Search results

This paper explores the dynamics of urban policy transfer in the European Union (EU), critically examining the process of Europeanization in relation to urban issues. The paper takes a comparative approach, analysing the evolution of urban policy and Europeanization in four member states: France, Italy, Spain and the UK from the 1990s up to the current Cohesion Policy period (2014–2020). Using an analytical framework based on three dimensions of Europeanization (direction, object and impact), we examine the extent to which urban policies are moving towards an integrated approach to sustainable urban development, as supported by the EU. The paper highlights the contradictions between processes of convergence through Europeanization, and path-dependent systems and trajectories that forge alternative paths. In doing so, it advances wider debates on the impact of Europeanization in a neo-liberal context by arguing that member states more likely to be affected by Europeanization are those most impacted by national austerity measures. A process of 'variegated Europeanization' is proposed to capture the differential practices taking place within the EU with regard to the circulation of the EU's approach to urban policy.

Objetivo: Al iniciar los años 90 del siglo pasado se formaliza a nivel internacional una tendencia a abordar los problemas de degradación de las ciudades desde un enfoque integrado y que cuente con la participación de la comunidad local. Ambos aspectos quedaron incorporados como elementos metodológicos en la Iniciativa Comunitaria URBAN (1994-1999) de regeneración urbana, lanzada por la Comisión Europea en 1994, y en su continuadora URBAN II (2000-2006). En España ambas contribuyeron a introducir innovación en la práctica de la regeneración urbana. Este trabajo analiza la incorporación del enfoque integrado y la participación en la Iniciativa Urbana (IU), el instrumento continuador de URBAN durante el periodo 2007-2013 en el marco de la Política Urbana de la UE en el país. Metodología: A través de una metodología cualitativa que revisa y analiza un número relevante de fuentes primarias, literatura científica, y 44 programas desarrollados dentro de la IU, el estudio revela la importancia del lanzamiento y formalización de este instrumento para avanzar en la introducción del enfoque integrado y de participación en la regeneración urbana. Conclusiones: Se profundiza hasta un nivel de análisis que permite entender el grado de integración de los enfoques objeto de estudio en el diseño de la IU y en sus programas, permitiendo identificar los ámbitos en los que se ha avanzado y aquellos en los que todavía se encuentran limitaciones. Originalidad: El trabajo se propone proporcionar conocimiento y contribuir a la (insuficiente) reflexión académica sobre un tema que será clave para definir los instrumentos que operarán en España dentro de la dimensión urbana de la Política de Cohesión de la UE en el periodo 2021-2027, donde el enfoque integrado y la participación seguirán siendo elementos fundamentales. ; Objectiu: A l'iniciar els anys 90 de segle passat es formalitza a nivell internacional una tendència a abordar els problemes de degradació de les ciutats des d'un enfocament integrat i que compti amb la participació de la comunitat local. Tots dos aspectes van quedar incorporats com a elements metodològics en la Iniciativa Comunitària URBAN (1994-1999) de regeneració urbana, llançada per la Comissió Europea el 1994, i en el seu continuadora URBAN II (2000-2006). A Espanya les dues van contribuir a introduir innovació en la pràctica de la regeneració urbana. Aquest treball analitza la incorporació de l'enfocament integrat i la participació en la Iniciativa Urbana (IU), l'instrument continuador d'URBAN durant el període 2007-2013 en el marc de la Política urbà de la UE al país. Metodologia: A través d'una metodologia qualitativa que revisa i analitza un nombre rellevant de fonts primàries, literatura científica, i 44 programes desenvolupats dins de la IU, l'estudi revela la importància de l'llançament i formalització d'aquest instrument per avançar en la introducció de l'enfocament integrat i de participació en la regeneració urbana. Conclusions: S'aprofundeix fins a un nivell d'anàlisi que permet entendre el grau d'integració dels enfocaments objecte d'estudi en el disseny de la IU i en els seus programes, permetent identificar els àmbits en què s'ha avançat i aquells en què encara es troben limitacions. Originalitat: El treball es proposa proporcionar coneixement i contribuir a la (insuficient) reflexió acadèmica sobre un tema que serà clau per definir els instruments que operaran a Espanya dins de la dimensió urbana de la Política de Cohesió de la UE en el període 2021-2027, on l'enfocament integrat i la participació seguiran sent elements fonamentals. ; Objective: At the beginning of the 1990s it is possible to identify the formalization of an international trend that aims to tackle the problems of urban decay through an integrated and participative approach. The URBAN Community Initiative, launched by the European Commission in 1994, adopted both aspects in its urban regeneration method. It was further developed under the second round of URBAN (called URBAN II -2000-2006). The literature has pointed out that through this methodology URBAN and URBAN II contributed importantly to introduce innovation in the practice of urban regeneration in Spain. This study analyses the adoption of the integrated and participative approach in the Iniciativa Urbana (IU), the instrument that explicitly continued the path of URBAN under the Urban Policy of the EU in Spain in the period 2007-2013. Methodology: Through a qualitative research methodology that analyzes a relevant number of primary sources, scientific literature on the topic, and 44 programmes of urban regeneration developed under the IU, the study reveals the importance of the launch and the design of this instrument to consolidate the introduction of the integrated and participative approaches in the country. Conclusions: It allows understanding the level of adoption of both methodological aspects in the programmes of the IU, the fields in which relevant advancement has taken place, and those in which Spanish cities still find relevant limitations in a framework characterized by path dependence. Originality: The study aims to provide knowledge and contribute to the (so far insufficient) academic reflection on a topic that will be crucial to define the instruments that will be operative in Spain under the urban dimension of the Cohesion Policy of the EU in the post 2020 period. ; Peer Reviewed

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.

International audience ; Climate Action Planning is one of the top priorities of cities in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and strengthening climate-resilience, as pointed out by the New Urban Agenda and the Paris Agreement. This study aims at assessing the development of climate change mitigation and adaptation planning in Italian cities. To this end, we analysed the availability of Local Climate Plans (LCPs) in 76 cities, which are included in the Eurostat Urban Audit (UA-2015) database. In a further step, we analysed the content of the urban climate change mitigation and adaptation plans available in a smaller sample of 32 Italian cities of 2007 Eurostat Urban Audit database (UA-3), looking at the single actions undertaken for addressing mitigation and adaptation to climate change. Results show the almost total absence of comprehensive and stand-alone urban climate change adaptation plans in Italy (except for two cities, Ancona and Bologna), whereas we found that in 61 out of 76 cities municipal civil protection plans are the instruments that deal with local emergencies associated to extreme weather events. On the other hand, 56 out of 76 urban climate change mitigation plans (i.e. Sustainable Energy Action Plans) are being developed in the framework of the Covenant of Mayors, which is a transnational network of local governments created by the European Union (EU) in 2012. The results obtained on the mitigation side point out that, in absence of a national law that imposes Italian cities to develop LCPs, transnational networks are an effective boost to voluntary commitment to reach EU climate and energy objectives.

International audience ; Climate Action Planning is one of the top priorities of cities in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and strengthening climate-resilience, as pointed out by the New Urban Agenda and the Paris Agreement. This study aims at assessing the development of climate change mitigation and adaptation planning in Italian cities. To this end, we analysed the availability of Local Climate Plans (LCPs) in 76 cities, which are included in the Eurostat Urban Audit (UA-2015) database. In a further step, we analysed the content of the urban climate change mitigation and adaptation plans available in a smaller sample of 32 Italian cities of 2007 Eurostat Urban Audit database (UA-3), looking at the single actions undertaken for addressing mitigation and adaptation to climate change. Results show the almost total absence of comprehensive and stand-alone urban climate change adaptation plans in Italy (except for two cities, Ancona and Bologna), whereas we found that in 61 out of 76 cities municipal civil protection plans are the instruments that deal with local emergencies associated to extreme weather events. On the other hand, 56 out of 76 urban climate change mitigation plans (i.e. Sustainable Energy Action Plans) are being developed in the framework of the Covenant of Mayors, which is a transnational network of local governments created by the European Union (EU) in 2012. The results obtained on the mitigation side point out that, in absence of a national law that imposes Italian cities to develop LCPs, transnational networks are an effective boost to voluntary commitment to reach EU climate and energy objectives.

International audience ; The Paris Agreement aims to limit global mean temperature rise this century well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. This target has wide-ranging implications for Europe and its cities, which are the source of substantial proportions of greenhouse gas emissions. This paper reports the state of planning for climate change by collecting and analysing local climate mitigation and adaptation plans across 885 urban areas of the EU-28. A typology and analysis framework was developed that classifies local climate plans in terms of their spatial (alignment with local, national and international policy) and sectoral integration (alignment into existing local policy documents). We document local climate plans that we call type A1: non-compulsory by national law and not developed as part of international climate networks; A2: compulsory by national law and not developed as part of international networks; A3: plans developed as part of international networks. This most comprehensive analysis to date reveals that there is large diversity in the availability of local climate plans with most being available in Central and Northern European cities. Approximately 66% of EU cities have an A1, A2, or A3 mitigation plan, 26% an adaptation plan, 17% joint adaptation and mitigation plans, and about 30% lack any form of local climate plan (i.e. what we classify as A1, A2, A3 plans). Mitigation plans are more numerous than adaptation plans, but mitigation does not always precede adaptation. Our analysis reveals that city size, national legislation, and international networks can influence the development of local climate plans. We found that size does matter as about 70% of the cities above 1 million inhabitants have a comprehensive and stand-alone mitigation and/or an adaptation plan (A1 or A2). Countries with national climate legislation (A2), such as Denmark, France, Slovakia and the United Kingdom, are found to have nearly twice as many urban mitigation plans, and five times more likely to ...

International audience ; The Paris Agreement aims to limit global mean temperature rise this century well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. This target has wide-ranging implications for Europe and its cities, which are the source of substantial proportions of greenhouse gas emissions. This paper reports the state of planning for climate change by collecting and analysing local climate mitigation and adaptation plans across 885 urban areas of the EU-28. A typology and analysis framework was developed that classifies local climate plans in terms of their spatial (alignment with local, national and international policy) and sectoral integration (alignment into existing local policy documents). We document local climate plans that we call type A1: non-compulsory by national law and not developed as part of international climate networks; A2: compulsory by national law and not developed as part of international networks; A3: plans developed as part of international networks. This most comprehensive analysis to date reveals that there is large diversity in the availability of local climate plans with most being available in Central and Northern European cities. Approximately 66% of EU cities have an A1, A2, or A3 mitigation plan, 26% an adaptation plan, 17% joint adaptation and mitigation plans, and about 30% lack any form of local climate plan (i.e. what we classify as A1, A2, A3 plans). Mitigation plans are more numerous than adaptation plans, but mitigation does not always precede adaptation. Our analysis reveals that city size, national legislation, and international networks can influence the development of local climate plans. We found that size does matter as about 70% of the cities above 1 million inhabitants have a comprehensive and stand-alone mitigation and/or an adaptation plan (A1 or A2). Countries with national climate legislation (A2), such as Denmark, France, Slovakia and the United Kingdom, are found to have nearly twice as many urban mitigation plans, and five times more likely to produce urban adaptation plans, than countries without such legislation. A1 and A2 mitigation plans are particularly numerous in Denmark, Poland, Germany, and Finland; while A1 and A2 adaptation plans are prevalent in Denmark, Finland, UK and France. The integration of adaptation and mitigation is country-specific and can mainly be observed in countries where local climate plans are compulsory, especially in France and the UK. Finally, local climate plans of international climate networks (A3) are mostly found in the many countries where autonomous, i.e. A1 plans are less common. The findings reported here are of international importance as they will inform and support decision-making and thinking of stakeholders with similar experiences or developments at all levels and sectors in other regions around the world.

The Paris Agreement aims to limit global mean temperature rise this century to well below 2 degrees C above pre-industrial levels. This target has wide-ranging implications for Europe and its cities, which are the source of substantial greenhouse gas emissions. This paper reports the state of local planning for climate change by collecting and analysing information about local climate mitigation and adaptation plans across 885 urban areas of the EU-28. A typology and framework for analysis was developed that classifies local climate plans in terms of their alignment with spatial (local, national and international) and other climate related policies. Out of eight types of local climate plans identified in total we document three types of stand-alone local climate plans classified as type Al (autonomously produced plans), A2 (plans produced to comply with national regulations) or A3 (plans developed for international climate networks). There is wide variation among countries in the prevalence of local climate plans, with generally more plans developed by central and northern European cities. Approximately 66% of EU cities have a type Al, A2, or A3 mitigation plan, 26% an adaptation plan, and 17% a joint adaptation and mitigation plan, while about 33% lack any form of stand-alone local climate plan (i.e. what we classify as Al, A2, A3 plans). Mitigation plans are more numerous than adaptation plans, but planning for mitigation does not always precede planning for adaptation. Our analysis reveals that city size, national legislation, and international networks can influence the development of local climate plans. We found that size does matter as about 80% of the cities with above 500,000 inhabitants have a comprehensive and stand-alone mitigation and/or an adaptation plan (Al). Cities in four countries with national climate legislation (A2), i.e. Denmark, France, Slovakia and the United Kingdom, are nearly twice as likely to produce local mitigation plans, and five times more likely to produce local adaptation plans, compared to cities in countries without such legislation. Al and A2 mitigation plans are particularly numerous in Denmark, Poland, Germany, and Finland: while Al and A2 adaptation plans are prevalent in Denmark, Finland, UK and France. The integration of adaptation and mitigation is country-specific and can mainly be observed in two countries where local climate plans are compulsory, i.e. France and the UK. Finally, local climate plans produced for international climate networks (A3) are mostly found in the many countries where autonomous (type Al) plans are less common. This is the most comprehensive analysis of local climate planning to date. The findings are of international importance as they will inform and support decision making towards climate planning and policy development at national, EU and global level being based on the most comprehensive and up-to-date knowledge of local climate planning available to date.

The Paris Agreement aims to limit global mean temperature rise this century to well below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels. This target has wide-ranging implications for Europe and its cities, which are the source of substantial greenhouse gas emissions. This paper reports the state of local planning for climate change by collecting and analysing information about local climate mitigation and adaptation plans across 885 urban areas of the EU-28. A typology and framework for analysis was developed that classifies local climate plans in terms of their alignment with spatial (local, national and international) and other climate related policies. Out of eight types of local climate plans identified in total we document three types of stand-alone local climate plans classified as type A1 (autonomously produced plans), A2 (plans produced to comply with national regulations) or A3 (plans developed for international climate networks). There is wide variation among countries in the prevalence of local climate plans, with generally more plans developed by central and northern European cities. Approximately 66% of EU cities have a type A1, A2, or A3 mitigation plan, 26% an adaptation plan, and 17% a joint adaptation and mitigation plan, while about 33% lack any form of stand-alone local climate plan (i.e. what we classify as A1, A2, A3 plans). Mitigation plans are more numerous than adaptation plans, but planning for mitigation does not always precede planning for adaptation. Our analysis reveals that city size, national legislation, and international networks can influence the development of local climate plans. We found that size does matter as about 80% of the cities with above 500,000 inhabitants have a comprehensive and stand-alone mitigation and/or an adaptation plan (A1). Cities in four countries with national climate legislation (A2), i.e. Denmark, France, Slovakia and the United Kingdom, are nearly twice as likely to produce local mitigation plans, and five times more likely to produce local adaptation plans, compared to cities in countries without such legislation. A1 and A2 mitigation plans are particularly numerous in Denmark, Poland, Germany, and Finland; while A1 and A2 adaptation plans are prevalent in Denmark, Finland, UK and France. The integration of adaptation and mitigation is country-specific and can mainly be observed in two countries where local climate plans are compulsory, i.e. France and the UK. Finally, local climate plans produced for international climate networks (A3) are mostly found in the many countries where autonomous (type A1) plans are less common. This is the most comprehensive analysis of local climate planning to date. The findings are of international importance as they will inform and support decision-making towards climate planning and policy development at national, EU and global level being based on the most comprehensive and up-to-date knowledge of local climate planning available to date. ; EU COST Action TU0902 that made the initial work possible and the positive engagement and interaction of the members of this group which led to this work. MO acknowledges funding from the Spanish Government (Grant no. FPDI-2013-16631). EKL was supported by the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of CR within the National Sustainability Program I (NPU I), grant number LO1415. OH and RD were funded by the EC project RAMSES Reconciling Adaptation, Mitigation and Sustainable Development for Cities (contract Ref 308497) and the EPSRC project LC Transforms: Low Carbon Transitions of Fleet Operations in Metropolitan Sites Project (EP/N010612/1).

The Paris Agreement aims to limit global mean temperature rise this century well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. This target has wide-ranging implications for Europe and its cities, which are the source of substantial proportions of greenhouse gas emissions. This paper reports the state of planning for climate change by collecting and analysing local climate mitigation and adaptation plans across 885 urban areas of the EU-28. A typology and analysis framework was developed that classifies local climate plans in terms of their spatial (alignment with local, national and international policy) and sectoral integration (alignment into existing local policy documents). We document local climate plans that we call type A1: non-compulsory by national law and not developed as part of international climate networks; A2: compulsory by national law and not developed as part of international networks; A3: plans developed as part of international networks. This most comprehensive analysis to date reveals that there is large diversity in the availability of local climate plans with most being available in Central and Northern European cities. Approximately 66% of EU cities have an A1, A2, or A3 mitigation plan, 26% an adaptation plan, 17% joint adaptation and mitigation plans, and about 30% lack any form of local climate plan (i.e. what we classify as A1, A2, A3 plans). Mitigation plans are more numerous than adaptation plans, but mitigation does not always precede adaptation. Our analysis reveals that city size, national legislation, and international networks can influence the development of local climate plans. We found that size does matter as about 70% of the cities above 1 million inhabitants have a comprehensive and stand-alone mitigation and/or an adaptation plan (A1 or A2). Countries with national climate legislation (A2), such as Denmark, France, Slovakia and the United Kingdom, are found to have nearly twice as many urban mitigation plans, and five times more likely to produce urban adaptation plans, than countries without such legislation. A1 and A2 mitigation plans are particularly numerous in Denmark, Poland, Germany, and Finland; while A1 and A2 adaptation plans are prevalent in Denmark, Finland, UK and France. The integration of adaptation and mitigation is country-specific and can mainly be observed in countries where local climate plans are compulsory, especially in France and the UK. Finally, local climate plans of international climate networks (A3) are mostly found in the many countries where autonomous, i.e. A1 plans are less common. The findings reported here are of international importance as they will inform and support decision-making and thinking of stakeholders with similar experiences or developments at all levels and sectors in other regions around the world.

La introducción del género en el Agenda Urbana para la Unión Europea. Estado de la cuestión y próximos desafíos ; The European Union (EU) adopted gender mainstreaming in the Treaty of Amsterdam as the strategy to reach equality between women and men. The mandate of the Treaty and subsequent legislation has led to the implementation of this vision in some of the policy areas, while others have just begun to introduce this approach.Research work developed by the author of this article has identified that the urban policy of the EU has not integrated the gender perspective in the terms expressed by the Treaty in the policy documents launched until 2013(De Gregorio, 2014 and 2017). This article presents the continuation of that study, focusing on the construction process of the Urban Agenda for the European Union from 2013, with the objective of understanding if it has introduced factors of transformation concerning the gender approach assumed in the new policy documents, and particularly in the Pact of Amsterdam (programmatic framework of the Urban Agenda).In order to achieve its goal this study uses a mixed-knowledge methodology. The analysis identifies that the policy process addressed has integrated the gender dimension in the policy discourse of the Pact, meaning an important change in the traditional approach. Its integration is not sufficient in terms of consistency and visibility, but it has a real potential to mainstream gender in the Urban Agenda for the EU. To achieve that it would be necessary to make the issue more visible and to integrate gender expertise and guidelines for action in the work of the partnerships that are giving content to the priority topics of the Urban Agenda for the European Union. ; L'Unione Europea (UE) ha adottato l'integrazione di genere nel Trattato di Amsterdam come strategia per raggiungere la parità tra donne e uomini. Il mandato del Trattato e della seguente legislazione ha portato alla realizzazione di questa visione in alcuni dei settori di intervento, mentre altri hanno appena iniziato a introdurre questo approccio.Il lavoro di ricerca sviluppato dall'autore di questo articolo ha evidenziato che la politica urbana della UE non ha integrato la prospettiva di genere nei termini espressi dal Trattato nei documenti politici emanati fino al 2013 (De Gregorio, 2014 e 2017). Questo articolo presenta il prosieguo di tale studio, concentrandosi sul processo di costruzione dell'Agenda Urbana per l'Unione Europea dal 2013, con l'obiettivo di capire se ha introdotto fattori di trasformazione per quanto riguarda l'approccio di genere assunto nei nuovi documenti di indirizzo politico, e in particolare nel Patto di Amsterdam (quadro programmatico dell'Agenda Urbana).Al fine di raggiungere tale obiettivo questo studio utilizza una metodologia di conoscenza mista. L'analisi mette in evidenza che il processo politico attuato ha integrato la dimensione di genere nel discorso politico del patto, il che significa un importante cambiamento rispetto all'approccio tradizionale. Le sua integrazione non è sufficiente in termini di coerenza e visibilità, ma ha un potenziale reale di integrazione dell'approccio di genere dell'Agenda Urbana per l'Unione Europea. Per ottenere ciò sarebbe necessario rendere la questione più visibile ed integrare le competenze di genere e le linee guida per l'azione nel lavoro delle partnership che stanno dando contenuto ai temi prioritari dell'Agenda Urbana per l'Unione Europea.

This article addresses the actions and instruments that constitute the urban regeneration policy developed by the Spanish Central Government over the last decade, focusing on their participative dimension. The methodology and assumptions of these tools reveal an intention to devolve to local communities and stakeholders an active role in urban regeneration processes. The analysis of their participative approach has been undertaken from the perspective of Collaborative Planning.The work highlights an interest of the Central Administration to provide mechanisms and guidelines for regional and local governments so that they can set up processes of participation in the context of regeneration of their urban neighbourhoods. The trend detected reveals relevant progress and limitations, the latter namely related to the political culture and other aspects inherent to the country reality. ; Este trabajo profundiza en las acciones e instrumentos que constituyen la política de regeneración urbana desarrollada por el Gobierno Central a lo largo de la última década en España, poniendo el foco en su dimensión participativa. Se trata de herramientas que intentan desde su metodología y presupuestos de actuación devolver a la ciudadanía y los actores locales un papel activo en los procesos de regeneración. El análisis del enfoque participativo de los mismos se ha realizado desde el marco teórico de la Planificación Colaborativa.El trabajo ha puesto de manifiesto que en los últimos años se ha dado un interés creciente por parte de la Administración Central por generar mecanismos y proveer directrices dirigidas a los gobiernos regionales y locales, para que estos pongan en marcha procesos de participación en el contexto de la regeneración de los barrios urbanos. La tendencia detectada presenta avances relevantes junto con limitaciones, en gran medida relacionadas con la cultura política y otros aspectos inherentes a la realidad española.

La política urbana de la Unión Europea en España: de URBAN a las Estrategias de Desarrollo Urbano Sostenible Integrado (EDUSI2) ; The implementation of the urban policy of the EU in Spain has exerted a relevant influence in the country, contributing importantly to transform the scenario of urban regeneration. One of the main reason that explains this influence is the introduction of a method for urban regeneration that is area-based, integrated, collaborative, participative, strategic and aimed to put into practice innovative solutions to tackle urban decline from the mid-90s. This method has been applied in the country in the context of different initiatives launched at the national level- URBAN (1994-1999), URBAN II (2000-2006), and the Iniciativa Urbana (2007-2013)-, and is known and acknowledged by EU institutions as the "URBAN method". It is also the reference on which in the present Spanish municipalities are developing the so-called Integrated Sustainable Urban Development Strategies (ISUDS1) cofinanced by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) during the period 2014-2020. This study analyzes the four mentioned instruments with the aim to understand the contribution that the urban policy of the EU has done to the policy field of urban regeneration in the country over the last 23 years. The results allow understanding the level of evolution in the implementation of integrated urban regeneration strategies in the framework those instruments, focusing particularly on the limitations that they have found to implement the "URBAN method". The study also provides policy recommendations that are considered relevant in the context of the current implementation of ISUDS by a relevant number of cities, and in the process of construction of the Urban Agenda for Spain in which the Central Government is working at the moment. ; L'attuazione della politica urbana dell'UE in Spagna ha esercitato un'influenza rilevante nel paese, contribuendo in modo importante a trasformare lo scenario della rigenerazione urbana. Uno dei principali motivi che spiega questa influenza è l'introduzione di un metodo per la rigenerazione urbana, che è di tipo territoriale, integrato, collaborativo e partecipativo, e mira a mettere in pratica soluzioni innovative per affrontare il declino urbano dalla metà degli anni '90. Questo metodo è stato applicato nel paese nel contesto di diverse iniziative avviate a livello nazionale - URBAN (1994-1999), URBAN II (2000-2006) e Iniciativa Urbana (2007-2013) - ed è conosciuto e riconosciuto dalle istituzioni dell'UE come il "metodo URBAN". È il riferimento su cui i comuni spagnoli stanno sviluppando i cosiddetti EDUSI cofinanziati dal Fondo europeo di sviluppo regionale (FESR) nel periodo 2014-2020. Questo studio analizza gli strumenti al fine di comprendere il contributo che la politica urbana dell'UE aveva dato al settore della rigenerazione urbana nel paese negli ultimi 23 anni.I risultati del lavoro permettono di comprendere il livello di evoluzione nell'attuazione di strategie integrate di rigenerazione urbana attraverso gli strumenti citati, concentrandosi in particolare sulle limitazioni che hanno trovato per attuare il metodo URBAN e fornire raccomandazioni politiche per il medio termine che sono considerati particolarmente rilevanti nel contesto dell'attuazione degli EDUSI e della costruzione dell'Agenda Urbana per la Spagna (su cui il governo centrale sta lavorando al momento) e il lancio del terzo bando degli EDUSI a medio termine.

Since 1990, when the EEC published the «Green Paper on the Urban Environment», the European Union has carried out an active role fighting against the decline that affects the European cities, through contributions that have consisted of recommendations, guidelines and a direct action on the deprived urban areas financed through the Cohesion Fund, the ERDF and the ESF. This task has led to the definition of a specific instrument to fight against urban decline in 1994: the URBAN Community Initiative. In Spain, the urban dimension of the EU policy and particularly URBAN and URBAN II have supposed a relevant contribution to the revitalization of the neighbourhoods in crisis. This article addresses the question of how and to what extent the influence of URBAN has transformed the urban regeneration practice in the peripheral areas of the country. ; Desde que en 1990 la CEE publicara el «Libro Verde sobre el Medio Ambiente Urbano», la Unión Europea ha desarrollado un papel activo en la lucha contra los procesos de declive que afectan a las ciudades de los Estados miembros, un papel basado en contribuciones en forma de recomendaciones y comunicaciones, y de una labor de acción directa sobre las zonas urbanas financiada a través del Fondo de Cohesión, el FEDER y el FSE. Esta labor desembocó en 1994 en la creación de un instrumento específico para combatir la degradación urbana: la Iniciativa Comunitaria URBAN. En España, tanto la dimensión urbana de la política de la UE como, en particular, URBAN y URBAN II, han supuesto una aportación relevante en el ámbito de la regeneración de los barrios degradados. El presente artículo profundiza en la contribución que las dos fases de esta Iniciativa Comunitaria han hecho a la práctica de la regeneración de las áreas periféricas en el país, focalizando en las aportaciones generales que se han detectado a través del análisis de los proyectos URBAN desarrollados en las áreas periféricas de las ciudades españolas.