Back to Case Library

Fondazione per l’Innovazione Urbana (FIU)

Created on 27-05-2024 | Updated on 18-10-2024

In this strategic experiment pioneered by the city of Bologna, the principles of the urban commons are able to be institutionalised by political advocacy groups and active citizens who are grounded in the territory of their respective community, while also able to reach the level of municipal process.The Fondazione per l’Innovazione Urbana (FIU) was founded by the city of Bologna to promote "relationships between local government, universities, firms, the tertiary sector and citizens" (FIU, 2024). The goal has been to produce better communication instruments and to foster social equity, cultural innovation and the transition to climate neutrality by identifying the most effective methodologies for citizen participation in local urban regeneration stratefies.

Instrument
Regulation, incentives

Issued (year)
-

Application period (years)
-

Scope
Country

Target group
All people

Housing tenure
-

Discipline
Public policy

Object of study
Instrument

Description

In 2003 Urban Centre Bologna was formed to communicate with citizens how the city was changing regarding a new mobility masterplan and other urban planning strategies promoted by the municipality. In 2014, the city council passed the “regulation on public collaboration between citizens and the city for the care and regeneration of urban commons,” which allowed citizens and private organizations to sign collaboration pacts with the city in order to improve public space, green areas, and abandoned buildings. In 2017, Bologna’s government launched a participatory budgeting process, inviting citizens to submit proposals for projects that would engage residents and reimagine the urban commons (Cities of Service, 2024).

As an evolution of these efforts, the Fondazione per l’Innovazione Urbana (FIU) was founded by the city of Bologna to promote "relationships between local government, universities, firms, the tertiary sector and citizens" (FIU, 2024). The goal has been to produce better communication instruments and to foster social equity, cultural innovation and the transition to climate neutrality by identifying the most effective methodologies for citizen participation in local urban regeneration stratefies. The FIU uses different tools to foster citizen participation and collaboration with other local stakeholders and academic/research organisations in decision-making processes. It is structured by different research centres and departments working with the underlying regulatory framework titled the Urban Innovation Plan, linked with the Participatory Budget, which connects public policy with collaborative governance/co-production methods.      

By using the Urban Living Lab methodoly, the aim was to stimulate and guide experimentation and innovation projects in the regeneration of spaces and buildings of public interest. The FIU organised District Laboratories (FIU, 2024) and used participation and co-production to reveal priorities and lead to participatory budgeting for making improvements to public spaces, organising events to accompany and strengthen the transformation of public spaces, collaboratively and based on local needs (D’alena et al., 2018).

For the year 2023, the city provided a budget of three million euros (five hundred thousand euros per neighbourhood) to fund the proposals born out of the visions of active citizens. Proposals were submitted online or at neighbourhood workshops scheduled in the evenings on specific days. After this first stage, the co-design phase finalised the proposals with the support of municipal technical staff and finally the voting phase outlined the six winning projects to be undertaken (Bologna Comune, 2024). The proposals include cultural, artistic and material interventions for regeneration of urban spaces, the enhancement of green areas or public gardens and in general to promote the right to urban public spaces which are open and collaborative.

In this strategic experiment pioneered by the city of Bologna, the principles of the urban commons are able to be institutionalised by political advocacy groups and active citizens who are grounded in the territory of their respective community, while also able to reach the level of municipal process. This has been possible due to the municipality guaranteeing the conditions for intermediaries to have access to several financing tools that facilitate network building opportunities and the up-scaling of local actions.

Alignment with project research areas

This case study aligns with the Community Participation research area and it's sub-category Community Planning regarding public-private partnerships to support urban regeneration programmes. It also aligns with Policy and Financing as the Bologna model impliments innoative local governance frameworks allowing for innovative regeneration projects to emerge.

Design, planning and building

Community participation

Policy and financing

* This diagram is for illustrative purposes only based on the author’s interpretation of the above case study

Alignment with SDGs

References

Bologna Commune (2024, May), The 2023 path, www.comune.bologna.it/partecipa/bilancio-partecipativo?sect=le-4-fasi-del-bilancio-partecipativo 

Cities of Service (2024, May), Co-Creating Urban Commons, www.citiesofservice.jhu.edu/resource/co-creating-urban-commons-bologna-italy/#:~:text=In%202014%2C%20the%20city%20council,green%20areas%2C%20and%20abandoned%20buildings.

D’alena, M., Beolchi, S., & Paolazzi, S. (2018). Civic imagination office as a platform to design a collaborative city. Proceedings of the ServDes. 2018 Conference, 18-20 June.

FIU, (2024, May), Neighborhood workshops, www.fondazioneinnovazioneurbana.it/progetto/labquartiere

Related vocabulary

Collaborative Governance

Area: Community participation

With the world becoming increasingly urbanized and city planning facing numerous complex challenges, urban governance is being downscaled and decentralized, from the national level to the local level. Local authorities are now assuming more prominent roles in structuring urban development plans at the city or neighbourhood level. Various interpretations of governance exist (see, for example housing governance on this vocabulary). However, the definition proposed by Ansell and Gash (2008) – describing governance as the “regimes of laws, rules, judicial decisions, and administrative practices that constrain, prescribe, and enable the provision of publicly supported goods and services” – remains pertinent in discussions about housing, energy, and urban development. Governance involves the negotiation and reconfiguration of institutions – representing “a set of norms” (Savini, 2019)– leading to claims of urban citizenship and power struggles. These processes aim to establish location-specific governance practices, as noted by Baker and Mehmood (2015) and Zavos et al. (2017). In European urban planning, innovative governance models are emerging, integrating housing and spatial planning with increased resident decision-making control (Nuissl & Heinrichs, 2011; Scheller & Thörn, 2018; Van Straalen et al., 2017). Consequently, exploring collaborative urban governance is crucial. Ansell and Gash (2008, p. 544) define collaborative governance as “a governing arrangement where one or more public agencies directly engage non-state stakeholders in a collective decision-making process that is formal, consensus-oriented, and deliberative and that aims to make or implement public policy or manage public programs or assets”- The shift towards neighbourhood-level governance is pivotal in nurturing a "politics of locality" (Ghose, 2005). Despite power disparities, new opportunities for active citizenry emerge, especially in housing, neighbourhood revitalization, and service delivery. Governance now extends beyond governmental tiers, incorporating the civic sphere and community-driven initiatives, bridging gaps left by formal state-driven sectors. Collaborative governance develops over time, benefiting from shared vision, dialogue, consensus-building, and understanding diverse roles and responsibilities (Innes & Booher, 2003). This integration emphasizes alternative governance forms, focusing on "territorially-focused collective action" (Healey, 2006, p. 305) and self-organization, contrasting the top-down, modernist model. Collaborative governance, akin to collaborative planning, emphasizes rights-claiming processes, granting decision-making authority to non-experts. Ghose (2005, p.64) contends that “in order to participate in the power hierarchies […] one has to understand how to perform actively as a citizen in order to claim a right to the city”. Therefore, collaborative governance is a process characterized by shared responsibilities, where shared knowledge serves as the primary currency. This shared knowledge is emphasized as crucial in challenging the authority of experts, as noted by Emerson et al. (2012).

Created on 26-10-2023

Author: A.Panagidis (ESR8)

Read more ->

Related publications

No entries

Blogposts

No entries

Relational graph

icon case study Case Study
icon case study Concept
icon case study Publication
icon case study Blogposts