Ex-post evaluation of the 2013 European capitals of culture : executive summary.
Date: 2015-12-23
Institutions: Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture
Subjects: European cultural event, capital city, cultural identity, cultural policy, cultural promotion, economic consequence, social impact, town, urban community, urban renewal

Ex-post Evaluation of the 2013 
European Capitals of Culture 

Executive Summary 
December 2014 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers  
to your questions about the European Union. 

Freephone number (*): 
00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 

(*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels 

may charge you). 

More information on the European Union is available on the internet (http://europa.eu). 

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2015 

ISBN:978-92-79-45804-0 
DOI: 10.2766/59760 

© European Union, 2014 
Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
HOW TO OBTAIN EU PUBLICATIONS 

Free publications: 

•  one copy: 

via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu); 

•  more than one copy or posters/maps: 

from the European Union’s representations (http://ec.europa.eu/represent_en.htm);  
from the delegations in non-EU countries 
(http://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/index_en.htm);  
by contacting the Europe Direct service (http://europa.eu/europedirect/index_en.htm) or 
calling 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (freephone number from anywhere in the EU) (*). 

(*) 

The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may charge you). 

Priced publications: 

•  via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu). 

 
 
 
 
This report sets  out the findings of an ex post evaluation of the European Capitals of 
Culture (ECoC) action in 2013, focussing on the two  cities hosting the title, Košice in 
Slovakia  and  the  Marseille-Provence  area  in  France.    The  evaluation  explores  the 
implementation  of  both  ECoC  throughout  their  ‘life-cycle’  i.e.  from  the  preparation  of 
applications,  through  the  selection  and  designation  process,  to  the  development  and 
completion of cultural programmes and supporting activities.  This summary considers 
the impacts of hosting the title for the two cities, before a comparative review sets out 
the  conclusions  emerging  from  Košice  and  Marseille-Provence  and  their  implications 
for  the  relevance,  efficiency,  effectiveness  and  sustainability  of  the  ECoC  action  as  a 
whole.   

Evaluation framework and methodology 
This evaluation and its methodology are designed to satisfy the standard requirement 
of  the  legal  basis  for  an  “external  and  independent  evaluation  of  the  results  of  the 
European  Capital  of  Culture  event  of  the  previous  year”1.  Although  this  evaluation  is 
primarily tasked with assessing the 2013 titles against the objectives  and criteria set 
out  in  the  2006  Decision  (the  legal  basis  in  force  at  the  time  of  their  official 
designation), the methodology takes account of the changing policy context for ECoC 
and changes to the legal basis wherever possible.   

In  order  for  results  to  be  comparable  with  previous  evaluations,  the  methodology 
follows a consistent approach for evidence gathering and analysis.  The two cities were 
first evaluated individually, based on primary data either collected during the fieldwork 
or  provided  by  each  ECoC,  as  well  as  the  analysis  of  a  range  of  secondary  data 
sources.  

Primary data sources include interviews conducted during two visits to each city or by 
telephone, as well as through an online survey. These interviews have sought to gain 
a  variety  of  perspectives  on  each  ECoC,  including  those  of  the  management  teams, 
decision-makers  at  local  and  national  level,  plus  key  cultural  operators,  a  range  of 
partners involved in the delivery of ECoC and a sample of organisations either leading 
or participating in ECoC projects.   

The  secondary  data  sources  include  information  in  the  original  ECoC  applications, 
studies  and  reports  produced  or  commissioned  by  the  ECoC,  events  programmes, 
promotional  materials  and  websites,  statistical  data  on  culture  and  tourism  and 
quantitative data supplied by the ECoC on finance, activities, outputs and results.  

Main Findings 

Košice 2013 

Slovakia was able to propose a European Capital of Culture (ECoC) for 2013 under the 
terms of the chronological order of entitlement set out in Decision 1622/2006/EC, with 
Košice  selected  for  the  title  by  means  of  a  national  competition.  Košice  is  Slovakia’s 
second  largest  city,  close  to  the  country’s  Eastern  border  (and  the  European  Union’s 
Schengen border).  The city has implemented European Capital of Culture as part of a 
long-term  plan  for  transforming  the  city  and  its  economy  from  an  industrial  to  a 
creative  city,  by  investing  in  cultural  infrastructure  and  support  for  the  creative  and 
tourism  sectors,  as  well  as  encouraging  a  whole  range  of  new  collaborations  and 
interactions.   

1 Decision No 1622/2006/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 2006 establishing 
a Community action for the European Capital of Culture event for the years 2007 to 2019 

 
 
 
 
                                           
The original concept for Košice 2013 was built around ‘Interface 2013’, drawing on the 
city’s  historical  role  as  a  multicultural  city  and  a  crossroads  between  central  and 
eastern  Europe,  while  recognising  the  city’s  developing  creative  sector.    The  final 
cultural  programme  combined  large-scale  public  art  festivals,  experimental  and 
innovative art forms, a programme of events reflecting the city’s multi-ethnic heritage, 
activities linking cultural heritage to new ideas and practices, and a series of activities 
promoting Košice and the Eastern Slovakia region at different levels. 

The  European  dimension  of  ECoC  was  reflected  in  a  variety  of  activities  across  the 
cultural  programme,  among  the  most  noteworthy  aspects  were  the  Košice  Artists  in 
Residence programme and a range of networking activities and good practice sharing, 
including in relation to the creative economy and tourism development. 

Košice  2013  placed  significant  emphasis  on  involving  local  citizens  in  the  ECoC, 
supported  by  the  development  of  new  cultural  facilities,  not  least  the  SPOTS 
programme featuring the regeneration of a number of disused heat exchanger stations 
and a programme of cultural and community development activities around these new 
facilities.  This  is  widely  regarded  as  demonstrating  good  practice  through  its  highly 
inclusive  approach  to  the  development  of  new  cultural  and  social  facilities  in 
neighbourhoods.    This  will  continue  to  improve  access  to  culture  and  provide  long-
term support for community development, intercultural dialogue and social cohesion. 

Košice  2013’s  overall  budgets  exceeded  the  original  projections,  thanks  in  large  part 
to the successful acquisition of significant resources from EU Structural Funds (€59m) 
to finance the infrastructure investments.  In common with many recent ECoC, Košice 
2013  was  affected  by  shortfalls  in  funding  from  regional  and  municipal  government 
(and lower private sector contributions).  Although this was partly offset by increased 
contributions  from  national  government,  this  has  served  to  reduce  the  budgets 
available  for  cultural  programming  and  supporting  activities  such  as  marketing  and 
communications.   

In  terms  of  impacts,  while  Košice’s  cultural  programme  was  comparatively  small, 
many new or additional opportunities were created for citizens to attend or participate 
in  cultural  activities.    This  was  felt  by  many  of  those  consulted  to  have  boosted  the 
vibrancy  and  quality  of  the  local  cultural  offer,  as  well  as  making  a  significant 
contribution  to  developing  the  skills,  capacity  and  connectivity  of  the  local  cultural, 
creative  and  tourism  sectors.    In  this  way,  Košice  2013  has  contributed  to  the  city’s 
long-term  social  and  economic  development  while  generating  a  number  of  more 
immediate  effects,  mainly  through  raised  attendance  at  cultural  events  and  an 
increase in the numbers of tourist visits, especially from neighbouring countries.   

A key success of Košice 2013 has been the approach to sustainability, with significant 
time  and  resources  allocated  to  legacy  planning.    In  addition  to  the  creation  of  new 
cultural  and  tourist  assets,  a  long-term  strategy  has  been  developed,  new  legacy 
bodies  established  and  ongoing  financial  commitments  obtained  from  government 
partners. 

Marseille-Provence 2013 

France  was  also  entitled  to  nominate  a  European  Capital  of  Culture  under  the 
chronological order of entitlement, though this was apparent as early as 19992.  After 
a national selection competition, the European Capital of Culture title was awarded to 
the port city of Marseille in partnership with many of the cities, towns and communes 
in  the  Bouches-du-Rhône  département,  including  Aix-en-Provence,  Arles,  Aubagne, 
Gardanne, Istres, Martigues and Salon-de-Provence.   

2  Decision  1419/1999/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  25  May  1999  establishing  a 
Community action for the European Capital of Culture event for the years 2005 to 2019 

Dezember 2014  5 

 
                                           
The funding commitments made at application stage by the stakeholders in Marseille-
Provence  were  respected,  with  public  contributions  complemented  by  significant 
amounts  of  private  sector  sponsorship.    The  total  budget  of  €98m  was  additional  to 
existing cultural budgets.   

Marseille-Provence  2013  has  been  a  high-profile  national  and  international  event, 
seeking to build on the Marseille-Euroméditerranée urban renewal project in the heart 
of  Marseille  while  promoting greater  integration  between  the  city  and its  surrounding 
area through support for arts, culture and the creative industries. 

Marseille  and  its  urban  renewal  projects  formed  the  focal  point  for  activities,  though 
the  ECoC  was  linked  to  improvements  in  the  cultural  infrastructure  across  the 
territory, including new venues such as MuCEM in Marseille (the Museum of European 
and  Mediterranean  Civilisations),  restoration  projects  in  former  industrial  and 
commercial  zones  as  well  as  numerous  renovations  and  extensions  of  existing 
facilities.   

Marseille-Provence  2013 
implemented  an  ambitious  and  extensive  cultural 
programme, reflecting the size and diversity of the area covered and covering a wide 
diversity  of  artistic  themes  and  disciplines.    The  programme  had  a  clear  European 
dimension  via  the  Partage  des  Midis  (sharing  the  south)  theme  which  cut  across  the 
entire  cultural  programme,  highlighting  Marseille’s  location  and  historic  role  as  a 
meeting point between European and Mediterranean cultures.   

One  of  the  main  objectives  was  to  encourage  wider  participation  in  culture,  through 
public  and  free  events,  specific  events  for  young  people  and  activities  either  taking 
place in disadvantaged neighbourhoods or showcasing the diversity of cultures present 
in  the  territory.    A  key  contribution  to  this  was  made  by  the  Quartiers  Créatifs 
(creative  neighbourhoods)  project  featuring  a  range  of  experimental  arts  and  non-
traditional cultural forms in different locations across the territory.   

Marseille-Provence  2013  created  a  number  of  economic  and  social  impacts,  most 
noticeably in  terms  of  total  cultural  audiences  and increases  in  the  number  of  tourist 
visits,  particularly  to  the  city  of  Marseille.    The  ECoC  also  generated  considerable 
media coverage and high levels of awareness amongst the general population.  There 
is  also  evidence  that  some  of  the  negative  perceptions  of  Marseille  have  been 
challenged  and  that,  for  the  first  time,  Marseille  is  seen  as  a  major  cultural 
destination.   

In the absence of legacy structures or formal cultural competencies  for the Marseille-
Provence Métropole, longer-term impacts are likely to be more limited.  Nevertheless, 
it  seems  clear  that  ECoC  has  made  a  positive  contribution  to levels  of  cooperation  in 
cultural  governance  and  served  to  boost  the  capacity  and  connectivity  of  the  local 
cultural and creative sectors.   

Dezember 2014  6 

 
Conclusions and Recommendations 
The  following  analysis  brings  together  the  findings,  success  factors  and  lessons 
learned from the two ECoC city sections in the main evaluation report, comparing and 
contrasting  experiences  in  order  to  provide  an  overview  of  the  European  Capitals  of 
Culture action in 2013.  Many of the findings from previous reports3, especially those 
pertaining to the overall relevance, efficiency and effectiveness of the ECoC action, are 
still  valid,  but  have  been  updated  with  new  information  gathered  during  the  2013 
evaluation wherever possible. 

Relevance 

The  experience  of  2013  reinforces  the  finding  from  previous  evaluations  that  ECoC 
remains highly relevant to the EU Treaty, particularly Article 167, through contributing 
to  the  flowering  of  Member  State  cultures,  highlighting  common  cultural  heritage  as 
well as cultural diversity and increasing cultural co-operation between Member States 
and internationally.   

The  selection  process  introduced  by  Decision  1622/2006/EC  ensured  that  the 
applications  of  both  the  eventual  ECoC  title-holders  for  2013  set  out  objectives  and 
approaches that were consistent with the legal basis for ECoC.  On balance, both title-
holders  implemented  cultural  projects  and  supporting  activities  that  were  coherent 
with  the  essence  of  their  applications,  and  therefore  supported  the  strategic  and 
operational objectives of ECoC as defined in the intervention logic.  

The  relevance  of  the  ECoC  Action  is  likely  to  be  strengthened  by  the  new  legal  basis 
established in 2014 to cover ECoC for 2020-2033. Indeed, the objectives and criteria 
of the ECoC Action set in the new legal basis4 better articulate the overall aims of EU 
policy  and  better  reflect  the  aspirations  of  the  title-holders  and  the  nature  of  their 
programmes than do the objectives of Decision 1622/2006/EC. 

Recommendation:  The  Commission  should  ensure  that  the  selection  panel 
and the monitoring and advisory panels provide recommendations that relate 
specifically to the criteria in  Article 14 of  Decision 445/2014/EU i.e. relating 
to  the  budget,  artistic  independence,  European  dimension,  marketing  and 
communication, and monitoring and evaluation. 

The  ECoC  concept  also  continues  to  be  of  relevance  to  the  objectives  of  local 
policymakers and stakeholders.  The experience of 2013 shows that ECoC has made a 
positive contribution to developing the range and diversity of cities' cultural offerings; 
enhancing  social  development;  promoting  the  international  profile  of  cities;  and 
supporting their economic development (through support for tourism and the creative 
economy). 

The ECoC Action remains complementary to other EU initiatives in the field of culture, 
and  this  report  highlights  examples  of  the  2013  ECoC  working  with  the  Creative 
Europe programme as well as with a range of programmes in other linked fields such 
as youth, citizenship, education and training and regional development.  

Both  2013  ECoC  utilised  ERDF  resources,  with  ECoC  perhaps  the  key  driving  force 
behind  Košice’s  ability  to  access  significant  amounts  from  EU  Structural  Funds  to 
finance  cultural  infrastructure  improvements.  Marseille-Provence  also  made  use  of 
ERDF  both  for  its  infrastructure  developments  and  for  elements  of  the  cultural 
programme.   

3 http://ec.europa.eu/culture/tools/actions/capitals-culture_en.htm 
4 Decision 445/2014/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 establishing a Union 
action  for  the  European  Capitals  of  Culture  for  the  years  2020  to  2033  and  repealing  Decision  No 
1622/2006/EC 

Dezember 2014  7 

 
                                           
Recommendation:  The  Commission  should  explore  ways  to  promote  and 
strengthen  the  contribution  of  the  EU  Structural  Funds  to  the  European 
Capitals of Culture, for example, through  identifying  and disseminating good 
practice or through providing guidance and information targeted to applicant 
and title-holders on how the Structural Funds can reinforce ECoC. 

Efficiency 

The  city  sections  of  the  main  report  show  that  the  2013  ECoC  chose  similar 
organisational forms for the delivery agencies, i.e. arms-length bodies but governance 
and  management  arrangements  were  much  more  complex  and  challenging  in 
Marseille-Provence, given the size of the territory.  

Clearly  the  2013  title  cities  are  very  different  places,  with  the  greater  Marseille-
Provence urban area covering a population of 1.8 million people and the Košice region 
having  a  population  of  360,000.    It  therefore  follows  that  the  resources  required  to 
achieve  the  expected  results  (or  a  ‘critical  mass’  of  impacts)  in  each  city  will  vary 
significantly. Indeed, the operating and programming resources available to the 2013 
ECoC are comparable when these population differences are taken into account. 

The  2013  ECoC  repeat  the  pattern  seen  in  recent  years,  with  title  cities  from  newer 
Member  States  in  central  and  eastern  Europe  tending  to  produce  ECoC  programmes 
that  are  smaller  in  scale  and  more  vulnerable  to  budget  reductions  in  the  lead-up  to 
the  title  year.    In  both  cities,  stakeholders  (and  the  majority  of  funders)  were 
committed  in  their  support  of  ECOC,  though  funding  commitments  in  Košice  were 
more  vulnerable  to  local  political  changes,  with  the  absence  of  a  long-term  funding 
agreement  for  municipal  and  regional  contributions  a  key  cause  of  the  limited 
resources  available  for  cultural  programming  during  the  title-year.  The  funding 
commitments  made  at  application  stage  by  the  stakeholders  in  Marseille-Provence 
were respected and the entire budget of €98m was additional to any existing budgets 
for culture. 

Recommendation:  The  Commission  should  encourage  Member  States  to 
indicate  at  the  outset  (e.g.  when  the  call  for  applications  is  issued),  the 
amount of funding that they intend to make available to winning cities. 

Marseille-Provence  exceeded  their  target  for  private  sponsorship,  with  €16.5m  raised 
from  207  companies.  This  success  reflected  a  coherent  strategy  to  create  good 
partnerships  with  corporate  sponsors  and  an  understanding  of  the  need  to  generate 
mutual benefits.  Efforts to raise private sponsorship were less successful in Košice, at 
least in part due to the lack of a culture of corporate giving or supportive tax regime in 
Slovakia,  though  there  were  private  contributions  to  infrastructure  projects  and  in-
kind support of various kinds.   

Recommendation:  The  Commission  should  seek  to  encourage  further  policy 
dialogue  with  Member  States  and  stakeholders  on  ways  of  encouraging  and 
incentivising private sector investment in the arts and culture.    

At European level, the ECoC Action continues to be very cost-effective when compared 
to  other  EU  policy  instruments  and  mechanisms,  given  the  very  modest  EU  funding 
available from the Melina Mercouri Prize 

Marketing  and  communications  presented  a  challenge  for  both  ECoC,  but  in  different 
ways.  In very simplified terms, Marseille-Provence faced the challenges of promoting 
a  large  and  diverse  territory  and  of  overcoming  negative  perceptions  of  Marseille, 
while  Košice  (and  Slovakia  as  a  whole)  was  seeking  to  raise  its  profile  amongst 
European  audiences  and  put  in  place  structures  that  would  maintain  and  expand 
progress in this area.   

Dezember 2014  8 

 
The  nature  of  the  Marseille-Provence  ECoC  covering  such  a  large,  diverse  area  was 
always  likely  to  make  the  formulation  and  projection  of  a  coherent  unified  ‘brand 
identity’ problematic.  Nevertheless, the development of a shared vision for each ECoC 
and its communication remains of importance, especially where the ECoC title covers a 
diverse area. 

To some extent both cities’ efforts were complicated by limited marketing budgets and 
the need to enlist a variety of tourist and public bodies in communication efforts.  This 
is  not  unique  to  2013;  the  temporary  nature  of  ECoC  means  that  there  must  be 
effective  partnership  working  between  ECoC  delivery  agencies  and  the  bodies 
responsible  for  communication  and  tourism  promotion  for  communications  efforts  to 
be successful.   

The 2013 ECoC were the first ones formally subject to the selection process introduced 
by  Decision  1622/2006/EC,  with  no  evidence  of  criticism  or  problems  in  relation  to 
transparency or fairness.  Indeed, the evidence suggests that the new process enabled 
two high quality applications and two interesting, innovative ECoC to be selected. 

Moreover, there is evidence that specific recommendations of the EU monitoring panel 
positively  affected  final  implementation.  For  Marseille-Provence  this  related  to  the 
further development of the European dimension in the final programme, while Košice 
took  on  board  recommendations  on  legacy  planning  and  the  need  to  reach  new 
audiences. There is less evidence that informal meetings between panel members and 
ECoC delivery agencies had a beneficial effect on the results of the 2013 ECoC.   

Effectiveness 

Despite a shortage of comprehensive data on results and impacts available at the time 
of writing, it is safe to say that the 2013 ECoC created a more extensive cultural offer 
in  both  cities  during  the  title-year.  Marseille-Provence  implemented  a  comprehensive 
range of activities and attracted an audience that was estimated to exceed 11 million, 
making it perhaps the best-attended ECoC to date. Although Košice’s programme was 
clearly  smaller  in  scale  and  spread  out  over  a  longer  time  period,  it  was  however 
highly  innovative  in  scope  and  content,  with  experimental  art  forms  and  creativity  in 
its broader sense strongly represented.   

The  European  dimension  was  an  integral  part  of  Marseille-Provence’s  programme, 
explicit  in  the  Partage  des  Midis  (Sharing  the  South)  theme  and  resulting  in  many 
collaborations with other countries, including with Mediterranean countries outside the 
EU.  Košice’s final programme placed less emphasis on the European dimension, which 
was  incorporated  in  a  number  of  specific  activities  rather  than  permeating  the  entire 
programme.    There  was  also  some  collaboration  between  the  two  ECoC  title-holders, 
although  this  was  modest  in  scale,  reflecting  the  very  limited  links  that  would 
otherwise exist between these two places. 

In terms of economic impacts, both ECoC made a clear contribution to developing the 
creative economy and the tourism offer in their respective cities.  Both had a positive 
effect  on  the  cities’  national  and  international  profiles  and  attracted  significant 
numbers of additional visitors, Marseille-Provence in particular generated considerable 
media coverage and high levels of awareness among the general population.   

Both  ECoC  also  made  a  contribution  to  urban  development,  particularly  by  bringing 
culture  to  peripheral  and  disadvantaged  neighbourhoods,  including  via  artist 
residencies and themes dealing with specific ethnic communities.   

Recommendation:  The  Commission  should  routinely  include  examples  of 
good  practice  from  ECoC  in  the  various  communication  and  dissemination 
activities  of  the  Creative  Europe  Programme,  any  future  European  Culture 
Forum and through relevant cultural networks and stakeholder platforms.   

Dezember 2014  9 

 
The  experience  of  both  cities  shows  that  the  effective  involvement  of  non-traditional 
cultural audiences or disadvantaged communities requires extensive preparatory work 
and/or  effective  partnership  working  with  intermediary  organisations.    These 
organisations are often small, inexperienced or ‘amateur’ in nature and are less likely 
to (successfully) apply for funding in programmes of this size and significance.  

Košice  2013  had  greatest  impact  on  the  city itself,  with  regional  effects  more  limited 
and  focussing  mainly  on  improved  regional  cooperation.    Clearly,  in  Marseille-
Provence,  the  intention  was  always  to  generate  impact  across  a  wider,  sub-regional 
territory.  Whilst  such  benefits  have  occurred,  some  lessons  have  been  learned  about 
the  risk  of  saturation  and  competition  for  profile  and  audiences  within  a  territory; 
there is a limit as to how many cultural events can take place at any one time, even in 
a large territory. A large part of the impact will inevitably be concentrated in the city 
of  Marseille itself, since the majority of new infrastructure developments and cultural 
events took place there and much of the benefit of these will endure. 

It  is  also  important  to  consider  the  extent  to  which  the  ECoC  action,  and  the  way  it 
has  been  implemented  in  2013,  has  generated  ‘European  added  value’5.    This  is 
generally  understood  as  the  ability  of  EU  interventions  to  create  greater  value  or 
benefits than Member  States acting alone, which in the cultural field requires actions 
with  a  strong  transnational  or  multilateral  focus,  that  are  visible  and  accessible  to 
large  numbers  of  EU  citizens,  and  that  aim  to  make  a  longer-term  contribution  to 
European  priorities 
integration,  mutual  knowledge  and 
understanding)6  While the ECoC action has clear potential to make contributions in all 
of  these  areas,  the  content  of  the  main  report  suggests  that  Marseille-Provence  had 
more demonstrable impacts than Košice in relation to European added value.    

cooperation, 

(i.e. 

Recommendation  Given  the  rich  experiences  of  2013,  the  Commission 
should  publish  (or  provide  links  to)  the  cities’  own  evaluation  reports  on  its 
website, in addition to reports of the EU level evaluations. 

Recommendation:  In  order  to  strengthen  evaluations  commissioned  by  the 
cities,  the  Commission  should  establish  voluntary  guidelines  and  common 
indicators for such evaluations. 

Sustainability 

Evidence of lasting improvements in the cultural vibrancy of cities is perhaps strongest 
in  the  case  of  Košice,  thanks  to  the  numbers  of  continuing  projects  and  the 
establishment of a new timetable of recurring events and festivals.  Marseille-Provence 
2013  did however  have  a  positive impact  on  the  level  of  (international)  collaboration 
and networking amongst local cultural operators.   

Both cities saw significant improvements to the cultural infrastructure, which are a key 
legacy  effect.    In  some  ways  this  is  most  noteworthy  in  Košice  given  the  context  of 
many years  of underinvestment. The  city of  Marseille enjoyed huge investment in its 
cultural  infrastructure  in  the  year  leading  up  to  2013,  with  the  title-year  providing  a 
stimulus for their timely completion and the opportunity for them to host ECoC events 
and benefit from the communication activities of the ECoC.  

Although  a  key  objective  of  Marseille-Provence  2013  was  to  deepen  collaboration 
across the Marseille-Provence area, though as highlighted above, this is most likely to 
be done on an informal basis in future. The experience of 2013 illustrates that legacy 
planning must involve a range of partner organisations, begin at an earlier stage and 
be adequately resourced, if ECoC  are to create more sustainable longer-term  effects.  

5 Defined in the evaluation questions as ‘Community added value’  
6 Council Resolution of 19 December 2002 implementing the work plan on European cooperation in the field 
of culture: European added value and mobility of persons and circulation of works in the cultural sector 

Dezember 2014  10 

 
                                           
Košice’s programme was part of a long-term process of urban development and, as a 
consequence of this (supported by the recommendations of the EU monitoring panel), 
legacy planning in Košice was well-developed by the close of 2013.  This has included 
the  establishment  of  three  legacy  bodies  (for  cultural  policy,  management  of  cultural 
infrastructure  and  tourism  development),  adoption  of  a  new  long  term  cultural 
development strategy and renewed willingness on the part of public agencies to value 
and fund investments in culture. 

Dezember 2014  11 

 
N
C
-
0
1
-
1
5
-
0
8
9
-
E
N
-
N

ISBN:978-92-79-45804-0