The London School of Economics and Political Science GOVERNING WITH THE CITIZENS Strategic Planning In Four Italian Cities Sonia Bussu A thesis submitted to the Department of Government of the London School of Economics for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, London, September 2012 1 Declaration I certify that the thesis I have presented for examination for the MPhil/PhD degree of the London School of Economics and Political Science is solely my own work other than where I have clearly indicated that it is the work of others (in which case the extent of any work carried out jointly by me and any other person is clearly identified in it). The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. Quotation from it is permitted, provided that full acknowledgement is made. This thesis may not be reproduced without my prior written consent. I warrant that this authorisation does not, to the best of my belief, infringe the rights of any third party. I declare that my thesis consists of 93,606 words. 2 Abstract In recent years there has been much political and academic interest in new modes of local governance, which are increasingly based on deliberative mechanisms and aim at engaging larger sectors of the population (i.e. governance by networks, territorial pacts, strategic planning ). Whereas the literature on urban governance has focused on the emergence of novel governance arrangements at city and regional levels and on the formation of a collective actor , deliberative democracy scholars have examined the democratic dimension (i.e. the deliberative forums) and assessed the applicability of their normative models to the real world; the literature on planning helps to understand the implementation gap that plagues many of these new arrangements. All these approaches often study the same empirical phenomena, however, with a few exceptions, debates within these literatures take no account of one another. This comparative case-study of strategic planning in four medium-sized Italian cities (Trento, Prato, Lecce, and Sassari), characterized by different socio-political and economic contexts, intends to contribute to bridging the gap between the above theoretical paradigms. Thus, the impact of strategic planning on the local polity is assessed on three levels: the formation of a collective actor, the democratic process, and implementation. Comparative analysis can help to evidence how such an impact is either hindered or enhanced by different forms and resources of leadership and how the latter interact with endogenous (i.e. pre-existing associational density) and exogenous factors (i.e. institutional constraints and opportunities at other jurisdictional levels). Different typologies of leadership will influence each dimension of the dependent variable (i.e. the formation of the collective actor, the democratic process, the implementation) to varying degrees. The type of leadership now required within the new multilevel governance system could be defined as facilitative leadership , which arises from the activity of working with , rather than exercising power over , others. This leadership is no longer identified solely with political institutions but often emerges from the coordinated work of a political sponsor and a public service CEO that acts as the champion of the governance process. Institutional constraints might affect outcomes, as 3 weak administrative capacity and resistance to change from within the bureaucracy will hinder implementation. A facilitative leadership can help to drive cultural change and organisational learning within local institutions, while offering identity incentives to the wider community. While pre-existing associational dynamics do not influence outcomes, since an inclusive leadership can encourage greater participation even where the social fabric would seem weaker, poor policy coordination among jurisdictional tiers will inevitably hamper the positive effects of strategic planning at the local level, which might be lost in a plethora of fragmented initiatives. 4 Contents Acknowledgments 8 Abbreviations 11 Introduction 12 PART I: THE THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK 1 Strategic Planning and The Participatory Turn 21 1.1 The City as a Collective Actor 22 1.1.1 The new local government 22 1.1.2 New Governance 25 1.1.3 A New Role for Cities 28 1.2 Beyond Negotiations: The Participatory Process 31 1.2.1 Deliberative Democracy in Practice 31 1.2.2 Deliberation And Empowerment 35 1.2.3 The Quality Of Local Democracy 37 1.3 Strategic Planning And The Implementation Gap 41 1.3.1 Strategic Planning in Italy 46 1.3.2 The pathological Implementation Gap 49 1.4 Conclusion 52 2 Rescaling Politics: The Italian Context 55 2.1 Institutional Reforms in Italy 57 2.1.1 The Rise of the Mayors 57 2.1.2 The Impact of the Mayoral Reform On Local Democracy 61 2.2 Local Governance and Participation In Italy 66 2.2.1 Urban Planning 66 2.2.2 Development Policies 68 2.3 The Importance of Leadership 72 2.3.1 Towards Facilitative Leadership 74 2.4 Methodology 77 2.4.1 The Dependent Variable 77 2.4.2 The Independent Variable 80 2.4.3 The Case Studies 83 2.4.4 Methods 89 2.4 Conclusion: Planning the Future 89 PART TWO: THE CASE STUDIES 5 3 “Trento Città Delle Opportunità” 93 3.1 The Socio-Economic Context 94 3.2 Strategic Planning: A Governmental Tool 96 3.2.1 The process 96 3.2.2 The Plan 100 3.2.3 The Outcomes 100 3.3 The Challenge of Collective Action 104 3.4 The Politics of Strategic Planning 106 3.5 The Limits of Inter-Institutional Cooperation 108 3.6 Participation Is A Local Affair 110 3.7 Conclusion 114 4 PratoAgenda : Between Weak Leadership And Strong Neighbourhood Associations 119 4.1 The Socio-Economic Context 120 4.2 The Strategic Plan: Expectations and Outcomes 125 4.2.1 The Rationale 125 4.2.2 The Process 127 4.2.3 Building A Collective actor: Lights And Shadows 130 4.3 In Search Of A Leadership 133 4.3.1 Multilevel Governance, Or Not 135 4.4 From SP to the Urban Structural Plan: Critical Democracy vs. Incumbent Democracy 136 4.5 Conclusion 142 5 Lecce: “Un Ponte Verso Lo Sviluppo Economico-Sociale-Culturale” 147 5.1 The Socio-Economic Context 148 5.2 A New Approach to Local Governance 154 5.3 The Strategic Plan: Coordinating Action 157 5.3.1 The Participatory Process: Promises and Disappointments 159 5.3.2 The Outcomes: A Plan of Compromise 163 5.4 Facilitative Leadership 166 5.5 Conclusion 169 6 “Sassari Bella, Buona E Forte” 172 6.1 The Socio-Economic Context 173 6.2 From Government to Governance 177 6 6.3 The Strategic Plan: Between Innovation and Inexperience 180 6.3.1 Collective Action And The Democratic Process 180 6.3.2 The Plan 184 6.4 The Implementation Gap 187 6.5 Too Many Plans Too Little Coordination 193 6.6 Conclusion 196 PART THREE: COMPARING AND EXPLAINING RESULTS 7 The Politics of Strategic Planning The case for renewing local democracy 200 7.1 Assessing the Impact 205 7.1.1 The Formation Of The Collective Actor 205 7.1.2 The Process: The Democratic Dimension 211 7.1.2 Understanding (Non) Implementation 216 7.2 Explaining Results 220 7.2.1 Leadership Resources And SP Outcomes 220 7.2.2 Re-Inventing The Political Space 229 7.2.3 The Elusive Multilevel Governance 233 7.2.3.1 The Pros And Cons Of Proceduralisation 235 7.3 Conclusion 238 7.3.1 The Quality of Local Democracy 238 7.3.2 What Future For Strategic Planning? 242 Notes 246 Appendix 1 Semi-structured Interview 261 Appendix 2 List of Interviewees 266 Appendix 3 List of Main Stakeholders 273 Bibliography 282 LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Figure 2.1 Variables 82 Figure 2.2 Leadership vs. Associational density 85 Table 2.1 Case study selection 86 Table 7.1 Impact of Strategic Planning 203 Table 7.2 Leadership Typologies 226 Table 7.2 Associational Context Typologies 230 7 Acknowledgments I confess that over the past four years I have often cursed myself for embarking on what seemed like an endless endeavour, which seriously put to the test my social life and my bank account. Yet (now that I have finally written it and safe in the knowledge that, for the time being at least, travelling back in time is not a serious option) I can comfortably say that I would do it all over again. The grand ambitions of the beginning had to be scaled down and the empirical research certainly made me a little more cynical (but only a little) about the wonders of local democracy and citizen participation. My ideal of participatory democracy is clearly very different from what the reality of my case studies has presented me with. During my fieldwork, however, I met some exceptional people, whose enthusiasm and commitment to citizen empowerment showed me that there is indeed much disenchantment with our local ‘democracy’, but also sheer will to pursue positive change, collectively. This thesis is dedicated to them. They offered me their time, support, insider knowledge; they gave me access to documents and continue to bring me up to date on developments. Their work is inspirational and has informed much of my thinking and writing. Indeed the time I spent travelling around Italy - collecting interviews and material, meeting new and interesting people every day, learning so much - was the most exciting part of this PhD, albeit very challenging. An average of five interviews a day, running nonstop from place to place, with no car (and public transport in the Italian provinces is what it is): how I would have loved to have a PA! Back in London came the hard bit.