Urban Regeneration & Social Sustainability
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Master’s thesis Efforts to improve the neighbourhood: did Rotterdam succeed? A mixed-methods study looking into the influence of large-scale urban regeneration on social sustainability in Rotterdam Author Shelley Wilson Student number 443376 Supervisor ir. S. Ruijsink, MSc. Second assessor prof. dr. J. Edelenbos Date 5 August 2020 Word count1 19.644 Public Administration, MSc Urban Governance Erasmus University Rotterdam, Erasmus School of Social and Behavioural Sciences Institute for Housing and Urban Development Studies 1 Excludes front matter (preface, table of contents, list of tables, list of figures, list of photos), abstract, list of references and appendices. Shelley Wilson – 05/08/2020 Abstract Municipalities regularly undertake urban regenerations hoping to improve the living environment. Rotterdam aims to achieve more and focuses on large-scale urban regeneration. However, the effects of urban regeneration on social sustainability remain debated. Case studies are conducted to identify what the influence of large-scale urban regeneration on social sustainability in Rotterdam is. Hoogvliet (large- scale urban regenerated) and Groot-IJsselmonde (only some small-scale interventions) are compared. Quantitative and qualitative methods are sequentially used to collect the data. The analysis showed that a window of opportunity allowed the large-scale urban regeneration to happen in Hoogvliet. The intervention resulted in, amongst other things, an increase in the socio- economic status. Contrary to the expectations, residents in a large-scale urban regenerated neighbourhood did not seem to value (three dimensions of) social sustainability higher than residents in a neighbourhood that has not been large-scale urban regenerated. Nevertheless, the differences in the mean scores between both neighbourhoods were not significant. An explanation for the difference in scores might be the neighbourhood design. In addition, large-scale urban regeneration was not a significant indicator for any of the investigated dimensions of social sustainability. Meanwhile, the results showed that the future situation is expected to be better by significantly more people in the neighbourhood that has not undergone large-scale regeneration. The influence of large-scale urban regeneration on social sustainability in Rotterdam seems to be minimal. The findings support the dichotomy that urban regeneration has positive and negative effects. More efforts than large-scale urban regeneration seem necessary to make people feel that their needs can be fulfilled in their neighbourhood, now and in the future. It seems to be about more feasible things that residents experience daily, such as the maintenance of the outdoor space and variety in shopping facilities. Therefore, two practical recommendations are made to guarantee social sustainability in the future. The results of this study do need to be nuanced. Other intervening and moderating variables might be in place and relevant to explain the influence of large-scale urban regeneration on social sustainability. The two neighbourhoods are comparable, but not identical. An ideal comparison is impossible. Besides, it is hard to anticipate what would have happened with Hoogvliet if the intervention did not take place. Finally, residents that do not expect the future to be better could expect the situation to remain the same, which is also socially sustainable because demands for now and future generations are fulfilled. One cannot conclude that the neighbourhoods are socially sustainable or not. Key words: (large-scale) urban regeneration, social sustainability, Rotterdam, amenities and social infrastructure, social and cultural life, voice and influence, contextuality, past-present-future 1 Shelley Wilson – 05/08/2020 Preface Dear reader, Herewith, I present you my master’s thesis ‘Efforts to improve the neighbourhood: did Rotterdam succeed?’. The basis of this research is a case study design in which two neighbourhoods are compared to analyse how large-scale urban regeneration influences social sustainability in Rotterdam. This thesis has been written to fulfil the graduation requirements of the Master Urban Governance at Erasmus University Rotterdam (EUR) and the Institute for Housing and Urban Development Studies (IHS). I was engaged in researching and writing this master’s thesis from January 2020 until August 2020. The master’s thesis was undertaken based on my interests in urban development and cities. I was intrigued to know more about how (large-scale) urban regenerations can contribute to an improved living environment for residents. I approached this research as unbiased as possible (the results were surprising to me!). There were times I found it challenging to do this research, but to stay within the context of Rotterdam: I continued to niet lullen maar poetsen. Conducting this extensive investigation did eventually allow me to answer the research questions. Fortunately, my thesis supervisor, Saskia Ruijsink, was always willing to answer my questions and to discuss the best way forward. I want to thank you for sharing your knowledge and all your help. Also, to my second reader, Jurian Edelenbos: thank you for your feedback. The comments allowed me to critically reflect on my thesis once more. Besides, I would like to thank the survey and interview respondents from Groot-IJsselmonde and Hoogvliet, without whose cooperation I would not have been able to conduct the analysis. Thank you for your time and effort. Finally, thanks to the people that were willing to proofread some parts of this thesis. Your feedback was valued. I would like to end with a special note of thanks to my parents and brother: your support was – and still is – really appreciated. You kept me motivated. I hope you enjoy reading it. Shelley Wilson Rotterdam, 5 August 2020 2 Shelley Wilson – 05/08/2020 List of content Abstract ...................................................................................................................................................1 Preface .....................................................................................................................................................2 List of content .........................................................................................................................................3 List of tables ............................................................................................................................................5 List of figures ..........................................................................................................................................6 List of photos ...........................................................................................................................................6 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................7 1.1 Research topic ................................................................................................................................7 1.2 Problem statement ..........................................................................................................................8 1.3 Scientific significance ....................................................................................................................8 1.4 Societal significance .......................................................................................................................9 1.5 Research objective ..........................................................................................................................9 1.6 Research question ...........................................................................................................................9 1.7 Sub-questions ...............................................................................................................................10 1.8 Reading guide ...............................................................................................................................10 2. Theoretical framework ....................................................................................................................11 2.1 Urban regeneration .......................................................................................................................11 2.1.1 Effects of urban regeneration ................................................................................................12 2.2 Three pillars of sustainability .......................................................................................................13 2.2.1 Social sustainability ...............................................................................................................14 2.2.2 Past-present-future ................................................................................................................15 2.3 Contextuality ................................................................................................................................16 2.4 Hypotheses ...................................................................................................................................17 2.5 Conceptual model .........................................................................................................................19 3. Methodology......................................................................................................................................21