Cities Against the Pandemic
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
FEPS COVID RESPONSE PAPERS July 2020 | #6 CITIES AGAINST THE PANDEMIC Summary About the author: In times of major crises such as the one we are facing right now, strong and coordinated interventions are needed at the central and the local levels of government. Iván Tosics Metropolitan Research Institute, Budapest In this paper, concrete examples are given of the vital role local governments play in the fight against the pandemic. The tasks of local governments are especially difficult in countries where the welfare system is underdeveloped, and cities constitute the last resort for people not protected by other systems. Municipalities can play a crucial role in ensuring that all members of the community are taken care of when the economy is at great risk of collapse. Some European cities have gone to great lengths in finding innovative ways to protect vulnerable groups: examples include Vienna, Barcelona, Berlin, and London. We must not forget that cities are key stakeholders in the fight for environmental sustainability. Their contribution to tackling the present crisis could serve as a blueprint for future social policies that take into consideration the green economy. In many countries, cities are the last bastion of progressive social policies. It is therefore essential that we learn from the mistakes of the past and avoid a renewed wave of austerity against municipal budgets. CITIES AGAINST THE PANDEMIC Iván Tosics Metropolitan Research Institute of Budapest Table of Contents 1. CHRONIC CRISES COMPOUNDED WITH THE SHOCK OF THE PANDEMIC ........................... 2 2. MULTILEVEL GOVERNANCE SYSTEMS AND THE ROLE OF CITIES ........................................ 3 3. INNOVATIVE LOCAL POLICIES DURING THE PANDEMIC ..................................................... 3 4. THE “TRADITIONAL” SOCIAL PROTECTION TASK OF CITIES ................................................ 6 5. THE NEED FOR EXTRAORDINARY INTERVENTIONS TO TACKLE UNUSUAL CHALLENGES ... 7 6. THE KEY TO RESILIENCE: COOPERATION BETWEEN LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT ................. 8 7. SOME POSITIVE IMPACTS OF THE PANDEMIC ON CITIES ................................................... 9 8. THE EMERGING NEW EU FRAMEWORK .............................................................................. 9 9. CONCLUDING REMARK ..................................................................................................... 10 ABOUT THE AUTHOR ................................................................................................................ 11 FEPS COVID RESPONSE INSIGHTS ............................................................................................. 11 Cities against the Pandemic Iván Tosics 1. CHRONIC CRISES COMPOUNDED WITH middle-class families who used to be in THE SHOCK OF THE PANDEMIC relatively secure positions started facing some risks. Poverty is not only about income; it is a The pandemic has turned the world upside multidimensional phenomenon. Today more down within a few weeks. The fight against the than ever, the various dimensions of inequality virus has made European nation-states – e.g. access to employment, food, housing, stronger, both in relation to the EU and against broadband, education, social networks, and their own regions and cities. Since February, supports services – are playing a part in national borders have been closed, and key unequal personal and health outcomes. decisions were taken in single centralised power centres in each country. For a few Moreover, all these effects are linked to weeks, the virus seemed to have terminated all complex societal processes. The issue is further dreams of reform regarding a federalist EU or complicated by the fact that the pandemic is national decentralisation. not the only crisis of our time. The present shock is an addendum to preexisting, chronic Local municipalities have suddenly found crises, such as environmental unsustainability, themselves in a peculiar and difficult situation. the growing problems of the prevalent On the one hand, they have become ever more economic development models, and mounting subordinated to higher levels of administration social inequalities. Although different in their and political power. On the other, they face character, these crises are interlinked; they all unprecedented levels and new forms of social require approaches that are in synergy with the and economic problems which they must react efforts to tackle the other problems (i.e. to. avoiding negative externalities of Besides the direct health impacts, the interventions). economic and social consequences of the These distressing problems clearly cannot be pandemic have also been extensive. Many solved on a single level of government. This sectors of the economy came to a standstill, as means that in searching for policies and a result of which unemployment increased interventions in each country, good multilevel dramatically. The different types of cooperation is needed between the national, confinement policies, introduced to slow the regional, and local levels of governments. spread of the virus, radically changed the Moreover, EU-level policies need to be livelihood of citizens, thus exacerbating pre- channelled into this cooperation. existing social problems while also creating new ones. In the flood of daily news, information is often lost on how the national multilevel-governance Although ‘everyone is affected’ by the systems work under the extraordinary lockdown policies, it is clear that people are conditions caused by the pandemic. withstanding the difficulties from vastly Furthermore, the role of cities is frequently different positions. The most affected ignored, especially what they can do within the individuals are those who were already at risk room of manoeuvre at their disposal, and of poverty and social exclusion. Types of despite their subordinated positions within employment and housing conditions are key systems of government. Below, I present some determinants of the ability to maintain income, experiences, highlighting innovative urban health and quality of life during the quarantine. initiatives based on examples taken from EU While most white-collar workers are able to cities. survive in remote employment or home office, a large share of blue-collar workers either lost their job or face the risk of getting infected at work. At the same time many of the lower- 2 2. MULTILEVEL GOVERNANCE SYSTEMS 3. INNOVATIVE LOCAL POLICIES DURING AND THE ROLE OF CITIES THE PANDEMIC Cities are part of multilevel governance The examples in this report are from some of systems in each country. However, there are the largest cities in the EU, where many of the large differences in the extent of difficulties of the pandemic were decentralization of tasks and financing across concentrated, giving us insight into the member states. Just to show the magnitude of relevant policies and interventions employed. differences: subnational government Needless to say, there are slight differences in expenditure can range from 0-2% (Malta, how types of cities (small, medium; close to a Cyprus, Ireland) to 25-35% (Sweden, Denmark) metropolis or in peripheral location) reacted to of GDP. Local governments have larger tasks the pandemic. Good overviews are given on and responsibilities in the latter, more the variety of cases and responses in the decentralized countries. compilation made by Politico and in the following two collections. The important factor in the handling of crises is not so much the level of decentralisation, but Concerning the constrained competencies of rather the cooperation between different municipalities under the crisis, the most visible levels of government. According to the interventions were implemented in the use of literature1, this constitutes an important part of public spaces and the coordination of public the resilience capability of countries. It is a transport. widespread approach, however, „to solve The enforcement of social distancing problems centrally through expert advice while necessitates the reorganisation of public ignoring the interests, information and spaces, with the aim of “democratizing” the capabilities of others involved”.2 Under the access to streets. It has become a common present pandemic, there were several practice of cities, for example in Budapest, to examples on central governments designate new cycle paths, first on a temporary concentrating power to the extreme, not giving basis, but with the potential to keep them additional financial help to (or even taking permanently. One of the larger-scale away money from) subnational governments in interventions was the temporary closure of the their fight against the virus. bank of the Danube for the weekends, handing The EU has a special role to play in multilevel over the otherwise busy road to bikers and governance. EU programmes are usually run pedestrians. under shared management, which means that the Commission is in direct contact only with the national level. The URBAN programme was an important exception, whereby cities received funding directly from the EU to implement integrated, area-based programmes. However, this programme has been terminated in 2007. Since then, cities are subordinated to the will of their national governments – which differ greatly in the extent they give independence to cities to design their development programmes. 1 Elinor Ostrom - Marco Janssen, 2005: MultiLevel 2 Scott, 1998, quoted in Ostrom-Hanssen. Governance and Resilience of Social-Ecological Systems Cities