Launching a Regional Development
Initiative: The Experience of IBA Emscher Park
IBA Emscher Park was a development program which ran
between 1989 and 1999 in the northern part of the Ruhr Valley. IBA
stands for International Building Exposition, a traditional approach to
innovative urban development which was interpreted in a very innovative
way: It was not just urban but actually regional development, and it was
not just about buildings but also about redeveloping brownfield sites,
developing industrial heritage sites, cleaning up highly polluted rivers
and contaminated estate, and improve the environmental quality and the
quality of life. Emscher Park stands for the overall objective of the
program: to convert the region along the Emscher river into a park-like
urban landscape.
One of the key decisions in launching IBA Emscher Park
was to avoid strategic planning, and indeed an overall coherent plan.
IBA Emscher Park was based on a project approach. It started in 1989
with a Call for Projects. Before that, the key stakeholders involved in
the IBA had defined a set of criteria for the selection of projects.
Basically, these criteria addressed two issues: quality and viability.
-
Quality was about architecture, urbanity and
ecology. It was agreed that only projects which tried to attain a
high architectural standard, contribute to substantial upgrading of
urban quality and improve the environmental situation were to be
accepted.
-
Viability was about being able to start a selected
project right on. Initially, IBA Emscher Park was supposed to run
for five years, so there was no time to be lost. Accordingly, all
those project proposals were to be rejected where major obstacles
stood in the way of quick implementation. One typical obstacle were
property issues, for instance projects where a piece of real estate
was to be redeveloped which belonged to various proprietors with
diverging interests and agendas. Another typical obstacle where
legal issues, where a given project would have involved highly
complicated and protracted permit processes.
Another key decision regarding the set-up of IBA was to
run it in a decentralised manner. A small secretariat was created, with
about 25 professionals who were hired on a fixed-term basis. Each of the
projects which were selected by the IBA Secretariat was run by a local
organisation. Often this was a legally independent development
corporation set up by local government, frequently with co-ownership of
state government. Occasionally, it was public-private partnerships,
private developers, or other non-governmental organisations. The IBA
Secretariat was represented in the governing body of each project
organisation. Moreover, IBA Secretariat often played a very important
role as a moderator and facilitator in stakeholder fora which were
created around many projects in order to involve and mobilise the local
community and make sure that a given project was firmly embedded into
local administrative and community structures.
The IBA Secretariat turned out to be an organisation
which reconciled the accumulation of power with a participatory
approach. It was very powerful because it had the full backing of state
government, which was the source of most of the funds needed for project
implementation. If a local government could not convince the IBA
Secretariat to accept a given project, it was highly unlikely that it
would find any other way of getting state funding. However, the IBA
Secretariat did not use its power to enforce its ideosyncratic ideas on
how to implement a given project. It rather organised a process where
both local knowledge and involvement where mobilised and where external
know-how and creativity where introduced, usually via International
Competitions which frequently involved internationally renowned
architects and planning bureaus.
In the end, the explicit absence of strategic planning
lead to projects which would not have been conceivable at the beginning,
and which would not have happened if the IBA had, at the outset, been
squeezed into the corset of a fixed strategic plan. In particular, this
applies to the re-use of abandoned industrial installations, such as a
huge steel plant or the largest cokery plant in the region. In the
course of the IBA, an increasing number of stakeholders in the region
accepted that these sites were not only scrapyards but also monuments of
the industrial history of the region, and as such comparable to more
conventional monuments such as churches. Re-defining abandoned
industrial installations led to the creation of locations for cultural,
recreational and business purposes. The re-definition involved an
extensive learning process, and a profound change of mindsets, neither
of which could have been planned strategically at the outset. At best,
some people were able to formulate a vague vision which envisaged
something like this. This is what perspectivic incrementalism is about:
Try to formulate a perspective, a vision, so that you know where you
want to head, and then try to get there step by step, without planning
the fifth step before you have done the first one.
top