and projects.

4

METRO IN PROGRESS

Index

# 0 Programme p 6

# 1 Session: Metropolitan Governance - Brussels Capital Region p 13 Alfredo Corbalan, Head of European projects, Agence de Développement Territorial - Brussels Capital Region (Belgium)

- Bordeaux Métropole p 15 Jean-Baptiste Rigaudy, Director of the territorial strategy mission - Bordeaux Métropole (France)

- The Netherlands p 17 Jeroen Saris, Director De Stad BV (the Netherlands)

# 2 Session: Investments Instruments - Stockholm p 21 Michael Erman, Project manager - Regional Growth and Planning Administration Stockholm County Council (Sweden)

- The Netherlands p 23 Pieter Brouwer, Cigarbox Advisory Services (the Netherlands)

- Paris p 25 Hélène Chartier, Mayor’s office in charge of the relationships with the Metropolis and local authorities - Ville de Paris (France)

- Warsaw p 27 Paweł Sajnog, Chief Specialist in the Department of European Funds & Economic Development, Integrated Territorial Investment Division - City of Warsaw (Poland)

- Eindhoven p 29 Robbert de Mug, Strategic Advisor - Municipality of Eindhoven (the Netherlands)

5


#3 Session: Quality of Life - The Hague p 33 Erik Pasveer, Head of urban development and planning - City of The Hague (The Netherlands)

- Paris p 35 Julien Neiertz, Director of Metropop’ - Paris (France)

# 4 MIP Brussels: Concluding Remarks - The European Metropolitan Agenda and the risk for the Netherlands. p 38 Jeroen Saris, Director - De Stad BV (the Netherlands)

- The European Metropolis p 41 Michel Sudarskis, Secretary General - INTA (France)

# 5 Speakers p 44

Get Involved! p 52 Contact us if you are interested in a roundtable focused on your specific cases, to learn from other metropolitan areas or to work on (universal) metropolitan challenges.

#0 PROGRAMME

8

METRO IN PROGRESS

10:00 - 10:20

Welcome and registrations10:20 - 10:40

Opening- Mireille FERRI Director - Atelier International du Grand Paris (France)- Paul GERRETSEN Director - Deltametropool Association (the Netherlands)

Reflections Paris’ conference: “Greater Paris and Metropolitan projects in Europe”

- Michel SUDARSKIS Secretary General - INTA (Paris)- Jaap MODDER (moderator of the day) Urban and regional planner - Brainville (the Netherlands)

10:40 - 12:10

Session 1: Metropolitan Governance- Alfredo CORBALAN Head of European projects, Agence de Développement Territorial - Brussels Capital Region (Belgium) - Jean-Baptiste RIGAUDY Director of the territorial strategy mission - Bordeaux Métropole (France) - Jeroen SARIS Director De Stad BV (the Netherlands)

13:00 - 15:00

Session 2: Investment Instruments - Michael ERMAN Project manager - Regional Growth and Planning Administration Stockholm County Councill (Sweden)- Pieter BROUWER Cigarbox Advisory Services (the Netherlands)- Hélène CHARTIER Mayor’s office in charge of the relationships with the Metropolis and local authorities - Ville de Paris (France) - Paweł SAJNOG Chief Specialist in the Department of European Funds & Economic Development, Integrated Territorial Investment Division - City of Warsaw (Poland)- Robbert DE MUG Strategic Advisor - Municipality of Eindhoven (the Netherlands)

9


15:00 - 16:00

Session 3: Quality of Life

- Erik PASVEER Head of urban development and planning - City of The Hague (The Netherlands)- Julien NEIERTZ Director of Métropop’ - Paris (France)

16:20 - 17:50

Open Discussion Conducted by:

- Paul GERRETSEN Director - Deltametropool Association (the Netherlands)- Michel SUDARSKIS Secretary General - INTA (Paris)

17:50 - 18:00

Conclusions - Paul GERRETSEN Director - Deltametropool Association (the Netherlands)- Michel SUDARSKIS Secretary General - INTA (Paris)

18:00 - 18:30

Drinks

TWITTER: #METROINPROGRESSLIVEBLOG: WWW.METROINPROGRESS.ORG

#1 METROPOLITAN GOVERNANCE

12

METRO IN PROGRESS

Notes

13


Brussels Capital Region: Metropolitan governance

issue in Europe.European cities are facing a common situation: a

growing gap between the “administrative” city and the “real” city. The administrative boundaries of European cities rarely cover the whole morphological urban area around the city. Without mentioning the different functional urbans areas that are even larger.

To manage this situation European cities have gradually started cooperating with their surrounding areas, mostly on ad-hoc basis. The result is a plurality of metropolitan governance arrangements across Europe.

To have a better vision on these different metropolitan arrangements, the EUROCITIES Working group on Metropolitan areas, which Brussels-Capital Region is a member, made a pan-European study in 2013. 38 European cities participated to the ‘Metropolitan areas in action’ (MAIA) study. The main findings of this study will be presented during the Roundtable.

More information: http://www.eurocities.eu/eurocities/documents/Metropolitan-areas-in-action-Concluding-report-WSPO-9DZJFR

ALFREDO CORBALANHEAD OF EUROPEAN PROJECTS, AGENCE DE DEVELOPPEMENT TERRITORIAL, ASBL - BRUSSELS-CAPITAL REGION (BELGIUM)

14

METRO IN PROGRESS

Notes

15


Bordeaux: New local governance

experiments.The city of Bordeaux has always been innovative

in terms of community policy management, the result of a long tradition of independence from the central gouvernement.

May be this is due to the fact that Bordeaux remained English until 1450, and became after that an hanseatic city, like Bremen or Hamburg, both cities and states. Although Louis XIV tried to control the ambition of independence, there was a survival during the French Revolution when the “girondins “ marked their independence against the central power.

Historical feed backs and story telling are always useful to address these issues of metropolitan governance, both in the process to define a shared and collective project and in the way to implement it.

Bordeaux created in the sixties one of the first “Communautés urbaines” in France, facing the question of building a common destiny for the 28 cities integrating the metropolitan area. Since 50 years, the policy management is made through a council of 28 mayors, which takes decisions on policies to be implemented in a co-management principle.

In the same way, every mayor managed the ir local council and organized citizen participation at neighbourhood levels.

Recently, this system has been evolving, facing new challenges:

The first challenge is the creation in france of the status of metropole for big cities (15 metropolis: Paris , Bordeaux, Marseille , Toulouse, lyon ,… ), to adapt the growth of metropolitan areas, giving to metropolitan administration new skills and may be in medium term prepare the election of president of agglomeration by direct voting.

The second challenge is to engage real citizen participation at the scale of the larger city area, and to create a discussion space on important choices, where the citizens can express their opinions about city growth, quality of life, and also concrete questions about every day life, like urban forms, nimby, soft mobility , ..

During the presentation, I will explain how we, in Bordeaux, apply new local governance experiments, especially in the design of new neighborhoods or economic areas .

JEAN-BAPTISTE RIGAUDYDIRECTOR OF THE TERRITORIAL STRATEGY MISSION – BORDEAUX MÉTROPOLE (FRANCE)

16

METRO IN PROGRESS

Notes

17


The Netherlands:

JEROEN SARIS DIRECTOR DE STAD BV (THE NETHERLANDS)

#2 INVESTMENT

INSTRUMENTS

20

METRO IN PROGRESS

Notes

21


Stockholm:Regional development

and investments based on polycentricity.

RUFS 2010, the Regional Development Plan for the Stockholm region, has the vision to make the Stockholm to the most attractive metropolitan region in Europe. RUFS 2010 expresses the shared desire for the region’s development until 2030, and with a longer perspective to 2050. It was drawn up by a large number of stakeholders in the region (26 municipalities, authorities, business life, NGOs, etc,). The most vital and guiding spatial structural aim is to evolve a polycentric region that consists of a regional center (i.e the metropolitan center comprising the cities of Stockholm, Solna and Sundbyberg) and eight so called regional cores at a distance of 10-30 km from the regional center. New dwellings and workplaces, cultural and public services as well as new transport infrastructure investments shall support the concept. Beneath other things, the regional transport plan has been linked to the concept.

Already at the millennium shift the concept of polycentricity was invented and stated in the regional plan of 2001. It was conceived out of long-term thinking and planning for a big population growth until 2030 (from 1.8 million year 2001 to 2.6 until 2030). Since that 15 years have gone and the regional center (Stockholm, Solna and Sunbyberg) has continued to grow and receive major investments. But the regional cores left without extensive physical implementation (housing and workplaces) and comprehensive investments in infrastructure. However, this is profoundly changing as the discussions and also decisions of the last 10 years ensured a clear priority for developing the regional cores. New investments in trunk roads and railways are established and ensure a good accessibility of the regional cores in the future. The major infrastructure investment negotiation processes “Stockholm agreement” (ended 2010) and the ongoing “Sweden negotiation” make sure that the regional cores, and the principal idea of polycentricity, become a clear development option towards the market stakeholders (builders and investors) but also towards the involved municipalities.

The presentation will try to explain the development/market conditions and also principal negotiations and agreements made in the Stockholm in order to promote a polycentric and thereby sustainable, dense and transport avoiding development. The vital question that remains is: Is polycentricity still the “right concept” for sustainable urban and regional development even in the future?

MICHAEL ERMANPROJECT MANAGER - REGIONAL GROWTH AND PLANNING ADMINISTRATION STOCKHOLM (SWEDEN)

22

METRO IN PROGRESS

Notes

23


The Netherlands:Faster, better decision-

making to create a vibrant Dutch metropolis.

We aspire to a strong, sustainable economy; high quality of life; and a vital population. At the same time we have competitive regions, conflicts of interest, a limited budget and hundreds of projects from which to choose to influence any given goal. What will pay off the most: a high-speed train from Rotterdam to Germany? An investment in our airports? A strong central district? More highways?

In the Netherlands there are three metropolitan regions with an international scope (Amsterdam-Utrecht, Rotterdam-The Hague, and Eindhoven); each needs space for independent decision-making on investment programs that increase the adaptability and improve the international position. Together with Jaap Modder, Jeroen Saris, Must and Jan Brouwer, Cigarbox developed Metropoly: a game of faster and better decision-making on the formation of a metropolis in the Netherlands.

PIETER BROUWERCIGARBOX ADVISORY SERVICES (THE NETHERLANDS)

24

METRO IN PROGRESS

Notes

25


Paris:

HÉLÈNE CHARTIERMAYOR’S OFFICE - VILLE DE PARIS, (FRANCE)

26

METRO IN PROGRESS

Notes

27


Warsaw:Integrated Territorial

Investments as a new approach to metropolitan development in the EU on the example of the City of Warsaw.

Integrated Territorial Investments is a new instrument of urban policy, introduced by the EU in the financial perspective 2014-2020. Its use creates possibility to deliver comprehensive solutions for the development of European metropolises, without prejudice to the tasks of the cohesion policy at regional and national level. The actions implemented through this platform are intended, among other things, to overcome the current difficulties in the approach to cooperation at the level of agglomeration, which in the case of Poland is of great importance due to the present structure and division of territorial administration at various levels.

City of Warsaw, as the capital of the country and at the same time a local government unit of the first and second local level, started in 2013 on the ITIs concept base the creation of agglomeration/metropolitan partnership on many fields, going beyond the existing (sometimes perceived as conservative) approach to cooperation with neighboring local governments. Programmatic result of this collaboration is the development of the Strategy of Integrated Territorial Investments for the Warsaw Functional Area 2014-2020+, under which the participating actors conducted a diagnosis of the problems and needs of the 40 associated municipalities, belonging to the Warsaw agglomeration/metropolis, together with the indication of the planned development projects, along with the crucial for their success complicity of EU funds.

PAWEŁ SAJNOG, CHIEF SPECIALIST IN THE DEPARTMENT OF EUROPEAN FUNDS & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, INTEGRATED TERRITORIAL INVESTMENT DIVISION - CITY OF WARSAW (POLAND)

28

METRO IN PROGRESS

Notes

29


Eindhoven: Brainport CityPhilips has been the driving force behind the

economic and thereby urban development of company town Eindhoven (located in the south of Holland). During an economic difficult period, early nineties, unemployment rates grow quick because of the closure of factories and the relocation of jobs towards eastern Europe and Asia.

Because of this there was a huge sense of urgency for both company’s, public institutions and eduction organisations in town to overcome this economic downturn - the famous triple helix parties.

Now, more then 20 years later, Eindhoven city is celebrating to be the smartest region in the world and is successful in attracting investments and people.

But this succes is still vulnerable: in a global competitive market company’s compete for talent on a global scale. The quality of cities and quality of urban life play a central role in people’s choice to settle anywhere. Eindhoven has to set a major step towards more urban quality, better amenities and better connections with other hotspots in Europe.

Because of that the Dutch central government, Province of Noord-Brabant, the city of Eindhoven and the economic board of Eindoven collaborate together to strengthen the spatio-economic structure of Eindhoven in the program “Brainport City”. But how do we collaborate? How do we invest? Who’s paying? In this brief presentation we explore the program Brainport City and look ahead for possible solutions.

ROBBERT DE MUGSTRATEGIC ADVISOR - MUNICIPALITY EINDHOVEN (THE NETHERLANDS)

#3 QUALITY OF LIFE

32

METRO IN PROGRESS

Notes

33


The Hague: Quality of Life - City in

Transition.The Hague is a city in transition. During the

presentation, the approach of The Hague towards this transition will be introduced. The approach combines top-down, bottom-up, focus and acceleration.

Learning from practice, specifically concerning quality of life, four conclusions can be made this far:

1. Quality of life is part of a broad transitional agenda.

2. Quality of life is both hardware (buildings and public space), activities and attitude.

3. Quality of life is connected to both the top and the bottom of the metropolitan challenge.

4. Quality of life can constitute a vision to accelerate and legitimate transition, i.e. a trade of between economic growth and quality of life.

ERIK PASVEERHEAD OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING - CITY OF THE HAGUE (THE NETHERLANDS)

34

METRO IN PROGRESS

Notes

35


Paris:

JULIEN NEIERTZDIRECTOR OF METROPOP’ - PARIS (FRANCE)

#4 MIP BRUSSELS: CONCLUDING

REMARKS

38

METRO IN PROGRESS

The European Metropolitan Agenda and the risk for the Netherlands. JEROEN SARISDIRECTOR - DE STAD BV

Over the past century, Dutch urban planning has deliberately steered away from contributing to ‘the rise of the metropolis’. The ultimate aim of planning and policy was to expand outwards: to ‘spread’ its people, housing, prosperity, functions, churches, universities etc. over the land. The motivation was that living in small towns would prevent the Dutch citizen from the slavery of the “great moloch”, as depicted in Fritz Lang’s ‘Metropolis’. The result of this approach, which is still the dominant policy approach in the Netherlands, is the weakening of its competitive potential when compared to other metropolitan areas in the world. A ‘metropolisation’ process is nevertheless still taking place in the Netherlands however. Informal metropolitan regions have been shaped around the municipalities of Amsterdam, Rotterdam and The Hague, without any formal instruments or competencies to respond to the social challenges (such as segregation, engagement, citizenship and quality of life) at a metropolitan scale. So, what did we learn in Brussels about proper functioning metropolis elsewhere in Europe?

European metropolisesThe roundtable revealed that, unlike the

metropolisation process in many Asian, African and South American cities, metropolisation in Europe is not driven by masses of the rural poor leaving their villages, vast population growth or rapid economic growth. European metropolises tend to spread over larger territories, or can sometimes grow slowly while the smaller cities are shrinking. European metropolises also tend to be older: the majority of inhabitants aren’t young people below the age of 25, but tend to be people above 50 years old. London and Paris are the most dense and expensive cities to live in, where the poorer and younger populations tend to be forced out into the outskirts of the metropolitan area. The narrative of unlimited growth and the attractiveness of the big city therefore no longer applies to the European context of metropolisation.

Quality of lifeThe session in Brussels focussed on the meaning

and signifi cance of ‘quality of life’ at the metropolitan level. In Manchester for example, ‘progress’ has shifted from ‘more of the same’ to ‘difference’, where de-industrialised regions are being transformed by their new economies. To date, this process seems to be working more successfully there than in the Rotterdam – The Hague Metropolis. In Stuttgart, ‘progress’ equates to innovation, where the central focus is fi nding ways to attract young people to the automobile and electronic industries. This is a similar challenge to that of the Brainport metropolis around the city of Eindhoven. Unlike Brainport however, Stuttgart’s metropolitan strategy is facing some resistance from its citizens, with weakening acceptance of the plans to modernise the urban infrastructure. In this sense, progress is no longer measured by economic growth in the well-developed economies of Europe. Copenhagen-Malmö summed up the new milestones of progress as being: social equality, cultural inclusiveness and sustainability in landscape and energy. In other words: ‘progress’ in the European metropolis is now measured in terms of ‘added human value’.

SizeNonetheless, the ‘usual suspects’, such as size and

legitimacy still matter. In some metropolitan areas, such as Stuttgart and Paris, hundreds of municipalities cooperate on a territorial scale that includes the most important economic players, university campuses and housing locations. The size of the new Greater Paris and its Gross Regional Product is equal to the size and GNP of all of the smaller states of the European Union.

The metropolitan area of Copenhagen-Malmö is a typical example of ‘borrowed size’, where the bridge between the two cities created the catchment area that was needed to build an international airport. Year after year, the two cities have added new components to their common programme, e.g. optimising the infrastructure, improving international connectivity, strengthening economic complementarities and improving sustainable energy production and social equality. The cooperation

Size

“THE NETHERLANDS IS CURRENTLY LAGGING FAR BEHIND IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE METROPOLITAN AGENDA. THIS IS WEAKENING THE INNOVATIVE CAPACITY OF ITS ECONOMY. ”

39


did not originated on the metropolitan level, but at the level of the two separated city councils, which incorporated it in their future visions.

Progress and the shortage of young talentEconomic progress is not a question of scale. In the

case of Stuttgart, the innovation capacity is restrained by the skills and age of the labour force. The need for technological innovation in this centre of the German automobile industry is accelerating in order to keep the industry competitive with the Asian and low wage industries. At the same time, the workforce is getting older and losing its capacity to innovate, and young skilled technicians from other European countries are not coming to Stuttgart because the city is not attractive enough to compete with the ‘hipper’ Berlin Metropolis.

The metropolis is also restrained in its modernisation. The population of Stuttgart is no longer convinced by the ‘blessings of progress’. Weakening citizen acceptance of new housing and infrastructure projects and redevelopments of underused central locations such as Stuttgart Station have made politicians hesitant to enforce top-down decisions.

The talk of progress is no longer appealing. With rapid growth in Asia and the global competitiveness of the region, local citizens are unconvinced that European metropolises grow intrinsically or autonomously. These feelings of resistance are not so much fuelled by ideological motives, but by feelings about the quality of life, environment and sustainability. The definition of progress, for citizens themselves, is thus much more about quality than quantity.

Unique identity or the generic city? The question of having a metropolitan identity

was raised. Does such a thing, as ‘urban identity’ exist at this level? The term ‘generic city’, coined by Rem Koolhaas, suggests the convergence of functions, forms and spaces in the global city, where the way in which metropolitan cities are designed and organised will no longer be rooted in the local culture where they originate. The Brussels conference showed the opposite however. Bucharest is deeply rooted in its history: the Ottoman heritage is easily recognisable, as is the glory of the European 19th Century metropolis, the past communist arrogance and today’s cowboy capitalism. The citizens that live in this heritage have the tendency to reformulate the programme of Bucharest however. The struggle against inequality, ignorance about the

hidden richness of the past and neglect of the public space is only just starting. Other European metropolises like Paris, London, but also the smaller sized like Copenhagen-Malmö, Stuttgart or Amsterdam also stress their distinctiveness. All European cities promote their history and heritage as being ‘unique’. Some do so by stressing their culture (e.g. the re-opening of the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam as a narrative about the glory of a small country); and others do so by highlighting their industrial achievements (e.g. Stuttgart with its Mercedes and Porsche museum; Oresund has bridged two harbour cities to stress its openness to the sea and the world).

ImaginationBordeaux exemplifies, in the purest form, how

identity is essential to making a metropolis. The metropolisation of region did not start with a plan to expand the area to meet the needs of the expected population growth (25 per cent increase in the next 12 years). Instead, the Mayor of Bordeaux first started with a consultation process, in which he asked institutional partners, businessmen, school children and inhabitants a simple question, namely: “What metropolis do you want to live in?” The responses formed the raw material for which a new vision for the Bordeaux metropolis was built on. This was a unique bottom-up approach, which connected directly to Bordeaux. This search for new ways to involve and connect to citizens is on the agenda for most European metropolises. How can we strengthen the bonds between the poor outskirts of the metropolis and its centre? How can we make the people living in the different municipalities feel connected to the future of their living and working spaces? Questions on what the metropolis can contribute to the quality of life demand a specific answer that in turn contributes to the identity of the metropolis.

The ongoing transformation process in European metropolises requires a strong cultural component. Arts and culture are necessary tools to investigate the future as they can open windows to new perspectives on societal change. In mastering new competencies, people need to experiment and create new forms and structures that will respond to new, upcoming possibilities.

Rebirth of Greater ManchesterIn shifting from an industrial society to one based

on the new economy, Manchester has had to do more than rely on learning some new skills in the schools

40

METRO IN PROGRESS

for professional education. Competition between the different regions in Greater Manchester only really ended when they realised the industrial era was truly over. The regions had to redefi ne themselves: and they still do. There was no roadmap for the rebirth of the metropolis: the path to discovering the media market, applied arts and information technology was found by trial and error, and cultural research helped redefi ne the identity of the city. The move of the BBC-studios from London was not an incident, but the cherry on top. Manchester has now become one of the sexiest metropolises in Europe and has much fewer problems in attracting young innovative people than Stuttgart has for example.

The Dutch way to innovation and competitiveness

Looking back at the Netherlands, where ‘metropolis’ is still a forbidden word, the city regions of Amsterdam, Rotterdam- The Hague and Brainport have started to form an informal metropolitan region. This is informal, although the national government is currently trying to transform its twelve provinces into fi ve offi cial new ones. This project is deemed to crash because nobody can really explain why the new provinces are necessary, i.e. what exact problem will forming these new provinces solve? After all: no real problem can be solved effectively at such a scale. The real questions play at the level and scale of the agglomerations around the big cities (i.e. the metropolitan scale) or in terms of their position at the national level.

Dutch metropolises face the same challenges as other European metropolises: i.e. segregation, environmental concerns, connectivity, unemployment and social/cultural in/exclusion. They do so without owning the instruments and legal competencies to address these challenges at the right scale however.

ConclusionThe European metropolitan agenda is fundamentally

different from that in other continents. In essence, this agenda is about international connectivity, innovation and human values. The meaning of progress has undergone a fundamental shift from improving growth to improving the quality of life. Culture will play a signifi cant role in developing this quality of life. Arts and culture are the means to investigate and improve the main themes of concern for the European Metropolis: identity, social inclusion and segregation. The Netherlands is currently lagging far behind in the development of the metropolitan agenda. This is weakening the innovative capacity of its economy. The lack of legitimate infl uence at the metropolitan level creates new risks in the struggle against segregation, exclusion and poverty. The challenge for the Dutch metropolitan agenda lies in fi nding the connection between complementary qualities: between cultural and technology poles, the research, commercial and production facilities between them and the creation of intensive interaction between these diverse qualities. In the absence of a national government that has a clear vision on innovation and metropolitan quality, this interregional interaction needs to be organised through the adoption of a bottom-up approach by the two metropolitan cities.

“THE NARRATIVE OF UNLIMITED GROWTH AND THE ATTRACTIVENESS OF THE BIG CITY THEREFORE NO LONGER APPLIES TO THE EUROPEAN CONTEXT OF METROPOLISATION.”

41


The European Metropolis.MICHEL SUDARSKIS SECRETARY GENERAL - INTA

‘What is a metropolis?’ remains an open question, and is probably best answered by the citizens of the metropolitan area itself.

All the contributions have demonstrated how complex and demanding the process of metropolitan construction is, and how much engagement and willpower is necessary for it. They have also clearly shown that metropolitan awareness and consciousness should not be underestimated. People, citizens, economic actors, and mostly, local politicians and policy-makers often fail to accept or understand this process. As a result the metropolitan dimension gets hardly any support. “How to bridge the gap between collective and individual interest?”

Jeroen Saris, Director of De Stad BV (NL), closed the roundtable with an anecdote that, since the 1990s, people in Amsterdam have asked themselves what a metropolis was all about. They even proposed to give up their municipal status to help facilitate other municipalities to create an integrated metropolitan area. They held a referendum, which resulted in a negative response by 99 per cent of the population. That urges one to consider the question: how important is identity and territorial awareness in the defi nition of metropolitan governance?

For Michel Sudarskis, the key message of the roundtable was that the metropolitan level is forming a new middle power (at least in Europe, and perhaps also in the rest of the world). This rising new middle power has come about from sub-national and sub-regional authorities that are searching for more fl exible, adaptable and better performing systems. In most of the case studies discussed at the roundtable, the

metropolitan process has come about from community pressure on the State to accelerate the construction of an informal, performing and multi-scale governance system that is still embedded in the national system.

Another point worth considering is the fact that the private sector is increasingly becoming a sub-national non-state actor with the legitimacy to shape public policy. Private interests are taking the lead in moving from profi t to purpose and increasingly acting in response to public interest, as is the case in Stuttgart and Manchester.

Ensuring territorial equity between metropolitan areas and the smaller municipalities surrounding them still remains an open challenge, as exemplifi ed in the cases of Copenhagen-Malmö and Stuttgart. An integrated mobility system is often part of the solution in these cases.

Two issues that remain open and unclear are the risk of polarisation and fragmentation within the metropolitan areas, and issues of inequalities at the metropolitan level. These remain issues that need to be addressed thoroughly.

“THE PRIVATE SECTOR IS INCREASINGLY BECOMING A SUB-NATIONAL NON-STATE ACTOR WITH THE LEGITIMACY TO SHAPE PUBLIC POLICY.”

#5SPEAKERS

44

METRO IN PROGRESS

Pieter has a background in economics and finance, with more than 10 years of experience in management consulting and financial advisory. With Cigarbox, Pieter develops and implements decision support systems for public investors, focusing on what you need to know at a minimum to make a good investment decision. Clients include the municipalities of the Hague and Rotterdam, VSBfonds, Paul Hamlyn Foundation, Leeuwarden Cultural Capital of Europe, and ABN AMRO. Pieter holds a master degree in finance and investments from the Erasmus University Rotterdam.

Hélène Chartier is in charge of monitoring relation between the Metropole of Paris and local authorities, in the Cabinet of the Mayor of Paris.

Before that, she worked in the Cabinet of the Deputy Mayor in charge of the Metropolis of Paris.

Also, she previously was Project Manager in Atelier Parisien d’Urbanisme (2011-2013), Head of Division of the Paris Heritage and Architecture Services (2007-2010) and Project Manager in Ove-ARUP in London (2003-2006).

She is gratuate of Ecole Centrale of Lyon.

PIETER BROUWER HÉLÈNE CHARTIER

45


Alfredo Corbalan is Head of European projects for the Urban Development Agency of the Brussels-Capital Region.

He graduated in political sciences and European politics with specialization in urban and regional policies. Along his career he has worked on several European projects linking the physical, economic, social and environmental aspects of urban development.

Alfredo Corbalan joined the Urban Development Agency in 2008 to coordinate a project fostering the development of the Canal area in Brussels. Between 2008 and 2010, he was involved in an European project on metropolitan governance (URBACT – joining Forces). Since 2011, he is participating to the Eurocities working group “metropolitan areas” on behalf of the Brussels-Capital Region

ALFREDO CORBALAN

Robbert de Mug has a background in both urban planning and urban geography. After his graduation in 2010 he respectively worked for the province of Noord-Brabant, a Waterboard and, since 2012, for the city of Eindhoven. In this ‘Brainport Town’ (and 2011 smartest region of the world) he played different roles both on organisational matters and spatial/economic development. He is currently involved in a longterm spatio-economic program named Brainport City, that aims to take the urban development of Eindhoven to the next level.

ROBBERT DE MUG

46

METRO IN PROGRESS

Michael’s professional background is both in chemistry, geography and civil engineering. He has several educations as e.g. a Master of Science in Spatial Planning. He is educated in Germany and France, but works since 1998 in Sweden.

The focus of Michael’s work has since 20 years been urban and regional planning at core institutions as the Nordic Council of Ministers, Stockholm County Council and the City of Stockholm. Major themes are land use planning, energy and climate as well transport issues. In the four past years Michael has been the chairman of EUROCITIES working group “Integrated Urban Development”.

As a strategic planner, Michael currently is responsible for the Climate Roadmap 2050 for the Stockholm Region. This is a long-term, multilevel task which is strongly related to implementation of the Regional Development Plan for Stockholm. Michael is also involved in many international and R&I-projects.

MICHAEL ERMAN

Mireille Ferri is a politician and member of the Green Party. Mireille Ferri is regional councilor of Ile-de- France, Vice President of l’Institut d’aménagement et d’urbanisme de la région d’Île-de-France (IAU Île-de-France), Vice President of Fédération nationale des agences d’urbanisme and Executive Director of the Atelier international du Grand Paris.

MIREILLE FERRI

47


Paul Gerretsen is chief designer in the fields of regional planning, urban planning and architecture. He has studied at the renowned Universities TU Delft and ETH Zurich. He graduated with honourable mention in 1999 at the TU Delft as Master of Architecture.

After his education he has been employed by the Dutch National Spatial Planning Agency where he has been involved in studies for the development of strategic regional planning.

From 2003 Paul Gerretsen has worked at Maxwan Architects and Urbanists on both urban and regional planning projects.

He has been the project leader of the prestigious Barking Riverside Master Plan, a new town for 25’000 people in East-London and the regional project “Deltametropool”, a study on the future of the Randstad Region in the Netherlands, housing 7 million inhabitants.

Between 2005 and 2007 Paul Gerretsen was appointed Director of the South Wing Studio for Research and Design of the Province South-Holland. In this function he was responsible for projects and publications considering topics such as the Network City, Accessibility and Mixed-Use Areas. Since 2001 he teaches and lectured at numerous schools and universities most prominently at Delft University of Technology and Technische Universität München.

From 2008 onwards he is appointed director of the Deltametropolis Association. The Deltametropolis Association is a members association that focuses on the development of the Randstad area, consists of the metropolitan area around the four major cities of the Netherlands. Members are government institutions, non-governmental pressure groups, companies and private persons.

PAUL GERRETSEN

Jaap Modder is member of the Board of the Deltametropolis Association and also a personal member of INTA.

He is working as a national and international consultant for his own firm Brainville and as an associate partner for Buck Consultants International. Experienced in the field of urban and regional planning in the Netherlands and abroad (USA, Russia, Belgium and Eastern Europe).

Chief editor of the Dutch leading magazine on urbanism S+RO, chair at the foundation Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat, and also active in the governance of cultural institutions.

At this moment active in the fields of area development, smart cities, transit oriented development and metropolitan governance.

JAAP MODDER

48

METRO IN PROGRESS

Julien Neiertz is a consultant and trainer in engineering for organization changes to local authorities. He is the co-founder of the association Metropop’! and its leader from the beginning. Metropop’! intends to transform the images productions of the suburbs and inhabitants of neighborhoods, as well as relations between people from the center and the periphery. The association organizes meeting spaces, exchange and co-production between citizens interested in participating in the Metropolitan building and created an educational approach to make accessible to everyone the stakes of the Grand Paris.

Erik Pasveer is Head of Urban Development and Planning in The Hague. Previously, he worked as Head Spatial Planning for the City of Delft and worked as urban planning at the Office of Riek Bakker, DRO Amsterdam, City of Rotterdam, Delft University of Technology and the Academy of Architecture in Rotterdam and Amsterdam.

Pasveer studied architecture in Delft.

JULIEN NEIETRZ ERIK PASVEER

49


Jean Baptiste Rigaudy had a double career as civil engineer and architect.

He is now 62 and lives in Bordeaux (France).

He worked as a city planner for a long time in operational positions (Paris, Fes, Metz, Bordeaux) and in technical advice to local authorities in Europe and South America concerning city planning and urban design.

After being director of planning in Bordeaux metropolis, he now heads the mission « stratégie territoriale », exploring new topics and new trends (evolution of life styles, smart cities, new business models), preparing Bordeaux therefore to become an attractive european metropolis in the future .

Jean Baptiste Rigaudy has been specialised in

Transit Oriented System ( TOS) and by therefore has been in position to define and advise different policies to promote metamorphosis of cities around public transport, higher density, renewing public spaces and reducing car use.

Convinced of the need to apply these methods to the suburb, he is now particulary interested in the gouvernance and the implementation of these policies in large metropolitan areas.

JEAN-BAPTISTE RIGAUDY

Paweł Sajnog (Chief Specialist in the Integrated Territorial Investment Division, European Funds & Economic Development Department, City of Warsaw, Poland)

Graduate of High School Of Commerce And Law in Warsaw (MSc). Since 2004 in the City of Warsaw (Warsaw City Hall), practitioner in the field of European funds’ implementation. Initially involved in activities focused on building the cooperation between the business community and local authorities of Warsaw, then responsible for preparation and implementation of the City of Warsaw projects, co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund and Norwegian Financial Mechanism, in particular in the fields of public transport, urban regeneration, sports & recreational infrastructure, culture, tourism and ICT. In the EU programming period 2014-2020 involved in the Integrated TerritoriaI Investments’ (ITIs) preparation for the Warsaw Functional Area (as a member of the Intermediate Body), including the strategic assumptions of the ITIs and identification & analysis of potential projects.

PAWEL SAJNONG

50

METRO IN PROGRESS

Michel Sudarskis is the Secretary General of INTA, the International Urban Development Association, since 1987. He holds PhD in Economics and Political Sciences. Before joining INTA he taught on international co-operation and foreign affairs as Associate Professor with several Universities (Strasbourg, Paris, Nice and Lille) and served with international organisations in Italy and Belgium.

Michel Sudarskis writes and speaks regularly on urban issues; he has lead more than 50 international urban development missions on behalf of INTA including spatial analysis and strategies, establishing spatial framework for infrastructure planning, new towns and major urban regeneration or development projects, and worked with the UNCRD in Latin America, the EIB in the Middle East, Spanish Cooperation Agency in Morocco.

MICHEL SURDARSKIS

Jeroen Saris started his own business de Stad BV in 1997. Previously he had been Alderman of Urban development, waterfront and the Inner city in Amsterdam (1990-1994), and party leader of Groen Links (the green party) in the municipal council.

De Stad BV is a concultancy in urban and regional development in a broad sense: physical planning, future research, economic performance, urban culture and governance.

Jeroen Saris is one of the founding fathers of the Dutch Platform for regional cooperation and strategy.

Jeroen Saris is and has been involved as consultant in several Dutch regions: Arnhem Nijmegen, Brainport Eindhoven, Metropolitan Region of Amsterdam, BrabantStad (5 cooperating cities and the provincial board) and North Netherlands. He also made a study of Metropolitan development in the US, Germany and UK. De Stad bv specializes in informal planning: innovation of policies of decision making in the field of environmental development and infrastructure. This innovation, directed towards the interaction between stakeholders often widely different in interests, has become indispensable for policy makers to be able to manage the increasing complexities of a global urban system.

JEROEN SARIS

51


52

METRO IN PROGRESS

GET IN-VOLVED!

Willing to contribute to the Metro in Progress Programme, to share your experience or looking to learn from experiences elsewhere? Please get in touch with us:

INTA18, rue Daval75011 ParisFrancet. 0033 1 58 30 34 52e. [email protected]. www.inta-aivn.org

DELTAMETROPOOL ASSOCIATIONPO Box 600 3000AP RotterdamThe Netherlandst. 0031 10 41 30 927e. [email protected]. www.deltametropool.nl

53


What?Metro in Progress is an open-source project on

comparison of metropolitan areas that is currently still in the making. Interviews, programmes, comparisons and reports are available on both the INTA website (www.inta-aivn.org) and on the Deltametropolis Association website (www.deltametropool.nl). You can follow the latest updates of the project via INTA’s Newsletter, twitter (#metroinprogress) and via the Metro in Progress website (www.metroinprogress.org). Furthermore, you can also actively participate!

Who? Policy-makers and professionals, territorial

authoritiesModes of governance change over time, seeking

to give coherence to territories rich in creativity. The cultural and social context, political and administrative systems, economic levels, the legacy of history and so forth are all variables that explain why no single formula exists for the process of metropolitan construction. With this in mind, this programme offers you a wide overview of the metropolitan processes that are taking place worldwide.

We specifically look at more practical experiences to discover how dialogue and exchange between metropolitan stakeholders may be enriched.

How? Sharing knowledge, learning from each other’s

experiences: The interviews, roundtables, desk research etc.

cover a broad range of topics: scaling the metropolitan area, governance and municipal cooperation, new forms of urbanity, metropolitan innovative economy and metropolitan sustainability.

Why?Are you looking for specific answers? Contact us to

organise a joint expert roundtable session that focuses on your specific case.

54

METRO IN PROGRESS

Notes

55


programme booklet - towards a metropolitan project (international roundtable paris, 2016))

Documents