3. Propuesta didáctica
3.11. Sesiones de aprendizaje
An effective urban regeneration process since 90s has been thought to reflect the wider circumstances and requirements of a distressed urban locality (in the city or region-wide context). This has led to identification a holistic approach that focuses on the necessity to improve the ways that together reduce social exclusion (society), enhance the economic reintegration of the so called disadvantaged areas (economy) and improve its spatial context (physical environment) (Figure 2.2).
In essence, today, regeneration of deprived urban areas, in content, is expected to provide long-term and wider benefits than ever before. An efficient regeneration process in a distressed urban area is expected to:
¾ Promote smart economic growth
¾ Increase tax revenues
¾ Provide financial return on under-utilized or used property
¾ Create new business/new jobs opportunities in untapped markets
¾ Empower the community (community building)
¾ Address community needs
¾ Remove blight
¾ Increase environmental quality
INPUTS
OUTPUTS
Figure 2.2. The Urban Regeneration Process Economic analysis
Existing plans and policies
Specifies goals and aims
Future requirements company-based action, stimulating green growth Economic development
e.g. support for new and existing firms, improved infrastructure, innovation,
economic diversification
The notions of the latest framework for a sustainable regeneration today can be better understood with the following key principles.
2.3.5.1. Strategic Management of Urban Regeneration
The last years have witnessed a growing consensus amongst policy makers about how a system for the strategic management of urban regeneration could be managed. Not surprisingly, this has been a reflection of the general agreement on strategic planning throughout the theories of urban planning in 90s. The urban policy in strategic planning includes land-use and development planning and stresses the need for a comprehensive range of long-term policies in order to move towards more sustainable cities. Correspondingly, the ad hoc, opportunistic, incremental and locally driven scheme by scheme approach to the regeneration of major sites in the central urban areas is replaced by a strategic approach recently. The strategic approach stresses on the need for ‘win-wins’ and place them at the heart of policy. Identifying ‘win-wins’ is primarily an analytical issue. Thus the implementation of sustainable regeneration places a high premium on the quality of analysis for policy-making and program development and process-driven decision making. According to this identification, the strategic approach should emphasize the need to clarify the intended outcomes of regeneration, construct a framework within which comprehensive strategies and action plans should be designed and implemented, provide clearly targeted policy instruments and clearly identify the roles and responsibilities of the actors and organizations involved in regeneration. A strategically designed regeneration project is expected to have a common purpose and cooperation for most of the actors involved, at the same time, bring added value in the long term (Urban Task Force 1999).
Evidently, many of the governments in developed countries as well as the European Commission itself have recently identified the features of their reformed policies for strategic management of urban regeneration.
2.3.5.2. Mixed-use Development
Mixed use development has especially gained interest after 80s. Enterprise
which are designated for mixed use differently from the traditional land-use decisions and/or zoning regulations. In mixed use development, zones are not purposed to serve for one specific function such as housing, commerce or recreation, but purposed for mixed-use to enhance local economic growth. In this sense, the idea of strengthening the local economy has encouraged the compact city forms and mixed use cities to act against long term dereliction and the abandonment of land near central city areas. It is believed that success is more easily measured in mixed use. A regenerated derelict site is believed to be more viable when it offers a context with variety of options to enhance the economy and social life at the same time. Not surprisingly, in many previous cases of 50s or 60s, the reason why redeveloped residential areas could not have achieved success in the long term is that other than housing, such areas have not been able to offer any other function which would at the same time enhance the social and economic conditions of residents as well as the physical conditions.
2.3.5.3. Compact City Form
Compact city form is lately introduced to urban planning literature with the need to make the best possible use of urban land and to avoid unnecessary sprawl. It is especially the consequence of the debates about the sustainability of urban forms that has focused on increasing the density of development, ensuring a mix of uses, containing urban ‘sprawl’ and achieving social and economic diversity and vitality which is characterized as the concept of compact city in recent years. Arguments in favour of a compact and centralized city claim that this type of urban form provides environmental, social and economic benefits. The environmental benefits of a compact urban form are various: a more efficient use of energy, a lesser traffic pollution, reduced pressure on greenfields and adoption of more efficient technologies. The social benefits of a compact urban form include a greater concern for sustainability issues more efficient services and facilities and increased quality urban environments. Its economic benefits are also great. A compact city with high density mixed-use areas is thought to contribute towards profitability and economic growth, lower energy consumption, and greater distribution efficiency. Economically, a compact urban form can also lead to new business formation and innovation, which also attracts new residents to central urban areas. Compact city advocates, in this respect goes along with the advocates on
adopting which will contribute to turning run down urban areas back into beneficial use and increases the attraction of businesses and residents.
Today, many urban policy prescriptions of member states in European Union such as; “The Urban Exchange Initiative in United Kingdom, Compact City Policy in Netherlands, the new Re-urbanism Policy in Japan”, stress similarly on the need for encouraging both intensified use of existing building and neighbourhoods and new housing to be built within existing urban areas in order to contain urban sprawl, preserve the countryside and make towns and cities more sustainable while at the same time improve the quality in central urban areas.
2.3.5.4. Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs)
Having constructed its roots in 1980s, public-private partnerships have emerged as a response to the rapid social, economic and institutional changes that societies have witnessed over the past few decades. Single-sector or single-agency approach in recent decades has been proven to have limitations in trying to tackle wider effects of those fundamental changes (Roberts and Sykes 2000). Most organizations involved in urban regeneration in last two decades have recognized that the issues they face have multiple causes and therefore need a multi-agency approach to plan and implement effective solutions. By the 1990s there has been a consensus on elimination of the traditional policy boundaries and adaptation of multi-level governance which unites different levels of government and of partnerships joining the forces of public, private and community actors and agencies to resolve problems. Parallel to the agreement on partnerships, devolution of power and resources from central to local governments has been adopted in many European countries. Hereafter, urban regeneration has evolved as a policy based less on destruction and more on renovation and investment, and today is an integral part of many local governments, often combined with small and large business incentives (Roberts and Sykes 2000, Beaten 2000, Osborne 2000).
From the mid-1990s the term of partnership planning has been redefined. A model of more balanced partnerships between the public, private and community/voluntary sectors has evolved by drawing on the experience of both the 1970s and 1980s. The private sector still in the leading role, the role of public sector has
ability to act as a regulator, catalyst and partner. Especially resulting from the emphasis in the new policy on strengthening community organizations outlined within the notions of latest strategic approach, today, more equal partnerships planning is encouraged for successful regeneration projects, which is defined best in the White Paper, 2000, in UK as their new national policy, named as Local Strategic Partnerships.
2.3.5.5. Community Capacity Building
The increasing application of the principles of sustainable regeneration and the consideration of equal partnerships with reference to notions of the new strategic approach in 90s has led to seeking very actively engagement of social capital in regeneration processes in recent years. Since regeneration was not simply about rehabilitating an area to make it more attractive, it should have also created the conditions that help enabling all of the residents to succeed economically and socially, community participation and capacity building have become essential for regeneration processes.
Communities and community sector is involved at all stages of a regeneration process with a bottom-up approach stressing: ‘citizens first’. A wide range of participative methods are used to encourage action for ensuring civil society participation in policy-making. Moreover, the progress on social dimension of regeneration also requires extensive ‘community capacity building’ with a wide range of support, techniques and initiatives which aim to empower individuals or organizations within deprived communities to contribute effectively to regeneration projects especially at the local level. More specifically, capacity building involves:
equipping people with skills and competencies which they would not otherwise have;
realizing existing skills and developing potential; promoting people’s increased self-confidence and their ability to take responsibility for identifying and meeting their own, and other people’s, needs; and in consequence encouraging people to become involved in their community within a purposed regeneration process.
Although effective regeneration and necessary community development programs are long-term goals and although sufficient time must be given for policy changes to allow progress to be made, an increasing number of government initiatives today rely heavily on a high degree of community engagement and social capital, since
there are significant social and economic returns on investment in community capacity building in the long run. Several examples of innovative mechanisms (not-for-profit organizations) have emerged lately for community-based neighbourhood regeneration the most popular of which are Community Development Trusts in U.K. and Community Development Corporations in U.S.