Future Plans for Urban Audit

1. Future Plans for Urban Audit Gunter Schäfer (Eurostat) Regional Statistics and Geographic Information

2. A few words on the Urban Audit background • The Urban Audit project has been started more than 10 years ago in successive data collection rounds • Ambitious objective to provide a comprehensive statistical picture of urban life • Voluntary data collection largely based on existing or ‘easily’ estimatable data • The Urban Audit data has been intensively used in EU Policy contexts and analyses (5th Cohesion Report, State of European Cities Report) • Urban Audit has been very useful in defining harmonised concepts for core cities, larger urban zones and sub-city districts • Currently the 4th data collection is ongoing. Data dissemination to be expected by end 2011.

3. Urban Audit Data Collection More than 300 variables collected from Member States Cover many demographic, economic and social aspects in European cities Data collections Exhaustive collection every three years – 2004, 2007, 2010 Annual data collection of 38 variables since 2010 Three spatial units 369 core cities larger urban zones (=including the city hinterland) sub-city information (reduced dataset)

4. Many issues related to Urban Audit • Low general data coverage (< 60%) • Large heterogeneity of the data coverage across countries • Heterogeneous origin of data • Methodology of the data not always clear • Need for estimation of data (not always implemented) • Comparability of indicators across cities and countries • Quality of the data • Complex structure of data collection in Europe (different set up of partners in Member States) • Communication of results and use by national bodies, cities and citizens

5. Data coverage per country

6. Available and estimated data

7. Arguments for need of consolidation • Urban Audit has a quite long tradition but is still a pilot project • Need for particular attention to quality aspects (coverage, reliability, comparability, etc.) • Wide variety of indicators but not strongly focused to policy needs • No formal basis but a lot of good will from all participants • No clear mandate or structure of responsibility in many Member States • Some worrying signs of waning support for Urban Audit within the ESS • Complex system for financing of data collection

8. Difficult general context • Severe resource constraints in Member States and Eurostat • Recent re-focusing of priorities in statistics (Economic governance, Europe 2020, etc.) • Importance of Urban Audit for EU policy making and national policy is not fully accepted in the ESS governing boards • Is Urban Audit core business of the ESS?

9. 2010 Initiative towards a legal basis • Discussion of the subject in the Working Group meeting of 2009 • Creation of a Task Force with delegates from Germany, Greece, France, United Kingdom and DG REGIO • Draft concepts for: • Regulation with a selection of key variables • Gentlemen‘s Agreement for voluntary indicators and proposal for financing • Concept rejected by the Eurostat management after consultations with Member States (Partnership Group)

10. Position of Eurostat management • Failed attempt for a legal basis • Clear signs that there is not sufficient support from Member States • Recognition of importance for EU policy purposes • Need for a rather fundamental re-thinking of Urban Audit • Request for new design with strong focus on: • Simplification • Methodology • City and user involvement • Short term position confirmed (next round of data collection based on grants) • Medium term evolution to be further consolidated

11. Programme for a revision of Urban Audit(Cooperation between DG REGIO and Eurostat) Consistent list of cities Consistent spatial definition of cities Revised frequency of data collections Focused list of indicators Reach an overall 80% response rate Improved the data validation process Increased direct cooperation with cities Improved communication with users Increased awareness of urban statistics Exploit synergies with other statistical data collections

12. 1. Consistent list of cities The current list of cities is over-complex: standard list, additional list for some countries, Large City Audit etc. New target: include all European cities with an urban centre with 50 000 or more inhabitants Advantage: Revision of the ‘Degree of Urbanisation’ will create country values for all cities in LFS and EU-SILC Country values can be used in combination with other information (administrative data), to improve the quality of the city estimates

13. 2. Consistent spatial definition of cities Comprehensive analysis of all European Core Cities and Larger Urban Zones (LUZ) Basis is the newly developed urban-intermediate-rural typology Objective criteria, will significantly increase the comparability of Urban Audit statistics List of European core cities (urban centres) and LUZ (agglomerations) on harmonised methodology

14. Copenhagen as example

15. 3. Revised frequency of data collections Timeliness of data is critical quality aspect for many indicators Stronger focus on annual data collection (= timely data) Decreased frequency of more exhaustive data collection to every five years These measures will considerably reduce the burden on NSIs Less diversity of indicators Reduced list of sources More stable organisation of data collection

16. 4. Focused list of indicators Detailed analysis to find good compromise between: Policy relevance Availability / resources to collect Quality Currently Urban Audit includes about 40 annual variables (since 2010) and 330 variables every three years In the future about 85 annual variables and 175 variables every five years See distributed new lists of indicators and dropped indicators

17. 5. Reach an overall 80% response rate Deleting indicators with poor response rate (policy relevance?) Increased use of existing Europe wide sources (EEA, Urban Atlas, etc.) or public information Promote estimations by data suppliers Estimations as part of financed data collection Organise specific advice on estimation techniques Specific efforts on missing data, e.g. additional consulting capacity Collect at least data for all urban areas in each country (using the new “degree of urbanisation”)

18. 6. Improved data validation process Emphasis in data collection on methodological background of data Extension of Eurostat’s validation tools through broader scope and external help, e.g. comparison with other data sources Encourage more validation by the data suppliers Encourage data validation directly by cities and users Prepare regular quality analysis and reports

19. 7. Increased direct cooperation with cities Cities will be asked to participate in supply of data directly … as supplementary measure to Eurostat organised data collection Attempt to establish direct contacts in cities Annually the data set for each city to be sent to the individual cities (including other information, such as geographic information) ‚Urban Statistics Day‘ or similar event to be organised regularly

20. 8. Improved communication with users Restructuring of Eurostat dissemination database for indicators Simplified structure Better explanations Better integration into other Eurostat tools (e.g. Statistics Explained) ‘Finally’ Country-Region-City Profile operational Open data system for direct user intervention (to be developed)

21. 9. Increased awareness of urban statistics A joint DG REGIO/Eurostat / publication on the "State of European Cities" …to be launched starting 2012 Descriptive and analytical elements Stabilized concepts, e.g. on city types Annual frequency Closer cooperation between Commission services on visibility of urban issues

22. 10. Synergies with other statistical data Harmonised definitions shall be used as much as possible to support the analysis of functional regions, metropolitan regions, coastal regions, etc. Using the new “degree of urbanisation” concept, statistics can be produced for all urban areas in a country These figures can then be used as benchmarks for city specific estimations

23. Medium / long-term evolution Consolidation of revised system of Urban Audit (in next round of data collection) Assessment of the new system Stronger support of ESS management will be required Data collection will centre around newly developed open data system Stronger use of data, e.g. small area estimations and analysis Continued central support of data collection (grants/service contracts)

24. Characteristics of planned open data system Direct external access to insert/modify data beside central loading Data validation by Eurostat editor before the publishing Attractive information base geographic information some background information statistical data Deliberate complementarity to public data (e.g. Wikipedia) Full use of existing software (following example of Statistics Explained)

25. Action plan 2012/13 data collection via planned grants system based on existing concept but with new indicators During 2nd half of 2011: Technical and interface design of new system End 2011 – early 2012 Consultation of Member States During 2012/13: Technical implementation and running in of new system New system to be used from 2013/14 onwards

26. Critical success factors Strongly improved quality level Achieving direct interest of cities Better visibility of the subject Open system approach adopted by users Continued support by Eurostat / DG REGIO management Support by the ESS

27. Thank you for your attention