Abstract
The City Monitor is a policy instrument and has been used to measure the state of 13 Flemish cities in 2004, 2006 and 2008. The community indicators of the City Monitor provide feedback on the evolution of a multitude of phenomena, and so they represent an opportunity for policy learning about the livability and sustainability of those cities. Indicators simplify the representation of societal problems and in that sense they are helping the communication between city authorities and their stakeholders. In this article we also focus on two innovative characteristics of the co-design methodology of the City Monitor. First of all, indicators were constructed on the basis of a normative vision about urban sustainability. We argue that a sustainability framework can give value added to map vital signs of the quality of life in Flemish cities. Secondly, the City Monitor was being developed with the participation of about 200 experts, coming from city governments and other administrations, civil society and academic world. It is our argument that the participatory approach fosters the use of community indicators and generates interesting side effects. As a third argument, we indicate the importance of the attitude of city authority people for its implementation within the city organisation. The City Monitor is certainly meant as an input for urban policy debate about the quality of life in the major Flemish cities. Does it live up to its expectations? And will the vision and indicators on urban sustainability stir up the debate about urban sustainable development?
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Researchers from the Centre for Sustainable Development (Ghent University), the Department of Business and Public Administration (University College Ghent) and the Centre for Local Politics (Ghent University) were involved.
The indicators for the City Monitor maintain a wide focus (across policy domains) and should be geared towards the future (medium term: 5–10 years, and long term: 10–20 years).
An update of the Bellagio Principles has been released by IISD and OECD in 2009 as BellagioSTAMP: Sustainability Assessment and Measurement Principles.
The project was managed by a core steering group (commissioning parties, Flemish cabinets, and academics) and a steering group with political and official representatives from the 13 major cities.
SMART = Specific, Measurable, Agreed upon, Realistic & sensitive, Time bound & cost effective.
‘Cities on track?’, 8th Congress on Local Politics, 27 March 2007, Ghent.
References
Block, T. (2009). From ID to 3D. Decision-making processes and power configurations in urban projects. Ph.D. Dissertation, Ghent University, 412 p.
Block, T., & Paredis, E. (2001). Towards sustainability indicators for the coastal region, Final report, CSD-UGent, August, 64 p.
Block, T., Van Assche, J., Vandewiele, D., De Rynck, F., & Reynaert, H. (2008). Indicator set for sustainable urban development. City Monitor for liveable and sustainable Flemish cities. 2006 Edition. Brussels: Flemish Government. free publication on www.UPRC.UGent.be.
Boston, J., Martin, J., Pallot, J., & Walsh, P. (1996). Public management: The New Zealand model. Auckland: Oxford University Press.
Bouckaert, G., Van Dooren, W., & Sterck, M. (2003). Measuring performances in Flemish government: An explorative research. Leuven: Research policy on administrative organisation in Flanders.
Bral, L., City Monitor, et al. (2009). A monitor on livable and sustainable Flemish cities (p. 304). Brussels: Flemish Government.
Browne, M. (1997). The field of information policy: 2. Redefining the boundaries and methodologies. Journal of Information Science, 23(5), 339–351.
Carey, S., & Smith, C. (1993). On understanding the nature of scientific knowledge. Educational Psychologist, 28(3), 235–251.
Denters, B., & Rose, N. (2005). Comparing local governance: Trends and developments. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
De Raedt, B., Van Assche, J., et al. (2005). Sustainability barometer Limburg, Report, Gent: CSD-UGent.
De Rynck, F. (Ed.). (2003). White paper on city policy: The century of the city. On city republics and screened cities. Brussels: Flemish Government. 238p.
Galtung, J. (1971). A structural theory of imperialism. Journal of Peace Research, 8(2), 81–117.
Goss, S. (2001). Making local governance work: Networks, relationships and the management of change. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Hammond, A., Adriaanse, A., Rodenburg, E., et al. (1995). Environmental indicators: A systematic approach to measuring and reporting on environmental policy performance in the context of sustainable development. Washington: World Resources Institute.
Hardi, P., & Zdan, T. (1997). Assessing sustainable development, Principles in practice. Winnipeg: International Insitute for Sustainable Development. 175 p.
Holden, M. (2006). Revisiting the local impact of community indicators projects: sustainable Seattle as prophet in its own land. Applied Research in Quality of Life Journal, 1(3–4), 253–277.
Innes, J. E. (1990). Knowledge and public policy: The search for meaningful indicators. Rutgers: Transaction Books.
Max-Neef, M., et al. (1989). Human scale development. In: Development dialogue, Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation, Uppsala, 1, pp. 1–80.
Miller, W., Dickson, M., & Stoker, G. (2000). Models of local governance. Public opinion and political theory in Britain. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
OECD. (2007). Measuring the progress of societies, Istanbul declaration of the world forum on statistics, knowledge and policy, Istanbul, 27–30 June.
Pinfield, G. (1997). The use of indicators in local sustainable development planning: a response to Jeb Brugman. Local Environment: The International Journal of Justice and Sustainability, 2(2), 185–187. ISSN: 1469–6711.
Rotmans, J., & enVan Asselt, M. (2000). Towards an integrated approach for sustainable city planning (p. 22). Maastricht: ICIS.
Simon, H. A. (1948). Administrative behavior: A study of decision-making processes in administrative organization. New York: Free Press.
Spangenberg, J. H., & Bonniot, O. (1998). Sustainability indicators—a compass on the road towards sustainability. Wuppertal Paper, Nr. 91, Feb. 1998, p. 34.
Vallet, N., De Rynck, F., & Block, T. (2005). Looking at city organisations in Flanders: Chances, challenges, limitations and illusions about the use of the City Monitor. In: Praktijkgids Management voor Lokale Besturen (pp. 273–308). Mechelen: Kluwer, Oktober.
Van Assche, J., Block, T., & De Jonge, W. (1999). The Ghent Barometer for sustainable development. Final Report, Centre for Sustainable Development—Ghent University, October 1999, 311 p.
Van Assche, J., Maes, T., & Kerkhove, G. (2003). A participative development of a sustainability barometer for the region of Kortrijk, Final report, CSD-UGent, 107 p.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Van Assche, J., Block, T. & Reynaert, H. Can Community Indicators Live Up to Their Expectations? The Case of the Flemish City Monitor for Livable and Sustainable Urban Development. Applied Research Quality Life 5, 341–352 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-010-9121-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-010-9121-7