Suchergebnisse

English
Urban policy has been inextricably tied to the management of the Northern Ireland conflict. The arrival of the EU URBAN Community Initiative 1994-99 struck a discordant note in the attempt to revitalise town centres, lever property capital and produce positive place imagery. This article reviews the experiences of the Initiative in Derry/Londonderry and suggests that its concern for spatial poverty, community participation and social regeneration has much to offer policy and politics in Northern Ireland's uncertain transition to post-conflict stability. A local White Paper is proposed in order to ground policy in the reality of post-industrial change, ethnoreligious segregation and the need to reach out to Northern Ireland's most disaffected communities.

Reunification profoundly challenged the local government structure inherited from the Cold War period in Berlin. Yet this sudden socioeconomic and political change did not produce any immediate impact on institutional arrangements or policy instruments within the urban policy field. In this context, the implementation of the European Community Initiative URBAN, between 1994 and 1999, offered an opportunity to actors who were willing to challenge the existing balance of power to contest the legitimacy of preexisting interests and representations. The author argues that, in a context of competing interpretations of the issues raised by segregation processes which have left pockets of poverty in both parts of the city, the URBAN programme has managed to become an important driving force behind an underlying process of change. Its innovative approach to urban poverty and social exclusion exerted an impact on the parameters of this process of change, exacerbating existing political and organisational conflicts and challenging local networks, sources of legitimacy, and policy instruments.

This book was published by the Water, Engineering and Development Centre (WEDC) at Loughborough University: http://wedc.lboro.ac.uk/ ; This manual investigates the extent and nature of the involvement of low-income urban communities in the provision of their local infrastructure. It also provides guidance for policy-makers and professional staff of urban government, development agencies, non-government organisations, and small to medium enterprises for promoting increased involvement of communities in the procurement of neighbourhood (tertiary level) infrastructure. Cases relating to water supply, sanitation, drainage, access, paving, street and security lighting, solid waste removal, and community buildings are examined.

The URBAN Community Initiative has been so far the most specific instrument of theurban policy in the European Union. It was developed during two consecutive programming periodsof the Cohesion Policy (the period 1994-1999, under the name of URBAN, and the 2000- 2006, underthe name of URBAN II).Its progress in Spain, as in other Member States, has made an important contribution to the practiceof urban regeneration. Its scope has been established by the country circumstances, which haveacted in accordance with the situation, limiting or fostering the introduction of the methodologicalapproach considered by this Community Initiative. From this awareness the paper analyzes thecontribution made by URBAN to the field of urban regeneration in Spain.The research has been developed stemming from the contextualization of URBAN in the frameworkof the EU urban policy, thus to characterize and understand its methodological elements and toanalyse, afterwards, its application to the Spanish case (through a general approach to the URBANprogrammes (1994-1999) and the development of case studies of the URBAN II programmes).The analysis of the results achieved by the Spanish programmes has produced some conclusionsabout the contribution made by URBAN to the Spanish context of urban regeneration and the lessonsthat has entailed its implementation. These conclusions are proposed as a contribution to the currentdiscussion on the extension of the EU urban policy for the new budget period 2014-2020. ; Hasta el presente la política urbana de la Unión Europea (UE) ha tenido suinstrumento más específico en la Iniciativa Comunitaria URBAN, desarrollada durantedos periodos presupuestarios consecutivos de la Política de Cohesión (1994-1999,bajo el nombre de URBAN, y 2000-2006, bajo el nombre de URBAN II).Su desarrollo en España, como en el resto de los Estados miembros, ha constituido unaaportación a la práctica de la regeneración urbana cuyo alcance ha quedado determinadopor la realidad del país, que ha actuado como marco circunstancial, limitando o favoreciendola introducción del enfoque y los elementos metodológicos que caracterizabanesta Iniciativa Comunitaria. Desde esta constatación este trabajo analiza lacontribución que URBAN ha hecho al escenario español de la regeneración urbana.La investigación se ha desarrollado partiendo de la contextualización de URBAN en elmarco de la política urbana de la UE, con el fin de caracterizarlo (entendiendo suselementos metodológicos) y analizar, acto seguido, su aplicación en el caso española través de un acercamiento general a los programas URBAN (1994-1999) y el desarrollode estudios de caso relativos a los programas URBAN II. El análisis de los resultadosalcanzados por los programas españoles, sin perder de vista el escenariogeneral de la regeneración urbana en el país, ha permitido llegar a conclusiones sobrela aportación que esta Iniciativa Comunitaria ha hecho al contexto español y sobre lasenseñanzas que deja su desarrollo. Las conclusiones a las que se ha llegado se proponencomo una contribución a la reflexión actual sobre la continuación de la políticaurbana de la UE de cara al nuevo periodo presupuestario 2014-2020.

Hasta el presente la política urbana de la Unión Europea (UE) ha tenido suinstrumento más específico en la Iniciativa Comunitaria URBAN, desarrollada durantedos periodos presupuestarios consecutivos de la Política de Cohesión (1994-1999,bajo el nombre de URBAN, y 2000-2006, bajo el nombre de URBAN II).Su desarrollo en España, como en el resto de los Estados miembros, ha constituido unaaportación a la práctica de la regeneración urbana cuyo alcance ha quedado determinadopor la realidad del país, que ha actuado como marco circunstancial, limitando o favoreciendola introducción del enfoque y los elementos metodológicos que caracterizabanesta Iniciativa Comunitaria. Desde esta constatación este trabajo analiza lacontribución que URBAN ha hecho al escenario español de la regeneración urbana.La investigación se ha desarrollado partiendo de la contextualización de URBAN en elmarco de la política urbana de la UE, con el fin de caracterizarlo (entendiendo suselementos metodológicos) y analizar, acto seguido, su aplicación en el caso española través de un acercamiento general a los programas URBAN (1994-1999) y el desarrollode estudios de caso relativos a los programas URBAN II. El análisis de los resultadosalcanzados por los programas españoles, sin perder de vista el escenariogeneral de la regeneración urbana en el país, ha permitido llegar a conclusiones sobrela aportación que esta Iniciativa Comunitaria ha hecho al contexto español y sobre lasenseñanzas que deja su desarrollo. Las conclusiones a las que se ha llegado se proponencomo una contribución a la reflexión actual sobre la continuación de la políticaurbana de la UE de cara al nuevo periodo presupuestario 2014-2020. ; The URBAN Community Initiative has been so far the most specific instrument of theurban policy in the European Union. It was developed during two consecutive programming periodsof the Cohesion Policy (the period 1994-1999, under the name of URBAN, and the 2000- 2006, underthe name of URBAN II).Its progress in Spain, as in other Member States, has made an important contribution to the practiceof urban regeneration. Its scope has been established by the country circumstances, which haveacted in accordance with the situation, limiting or fostering the introduction of the methodologicalapproach considered by this Community Initiative. From this awareness the paper analyzes thecontribution made by URBAN to the field of urban regeneration in Spain.The research has been developed stemming from the contextualization of URBAN in the frameworkof the EU urban policy, thus to characterize and understand its methodological elements and toanalyse, afterwards, its application to the Spanish case (through a general approach to the URBANprogrammes (1994-1999) and the development of case studies of the URBAN II programmes).The analysis of the results achieved by the Spanish programmes has produced some conclusionsabout the contribution made by URBAN to the Spanish context of urban regeneration and the lessonsthat has entailed its implementation. These conclusions are proposed as a contribution to the currentdiscussion on the extension of the EU urban policy for the new budget period 2014-2020.

The relevance of the relationship between evaluation and learning is widely acknowledged; as well as the importance of this learning process to support policy decision making and to judge the value of "what was done", "how" and "with what results". Although the activity of evaluation is not something new, but a field of knowledge with its own theories and practices, it is important to notice that there is great variability in the tradition and cultures of evaluation between countries. This paper presents and compares different conceptual and methodological frameworks created for the assessment of the European initiative Urban II, including the one that was used by the author in the context of an academic evaluation in the city of Porto. The comparative analysis of the results leads us to the recommendation for more democratic processes of evaluation and intervention, in order to improve their quality and accountability and promote the important goal of learning with this type of experimental initiatives. ; The author is supported by grant no. SFRH/BPD/75863/2011 from Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia, Lisboa, Portugal.

This is a conference paper. ; Despite the notable contributions of community-driven initiatives to improve access to urban water supply in Ghana, no conscious effort has been made to harness the full potential of their involvement in improving urban water supply. Drawing on ongoing research on improving urban water and sanitation provision through information and action driven locally, this paper examines community-driven initiatives towards improve access to water supply in urban Ghana. The discussions reveals that while the role of communitybased water providers remain unrecognised in the absence of support from governments and financial institutions, they are vital to millions of poor urban households who cannot access water through the formal network. The paper calls for promoting and supporting community-driven initiatives so that in the absence of universal pipe coverage, they can operate efficiently under a light regulatory regime that ensures fair prices and a viable service delivery.

This paper aims to reflect on the results of the project Community Intervention in Urban Areas: a youth driven initiative. This project envisioned the development of a Transnational Seminar that gave origin to the development of youth arts intervention projects and to the elaboration of the document "Youth Policies for Urban Neighborhoods". The project started from the youth's reflection on the physical, social, economic, and cultural degradation of specific spaces/territories and communities in Portugal, Italy, the Netherlands, and Belgium (spaces in ruins, non-places and other abandoned areas), exploring these territories as spaces for transformation and future renovation. The idea is to explore the ways youth may contribute to the transformation of these spaces, therefore enhancing their civic knowledge, capacity to intervene and influence policy and research under this theme. We wish to explore the role of younger generations, and youth in particular, through a change of paradigm. That is, by developing alternatives of intervention, through Participant Action Research and through the exploration of its connections with artistic practice and the cultural field in general. We hope this approach can influence local, national and European youth education policies and enhance different approaches to research in general.