Elisei

Pietro

Elisei

Validated Lead Expert

Generic Skills

B.1. Understanding of integrated and sustainable urban development:

My professional profile unites a 20-year experience combining tasks as researcher in the field of urban and territorial policies (doctorate + a number of different research contracts both for public and private institutions), with assignments as international expert in urban planning (expertise in urban policy design, focus on urban regeneration and strategic planning). In these fields, I have gathered different experiences as project and content manager. Among major clients, it is worth remembering EC, UN-Habitat and UNECE. I have a number of publications on topics related to integrated urban planning and integrated territorial approach. Issues connected to sustainable development have been always central in my work as practitioner (especially in the identification and design of projects in strategic plans/agendas) and as researcher (to investigate the multiple and interrelated component of sustainable and coherent solutions for the urban ant territorial realm). Integrated and sustainable development is the result of multi-actors and multi-thematic planning processes. Good governance and sustainable choices are strictly dependent on capability of shaping flexible, effective and efficient policy schemes that permit to all involved parts to have room for their ideas and interest. A sustainable development is in primis a result of a local rooted and participated decision-making process.

B.2. Understanding of exchange and learning processes at transnational level:

I have gathered in my professional activity good experience in managing EU projects based on exchange of planning experiences, policies, programs or practices related to spatial planning (e.g. INTERREG III, INTERREG SEE projects and so on) and on proper transfer of knowledge, transfer of good practices from a city to others (e.g. URBACT). To operate exchange of knowledge requires a relevant capability of listening, interpreting and transferring the experiences implemented by planners, civil servants, NGOs and other planning actors. Moreover, it requires a good knowledge of the different planning systems, but even understanding attitudes and behaviors related to the local and specific way of putting them into practice. In every city, planning contexts, traditions and approaches have character of uniqueness, even if European planning systems and way of designing and shaping policies, at a first outlook, seems to be very similar, but different are planners’ approaches. It is essential to me to find always new and effective way to keep alive and make effective dialogue among the main planning actors constituting the local support groups. It is crucial to have in the own “box of tools” a number of contemporary and innovative “best and/or worst practices” settled to consent to participants the direct learning from concrete examples: learning from real experiences. Finally, it is important to manage and put emphasis on diversity and cross-cultural management techniques.

B.3. Proficiency in English:

In 20 years of professional career, I have delivered a relevant number of project’s report generated within EU projects. My basket of EU projects contains different programs and initiatives. It is worth remembering: a) The territorial cooperation initiatives (e.g. INTERREG, URBACT, ENPI and so on), b) The IT/ICT projects looking to developed platforms and smart solutions for the urban environment (e.g Tentelekom, ICT-PSP and so on), c) The research-action oriented ones (e.g. FP6, FP7 and currently Horizon2020). In these projects I had a role of content or project manager, it means I had to manage and organize meetings, taking notes and make quick briefing, draft proper project reports on specific scientific or organizational subjects: all this has been done in English. Moreover, in my researcher activity, I produced articles and books in English; moreover, I have been invited to hold keynotes speeches on topic relate to urban planning. I have already worked as URBACT lead expert (TUTUR) and even as thematic expert (LUMASEC, RE-BLOCK). I think that all achievements reported here above demonstrate my capability to speak, understand and write in English at a good level. Additionally, I speak, write and understand the German and the Romanian languages. I manage at sufficient level the Spanish and can just read French and Portuguese.

Expertise for the design and delivery of transnational exchange and learning activities:

Summary Expertise for the design and delivery of transnational exchange and learning activities:

Many methods are good to create, share and capture knowledge. It is fundamental to make the distinction between information and knowledge, availability of data and useful and effective information. We need, in experiences based on practices content exchange or transfer, to develop the capability of “translating” a specific local expertise in a one usable in a different and often distant context. It is important to take useful information of best practices and to re-aggregate them in the new context, thanks to the interaction with components of Local Support Groups. People are engaged in the moment they feel protagonist in the process and owner of the identified projects. It is important to make involved people to become designer, bringing them from the “complain phase” to the pro-active one. To support people to focus on explicit problems in specific urban areas help a lot the planning process. It is necessary always to understand and to define the ‘planning context” to make participation effective, syntonic and synergic with “elected decision makers” and other interests insisting on the selected areas. Partners, local support groups actors, external experts, decision makers are the font, the users and the persons using and validating the captured knowledge. It is essential to make the appropriate questions, but even to listen the answers, that is the way for sustainable choices. Finally, caught knowledge has to be converted in open content driver of innovative ideas.

Thematic expertise:

Theme / Policy:

Integrated Urban Renewal

Summary Thematic expertise:

In 20 years of planning experience, as both practitioner and researcher, I have cumulated a number of experiences related to integrated urban renewal and regeneration. Beyond scientific publications I wrote about the design of policies for urban regeneration and renewal in Europe (doctorate thesis – 2004, and many articles), I can rely on sound experience on consulting cities, regions and national ministries on topic related to urban regeneration and renewal policies. Moreover, in my role of expert in this topic, I consulted/interacted with many cities, from capital cities to small and middle-sized ones, among these: Bremen, Rome, Madrid, Torino, Cluj, Iasi, Perm, Samara, Alba Iulia, Kavala, Baia Mare and many other small ones. I have experimented/mixed methods to get the most out of participatory planning processes, especially at neighborhood level. I believe that sustainable solutions are based on local rooted processes, where a “local clarification; is triggered among the different governance tiers, where “urban dialogue”, with institutions, with residents and with private actors/investors, is put at the center of the planning process. Finally, in contemporary initiatives for urban regeneration/renewal, innovative ideas lies in the re-interpretation of functions and values of public space. A public space enriched by intelligent objects, hyper-connected people. An enriched space that is becoming the predominant and most significant infrastructure of cities.

Theme / Policy:

Urban Strategic Planning

Summary Thematic expertise:

In 20 years of planning experience, as both practitioner and researcher, I have cumulated a number of experiences in strategic planning. My experience is based on EU cities, but in my portfolio, I have even cities outside EU member states. Among the strategic plans, it is worth remembering: Alba Iulia, Kavala, Samara/Tolyatti, Perm. Recently, I designed and coordinated one major project, EU financed, on strategic planning in South East Europe: STATUS (STRATEGIC TERRITORIAL AGENDAS FOR SMALL AND MIDDLE SIZED TOWNS AND CITIES), where attention focused on small and middle-sized cities (10 strategic plans realized in less than two years: www.seecityplatform.net ). These cities are the ones that need to think about their future if they want to keep competitive and at the same time maintain a good level in quality of life. It is important, in coordinating strategic planning processes, to focus the attention on the way decisions are made, enlarging and sharing decision is a success factor. It is central to provide mechanisms that make local communities becoming owner of the selected projects; this projects ownership is a basic step towards sustainable choices. Finally, to set up the governance mechanisms sustaining the designed strategic plan, it is important to create policy schemes that facilitate vertical and horizontal integration of institutional actors. Institutional actors that have to be contextualized within PPPP frames (Public Private People Partnerships).

Expertise support to local authorities and other stakeholders in designing & delivering integrated and participatory policies

E.1. Knowledge on participatory methods and tools for co-production and implementation of local polices :

The choice of methods depend on local context, scale of project, planning actors, planners involved. In the 3rd edition of Italian national competition on participatory planning, we (planners team) got the 2nd place, the award was delivered by INU and WWF. It was in Bologna, we used the ‘scenario planning” unites to a job of data collection, interviews and meetings designed to better listen people. Another experience was in the Mezzogiorno, I had to facilitate “institutional participation”. It means I had to enable the dialogue between labor unions, trade unions, confederation of entrepreneurs and the regional managing authorities. In this situation, the best option was to know into detail the regulations for managing the structural funds (content knowledge), and bringing the discussion always on transversally acknowledged territorial issues, in order to generate a collaborative dialogue. When I had to create conflict to move stagnating debates, the provocation was done always on real projects and never on political themes. Last experience is the project STATUS (see C1.3). Methodology based on: 1) an inception phase, 2) planning process, 3) the delivery of the Strategic Agendas, and creation of the Urban Centers. Both of these final activities supported by the creation of local Urban Task Forces (providing continuity to participation). A book on this methodology, how to design strategic plan through participatory planning process, has been financed by EU Program SEE.

E.2. Knowledge on integrated approach for the design, delivering, monitoring and evaluation of urban strategies/policies:

From 2007 to 2009 I worked as international expert in contracts having as final beneficiary the Romanian Ministry for Regional Development. I had to accompany major cities (growth and development poles) to design PIDUs (Urban Integrated Development Plans, with strong component of urban regeneration). Local preparation to use integrated planning tools was not so consistent. Methodology to deliver and design the plans was based on operational meetings involving civil servants, politician, ngos, entrepreneurs, academics (all potential stakeholders). I usually divided the participants in Groups, every group, based on competences, had to develop a specific conceptual axis for development (e.g. green corridors, culture, mobility, local economy…) asking to integrate the specific theme with the others. It was transferring by making drawings and talking about consistency and consequences of projects put on paper, assessing level of synergy and compliance with EU strategies and funds. As far as monitoring and evaluation concern, from 2008 to 2012 I published a number of scientific articles on consequences and transformation induced by this relevant EU policy in a post-communist nation (see my CV). I considered as parameters: liaison of selected projects with the indications emerged in meetings discussion, their impact and sustainability, assessed under diverse viewpoints, their level of synergy and the integration potential, even these assessed under different perspectives.

E.3. Awareness of the main policy and funding schemes for sustainable urban development at EU and national level:

I use different sources in order to keep up to date about policies, funds and trends related to sustainable urban development policies. Access to diverse database of major scientific reviews (e.g. European Planning Studies, City, International Journal of Urban and Regional Studies, Urban Studies, Urbanistica, Town Planning Review). Subscription to EU publications (e.g. Panorama), monitoring the EUbookshop, the DGregio website. Following colleagues (international experts), EU commissioners, and politicians playing roles in urban and territorial development on TWITTER or FACEBOOK, when possible even in LinkedIn. I like to participate to international seminars and conferences, the direct exchange with colleagues is always the most effective way to understand what’s going on. When I can, I keep teaching in the university, as the direct contact with new generations help to understand the new needs and aspiration of future urban planners, they often reflect direct problems they experience in contemporary city. I try to read recent books on this subject; I am facilitated a lot using KINDLE. My role of ISOCARP VP help me a lot to be informed about initiatives launched by international institutions (EU, UN, OECD, EIB…), and get in direct contact with issues arisen in meetings, seminars and conferences. Finally, I like to have long walks in the city, and I like to observe realized projects, current transformation and trying to have a critical and detached opinion.

E.4. Ability to understand specific local situations and adapt tools and content to different local realities:

I was involved in many projects, financed by EU Territorial cooperation programs (Interreg, Urbact) or directly responding to cohesion policy funds, competition (Tentelekon, ICT-PSP), research (FP6, FP7, Horizon 2020) or financed directly by cities. In these projects, I had to adapt content and indications at local level or the opposite, from local level practices to generalize values for policy design. My role of urban planner in adapting tools and content, in the different local contexts, is based upon few principles: • The decision making process should be a result of coordination and integration of the diverse interests emerging during the planning process. • The sustainability of choices is guaranteed just if identified projects are local rooted (residents really want that projects). • It is essential at the beginning of every participatory planning process to operate a “local clarification” (who is doing what, even institutions should give guarantee of coherence in the process in order to keep under control the political mood). • It is vital to identify proper places for the local support groups in the city (e.g. Urban Centers), where stakeholders can experiment diverse techniques of participations and be informed through different means (cinema, experts, seminars, books presentations, exhibitions…). • Participatory budget initiatives (politician give room to residents in making decision about part of local funds) reinforce the stability and credibility of the process.

Summary Expertise:

Many local authorities, practitioners, decision makers are not familiar with the concept of integrated territorial approach. As policy designer/urban planner I had the privilege to support national and local authorities to prepare policy schemes to facilitate the use of EU and local funds. Effective and concrete policy schemes pursue the integration of the different resources that can play a role in the “urban development framework”. Integration relates to governance tiers (vertical), to local actors (horizontal), to coordination of the many potential solutions (prioritization). This multidimensional integration is not easy to achieve, as many divergent forces operate. Highlights concerning my working experience are: • The assistance I provided to Romanian cities (growth poles and development poles) to prepare PIDUS (2007 -2013, Urban Integrated Development Plans), a relevant ERDF investment in integrated planning finalized to promote urban regeneration actions. • The design of strategic plans for cities in different EU member states and even outside Europe. I always promoted planning frameworks capable to open the decision making process to multiple interested planning actors, looking always at realizing public – private – people - partnerships. • The assistance I provided in the Italian Mezzogiorno to facilitate the dialogue between regional managing authorities and labor unions, trade unions, confederation of entrepreneurs in order to design the ROPs.