Results and impact of the URBAN Community Initiative in 2000-2006
URBAN II, the Community Initiative for boosting depressed urban areas, has made a positive contribution to tackling the challenges of neighbourhoods in crisis. This was one of the key findings of the evaluation carried out by the European Commission. Between 2000 and 2006, URBAN II enabled converting and renovating 2314,000 m² of buildings, the creation of 3,238,000 m² of
247 projects aiming to reduce local crime, including street wardens, landscaping and street lighting, were implemented in collaboration with community groups and neighbourhood watch schemes. More importantly, regeneration continues in many of the programme areas even after European funding has ceased: 60% of the projects continued beyond the URBAN II funding period. The key factor for successful projects was local ownership: projects had a stronger impact when selected and delivered with commitment from local stakeholders.
Results:
Positive changes for the area as a whole or at least stabilisation were noted in almost all the case studies and stakeholders attributed these to URBAN. In addition, many quantified effects were recorded including:
- 2,314,000 m² of buildings converted and renovated and 3,238,000 m² of green space created.
- 6,000 small businesses and start-ups supported and given access to business services, resulting in 2,000 jobs created.
- Of the 108,000 people trained, more than half were from vulnerable groups and were helped to overcome illiteracy and continue their education or to enter the labour market for the first time
- 247 projects to reduce local crime, including street wardens, CCTV, landscaping and street lighting, delivered in collaboration with community groups and neighbourhood watches.
Regeneration continues in many of the programme areas: URBAN stimulated community led processes, that picked up and continued the work once European funding had ceased. 60% of the projects continued after URBAN II.
However, while URBAN contributed to change, it was only one of a number of policy 'drivers' and often not the most important driver. For example, regional and national factors shape the local economy, mainstream policies are important influences on health, education, skills and crime.
Policy conclusions:
- Such "local development" measures can be effective, but expectations should be realistic: changes to the local environment, small business, local community. Programmes should be aligned with city, regional and national policies.
- The key factor underlying successful projects was local ownership. Such projects were selected in line with local perceptions of need, with commitment from local players and delivered in partnership with locals.But larger players had an important role in providing expertise and administrative capacity. In the 60% of projects that continued after URBAN II the support of a larger partner was usually key.
- An area of administrative weakness was monitoring. These small programmes planned an average of 59 indicators each, but 35% were not collected. In addition, easy output indicators were favoured at the expense of results. In future, such programmes should focus on a few relevant indicators with consistent follow-up.
- For exchange of experience under URBACT, active participation requires a greater commitment in terms of time and resources, but is more effective than documents alone.