Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
The Reference Framework for Sustainable Cities
1
Monitoring Sustainable
Urban Development Plans
using RFSC and Open Data
MONITORING SUSTAINABLE URBAN DEVELOPMENT PLANS USING
RFSC AND OPEN DATA
• Koos van Dijken, Platform 31
2
• Koos van Dijken, Platform 31• Nathalie Debord, La Rochelle and Adam Duchac, Hradec
Kralove• Daniel Levisson and Albert Edman, City of Umeå• Hugo Poelman, DG Regional and Urban Policy, European
Commission• Question and Answer session
Introduction to the RFSCThe Reference Framework for Sustainable Cities
Cities of Tomorrow – Workshop urban development plans, RFSC and open data, 17 February 2014, Brussels
3
WWW.RFSC.EU
Introduction to the RFSC
The Reference Framework for Sustainable Cities
Cities of Tomorrow – Workshop urban development plans, RFSC and open data, 17 February 2014, Brussels
4
Our support ([email protected] ou www.rfsc.eu)
• Helpdesk
• Events, newsletter
• Information, demonstration and
Cities of Tomorrow – Workshop urban development plans, RFSC and open data, 17 February 2014, Brussels
5
demonstration and training material
• For specific needs, regions, or themes
• We support Ambassador Cities and peer group of cities
• We come to you
Introduction to the RFSC
The Reference Framework for Sustainable Cities
Cities of Tomorrow – Workshop urban development plans, RFSC and open data, 17 February 2014, Brussels
6
Introduction to the RFSC
Sign up!Create a Visitors AccountAsk for extended rights
to become RFSC-city
Cities of Tomorrow – Workshop urban development plans, RFSC and open data, 17 February 2014, Brussels
7
A toolkit for cities
• an interactive web-tool
• facilitating the dialogue about sustainable and integrated urban development
Cities of Tomorrow – Workshop urban development plans, RFSC and open data, 17 February 2014, Brussels
8
– within cities
– between cities
– with local stakeholders
– across sectors
– at different political levels (local, regional, national, European)
– within different levels of governance
Benefits: better communication & results
• about sustainable and integrated strategies and projects
• amongst and between different groups
• fostering integrated thinking and actions
Cities of Tomorrow – Workshop urban development plans, RFSC and open data, 17 February 2014, Brussels
9
• fostering integrated thinking and actions
• illustrate and explain decision-making processes
• compare the impact and results for different alternatives
• improve coordination and give reasons for the choices taken
• assessing progress over time
• building capacity in urban management
Three main sections of RFSC
Cities of Tomorrow – Workshop urban development plans, RFSC and open data, 17 February 2014, Brussels
10
3 main tools
Checklist to develop a sustainable urban development strategy
Cities of Tomorrow – Workshop urban development plans, RFSC and open data, 17 February 2014, Brussels
11
Check whether a strategy or project is developed in an integrated manner
Build a monitoring system to evaluate a strategy or project
Choose the tool that best fit your needs
The “core” of the 3 tools
25 questions on sustainable urban development
• covering the European objectives and principles
grouped by the 4 pillars of sustainability
Cities of Tomorrow – Workshop urban development plans, RFSC and open data, 17 February 2014, Brussels
12
• grouped by the 4 pillars of sustainability– economy
– social affairs
– environment
– governance
• each question specified with sub-questions to go into details and to stimulate further debate
La Rochelle (France)
Hradec Králové (Czech Republic)
Umeå (Sweden)
Presentation of the
peerpeer--cities networkcities network
A peer-cities network?
What for?
• To broaden our scope of reflexion : good practices can be found
everywhere in Europe. The RFSC webtool is a useful and relevant place to
share them, using a common language.
Who to collaborate with?
• Cities with similar features/needs. Our 3 cities, Hradec Králové, Umeå and
La Rochelle are medium-sized cities, focusing on the monitoring ofLa Rochelle are medium-sized cities, focusing on the monitoring of
sustainable development plans.
• However, each of our 3 cities works differently on it, depending the local
context, the cultural background regarding evaluation and monitoring, and
the needs.
• One strong common point: being convinced by the tool (-but we’ve been
RFSC test cities since 2011!)-, as a starting point / basis to improve
communication, internally or externally, by involving people through
dialogue.
• La Rochelle “case study”
La Rochelle : where do we start from ?
Our expectations regarding the RFSC, from 2011 on (the testing phase):
- Develop an internal culture around sustainable development
- Foster a culture of assessment of the projects developed
- Enter a new platform for European exchanges
- Share a strategic common vision and set off a cross-disciplinarydialogue between the departments.
���� A tool for management
The “check the integrated approach” tool : our favourite so far !
-Weighting of the importance of an objective
-Qualitative assessment
-Clear, explicit vision of the project thanks to the spider diagram.
�Monitoring of global, complex and long-term projects (withmultiple milestones)
� to identify and manage interdependencies between differentactions
- The 2014 context : the monitoring of our Agenda 21 local action plan
- The process : focusing on the third tool of the RFSC, dedicated to monitoring progress to:
– ensure the availability of data,
– check whether they can be accessed easily.
A first very important step in strengthening our culture of monitoring and evaluation.
Build a monitoring system to evaluate a strategy or project
A first very important step in strengthening our culture of monitoring and evaluation.
- The third tool:
�Question of the definition / “sphere of operation” of indicators
�Question of relevance :
�Regarding the monitoring of the local action plan
of the Agenda 21,
�Regarding the monitoring of sustainable development,
clear enough to enable a “portait of territory”,
shareable with citizens.
RFSC Experience
Practical output
• Establish cooperation with relevant peer cities
• Gain and share experience with integrated approach and strategic planning
• Opportunity to engage local stakeholders
• Multi-level governance• Multi-level governance
RFSC web tool
• Integrated and simplified approach to monitor sustainable urban development
• Possibility to set custom indicators
• Clear graphical output
3rd seminar – June 2014, Czech Republic
Focus
• RFSC role in local politics• Dissemination of RFSC• Workshops (using the RFSC, beeing RFSC administrator)
Participants
• peer cities
• international guests
• Czech cities
• Czech national contact point for RFSC (Ministry for Local Development)
• anyone interested in RFSC and/or integrated approach
Thank you for your attention!
La RochelleNathalie Clain-Beauchef - Responsible for the Agenda [email protected]
Nathalie Debord - European Projects [email protected]
Hradec KrálovéAdam Duchac – Development Strategies [email protected]@mmhk.cz
Eliska Babkova - Development Strategies [email protected]
UmeåDaniel Levisson – Responsible for monitoring spatial [email protected]
Albert Edman - Head of Urban development and [email protected]
New noise (by Refused)
We lack the motion to move to the new beat
…How can we expect anyone to listenIf we're using the same old voice? We need new noise New art for the real peopleNew art for the real people
…We dance to all the wrong songsWe enjoy all the wrong movesWe dance to all the wrong songsWe're not leading
…
We lack the motion to move to the new beat
Monitoring sustainable urban development plans using RFSC and Open data
Umeå and Sweden case study -Sustainable Ålidhem district
Daniel Levisson
Albert Edman
City of Umeå, Sweden
Starting points – City of Umeå
Spatial plan objectives
City council strategic objectives
Strategic reasons, why join RFSC?
• Gain and share experience with strategic planning
• Integrated and simplified approach to monitoring sustainable urban development
• Multi-level governance
Practical reasons, why work with the RFSC
• Establish cooperation with relevant peer cities with
• Proven track record and results
• Similar urban challenges
• Continue success with other EU projects (M-Spice, URBACT)
Input 1 – RFSC 28 Key indicators
Governance
What is Open data?
”…catalysing the evolution of open data culture
to create economic, environmental, and social
value. It helps unlock supply, generates demand,
Input 2 - Open data
value. It helps unlock supply, generates demand,
creates and disseminates knowledge to address
local and global issues”
/Open Data Institute (ODI)
Input 2 - Open data
Input 2 - Open data
About Ålidhem city district• 7 000 inhabitants (6 % of Umeå)
• High student population
• Mainly rented apartments
• NOT Umeå’s most deprived area
Devastating fire (Christmas 2008)
About ”Sustainable Ålidhem” • National pilot - 1 000 inhabitants
• Energy efficiency & small rent increases
• Systemic approach (District - City – EU)
• Access to ”open data” - Umeå university
Case Sustainable Ålidhem
(K 5) - Employment rate for women and men aged 20-64
70
80
20
30
40
50
60
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
EU-28 Umeå Sustainable Ålidhem
Case Sustainable Ålidhem
(K 10) - Share of 30-34 years old having completed tertiary or equivalent education - with reference value of at least 40%
50
60
0
10
20
30
40
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
EU-28 Umeå Sustainable Ålidhem
Case Sustainable Ålidhem
Energy efficiency per capita
100
110
EU target
EU
Sweden
Umeå
50
60
70
80
90
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
%
Case Sustainable Ålidhem
Energy efficiency per capita
100
110
EU target
EU
Sweden
Umeå
50
60
70
80
90
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Umeå
Sustainable Ålidhem
New noise (by Refused)
We lack the motion to move to the new beat
…How can we expect anyone to listenIf we're using the same old voice? We need new noise New art for the real peopleNew art for the real people
…We dance to all the wrong songsWe enjoy all the wrong movesWe dance to all the wrong songsWe're not leading
…
We lack the motion to move to the new beat
Suggestions for further development
• City responsibilities– Monitor local development and plans
– Share and exchange knowledge
– Analyse systemic effects– Analyse systemic effects
• EU and Member States roles– Support monitoring with auto-generated data
– Facilitate city exchanges
– Multi-level governance coordination
Question time
36
