Understanding the EU Urban Agenda from the margins of Europe: the case of Porto

This research focuses on the EU regional policy and presents a critical analysis of its influence on the urban regeneration process of the Portuguese city of Porto. A particular attention is drawn to the historic centre area which in 1996 was formally recognised by the UNESCO as a World Heritage Site. The old town's social, cultural and historic heritage has been dealing with a diverse range of challenges and consequently has been the stage of different urban interventions. Among the actions that have been implemented during the last 50 years to steer the area's development, two area-based interventions linked to the EU Cohesion Policy have notably contributed to the processes of urban change—1990 Urban Pilot Project and 2006 Programa de Reabilitação Urbana. In order to make sense of the intricate relationship between the urban dimension of the EU regional policy and the processes of urban regeneration we started by tracing the development of the EU urban agenda. As a second step we contextualised the historic Bairro da Sé do Porto area within national and local urban policies and development patterns. Finally, it was possible to put forward a series of considerations regarding the influence of EU initiatives in this southwestern European city. Hopefully, the insights resulting from this research will not only help to understand local effects of EU instruments and their specificities at the level of implementation, but allow future EU policy making to capitalise on its urban agenda in order to promote a better future

Urban rehabilitation areas in Oporto, Portugal. A brief overview

This paper establishes some preliminary outcomes of the research period carried in 2019 at CITTA – University of Porto as a visiting student. Oporto is the second largest Portuguese city and the engine of the metropolitan system of the northern region of the country. For more than 30 years local urban policies have been articulated with the EU urban policies to deal with severe urban problems and boost regeneration processes. Whilst the PhD research project is entitled – Understanding the EU’s urban agenda at the margins of Europe: lessons and perspectives – studying the case of Oporto is an opportunity to reflect on the influence and impact of the EU’s regional policy over the trajectories of urban development. The contact with local experts and the possibility to experience personally the dynamics that have been describing the city, resulted in the gathering of interesting information for the research project that are presented in part in this paper

Urban change and regional development at the margins of Europe: an introduction

Since the beginning of the nineties the urban dimension has taken a growing relevance within the EU’s regional policy. The implementation of community initiatives or other areabased projects under the structural funds has meant for several cities a tangible opportunity to start urban renewal, introduce innovative planning instruments and implement new governance relations. In the so called “less developed” regions, this process has also been accompanied by significant financial resources, giving local governments and municipalities the chance to start large infrastructure projects of metropolitan or even regional relevance. Development processes in regions and urban areas, however, have followed very different trajectories, particularly at the economic and geopolitical margins of Europe. While some cities and regions seems to have benefited from a positive interaction between urban and regional policies and, national and European initiatives, in many others local development and innovative planning processes encountered resistances and difficulties, so that results must be evaluated carefully and from a critical perspective. With the general aim of understanding the place of cities and urban policy within the EU’s cohesion policy, the paper provides an exploration of the concepts, the geographies and the principles surrounding the problem of regional disparities in the European Union, with a specific focus on the instruments made available by the European Union to connect urban policy to regional cohesion. Such an exploration focuses on three main arguments that are addressed in the paper: • the problem of regional disparities and the way these have been faced by EU regional policy; • a description of the urban-regional diversities in the European Union; • the role of cities in the EU’s cohesion policy

COLLABORATIVE GOVERNANCE IN PORTUGAL – YES OR NO? A CRITICAL APPROACH BASED ON AN EMPIRICAL SURVEY

Collaborative governance can be defined as a concerted type of decision-making and collective action in which government bodies and private sector stakeholders interact as equal partners with the aim of achieving outcomes of interest for both parties. In practical terms, this is a type of governance where special meetings and negotiations are held – typically in somewhat elitist and secretive settings – with the aim of defining shared responsibilities and benefits associated with joint public-private ventures. Academic authors in favour of the adoption of collaborative governance in Portugal tend to present a rather positive view on the merits of this approach. They argue that it is potentially the best approach to address the heavily bureaucratic and paternalistic traits of Portuguese planning. This is against the view of authors who consider collaborative governance problematic for the public interest. Some of these sceptical authors add that collaborative governance has become in fact a surreptitious tool for the advancement of neoliberal goals. This debate raises a dilemma: should or should not collaborative governance be adopted by Portuguese local authorities in matters related with spatial planning? Based on an online survey, this research portrays the perceptions held by planners and planning-related professionals (e.g. planning academics, consultants) about collaborative governance in Portuguese local authorities. The empirical results suggest that, in general terms, these individuals consider collaborative governance capable of delivering a number of positive outcomes, but is also associated with serious risks for the public interest. In sum, they simultaneously endorse the views of academic writers in favour and against collaborative governance. The respondents generally agree that more research on the topic is needed and that a clearer legal framework should be produced to regulate the use of this governance type to protect the public interest. These results are used to critically discuss collaborative governance in Portugal and identify possible alternative directions for the future of public decision-making and action in this country at the local authority level. This work was financially supported by: Project POCI-01-0145-FEDER-016431 – funded by European Structural and Investment Funds (FEEI) through - Programa Operacional Competitividade e Internacionalização - COMPETE2020 and by national funds through FCT - Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, I.P