Urban Audit 2006 POLAND

Overview 1998 – setting up the Urban Audit project (pilot phase). Up to now there have been 3 phases of the project. 2003 - Poland joined the second phase of the project. 23 Polish cities were included. December 2006 - third phase of the project, covering 28 Polish cities (5 new and 17 LCA’s).

Organisational set-up 28 city halls 16 Regional Statistical Offices NUAC CSO RSO Poznań Poznań Konin Kalisz RSO … City CSCC

Resources 1. Planned budget - almost 103 000 Euro (almost 89% = cost of personnel). 2. Tasks were realised within the planned timetable framework: 22 February 2007 – identification of variables; 22 June 2007 – compilation of maps for spatial units; 22 September – compilation of variables for UA and LCA cities; by 22 June 2008 the final report will be sent to Eurostat. 3. Total number of persons engaged in the project = 178, of which 113 work in regional statistical offices.

Results Urban Audit 2003 Urban Audit 2006 288 variables at the city level (about 87% of required data); 157 variables at LUZ level (92% of required data); 25 variables at the SCD level (about 76% of required data). Urban Audit 2006 193 variables at the city level (about 60% of required data); 102 variables at the LUZ level (about 56% of required data) 13 variables at the SCD level (25% of required data); 194 variables at the national level (about 80% of required data); 25 variables for LCA (about 53% of required data).

Response rate in Poland (%)

User’s satisfaction Growing interest in Urban Audit results among local authorities, central administration, scientists and students. UA data is used to: analyse diversity of Polish cities; compare the quality of life in Polish cities with EU cities; create strategies for urban and agglomeration development; prepare analytical reports that compare metropolitan regions.

Success factors and obstacles popularisation of UA project among various groups of statistical data users widening data coverage for cities by using different data sources developing close cooperation with local authorities Obstacles lack of data sources unreliable data in some cases lack of detailed definition of variables

Cooperation with Eurostat Good practises exchange experiences methodological assistance Areas for improvement definitions and variables should not be changed during the project control algorithm included in UA Glossary corrected or confirmed variables in the 1st round of quality control should not be included in 2nd round –> significant reduction of burden FAQ – direct exchange of meta information

Thank you for attention Dominika Rogalińska d.rogalinska@stat.gov.pl