Cities 38 (2014) 57–68

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Cities

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate /c i t ies

City profile

Lyon City Profile

0264-2751/$ - see front matter � 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2013.12.003

⇑ Corresponding author.E-mail addresses: jcarpenter@brookes.ac.uk (J. Carpenter), roelof.verhage@

univ-lyon2.fr (R. Verhage).

Juliet Carpenter ⇑, Roelof VerhageInstitut d’Urbanisme de Lyon, Université de Lumière - Lyon 2, CNRS UMR 5206 Triangle, 14 Avenue Berthelot, 69007 Lyon, France

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history:Received 25 July 2013Received in revised form 12 December 2013Accepted 12 December 2013Available online 5 February 2014

Keywords:LyonFranceGovernanceLa Confluence

Lyon is France’s second city, located in south-eastern France at the confluence of the Saône and Rhônerivers. Historically, it was a significant European trade and financial centre during the 15th and 16th cen-turies, and from the 16th century, also became the largest producer of textiles in France, particularlyassociated with silk weaving. By the 19th century Lyon had become an important industrial city witha diversified base and associated tertiary activities. The 20th century saw the city expand further, partic-ularly into its hinterland beyond the administrative boundaries. As a result, in relation to governance,there is a range of complex and multi-layered structures that characterise the city and the surroundingagglomeration. This profile documents these governance arrangements, and sets out some of the keychallenges that the city faces today, including economic competitiveness, social cohesion and issuesrelated to environmental sustainability. It shows that despite the city being a player on the Europeanstage, with a number of high-profile urban development projects, including La Confluence regenerationarea, there are still high levels of social polarisation in the city, with significant socio-spatial disparitiesbetween neighbourhoods. The challenge for Lyon is to make connections between high-profile develop-ment projects and disadvantaged neighbourhoods in the city, in order to address some of the key struc-tural challenges that urban areas in many countries of the global north face in the 21st century.

� 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Introduction

Lyon is France’s second city, with an important industrial legacywhich is still very much in evidence today. However, it has tradi-tionally been seen as playing second fiddle to the French capitalof Paris, in relation to economic, political and cultural activity(Fig. 1). What this City Profile will illustrate is that Lyon has forgeda certain independence from the dominant capital, founded on itsstrong economic base and expressed in the network of governancearrangements that have built up in the city region. These have ledto a certain autonomy for the city, with Lyon finding its way on theinternational stage as a European partner city as well as a potentiallocation for international investment in a number of high-profileurban development projects. However, as this City Profile will dem-onstrate, the presence of international capital investment andhigh-profile building projects does not necessarily impact on someof the most disadvantaged areas of the city, and Lyon is character-ised, as are many other major cities in western Europe, by a num-ber of significantly deprived neighbourhoods, demonstratingserious problems of economic and social exclusion.

Following this introduction, the subsequent section providesthe geographic context for the development of the city, followed

by an outline of Lyon’s historical development. The next section fo-cuses on the particular issue of governance within the city, high-lighting the millefeuille of governance layers that operate in thecity region. With this governance context as background, the fol-lowing section then explores the key challenges for the city, whichare related to economic competitiveness, social polarisation andenvironmental sustainability. The penultimate section takes theexample of a key urban development project in the city, La Conflu-ence, and explores some of the issues that it raises in relation tosustainable urban development. The final section draws out someconclusions, highlighting the tensions that exist between high-pro-file urban development projects, and pressing socio-economicneeds in other parts of the city.

Geographic context

The city of Lyon, created in Roman times as Lugdunum, capitalof Gaul, is situated strategically in the infrastructure network thatconnects the north of Europe to the South. It is situated in thesouth-eastern part of France, at the confluence of the rivers Saôneand Rhône (see Fig. 2). The historical crossroads formed by thetransport axes of these two rivers is a key element for understand-ing the emergence and the evolution of the city of Lyon. The Rhôneconnects the city of Lyon southwards to Marseille and the Mediter-ranean, whereas the Saône continues this axis further north

Fig. 1. Population density in France, showing the position of Lyon and Paris. Source: Agence d’Urbanisme de Lyon.

Fig. 2. An aerial view of Lyon showing the two rivers of the Rhône and Saônerunning from left to right, converging at La Confluence. Source: J. Léone/Grand Lyon.

58 J. Carpenter, R. Verhage / Cities 38 (2014) 57–68

towards the Seine and the Rhine basins. Together historically, theyform a crucial part of the link between the Mediterranean and theNorth Sea. To the east, the city is a starting point for several roadscrossing the Alps towards Switzerland and the north of Italy. As aresult, since Roman times, Lyon has been a staging post on thejourney between the North and the South of France, and for Eur-ope. At various points in history, the Rhône has been a boundary,between the Kingdom of France and the German empire and be-tween the Lyonnais and the Dauphiné. As a result, the city of Lyonhas always been in contact with different regions, which adds toits history as a European crossroads.

The site of the city of Lyon itself is strongly characterised by theconfluence of the two rivers, and the alternation between hills and

plains that come with it. The city developed originally on the wes-tern banks of the Saône river, where the edge of the Massif Centralprovided higher, dry land for urban development. Until the renais-sance, the heart of the city was situated on the banks of the Saôneand the hills surrounding it (Fig. 3). The Rhône river was muchmore difficult to cross because of its strong currents. Until theend of the 18th century, the course of the Rhône was not stabilisedand shifted due to flooding. Much of the low lying river plains be-tween the two rivers and to the east of the Rhône were wetlandsthat were unsuitable for urban development without proper drain-ing and consolidation. As a result, urban development on the banksof the Rhône occurred later, and significant urban development onthe east bank of the Rhône did not take place until the end of the18th century. But from that moment onwards, the easterly exten-sion of the city became more and more important as the flat riverplains were more suitable than the hilly western part of the city forthe development of the modern, industrial city (see Fig. 4).

Historical development

As Bonneville (1997) argues, since its creation in 49 BC duringthe Roman Empire, the city of Lyon has been marked by alternatingperiods, where for a time international connections have beenimportant structuring elements for the city’s development, andperiods where regional exchanges have dominated. Important ascapital of Gaul in the Roman period, the city combined administra-tive, commercial and political roles. During the Middle Ages, thecity lost a part of its importance, although during the 12th and13th centuries, it became an international Catholic capital, evenhosting some Popes that had left Rome at the time. But the real re-vival of the city’s dynamics began during the Renaissance, in the15th and 16th centuries, when Italian bankers came to settle in

Fig. 4. View from the Fourvière, showing the medieval Old Lyon in the foreground,the 18th century Presqu’Ile in the middle-ground, and the more recent develop-ments, including the Part Dieu business district in the background. Source: J. Léone/Grand Lyon.

J. Carpenter, R. Verhage / Cities 38 (2014) 57–68 59

Lyon. An important element in this revival of activity was the rightgiven to the city of Lyon by King Louis XI in 1464 to organise fairs,as an attempt to counter the influence of the city of Geneva. Thishelped the city to develop into an important European trade andfinancial centre. The prosperity brought to the city by this positionallowed industrial activities to develop, in particular silk weaving,that was in a later phase, the basis of the development of the CroixRousse district of the city (Fig. 5). In the 16th century, Lyon becamethe largest producer of textiles in France, with a significant in-crease in population. In 1550, it was France’s second city with80,000 inhabitants, after Paris with 200,000 inhabitants.

During the 17th and 18th centuries, Lyon lost part of its interna-tional influence. As other European cities grew, fairs were heldelsewhere, and other cities in Europe emerged as banking capitals.However, the industrial activities of the city, in particular the tex-tile industry, continued to develop significantly. During the revolu-tion of 1789, in which Lyon was opposed to the new regime, thecity suffered from heavy destruction that severely affected itseconomy and lead to a demographic downturn. However, this onlytemporarily stopped the industrial development of the city, whichentered a phase of diversification. The treatment of the textiles thatwere produced led to the development of the chemical industry;the mechanisation of the textile industry stimulated the develop-ment of mechanical industries. As a result, at the end of the 19thcentury, Lyon had become an important industrial city with450,000 inhabitants, and a diversified industrial base that no long-er depended solely on textile production. This industrial base gen-erated considerable activity in the commercial, banking and othertertiary sectors and was the foundation for the urban developmentof Lyon until the 1960s–1970s. The population of the Lyon munic-ipality grew to its highest level in 1930, with some 580,000 inhab-itants (see Fig. 6 for the development of the city centre). Since then,much of the urban expansion has taken place in peripheral areas.In 2013, the municipality of Lyon had a population of 440,000,but the agglomeration of Lyon numbered some 1.3 millioninhabitants.

Fig. 3. The iconic Basilica, built between 1872 and 1884 on the Fourvière hill has acommanding position over the city, built on the western hills where the city wasinitially founded. Source: J. Léone/Grand Lyon.

Fig. 5. The slopes of the Croix Rousse district, famous for its silk-weaving industry,with the Presqu’Ile below. Source: J. Léone/Grand Lyon.

In the period since the 1970s, the extension of the city of Lyonhas changed character (Boino, 2009). Until then, the city had al-ways developed in continuity with the existing built up fabric.From the first settlements on the banks of the Saône, via the earlyextensions of the eastern banks of the Rhône to the grandsensembles (suburban housing estates) of the 1960s and 1970s,the urban fabric remained fairly compact. During the course ofthe 1970s, the city started to sprawl in a discontiguous way intothe surrounding countryside. As a result, the match betweenadministrative boundaries and territorial dynamics has becomeproblematic. As we have seen, the municipality of Lyon is hometo 440,000 inhabitants, but the agglomeration extends way beyondthe municipal boundaries. This reality led to the creation in 1969 ofthe Greater Lyon Authority (Le Grand Lyon), an intermunicipalcooperation structure of 58 municipalities and 1.3 million inhabit-ants in 2013. However, what could be called the ‘‘functional

Fig. 6. The historical development of the City of Lyon. Source: « Atlas histórico deciudades europeas – France », Centre de Cultura Contemporània de Barcelona andSalvat editores, Barcelona 1996.

60 J. Carpenter, R. Verhage / Cities 38 (2014) 57–68

territory’’ of the city of Lyon does not end at the limits of the Great-er Lyon Authority. Based on journey to work patterns, the Frenchstatistical office (INSEE) defines the ‘‘urban zone’’ (aire urbaine)for Lyon as an area covering some 2.1 million inhabitants extend-ing to the neighbouring towns of Villefranche and Bourgoin-Jal-lieux (Agence d’Urbanisme de Lyon, 2011). This urban zone doesnot correspond to any layer of government, but exists as a territo-rial reality, in relation to its travel to work area.

Governance

A multi-layered institutional organisation

Because of the mis-match between the metropolitan area ofLyon and its administrative boundaries, the governance of Lyonis characterised by a multi-layered, partly formal and partly infor-mal institutional organisation. The City of Lyon (Ville de Lyon) witha population of 440,000 is the central municipality of the GreaterLyon (le Grand Lyon) area. The budget for the City of Lyon in2012 was 717 million euros, with a staff of around 8000 people,covering competencies including culture, education, sport, greenspace and economic development. The City of Lyon sits withinthe Greater Lyon area, a statutory Communauté Urbaine that wascreated in 1969, as a national initiative (together with similarstructures in Bordeaux, Lille and Strasbourg). Initially this widerstatutory body was referred to as the Communauté Urbaine de Lyon,but has been known as ‘Le Grand Lyon’ since the 1990s. Le GrandLyon is made up of the City of Lyon and 57 other surrounding localauthorities, including some communes of significant size such asVilleurbanne (140,000), Venissieux (60,000) and Vaulx-en-Velin(40,000). Together, these 58 municipalities comprise the GrandLyon area, which is accorded tax raising powers and competences

in planning, public transport, water treatment, waste management,economic development and culture. The budget of the Grand Lyonfor 2012 was 1.9 billion euros, and it has a staff of around 5000employees. Its council is made up of representatives of the 58municipalities, traditionally chaired by the Mayor of Lyon, cur-rently Gérard Collomb.

It is generally felt that Lyon has built a strong governance struc-ture at the level of the Greater Lyon area based on consensus, withlocal public and private actors working together (Boino, 2009), andthat this has been responsible for a range of successes in differentpolicy domains, such as economic development and large urbandevelopment projects. Support for these governance structurestherefore has a strong political motivation (Jouve, 2009). However,the size of the Greater Lyon area is thought to be too constrainingfor the city’s ambitions related to territorial development (ESPON,2012). To overcome this, several initiatives have been proposed inrecent years related to a wider governance structure for the metro-politan area of Lyon.

A ‘‘Pôle Métropolitain’’ was established in 2012, to bring togetherthe actors of the ‘joint authorities’ in the region (Agenced’Urbanisme de Lyon, 2012a). In line with the ‘‘Local AuthoritiesReform Act’’ of 2010 (Loi de Réforme des Collectivités Territoriales),four major ‘joint authorities’ in and around Lyon signed anagreement in 2012 to create a Metropolitan Pole, bringing togetherthe Greater Lyon area, the St Etienne metropolitan area, the groupof municipalities around Bourgoin-Jallieu and Vienne (Fig. 7). Thisup-scaled Metropolitan Pole covers 140 municipalities in all, with atotal population of around 2 million, to address issues such astransport, the economy and the environment.

It is too early to say what the results of such an umbrellagovernance structure will be, although some critics have raisedquestions about its potential efficacy (ESPON, 2012) and appar-ent illogicalities. Firstly, there are some key territorial areas thatare not included in the Metropolitan Pole, such as the Lyon’s StExupéry airport, which is located in the Communauté de Com-munes de l’Est Lyonnais (East Lyon Group of Municipalities), itselfnot a part of the Metropolitan Pole as it is currently configured.The reasons for this are both historical and political. Historically,the airport of Lyon was situated in the municipality of Bron,which is a part of the Greater Lyon Authority. But in 1973, thecentral state decided to move the airport to the municipalityof Colombier-Saugnieu, some thirty kilometres east of the cityof Lyon, in order to develop it into an airport with an interna-tional potential. However, the municipalities to the east of Lyonwere also affected by several other decisions made during thisperiod: the modification of the boundaries of the Rhône andIsère départements in 1967, that transferred these municipalitiesto the Rhône department; the creation of the Greater LyonAuthority to their west in 1969; and the creation of the newtown of Ile d’Abeau to the east in 1973. In reaction to thesedecisions, the municipalities to the east of the Grand Lyon areahave adopted a defensive position towards the Grand Lyon. Dur-ing the 1990s, when new laws on intermunicipal cooperationcreated the possibility to create a Communauté de Communes,they took up the opportunity, with the result that the Aeroportde Saint-Exupéry is not part of the Greater Lyon Authority. Thisraises questions about how the development of the airport willbe planned, and which actors will be involved.

Secondly, membership of the Metropolitan Pole is restricted by lawto ‘joint authorities’ which necessarily excludes other governancestructures such as the Rhône-Alpes region and the départements ofRhône and Isère. It is therefore questionable whether such a metropol-itan governance structure can address issues at the wider scaleeffectively, although there is strong political support for its implemen-tation, to reinforce particular power structures. No doubt, such ques-

Fig. 7. Population density of the Lyon area.

J. Carpenter, R. Verhage / Cities 38 (2014) 57–68 61

tions will be the subject of some debate in the years to come, as theMetropolitan Pole becomes established and its outcomes evaluated.

In parallel to the ‘‘Pôle Métropolitain’’, but on another level, dis-cussions are currently underway to create a single governancestructure for the Lyon area. This so-called ‘‘Euro-metropolis’’ wouldact as a single planning authority for the Lyon area, and would sub-sume the competencies of the Département covering this area. Cre-ating such a structure requires modification of national legislation,and would be the next step in France’s decentralisation policy. Thecurrent mayor of the city of Lyon, Gérard Collomb, is strongly in fa-vour of the ‘‘Euro-metropolis’’, but the issue is still being debatedand the future of a possible unitary form of territorial governancefor the Lyon area is under discussion. This illustrates the on-goingdebates about the governance of a territory that actively wants toconstruct its future development.

These institutional structures also have to be seen within theFrench national context of a strong emphasis on institutions, whichcomes from two sources. Firstly, there is the need to overcome thehistorical weaknesses of the inherited, and deeply entrenched, sys-tem of local administration, represented by the structure of com-munes, totalling some 36,000 throughout France. Secondly, thereis the need to address the tension between central and local con-trol, which has engendered a heavy emphasis on institutions andtheir roles at different levels.

Institutional structure and urban development strategy

The institutional structure of the area is thus complex, multi-layered and in constant evolution. A crucial element to understandthe relation between the different layers of government in Franceis the small size of most municipalities. France has by far thelargest number of municipalities of all EU countries, with more

than 36,000. This influences the way in which the larger French cit-ies such as Lyon are governed, necessarily involving intermunicipalcooperation. It also influences the relation between the centralState and the local planning authorities.

Despite 30 years of pursuing a policy of decentralisation,France remains in many ways a strongly centralised state, whichretains considerable central power in certain policy areas that im-pact on cities, such as health, education, research and develop-ment and transport. Furthermore, the State plays an importantrole in funding local projects through ‘‘Region-State ProjectAgreements’’ (Contrat de Projet Etat-Région), documents whichset out State and local governments’ financial commitments tofund major projects of common interest such as infrastructureprojects or investment in major economic development pro-grammes. In relation to planning, the State also plays a rolethrough the Territorial Planning Guidance document (DirectiveTerritorial d’Aménagement – DTA), which details the State’s prior-ities in the medium and long term for planning in the nationalinterest. Fig. 8 illustrates the boundary of the DTA in relation tothe other territorial levels. It should be noted that there is nooverall national spatial plan in France. Central state spatial plan-ning through the DTA only focuses on areas that are consideredcrucial from a national point of view, either because of their vul-nerability (e.g. the Alps), because of their difficult economic situ-ation (e.g. the former mining area of the Lorraine) or because oftheir importance for the national economy (e.g. the metropolitanarea of Lyon, as France’s second city). The existence of the DTAthus shows the interest the central state holds in the develop-ment of this area.

Additionally, the State has also played a key role in shaping lo-cal governance structures, from paving the way for the introduc-tion of the Greater Lyon Authority (Communauté Urbaine de Lyon)

Fig. 8. The different administrative boundaries and territorial levels around Lyon.

62 J. Carpenter, R. Verhage / Cities 38 (2014) 57–68

in 1969, to the creation of the strategic master-planning documentfor urban areas, the Schèma de Cohérence Territoriale (SCOT) in2000, to most recently, the establishment of ‘‘Metropolitan Poles’’as a new level of ‘‘intra-metropolitan’’ governance to address is-sues such as transport, the environment and the economy (ESPON,2012). Thus, in relation to governance, Lyon has traditionally beenheavily influenced, both politically and economically, by directivesat the level of the State.

In the face of the State’s strong and enduring influence, polit-ical and business elites in Lyon have over the years developed atradition of cooperation and collaboration to counter controlfrom the centre. A first initiative involved the establishment in1974 of an economic development agency for the Lyon region,ADERLY (Agence pour le Développement Economique de la RégionLyonnaise), one of the first to be created in France (Linossier,2006). This can be seen as the precursor for what was laternamed ‘‘urban governance’’, bringing together representativesfrom the Greater Lyon political institution with private sectoreconomic elites from the Lyon Chamber of Commerce (Jouve,2009). It was also the forum for the first reflections on the inter-nationalisation of the city, and the role that Lyon could play onan international stage.

Lyon has traditionally been dominated by the political right,with the right-of-centre Michel Noir and then Raymond Barreholding the Presidency of the Greater Lyon Council from 1989and 1995 respectively, until 2001. Michel Noir had also held officein national government under President Chirac, as Minister for For-eign Trade, and was quick to dismiss the Paris-Lyon rivalry, prefer-ring rather to look internationally, and think more broadly aboutLyon’s role in relation to other European cities and beyond (Jouve,2009). When the Socialist Gérard Collomb took power in the elec-tion of 2001, he continued the international approach embraced byhis predecessors, pushing forward with a policy of marketing thecity to foreign investors, while at the same time launching a seriesof high-profile urban development projects in Lyon, such as LaConfluence (see below). Collomb was also keen to get involved innetworks of European cities, to exchange good practice and rein-force Lyon’s presence on the European scene, holding the Presi-dency of the association ‘‘Eurocities’’ between 2006 and 2008(Payre, 2010). There has therefore been a strong push to promoteLyon on the European and international stage, although the citystill struggles to attain the status of other European cities such asBarcelona or Milan in relation to its attractiveness to investmentcapital and the ‘‘creative class’’ (Florida, 2004).

J. Carpenter, R. Verhage / Cities 38 (2014) 57–68 63

Key challenges for the city

Economic competitiveness

In comparison with many other French cities, the developmentof Lyon is largely influenced by private economic actors (mer-chants, bankers, and those associated with industry) (Jouve,2009). The period between 1945 and 1975, with reconstructionafter the second World War and the three decades of economicand demographic growth that followed it, was more marked bythe central State playing an important role in urban development.But since the beginning of the 1980s, following the decentralisa-tion laws of Deferre in 1982–1985, local elites, both political andeconomic, again became the main drivers of urban development.As a consequence, the urban development policies of the last dec-ades can be characterised as liberal, in the economic sense of theword. It has to be noted that this liberal orientation is: ‘‘. . .embed-ded in a national context in which the nation state has stronglycontributed to modify the local agenda and its contradictions. Itwould not be correct to describe Lyon as a neoliberal city in theway our Anglo-Saxon colleagues understand the term’’ (Jouve,2009: 126 – own translation).

The quest to become a leading European metropolis is a centralelement of the development strategy of the city of Lyon. As a result,one of the key issues that Lyon tries to address is its competitive-ness in a global economy, and its ability to attract businesses andinvestment in a highly competitive market. Although Lyon’s econ-omy has become more service oriented, the industrial sector is stillrelatively strong, totalling some 21.4% of total employment (CCIL,2009), and making Lyon one of the most industrialised of the Frenchurban economies. Lyon has traditionally been known for its gener-alist rather than specialist economy, although certain key sectorsstand out as being important, including biotechnology, pharmaceu-ticals, logistics and the petrochemical industry, with companiessuch as Total, GDF-Suez, Sanofi Aventis, Rhodia, Bio-Merieux andBoiron being significant employers (ESPON, 2012). In relation toR&D, Lyon fares relatively well in terms of innovation, where it isranked third nationally, after Paris and Grenoble, in thenumber of European patent applications (OMPREL - ObeservationMétropolitaine Partenariale de la Région Economique Lyonnaise, 2010).

Furthermore, in the face of the current economic crisis, the cityhas demonstrated some resilience, although it has felt the pressureof competition particularly from other European cities, and has haddifficulty attracting and retaining company headquarters. A reportby the Observation Métropolitaine Partenariale de la Région Economi-que Lyonnaise (OMPREL, 2010) notes that there are no headquartersof Fortune 500 firms in the city, compared to for example, Munich,where six are located, Barcelona with two, and Milan with three, allbeing comparable ‘second cities’ in other European member states.Furthermore, Lyon has actually lost some headquarters in the lastdecade to Paris and other European cities (ESPON, 2012: 368), de-spite its efforts in international marketing strategies.

Indeed, the future of Lyon’s competitiveness is perceived to liein the development of its industrial sectors (CCIL, 2009), throughso-called ‘‘Pôles de compétitivité’’ (‘‘Competitiveness Clusters’’). Thispolicy was launched in 2004, in an attempt to promote the growthof high-tech clusters nationally by bringing together businesses,higher education institutes and R&D facilities to promote partner-ships and synergies to the benefit of key industrial sectors. Chosenby the Government on the basis of competitive bidding, there arefive clusters in the Lyon area (out of a national total of 67), coveringthe sectors of biotechnology, the petrochemical industry, textiles,transport and multimedia/gaming. State funding supports individ-ual projects, as well as providing tax advantages, grants and loansfor businesses. The biotech cluster is classed as ‘globally significant’

(rather than just nationally or regionally significant) by the Frenchgovernment. However, the State relies heavily on local authoritiesto support and invest in the clusters (DGCIS-DATAR, 2011: 4), tomaximise their impact. In the case of Lyon, the Greater LyonAuthority and other partners have been active in supporting all fiveclusters. For example, the Lyon Biopôle biotech cluster in the Ger-land area of the city has seen a public investment of 248 millioneuros since 2005, provided not only by the central State, but alsoby local authorities including the Greater Lyon Authority, theRhône-Alpes region, Department Councils (Conseils Généraux), Gre-noble-Alpes métropole and the City of Grenoble (Lyonbiopôle,2012: 12). An independent evaluation in 2008 demonstrated thatthe five poles in Lyon had been relatively successful in reachingtheir objectives, for example in relation to investment targetsand job creation (BCG, 2008).

However, Lyon is constantly aware of the need to rise to thechallenge of global competition and economic competitiveness.The Grand Lyon is therefore at pains to promote itself on the worldstage as ‘‘Lyon Inc.’’ (Jouve, 2009), an attractive place for investmentin the current neoliberal climate (Brenner & Theodore, 2002) wherea city must sell itself to potential investors, as well as employersand employees. Much of the urban planning policies of the citycan be understood in this light. Since the 1990s, the city has in-vested heavily to improve its attractiveness for residents, visitorsand investors, for example through the quality of its public space(e.g. Berges du Rhône), through the organisation of large events(e.g. Fête des Lumières, Biennale de la Danse), and by investing in anumber of large urban projects, such as the Cité Internationaledevelopment (Linossier, 2009), the area of La Confluence (see below)and currently the redevelopment of the Part Dieu area. In 1998, thearea of Old Lyon and the Croix Rousse was also classified a UNESCOWorld Heritage Site. And not without a certain success. The city ofLyon has clearly improved its visibility among European cities, andin the current period of economic stagnation, the economy remainsstrong, with an average estimated GDP of 35,700 euros per inhabi-tant, compared to the European (EU27) average of 24,900 euros(OPALE, 2009). However, there is a flip side to this coin.

Social polarisation

As in many cities, the Lyon agglomeration is divided into a poorereast and richer west (INSEE, 2010), a socio-spatial configurationwhich dates back to Lyon’s history as an industrial city with a pow-erful economic elite concentrated in the city centre (the 6th arron-dissement and the Presqu’Ile around Ainay Basilica). Rapidpopulation growth in the post-war period led to the rise of large so-cial housing estates on the edge of Lyon, particularly in the easternsuburbs of Vaulx-en-Velin, Bron and Vénissieux. These have becomeareas of concentration of mainly working class, low income and eth-nic minority groups while the middle and upper classes tend to livein the centre and west of the city (as illustrated in Figs. 9 and 10).

These socio-spatial contrasts, the concentration of urban pov-erty and the frustrations that this generated, were brought to thefore in the early 1980s, when France’s first significant riots eruptedin the agglomeration of Lyon, in the eastern banlieues (suburbs) ofVenissieux in 1981, and subsequently in Vaulx-en-Velin in 1990,provoked by a combination of both economic and social exclusionfrom French mainstream society (Dikeç, 2007). In response to theunrest, a series of policies have been put in place to address the so-cial and economic pressures, and environmental/architecturalinadequacies of these neighbourhoods, in particular through urbanregeneration programmes including demolition of outdated hous-ing stock, through the ‘‘Politique de la Ville’’, urban policies for dis-advantaged neighbourhoods (Donzelot & Estèbe, 1994; Epstein,2011) (see Figs. 11 and 12).

Fig. 9. Median declared income per tax declaration in 2009, communes of theGrand Lyon.

Fig. 10. Unemployment rate in 2008, communes of the Grand Lyon. Source forFigs. 9 and 10: Agence d’Urbanisme de Lyon, Les inégalités sociales et territoriales dansl’agglomération lyonnaise Cahier n�6, Lyon: Observatoire territorial de la cohésionsociale, Agence d’urbanisme pour le développement de l’agglomération lyonnaise,septembre 2012, (contact Nicole Ponton Frénay).

Fig. 11. Housing estates in the eastern suburb of Venissieux. Source: J. Léone/GrandLyon.

Fig. 12. New single-family housing built to replace some of the 1970s socialhousing estates in Venissieux, eastern Lyon. Source: J. Léone/Grand Lyon.

64 J. Carpenter, R. Verhage / Cities 38 (2014) 57–68

The physical approach to urban renewal, by rehabilitation, anddemolition and reconstruction of problematic housing stock isreinforced by a social approach. Since 2006 this has taken the formof a ‘‘Contrat Urbain de Cohésion Sociale’’ (CUCS), which is an

agreement between the central State and urban areas to addressdeprivation. In Lyon in 2009, 21% of the population (266,200 peo-ple) live in these priority areas. However, despite the ‘‘Politique dela Ville’’ policies in place since the 1990s, there are still persistentproblems of urban disadvantage, witnessed by higher unemploy-ment levels, lower educational attainment levels and higher num-bers of households drawing social benefits in priority areas than inthe rest of the city. For example, as shown in Fig. 13 below, theCUCS areas in Lyon have a much younger population than the restof the agglomeration, they have larger family sizes, there are moreunemployed people and the population is less qualified.

Recent income data (Fig. 9) also show a growing disparity be-tween the east and west of the city (Agence d’Urbanisme de Lyon,2012b) and critics suggest that these trends are likely to continue,with low income groups increasingly being pushed further fromthe city centre. The mechanisms behind this trend are easy tounderstand, but complicated to counter. Improvements to thephysical environment and quality of life in the city, and in partic-ular the city centre, make an attractive environment for privateinvestment. Both companies and households are prepared to paya relatively high price for real estate in Lyon. The current price ofnew apartments in central Lyon is around 4400 euros per squaremetre (Chambre des Notaires du Rhône, 2013). Although this is mod-erate in comparison to Paris, where prices are easily double, it is farfrom accessible for a large proportion of the population of the city.The less well-off majority is therefore relegated to the areas thatare less attractive to private investment, situated in particular in

Fig. 13. Key indicators for the CUCS in the Greater Lyon area. Source: Agence d’Urbanisme de Lyon, 2012b.

J. Carpenter, R. Verhage / Cities 38 (2014) 57–68 65

the eastern suburbs, or in the more rural areas outside the Lyonagglomeration.

Environmental sustainability

In common with other cities worldwide (Davoudi, Crawford, &Mehmood, 2009), the Greater Lyon area has for some time beenpreoccupied with issues related to environmental sustainabilityand climate change. The first discussions on the city’s responsesto the challenges of environmental sustainability date back to theend of the 1980s, which resulted in the creation of a ‘‘mission écol-ogie urbaine’’ in 1990 as part of the administrative structure of theGrand Lyon. Like other transversal policy axes for housing, trans-port and the economy, this fourth axe had to ensure that environ-mental issues were not considered in a sectoral way, but integratedtransversally into all urban development projects. Even though theemphasis given to the ‘‘mission ecologie urbaine’’ was less than fortransport or housing, it did produce two charters on urban ecology,each defining the actions to be undertaken for a period of fiveyears. The first charter, published in parallel with the strategic spa-tial plan ‘‘Schéma Directeur Lyon 2010’’ in 1992 was innovative forits time, proposing some 160 actions in the fields of air and waterpollution, noise, waste management, green spaces, alternative en-ergy and environmental risks. The second charter for the period1996–2000 was eventually renamed as ‘‘Agenda 21’’, althoughsome have questioned whether it qualified as such (Boutaud,2004). It could be argued that the ambitions of the Grand Lyon inthis period were more focused on improving the international pro-file of the city and increasing its attractiveness for business invest-ment, than on environmental concerns.

The international ambitions of the city of Lyon resulted in itsparticipation in numerous European networks at the end of the1990s and the 2000s. These also included programmes in the fieldof energy efficiency in the built environment (in particular theEuropean Union programmes ‘Restart’ and later ‘Concerto’). As aresult of these programmes, the urban ecology and housing depart-ments worked together to produce a ‘‘référentiel habitat’’ at thebeginning of the 2000s, in which the city specified its requirementsin terms of energy efficiency for new social housing in order to beeligible for local government subsidies. These experiences and oth-ers paved the way for a more ambitious approach to issues of envi-ronmental sustainability in the 2000s. In particular, thepreoccupation with climate change, following the signature ofthe Kyoto Protocol in 1997, shifted attention from urban ecologyto energy efficiency and the reduction of greenhouse gases(GHG). This resulted in the Greater Lyon Plan Climat-EnergieTerritorial in 2007, followed by a ‘‘Climate Diagnostic’’ (DiagnosticClimat) in 2009 and a series of scenarios in 2011. These documents

came together in an Action Plan that was signed by a range ofstakeholders at the end of 2011, and adopted by the Greater LyonAuthority (Communauté Urbaine du Grand Lyon) in February 2012(Rocher, 2013).

The Plan Climat identified various levels at which the GreaterLyon Authority could act to address issues of climate change.Firstly, the institution itself aims to be an ‘exemplary organisation’,by reducing its own carbon footprint, in particular through modi-fying its own buildings and services, such as reducing the numberof vehicles it uses, and installing solar panels on its buildings. It isestimated that this accounts for around 5% of the city’s GHG emis-sions. Secondly, at the level of its own policies, it aims to integrateclimate mitigation measures, for example, through developing thepublic transport network and other non or less-polluting forms oftransport. For example, improvements to the public transport sys-tem in Lyon have resulted in a clear drop in private car use in re-cent years, from 52% of total trips in 1995 to 47% in 2006 (SEPAL,2007). Lyon was also the first city in France to set up a bicyclerenting scheme (‘‘Vélo’v’’) in May 2005, which was subsequentlycopied by other cities in France (Paris’ ‘‘Vélib’’ system introducedin July 2007), and elsewhere (e.g. Barcelona’s ‘‘Bicing’’ system,launched in March 2008).

It should be noted that the issue of transport is somewhat con-tradictory. The measures that have been taken have led to a de-crease in private car use in the city of Lyon. But at the sametime, the Grand Lyon is a driving force behind the constructionof ‘‘missing links’’ in the motorway system that circles the city.In particular, this concerns the A46 and the A89 motorways to-wards the west, and the western bypass of the city that woulddeviate traffic from France’s main North–South link, the A6-A7motorway, that currently runs through the centre of Lyon (see alsothe section on the Confluence project, below). So, at this widerscale, the desire for accessibility of Lyon and the need to limit con-gestion and pollution caused by through traffic in the city, is set toresult in investment in road-infrastructure, thus creating the con-ditions for more intensive car use.

By far the largest proportion of GHG emissions (75%) comesfrom actions of other actors in the city, and here, the Greater LyonAuthority is aiming to work in partnership with other stakeholders(private sector, public sector, voluntary sector and civil society), toencourage the adoption of climate mitigation actions. This fits withthe consensual and partnership approach that has been developedover the years in the city, particularly around economic networks.Indeed, given the importance of the industrial sector in contribut-ing to the city’s carbon footprint, the Greater Lyon Authority hasused its networks created through the poles of competitiveness(in particular in AXELERA cluster covering chemistry and the envi-ronment, and the Lyon Urban Truck and Bus (LUTB) cluster), to

Fig. 14. An overview of La Confluence development. Source: J. Léone/Grand Lyon.

66 J. Carpenter, R. Verhage / Cities 38 (2014) 57–68

influence private sector actors to take action against GHGemissions.

In parallel to the Plan Climat, the Grand Lyon produces référent-iels (standards) in which it specifies its requirements in terms ofenvironmental sustainability for housing development (in 2005)and for sustainable neighbourhoods (in 2011). The requirementsin these référentiels are imposed on developers that intervene inthe area. As such, the référentiels contribute to a change in the prac-tice of urban development in the Greater Lyon area. At a wider le-vel, the principles of sustainable development are also written intothe revised master-planning document for the Greater Lyon areaand its surrounding region (the SCOT – Schèma de Cohérence Terri-toriale), adopted in February 2011, and the accompanying docu-ment related to sustainable development, the PADD (Projetd’Aménagement et de Développement Durable). The strategy setout in the SCOT for the city region is based on a polycentric orga-nisation, with future population and economic growth concen-trated in already existing centres, linked by an efficient publictransport service. The aim, within the context of sustainable devel-opment, is to limit urban sprawl, preserve greenfield sites aroundcities, optimise energy consumption by promoting the compactcity, and reduce travel by providing appropriate services and facil-ities in each urban centre. Beyond this more strategic level, theGreater Lyon Authority has also promoted a number of projectsthat aim to showcase the environmentally sustainable approachthat the city espouses. One of the key projects has been the citycentre extension of La Confluence, which will be elaborated inmore detail below.

Fig. 15. Green space and measures to promote biodiversity were built into themasterplan of La Confluence, the city’s flagship urban project. Source: J. Léone/Grand Lyon.

Fig. 16. New housing, a shopping centre, cinema and green space in La Confluencedevelopment. Source: J. Léone/Grand Lyon.

La Confluence

The different challenges for the city come to the fore in the areaof La Confluence, a centrally located brown-field site that has beenthe focus of public and private investment in recent years. The arealies at the confluence of the Rhône and the Saône rivers, directlyadjacent to the city centre of Lyon, but historically cut off from itby a railway line and more recently, the A6-A7 motorway(Fig. 14). As a result of this, and of the presence of a river harbourand railway station, the area was developed mainly through activ-ities related to industry and logistics. Since the 1980s, these activ-ities have gradually ceased, leaving an underused area of some 150hectares that presented significant potential for development, dueto its location near the city centre. A first plan in the 1990s wasabandoned, mainly because it was felt that the redevelopment ofthe area required the A6-A7 motorway to be downgraded. Butin order to make that possible, the through traffic would need tobe diverted to a western ring road of the city. As construction ofthe ring road did not seem feasible in the short or medium term,the plan was abandoned. After the municipal elections of 2001,the new mayor Gerard Collomb decided to launch the project any-way, but in a new and more pragmatic form, starting with a firstphase covering 40 hectares in the area furthest from the motorway.

The objective of the regeneration of the Confluence area is toextend the city centre of Lyon south, beyond the railway lines, thathave traditionally acted as a barrier to development. In order togive the area the characteristics of a city centre, an equal balanceof housing, retail and offices is planned. The Greater Lyon Author-ity, through a semi-public single purpose agency, took charge ofland acquisition and land development. Serviced building plotswere then sold to private investors in order to implement the realestate development. As such, the project is characteristic of theFrench approach to large urban projects, in which the planningauthority, often through the intermediary of an arm’s length publicdevelopment agency, takes charge of the land development in or-der to ensure implementation of the project according to its plans.

The real-estate development is left to private investors, who haveto comply with the requirements of the planning authority,but who in return get access to serviced building land inlocations where public involvement strongly reduces their risks(Karadimitriou, de Magalhaes, & Verhage, 2013).

J. Carpenter, R. Verhage / Cities 38 (2014) 57–68 67

The objective of the city from the very beginning was to developa project that could serve as a ‘best practice’ example of sustain-able urban development and a signpost of urban quality in Lyon.The requirements in terms of architectural quality, public space,social mix and environmental performance were therefore high(Verhage et al., 2012). This quest for a high quality developmentwas partly justified by the need to change the image of the areain order to attract private investment. But it was also a deliberatedesire by the city of Lyon to use the project in its communicationstrategy to outside investors (Verhage & Linossier, 2009).

To fulfil the project’s high quality standards, the city investedheavily in public space. But beyond that, private investors had toconform to exacting requirements in terms of energy performance,architectural quality and levels of social housing. To incentiviseinvestment, the Greater Lyon Authority used the land developmentagency to sell land at below market value. Strong political supportalso reduced the risk for private developers engaging in the project,encouraging companies to invest in the area. Also, the neighbour-hood was used as an experimental area in the EU Concerto pro-gramme on energy performance in urban development. Theexacting requirements in this field concerning building materials,insulation, and the use of renewable and passive energy have sincebecome the standards for building development in the wholeGreater Lyon area, but initially they were new in the Confluenceproject. The Concerto progamme provided funding for developersto cover part of the extra costs involved in using these new tech-niques (Fig. 15).

At the time of writing, in 2013, the first phase of the Confluenceproject is nearly finished, all land has been sold and almost allbuildings have been completed (Fig. 16). The city appears to havesucceeded in putting the area on the mental map, not only of Lyonresidents, but also of companies and administrations who haverelocated to the area, and of many European decision-makers inthe field of urban planning who have come across images of thearea, through processes of policy mobility (McCann & Ward,2011), in European network meetings, journals and conferences.

However, a number of questions remain. The Confluence projecthas absorbed significant public investment. Because of the generousamount of green space, the high standards of development and themoderate sales price of land, the public sector has subsidised thedevelopment up to almost 80 million euros, and has invested directlyin public facilities up to another 27 million euros, on a total invest-ment of 225 million euros (Communauté Urbaine du Grand Lyon,2012). Besides financing almost half of the land development ofthe first phase of La Confluence, other significant public investmenthas also gone into developing the tramway line, modifying the tra-jectory of the railway line crossing the area, and for a new museumat the tip of the Confluence area, where the two rivers meet.

Questions can be asked about the benefits of these public invest-ments for local taxpayers. The project contributes to the attractive-ness of the city centre, and as a result to the rise of real estateprices in this area. In an attempt to create a ‘‘socially mixed’’ area,the housing offer on the site is composed of both high-end luxuryapartments in the free-market sector (70% of all dwellings), and socialand affordable housing units according to the requirements of theplanning authority (30%). Plans for Phase 2 of the project include aneven higher proportion of affordable housing. The provision of socialhousing in the area makes it accessible for lower income households,but there is little or no provision for middle-income households to ac-cess housing in the neighbourhood. There is a risk that this reinforcessegregation between the central part of the agglomeration and itseastern fringes. Also, transport to the area remains problematic, orig-inally one of the key reasons why the neighbourhood has been under-developed over recent decades. The extension of a new tramline,planned for 2014 to link the Confluence with the east bank of theRhône and the metroline at Gerland will address this issue to some

degree, but because of the insular character of the site, accessibilityremains a problem (Verhage & Linossier, 2009).

Conclusions

Lyon has developed a system of urban governance that, over theyears, has allowed the city to build up strong partnerships with theprivate sector, with political and business elites coming together tofind consensus on developing the city. Coming from both politicaland business sides, there has also been a clear will to ‘internationa-lise’ the city, proactively taking part in European networking,building partnerships with other cities, and striving to put Lyonon the international stage. With this international networkinghas come a strong drive to position the city favourably in relationto inward investment and attracting international capital. AsSimmie, Carpenter, Chadwick, Martin, and Wood (2006)highlighted, strategies to promote urban competitiveness includephysical upgrading of the urban environment and policies toimprove urban quality of life, both of which have been pursuedby the Greater Lyon Authority to increase the city’s attractivenessboth to international capital and to a mobile workforce.

However, within a framework of globalisation and territorialcompetition, Lyon is bidding with other European and world citiesfor investment and jobs. While there have been some successes inattracting high profile companies to the city, Greater Lyon has yetto fully convince international global capital that Lyon is the placeto invest, instead of Paris or other major European cities. The cityhas found it hard to retain the headquarters of international firms,some having departed for Paris or elsewhere in Europe, raisingfears that the Lyon may be perceived as a ‘back office’ for othermore attractive urban locations (ESPON, 2012).

There are also potentially uneven spatial effects of a develop-ment strategy that focuses on positioning the city in relation tointernational competition. To some extent, there is a tension be-tween competitiveness and cohesion, as highlighted in the SpecialIssue of Urban Studies (2012, vol. 49, 9), focusing on the incongru-ences of policies related to competitiveness and cohesion. On theone hand, there is the desire to promote Lyon as a city at the fore-front of the global economy, promoting high profile urban develop-ment projects such as the Confluence as ideal locations forinternational investment and urban living; on the other hand, pol-icy-makers are confronted with urban deprivation in the city’s sub-urbs that is a far cry from the high-end ‘‘urban lifestyle’’developments that are being promoted elsewhere in the city. Thechallenge for a city such as Lyon, is to try and make connectionsbetween these two spheres, to attempt to forge links betweenthe benefits of a development strategy based around ‘internation-alisation’ within a global economy, and the needs of disadvantagedneighbourhoods, where unemployment and poor housing condi-tions are number one priorities. Attempts are being made to buildsuch bridges. If they produce the desired effects, Lyon could beseen, in years to come, as a flagship example of a city that madereal attempts to address key structural challenges that are facingmajor urban areas in the global north.

References

Agence d’Urbanisme de Lyon (2011). « Aire urbaine 2010: Aire métropolitainelyonnaise » Octobre 2011, Observatoire partenarial démographie, Octobre2011 – No. 2 <http://www.urbalyon.org/AffichePDF/Aire_urbaine_2010_-__metropolitaine_lyonnaise-3113> Accessed 18.06.13.

Agence d’Urbanisme de Lyon (2012a). Le Pôle Métropolitain en quelques chiffres.<http://documentation.urbalyon.org/GEIDEFile/Portrait_PoleMetropolitain_01.pdf?Archive=193859191103&File=Portrait_PoleMetropolitain_01_pdf>Accessed 10.06.13.

Agence d’Urbanisme de Lyon (2012b). Les inégalités sociales et territoriales dansl’agglomération lyonnaise Cahier n� 6. Lyon: Observatoire territorial de lacohésion sociale, Agence d’urbanisme pour le développement del’agglomération lyonnaise, septembre 2012 (contact Nicole Ponton Frénay).

68 J. Carpenter, R. Verhage / Cities 38 (2014) 57–68

BCG and CM International (2008). Evaluation des pôles de compétitivité. Report forthe DATAR, Paris.

Boino, P. (2009). Lyon: La production de la ville. Paris: Parenthèses.Bonneville, M. (1997). Lyon: Métropole régionale ou euro-cité? Collection Villes, Paris:

Anthropos.Boutaud, A. (2004). Le développement durable: Penser le changement ou changer le

pansement? PhD thesis in Sciences de la Terre et de l’environnement, Ecole desMines de Saint-Etienne et Université Jean Monnet, Saint-Etienne, 415 p.

Brenner, N., & Theodore, N. (Eds.). (2002). Spaces of neoliberalism: Urbanrestructuring in North America and Western Europe. Oxford: Blackwell.

CCIL (2009). Livre Blanc: Pour une Nouvelle Ambition Industrielle pour la RégionUrbaine de Lyon, Lyon: CCIL, March 2009.

Chambre des Notaires du Rhône (2013). Prix des appartements neufs. <http://www.chambre-rhone.notaires.fr/prix-immobilier/appartements-neufs/>Accessed 19.06.13.

Communauté Urbaine du Grand Lyon (2012). Extrait du régistre des délibérations duconseil communautaire, séance du 25 juin 2012, Délibération n� 2012–3108.

Davoudi, S., Crawford, J., & Mehmood, A. (2009). Planning for climate change.Strategies for mitigation and adaption for spatial planners. London: Earthscan.

DGCIS-DATAR (2011). Competitiveness clusters in France, Paris: DGCIS-DATAR. <http://competitivite.gouv.fr/documents/commun/Documentation_poles/brochures_poles/anglais/brochure-ang-internet.pdf> Accessed 12.06.13.

Dikeç, M. (2007). Badlands of the Republic. Space, politics and urban policy. Oxford:Blackwell Publishing.

Donzelot, J., & Estèbe, P. (1994). L’Etat animateur. Essai sur la politique de la ville.Paris: Esprit.

Epstein, R. (2011). « Politiques de la ville: Bilan et (absence de) perspectives ».Regards Croisés sur l’Economie, 9, 203–211.

ESPON (2012). Second tier cities and territorial development in Europe: Performance, policiesand prospects (pp. 359–395, 396-419). Lyon, France. <http://www.espon.eu/export/sites/default/Documents/Projects/AppliedResearch/SGPTD/SGPTD_Scientific_Report_-_ Final_Version_27.09.12.pdf>.

Florida, R. (2004). Cities and the creative class. New York: Routledge.INSEE (2010). Grand Lyon: La précarité reste concentrée à l’est de l’agglomération.

Paris: INSEE.Jouve, B. (2009). « De la métropole d’équilibre à Lyon INC ». In P. Boino (Ed.), Lyon la

production de la ville. Paris: Parenthèses.Karadimitriou, N., de Magalhaes, C., & Verhage, R. (2013). Planning, risk and property

development: Urban regeneration in England, France and the Netherlands.Abingdon: Routledge.

Linossier, R. (2006). La Territorialisation de la Régulation Economique dansl’Agglomération Lyonnaise (1950–2005): Politiques – Acteurs – Territoires. PhDthesis presented at the University of Lyon 2, 7th February 2006.

Linossier, R. (2009). La Cité internationale. In P. Boino (Ed.), Lyon: La Production de laVille. Paris: Parenthèses.

Lyonbiopôle (2012). Key figures 2012. Lyon: Lyonbiopôle <http://www.lyonbiopole.com/document/documents_generaux/13.pdf> Accessed 12.06.13.

McCann, E., & Ward, K. (2011). Introduction: Urban assemblages: Territories,relations, practices, and power. In E. McCann & K. Ward (Eds.), Mobile urbanism:Cities and policy making in the global age. Minneapolis, MN: MinnesotaUniversity Press.

OMPREL (2010). La région urbaine de Lyon dans l’Europe des métropoles, RUL, SGAR,Agence d’Urbanisme and Opale.

OPALE (2009). Lyon, puissance économique. <http://www.opale-lyon.com/content/medias/pdf/000051.pdf> Accessed 19.06.13.

Payre, R. (2010). The importance of being connected: City networks and urbangovernment, Lyon and Eurocities (1990–2005). International Journal of Urbanand Regional Research, 34(2), 260–280.

Rocher, L. (2013). Le climat, nouvel objet de l’action urbaine lyonnaise. In F.Bertrand, & L. Rocher (Eds.), Les territoires face aux changements climatiques. Unepremière génération d’initiatives locales (pp. 125–147). Bruxelles: Peter Lang,collection Ecopolis.

SEPAL (2007). Enseignements pour l’agglomération Lyonnaise des récentes enquêtesdéplacements. Lyon: SEPAL. <http://www.scot-agglolyon.fr/_dynamique//docu-mentation/fichiers/Emd_Cordon_Urbagares.pdf> Accessed 23.07.13.

Simmie, J., Carpenter, J., Chadwick, A., Martin, R., & Wood, P. (2006). The competitiveeconomic performance of English cities. London: ODPM. <http://planning.brookes.ac.uk/staff/resources/simmie/TheCompetitiveEconomicPerformanceofEnglishCities_id1504790.pdf> Accessed 23.07.13.

Verhage, R., & Linossier, R. (2009). La co-production public-privé des projetsurbains: Entre création de valeur économique et réalisation des objectifspublics. In P. Boino (Ed.), Lyon: La production de la Ville. Paris: Parenthèses.

Verhage, R., Menez, F., Lorenzi, E., Devisme, L., Geppert, A., Bourdin, V. et al. (2012).Apprentissage du développement urbain durable et changement des pratiquesprofesionnelles : Expériences à Lyon, Reims, Nantes et Grenoble, Rapport Final,Programme Interdisciplinaire de recherche sur la Ville et l’Environnement(PIRVE). <http://urbamet.documentation.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/documents/Urbamet/0312/Urbamet-0312178/pcaouv00197082.pdf>