2005 stipo reurba2 governance best practice enschede zuid eng

8/8/2019 2005 Stipo ReUrbA2 Governance Best Practice Enschede Zuid ENG

1/21

Partners: Province of South Holland, Newcastle City Council, GIU Saarland, English Heritage,

Development Corporation Rotterdam.

Lead Partner:

Urban Regeneration:

from Government

to Governance

A practical outline

ReUrbA2 and Stipo Consult

2005


2/21

2/21

Introduction

The ReUrbA-method

ReUrbA, Restructuring Urbanised Areas, is a partnership of five (English Heritage

in London, Newcastle City Council, GIU Saarland, Rotterdam Development, the

province of South-Holland). The goal is to exchange visions on and methods for

urban regeneration, primarily in order to improve individual projects, but also in

order to develop common insights and to make those more widely available.

During ReUrbA2, a method for urban regeneration arose from shared innovations.

This method is based on four principles:

1. from Government to Governance2. from planned supply to demand-oriented, targeted at specific groups and life-

styles

3. from demolition as starting point to creative transformation principles4. from budget-oriented to value-oriented.From Government to Governance

This publication closely considersgovernance. In all restructuring projects, the

transition from government to governance plays a central role, as it does in the

five ReUrbA projects. Governance is a necessary condition for bringing vision and

realisation closer together. Authorities can no longer achieve implementation on

their own especially where urban regeneration and restructuring are concerned.

Compared to building in open fields, there are a multitude of established

stakeholders, each with their own specific interests and investments. These parties

need to be involved, not just during the implementation of projects, but

throughout the various phases of planning and development.

Government bodies depend on the contributions of others, as the role of

administration is no longer to develop a plan and find support for it, but rather to

bring together and coordinate plans of the various stakeholders. The authorities

no longer set the agenda and direct the process of involving other parties, but

rather they make sure they know what other agendas run alongside their own and

try to build alliances between stakeholders. Governance means finding partnersand finding ways to link partners strategies so as to create commitment to the

success of the project.

In other words, from government to governance,

creating a strategic triangle for urban regeneration:

government bodies (local, districts, regions) end-users (residents, entrepreneurs) investors (financial and social).The authorities can no longer plan from behind a desk. All of a sudden, they need

to develop entrepreneurship and organisational power. Governing bodies need to

form alliances, aimed at common goals, which otherwise would not have existed.


3/21

3/21

And all this within a force field with too many rather than too few stakeholders,

where it is uncertain at best whether those stakeholders appreciate the

interference of authorities at all.

This calls for a completely new set of methods and skills, compared to what

boroughs, cities and provinces are used to. Completely different tasks than most

policy makers and project managers were originally hired to do. A high demand

for new insights has arisen, therefore, but they have to be practically viable!

Too much theory, too little practice

The transition from government to governance is not unique to the ReUrbA

Partnership. In recent times, volumes have been written and published on

governance. But practical, concrete descriptions of experiences with governance

in urban regeneration and restructuring have hardly been written, let alone in such

a way as to make them applicable to other projects. In order to start filling thisgap, this ReUrbA report contains an experience-based description of a method of

governance which is applicable in actual practice.

In A practical method: Kultuurstraat and Civic Steering, a method of

governance is described which was used in practice for the urban regeneration

project Kultuurstraat1 Wesselerbrink in Enschede South, The Netherlands. The

Wesselerbrink is one of 56 areas listed for restructuring by the Dutch Ministry of

Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment (VROM). Governance was used

there to make sure the social infrastructure would not lag behind the physical

restructuring. Over a period of 7 months, an action plan was put together jointly

by residents, investors, neighbourhood workers, external inspirators, council

members and policy makers. The first projects started within that first period.

Vision and realisation were closely linked. The result is, that most projects are

carried by (different chains of) residents and investors, instead of by the

authorities. The underlying methods were the Stipo-approach, combined with the

Enschede model for working on district-level.

The Kultuurstraat was appointed as a beacon project by the Ministry of VROM

because of the integrated physical and social approach. It also won the 2005

ECORYS restructuring price out of all 56 listed areas in The Netherlands, having

the most innovative and solution-oriented restructuring approach.

1 Literally translated, this means Culture Street


4/21

4/21

Table of contents

Introduction...................................................................................................2

The ReUrbA-method.............................. .................................. .................................. ......... 2

From Government to Governance............................... ................................ ................... 2

Too much theory, too little practice ................................ ................................ ............... 3

A practical method: Kultuurstraat and Civic Steering .............................5

Stop moving problems around!............................... ................................ .......................... 5

Organisation reflecting society..... .................................. .................................. ................. 5Bounded rationality.............................. .................................. .................................. ............ 7

Civic Steering, a new paradigm?..... ................................ ................................. ................ 8

The Enschede model ............................. .................................. .................................. ....10

The Stipo-approach........................................................................................................10

Governance in practice: the Civic Steering-method..................................................11

1. Aiming Governance: core vision with pillars.......................................................12

2. Building Governance gradually: the co-makers strategy...................................13

3. Governance with intentional side-effects.............................................................15

4. Putting governance in its context: middle-up-down by positioning...............15

5. Aiming governance at the future: the ideal neighbourhood.......................... ..16

6. Leading governance to creativity: simple cross-sections................................167. Leading governance to commitment and execution: a chain of chains.........17

Governance and governments new role and competencies...............................18

Credits .........................................................................................................21

Kultuurstraat and Civic Steering.....................................................................................21

Stipo Consult.......................................................................................................................21

District Management Enschede South...........................................................................21

ReUrbA2................................................................................................................................21Translation............................................................................................................................21


5/21


6/21

6/21

towns and boring working areas, as well as a shift from heavy industry to a

service economy, that ideal has been turned upside down. A new ideal of

lively, mixed districts where social activities complement the local economy

and integrated care has forced the different sectors to join forces, both when

building new and when restructuring existing areas.

Rotterdam area as an indicative example: more existing urban areas: in the forty years afterWWII more than eight times as much city was added than in all previous centuries puttogether.

3. From mostly spatial to spatial-economic-social steering ambitions.Merely piling up bricks either leaves problems behind the front door unsolved,

or moves them to other areas. The ambition to enforce the social

infrastructure alongside the physical brings different sectors together, for

redevelopment and high-quality maintenance. This has translated into locally

focused project management.

4.

From quantity to quality demanding society When we go even deeper,social changes appear to be hiding behind the shift in focus of policy-makers.

Right after WWII, quantity production of housing was the quality wanted.

Standards may have been lower then. A run-of-the-mill apartment block and a

linoleum-floored community building was all we expected. Who ever spoke

about aesthetic quality back then? About cultural building, about character and

distinctive architecture? About ecological building or even building for life?

The houses we hastily built back then now turn out to lag behind the wishes

of a ageing, individualised, double income and task-combining society. This

forces the different sectors to cooperate much more closely.

5. From Christaller to Specialisation. The old, hierarchical planning modelsno longer work the moment mothers start working, the moment both adults

need to have access to a car and the moment they start shaping their lives

Christaller no longer works due to

changed mobility patterns and the rise

of a network society.


7/21

7/21

combining household chores with work, asking themselves questions like

where can I most efficiently shop for groceries on my way home? Changed

mobility patterns render old planning models like Christallers obsolete. A

network society uses highly specialised facilities at self-chosen locations,

placing increased importance on a distinctive identity for different areas.

Urban facilities, which used to be logically placed in the centre of a city, now

end up in suburbs, on city-edges or even in commuter-towns. This requires

new cross-links.

6. From local government from above, to local government betweenstakeholders. A fundamental change in all of this is governments new

position. During post-war rebuilding of the country, strong government was

required. Now this period has ended, government can no longer decide on its

own, but is merely one of the parties between other institutions and

organisations, like housing associations and residents groups. The historical,directing government is now viewed as a hurdle that needs to be overcome or

even simply ignored. With luck, it will turn itself into a chain-regulating

government. Chain-regulation has many effects, among which is the forced

taking down of boundaries between sectors.

All in all, these movements have to major consequences for government bodies:

1. They render independent operating within the spatial and social sectorsimpossible.

2. They make the switch from government planning from behind a desk togovernance joint planning with residents and investors crucial.

Bounded rationality

This raises the question: where does this lead? How should governments go about

solving social problems like urban renewal? There are those who prophecy the

end of all planning. The modernist illusion of being able to shape society is

followed by a deeply-rooted post-modernist distrust of any categorical regulating

principles. An interesting train of thought which, followed through to its extreme,

would result in processes too complex to control with an infinite amount of

interconnected subjects and sectors.

All this is linked to the theory of bounded rationality (by, among others, H.A.

Simon). People as well as organisations can only store and access a limited amount

of information and knowledge. They are, therefore, also limited in their ability to

make rational decisions, as it is nearly impossible to oversee all the available

alternatives. In the end, people will reach their final conclusions based on very

bounded rationality. The concept means, basically, not seeing the wood for the

trees. Added to the realisation that we cannot control the shape of society, this

means that (spatial) planning, too, is an illusion.

Our position is, however, that planning, or steering, is still possible, as long as our

approach takes the effects of bounded rationality into account.


8/21

8/21

The example of Enschede South and the results achieved there prove our position:

1. When an issue becomes too complex, the trick is too cut it down intomanageable, simple pieces.

2. Not too much time and energy is spent analysing and looking back, thuspreventing a excess of irrelevant or less important information. Instead, we

look forward from the start to a possible future and from there we reason

our way back to the present.

3. We keep the organisation small and efficient: no large project organisation buta small nuclear team. A large organisation will get stuck in endless meetings

which gradually loses its edge. The Kultuurstraat was set up by a small but

purposeful nuclear team of district managers and a few external Stipo

consultants, client and consultant on one and the same team. This is necessary

in a process where the outcome is unknown. We accept the uncertainty that

goes with it: that is what the process is all about.4. This makes certain conditions necessary. The risk of such a small organisationis its vulnerability, which we overcome by making the planning period as short

as possible (in the case of Enschede South this was effectively 7 months) and

with sufficient staying power within the nuclear team to get from idea to

result. At the same time, we make sure the urban sectors actively contribute

to the implementation of the projects.

But above all, we overcome this vulnerability by consciously tapping into the

organisational power of other parties and stakeholders (enhancement, see

below).5. Finally, this way of working makes high demands on the competences within

the team. The client needs to be sensitive to its environment (strongrelationships with institutions, residents networks, local culture, communityservices, local authorities), be maximally competitive and take every chancethey get to achieve concrete results on parts of the entire vision. Theconsultants need to supply the process with explicit ideas and expertise. Bothmust cultivate a boundless curiosity and creativity so unexpecteddevelopments can be incorporated at any time.

Above all, this method consciously does not start with an integrated approach.

Integrality may be a result, but not a foundation. If it were, the project

management would drown in a sea of information right from the start, which

would prevent them from making distinctive, astute choices. We do, however,work along a jointly supported course, which connects the different sectors. In

order to keep that course straight and manageable it is defined by three main

ambitions, the pillars. These are arrived at in stages. They are not defined based

on the separate meetings and interviews, but once again by interpretation.

Civic Steering, a new paradigm?

In the Wesselerbrink approach, the physical, social, economical and safety sectors

do not play very distinct roles. Central to the approach are present and future

living within the district, not the different areas of policy-making. Steering power is

developed, not from a central control mechanism, but through the more modern

tactic of cross-fertilisation, chain-organisation and unleashing. We have named thissteering power Civic Steering.


9/21

9/21

social

spatial

economiic

middle-

up-down

city

region

district

neighbourhood

C I V I C S T E E R I N G

safety

Civic Steering does not take a bottom-up approach, because a vision would get

stuck in the present and in not-in-my-backyard (NIMBY) mechanisms. Nor is it

implemented top-down, as support would be lacking and the problem-solving

know-how from the field would not be used optimally. Finding the right balance

between the two results in a middle-up-down approach. The next few paragraphs

explain how this works.

One central question in urban regeneration is how physical restructuring can go

hand in hand with investments in social and cultural infrastructure, a stronger local

economy and in safety. The Wesselerbrink assignment focused primarily on social-physical cooperation, a combination that functions less than perfectly in the world

of urban regeneration. Civic Steering does not attribute a central role to one or

the other, nor to the cooperation between the two, but rather to the issues

raised by the middle-up-down approach. From the core targets, placed in an

increasingly wide perspective, the various sectors of policy are involved as needed.

This results in an approach that differs fundamentally from the linear

administrative organisation.

A paradigm is a set of basic rules which we use to capture reality and try to mould

it to our wishes. A linear organisation divided into different sectors is one such

paradigm, and so are spatial planning and welfare policy. As reality changes with

time, so our paradigms change with it. But this is not an autonomous process.

Paradigms carry deeply-rooted patterns with them. A paradigm shift (Kuhn) is

fundamental and all-enveloping. Often, they emerge long after reality has changed,

but we are still holding on frantically to our old paradigm.

The Civic Steering method, used in the Kultuurstraat, could be such a new

paradigm, the answer to calls for governance and cooperation between sectors

like the social and the physical. Civic Steering is a generalists discipline, but

specialists are needed for the execution. Building will always be necessary, making

specific know-how essential. Crime prevention, too, is a specialised discipline.

These mono-disciplines are crucial to help develop the issues raised by theprocess of Civic Steering.


10/21

10/21

The Enschede model

Civic Steering stems from two sources. The first is the Enschede model of

working at city-district level, consciously keeping district-organisations very small

so as to avoid competition with the administration at city level and in order to

stimulate innovative cooperation with social partners within the district.

The essentials of the Enschede model are:

district management as a local stakeholder, separate from but connected to theadministrative sectors, with good support from residents, parties and political

administration.

steering towards processes based on local initiatives (which should be keptlocal): joining and interweaving, monitor ambitions and long-term goals, keeping

an open agenda.

more important than content itself is trusting that quality of content willemerge from the process, because it is run by local stakeholders.

focused and experimental: results count, act before you think is the motto, aninversion of the usual advice. Dont ponder a decision for too long, but learn

along the way.

steering towards long-term effects (not long-term results!) and short-termresults (quick successes).

working close to street-reality forces us to use a coherent approach.The Stipo-approach

Secondly, Civic Steering stems from the Stipo-approach, developed at the

University of Amsterdam and improved by use in practice.

The essentials of the Stipo-approach are:

Middle-up-

down

Not top-down (imposing plans from above does not work)

nor just bottom-up (which leads to NIMBY-thinking). Middle-

up-down: innovative ideas, know-how and inspiration from

within a neighbourhood are mobilised to arrive at a well

thought out plan, which is not imposed from above but built

from the ground. At the same time, it is positioned within its

wider surroundings and developments which within the next

ten years will put the area in a different position. Refreshing

outside inspiration is mobilised in order to expand fantasiesabout possible futures.

Enhancement Initiative is not stolen, but rewarded. Existing initiatives are the

starting point. Running projects are not slowed down, but

strengthened by cleverly connecting them to other projects.

Co-makership The work is not done from behind the drawing-table. Key-

actors, residents, investors, council members and policy-

makers become co-makers of a plan by having them contribute

actively. It then becomes their vision, their project.


11/21

11/21

Future-

oriented

Interviews are conducted based on ideal neighbourhoods. Not

from the past to the present (solving past problems) or even

from the present to tomorrow, but from a moment ten to

twenty years from now to the present, distilling strategies

from reasoning backwards.

Integrate

thinking and

acting

From the beginning, ideals are linked to concrete actions, even

during the formulation of the vision. By starting to act as soon

as you start tot think, the plan does not stay on paper. Quick

wins are essential in a low-confidence environment in order to

keep up faith in change and the achievement of ambitious

goals.

Cross-sections

and creativity

People and parties are brought together in workshops so new,

unexpected combinations arise and people can link upinitiatives and ideas. Cross-sections are organised between

areas of expertise and worlds of thought, bringing new insights,

actions and enthusiasm. Creativity grows where different

worlds meet.

Disentangling During all phases, a method of disentangling is applied. Each

complex issue of urban renewal is composed of simple

problems. Staying focused on the entire complex does not

solve a problem. By disentangling it, our options become clear.

Interviews with co-makers serve to activate project ideas for

the simple problems thus formulated.

Integral as a

result, not an

assumption

By conducting one-on-one interviews and organising specific

cross-section meetings, the project stays manageable and

motivating for participants. No large discussion groups with

little active energy, but a gradual build-up of communication.

Disentangling enables innovation on sub-topics, which are then

linked together. Integrality can be the result, but is

emphatically not assumed at the outset.

Governance in practice: the Civic Steering-method

This method for governance was developed to strengthen social infrastructure,

but is described in such a way as to be applicable in other situations as well. To

achieve that, a thorough understanding of the carefully chosen structure and

underlying vision are essential.

We will describe the method as if it were a recipe, assuming that a true chef will

not follow recipes to the letter, but use them creatively to suit his own needs and

wishes. New situations will at least require the lessons learnt during this project

to be grafted onto your specific situation and local culture. Recipes are no more

than reconstructions of actual events, base on experience and testing (tasting andserving). Civic Steering, then, is not an approach we made up beforehand, but an


12/21

12/21

analytic report of what proved effective. It is the result of trial and error, of

continual feedback and endless fine-tuning.

Nor is this method intended as a template. The various stages don not have to be

gone through subsequently that wont in fact be possible. An interview with a

resident or an investor, for example, can be used to feed into different stages at

once. Integrating thinking and acting means that some parts of the project are put

into execution immediately.

Nevertheless, we will start by presenting a schematic overview of the method, to

provide insight in its broad outline.

pillarsG

O

V

E

R

N

A

N

C

E

Stipo Consult

Amsterdamwww.stipo.nl

copying

allowed

if source ismentioned

ideals

general order

implementation

co-makers

cross-sections

co-makers +

external

inspirators

vision for the future

bilateral

interviews

co-makers

(investors,

residents)

core vision

The various stages of the project are discussed below.

1. Aiming Governance: core vision with pillars

Governance does not mean there is no underlying vision. On the contrary:

governance works much better when initiated by someone who wants something.

It is, therefore, important to capture the heart of your vision in a few pillars.

Those pillars firmly state the most important goals for a neighbourhood. Limit

yourself to two or three, no more, so they can be referred to at any stage of the

daily process (less is more!). Stick to the outlines, so there is room for other

peoples contributions (for Kultuurstraat, the pillars were more neighbourhood

pride, a unique and loved neighbourhood and strengthening social cooperation:

new neighbourliness). Be prepared to make changes as the process moves along.

Use the pillars to act and think about separate initiatives from one shared point of

view, to create coherence between initiatives and have them strengthen each

other, in order to make choices and keep a clear focus. Name the pillars based oninterviews with clients and council members, and possibly some of the more

prominent residents and investors. The pillars will not emerge from those

interviews literally, an analysis from above will be needed. It enhances steering


13/21

13/21

power if the pillars are sanctioned at the outset by those who are politically

responsible.

2. Building Governance gradually: the co-makers strategy

Give co-makers an essential role in all stages of the project. Aim your strategy at

making residents, investors, policy makers, government officials and other

stakeholders feel responsible for the process, rather than standing on the side-

lines. Their contributions literally make them co-makers.

Use working with co-makers as a two-edged sword: In a relatively short time,

gather stimulating information and know-how necessary for innovation (impossible

to do so using websites, publications or statistic analyses alone). At the same time,

build commitment from the important players to the accomplishment of those

innovations.

If co-makership is to be successful, a number of conditions have to be met:

start bilaterally: dont raise too many expectations too soon with too manypeople, making the rest of the process unmanageable; rather, get a few people

involved properly; build up trust gradually so innovation can be achieved.

during interviews, maintain an open attitude and show honest interest:dialogue, two-way traffic, consciously bypassing your own expertise from time

to time, start from the world of the co-maker(s), do not use a list of questions

without room for expansion.

get the thought process away from the here and now; ask each co-maker whathe or she wants the neighbourhood to be and what they want to eliminate.

This will serve as input for the ideal neighbourhood. you are not without goals of your own during your interview, you want to

achieve something (a.o. the pillars); try to forge coalitions and show a

fundamental readiness mobilise different voices, turn in new directions where

the need to do so is founded.

even during the interviews, link the ideals to concrete actions by initiators,investors and policy-makers; the co-maker interview is a subtle game of give

and take.

show the co-maker within a short period of time what is done with his or hercontributions: cash in on intermediate results through interview reports,

repeat-discussions or concrete (executive) actions; if results stay out for too

long, the co-maker will give up.

Select a few co-makers using three questions as criteria:

1. What information do we need and who can give us sparkling ideas?2. Who is willing to contribute to the thought-process constructively (simply

complaining doesnt help)?

3. Who take key-positions within larger groups? (If you have a key-figure onboard, you have the larger group along for free. It is far more convincing when

residents take over communication with their own peers, than when you

explain things to them as an outsider).

Opinions and views can differ fundamentally. By interviewing a range of co-makers,

you will gradually get a full picture and will be able to compare different


14/21

14/21

viewpoints. Having gained a complete overview of wishes, opportunities and plans

for the future, link them all together in a proposed plan of action and present this

to the co-makers. Then, bring the various co-makers together literally (see cross-

sections).

Dos & Donts for co-maker interviews

Dos:

Incorporate statements and ideas of co-makers you interview into the visionand the plans;

Use your energy for finding the innovative, the surprising in the intervieweesstatements. Do not tell the interviewee you already know what theyre saying.

Help the interviewee find new ideas and solutions (keep asking about possiblesolutions, not problems).

Share your own ideas for solutions and stimulate the interviewee to do thesame. Be willing to use the interviewees ideas as elements or even foundations of

your own vision. Thus, a joint vision will sooner be achieved, which is the basis

of co-makership.

Write an interview report aimed at maximum enthusiasm with theinterviewee.

Donts:

Dont be drawn into an argument. Your goal should not be to defend yourown vision or convince the interviewee.

Dont tell the interviewee what problems the council sees just to tell him orher how the council intends to solve those.

Avoid spending energy on finding problems and faults with the ideas of theinterviewee.

Never use your knowledge and expertise to score a point. Dont wait too long following up on the interview (black box effect).Consciously choose a specific order in categories of co-makers you interview. For

the Kultuurstraat project, the following order was chosen:

1. visionaries in order to be able to put current developments, which will

come up in following interviews, into a wide, long-term

perspective;

2. current

residents

primary target-group of your work; experts by experience of

current living conditions and existing cultural and social

structures; starting point for tapping into existing forces within

the neighbourhood; an occasional counter question, stemming

from the interviews with visionaries, can arise;


15/21

15/21

3. investors in order to gain a thorough understanding of current investment

plans, to give a first indication of residents views, to avoid

hindering running projects but instead strengthen them by new,

smart combinations; your knowledge of what the residents want

allows you to question investors in-depth.

4.

professionals

partly experts by experience, partly investors in the future

neighbourhood.

5. council

members

important for steering on a broad level and to involve at an early

stage

6. policy

makers

now you are ready to compare the views of residents, investors

and council members to policy programmes impartially and see

where initiatives can be tied together and deepened.

7. external

inspirators

in order to get critical reflections on the views and thoughts on

neighbourhood development from a fresh outside perspective,

people with experience elsewhere who can contribute from a

helicopter view; this will make available extra thinking power

and network, allow you to hold a mirror up to the

neighbourhood and make solutions from elsewhere work for

this area.

3. Governance with intentional side-effects

Developing a plan is not the Civic Steering methods only goal, it also aims at anumber of intentional side-effects. A first side-effect is the strengthening of

commitment from residents, investors and professionals. They see their

contributions being heeded, that it is in fact they who jointly develop the plan of

action. This is the co-makers effect: the participant becomes co-developer and

thus co-owner of the plan of action.

A second side-effect is that you get closer to the actual developments, allowing

you to respond and intervene more quickly and accurately. Some wishes lead to

immediate implementation, even during the interview period, making the first

successes visible straight away. Integrating thinking and acting is a theory we put in

to practice right from the start.

A third side-effect is sifting common themes concerns and interests from the

series of interviews, strengthening participants involvement even further.

4. Putting governance in its context: middle-up-down by positioning

Interviews with residents first and foremost help paint a picture of the present. A

neighbourhood always functions within a wider context, and will change function

and character over the years. Alongside the picture of the here and now, make

sure you present images of future developments, both of the neighbourhood itself

and of its surroundings. Pay special attention to positioning the neighbourhood

within a larger area as well as in time:

creating a deeper understanding of current and pending initiatives andinvestments and how they are linked together; making the strengths of the neighbourhood explicit; key figures in and around the area become party to the three pillars.


16/21

16/21

5. Aiming governance at the future: the ideal neighbourhood

Aim at a task-culture, in which inclination determines courage, ability and

obligation (this in contrast to a role-culture, where obligation and ability

determine inclination). Investigate ambitions and wishes first, make sure they are

shared, then look for strategies and means.

vision

inclination

structure, culture

obligation / permission

strategycourage

core competenciesabilities

vision

inclination

structure, culture

obligation / permission

strategycourage

core competenciesabilities

Formulating the ideal neighbourhood plays an essential part in this. In co-maker

interviews, discussions with council members and the organisation, keep putting

the following question central first: which are the three most important changes

that you want to have taken place in ten to twenty years? Answers may be images

(as in the neighbourhood branding sessions, where residents visualise their own

identity).

From here, an ideal neighbourhood is built, allowing you to travel forward in time

and reason your way back to the present. By doing so in a number of bilateral

interviews, spread out over the different categories of stakeholders, widely varying

answers will come up. Use the pillars to shape the ideal neighbourhood, both

physically/spatially and socially.

This process will supply you with knowledge and insights that cannot be conceived

from behind a desk. Problems and opportunities in a neighbourhood as well as its

residents are put at the centre of things, rather than certain policy sectors. The

approach is no longer aimed at one specific sector like spatial planning or social

welfare, but at the quality of living in a neighbourhood. What that quality is orshould be cannot be determined from above or from ground-level, but should be a

rich mixture gained from sources of knowledge and experience.

6. Leading governance to creativity: simple cross-sections

A city or city district can rarely accomplish projects aimed at social infrastructure

on its own. Local government increasingly has to depend on partners and

investors with goals of their own. Apart from partners involvement in a shared

ideal neighbourhood, extra leverage is needed to get initiatives of the ground

properly. This leverage can be found in creating unique combinations on cross-

sections.

In any neighbourhood, there are running activities and projects. They contributeto innovation, but without steering they each act separately, without interaction.

By facilitating contact between partners involved in specific themes, you create

task culture: inclination

determines obligation, courage and

role culture: obligation determines

inclination, courage and ability


17/21

17/21

such combinations; both spatially (shared use of buildings and public space) and in

activities (using each others activities, facilities, organisations).

These combinations have three characteristics in common: they bring all parties

closer to reaching their targets; they create completely new, unexpected

opportunities; finally, they cost little more than what it takes to find the

combination. They are, therefore, smart combinations.

Opportunities to link developments to each other effectively and valuably nearly

always exist, but are also unique and cannot be repeated. Making the best use of

these opportunities requires tailor-made combinations, which have added value

for this specific project alone, and at this particular moment in time. Finding smart

opportunities and possible combinations requires creativity and a birds eye view.

And creativity springs from exchanging ideas.

For the Kultuurstraat Wesselerbrink, eight cross-sections of ideas were named,important topics which needed to be dealt with in the neighbourhood, each with

their underlying combinations of initiatives and capabilities of separate parties.

Work out your cross-sections in workshops (see below).

To give you an idea of possible cross-sections and how they can work, we briefly

present the main ones from Kultuurstraat below:

Groups from different cultural backgrounds are brought together, not with asingle grant but by initiating structural commercial activities.

A corporation of facilities is founded, which generates value-oriented fundingfor strong community buildings and social and cultural facilities. The city real

estate company and housing associations jointly invest in the corporation,based on the prospect of an increase in the value of real-estate in the area.

The neighbourhood is transformed into a child-friendly environment forparents with young children and older youth. At the same time, a service area

for independent living for the elderly is developed. Both environments are

created coherently.

The functional lane-structure is made into the heart of the neighbourhoodpride, by turning them into large-scale art-projects; the smaller sections within

the neighbourhood are given their own character by asking residents to choose

a specific theme which will colour their particular area.

In order to invoke pride and channel the emotions resulting from therestructuring, a neighbourhood soap is organised.

New organisational power is given to preventive social work (youth work, carefor the elderly, crime prevention) by generating new funding through property

developers in the neighbourhood.

7. Leading governance to commitment and execution: a chain of chains

At each cross-section a chain differently composed each time can be made

from people and organisations that have something to say about the topic in some

way, who undertake activities or want to invest or who simply bring refreshing

ideas to the table. After the first series of bilateral interviews, the time has come

to bring residents, investors, etc, in different combinations, together on such across-section.


18/21

18/21

During this stage, look for cross-sections of initiatives and investments. Your goal

is to enhance and enforce the separate initiatives as well as the accomplishment of

your vision. Use the insights from earlier stages. Organising cross-sections inspires

creativity and enthusiasm.

On specific topics, bring together the thought processes of residents, initiators,

artists and professionals. Make sure they meet in a creative setting so they can

exchange and shape their ideas and decide on joint follow-up actions. Show

connections between initiatives that were unnoticed before. This process of

linking is active and creative and will lead to new combinations. Close these

workshops by formulating (trial) projects that jointly make up the first (quick)

successes and the long term programme, naming the main stakeholders and one

owner. It is a concentrated and motivating form of chain organising.

Thus, you organise cross-fertilisation between ideas, angles and interests. This

kind of workshop will frequently lead you somewhere you had not expected

beforehand. Separating expected effects (goals) from expected results (measures)can help you be flexible. The expected effects will remain unchanged during these

workshops, while the results and measures they come up with are often a

complete surprise.

In Enschede, each workshop had concrete results, project ideas or follow-up

actions. Each workshop presented a group of people who felt committed to the

subject and the commonly desired innovation to the extend that they were willing

to get involved on a permanent basis. And almost all workshops resulted in one

owner. Rarely, this was a government official. Much more frequently, it was a

resident, a professional or an investor. Sometimes the result was a short project

with a good chance of short-term success, while at other times long-term projectswith various intermediate stages were formulated.

For the implementation and steering, Enschede South still uses the workshop

method. Before each summer, the progress of the various projects is reflected on

in workshops. Each December the co-makers meet in workshops in order to

formulate new initiatives and start on their implementation.

Governance and governments new role and competencies

Governance means that a process is started within a network of many active and

invested parties. But what does this mean for the role of governments? For

usually, they are among the initiators for urban regeneration, if not the only ones.

Governments role is clearly no longer to think up plans from behind a desk and

without consulting anyone, to then ambush the other parties with it, either

assisted by a clever communication strategy or not. This traditional way of

working does not do justice to the force-field of initiators and investors, who each

have their own agenda for the area which is to be restructured. It does not create

support. It kills the initiatives already there. And it leads to an unnecessary poverty

of ideas for planning and projects.

In governance, governments can still initiate, but will have to find a completely

different way to play their role. They become knowledge brokers rather thanknowledge creators. Governments cannot simply run their own agendas, but have

to accept the fact that there are others with their own legitimate agendas. It is up


19/21

19/21

to governments to know and acknowledge those and to forge new coalitions and

chains between them. Governments can no longer assume a bureaucratic attitude

of authority. New skills are needed regarding entrepreneurship and creativity.

Developing plans should not lead to colourless compromises as a result of too

wide consultation where everybody has to be kept satisfied.

Creativity is needed to lead the process through innovations to a place nobody

knew existed. To create unexpected ideas by not using the stream of information

literally but interpreting it and get refreshing outside expertise in at crucial

moments.

Entrepreneurship is needed to get from innovative ideas to their

implementation, to reward and link up existing initiatives and to tap into new

sources of investment. To steer discussions to commitment at the right moment.

And to support chains in the execution when necessary, help organise funds in

most cases consciously without taking over end responsibility.

It is the lack of these two qualities that causes processes of governance to end in

disappointment as often as not. Governance, then, is no guarantee for success, but

depends largely on the way it is organised. We will end, therefore, by listing the

most important dos and donts for governments in putting governance into

practice:

not but:

anything you say aim commitment from all parties

involved from a razor sharp course

generating an unmanageable amount of

expectations

careful build-up of communication

strategy, consciously starting low-key,

ending big

using any available input start with the strongest links, or the

weaker ones will determine innovative

and active power

working integrally as a matter of

course, drowning in a swamp where

everything is connected to everything

else

disentangling of complex problems to

simple, manageable chunks

large project group minimal cuisine: small organisationnarrow-mindedness accepting process creativity and the

uncertainty of searching fort the

unknown

trying to cover up at every stage for

fear of failure or of being held

accountable

act before you think, courage and

entrepreneurship

blocking, taking over or stealing

initiatives

reward initiatives, smartly combining

them and forging chains that would

otherwise not exist, stepping aside in

time to allow partners to take

responsibility and credit


20/21

20/21

not but:

directing in terms of results based on

mistrust and a wish to keep market

forces on a leash

steering in terms of goals in order to

stimulate creative market forces to

create their own results for yourgoals

chain direction chain organisation, unleashing, lighting

fires

pillarsG

O

V

E

R

N

A

N

C

E

Stipo Consult

Amsterdamwww.stipo.nl

copyingallowed

if source ismentioned

ideals

general order

implementation

co-makers

cross-sections

co-makers +

external

inspirators

vision for the future

bilateral

interviews

co-makers

(investors,residents)

core vision


21/21

Credits

Kultuurstraat and Civic Steering

The Kultuurstraat Wesselerbrink approach was

based on the well-tried Stipo approach, which was

developed at the University of Amsterdam. For the

Wesselerbrink project, this method was adapted

to fit the local situation and culture of Enschede

South, combined with experience in working by

district level.

Stipo Consult

Spatial strategy

Mr. drs H.E. Karssenberg

[email protected]

www.stipo.nl

phone +31 20 4233 690

Amsterdam, The Netherlands

District Management Enschede South

Mr. M. Verhijde en Ms. A. Oude-Vrielink

Email: [email protected]

www.enschede.nl -> stadsdelen -> stadsdeel zuid

phone +31 53 4750 451

Gemeente Enschede, The Netherlands

ReUrbA2

Mr. M. Reede and Ms. W. Faling

Province of South Holland , The Hague, The

Netherlands

phone +31 70 441 68 45

[email protected]

www.reurba.org

Translation

S. Koers MA, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

[email protected]

www.praktischidealisme.nl

c o n s u l t

ruimtelijke productstrategie

en -ontwikkeling

S t i p o

2005 stipo reurba2 governance best practice enschede zuid eng

Documents