Project and Process: Long-term Management of an Urban Renewal Process in Malmö,

Sweden

Denise Maines

What are the long-term considerations for managing an initiative like Ekostaden Augustenborg?

• What types of funding are sustainable?• How can leadership be sustained?• How can reasonable goals be created for a 12 year

process?Environmental Health and Equity: Global Strategies and InnovationApril 30, 2011McGill University

Malmö, Sweden

MKB:

a city-owned housing company managing 1/3 of Malmö’s real-estate

May 24-July 15, 2010

Why Ekostaden Augustenborg?“People were ashamed of this area. You didn’t mention that you

lived in Augustenborg if you did. …maybe the reputation was worse than the actual fact, but the reputation was very bad”

Internationally acclaimed example of sustainable urban renewal Low-income neighborhood Focus on social and environmental sustainability Emphasis on maintaining low rent High level of collaboration between key actors 12 years of history (1998-2010)

“You see they kind of used ecological sustainability as a driving force to also drag along social and economic sustainability”

Three Areas, One Goal

•1800 apartments•3000 residents

Courtesy of Va Syd

A Series of Projects

Green roofs Open storm water

drain system Gardening projects Traffic calming Renewable energy

sources such as a windmill, solar panels

Waste reduction using biogas, composting, recycling

Questions and Methods

What are the long-term considerations for managing an initiative like Ekostaden Augustenborg?

41 semi-structured interviews 3 key stakeholder groups

Employees at the housing company Residents City officials

Best viewed as a process 

Three Phases: Intense phase, 1998-

2001 Phase Out, 2001-2008 Rejuvenation, 2008-2010

 Three key features:oFundingoCollaborationoLevel of Activity

Phase One: 1998-2001

High levels of funding, collaboration and activity Three key stakeholders agree to work together on

the Ekostaden project Grants drive project development Resident participation is prioritized Diversity of projects

“We will not go into this project if not the different departments who are involved have made an agreement that we should all make this the highest priority”—City

official

Phase Two: 2001-2008

Decreased funding, collaboration and activity Programme funding ends Change in personnel Resident participation decreases

Maintenance of old projects International attention Transfer of initiatives

“There were some real issues there about the long-term management, which we didn’t manage well… we didn’t address [it] properly at the start

of the project.” – former project leader

“When I came, the Ekostaden project almost had stopped. We were living, what is the correct

expression, old merits, eh, nothing new… and we felt that we had failed.”—Current housing

company manager

Problems with the project

Phase Three: 2008-2010

Environmental Project Manager Clearer sense of ownership Goal to work with residents

Financing versus funding The Malmo Model

Maintenance plan drives activity Laundry rooms Bathrooms

“Ekostaden is never finished, and that is just the way it is supposed to be.”—City official

Considerations for long-term management

Balancing funding and financing Grants are project-based, not processed-

based Financing increases rent

Long term leadership Importance of key players Creating key roles 

Mainstreaming a process Loses cutting edge Focusing on a flagship

Discussion

What role should short-term external funding play in sustainable processes? Time will tell if funding or financing is a better

model

How can processes accommodate shifting networks of collaboration? Creating a position may prove to be a long-lasting

solution, but must incorporate organic collaborative structures

Thank you to the IHSP, staff at the housing company, residents, and city officials in Malmo for making this case study possible

QUESTIONS?