URBACT National Dissemination Points: Where Do They Come From? Where Do They Go?

Q: Ségolène, can you please give us some background about URBACT National Dissemination Points?  How were they created and which is their mission?

A:  The NDPs were created with the idea that there were many urban practitioners in different countries that could benefit from what was produced by URBACT, the exchanges and the results of the projects, but who could not read English well enough to access the material directly on the URBACT website, which is in English. So we wanted to find national on-line networks working on urban planning, that already have a specialized audience and enough visibility, in order for them to disseminate and communicate about URBACT. The way the NDPs were selected was though a call for tender. An external assessment panel chose the ones that seemed able to reach out an audience beyond the URBACT community. In the countries where no such website existed or presented itself, the Ministries decided to do it themselves, on their own website. To this day we have 20 active URBACT National Dissemination Points! Most of NDPs activities today are focused on communicating URBACT and its results. They publish each month a news bulletin that is framed on the URBACT newsletter, but they translate it, publish it on their website and send it to their subscribers. They also manage and animate a page on their website that is dedicated to URBACT, where they present the cities of their country that are members in URBACT, the projects these cities work on. NDPs also produce new content about these cities, writing articles, doing interviews and so on. Some NDPs have also developed other types of activities, such as participating to external events in their countries, where they provide information about URBACT, distribute URBACT publications, do presentations and animate the URBACT community in their country.

Q: Which are in your opinion the strong points of NDPs? Which among their tasks they managed to do best? Is there a main learning point from this experience?
A: It is difficult to answer this question because each NDP is different from the point of view of their structure (some are private, some private-public bodies, in close relation to ministries and some are Ministries) and we don’t have the same agreement with all of them. If I were to pick one common strong point, it would be the ability to develop a specific audience related to URBACT in their country, and the continuous exchange they have with this public. Talking about good practices, these too can be very different. For example, one of the recent good practices comes from the German NDP that wrote an article on URBACT III and proposed it to several newspapers. 2 of them took on the article, one printed and one on-line. This proves that the NDPs can reach to a far bigger audience than their specific one and that there is a big potential around them. Another interesting example comes from the Slovenian NDP that developed a strong relation with the city of Ljutomer that was part of URBACT Active Travel network. They did a video interview with project partners that was very successful, as it was a story about the people and the city, how they engaged in URBACT, what they have learned, the type of project they developed. Some NDPs also developed a lot their social media tools, not all likewise. The Italian NDP for example relays a lot on their on-line network  (twitter, facebook) to promote and disseminate URBACT outputs and events, and this works very well.

Q: On the other side, which are the limits that you see in the work NDPs have done so far? Which are the risks that such a mission can encounter?
A: One of the main limits is the fact that each NDP is different, starting from the structure that hosts the contact point to the work they do and the public they have. This makes it such that it is difficult at times to compare them and what they do and to have an overview on how far their activity is reaching. Another problem relates to the fact that at the beginning the NDPs were not supposed to be in contact with URBACT networks, but to act as a multiplier of the information coming from the Secretariat, translating it and using their channels for sharing this information. But this way they weren’t close enough to the local URBACT community that is made of Local Support Group members and local project partners which are a key source of information and news for the national level. This new dimension developed in the last years and it still is a work in progress. The Spanish NDP for example created a specific column in its news bulletin, publishing relevant URBACT information that comes exclusively from the Spanish URBACT cities, such as events, the publication of outputs and so on. Unfortunately, this type of activity was mainly developed for on-going projects and not so much for the ones that are now closed. Another point that is sometimes problematic, but here again it varies from one NDP to another, is the link they develop with the Ministry in charge of URBACT, especially when the NDP is not an affiliated structure or directly based within the Ministry. They are not in the closest loop of information about URBACT and therefore not always in the best position to deliver information about URBACT related to the national bodies of governance of the programme.

Q: An what about the opportunities? Which are the activities that you think likely that the NDPs will develop in the future? Is there a menu of possible roles and activities for them?
A: What we saw from the activities developed so far is that focusing entirely on the on-line channels is not enough. So we are thinking seriously to include in the “NDP Menu” also the participation to external events, where the NDPs could provide information and support about URBACT, distribute publications and so on. Another possible option on the table, but still to be decided, is if they could play a role in informing about the calls for proposals that URBACT periodically launches, helping also networks to find partners in their countries and conversely. They could also have a role in more links between the URBACT community and other cities in their country, be an active player in the urban community, if such networks exist. And finding ways to have the information circulate We are also thinking that the NDPs should communicate and inform about URBACT, by producing new content as well.  Communication can be co-creation it doesn’t have to be just translation.  By working with cities, experts, city managers, they could develop specific content for their country, which is not the case today.

Q: And one last question for you Ségolène. It’s been almost 5 years now that you are in charge of the coordination of National Dissemination Points for URBACT. How was and still is this experience for you?
A:  Maybe the best point for me was that during all these years I’ve met with people from Europe who are passionate about urban planning and about communication. They are willing to make efforts to reach out to new public and to present URBACT in new and interesting ways. It is about people that invested time, energy and though in finding innovative ways for communicating about URBACT. A big challenge of this work was related to the fact that almost all my communication with them is at distance. We use phone appointments, skype, mails, but the human contact is lacking. If you multiply this by 20 NDPs, it can easily become overloading, but recently we’ve started using a digital communication platform and we’ve started also developing multi-directional communication, so things are moving also from this point of view. And if there’s something I’ve learned about communication in general is this: if you want it to really work it has to be co-created and multi-directional! 

Read more: The list of URBACT National Dissemination Points - URBACT website