How can Public Leadership affect the realization of strategic projects in urban development?

1. 1

2. RESEARCH QUESTION How can Public Leadership affect the realization of strategic projects in urban development? 2

3. INTERDISCIPLINARY Planning Sociology Public administration Spatial economics Management 3

4. DEFINITION The establishments of national, regional, and local government agencies that administer, oversee, and manage public programs and have executive, legislative, or judicial authority over the realization of a strategic project. Development Authority 4

5. DEFINITION The process in which development authorities transform ambitions into real life projects. Realization Ambition Intervention Why? What? How? Strategy Tactics Operation 5

6. DEFINITION Emblematic and integrated urban structures which affect a considerable part of the city, the city as a whole or even a region. Essential features are the relations between public and private interventions and their economic, cultural, environmental and spatial impacts. (Lungo 2004) Strategic projects 6

7. Multi-administr. coordination Regional value Revitalization 7

8. DEFINITION A mental position, which results into a certain response of an individual or group to its environment. This definition includes the behavior of an organization within its surroundings. Public Leadership 8

9. PUBLIC – PRIVATE SECTOR Traditional Contemporary Role complexity Both existent 9

10. TOPICALITY Different language Non-optimal collaboration Independent project manager 10

11. DE LEEUW (2002) Steering model Simplification of reality Study structure 11

12. DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Realization strategic project Interpretation of steering model Context Context Process Dev. Authority Politics Economy Social Technical Legal Environmental Public Private Community Leadership style 12

13. CONTINGENT LEADERSHIP Context Process 13

14. Directing Reactive Proactive Interacting DIRECTING vs INTERACTING Directing Hierarchy Blue Print Rules & regulations Interacting Equality of actors Consensus Deregulation 14

15. Directing Reactive Proactive Interacting REACTIVE VS PROACTIVE Proactive Public initiative Actively investing Supply oriented Reactive Market initiative Avoiding risk Demand oriented 15

16. Directing Regulator Implementer Reactive Proactive Collaborator Enabler Interacting PUBLIC LEADERSHIP STYLES Regulator Implementer Enabler Collaborator 16

17. EMPIRICAL STUDY Rotterdam Bilbao Paris 17

18. CENTRAL DISTRICT V&W and VROM Mainport strategy HST network 18

19. ROUND 1 dS+V High urban quality Active participation 19

20. SHIFT Uncertainties HST Lack alignment V&W and VROM Leefbaar Party Lack of market confidence 20

21. ROUND 2 GW Deterministic Focus on hub Investing Pragmatic 21

22. SHIFT Frustrated process Rotterdam Urban Vision 2030 Financial crisis 22

23. ROUND 3 OBR Urban area redevelopment Joint vision Involving local stakeholders 23

24. Directing Regulator Implementer Round 2 Reactive Proactive Round 3 Round 1 Collaborator Enabler Interacting SUMMARY Round 1: dS+V Round 2: GW Round 3: OBR 24

25. ABANDOIBARRA Post- Franco Open market Economic crisis Sense of urgency 25

26. PERIOD 1 Investing Deterministic 26

27. SHIFT Decline of political consensus Mobilized community Lack of market conformity 27

28. PERIOD 2 Investing Deterministic Career politicians 28

29. Directing Regulator Implementer Reactive Proactive Collaborator Enabler Interacting SUMMARY Metropoli-30 transformed into a think-tank Ria2000 cannot sustain its investment policy Ria2000 Metr-30 29

30. RIVE GAUCHE Connecting Seine river sides Scarcity of space Mixed use redevelopment 30

31. ROUND 1 Political decision Nation Library Investing infra Minimal standards of participation 31

32. SHIFT Community mobilization Political shift to the left wing Delanoë new Mayor of Paris 32

33. ROUND 2 Permanent public consult committee 220.000 m2 of academic program 33

34. SHIFT Financial crisis Public development is completed 34

35. ROUND 3 Regulating Awaiting market initiatives 35

36. Directing Round 1 Regulator Implementer Round 3 Round 2 Reactive Proactive Collaborator Enabler Interacting SUMMARY Strong principles Delegate power Flexibility Intrinsic shift 36

37. CONCLUSIONS How can Public Leadership affect the realization of strategic projects in urban development? In every case a shift in public leadership style affected the realization of the strategic project. There is however not one best way to lead – or not one best attitude to have. Research question 37

38. Directing Regulator Implementer Reactive Proactive Collaborator Enabler Interacting PUBLIC LEADERSHIP STYLES Contingency Situational Never only one role Dynamic model 38

39. Directing R I Reactive Proactive E C Interacting APPLICATION Market Regulatory instruments Market Shaping instruments Zoning plans, building codes and permits. Visions, plans and notes. Subsidies or direct stimulations. Vision/ consensus building. Market Stimulating instruments Market Activating instruments 39

40. PUBLIC LEADERSHIP Create and manage the arena in which actors act. Let the circumstances decide. Cultivate and embrace a diversity of perspectives. Question the world around and forecast change. Scene setting Situational Cooperative Anticipative 40

41. INTRINSIC CHANGE OF STYLE Drivers? When? How to forecast? 41

42. ORGANIZATIONAL LAYOUT Modular, slim project-based project teams. A limited number of guiding principles. Promote adaptive values and encourage flexibility. Cooperative and horizontal management. Focus on individual competences. 42

43. ADAPTIVE ORGANIZATION Renaissance Individuals make the difference Create consciousness 43

44. EVALUATION 44

45. DIPLOMA? 45

47. Stadsontwikkeling Ontw. bedrijf Gemeentewerken Stedenbouw DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY dS+V GW OBR

48. Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 1997 2001 2007 Present TIME LINE

49. DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Blank page Financial autonomy Strategic plan Bilbao Ria 2000 Bilbao Metropoli-30

50. DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY SEMAPA SNCF / Municipal agreement