Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on 'Towards an urban agenda in the European Union` (98/C 251/04)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

having regard to the Commission's Communication Towards an urban agenda in the European Union ();

having regard to the decision of the Commission of 8 March 1997 to consult it in accordance with Article 198 C (first paragraph) of the Treaty establishing the European Community;

having regard to the decisions of its bureau on 30 May 1997 and 18 February 1998 to charge Commission 4 (Spatial planning, urban issues, energy, the environment) with the preparation of this opinion;

having regard to the overview report The Europe of the Cities - Community measures in urban areas;

having regard to the communication 'Agenda 2000: For a stronger and wider Europe`;

having regard to the first official draft of the 'European Spatial Development Perspective` prepared for the informal meeting of ministers responsible for spatial planning in June 1997;

having regard to various Opinions of the Committee of the Regions:

- Commission communication on cooperation for European territorial development - Europe 2000+ (CdR 233/95) ()

- Evaluation of the financial and administrative consequences for local and regional authorities of EU legislation (CdR 368/95) ()

- Green Paper on Citizens network (CdR 42/96 fin) ()

- Regional and local authorities in the European Union (CdR 47/96 fin) ()

- Fifth Environmental action programme (CdR 142/96 fin) ()

- The role of local and regional authorities in public service (CdR 148/96 fin) ()

- Urban development and the European Union (CdR 235/95) ()

- Spatial planning in Europe (CdR 340/96 fin) ()

- The role of local and regional authorities in linking education and training establishments to enterprises (CdR 346/96 fin) ()

- Green Paper on the future of noise policy (CdR 436/96 fin) ()

- Working document on the impact of Structural Funds on urban areas (CdR 8/97 fin)

- Local and regional aspects of the Fifth Framework programme (CdR 158/97 fin) ()

- Intercultural education (CdR 194/97 fin) ()

having regard to the preparations of the working group (consisting of Mr Berger, Mr Frau, Mrs Freehill, Mr Penttilä, Mr Peper (rapporteur), Mrs Powell and Mrs Tallberg) in drawing up this opinion;

having regard to the draft opinion (CdR 316/97 rev. 2) adopted by Commission 4 on 14 January 1998 (rapporteur: Mr Peper),

unanimously adopted at its 23rd plenary session of 13 and 14 May 1998 (meeting of 14 May) the following opinion.

1. Introduction

1.1. The Committee of the Regions welcomes the publication of the Commission's discussion paper 'Towards an urban agenda in the European Union`. After the Green Paper on Urban Environment (1990), the launch of the Sustainable City project and the implementation of the Community Initiative Urban, it is an important next step in recognizing that cities are vital to ensuring competitive regions and a competitive Europe. The discussion paper underlines the arguments put forward by the Committee of Region's Opinion on Urban development and the European Union, stressing the need to develop an integrated urban approach to both tackle the serious problems faced by cities and make use of their opportunities for economic growth and prosperity. At the same time, such an integrated approach would greatly increase the effectiveness of existing Community policies affecting urban areas.

1.2. The Commission's communication has been presented at a crucial time when the role of European cities is attracting growing attention. This is the result of many years of conscious effort, mainly on the part of local authorities and their representative organizations. The Committee of the Regions has, since its start, promoted the need for an urban perspective in Community policies and programmes. Initially, this awareness developed rather slowly, but the process has gained momentum during the past year. National governments have shown an interest in urban issues, developing explicit urban policies or promoting the coordination of sectoral policies affecting cities.

1.3. This renewed attention in the role of cities is now being shown at the European level. The Cohesion Forum, which discussed the revision of the Structural Funds in April 1997, identified structural changes in urban areas as a key objective. During the Committee of the Regions European Summit of Regional and Local Authorities, held in Amsterdam in May, there was a strong call for a European urban policy. In June 1997 this was acknowledged by the Informal Council of ministers for regional policy and spatial development who in the first instance, when the official draft of the European Spatial Development Perspective was submitted, concluded that there is a strong need to develop a more balanced and polycentric system of cities and allocated urban policy a separate slot on the agenda for the first time. The renewed focus on cities has also been reflected in Agenda 2000, where structural changes in urban areas are placed in the mainstream of future structural actions.

2. General reflections

2.1. The Committee of the Regions strongly subscribes to the Commission's analysis contained in the chapter 'Challenges facing Europe's cities`. This clearly demonstrates the wide variety in Europe's urban landscape and stresses the role of cities and urban regions as centres of economic activity, innovation and prosperity for the European Union. On the other hand, it also recognizes the enormous problems faced by cities whether they were hit by a steep decline in industrial employment or form part of regional economies largely dependent on the agricultural sector. Common problems that are identified include unacceptably high levels of unemployment, growing numbers of socially excluded persons, a degrading quality of life and increased congestion. The Commission concludes therefore that: 'The city is, in many parts of Europe, no longer a desirable place to bring up children, to spend leisure time, or to live. This erosion of the role of the city is perhaps the greatest threat to the European model of development and society and one which needs the widest debate` ().

2.2. Currently there are a number of Community instruments that have an impact on urban development. In its communication the Commission distinguishes four categories:

- policies which promote economic competitiveness and employment (such as single market policies, RTD policies and the Territorial Employment Pacts);

- policy in favour of economic and social cohesion (i.e. the Structural Funds);

- policies which help the insertion of cities in trans-European networks (including public transport and transport pricing policies);

- policies promoting sustainable development and the quality of life in cities (Sustainable Cities project, greening the Structural Funds and several RTD programmes).

In the recently published brochure 'The Europe of the cities - Community actions in the cities` (1997), the Commission puts additional emphasis on combating social exclusion in cities, promoting the local economy and cultural actions.

2.3. The Committee of the Regions acknowledges that these Community measures definitely affect urban development. However, it must also be noted that not all of these policies are intended for urban areas, and as a result, although the local authorities may have a say in how these policies are implemented, they often have no influence whatsoever. Therefore, the Committee of the Regions stresses that the sum of Community measures affecting urban areas does not add up to an urban policy.

2.4. For this reason, the Committee of the Regions warmly welcomes the invitation for suggestions 'to an improved integration of Community policies relevant to urban development, in order to ensure that they fully correspond to actions at other levels and in particular to the needs of cities and towns` (). In particular, it welcomes the Commission's request for special attention to:

- an urban perspective in European Union policies;

- services of public interest and urban development;

- the contribution of the Structural Funds;

- increasing knowledge and promoting the exchange of experience between cities.

2.5. On the basis of Article 198 C (first paragraph) of the Treaty of the European Community the Committee of the Regions must be consulted in the fields of trans-European networks, public health, education, youth, culture and economic and social cohesion. Furthermore, the Committee of the Regions has taken the initiative to give its opinion in other areas affecting the cities and regions. This has already given rise to numerous opinions on how to improve the incorporation of the local and regional dimension into Community policies and programmes, an overview of which is given in the Annex. At the moment several opinions focusing on specific urban issues are being drafted. Finally, the Treaty of Amsterdam will add a new range of competencies to the Committee of the Regions which will cover employment, social policy, implementing measures for public health, the environment, vocational training and transport.

2.6. The Committee of the Regions welcomes the opportunity to discuss its opinion and ideas during an Urban Forum to be held in the Autumn of 1998. The Committee of the Regions believes that this opinion will provide the basis for a broader discussion within its commissions. Together with the opinions that are more focused on specific (sectoral) policy fields, this opinion will prove to be an important input into a European White Paper on Urban Development.

3. Cities and regions: analysis

3.1. Cities and European culture

3.1.1. Cities and their culture have formed the foundation of European civilization. As has been stated in different documents regarding the urban perspective in European Union policies, Europe has a long tradition of urban culture. Following the Roman period, and particularly after the Renaissance in the late Middle Ages, cities developed rapidly. Urban economies brought in new technologies and products. At the present time, most scholars, opinion leaders and politicians agree that European culture, its society and its economic system must be characterized as predominantly urban. Eighty percent of the European population lives in cities. 'Around 20 % of Europeans live in larger conurbations of more than 250 000 inhabitants`, a further 20 % in medium-sized cities (50 000-250 000) and 40 % in towns of 10 000-50 000 inhabitants ().

3.1.2. Cities are also at the present time sources of progress, freedom and culture. However, over the last 20 years we have seen that many European cities suffer increasingly serious threats on the social, economic and environmental level. The problems of certain urban districts facing very high unemployment rates can be so severe that they strongly affect the urban area as a whole. Negative developments in cities will have inevitable negative consequences for European society and its economy. For many cities, unemployment is the most serious problem. Most cities have to cope with unemployment rates above the average national level. These high unemployment rates are the cause of many social problems.

3.1.3. For the future, the role of cities in Europe will remain crucial, especially the role of urban and metropolitan networks. As a result of the single market, national economies lose importance not only in favour of regions, but also in favour of metropolitan areas and conglomerates of cities, which are linked into networks on the international and sometimes European scale. Important examples of the changing position of cities in international networks are Barcelona, Lille, Berlin, London and Paris. Smaller cities are also progressively becoming part of larger urban networks, either on a regional, national or international level. Therefore, the role of cities and metropolitan regions remains of great importance for the European economy.

3.1.4. Cities come in all shapes and sizes, and different cities in the Community face different problems and different challenges. Cities vary greatly in size, economic structure and their place in the European economic network. Not every city is part of the European network, not every city has the same socio-economic structure, not every city is in decline. Cities should thus be classified into different categories, according to their position in functional networks and the challenges and problems they face, rather than on their size alone. Referring to the European Spatial Development Perspective (first draft) [ESDP] there are eight types of cities on three levels. Each level refers to the highest scale of the network in which the city is linked:

- on the international level:

1. global cities;

2. metropolitan regions;

3. capital cities;

- on the national level:

4. 'older industrial cities`;

5. 'peripheral cities`;

- on the regional level:

6. cities in the core area;

7. cities outside the core area;

8. medium-sized cities in predominantly rural regions.

3.1.5. Each of these eight types of cities refers to a way of linking in an urban network, to specific characteristics of its economic base and to a specific relation to its surrounding region and/or cities in its vicinity. No two European cities are the same and this classification already indicates the wide spectrum of European cities and their characteristics. Cities vary from relatively small to clusters with millions of inhabitants, from traditional service-based economies to industrial centres, from centres in almost empty regions to parts of huge and densely-populated urban areas. This implies that there are no blueprint solutions which can be applied to every European city.

3.2. The European city in its region: a threatened balance

3.2.1. As long as cities exist, they depend on their surrounding regions. Not only for water, food production and raw materials for manufacturing, but also for labour. No city could, or can, exist without its surrounding areas. This was the case in the Middle Ages as it is today, although today cities also depend on economic ties over larger distances, which can be on a national or even international scale. On the other hand, regions have long depended on their central cities. Cities provide different facilities (commerce and trade, leisure, education, art, health care, etc.) as well as being a source of work and income for many inhabitants of the surrounding regions. As stated in the ESDP, the interdependence of rural and urban areas is actually increasing, due to suburbanization, infrastructural works, strongly intertwined economies, interwoven environmental issues and the growing importance of the landscape for recreation and leisure.

3.2.2. Therefore, when studying urban problems and formulating urban policy, the Committee of the Regions argues in favour of a perspective on the level of the so-called functional urban region (FUR): networks of cities and surrounding areas that are closely interrelated in terms of local and regional economy, the (daily) mobility of their citizens. FURS often go beyond the administrative borders of the central city. They include suburban settlements that are related to the central cities. However, functional urban regions can vary widely, depending on the type and size of the city that is involved, in scale and number of inhabitants: from FURS around small and medium-sized cities in predominantly rural areas to metropolitan regions. The concept of the FUR offers opportunities for regarding urban phenomena beyond the borders of the central city, and can also provide solutions to urban problems on an appropriate scale. The concept of the FUR should be further elaborated in the future in order to obtain an adequate conceptual framework of urban analysis and urban policy, in other words the significance of the urban dimension.

3.2.3. Although the interdependence of cities and surrounding regions is increasing, it has also become more problematic and vulnerable. In the first place, the issue of suburbanization causes many environmental, transport and safety problems in numerous European urban areas. As has been stated in ESDP, villages, towns and cities continue to expand, often relatively uncontrolled, because of the European populations' growing need for space. The middle and higher income groups tend to move to the suburbs, but still find work in the city, which remains the preferred location for high-quality services and education. As a result of this, the central city government is faced by financial problems of both tax-income and a reduced spending power for the city's economy. This process of suburbanization started first, in the sixties, in the countries of north-western Europe, where it has become an established pattern of settlement. In other European countries, suburban settlements have started to develop, because of rising living standards, increasing car use and better roads. Large green areas around cities have been transformed into large suburban zones, where daily commuting causes traffic jams and environmental problems. This so-called urban sprawl is a result of improved living standards, decentralization and growth, but it increases the costs of urban infrastructure, traffic and energy consumption, and often has a negative impact on the quality of the countryside.

3.2.4. In the second place, many rural areas have to cope with a decrease in the importance of their traditional agricultural base. As a result of the market opening up, together with cuts in public subsidies, agricultural areas will be transformed or taken over by other agricultural areas in the same country or in other EU-countries. Traditional agricultural areas are therefore undergoing structural change. Some areas, e.g. in the south of Europe, are partially giving up production or spread their production over a wider territory. Other areas are intensifying their production with new techniques. All these processes of change result in a loss of employment and a decline in population. Therefore, new strategies need to be developed to keep the economic activity of these regions alive. These strategies should reflect the completely new functional relations between cities and regions that arise from the shifts in agriculture. Especially in the relatively densely populated parts of Europe, rural areas become more important as areas providing recreation and leisure facilities for city dwellers. When the traditional economic base weakens, they also become more financially dependent on the urban population. It becomes difficult to maintain the quality of the landscape and ensure the survival of local communities.

3.2.5. Many European cities are faced with a transition towards a service-based economy. In particular, the category of older industrial cities needs to make a marked shift towards an almost completely new economic structure, based on services, knowledge, leisure and tourism. New jobs in the city do not always provide work for those made redundant from traditional industry. The service industry and knowledge-based economy demand highly-educated and specialized workers, while many of the unemployed have a lower level of education, and lack the necessary training. This process is accelerated by the rapid changes in information technology and telecommunication networks and a number of fundamental changes in society can be foreseen for the near future. Information technology will severely change the way people and organizations communicate, learn and do business.

3.2.6. The economic, demographic and spatial changes can be very drastic. Many cities are unable to adapt themselves fast enough to the changing circumstances. The required investments are too high, the budgets under too much pressure to bear the inevitable social costs. When the efforts fall short, cities can lose their vitality and lapse into an urban crisis scenario. Investments aimed at the future will have to give way to tackling the immediate acute social needs, leaving the city further behind. For many cities a process of structural change is thus required. This process takes many years and must be accompanied by long-term structural measures.

3.2.7. When looked at closely, so-called urban problems such as unemployment, social fragmentation, strains on the quality of life and problems of traffic and transportation, are the outcome of complex processes that take place on the scale of the functional urban region. For example, selective migration processes from the city to surrounding regions are responsible for daily traffic congestion, but also for a high proportion of lower income groups in the cities. Expensive urban facilities such as hospitals, high schools, theatres and museums are often heavily subsidized by the local government but used by people in a large surrounding area stretching far beyond the administrative borders of the city. This leads to further financial problems for the city.

3.2.8. Nevertheless, processes on the scale of the functional urban region often cause problems on a very local scale: certain neighbourhoods, both in cities and other parts of urban regions, suffer from a high rate of unemployment, others are troubled by heavy road traffic, airport noise or nuisance caused by industry. The quality and the future value of certain urban districts is particularly alarming. In these urban areas in difficulty, economic, social and physical problems cumulate, resulting in a lack of social cohesion and the social exclusion of the population. Focussing on recovering economic resilience leads to a different way of looking at these districts, stressing the opportunities as well as the problems. Such an approach can never be volatile because it aims at a fundamental structural change. In other words, the process of positive regional development very often demands measures on a local district or neighbourhood scale.

3.2.9. Owing to the high unemployment levels which have rocketed in the 1990s, increasing numbers of unemployed people have had their unemployment benefit terminated. Moreover, a large number of unemployed people have never entered the labour market, and, consequently, are not covered by national unemployment insurance schemes. In many Member States, these people are increasingly dependent on welfare payments from local authorities for their livelihood. This passive acceptance of welfare handouts has a negative effect on the individual's self-respect, and is devastating for the municipal economy. It also means that tax revenue, which ought to be used to enable towns and cities to provide services such as education, health and community care services, etc. is used for welfare payments. A further corollary is that tension and conflict arise between different groups in our towns and cities. In some countries, welfare costs have risen over recent years as refugees have headed mainly for towns and cities, and government support has been insufficient.

3.3. Towards a multi-sectoral urban perspective on sectoral issues

3.3.1. Cities can be characterized by diversity within a small area. They are traditionally multi-cultural centres of tolerance and spiritual freedom. The more diversity there is, the more an urban centre is a city. Cities are concentrations of knowledge, information and specialized services. The complexity of urban processes and problems often requires a multi-sectoral perspective. In many cities, a wide variety of functions and large numbers of people are often bunched together in high densities, sometimes even on different floors of the same building. This positive, inspiring effect of clustered functions can provide real economic and cultural opportunities that the local authorities can use to improve urban cohesion.

3.3.2. As a consequence of this urban complexity, measures in one field have a great impact on other fields. Instead of standard problems with standard solutions, cities often have to cope with complex problems that demand multi-sectoral, tailor-made solutions. For example in order to provide housing amid amenities or economic facilities, public areas have to be used more intensively than elsewhere, and creative solutions have to be found for heavy traffic and parking problems.

3.3.3. The impact of measures aimed at one sector, on another sector, is greater in cities than in rural areas. The increase in traffic and transport influences the quality of life more strongly in cities than in rural areas. Measures in one field can have a negative impact on another field. For example, new infrastructure linking European cities can have negative consequences on the quality of life in certain neighbourhoods. Concepts of sustainability are more relevant and therefore easier to evaluate in new towns and neighbourhoods in urban areas than in existing neighbourhoods, especially when they are crossed by roads serving heavy traffic.

4. A framework for local urban policies

4.1. Integration at the local level

4.1.1. The growing awareness of cities and the problems and challenges they face, has resulted in a number of studies on the role of cities in Europe. Several action programmes have been set up to benefit cities in particular. A number of existing instruments were also (partly) adapted to better suit urban needs. The Committee of the Regions stressed, in its own-initiative Opinion on Evaluation of the financial and administrative consequences for local and regional authorities of EU legislation, the need to check new European measures on their effect on urban and regional authorities. This has recently been acknowledged by the Amsterdam Council and will be included in the protocol concerning the application of the subsidiarity principle.

4.1.2. However, this approach is based more on sectoral policies and is independent of other measures. Therefore, new European measures should also be examined to find out how they might influence existing measures affecting cities, and whether they fit into one integrated urban policy. The major task will be to develop an urban policy that will coordinate present sectoral, ad hoc and highly fragmented policies in order to achieve a coherent, integrated, and thus efficient, approach.

4.1.3. Present discussions on such a future urban policy all share a common feature; their approach is top-down. However, the key to urban policy should involve combining this top-down approach with a bottom-up approach. By their very nature, the policies of local authorities must be integrated, coordinated and coherent. This bottom-up approach should provide valuable insights for a future European urban policy.

4.1.4. Every city has a unique combination of problems and possibilities, the underlying trends being largely the same. Many cities identify their opportunities and threats and set out a strategy for improving their vitality. Local urban policies can be grouped together in various ways. The following reflects the twin challenge to urban policy identified in the Commission's communication ('... maintaining its cities at the forefront of an increasingly globalized and competitive economy while addressing the cumulative legacy of urban deprivation ...` () and the need to pay more attention to the citizens:

- developing a strong city;

- creating valuable districts;

- improving citizens' participation.

It should be noted that this is just a model and that, in reality, policies in any group will not only affect other policies within that group but also policies in the other two. It should also be noted that these examples of local policies are not being implemented by all cities to the same extent, or in the same mix.

4.2. Developing a strong city

4.2.1. From the above analysis, it is clear that cities are threatened by suburbanization and the movement to the countryside. Cities lose inhabitants and businesses, experience a continued selective migration and face a decline in the number of urban functions. Local authorities try to reverse the trend by improving competitiveness and creating a stronger and more vital city.

4.2.2. The key for vital cities is (re)urbanization. Cities' policies are geared towards creating diversity and support, and the development of attractive living and business environments. On the one hand, these policies are aimed at a more efficient use of the urban area by developing a compact city. On the other hand, liveability is improved by more high-quality public space. Through a balanced approach to urbanization, cities give priority to the building of new houses in existing urban areas before developing new estates. Of course, both are necessary but should be developed in such a way that the city as a whole is strengthened.

4.2.3. A strong city is very dependent on a strong economy as a basic condition for employment. New jobs must primarily be created by the market sector. With companies becoming increasingly footloose, policies are being aimed at creating favourable location factors. Commercial sites and obsolete office buildings are being redeveloped and sufficient new sites and offices are being developed to attract new businesses and allow existing ones to expand. Attention should be drawn here to the establishment of very large shopping centres in towns and cities and in the outskirts of urban areas. Opinions differ, at both local and regional level, as to the impact of these shopping centres on neighbouring town and city centres. A study should be carried out to investigate the benefits and drawbacks of these shopping centres in order to establish a clear picture of the situation. When carrying out this assessment the basic criterion has to be that such shopping centres should strengthen the urban economy as a whole with a view to maintaining or, as the case may be, restoring the shopping facilities and businesses established in towns and cities.

4.2.4. Cities' efforts seem to be concentrated on acquiring a few very large international companies, but often the small and medium-sized companies that serve the local or regional market are more important. They are fundamental for economic growth. Local governments can act as incubators, promoting entrepreneurship and innovation, supporting the setting up of new businesses and making sure they do not take their business elsewhere. Increasing attention is being paid to entrepreneurship and to the development of new businesses in the most deprived neighbourhoods. Local and regional development should thus be created primarily from within.

4.2.5. More and more cities in Europe are taking a strategic, long-term approach to economic development. In the first place, they are concentrating on improving the general economic climate and especially on removing the competitive disadvantages in the city or region. The negative consequences of government action are the first to be dealt with. The strategies will be based on the opportunities that can be found in the city or the wider region. They are increasingly characterized by a targeted development. With this kind of specialization, better use is made of available resources. Furthermore, it builds on the existing infrastructure and image of the city. Not every city can become a Silicon Valley or develop an airport. These strategies thus aim to improve the conditions for existing companies and become attractive for newcomers.

4.2.6. Infrastructure is a fundamental location factor that cannot be completely controlled by local policies. Major infrastructure is primarily a national concern, and the development of trans-European transport and telecommunication networks (TENs) makes it an international matter. It is of crucial importance that cities and regions, no matter what their size, are linked to the TENs, either directly or indirectly, by national networks.

4.2.7. Equally important is the internal accessibility of the urban region. Increased mobility has resulted in unacceptable forms of congestion. Local and regional transport has to shift from the private car to other modes of transport and ring roads need to be built. Local government's policies therefore aim to make public transport more attractive, reroute traffic around cities, discourage car use and develop special bicycle facilities. These policies are increasingly developed from a regional perspective, especially in the more urbanized regions. Necessary infrastructure through dense areas should be integrated into the urban tissue with a minimum of nuisance for the surrounding neighbourhoods.

4.2.8. The need for revitalizing the city through stronger urbanization within city boundaries and economic growth can strain the urban environment, which in turn will have a negative impact on the city's vitality. Environmental quality in itself is increasingly seen as an important location factor. The key to urban development is, therefore, to keep the balance. Local authorities try to accomplish this by a sustainable approach to urban development, tackling economic, social and environmental issues in an integrated way.

4.2.9. In attracting inhabitants, visitors and companies to the city, the city's image is becoming more and more important. Image is important for both an historic city and a city with modern architecture, for a tourist city and a business city. One aspect of a more strategic approach to urban development is therefore to build on the specific character and image of the city. Through city marketing, local authorities propagate their image; be good and tell everyone about it.

4.3. Creating valuable districts

4.3.1. For a compact city it is most important to create a city in which people like to live, work and spend their leisure time. Furthermore, the information society will cause a shift towards working where one lives i.e. the home environment. Some cities are more successful in retaining their population than others, and certain cities attract considerably more newcomers than others. The basis for a vital city is, therefore, the social and cultural diversity of its population. People that have left the city because it has become unsafe, unclean or unhealthy need to be won back. Local authorities therefore aim to improve the quality of life with 'clean, intact and safe` forming the basic conditions, but also by investing in the intellectual, social and cultural capital of its population.

4.3.2. To attract households with a strong socio-economic basis, it is necessary to improve the quality of housing in many cities. This should not be accomplished merely by building new housing estates but rather by creating more diverse housing in existing urban areas, and especially those faced by deprivation. Of course, this will only be successful if the overall quality of life in these districts improves.

4.3.3. Improving the quality of life in cities often requires an improvement in the public space, green areas and recreational facilities. Cities are therefore investing heavily in the quality of this public space and making better use of the green areas available. Where possible, new green areas such as urban parks and green cycle and pedestrian routes are being developed. Furthermore, cities are increasingly investing in a green region with the necessary public transport links.

4.3.4. Often cities can be dirty. Litter, dog dirt, graffiti and vandalism constitute a public nuisance and deter visitors and potential newcomers. Keeping the city clean is an important civic responsibility. Local governments need, first of all, to provide sufficient facilities to dispose of waste. However, it is equally important to inform the public and take strong measures against offenders. With regard to environmental sustainability, it also requires the promotion of recycling by providing the necessary facilities for the separation of waste.

4.3.5. Many people feel unsafe in cities, especially in the larger ones. Burglaries, housebreaking, thefts, robberies, violence, hooliganism and drugs-related crime make cities feel unsafe. Negative images of cities as domains of crime increase subjective feelings about the lack of safety. In particular, the lack of opportunities for the youth in deprived neighbourhoods with high unemployment, can result in disorganized ways of life such as dealing in drugs and committing other crimes. Combating and preventing crime, with special attention to drug-related crime, is a first priority. Equally important is the need to improve the opportunities in deprived neighbourhoods. Reducing crime does not necessarily result in people feeling safer, however, more police on the streets, security officers in public transport, and improved lighting and maintenance of public space does. City policies are therefore geared towards regaining the public domain. This requires a long-term approach and close monitoring to prevent problems moving to other neighbourhoods.

4.3.6. Cities take different approaches to urban revitalization. This varies from urban renewal (demolish complete neighbourhoods) and fighting deprivation to various forms of social renewal (i.e. promoting own initiative and responsibility) and stimulating the local economy. Recently, some local authorities have started experiments to combine these different strategies into an integrated area-based approach that puts the stress on the recovery of economic resilience and opportunities rather than on the problems.

4.4. Improving citizens' participation

4.4.1. Many cities have experienced extensive physical renewal, while at the same time experiencing social decay. The challenge is to further develop the 'social renewal` of cities. Already, considerable efforts have been made in several fields such as education and training, the integration of newcomers, integrated safety policy and youth policy. Nevertheless, cities have not yet been able to turn the tide. Short-term ad hoc policies are not desirable. They will only result in a political culture of volatile policy with a lack of continuity. Local authorities prefer to focus on restoring the social fabric by stimulating citizens' involvement and participation in society.

4.4.2. Unemployment is probably one of the most serious problems of the cities. The discrepancy between supply and demand is particularly difficult to resolve. Creating new jobs is primarily up to the market sector. However, this has not provided enough jobs for the local labour force. Local authorities' policies are aimed at integrating the unemployed into society. Many potential jobs can be found in public services; however, these jobs often represent additional work designed to improve the quality of life in towns and cities, without being commercially viable. Examples of such jobs include street-sweepers, security officers in public transport and police assistants. The success of these types of policies is largely dependent on the available funds. A substantial number of jobs can be created especially when social security benefits can be used, but not enough to create full employment. Those who remain unemployed are encouraged to do voluntary work in order to remain involved in society.

4.4.3. The key to future employment is education, training and mobility. Urban policies try to encourage citizens to increase their level of education and training, and are aimed at creating easily accessible facilities at a local level. Those people who have had inadequate education should have the opportunity to catch up. Equally important are policies aimed at discouraging early drop outs. Youngsters in particular need intensive supervision, and special attention is also given to the integration of newcomers who can face both language and cultural barriers. Furthermore, urban policies try to build bridges between the educational institutions and businesses in order to bring education more in line with the labour market. Finally the particular problems of the long-term unemployed, those over 50, must be taken into account. They should be given the possibility to choose between vocational training and training aimed involving them in non-vocational, social, local organizations. This 'social investment` will lower feelings of social redundancy, at the same time increasing the quality of the social infrastructure.

4.4.4. Cities are more than just economies. They represent - apart from political ideologies - a societal model that brings together large groups of very different people, often strangers to one another. With so many people in a small place, urban societies can only function when they are, to some extent, predictable and controllable. Local authorities and citizens thus set and comply to many rules, whether formally or informally, to ensure that urban life functions through order: social, normative, economic and spatial.

4.4.5. Changes to the population, urban renewal, the individualization of society and feelings of insecurity have had a severe impact on how citizens interact. Social norms are no longer self-evident to all members of society. City policies try to restore this social fabric at the neighbourhood level. Social investments consciously devote time, effort and money into the social quality of the city and to improve the citizens' ability to do things independently, through improving community spirit and local initiatives. A neighbourhood approach encourages citizens to cooperate and address their responsibilities.

4.4.6. Special attention is given to the needs of socially vulnerable groups, i.e. youth, elderly and migrants. In cities, dropping out of school and crime rates among youngsters are considerably higher than the national average. Youngsters need strong coaching and monitoring, at the school and also during after-school hours, and they should be encouraged in sports or other social activities. When completing their education, young people should be guaranteed a (subsidized) job rather than face unemployment. Migrants are a growing part of the population, often concentrated in deprived neighbourhoods. It is of vital importance to include them in our society by offering education (both the national language and vocational skills), jobs and housing. Integration is the responsibility of both the new resident and the existing urban society. The proportion of the elderly in the European population is increasing sharply. Although this is not a problem just for cities, the large number in the cities nevertheless requires special facilities, easy access and safe districts.

4.4.7. People living in deprived neighbourhoods or city districts often face health problems. There is a direct relation between public health and education, income, quality of life, employment, etc. Urban policies can thus strongly influence public health by improving these factors. Supporting measures are aimed at monitoring the effects of local policies on public health and taking stock of unhealthy local conditions that call for joint action. Furthermore, policies are aimed at health education and prevention at the local level. Special attention is given to health education 'to and by` the elderly or migrants.

5. A new approach to urban policy

5.1. The need for a new approach

5.1.1. In its own-initiative Opinion 'Urban development and the European Union` the Committee of the Regions stressed the absence of a specific reference to urban areas in the Maastricht Treaty, which has not been corrected by the new Treaty. Until now, there has been no strategic vision concerning urban development, and this has resulted in the adoption of uncoordinated measures. Furthermore, there are no explicit provisions for the effective coordination of EU policies on transport, the environment, public health and economic development in urban areas. Implicitly, however, a European urban policy already has a basis in Article 2 of the Treaty. This states that one of the tasks is '... to promote throughout the Community a harmonious, balanced and sustainable development of economic activities ...` and '... the raising of the standard of living and quality of life, and economic and social cohesion and solidarity among Member States`.

5.1.2. The analysis of the role of cities shows that cities have, in the past, played a crucial role in achieving the 'grand principles` of Article 2. Therefore, the often severe problems currently faced by cities are a serious threat for the future well-being of Europe. If the trend is not reversed, Europe will fail to meet its principal objective of cohesion. For several reasons, local authorities have not been able to tackle these problems sufficiently. According to the subsidiarity principle, urban policies should be a national concern. A number of Member States have already developed urban policies to a greater or lesser extent. Subsidiarity does not however, mean that the other tiers of authority can avoid their responsibilities. This is also not the case as regards other policy areas in which the EU plays an active role. The European Union should be stimulated to coordinate and integrate its measures affecting urban areas, to improve their effectiveness and efficiency. Therefore, the Committee of the Regions calls upon the European Commission to develop an urban policy that is complementary to national urban policies aiming at improving social cohesion in urban areas. This is also a matter of concern to the EU. At the same time this European urban policy should act as an incentive for more structural cooperation at the level of the functional urban region between local authorities.

5.1.3. With urban issues now so clearly on the European agenda, both through the Commission's Communication 'Towards an Urban agenda in the European Union` and the Agenda 2000 proposals, it is no longer a question of 'Urban policy or not`. There must definitely be a comprehensive urban policy in the near future and attention must now be paid to its content. Once urban policy is given more attention within the EU and is also (more readily) seen to operate at EU level, a paragraph on urban policy is bound to be included in the Treaty.

5.1.4. Aid for specially vulnerable areas in major cities is an entirely new feature of European structural policy. Hence the application of state aid rules () is a somewhat clumsy instrument in countries with a small population and low population density since these rules were tailored to regions and not urban areas.

The Committee of the Regions therefore requests the Commission, when applying assistance in urban areas, to take into account special regional circumstances. In certain areas with a low population density, the Committee of the Regions asks the Commission to find ways to make exceptions to the fictitious criterion of 100 000 inhabitants.

5.2. An integrated approach

5.2.1. The present approach to urban areas is primarily a sectoral one. Several EU measures have an impact on cities, however, very few directly target urban issues and, when they do, local authorities do not always have a say in how they are implemented. In fact, in several Member States local authorities are not given the opportunity to tackle these problems because many of the traditional functions are increasingly being given over to non-elected agencies. As well as these EU measures, cities are confronted with policies and programmes from regional and national governments and it is the responsibility of local governments to implement this myriad of incoherent, and often conflicting, measures into their own policies. The major challenge faced is to realize policy integration on urban issues at all administrative levels. In other words, an effective European urban policy is needed to complement integrated national urban policies.

5.2.2. The key to a European urban policy, as well as to national policy, is to take a 'bottom-up approach`, i.e. the point of view of local authorities. Local and regional authorities are best placed to deal with a multitude of issues, problems, organizations and policies that require a multi-sectoral and coherent approach. Furthermore, cities (especially those on the 'international level`) are among the first to experience both the problems and the opportunities that will be decisive for the future of Europe. It is also necessary that policies which are developed for the benefit of cities, should cater as much as possible for local needs. Therefore, the Committee of the Regions believes that local governments' experience should be at the core of the development of an integrated European urban policy.

5.2.3. To actually develop an integrated urban policy, a clear framework based on a European vision and a strategy on the socio-economic functioning of the European urban system is required. This framework should take into account the fact that urban regions increasingly function as part of one interdependent system. The framework should reflect the different types of cities in Europe, from the major cities at the heart of Europe to the more peripheral cities, particularly those driving large regional economies. This system is being further advanced by European integration, a European infrastructure and the need for spatial specialization; however, it should also reflect the need for more balance, and stronger relations, between the cities and their wider regions. The lack of an adequate vision on the desired development of cities in Europe shall lead to sub-optimal decisions and undesirable developments from a European perspective. The European Spatial Development Plan is a first step in recognizing this.

5.2.4. A European framework on urban development should also take into consideration the fact that cities act as motors behind regional, national and European growth - particularly for metropolitan and capital regions - and as international gateways linking Europe to the global market. Furthermore, it should address European-wide questions on issues such as unemployment, social exclusion, urban regeneration, sustainability and mobility, education and training, youth, the elderly, migrants, safety and public health. It must also take into account how all these questions interact with each other on the local level. Special attention should be paid to the practical ideas that emerge from the local level, such as local community involvement.

5.2.5. This framework should thus create the necessary conditions to fully develop the urban potential in Europe. It should also be flexible enough to take national policy measures and regional differences into account in order to ensure complementarity to cater for custom-made implementation.

5.2.6. Once a European framework on urban development is established, it is relatively easy to develop an urban perspective in the more sectoral European Union policies. As stated by the Commission, these should play a complementary role and fully correspond to actions at other levels of authority. Therefore, current measures affecting cities need to be adopted into the overall vision and strategy while new policies and programmes will have to be tested against it. The result will be a much more targeted application of sectoral measures and thus a more effective and efficient use of Community resources.

5.3. A knowledge-based approach

5.3.1. The Committee of the Regions acknowledges that 'there is an increasing need for significant and comparable information about cities, particularly amongst local and other public authorities` (). Comprehensive regional and urban information is indeed a prerequisite for adequate urban management. Several local authorities have already developed such 'barometers` that measure the quality of life in a city, and these are often customized to local circumstances. These systems identify needs and trends and allow for a reliable monitoring of the effects of policies. However, the Barcelona declaration on the need for a European system of local quality of life indicators () also states that 'the current statistical data and indicators of quality of life are clearly inadequate in both quantity and contents` (point 2). Therefore, 'A European system of local and regional indicators of quality of life` (point 3) is required.

5.3.2. The Committee of the Regions has stressed the need for comparable standards: 'The European Commission's proposal to launch an urban audit in the near future is a first practical step in this direction`. This audit focuses on 58 cities, 8 conurbations and 21 wider metropolitan regions. It is based on a simple, rather general set of indicators that primarily aim to measure the quality of life in the city. The Committee of the Regions however, believes that the proposed system should be more detailed in order to achieve the required results and it must take into account the specific local and regional circumstances. Furthermore, the information should reflect the functional urban region, as suggested in chapter 3 of this opinion, rather than being based on administrative borders. These principles will be key elements of the Committee of the Regions' study on the present state of indicators for the main European towns and cities and their correlation at regional level.

5.3.3. Although adequate statistical data and indicators are important for the decision-making process, local authorities are particularly keen to learn about each others' policies and projects. The Committee of the Regions therefore suggests to build on the good practices of local authorities and actively promote the exchange of experience between local decision-makers and urban managers. Local governments themselves must play a leading role in these processes. The Committee would, however, emphasize that the cross-border exchange of information on urban development should take place with the active approval and involvement of towns and cities - and where thought desirable - of associations representing towns and cities participating in this cross-border exchange of information.

5.3.4. This exchange of experience has been the primary reason behind the founding of large numbers of city networks, differing from 'simple` city twinning to highly complex forms of cooperation on specific topics. The Committee of the Regions welcomes the Commission's intention to provide support and incentives for these international urban partnerships. The Committee of the Regions believes, however, that it is necessary to promote a stronger concentration and coordination of these networking activities. It is vital to build on the experiences and expertise already gained and the structures already set up. The Committee of the Regions, especially with its enhanced competencies, is the ideal platform for realizing this.

5.3.5. The Committee of the Regions fully agrees with the Commission on the need to improve cooperation between local authorities in different parts of the world. From the point of view of developing aid, supporting local democracy, but also exchanging experience with other well-developed local authorities, this type of networking should be strongly promoted.

5.3.6. The Commission has stressed that urban indicators will not be used as a selection criterion for Structural Funds support. At the same time, it has suggested that as a second stage these indicators could 'enable a better assessment of the impact of various national as well as European policies, on the development of urban areas.` The Committee of the Regions has stressed that a future European system of local and regional indicators could indeed 'play a pivotal role in identifying urban and regional policy objectives and in establishing, implementing and following up the measures designed to meet them`. It must be assured however, that the indicators used to determine the eligibility for Structural Funds' support are different from those used to implement and monitor the programmes.

5.3.7. The Committee of the Regions considers it essential that research is undertaken on the future nature of cities vis-à-vis the impact of information technology, the changing nature of work, advances in transportation and heightened environmental awareness. In this respect it welcomes the inclusion of 'The city of Tomorrow` objective in the fifth framework programme and calls for more research on such issues in the European context.

5.4. The role of the Structural Funds

5.4.1. Research on the 'Regional and Local Government in the European Union` shows that local and regional tax revenues and general income, resulting from national policies are the most important source of revenue for local governments. The national policies concern programmes that address general social issues. However, the concentration and accumulation of these social issues in the larger cities and urban regions demands a more targeted application. Regeneration policies encompassing spatial and infrastructural policies to (re)develop housing estates, business sites and infrastructure are dependent on national priorities and resources that aim at strengthening the position of economic centres in an internationally competitive environment. There is the need for a stronger urban orientation in these general policies. In this way, urban problems and opportunities are addressed by structural improvements at both the macro and micro-level. European policies should be complementary to these national policies. By focusing on the micro-level, i.e. the most deprived urban districts, these complementary measures from the European Union can provide the necessary support and stimulate the development of a new orientation on urban and regional development in Europe.

5.4.2. The most significant impact of EU-policies on cities, at least in financial terms, results from the Structural Funds. However, there has been insufficient recognition of the specific needs of urban areas. The Committee of the Regions therefore supports the Commission's suggestion that paying 'greater attention to urban development in future strategy building and programmes could result in an integrated strategy between actions in urban areas in their wider regions, as well as in terms of economic and human resource development` ().

5.4.3. However, this approach still only focuses on cohesion between regions. The First Cohesion report (1996) stressed the need for stronger cohesion within and between cities: 'There is a real danger of further fragmentation within European cities, rising unemployment and social exclusion being accompanied by a deeper divide between haves and have-nots. In some Member States, the urban problem is already regarded as the major challenge to national cohesion. A more focused approach may also be necessary at Union level` ().

5.4.4. The Committee of the Regions therefore welcomes Agenda 2000 that considers 'urban areas in difficulty` as one of four key elements of a new Objective-2 that 'will favour economic diversification including in regions heavily dependent on a single declining economic sector. This will require increased support for small and medium-sized enterprises and innovation as well as a greater emphasis on vocational training, local development potential, the protection of the environment and combating social exclusion, particularly in urban areas in difficulty`. Furthermore, 'Combating social exclusion` has been defined as one of the four areas of activity within the horizontal Objective 3. Since social exclusion is concentrated in urban areas, the new Objective 3 must thus include an urban dimension (). On the other hand, Agenda 2000 has not put forward the need to stress for a stronger urban focus within the regional Objective-1 programmes. The Committee of the Regions believes that a balanced European urban policy must include cities and urban regions that are covered by both Objectives 1 and 2 and underpin EU assistance in various regions not eligible for regional support from the Structural Funds.

5.4.5. Agenda 2000 suggests that the highly successful Community Initiative Urban should not be continued but should instead be incorporated into mainstream programmes. This will allow for building on the success of Urban while putting additional emphasis on job creation and combating social exclusion. The Committee of the Regions additionally wishes to stress the importance of programmes dealing with new needs of cities. The Article 10 Urban Pilot Projects and, to a larger extent, the Community Initiative Urban, have already proved to be successful at dealing with these new needs. The traditional Objective-programmes are focused on a regional basis, however, Urban is targeted at pockets of deprivation, and aims at improving urban cohesion. The Committee of the Regions believes that the effect of these approaches, that have been beneficial to many cities, must be studied, particularly examining how they can act as catalyst for urban development. The Committee of the Regions firmly believes that this approach must be continued, independent of the proposals for a new Objective 2.

5.4.6. The Committee of the Regions fully supports the Commission's proposals for greater concentration. At present, Objectives 1, 2, 5b and 6 cover 51 % of the Union's population. Future Structural Funds should target that section of the population facing the worst possible circumstances, and this should include those people living in Europe's most deprived urban districts. This type of geographical targeting is also being pursued by Urban and has proved to be an effective use of European funding.

5.4.7. The proposal to simplify the financing system through a single programme per region is highly welcomed. Local governments in particular were often faced with contradictory regulations from the different European funds, and sometimes a specific project that was eligible under one fund could be non-eligible under another. The end result was often the withdrawal of a potentially successful project. These incoherences in Structural Fund regulations form a barrier to the integrated approach which has to be removed.

5.4.8. In Agenda 2000, simpler and more transparent eligibility criteria are also proposed for each type of area covered by the new Objective 2. These eligibility criteria should take account of relevant socio-economic criteria, unemployment levels and the degree of social exclusion. The Committee of the Regions believes that the criteria for urban areas which aim at social cohesion include criteria on the quality of life and sustainability. Finally, these criteria should recognize urban dynamics and the different characteristics of cities in different parts of the Union.

5.5. Institutional aspects

5.5.1. A new approach to urban policy needs to be fully reflected by the European Institutions. This particularly concerns the European Commission as it is responsible for the actual preparation and implementation of a European urban policy. However, at present, there is only an informal Interservice Group on urban issues. This informal structure relies too much on a sense of willingness, whereas in the new system, urban policy must be a key responsibility.

5.5.2. The current 'Modernization of Administration and Personnel policy` (MAP 2000) provides the opportunity to realize a more appropriate and formalized structure. The Committee of the Regions suggests this could be achieved by establishing an interdisciplinary team, preferably within the Directorate General for Regional Policy and Cohesion. This team would be responsible for the development of the suggested strategic urban framework. Furthermore, it should also be made responsible for testing (new) sectoral policies and programmes against this framework.

5.5.3. The Committee of the Regions believes that this formal administrative structure should ultimately be completed by assigning a European Commissioner overall responsibility for urban policy and the necessary budgets. The proposed new Objectives 2 - for urban areas in difficulties - and 3 - combating social exclusion - and innovatory programmes like Urban and the Article 10 Urban Pilot Projects are the most obvious programmes for inclusion.

5.5.4. The Committee of the Regions believes that the increased attention to urban issues and the suggested, more formalized, structure for the European Commission should have democratic support. At present, urban issues are mainly dealt with in the European Parliament's Committee on Regional Policy, particularly when Structural Funds are involved. However, urban issues are also handled in other Parliamentary Committees from a more sectoral point of view. In the past, there has been an Intergroup of Local and Regional Representatives of the Political Groups that has played a crucial role in putting urban issues on the European agenda.

5.5.5. Prior to the implementation of the Amsterdam Treaty, the Committee of the Regions would like to suggest that the European Parliament consider creating a more structured platform for urban issues. Ideally, this could take the form of a new Committee on Urban Policy. For the time being, the Committee of the Regions wishes to express its intention to work closely with the European Parliament in the preparation of the Urban Forum and the White Paper on Urban Development.

5.5.6. The European Union's two advisory bodies are already equipped to address urban issues effectively. The Committee of the Regions wishes to support the Economic and Social Committee in continuing its work on the European urban agenda. The Committee of the Regions itself will continue to develop the urban agenda within its Commission 4 - 'Spatial planning, urban issues, energy, the environment`.

5.5.7. Finally, the suggested new approach to urban policy should also be reflected by the European Council. The Committee of the Regions was particularly pleased with the initiative of the Dutch Presidency and the conclusions of the Noordwijk Council on Urban Policy. The willingness to further develop the agenda, give an additional impulse to the exchange of experiences and convene a second meeting during the Presidency of the United Kingdom is highly welcomed. The Committee of the Regions would like to suggest that the Council continue this work in a structured way, preferably by continuing to hold Council meetings on urban policy on an annual basis.

5.5.8. To benefit fully from the discussions within the different institutions, the Committee of the Regions would like to suggest that inter-institutional meetings be convened on a regular basis. Furthermore, a meeting with special interest groups could be held once a year. The proposed Urban Forum could be the first of such meetings.

5.5.9. The Committee of the Regions appreciates the intention of the European Commission to set up an expert group to help assist in the preparation of a White Paper on Urban Development. The Committee of the Regions believes that such a group should not only consist of experts from the various Member States and experienced urban researchers but the involvement of experts from local authorities is equally important.

5.5.10. The need for an integrated European urban policy does not mean that other tiers of authority should no longer aim for further policy integration. National policies in particular have a profound impact on cities. Local authorities are financially dependent on their national governments for fulfilling their responsibilities. As a result of budgetary restraints, a stronger coordination of more general sectoral policies becomes increasingly important. Therefore, the Committee of the Regions wishes to encourage the European Council in promoting more deep-rooted policy integration and genuine national urban policies.

5.5.11. Local and regional authorities will benefit significantly from policy integration at the national and European level. It will greatly reduce the burden of coordinating the wide variety of regional, national and Community policies and initiatives which exist at present. However, local authorities themselves must also make a renewed effort to apply the available resources as effectively and efficiently as possible.

5.5.12. Local authorities must tackle their problems and utilize their opportunities at the most appropriate level; i.e. closest to the citizens. Many of the cities' problems are concentrated in specific neighbourhoods and solutions also need to be sought at the neighbourhood level. Public health, social inclusion, education and public safety require custom-made solutions. On the other hand, policies required to boost the economy, create jobs and promote public transport need to be developed at the city level or within the wider conurbation. It must also be noted that problems in certain neighbourhoods can only be tackled in surrounding areas or in the wider conurbation. At the same time it must be ensured that these problem areas are able to benefit fully from developments in their more prosperous, surrounding areas. Structural Fund support could prove to be a valuable incentive to improve this urban cohesion.

5.5.13. Tackling problems at the neighbourhood level should be done within the competencies of local authorities. However, for several cities, this is the preferred, rather than the actual, situation. Furthermore, the administrative boundaries of local authorities usually fail to coincide with their functional urban region. Where possible, more permanent and binding forms of cooperation between the local authorities should be actively pursued, and necessary structures set up.

5.5.14. At the same time, local authorities should concentrate on their core responsibilities, deliver quality services, value for money and constantly reflect the changing concerns of society. They must improve the sometimes eroded relationship with their citizens, which is largely based on trust. Citizens should become stakeholders in the urban society.

5.5.15. To address all these issues, cities have to organize themselves. Local authorities must first of all bring together the local organizations, whether public or private, to mobilize knowledge, competency and energy. Cooperation within the wider conurbation requires strong partnerships between the local authorities. Equally important are the relations with the regional and national governments and the European Union. Urban policies and programmes should be set up, implemented and monitored in partnership with the local authorities, to truly take into account the expertise and knowledge available at the local level. This organizing capacity of local authorities also implies a new style of urban management which is able to draw up urban development strategies and create the necessary coalitions.

6. Conclusions

6.1. The Committee of the Regions warmly welcomes the European Commission's communication that takes the initiative to start a debate on a future urban agenda in the European Union. This communication fully reflects the renewed attention to our cities and the need for Europe to become closer to its citizens. It is a major step forward in becoming conscious that Europe's urban areas are indeed the motors of economic growth, prosperity and culture, but that they also face the most serious problems of modern society. The Committee of the Regions believes that it is now time for a European-wide debate and therefore strongly supports the intention of the European Commission and the Council of Ministers to set up an Urban Forum in 1998. The results of this debate should be further developed into a White Paper on Urban Development.

6.2. Cities are multi-faceted and multi-dimensional. On the one hand, they are the engines of regional and national economies. On the other hand, these cities, and more specifically certain urban districts, are suffering serious decay because of social, economic and environmental problems. High levels of unemployment, poverty, poor living conditions and lack of safety, result in social exclusion and segregation. This increasingly threatens the social and economic vitality and cohesion of our society. The Committee of the Regions strongly believes that this process must be reversed. Cities must again become the places where we want to live, raise our children, and spend our leisure time.

6.3. The Committee of the Regions is convinced that there is a strong need for an improved relationship between cities and their wider regions. This strong interdependency is reflected by the concept of the functional urban region (FUR). This concept should be universally valid, irrespective of the size of cities, and should be the starting point for a future European policy. The main challenge is to develop a European urban policy in such a way that cities and their regions of all sizes and characters are included. The European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP) is an initial response to this challenge which should be enhanced by the transnational seminars organized by the European Commission.

6.4. The Committee of the Regions agrees that several Community instruments already have a considerable impact on urban development. However, this is not the same as a European urban policy that co-ordinates and integrates Community actions and is specifically aimed at cities and their inhabitants. In several of its opinions, the Committee of the Regions has already suggested how the local and regional perspective should be included in specific Community policies and programmes. What is needed today is a new overall approach to urban areas. This should primarily be the responsibility of local authorities, with the support of, and in partnership with, regional and national authorities. The Committee of the Regions stresses the need for policy integration on urban issues at all administrative levels. In this regard the development of an integrated national urban policy in all Member States is a high priority. To achieve its principle objective of cohesion, the European Union should develop an urban policy that is complementary to these national policies and reflects the need to align Community policies and action plans already affecting cities more closely with the cities' needs, while heeding the subsidiarity principle.

6.5. The Committee of the Regions believes that a new approach to urban issues requires, first of all, a clear framework for urban development. This framework should be based on a vision and strategy on the future role of cities. It should reflect the spatial effects of European integration, specialization and trans-European networks. However, it must also address a range of European-wide questions regarding unemployment, social exclusion, urban regeneration, sustainability, mobility, safety, education, youth and public health. In order to ensure complementarity, the framework needs to take into account national policy, and it also has to be flexible enough to take into consideration regional differences that call for tailor-made implementation. When such a framework has been devised, present (sectoral) policies and programmes affecting cities will need to be adjusted and new Community measures will have to be tested against it. The Committee of the Regions is convinced that this will substantially improve both the effectiveness and efficiency of Community resources, as well as the transparency of EU-policies.

6.6. The Committee of the Regions advocates a European urban agenda that is based on the experiences of local authorities, as it is at the local level that numerous sectoral measures have to be implemented on a day-to-day basis. Furthermore, cities (and especially the major cities and urban regions) are among the first to be confronted with both the problems and opportunities facing modern society. Experiences from the local level show that strengthening the economic structure must form the backbone of any urban policy. However, it is also very clear that this can only be realized by parallel initiatives to strengthen the social infrastructure: education and training, quality of life, safety and care, particularly aimed at the socially excluded. In other words 'developing a strong city, creating valuable districts and improving citizens' participation`.

6.7. A European urban policy should facilitate an integrated, co-ordinated and more targeted approach to urban issues. Furthermore, it should be knowledge-based to identify needs and trends and allow for reliable monitoring, and therefore be independent of the criteria used for allocating funding. As well as including statistics, it should include information on specific policies and projects to improve policy-making for urban areas. The Committee of the Regions also believes that there is a strong need for partnerships between the different levels of government, as well as with the private sector, educational institutions and various actors at the city level. This partnership should be supported by effective participation in urban networks, building on their experience and proven structures. This partnership also requires stronger concentration and co-ordination of network activities, which could be realized within the framework of the Committee of the Regions.

6.8. The Committee of the Regions firmly believes that urban policies should emphasize long-term social-economic recovery and be linked to the inherent potential of urban districts, in order to bring life back to these areas. This revitalization from within, first of all requires better targeting, both geographically and thematically, concentrating on the worst deprived city districts, as has already been stressed in the First Cohesion report. The Committee of the Regions therefore supports the proposal in Agenda 2000 to include urban issues in the mainstream under a redefined Objective 2 aimed at economic and social restructuring. This will provide the opportunity to build on the successes of Urban whilst putting additional emphasis on tackling unemployment and encouraging social cohesion. It must be noted however, that a stronger urban focus within the regional Objective 1 programmes is equally important. At the same time a European urban policy must also include urban areas not eligible for regional support for instance by including the programmes to combat social exclusion from the horizontal new Objective 3. Furthermore, the Committee of the Regions wishes to emphasize the importance of programmes dealing with new needs of cities. The success of innovative approaches established under Article 10 Urban Pilot Projects and Urban requires that a substantial programme on Urban Development is maintained.

Experience with innovative approaches (Urban Pilot Projects and Urban) today gives towns, experts and leaders of associations the opportunity to enhance their knowledge of developments in the other EU States. Such knowledge is necessary today. Exchange arrangements must be put on a structured, long-term footing. The Committee of the Regions urges the Commission to encourage exchanges of know-how and to involve experts, associations, local community leaders and academics. Exchanges must equip these players better to meet the challenges and to get to grips with a European urban policy. The players have a wide range of roles and are crucial components for the success of an urban policy. They are the harbingers of the trades and professions of tomorrow. Reflection/action on the training of urban players must reconcile individual and collective skills: multi-disciplinary teams, local elected representatives and activists in community associations.

6.9. The realization and implementation of a European urban policy also requires changes to the Institutions. The Committee of the Regions suggests that the European Commission should establish an Interdisciplinary team within the Directorate General for Regional Policy and Cohesion and allocate overall responsibility to one Commissioner. The Committee of the Regions believes that this structure should be supported by an urban expert group with experts drawn from the Member States and urban researchers, and involving the expertise of local authorities. This structure requires the democratic support of the European Parliament. The Committee of the Regions' Commission 4 'Spatial planning, urban issues, energy, the environment` and the Economic and Social Committee's 'Section for Regional Development and Town and Country Planning` could serve as models of such a group. Furthermore, the Committee of the Regions believes that the initiative of the Urban Council needs to be continued in a structured way, in order to realize policy integration, de-compartmentalization and genuine urban policies at all administrative levels. The Committee of the Regions is convinced that a European urban policy can only be accomplished by close cooperation between all Institutions and their advisory bodies.

6.10. A European urban policy also requires a number of changes at the local level. The Committee of the Regions wishes to encourage local authorities to undertake a renewed effort to make better and more targeted use of available resources. Urban issues need to be tackled at the level closest to the citizens. Often, this is at the neighbourhood level but some of the problems and opportunities require answers at the city level or within the wider conurbation. For many cities this will involve a restructuring of the administration in order to develop more permanent and binding forms of cooperation within the region. However, the Committee of the Regions believes that this also requires a new style of urban management, that mobilizes knowledge, competence and energy from all organizations, whether private or public, and regards citizens as stakeholders of the urban society.

6.11. Making the choice to develop vital and sustainable cities for the 21st century is not only an urban concern, but is of crucial national and European importance. Strengthening urbanization demands perseverance. Dealing with urban issues - which is in itself a relatively recent phenomenon - has in the past suffered all too often from constant policy changes and volatility. A new, co-ordinated and integrated European approach founded on cities in their regional context and their citizens is now required. A citizens' Europe begins in our cities.

Brussels, 14 May 1998.

The Chairman of the Committee of the Regions

Manfred DAMMEYER

() COM(97) 197 final.

() OJ C 100, 2.4.1996, p. 65.

() OJ C 126, 29.4.1996, p. 1.

() OJ C 337, 11.11.1996, p. 20.

() Not yet published in OJ.

() OJ C 34, 3.2.1997, p. 12.

() OJ C 116, 14.4.1997, p. 52.

() OJ C 100, 2.4.1996, p. 78.

() OJ C 116, 14.4.1997, p. 1.

() OJ C 116, 14.4.1997, p. 98.

() OJ C 215, 16.7.1997, p. 44.

() OJ C 379, 15.12.1997, p. 26.

() OJ C 215, 16.7.1997, p. 21.

() COM(97) 197 final, p. 8.

() COM(97) 197 final, p. 14.

() COM(97) 197 final, p. 13.

() OJ C 74, 10.3.1998, Article 3(10)(3).

() COM(97) 197 final, p. 16.

() CdR 138/97 fin.

() COM(96) 542 final.

() COM(97) 2000 final, p. 22.