Experiences reported during the impulse congress in October 2000 demonstrated that the following aspects of neighbourhood management still needed considerable clarification.
Discussions revealed that neighbourhood management is primarily a question of devising strategies to involve a variety of local people in district processes. No single person can cope with the overwhelming range of tasks, so "it is recommended that duties be distributed among several partners."(1) It was deemed essential to clarify which levels of control and action to include and what decision-making powers each should receive.(2) Most congress participants agreed that neighbourhood management structures should incorporate both "top-down" and "bottom-up" approaches, since district players would be overloaded if they had to shoulder too much responsibility.
One further conclusion from the impulse congress regards the scope of neighbourhood management and illustrates what can be expected from this tool: "Neighbourhood schemes can only address the symptoms of structural problems (vacant buildings, poverty, unemployment etc.), but they are not (usually) able to influence the underlying causes of the difficulties."(3) Neighbourhood management structures should not be blamed by those who are disillusioned with local trends.(4)
Difu and the Essen Institute for District Social Work and Counselling (ISSAB) have drawn up standard criteria for neighbourhood management structures.(5) The guidelines benefited from Socially Integrative City support and the detailed input of those cities involved in predecessor programmes on integrative district development. The neighbourhood management node of "Network: Municipalities of the Future"(6) amended the criteria after receiving guidance from ISSAB and Difu. The two institutes acted on behalf of sponsors and participating municipalities.(7)
Neighbourhood management is now generally interpreted as a strategic approach to the systematic installation of a self-supporting onsite set-up and sustainable staff and material structures. The latter guarantee the continuation of the strategy. The following aspects play a role:(8)
Effective neighbourhood management is a complex process, which
|
Figure 68: Neighbourhood management – task sections and organization* |
 |
|
*Source: Thomas Franke, Gaby Grimm, 2002 |
In addition to establishing an interdepartmental taskforce within local administration, it appears prudent to appoint a district commissioner responsible for building horizontal networks of participating authorities (district-related interdepartmental cooperation), steering use of municipal resources, orchestrating the project as a whole, implementing the action plan and overseeing financial planning.
Onsite offices staffed by qualified personnel and suitably equipped to meet requirements are indispensable for successful integrative district development.(10) These offices coordinate horizontal networking and cooperate with local players. They are also responsible for general outreach to activate neighbourhood residents.(11)
An area moderator is essential for intermediate-level networking, which serves as a mediating platform between politicians, administrators, the market, the third sector and other local players. Through participatory forums and similar actions, the moderator is responsible for: vertical networking between "system" and "living" worlds,(12) guaranteeing the flow of information between levels of action, ensuring procedural transparency, moderation, mediation, dialogue management and public relations.
The tasks and functions indicated in the model should not be equated with distinct positions. Several functions may be performed by a single official in practice, and, by the same token, certain individual functions may involve a whole team of project workers, depending on the size of a municipality and its programme district.
(1) Bericht aus der Arbeitsgruppe "Aufgabenstruktur und Qualifikation", Deutsches Institut für Urbanistik (Eds.), Impulskongress Quartiermanagement, p. 70.
(2) Contribution from Kerstin Jahnke during the panel plenary session "Erfahrungen mit Organisation und Verfahren des Quartiermanagements", Deutsches Institut für Urbanistik (Eds.), Impulskongress Quartiermanagement, p. 120.
(3) Karin Schmalriede, Aktivierung der Bevölkerung, Bericht aus der Arbeitsgruppe 3 a, Deutsches Institut für Urbanistik (Eds.), Impulskongress Integratives Handeln für die soziale Stadtentwicklung. Dokumentation, Berlin 2002 (Arbeitspapiere zum Programm Soziale Stadt, Vol. 7), p. 59.
(4) Ulrike Meyer, Aktivierung der Bevölkerung, Bericht aus der Arbeitsgruppe 3 b, Deutsches Institut für Urbanistik (Eds.), Impulskongress Quartiermanagement, p. 65.
(5) Thomas Franke und Gaby Grimm, Quartiermanagement: Systematisierung und Begriffsbestimmung, www.sozialestadt.de/veroeffentlichungen/quartiermanagement_systematisierung.phtml (September 2001).
(6) Bertelsmann Stiftung, Hans Böckler Stiftung and the Kommunale Gemeinschaftsstelle für Verwaltungsvereinfachung (KGSt) sponsored the network; Belm, Hamburg, Hannover, Wiesbaden and Wolfsburg participated with Socially Integrative City programme districts.
(7) Bertelsmann Stiftung, Hans-Böckler-Stiftung und Kommunale Gemeinschaftsstelle für Verwaltungsvereinfachung (Eds.), Quartiermanagement – Ein strategischer Stadt(teil)entwicklungsansatz. Organisationsmodell und Praxisbeispiele, Transferprodukt der Netzwerkarbeit, November 2002.
(8) For the approach to the definition and the organization model cf. Thomas Franke und Gaby Grimm, Quartiermanagement: Systematisierung und Begriffsbestimmung , Bertelsmann Stiftung, Hans-Böckler-Stiftung und Kommunale Gemeinschaftsstelle für Verwaltungsvereinfachung (Eds.), p. 5-12.
(9) Cf. Chapter 8.
(10) This is a central conclusion of experiences with North Rhine-Westphalia's action initiative Districts With Special Renewal Needs; cf. Institut für Landes- und Stadtentwicklungsforschung des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen, Analyse der Umsetzung des Handlungsprogramms, p. 43.
(11) Cf. Chapter 8.
(12) Cf. Friedmann, Die verwundete Stadt.
Translated from: Soziale Stadt - Strategien für die Soziale Stadt, Erfahrungen und Perspektiven – Umsetzung des Bund-Länder-Programms „Stadtteile mit besonderem Entwicklungsbedarf – die soziale Stadt", Deutsches Institut für Urbanistik 2003
