ANALYSIS OF APPROACHES TO THE ADMINISTRATION OF METROPOLITAN AREAS IN THE EUROPEAN CAPITALS.

Transcription

1 ANALYSIS OF APPROACHES TO THE ADMINISTRATION OF METROPOLITAN AREAS IN THE EUROPEAN CAPITALS. Paper prepared by Catherine Sykianaki Kylika, president of the Organisation for Planning and Environmental Protection of Athens, Athens 2006 THE CASE OF ATHENS METROPOLITAN AREA Introduction The capital city of Athens and its metropolitan region (AMA) constitutes the main gateway to Greece. One third of the Greek population resides in the AMA which produces around one third of Greece s GDP. Today, Athens and its region, Attica, are going through a very dynamic transition period - old institutional structures still subsist, but integrated and strategic governance structures are emerging, driven mainly by the process of integration into the European Union and by the investments for the 2004 Olympic Games. New public infrastructures, complementing environmental and architectural assets, are radically transforming the region. The intensity of the changes underway is also due to a catching up process subsequent to years of inertia which had eroded the competitiveness of and quality of life of Athens. A key challenge will be to maintain the sense of urgency, good will and civic pride which have emerged due to the catalytic effect of the Olympic Games. Strong leadership will be crucial on the part of decision makers at all levels of government and in civic society to maintain the momentum. Governance Issues In Greece and AMA (Athens Metropolitan Area) In Greece, sub-national and supranational levels of government administration are inextricable elements of the regulatory framework, and developments at one level affect others. Until the early 1990s, Greece had a highly centralised structure relying on deconcentrated government offices at the prefecture level (Nomos). A series of major reforms undertaken in the past decade, have restructured and empowered the sub national level. As a result Greece has a three-tier system: 13 deconcentrated regions governed by a council and Secretary General appointed by the government for four years, a decentralised second level of 51 prefectures (Nomos) with each region containing two to five prefectures, and a decentralised first level of municipalities and communes. The presidents of the first and second levels have been elected since The flowchart below details the administrative structure.

2 The State 13 Regions ATTICA REGION 51 Prefectures (2nd tier of LA s) The organisation for Planning & Environmental Protection of Athens is responsible for Planning issues of the Region of ATTICA 4 Prefectures Wide Prefecture of Athens - Piraeus Prefecture of Athens Prefecture of Piraeus Prefecture of Eastern Attica Prefecture of Western Attica 152 Municipalities (1st Tier of LA s) The basic structure of the services for the Prefectural department includes planning and programming, economic development, social development, culture and quality of life, the sector of civic rights and protection and the sector of administrative support. The administrative importance of the Unified Prefecture is minor, while on the contrary the two Prefectures of Athens and Piraeus departments operate independently and posses more resources, means and personnel. There are also about 300 public agencies in Attica Region with Territorial or Sectoral administrative competencies. This creates enormous difficulties to deliver effective and efficient government and weakens institutional capacity to develop long-term coherent strategies. The Region of Attica presents several particularities in relation to the other regions of Greece as many of the responsibilities exercised by the agencies of the Region are, in fact, exercised in Attica by central agencies of the Ministries or special agencies (i.e., the Organisation of Athens- responsible for the Planning and Environmental Protection of Athens). Regional policies have until recently aimed to channel investment to other regions of Greece rather than to the Region of Attica with the objective of achieving more balanced demographic and economic development over the national territory and because Athens was considered to be saturated. Despite this policy, the Athens Metropolitan Area continued to grow, maintaining its share of population and economic activity. The recent infrastructure investments in the Athens region have broken with these traditional regional policies, providing long awaited investment in transport infrastructure for the Athens region (new airport, ring 2

3 roads, new Metro, a tramway, upgrading of bus system, etc.). There is now more recognition of the need to better structure growth in the Athens region rather than simply curtail it. This is linked to greater understanding of the international role which Athens will have to play in a global economy which will require better planning and investment strategies. Central Government Services in Attica Attica concentrates a large share of civil servants and public administration. According to data from the Ministry of Interior, Public Administration and Decentralisation, 46.5% of civil servants work in Attica. The most significant government entities which directly affect metropolitan Athens are: Ministry of Transport: the Ministry monitors and controls several significant agencies for Transportation in Attica (OASA, OSE, KTEL). Ministry of Interior, Public Administration and Decentralization: Highly significant is the Directorate General of Development Programmes (mainly supporting local development) while Directorate General of Local Government has a unique role through the activities of the Directorate of Technical Services. Under the same directorate is the Architectural City Planning Department which copes with projects and works for restoration, reformation, preservation of the cultural heritage and the protection of the man made environment. It supports municipalities in land use planning and city planning and also elaborates technical specifications and provides technical support and assistance. Ministry for the Environment, Physical Planning and Public Works (YPEHODE): YPEHODE monitors and controls significant agencies for Attica such as the Organization for Planning and Environmental Protection of Athens with spatial planning responsibilities and the elaboration and implementation of specific studies of Structural Projects or of Strategic Actions Plans such as the Strategic Action Plan for the aesthetic and functional regeneration of Athens 2004 Ministry of Culture: The Ministry is responsible for large scale urban redevelopment projects such as the Unification of Archaeological Sites of Athens as well as the protection of archaeological sites and the monitoring of several restoration projects (i.e., for the Acropolis). Local Government in the Athens Metropolitan Area In total, there are 91 municipalities and 31 communities in the Unified Super-Prefectural department of Attica. The Programme for the consolidation of OTA (Local Authorities) was implemented only in specific insular or coastal municipalities of the prefecture Piraeus. By 1998, in Attica 108 municipal and communal agencies were registered in 64 municipalities which employed more than employees. Of the 108 agencies, 36 are development oriented while the remaining ones deal with technical issues. Other actors include various subsidiary companies of Local Authorities (OTA). General public institutions, public libraries, cultural centres, sport organizations fall into this category. In total there are more than 369 public agencies in Attica. This presents enormous challenges to deliver effective and efficient government and weakens institutional capacity to develop long-term coherent strategies. Governance in Athens Metropolitan Area Main issues to be considered 3

4 Governance issues are critical to improving vertical and horizontal co-ordination, co-operation with the private and community sectors, and the capacity of sub-national authorities to meet the obligations of international treaties. Governance problems can also prevent competition between territories for jobs and investment due to differences in environmental standards. The governance framework in Greece is such that improvements will only be possible if there is a greater degree of devolution/decentralisation of power, coupled with studiously building capacity to deliver a new kind of land-use planning system. There is widespread municipal fragmentation coupled with a strong, but traditional, national planning legal system, and very weak capacity at the metropolitan and regional level. Top-down, technocratic strategies alone appear unable to generate a reassuring vision of the future on which an overall development strategy can be based. Territorial policies respond to the requirements for ecological sustainability and to the demand of people for places that combine economic opportunity with a higher quality of life. There is a clear lack of local empowerment through local governance measures and a limited flow and dissemination of policy objectives and initiatives. In response to these factors the Hellenic Ministry of Interior, Public Administration and Decentralization (M.I.P.A.D.), proposed a dialogue about the transformation of the local administration s legal framework. This dialogue took place in 2003 among the M.I.P.A.D., the Central Union of Local Authorities, and the Political Parties which are represented at the Greek Parliament. This will lead to a new legal framework for the local administration, under the form of a national law *. The dialogue continued with a Forum in Thessaloniki (June 2005) based on the results of special research and studies on the issues of Metropolitan Government for Athens and Thessaloniki. (The research was done by the institute of Regional Development and the Technical University of Athens department of Regional Planning. The studies were done by the relevant department of law of the University of Athens and the National Academy of Greece). Present Considerations on Governance for Metropolitan Athens Analysis of Athens Metropolitan Area (AMA) raises issues that are common to most if not all metropolitan city regions, namely, the need for integration across administrative areas, between the policies and programmes of infrastructure agencies and service delivery, and between levels of government. In addition, it shares a particular problem that relates to those metropolitan areas that are capital city regions. The problem for these areas is that the decisions which need to be taken are of their very nature national planning decisions in terms of their significance to the national economy, politics and budgets. As such, it is difficult to delegate to a local body the power and responsibility to determine priorities, to the same extent that it might be possible for other metropolitan areas. The creation of a new authority (even if this is by giving greater powers to the existing body) in essence only addresses the problems related to the Competences. This is essential but it will only be effective if the problems related to the Capabilities and Processes of the existing system. * This type of law requires constitutional changes, namely concerning responsibilities on Regional Planning which (according to the present constitution) belong to central government bodies only 4

5 The changing context of government As was mentioned previously, the Hellenic Ministry of Interior, Public Administration and Decentralization (M.I.P.A.D) has started a dialogue with the Central Union of Local Authorities to determine the local administration s legal framework. A multi stakeholder approach will include the M.I.P.A.D, representatives from the political parties from the Greek Parliament. This will result in a new legal framework for the local administration, under the form of a national law. GOVERNANCE AND SPATIAL PLANNING There is widespread municipal fragmentation coupled with a strong, but traditional, national planning legal system, and very weak capacity at the metropolitan and regional level. Territorial policies respond to the requirements for ecological sustainability and to the demand of people for places that combine economic opportunity with a higher quality of life. There is a clear lack of local empowerment through local governance measures and a limited flow and dissemination of policy objectives and initiatives. Both governance and planning arrangements in the Athens Region are conditioned by: the function of Athens as the capital of Greece and its largest market; the critical role of central government in policy making; the lack of a clear and comprehensive vision for the future of the metropolitan region combining an economic development strategy, a social strategy and an environmental strategy; the lack of a coherent political/institutional/legal framework to support such a vision and strategy, encourage inter-municipal co-operation, and implement area wide planning and policies. the Cluttered and Fragmented Territorial and Sectoral responsibilities that create enormous difficulties in the realization of strategic projects. Policy and aspiration is generally in advance of implementation in Athens, and only central government seems to have any capability on bigger initiatives. Today there is work in process to define more regional devolution through the creation of a new democratic/participative tier around the regional prefectures, but there is clearly varying opinion on how to proceed. National government controls much of what is decided in Athens, but is highly departmentalised, making cross-sectoral integration difficult. Their prevailing scenarios on the best Metropolitan Government for AMA (after long research and discussions) is towards the formulation of an elected regional council but with appointed (by the parliament) presidency. Basic role and responsibilities: Planning and implementation coordinator of all regional projects. 5

6 Athens is the capital city, and it is not unusual for there to be limited forms of local government in capital cities, with national government and national initiative playing a strong part in how the city is managed. It is frequently also the case when national capitals are the main metropolitan nucleus within their nation (i.e. Vienna, Brussels, etc.). Capital cities are often seen as belonging to the whole nation, and it is viewed as important to resist their management being too localised, or narrowly framed. However, this makes metropolitan leadership difficult to achieve. The current olympic experience in Athens demonstrates how very significant investments can be achieved by a national government focussing public finance and regulatory powers on key locations in the Capital city to achieve a step change in a short period. This is not unlike the recent experience in Berlin, and bears some resemblance to the regeneration of London Docklands. In each of these cases, an authoritative approach to regeneration has been taken, and national or State government has used its powers in a dominant manner to achieve change against local lobbies in key locations. Policy and aspiration is generally in advance of implementation in Athens, and only central government seems to have any capability on bigger initiatives. There appears to be no concerted attempt to build the capacity at the local level. There is some talk of more regional devolution through the creation of a new democratic/participative tier around the regional prefectures, but there is clearly widely varying opinion on how likely any of this is. National government controls much of what is decided in Athens, but is highly departmentalised, making cross-sectoral integration difficult. SPATIAL PLANNING AND STRATEGIC PLANNING FOR ATHENS METROPOLITAN AREA The Structure Plan is the Strategic Plan for the Athens Metropolitan Area and is overseen by a national government agency, the Organisation of Athens. The Organisation of Athens legal mandate is to prepare, monitor and review the Athens Metropolitan Region Structure Plan and, in that context, to coordinate the programmes and actions pertaining to spatial aspects, of all public sector agencies. The Structure Plan and Programme for the Environmental Protection of Athens was ratified by national Law (1515/85). That same Law provided for the foundation of the Organisation of Athens (ORSA). The Structure Plan determines the guiding framework that sets the policy goals, orientations and specific measures for the sustainable development of Attica and suggests a number of priorities concerning urban and spatial structure. On the more detailed scale of spatial planning, the realization of the Structure Plan goals is achieved by a series of plans, carried out by the ORSA: the General Urban Plans (Master Plans) that are prepared and approved for each municipality; the Development Control zones that cover the entire sub-urban hinterland not included in the city plan; the Zones of Environmental Protection plans; and the Major Structural Interventions and Urban Rehabilitation Projects, which are of strategic importance for the spatial, economic and social development of the Greater Athens Area. The Structure Plan enforcement power lies mainly on setting the frame for detailed legally binding lower tier spatial plans and building control instruments, as well for 6

7 individual projects. Its effectiveness is supported by a series of either restrictive/dissuading or else recommendation-type policy measures that are not linked to any implementation programmes. No active role is assigned to the private sector stakeholders, who have to conform or else to try to negotiate a modification of the regulations in force. Existing legislation does not provide for an integrated set of flexible operational tools and mechanisms, pertaining to economic and social, as well as spatial, issues. An inherent problem of the current system is that legislation is created, modified and superseded but not actually implemented. The flowchart below details the current system, which is cumbersome and inhibited because it is inconsistently applied and enforced. Without the overarching strategy, effectively implemented subordinate legislation and regulation are rendered impotent. The current system also reveals a cluttered administrative context, with respect to number of public agencies with some administrative authority or obligation for Athens. Regulatory systems need to workable and clear for those responsible for implementation as well as for stakeholders. The main objectives of the Athens Plan as regards the development of the Greater Athens Area within the national framework are the: a. Stabilisation of the population of the Greater Athens Area, ultimately aiming at its reduction b. Containment of the expanding economic activities in the capital and promotion of the capital to the national centre of administrative functions. Considering the above, the 1985 Structure Plan is an outdated instrument based on land use zoning with insufficient regard for social, economic and environmental issues and has no meaningful statutory powers. Enforcement is uneven, exacerbated through a lack of appropriate structures and resources to monitor and promote more effective planning. The national policy context does not provide clear priorities. Whilst many positive gains have been realised through the significant infrastructure investment and preparations for the Olympic Games, spatial planning has been driven by short-term needs and large-scale projects which have their place in city development but realise optimal outcomes only when integrated into the urban fabric as a whole. 7

8 Planning Planning istruments Level Spatial - Environment - Planning Socio-Economic Planning National National Special National Development Plan Level Territorial Territorial Plan (NTP) Plan (NTPs) Sectoral Operational Plans Structural Plan of Athens (in frame of CFS ) Regional Regional Metropolitan Area Regional Development Plans Level Territorial (Law 1515/85) Plan (PTPs) Structural Plan of Thessaloniki (Law 2742/99) Metropolitan Area Regional Operational Plans (Law 1561/86) (in frame of CFS ) Local Regularotary Plans (Master) General Urban Special Spatial Level (Law 2508/97) Plans (GUPs) Plan (SSPs) * (1st and 2nd City/Town Planning Special Environmental tier of Las) Conce rning (Law 1337/83, Plan (SEPs) ** Urban and Large Urban centres Law 2508/97) (Law 1650/86, Law 2742/99) Local Concerning Development * Zones of Integrated Development of Economic Activities - Zones of special intervation - Zones of Urban Development Control ** Zones of Nature Protection Cities Towns Urbanised areas Concerning Countryside/rural space Cultural and natural Environments and Landscapes Plans 8

9 Present and Future Considerations National policy in Greece, as in many other countries, is dominated by the need for economic growth, and improving the infrastructure to support economic development to all New legislation is orientated by these considerations. The country is undergoing widespread institutional reform as competencies are devolved to regional agencies and a strengthened tier of local government. The new governmental structure presents opportunities for creating more effective spatial planning. A new legislation introduces sustainable development into Urban Planning. The new legislation specifically provides for the remedial action and urban consolidation required in areas which have been loosely urbanised and for the participation of the private sector into the public projects following the practice legacy of the Olympics projects (Legacy). Further proposals are in hand for a revision of the planning law and instruments, which will use sustainable development as an organising principle, which will extend to other sectors. Also and above all other considerations, Athens is a capital city and is seen by the government as belonging to the whole nation, so the Metropolitan governance is viewed as important to resist its management being localised, or narrowly framed. This makes metropolitan leadership difficult to achieve. Olympic Games experience in Athens demonstrated how very significant investments can be achieved by a national government focusing public finance and regulating powers on key locations in the Capital to achieve a step change in a short period. Key planning issues for the new structural Plan of AMA are: controlling sprawl; planning development in the outer Region of Attica; redevelopment of older former industrial areas; regenerating the historic city centre, upgrading housing and infrastructure; protection of environmentally sensitive areas; and forming a development strategy that will promote public-private partnerships. The 2004 Olympic Games provided an excellent opportunity to project a new image of Athens as a modern well planned and well run urban region which is attractive in terms of both economic investment and quality of life. Key objectives were to make a success of the Games but also, and importantly, to sustain into the future the momentum of the economic, social and environmental improvements generated by the Games. The preparatory works connected with the Olympic Games have effectively restructured the urban region via the new airport, ring roads and major highways, a new Metro, a new tramway, a redeveloped coastal zone at Faliron, new and upgraded sports facilities, new and refurbished hotels, and the

10 Unification of Archaeological sites in the city centre comprising a large new pedestrian circuit. Twenty years after the adoption of the Athens Structural Plan, we were able to make an evaluation of the extent to which its objectives have been met, the timeliness of its particular choices, and its capability to deal with the new realities and the prospects of the city. In the process of updating the Athens Structural Plan, the formulation of new courses of action, priorities and goals ill serve and support the strategic choices that aim to boost the competitiveness of the city. At the same time, the achievement of the greatest social cohesion possible and the sustainable development of the city are considered basic pursuits. In order to promote an effective pro-active regional strategy, the Organisation of Athens is launching an integrated Operational Strategic Development Plan for the Attica Region, aiming at the mobilisation of all stakeholders towards a mutually agreed action plan. At the same time, a forum will be established for all interested parties so as to enhance the participation procedure and make plan more acceptable to all participants. The changes, in Metropolitan Governance, seek to establish a metropolitan tier of government for the AMA which is consistent with the recommendations for good metropolitan governance advocated through European Union Policies. The Organisation for the Planning of Athens is working in close co-operation with the Ministry to ensure that the future replacement Structure Plan reflects the new governance structure and becomes a strategic guidance plan for the metropolitan area addressing physical, economic and social needs in the short medium and long-term. The time is right for changes towards the right direction. The efforts being made by Greece to conform to European Union directives, the ESDP, CSF and the delivery of the Olympic Games have together been instrumental in kick starting and sustaining the process of reform, to create a sustainable Urban Region. 10

11 APPENDIX ANALYSIS OF APPROACHES TO THE METROPOLITAN GOVERNMENT IN ATHENS The key reason for the establishment of Metropolitan Government is stated as: The need to relieve the Central Government from local functions and enhance its central role for the whole country The enhancement of the competitiveness of the Metropolitan area The sustainable development of the Metropolitan area based on a strategic long-term plan The improvement of the quality of life and environment The provision of better quality services to the public The achievement of social cohesion Main issues to be considered on establishing a Metropolitan Government: The enrichment of the citizen s participation on the decision-making for local actions is to be achieved, by: publicising all the actions of the local authorities; the production of 4 year action plans for each municipality, ( from draft to final version) in order to inform citizens and increase participation at the local level; strengthening of the active participation of the all the elected political powers, in the municipality, so that the municipal board, can become the political, programming, and controlling body of the municipality; establishing a specific framework for the relation between the municipality and the citizens, and the non-governmental institutions. Strengthening the co-operation between the municipalities and among municipalities and the central government. For certain activities like urban planning, social policy, environmental protection, transportation, secure, there is the need to become activities of the corporation between municipalities, and for that there will be the absolute support of the central government by the means of finance, training, etc. Enhancing co-operation between public and private sectors, through schemes like P.F.I., etc... Certain changes in the legal framework enabling local authorities to create projects through such schemes are included at the proposal given by the Ministry to the Central Union of Local Authorities. The Ministry will facilitate exchange and learning between local authorities to enhance capacity for delivery of Major Projects. 11

12 Establishing (besides the capital city of Athens) metropolitan administration for the greater areas of the 5 big Hellenic cities Thessaloniki, Larissa, Volos, Patras, and Heraklion and for certain activities as: Transportation, Urban Planning, Social Policy, Environment, and Security. The changes, in effect, seek to establish a metropolitan tier of government for the AMA which is consistent with the recommendations for good metropolitan governance. The Organisation for the Metropolitan Planning of Athens is working in close co-operation with the Ministry of Environment to ensure that the new Structure Plan reflects the new governance structure and becomes a strategic guidance plan for the metropolitan area addressing physical, economic and social needs in the short medium and long-term. Good governance and strategic planning are mutually dependant factors of effective territorial competitiveness. Metropolitan Functions The scope of Metropolitan Governance covers several functions. All the relevant studies and the prevailing scenarios (that will be presented next) agreed on this subject. Most of these functions are executed by central agencies today (as mentioned in earlier chapter). Thus, the establishment of a form of Metropolitan Government requires the decentralization of central government functions. These functions cover several sectors as follows: Economic Development These functions include planning and the procedure and promotion of Urban Economic Development, the promotion of the Metropolitan area in the European and international area, the data collection and know-how for the attraction of economic functions and the representation of the Metropolis in International Organisations and Forums. Within this frame, the collaboration of Public and Private Sector is essential Spatial Planning This subject constitutes a crucial function and responsibility of the Metropolitan Government. This function is also connected with all levels of spatial planning and in particular of Sectoral Planning. It mainly includes the co-ordination of Urban Planning with the Strategic Development Plan, the planning of all projects of metropolitan scale, the spatial definition of development areas, etc Social policy The functions of social policy (health, housing, social services) are a minor part of the Metropolitan Government. These functions, as they concern mainly social services, are more effectively provided by the local authorities. Only installations of strategic importance and provision of coordinating facility are functions provided at the Metropolitan level, in collaboration with local authorities. Environment The environmental policy is a major Metropolitan responsibility. It mainly refers to the provision of strategic plan for the improvement of the Metropolitan Urban and Natural environment i.e. In many cases the Metropolitan agencies take up 12

13 the management of a comprehensive system for dealing with the waste, in collaboration with the lower level or sectoral agencies. Transportation This function answers to the provision of an effective and coordinated transportation system for the Metropolitan area that deals with the crucial problems of this sector which are characteristic in the big urban centers (i.e. congestion, air pollution, accessibility, etc). The Metropolitan agencies take up a systematic and strategic planning role in the preparation and implementation of strategic frames for the development of this sector Civic Protection Policy The Metropolitan Government has a coordinating role for the safety and the civic protection policies (for dealing with natural or technical disasters). They have to collect data and collaborate with the lower level agencies which are responsible for the above functions. PRESENTATION OF THE SELECTED 5 SCENARIOS FOR METROPOLITAN GOVERNMENT From the combination of all studies and researches on the subject of the best Metropolitan Government for Athens Metropolitan Area 5 scenarios were originally selected as clear cases to be discussed in the relevant Forum, (held by the Minister of Interior), in collaboration with the Central agency of Local Authorities and representatives form the Greek Parliament (June 2005, Thessaloniki). 1. Metropolitan Municipality A strong Municipality is created by the compulsory connection of the 1 st tier of Local Authorities (67 in the case of the Urban Agglomentation of Athens). The municipality and its sectoral departments are governed by selected bodies and represented in the Regional council (In an extended form of this scenario the Metropolitan Municipality includes the two major areas of recent Urbanisation: Thriassion and Mesogeia valleys) 2. Metropolitan Union The existing Local Authorities of 1 st and 2 nd tier are represented in the Council of the Metropolitan Agency: In Athens it can function either for the whole Region or the Urban Agglomentation or the Urban Agglomentation plus Thriassion and Messogeia Valleys. 3. Metropolitan Region Decentralized Central Government In this scenario the Region of Attica (Athens Regional Area) is upscaled (enhanced) as decentralized body of central government, with adequate budget, functions and competencies. The participation of the 1 st tier of local authorities in the Regional council) is enhanced, where the General Secretary of the Region acts as president. 4. Metropolitan (Local) Authority A Metropolitan Local Authority of 2 nd tier is formed, covering the whole Attica or the Agglomentation of Athens, Thriassion and Messogeia Valley. 13

14 Basic bodies of this form (which will be elected) will be an elected President and elected Council, while the Metropolitan (Local) Authority will be divided in prefectures (4 existing ones or 6 to 8 new ones). The heads of these sub-metropolitan areas will be selected Prefects and will be part of the Metropolitan Council and heads of Prefecture Committees. 5. Metropolitan Regional Council (Mixed Form) This scenario refers to an evolution of the existing Regional Council. Specifically, the new Metropolitan Council will have 3 bodies (in unequal numbers). The members of the first body will be elected by the public. The second body will have representatives of all Local Authorities in the Metropolitan Area and mainly from the major municipalities and the 3 rd will have representatives from sectoral agencies etc. The president of the M.R.C. will be elected either by the first two bodies or will be appointed by the parliament. In Attica Region, the Metropolitan area in this form of Metropolitan Government will be the whole Region. Administration and social participation issues With the exception of the scenarios 3 and 5, the appointed General Secretary of the Region is kept with all the (already) decentralized functions, while the Regional Council changes its existing form. At the same time, a body of widespread social participation is formed which acts as consultant body for the Metropolitan (of strategic importance) issues. EVALUATION OF THE 5 SCENARIOS The evaluation of the 5 basic scenarios takes into consideration two major set of criteria. A. Political and Social Acceptance and Actual Possibility of Realization of the proposed changes Political support Democratic legalization Magnitude of required changes to the existing system (administrative changes, etc) Constitutional requirements regarding functions of Local Authorities and decentralization issues Conformation with the administrative structure and national equilibrium B. Effective governance Strategic Planning Effectiveness and productivity Coordination (cooperation, administrative cohesion, synergy of policies) Transparent functions and procedures Political acceptance and Public Participation 14

15 Quality of Services Proximity of the services to the public SCENARIO SELECTION Advantages and Disadvantages of the 5 scenarios The scenario of Metropolitan Municipality is considered as the most democratic for Metropolitan Governance. The major problems are: a. The extension of the required changes for the functions of the 1 st and 2 nd tier of local authorities b. The metropolitan scale functions (and particularly those concerning the Environment and Transportation) will be a subject of collaboration with several central sectoral agencies. The scenario for Metropolitan Union will be easily accepted from the LAs which participate. The difficult and crucial decisions on controversial installations or issues will create political battles without solving anything, while the Greek constitution states that only Central Government bodies can have competencies on projects of Metropolitan scale. Also, the Council of State does not support this type of scenario. For the Metropolitan Region Decentralized Government scenario, the Region does not have the democratic status for taking important decisions of Metropolitan scale, while the participation of LAs in the Regional Council does not provide for an enhancement of the LAs participation on dealing with Metropolitan functions. The scenario of Metropolitan Local 2 nd tier Authority has the political and administrative responsibility in the Metropolitan area while at the same time, it has a strong and democratic legal mandate. From the other hand, the 1 st tier LAs (even the bigger municipalities) will not be able to participate in the Metropolitan functions. The Metropolitan Regional Council (MRC) or the Mixed Form scenario has the advantages and disadvantages of a mixed structure. Its basic body assures the participation of all tiers of LAs, the provision of the required Legal mandate of a part of the MRC and the inclusion of all the social and sectoral agencies of the Metropolitan area Basic problem in this scenario is the difficulty in taking decisions, particularly for projects of Metropolitan scale, while at the same time the political responsibility will be divided and diffused. Proposed Scenarios (for further consideration) Taking into consideration: The previously mentioned comparative advantages and disadvantages of the 5 major scenarios The European elect practice (from a comparative analysis on this subject in European metropolitan areas), where two types of scenarios are used, that is, the Metropolitan Union and the Metropolitan LAs with elected bodies The given priorities for the development policies for the National and Metropolitan area 15

16 The proposals of the special and research studies on this subject: From the five major scenarios, three scenarios were proposed for further discussion: The Metropolitan Union The Metropolitan Local Authority (2 nd tier) The Metropolitan Regional Council (Mixed form) The other two scenarios (Metropolitan Municipality and Metropolitan Region) were not proposed for further consideration since they do not comply with the basic selection criteria. Taking into consideration the analysed advantages and disadvantages of the 5 main scenarios, the Forum (held mainly by the LAs central bodies) proposed the Metropolitan LA of 2 tier as the most effective and democratic scenario for Metropolitan Government. The main problem to accept this scenario is that Athens is a capital city where the decisions on the establishment and management of major functions are of national importance and they need central government support to be realized. Also, the present Greek constitution does not provide for the required competencies, mainly for planning and promotion of major scale issues. Also, there will be need for extensive changes considering the new administrative structure, where a vast number of sectoral agencies and competencies will have to be dissolved or adapted to the new structure. So, it is considered almost an impossibility for the central government to accept this type scenario. There is also another proposal, based on the more technocratic approach of the research made by the Institute for Regional Development on behalf of the Ministry of Interior. This Technocratic proposal is for a similar form to the Mixed type scenario as the most realistic one for the present situation. Panel discussions on this proposal stressed that this scenario can be accepted for an intermediate period, until the necessary constitutional and administrative changes are accepted and promoted, so as to be possible to install a Metropolitan Government of the type proposed by the Forum of LAs.. Sources 1. Metropolitan Governance. International Experience and Greek reality Institute for regional Development (ΙΑΠΑΔ), Athens Strategic, Physical Plan for the development of Athens Attica National Technical University of Athens, Athens Metropolitan Governance for Thessaloniki, Research department of the University of Thessaloniki Ministry of Interior, Athens The emergence of Metropolitan Governance in Athens Getimis P./ Hlepas N K, Metropolitan Governance for Athens and Attiki, Ministry of Interior ΙΑΠΑΔ, Athens OECD Territorial Reviews, Athens, Greece