1 / 14

Urban benchmarking USESPON Workshop „Urban Benchmarking”

Urban benchmarking USESPON Workshop „Urban Benchmarking”. 6.11.2013 Katarzyna Wojnar. Cele warsztatu. Presentation of urban benchmarking tool

kiaria
Download Presentation

Urban benchmarking USESPON Workshop „Urban Benchmarking”

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Urban benchmarking USESPON Workshop „Urban Benchmarking” 6.11.2013 Katarzyna Wojnar

  2. Cele warsztatu • Presentation of urban benchmarking tool • as a tool for complex assessment of development potential on urban, regional and nationallevel. During the workshop, participants getbasic information about the assumptions and methodology of benchmarking cities, and then, under the guidance of experts, will have the opportunity to • Conducttheirownanalysis • Includingavailableanalyticaltools, especially ESPON tools. • 3. Integration of 3 levels

  3. Groups Central Perspective Regional Perspective Localperspective

  4. Agenda: • 11.00-Introduction • 11.30 - Brainstorming and presentation of results • 12.00-Benchmarking towns, step by step • 12.45 - Lunch • 13.20 - Online applications and ESPON ESPONCityBenchHyperAtlas • 13.30 - Benchmarking towns in practice • 14.00 - Benchmarking cities group exercises • 14.45 - Discussion: feelings, doubts, dilemmas • 15.15 - Evaluation of the meeting (evaluation questionnaire) • 15.30 - End of the meeting

  5. ESPON Programmewww.espon.eu

  6. Urban Benchmarking as a tool for complex assessment of development potential USESPON Workshop „Urban Benchmarking” 6.11.2013 Katarzyna Wojnar

  7. The origin and nature „bench-mark”: point of reference, level marked, as a starting point to conduct measurements of hight • Diagram of the relative evaluation result in characterizing UB Benchmarking: a tool for improving performance that goes beyond measure, indicating HOWto achieve better results (Foot, 1998) Methos of relativeassessment of performance results, especially for the measurement of complex phenomena that are difficult to define witha clear measure of success Benchmarking can be used to learn from the best of their knowledge and experience. As a management tool first appeared in the private sector

  8. Benchmarking in public sector „allgovernments needreliable methods for assessing the relativeresults of the various public programs to be able toset the overall goals and formulatestrategies.Benchmarking allows officials toimprove the quality ofinformation basedon the achievedresults [...], helping to meet the requirements of internal and external accountability. ” O’Connel(2000: 22)

  9. Benchmarking in public sector • the 80s. : Margaret TatcherCompulsoryCompetitiveTendering – benchmarking efficiency in public services • the 90s. : BeaconSchemein UK- dissemination of bestpractices in the field of public services usług publicznycamonglocaladminsitration, qualitycertificates • Firstdecade of the twenty-first century: the riseofurbanstudies • Changing number of articles in the field of urban studies, 1992-2012

  10. Context Typology of European metropolitan areas (MEGA) Source: ESPON Project 1.1.1 • Typology of Europeanmetropolitan areas (MEGA) based on their function in the information economy and industry • 76 MEGA: biggestconcentration in the so-calledEuropeanPentagon • Warsaw has been classified as MEGA 3 • Other  large Polish cities as noeds of fourthcategory Legend

  11. Context • Citiesplaykey role in development processes • Biggestcities in Poland arefacingdynamicchangesrelated to development of metropolitanfunctions • Position of Polishcities in Europeanmetropolitanspaceisrelativelyweak • Urban governancedemandsnewapproachincludingcomplex relations thatcharacterisefunctionalareas

  12. Context • EUROPA 2020 • Smart, sustainable and • inclusive growth • Urban contextdemandsnewanalyticaltoolsthatallow: • (1) mergingseveralthematicalfields of analysis, • (2) flexibleindicatoradjustmentsallowingoperationalisation of abstractissuessuch as „smart growth”, • (3) presentation of results in relativeperspectivefocused on areas with potential for improvement.

  13. Urban benchmarking : pros • allowsobjectiveanalysis of strenghts and weaknessesof a particularcity • showsareas with potential for improvement • comparativeapproach – evaluation of a particularcity in relation to other, similar(referencegroup) – easieridentiffication and interpretation, bettercommunication of results • evaluation of effectivenes of programmestargetedatrestructuring and improvement of urbanfunctionality • flexibility – allows to adjust the diagnosis, i.e. to 3 strategicgoals of the Europe 2020 strategy • participation - mechanismempowering public engagement, both on the diagnostic and interpretativestages • itallows to includeenvironmentalissues

  14. Urban benchmarking : cons • temptation to look for anidealsolutionorperformcopy-pastestrategy • thereis no universalformula to select the rightreferencegroup – itneeds to be selectedverycarefully • usinguniversalstandards (i.e. EU average) can be blind for territorialspecificities • need for criticalanalysis of indicators– theirrelation to goals, comparability, credibility of sources • limitedavailability of comparablestatistical data • disadvantages of statisticalapproachresulting from differentdefinitions and indicatorconstructionmethodologies

More Related