1. Adding Value to the Urban Audit
Urban Audit City Meeting,
14th March 2006

2. Contents
Aims, Approach and Results to be Expected
Some results from Internet survey
3. Examples of Maps

3. Aims of the project
Describe the current state of European cities and the changes over time; including the position of cities within their countries through country chapters
To create a clear set of city typologies – helping to organise the cities in different groups facilitating the exchange of experience
To demonstrate the use of the urban audit – helping to provide a guide to urgan poliy based on the relative positioning of a city
Assess the strengths and weakensses of the Urban Audit

4. Key Approach: Creating Value

5. Relation between aims, tasks and deliverables

6. State of European Cities Report: A. Typology & Trends
Aim:
Main deliverable that will set the bar for the future
Balanced trend report with proper attention to different thematic categories
Attention to subcity level in social sections
Easy-to-understand and appealing classifications/ typologies
Methodology should not distract us from focusing on the information

7. State of European Cities Report: A. Typology & Trends
Deliverables:
Main State of Cities Report (approx. 150 pages) including an Executive Summary
Approach:
Identify 20 key indicators (based on availability, user interest and EU interest)
Focus on city level – use other levels for comparison (disparities)
Gross list of typologies to be tested by team and external experts

8. State of European Cities Report: B. Country Chapters
Aim:
Description of the national urban hierarchy, trends
Overview of main themes, focusing on the question ‘how much power do cities have?’ Competence of city authorities and their limitations – who decides what – putting cities on a scale, focus on competitiveness areas
Notes regarding the limitation of the Urban Audit

9. State of European Cities Report: B. Country Chapters
Deliverables:
2.5 pages per country (presented in Annex to report)
Approach:
Introductory overview of decentralisation trends
Focus on 6 important tasks at city level
Use of detailed template with specific questions (use of scale 1-5)
Using specific guidelines/manual/instructions (including an explanation of terms used)
Pilots in 3 countries (North, Central, East)

10. 2. Case Studies Aim: Comparing cities as a value added
Collaboration with city authorities
Useful example/template: what can you do with the Urban Audit?
Short and concise deliverables (including some process aspects)
Focus on transferable key issues only (especially within the typology - no need to be comprehensive)
4-6 accessible case studies (balanced package in terms of size, typology and geographic position within EU)
Linking with Regional Programming/Structural Funds would be especially interesting

11. 2. Case Studies Deliverables Approach 4 to 5 5-page case studies
Profiles with existing UA data
Create a long-list of possible cities with whom we have contacts
Selection criteria include: geographic coverage, size, contacts, Internet Questionnaire response, fit with typologies
Dependent on cooperation of local actors and geographical spread
Focus on local policy issues and challenges that matter to this type of cities

12. 3. Future Direction for the UA
Expectation:
Write down experiences with the usage (including a judgment about LUZ)
Comment on the new list of variables (for 2009) – e.g. strange outlyers
Deliverables:
Note on Strengths/Weaknesses
Approach
Take note of comments throughout the project

13. Time planning

14. Expert Panel NW Europe Prof. M. Parkinson Prof. J. Lambooy
C& E. Europe
Prof. G. Gorzelak
S. Europe
M. Pezzini (OECD)
-> Additional input (User perspective): Greg Clark (Cities and Regions)

15. Some results from the Internet Questionnaire: Approach
Identification of correct ‘avant garde’ target groups – availability of addresses (UA contact points, URBACT, Eurocities, EUKN, Urban II Networks, Metrex)
Questionnaire focusing on ‘have you used the UA? How, and for what purpose?’
Sent out by Commission
236 responses; of which 34% from city administrations ( fully usable)
Respondents tend to come more from Netherlands, Germany, Spain, UK, Italy, Belgium

16. Some results from the Internet Questionnaire
Urban Audit is actively used for preparing policy documents (45%), briefing politicians (30%), academic research (23%) and government research (21%)
UA is used above all for EU trends development (48%), ranking (26%), benchmarking (31%)
Key interest in identifying similar cities (27%) and constructing city typologies (23%)
UA provides data that were not accessible before in 72% of cases
Key areas for comparison: 1) Economic performance 2) Social cohesion 3) Population growth

17. Case Studies A. Internet Questionnaire – Important subjects

18. Jan Maarten de Vet Tel. (32) 2 743 89 49 Janmaarten_devet@ecotec.com
For more information, comments or interest in joining our case study work:
Jan Maarten de Vet
Tel. (32)