SCATTER workshop, Milan, 24 October 2003 Institutional issues in relation with the control of urban sprawl: from barriers to co-operation Analysis performed by STRATEC and the CRISP (Centre de recherche et dinformation socio-politiques, Brussels) with contributions from all the partners

SCATTER workshop, 24 October Objectives Identify institutional barriers which raise when tackling urban sprawl Analyse new ways of cooperation between institutions Analysis based on 6 case studies

SCATTER workshop, 24 October The 6 case studies Stuttgart Verband Region Stuttgart (created 1994) – covers 179 municipalities Brussels Brussels-Capital Region (created 1989 along with the 2 other Regions) – comprises 19 communes Cooperation agreement between the Regions and the federal state about the future Regional Express Railway Convention between the 3 Regions and the federal state (January 2003) about the future RER

SCATTER workshop, 24 October The 6 case studies (cont.) Helsinki Helsinki Metropolitan Area Council (created 1970) – covers 4 cities : Helsinki, Espoo, Vantaa, Kauniainen Rennes Pays de Rennes (created 1999) – includes 61 municipalities Drawing up of the SCOT Master Plan

SCATTER workshop, 24 October The 6 case studies (cont.) Bristol Joint Strategic Planning and Transport Committee (1996) Brings together 4 counties Produced the Joint Replacement Structure Plan Milan North Milan Development Agency (created 1996) Brings together 4 municipalities and private partners Designed to support the rehabilitation of the old industrialised areas

SCATTER workshop, 24 October The 4 main features of an institution The political composition / the democratic legitimacy: Directly elected representatives Representatives elected at another level Members appointed or designated by another non-elective process Associated to the mode of decision-making

SCATTER workshop, 24 October The 4 main features of an institution (cont.) The power / the action instruments: Legislative power Regulatory power or executive power Intermediary stage regulatory power Recommendations – consultative or expert role Conciliation and dialogue Other action instruments: Of financial nature : fiscal instruments, financial aids, capacity of purchases and sales Planning power

SCATTER workshop, 24 October The 4 main features of an institution (cont.) The matters of competence: e.g. : Land use Housing Transport and mobility Economic policy Environment Social affairs The territory : An entire metropolitan area including the areas were out- migrating activities locate Or only parts of it

SCATTER workshop, 24 October The main features of an institution (cont.) Democratic legitimacy Power/action instruments Matters of competence Territory SCOPE OF AUTHORITY DEGREE OF AUTHORITY The institutional square : a question of balance

SCATTER workshop, 24 October The 6 institutions – Degree of authority

SCATTER workshop, 24 October The 6 institutions – Scope of authority

SCATTER workshop, 24 October Examples of imbalances within an institution Imbalance between territory and objectives particularly crucial when tackling urban sprawl Imbalance between matters of competence and objectives Imbalance between matters of competence and political composition e.g.: representatives elected at municipal level / supra-municipal interests Imbalance between action instruments and objectives e.g.: shortcomings in the fiscal instruments e.g.: institutions having only consultative role can sometimes have a reflection on broader matters

SCATTER workshop, 24 October Examples of imbalances within an institution (cont.) Imbalance related to the political composition e.g.: representatives elected at municipal level e.g.: mistrust towards representatives of the city centre e.g.: difficulties related to the right of veto (consensus is needed)

SCATTER workshop, 24 October Where are institutional obstacles raising from ? 1. From the nature of the institutional framework itself: imbalances between the 4 facets of the institution, shortcomings, inadequacy too much territorial fragmentation competition between institutions working on contiguous territories multiplicity of actors, dissipation of power, no one is taking responsibility inadequate sharing of costs and charges etc.

SCATTER workshop, 24 October Where are institutional obstacles raising from ? (cont.) 2. From conflicts between institutions: competition between actors competent on connected matters on the same territory conflicts between institutions as regards their respective competences conflicts of interests deliberate lack of cooperation lack of an higher level institution able to arbitrate and regulate the conflicts between municipalities etc.

SCATTER workshop, 24 October Types of response to the institutional obstacles 1. Creation of a new institution 2. More or less deep transformation of the existing institutions covering the territory concerned 3. Improvement of cooperation mechanisms between existing institutions 4. Combination of 2 types or of the 3 types

SCATTER workshop, 24 October Types of response to the institutional obstacles (cont.) 1. Creation of a new institution: In charge of implementing policies Coordinating policies (with decision-making and monitoring authority) Generating dialogue and a prospective reflection

SCATTER workshop, 24 October Types of response to the institutional obstacles (cont.) 2. More or less deep transformation of the existing institutions covering the territory concerned, e.g.: Creating a common service between 2 or more institutions Transferring fiscal power from one level to another Flexible revising mechanism for the territory over which the metropolitan institution acts Modify the political composition of the metropolitan institution so that it holds the general interest as a priority Etc.

SCATTER workshop, 24 October Types of response to the institutional obstacles (cont.) 3. Improvement of cooperation mechanisms between existing institutions, e.g.: General cooperation Cooperation around a specific initiative (sector- or territory- based) Limited technical agreements (e.g. to unblock a situation) Creation of a specific institutional scene to tackle urban sprawl (permanent discussion and dialogue instrument) Etc.

SCATTER workshop, 24 October Some conclusions This provides a grid for analysis rather than one single solution There is a variety of institutional solutions Institutions can change One important condition : consistency between the form, the features of the (metropolitan) institution and the objectives that it has to achieve Consistency (as regards policies) with higher level institutions (e.g. state)