THE AALBORG COMMITMENTS IN GENEVA: AN ASSESSMENT AT HALF-TIME 1. City of Geneva in context : key facts 2. Why did the City of Geneva sign the Aalborg Commitments? 3. The Aalborg Commitments: are they useful for the City of Geneva? 4. Outlook and potential improvements -1-
THE AALBORG COMMITMENTS IN GENEVA: AN ASSESSMENT AT HALF-TIME 1. City of Geneva in context : key facts 2. Why did the City of Geneva sign the Aalborg Commitments? 3. The Aalborg Commitments: are they useful for the City of Geneva? 4. Outlook and potential improvements -2-
Geneva particularities: key facts N 1 worldwide: number of international NGOs N 1 worldwide: financial services N 2 worldwide: international trading N 5 worldwide: cost of living (Mercer ranking) N 8 worldwide: quality of living (Mercer ranking) -3-
Geneva agglomeration City of Geneva 193 000 inhabitant 43% foreigners 150 000 jobs 16 km 2 12'000 inhabitants/km² 0.3% vacant housing 550 000 pendular vehicles City-canton City-centre 5 elected councillors (executive) Ville de Genève -4-
Key challenges HOUSING MOBILITY JOBS WEALTH DISTRIBUTION LIVING TOGETHER -5-
THE AALBORG COMMITMENTS IN GENEVA: AN ASSESSMENT AT HALF-TIME 1. City of Geneva in context : key facts 2. Why did the City of Geneva sign the Aalborg Commitments? 3. The Aalborg Commitments: are they useful for the City of Geneva? 4. Outlook and potential improvements -6-
Sustainable development policy shift BEFORE 2007 : SECTORISED POLICIES AND AWARENESS BUILDING 2001 : Creation of the City S first Agenda 21 unit 2004 : Network of A21 coordinators in each department 2003-2007 : «Fête du développement durable», among others. AFTER 2007 : COHERENT, MEASURABLE AND EFFICIENT POLICY 2007 : New legislature : more political involvement 2010 : Sustainable development baseline review 2010 : Sustainable development strategic programme Need for a framework and for tools to anchor this policy shift. -7-
Which framework? 1995 : SIGNATURE OF THE AALBORG CHARTER Most famous declaration for local sustainability. 1998 : MEMBER OF ICLEI Pioneer network for sustainable cities 2010: SIGNATURE OF THE AALBORG COMMITMENTS First reference framework for cities who signed the Charter. -8-
THE AALBORG COMMITMENTS IN GENEVA: AN ASSESSMENT AT HALF-TIME 1. City of Geneva in context : key facts 2. Why did the City of Geneva sign the Aalborg Commitments? 3. The Aalborg Commitments: are they useful for the City of Geneva? 4. Outlook and potential improvements -9-
Sustainable developement strategic programme(2011-2014) 2013- Half-time assessment Do the Aalborg Commitments allow us to answer new politicl demands for a policy that is I. COHERENT AND CROSS-DEPARTMENTAL? II. AMBITIOUS AND ASSESSABLE? III. EFFICIENT ET SHARABLE? -10-
I. Coherent and crossdepartmental PROGRAMME BENEFITS DIFFICULTIES Consultation process 13 objectives covering all 10 Aalborg commitments Validation by all 5 elected leaders Baseline review and objectives chosen together All areas taken into account Legitimacy Inclusion of all actors Balance between specific and transversal topics New political prorities Specific organigramme Legitimacy and «big family» Departmental management Common methods and tools Integration of additional demands in the budgetary process Reference documents, common tool and common language Additional ressources No ready-made tools Yearly budget validation and departmental budget management Specific communication Projects can be highlighted Fear of losing control -11-
I. A coherent and crossdepartmental policy 1st significant crossdepartmental project A reference framework is a partial answer, but internal and external governance remain essential. -12-
II. Ambitious and assessable PROGRAMME BENEFITS DIFFICULTIES 4-year planification Global objectives detailed into SMART objectives Internal follow-up and support with project management specialists Planning the implementaion stages, budgets, risks, Follow-up Project management training Time-consuming Project management is not local work culture + Data availability is limited none Choices made by competent departments Easier collaboration Administration-centered objectives Rigorous evaluation process Objective assessments Balance between rigor and feasability Integrated into the Indicator Circle (30 SD indicators) Baseline review every 4 years and Swiss-wide benchmarking -13- Not specific for the city of Geneva
II. An ambitious and assessable policy Difficulties linked to the first-time round of a project this size. -14-
III. Efficient and sharable PROGRAMME BENEFITS DIFFICULTIES Action plans chosen by each department Implementation linked to municipal competences Integration of additional requests into the budget process Centralised communication Innovation, consolidation and communication projects Ideas, role-modeling, Additional ressources Communication on the whole programme Heterogeneity of objectives and of results Building partnerships (public-private, publicpublic) Yearly budget with no long-term guarantee Complexity of contents Communication of results Increased transparence Not enough legitimacy to communicate in all areas -15-
III. An efficient and sharable policy The City is a place of ideas, assessments and experiments Big challenges remain at the «Grand-Genève» level -16-
THE AALBORG COMMITMENTS IN GENEVA: AN ASSESSMENT AT HALF-TIME 1. City of Geneva in context : key facts 2. Why did the City of Geneva sign the Aalborg Commitments? 3. The Aalborg Commitments: are they useful for the City of Geneva? 4. Outlook and potential improvements -17-
Outlook and potential improvements EVOLUTION OF PROGRAMME 2011-2014 Simpler follow-up procedures Better data gathering Improved communication (Newsletter) More public involvement Partnership building for 2015-2018 -18-
Outlook and potential improvements OUTLOOK FOR PROGRAMME 2015-2018 Deeper coherence More diverse stakeholder involvement Development of agglomeration-wide partnerships Budgets decided for more than a year Integration of sustainability issues into each project evaluation -19-
Expectations towards the Aalborg commitments Signatory city networks should come alive Best practise sharing made easier Clear links to other frameworks and networks More international visibility -20-