CITY IDENTITY DEVELOPMENT
COMPARING THE CASES OF ROTTERDAM
AND FRANKFURT AM MAIN
CITY IDENTITY DEVELOPMENT
-
Comparing the cases of Rotterdam
and Frankfurt am Main
Amsterdam June 2014
By Coen Hermans
Colophon
Master thesis:City Identity Development
Comparing the cases of Rotterdam and Frankfurt am Main
C.S.J. (Coen) Hermans 10430083
coen.hermans@kpnmail.nl
June 23, 2014
1st Supervisor Dr. Rick Vermeulen
Researcher and lecture at the Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences, University of Amsterdam
Second Supervisor Mw. A.P. (Anita) Blessing MSc
Postdoctoral researcher at the Facultyof Social and Behavioural Sciences, University of Amsterdam
Photos and figures: Unless otherwise mentioned all photos and figures are made by Coen Hermans.
University of Amsterdam
Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences Department of Urban Planning
Master Urban and Regional Planning
“What is the city but the people?”
i
Abstract
For the development of a city identity a lot of cities can trust on their traditional, historical grown city centre. However, there are also cities that have no historical city centre, because it was destroyed, for example as a consequence of war. Therefore this master thesis will research how cities with a relatively young and modern city centre try to develop a city identity and what kind of city identity it is they want to develop. The timeframe of the research is between 1990 and 2025. In order to research the city identity development of cities with a relatively young and modern city centre, two international cases studies are done in the cities of Rotterdam (the Netherlands) and Frankfurt am Main (Germany). Both cities are researched on the four components of city branding model of Kavaratzis (2008). The four components Kavaratzis separates are; Behaviour, Landscape strategy, Infrastructure and Organisational structure. In order to research these components an intensive analysis of branding and policy documents is done in combination with interviews with key persons. These key persons were representatives of organisations who were involved in the process of developing the city identity of Rotterdam or Frankfurt am Main. The comparison of both cases reveals that both cities are in different stages of the same city development trajectory and therefore want to develop different kind of city identities. For every phase another combination of components is used for the development of the city identity. Nevertheless the landscape strategy component is in every phase present as one of the most important components, because this is the most visual component of the city branding model.
Keywords
City identity, city branding, landscape strategy, behaviour, organisational structure, infrastructure, Frankfurt am Main, Rotterdam.
ii
iii
Foreword
The master thesis in front of you, represents the final work for m master’s degree in urban planning. Almost exactly one year ago I also wrote a thesis, but then for my bachelors at the university of applied science. By then I would have never though that I would be able to become a the scientific researcher I am now, so fast. I am really grateful that I had the change to do a Master study at the University of Amsterdam, because it offered me the theoretical depth I was looking for. Although it sometimes was very hard and it asked sometimes the most of me, I am really proud to present this thesis about city identity development. Ever since I started to study urban planning I have tried to include some international aspects. Therefore I am very happy that also in my final work I had one foreign case study. Nevertheless I am aware that I had could not done this without the help of some other, which I would like to thank now.
First of all I would like to thank my supervisor, Rick Vermeulen. As a supervisor he was always able to ask me the right questions and structure my sometime muddled thoughts. It was his inspiring supervision that kept me going.
Secondly I would like to thank all the representatives I interviewed for their time. Without their willingness to speak with me it would not possible to do this research.
Next, I would like to thank my fellow student, Rogier van der Hulst, with who I spend hours and hours in the library of the university, working on our thesis. And with who I drank gallons of coffee while discussing the progress we made with our thesis’s.
Finally, I would like to thank my family. Without their support and endless trust in my abilities, I would never been able to complete this thesis.
Coen Hermans
iv
v
Contents
Colophon
iv
Abstract
i
Foreword
iii
Contents
v
1
Introduction
-
1
-
1.1 Thesis structure - 2 -2
Theoretical Framework
- 3 -
2.1 City Identity - 3 - 2.1.1 What is identity? - 3 - 2.1.2 City identity - 4 -2.1.3 City identity in this research - 6 - 2.2 Relevant Concepts and Theories - 7 - 2.3 Research Methods and Strategies - 8 -
2.4 Linking the literature - 10 -
2.5 Hypothesis - 11 -
3
Method -
13
-
3.1 Research Method - 13 - 3.2 Choice of cases - 15 - 3.2.1 Case selection - 15 - 3.2.2 Cases - 16 - 3.3 Units of analysis - 17 -3.4 Data collection method - 17 -
3.5 Data analysing method - 21 -
4
Rotterdam
-
23
-
4.1 Historical context - 23 -
4.2 City Identity of Rotterdam - 25 -
4.2.1 Before 1987 - 25 -
4.2.2 1987 - 2000 - 26 -
4.2.3 The 2000s to 2014 - 27 -
4.3 Creating the Rotterdam City Identity - 29 -
4.3.1 Metropolis Rotterdam - 29 -
4.3.2 Rotterdam: A young and international city - 34 -
5
Frankfurt am Main
- 47 -
5.1 Historical context - 47 -
5.2 City Identity of Frankfurt am Main - 50 -
5.2.1 Before 1990 - 50 -
5.2.2 1990s (1990 – 1997) - 51 -
5.2.3 2000s - 52 -
5.3 Creating the Frankfurt am Main City Identity - 53 - 5.3.1 Positive aspects of a Metropolis - 53 - 5.3.2 Modern city with historical roots - 62 -
vi
6
Comparison
-
71
-
6.1 Development of the cities - 72 -
6.2 The city identity - 72 -
6.3 Development of the city identity - 73 -
7
Conclusion
-
77
-
7.1 The preferred identity - 77 -
7.2 Development of the preferred identity - 78 -
8 Discussion and Reflection
- 81 -
8.1 Discussion - 81 - 8.1.2 Scientific relevance - 82 - 8.2 Reflection - 82 -
References - 84 -
Appendix
Appendix I - Interviews Frankfurt am MainInterview plan – Stadtplanungsambt Interview – Stadtplanungsambt
Interview plan – Stiftung Polytechnische Gesellschaft - 15 -
Interview – Stiftung Polytechnische Gesellschaft - 19 -
Rotterdam Interview plan – Deltalinqs Interview – Deltalinqs
- 1 -
1 Introduction
In the world of today it becomes more and more important for European cities to distinguish themselves from other cities, because the urban landscape of cities in Europe has dramatically changed the last decades (Verheul, 2012). In the past the economic growth of cities was almost guaranteed by the industrial sector and its employees who came to the city. However, a combination of globalization, removal of trade-restrictions, de-industrialisation, rescaling and shifting to a service based economy changed the role of cities. This change gave cities a new position, namely as hubs in the international network. The changed role of the city made that cities had to compete with each other.
The competition between cities made the administrations of European cities more entrepreneurial. An important consequence of the shift to entrepreneurialism has been the application of the concept of ‘city marketing’ or ‘place marketing’ (Harvey, 1989) Many cities see the possibilities of using marketing techniques to urban governance, in order to increase the competitiveness by gaining attention for the city as a place to live, work or visit (Boisen, 2007a, 2007b). One of the marketing techniques used by a lot of cities is creating and promoting a city identity. This city identity must help to articulate the city in the globalized world (Riza, Doratli & Fasli, 2012) and to secure their competitive position (Seisdedos, 2006). Promoting heritage is favoured by a lot of European cities as a starting point to build their city identity on. The Canal Belt of Amsterdam is a good example of this (de Swaan, 2004). Although it was originally built for practical reasons, nowadays it is something unique in the world. Its authenticity creates a strong image for the city. The existing literature wrote a lot about the importance of the (cultural) heritage for the identity of a city (Hajer & Reijndorp, 2004; Rooijendijk, 2004; Evans, 2005; Jansen, Luiten, Renes & Rouwendal, 2012). However, not every city has the luxury of a city centre full of heritage, which it could use for creating a city identity.
Especially in Europe there are a quite a number of cities that last their medieval heritage as a consequents of a war or (natural) disasters. However, also these cities try to develop a city identity that can articulate the city in the globalized world, in order to improve the competitiveness of the city. To create a strong city identity is for these cities even more important than for others. When cities with a historical city centre decide to not actively work on their city identity, the heritage of these cities still will give a positive impulse to the identity of the city, even when there is no strategy behind it. When cities without a historical city centre do nothing on their identity, there is no back up and the negative aspects of the city will form the identity of the city (Rooijendijk, 2004; Evans, 2005; Jansen et al., 2012).
- 2 -
This thesis will examine the way how these cities with a relatively young and modern city centre try to develop their city identity. Although this research could be done in at least every Western-European country this research will be focussing on cities in the countries Germany and the Netherlands as representative countries. The research question of this research therefore is;
‘What kind of identity do cities in Germany and The Netherlands,
with a relatively young and modern city centre, try to develop and how do these cities try to develop physical contributions to this
identity since 1990?’
In order to answer this broad research question, several sub questions will be used to find the final answer. The sub questions of this research are: 1. What is city identity? 2. What determines the identity of a city? 3. How do cities with a relatively young and modern city centre decide what kind of identity they want? and 4. Is the preferred identity a stable factor over time? The sub questions mainly serve to structure the research process and will therefore not provide the structure of this thesis. The structure of this thesis is describe in the next paragraph.
1.1 Thesis structure
The thesis will continue with chapter 2 in which the theoretical framework of this research will be outlined. In chapter 3 the method of this research and the selection of the cases will be described. Chapter 4 and 5 contains the two case studies of Rotterdam in The Netherlands and Frankfurt am Main in Germany. These two case studies will be compared (with each other) in chapter 6.. The results of this comparison will be used to draw the final conclusions on in chapter 7. The last chapter of this thesis is reserved for reflection and discussion on the research and the topic of this thesis.
- 3 -
2 Theoretical
Framework
This chapter provides a review of the existing literature of concepts relevant for this thesis. First a short overview will be given of the existing literature about city identity followed by relevant concepts and theories. In the third part of this chapter the theoretical framework of the city branding model of Kavaratzis (Kavaratzis, 2008) will be explained. This framework forms the basis of the theoretical framework of this research. In the fourth part of this chapter relevant terms will be operationalized and the chapter will conclude with the hypothesis of this research based on the existing literature.
2.1 City Identity
In the existing scientific literature a lot has been written on city identity, because over the last two decades, more and more towns, cities, regions, and countries invested in branding campaigns in order to establish a reputation for themselves, and to have a competitive edge in today’s global market (Sevin, 2014). Also in Europe there is a growing number of cities and towns that have acknowledged that marketing could be a powerful instrument in such a new style of urban management (van de Berg & Braun, 1999). By creating a city identity the cities try to develop a clear and recognizable impression of themselves. This impression must help to attract tourist, to attract new investors and to stimulate urban development and so on. All in order to compete on the new global scale. Because this global scale is where the cities compete with each other more and more. This competition has grown over the last decades, because of fundamental changes in the economy, technology and demography. Together these aspects reshape the environment of towns and cities in Europe (van de Berg & Braun, 1999). So the development of a city identity is an important aspect in the global competition between cities. But how can this city identity be defined?
2.1.1 What is identity?
City identity is a form of what sociologist and psychologist call
social identity. Based on Verheul (2012) a short look at the term
‘identity’ alone is necessary, before looking at city identity. Sociologists and social psychologists base their thinking about identity development on relational aspects. Developing your identity is not something you do in a sort of social isolation where you can choose which identity you want. In fact they argue that the opposite is true. In 1953, Sullivan developed a theory which argues that people become who they are by mirror themselves to ‘significant others’(Sullivan, 1953). These significant others are people who we want to look like but also people we never want to look like. However, these significant others will influence the way someone behaves. Another import theory in sociology and social psychology is the aforementioned social identity theory. This theory argues that someone’s self-definition is based on the membership of social groups and the value and the emotional connection to that membership (Tajfel, 1981, 1982). When people are asked who they are, they mainly refer to social groups. For
- 4 -
example one can say; I am a designer, a footballer and a member of the Labour party. According to Brewer (1991) people need these social groups because they are searching for categorization, but at the same time they want to distinguish themselves. Therefore Brewer developed the ‘optimal distinctiveness model’. In his theory Brewer explains that inside a social group people will minimalize the differences. This applies to both, the social groups they are in and the social groups they are not in. However, the differences between the social groups will be maximized. So, mainly individuals will be judged on stereotypes instead of their individual and unique capacities (Verheul, 2012).
Previous social theories are both based on competition and as a consequences of that distinction. However, there are also other theories. One other important theory to mention is the ‘role-theory, which looks at the interdependency of different groups. For example the student and teacher or employee and employer. Both groups need each other to form their identity.
All theories mentioned so far in this paragraph explained the way people develop their identity, however, it does not explain what this identity is. Nevertheless, in the first place it is wrong to think that it is possible to say that someone has one and the same identity in every situation. People have different positions, identities and loyalties, therefore they construct a combined identity for multiple diverse aspects of their lives, like gender, ethnicity, their profession, their political colour and the cities with which they feel connected (Verheul, 2012). In conclusion it can be stated that it is impossible to define one single identity for a person because it is too personal and position related.
2.1.2 City identity
Before looking at City Identity, it is important to mention that the
terms city identity, -branding, -image and
-marketing are often used interchangeably. However, this is not
completely correct because there is a difference between the four terms. For this research it is important to explain city identity in relation to image and branding. First there is the preferred city identity of the policymakers of a city. This preferred identity is what they want that the city become. The policymakers want the people - both residents and visitors - look at the city in the same way as they do. The way the people look at the city is called the image. The image is the way people see the city and therefore can be different from what the city really is. In order to create an image in the peoples mind that is closely to the preferred identity, city branding is used (Figure 1). So city branding is the way by which cities try to create and communicate their identity. McCulloch (n.d.) and Muilwijk (n.d.) explain more about the differences between those different terms.
Figure 1 - Identity in relation with Branding and Image.
However, for this research it is important to give a clear definition of what is meant by city identity first.
- 5 -
As the conclusion of the previous paragraph said; it is not possible to define one single identity for a person, therefore, it is also not possible to catch the identity of a city in one image or picture. It is too personal and too position related (Verheul, 20120). Furthermore, Strauss (1976) argues that we can only imagine the city as a whole, if it is reduced and simplified. These simplifications of the city are constantly exchanged and copied by people, which makes that these images are starting to live their own life (Verheul, 2012). In this sense city identity is a simplification of what people think the identity of a city is. However, according to Bekaert (1989) this does not mean that it is useless to search for the identity of a city. ‘We shall never know what the identity of a city is and even less shall we know what is meant by identity or image. However, this does not mean that the use of these terms is useless or complete nonsense’ (Bekaert, 1989, p. 68). Because in reality people try to formulate and develop the identity of cities all the time. The impossibility to describe the identity of a city is as big as the desire of people to do so (Verheul, 2012). These attempts by people to describe the city identity influenced the people because they are going to behave accordingly. Therefore these attempts should be taken serious, because “if men can define things as real, they become real in their consequences” (Merton, 1995; Thomas & Thomas, 1928, p. 527). Also Riza et al. (2012) seems to agree when they say that city identity is about about “… creating images on people’s mind even who have not seen it before” (p.294). However, they continue arguing with “Therefore, identity is always exclusive and not reproducible” (Riza et al., 2012, p.294). This argument is supported by Kevin Lynch (1960) who defines city identity as the extent to which a person can recognize or recall a place as being different from other cities or places. So city identity is also about being exclusive in order to distinguish the city from other cities. It is exactly this element of distinction that characterise the dominant understanding of city identity (Dormans, van Houtum & Lagendijk, 2003, p. 30). According to Verheul (2012) city identity is mainly formulated as “…the recognisable, but hard to formulate essence of the city that distinguish the city form other cities” (p. 55).
Applying the sociological and social psychological theories about identity on city identity, it becomes clear how important a city can be in the social identity of the people who live in that city (Verheul, 2012). As the ‘optimal distinctive model’ of Brewer showed the citizens of a city are willing to minimalize the differences inside the city and maximize the differences between their own city and another city. Löw (2008) defines this as ‘städtische Eigenlogik’ and argues that the specifics of a city only exists in relation to the specifics of other cities. A city can only profile itself in a specific way by means of contrasting with the profile of other (rival) cities. Besides the optimal distinctive model, this also fits with Sullivan’s theory about ‘significant others’. Cities use each other to distinguish and develop themselves. A strong example, given by Verheul (2012), is Zwolle. This city in the periphery of The Netherlands promotes itself as ‘Green Zwolle’, the value of this identity increases mainly as the cities in the Randstad are experienced as hectic and crowded. So again the competitiveness and the distinction come forward as aspects that influence the development of an identity. Although again these are not the only aspects on which a city identity can be defined and
- 6 -
developed. Also the role-theory can be found in the practice of city identity development. Again a strong example is given by Verheul (2012) concerning the city of Zandvoort. Zandvoort promote itself internationally as the Beach of Amsterdam. So instead of competing with Amsterdam, it is focusing on the relation with Amsterdam.
In conclusion it can be stated that it is impossible to know the exact identity of a city, because it is to personal and position bound and the images are simplifications of the total complex city. Every person or organisation that tries to formulate the identity of a city makes constantly choices about which elements will be part of the city identity. But as Lynch(1960) showed, it is also about what the city identity is not, because it are the differences that the city can use to distinguish itself.
2.1.3 City identity in this research
Because ‘what’ the city identity is, is so personal and position bound it will not be possible to answer the first question in a way that covers every existing interpretation of city identity. According to Verheul (2012) only the strongest identity constructions are adopted by social groups in the city. Identity constructions in this sense are instruments used by formal and informal organisations to show others what they think that the city identity should be. These organisations have an idea about what they think the city is or should be and they are searching for each other to support this idea (Verheul, 2012).
In this research the focus will be on the city identity as formulated by the policymakers in the policy documents of the city. The perspective of the policymakers is chosen because of the assumption of Verheul (2012) that only the strongest identity constructions are adopted. Policymakers are assumed to be in contact(direct or indirect) with the citizens of the city and therefore will hear about many different identity constructions. However, the policymakers decide which identity constructions are strong enough to make it to the policy of the city. Secondly, Healey (2002) states that a city has multiple meanings that can be put into use for multiple strategic resources. Policymakers are the designers of the strategy of a city and therefore ought to know which of the different city identities fits best with the city’s strategy. Therefore the formulation of the policymakers seems to be the best way to examine the preferred identity of a city. According to Wortelboer (2008) “the preferred identity is what the city would like to be the identity. The city itself decide what it wants to be…” (p.34). In this case ‘the city itself’ are the policymakers.
As mentioned earlier, this research will focus mainly on the physical aspects of the city identity, because the construction of a city identity forms the basis for the development of certain project in the city. And exactly these projects have to make the preferred identity visible in the city (Verheul, 2012). In conclusion of this chapter, the definition of ‘city identity’ in this research will be: ‘The impression that policymakers want to create for a city, as
defined in the policy documents, in order to make the city competitive, distinctive and recognizable on a global scale’.
- 7 - 2.2 Relevant Concepts and Theories
In relation to the city identity – defined in the previous paragraph – different concepts and theories are developed about the way cities try to develop the city identity they want (the preferred city identity). One of the concepts that cities use is the strategy of organising cultural events. Cities are increasingly using cultural events to improve their image, stimulate urban development and attract visitors and investment (Richards & Wilson, 2004). Another theory is that most cities try to strengthen their visual image by creating symbolic markers (Dembski & Salet, 2009) or by integrating nonphysical elements such as culture, economic, social aspects and activities, in order to achieve a sustainable urban image (Rehan, 2013). Or in other words, Vanolo (2008) says that most cities are trying to promote new urban representations at an international level, and celebrate ideas of a cultural, post-industrial economy through campaigns of urban branding. Another way of how a city can get an identity is by focusing on the fact that it has grown over time. Not because of any specific policy or branding at forehand, but just because of its history. “The continuity of circumstances which shape the identity is formed by the continuity of certain conditions” (Ongül, 2012, p.1). Riza et al. (2012) summarize these trends by saying that one of the three approaches cities use is promoting heritage. The other two mainly used approaches are: cultural mega events and the construction of iconic buildings.
The underlying concept, which explains why cities develop a city identity, is the concept of competition between cities. Most of this literature is focused on the competition of brands at the expense of exploring the relations between people, symbols, meanings, and physical characteristics of cities (Sevin, 2014). In general there are two contrasting perspectives on the competitive advantages of city-regions. One emphasizes the benefits of scale and diversity that flows from concentrations of economic activity. The other stresses the quality of the interactions between firms and supporting institutions (Turok, 2003). In addition to this competiveness concept Lever (1999) argues, based on two studies (Cheshire ,1999; Chesire and Carbonaro; 1996), that the urban size of a city (measured as total population) and the economic potential have a positive effect on the competitive successes of a city.
Another important concept strongly related to city identity is city image. For this concept it is important to realize that the concept of city image is multidimensional; it is not limited solely to one urbanistic aspect but, rather, includes other dimensions (Luque-Martínez, Barrio-García, Ibánez-Zapata & Molina, 2007). The same can be said about city identity. Therefore the findings of this research must been seen in relation to other dimensions, like commerce and tourism, urban appeal, preservation of heritage, cultural and social resources. So although the focus of this research is on the physical aspects of the city identity development, it is important to keep in mind that these physical aspects always have a relation with other aspects of the city.
A final concept discussed in the literature is the effectiveness of branding and the content of branding (Lui, 2009; Stigel & Friman, 2006; Vanolo, 2008; Zhang & Zhao, 2009). Some authors doubt the content of branding and see it more as smoke than as a fire (Stigel & Frimann, 2006). They wonder if there is more behind the
- 8 -
slogans and the words. However, the question what the effect of branding is and what the content of a brand is, will not be part of this research.
2.3 Research Methods and Strategies
In the essay From city marketing to city branding Kavaratzis (2008) used a theoretical framework that was focused on the communication of an image or brand of a city. Figure 2 shows this theoretical framework. Kavaratzis separates three forms of image communication, namely primary, secondary and tertiary communication.
Figure 2. Theoretical framework of City Branding by Kavaratzis. Reprinted from From city marketing to city branding (p. 41), by M. Kavaratzis, 2008, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, The Netherlands
Primary communication relates to the communicative effects of a city’s actions, when communication is not the main goal of these actions (Kavaratzis, 2008). This primary communication is divided further into four broad areas; Landscape strategies, Infrastructure Projects, Organizational and administrative structure and City’s Behaviour. The secondary communication is the formal, intentional communication, that most commonly takes place through well-known marketing practices like indoor and outdoor advertising, public relations, graphic design, the use of a logo etc. (Kavaratzis, 2008). For answering the research question the secondary communication is less relevant. The tertiary communication is like the secondary communication much less relevant for this research. This tertiary communication namely refers to word-of-mouth, reinforced by media and competitors’ communication. It is linked with the rest by an interrupted line, as it is not controllable by marketers (Kavaratzis, 2008). So this tertiary communication is, just like the secondary communication, more about the marketing
- 9 -
of a city image or city brand and less about the what the cities do to create that brand.
For this research only the primary communication will be useful. Kavaratzis (2008) created figure 3 to show the components of the primary communication of a city brand. This model can be used to compare different cities and will help to reveal on which part of the city brand the cities focus the most.
Figure 3 – City branding model based on Kavaratzis, 2008
All the different components of the city branding model look at a specific part of the city brand. The different components will now be shortly explained.
Landscape strategy
The first component is Landscape strategy. This component is about relevant decisions and actions to architecture, urban design or public space(Kavaratzis, 2008). Goal of this part of the city branding model is to look at the physical part of the brand, therefore this is in most cases the most visual component of the city branding model.
Behaviour
The second component is Behaviour. This component mainly looks at three different things. First of all it looks at the vision that the city leaders have for the city (Kavaratzis, 2005; 2008). So it is about the broader vision for the future and the strategy of city. But it is also about what a city offers related to that strategy. Therefore this component also looks at what kind of events a city organise or wants to organise and this component looks at what kind of financial incentives a city provides related to that strategy or vision. For example to attract a certain kind of businesses to the city, who are important for the strategy of the city. This component will sometimes have some overlap with the fourth component of
Infrastructure. Landscape strategy o Architecture o Urban Design o Public Space Behaviour
o Vision of the city o Quality of service o Events o Incentives Organizational Structure o PPPs o Citizens’ Participation Infrastructure o Accessibility o Audience o Facilities
City Brand:
- 10 -
Organisational structure
The third component of the city branding model is the
organisational structure component. This component can be
distinguished in two parts. The first part is about the way the effectiveness and improvement of the city’s governing structure (Kavaratzis, 2008). This also concerns the communication and the involvement of the citizens and other interest groups in the city branding process. The second part of this component is about the way the city creates Public Private Partnerships (PPPs) So in summary it can be stated that this component is about the process behind the city branding.
Infrastructure
The fourth and final component of the city branding model is the
Infrastructure. This component is about what a city does to give
the infrastructure of the city a distinctive character (Kavaratzis, 2008). Most important to notice is that in this component infrastructure is about guaranteeing the city’s accessibility to the various audiences or sufficiency of various facilities, like cultural centres, conference facilities etc. (Kavaratzis, 2005; 2008). So infrastructure and accessibility in this component are about creating access to the audience and facilities and not about accessibility in terms of traffic.
2.4 Linking the literature
All the literature, concepts and methods explained in previous paragraphs are not standalone, but must be seen in relation to each other. First of all, Riza et al. (2012) explained that in general there are mainly three approaches for promoting cities: cultural mega events, restoration and promoting heritage and the construction of iconic buildings. Looking at the research question the ‘restoration and promoting heritage’ part is not an option for any of the cities in this research (as will be explained in paragraph 3.2), because the research is about focussing on cities with a relatively young and modern city centre. Therefore these cities cannot use heritage for their city identity. However, looking at the branding model of Kavaratzis (2008) the remaining two approaches both can be placed in the top of the model.
First, the construction of iconic buildings. This can be seen as a form of large-scale development and architecture. Therefore this approach fits in the component landscape strategy of the branding model of Kavaratzis (2008). Dembski & Salet (2009) also give arguments that landscape strategy is a good way of building a strong city identity. By creating symbolic markers, which can be iconic architecture but also constructions in the public space, the visual image of a city improves which contributes to the identity of a city. Finally Rehan (2013) explains that most cities are trying to strengthen its visual image in order to achieve a sustainable urban image.
Second, the cultural mega events can be placed in the component Behaviour of Kavaratzis branding model. Richards &Wilson (2004) argue that a lot of cities using this approach to improve their image, stimulate urban development and attract visitors and investment. By creating cultural mega events the city
- 11 -
will be promoted and therefore well-known on the international scale.
2.5 Hypothesis
So in conclusion, the hypothesis of this research will be that most cities with a relatively young and modern city centre use a strategy to develop their city identity with a strong focus on the ‘Landscape
strategy’ component. However, also the other components of the
branding model of Kavaratzis will be used for the strategy, because as Luque-Martinez et al. (2007) explains city identity has multiple dimensions. Based on the literature the ‘Behaviour’ component probably will be the second most used part in the strategy of cities to create their city identity. Connecting the other components to the landscape strategy component will help to integrate nonphysical elements, such as culture, economy and social aspects and activities to the visual and physically constructed image of the city (Rehan, 2013).
- 12 -
- 13 -
3 Method
The research is focusing on the identity of cities. In order to investigate the identity of cities in a clear and scientific way it is important to have a clear research method. In this chapter the research method is described.
3.1 Research Method
Figure 4 shows the total research design based on Yin (2009). The research begins with a review of the existing literature. Publications about city identity and city branding form the most prominent part of this literature review, but also literature of other related topics will be reviewed. Yin (2009) argue that “novices may think that the purpose of a literature review is to determine the answers about what is known on a topic; in contrast, experienced investigators review previous research to develop sharper and more insightful questions about the topic” (p. 9).
The research design of this research will be a multiple case study design (Yin, 2009). A case study is an empirical enquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident” (Yin, 2009, p.13). A case study is the best way to study the way cities with a relatively young and modern city centre try to develop a city identity, because it is a broad and complex phenomenon and cannot be studied outside its natural context. For both of the elements a case study approach is considered the most appropriate way (Bonoma, 1985; Rainisto, 2003). In this research a multiple case study is chosen over a single case study design because a multiple case study is more convincing and compelling. Multiple case studies are more powerful, more convincing and provide more insights than a single case study design (de Vaus, 2001). For reasons of resources and time limitations this case study contains only two cases.
Although the multiple case study design is chosen, the cases will be researched independently first. This will be done to get a full overview and understanding of the city identity of each city and the way each city tries to develop their identity before comparing them with each other. Comparing the two cases in the end will help to draw the final conclusions.
- 14 -
In order to make a good comparison between the cases. The cases must be researched over the same time period. Basically the starting point will be the deindustrialization of the European cities. This deindustrialization started in some cities a little bit earlier than in others. Therefore it is hard to point one concrete moment, but in order to give a sharp time frame for this research, 1990 is chosen as starting point for the research. By 1990 almost all cities in The Netherlands and Germany were facing deindustrialization. A first look at this starting point might suggest it is a bit of strange moment to start a research that focusses on cities with a relatively young and modern city centre. Why not start at the moment of rebuilding the city centre after World War II? There are several reasons. First, on the moment of rebuilding the city, the focus was, in most cases, on rebuilding the city and there was little attention for identity. And for cities that are rebuild in the 50s and 60s it could be a very logic choice to build new industrial areas. The question what the best rebuilding strategy would have been is not part of this research. However, what is part of my research is the moment that cities were forced to think about their image. That moment occurred when the industry was leaving the city. Cities with a historical city centre were able to fall back on that historical city centre and could use it as part of their identity and their strategy. In contrast, the cities that have a relatively young city centre did not have that option. Therefore these cities were forced to think more about their identity and possibly have to work a little harder for their identity than other cities. An important thing to notice related to this is that cities with a relatively young and modern city centre also started looking at their own strengths and weaknesses that occurred over time. So this research will be aware of the fact that every city comes from somewhere and has its own past that has an influence in some way. This will be noticed in the research but it will not form the focus of this research. Besides the starting point of 1990, the endpoint of this research in terms of time also has to be operationalised. Part of the research is also to examine how cities try to develop their identity today and what their plans and strategies are for the near future. Therefore the endpoint of this research will be in the future. Because most cities make strategic spatial plans for the next 10 to 15 years this will also be the maximum for this research to look forward. In order to give a sharp time frame the end of the timeframe of the research will be at 2025. Figure 5 shows a timeline with the timeframe of this research.
Figure 5 – Timeframe thesis research
Finally it is good to mention that an identity consists of different aspects that might or might not be in line with each other. For example a city can have an economic identity and a touristic identity. In such a case a closer look at the identities has to show if these two identities are independent or that they are still related in some way. When it turns out that they are related than they will be treated as one identity. If it turns out that a city has two
- 15 -
independent identities, than they both will be investigated as independent identities.
3.2 Choice of cases
3.2.1 Case selection
The goal of this research is to find out more about the city identity development in cities with a relatively young and modern city
centre, so in order to do this a case study will be done as explained
in the previous paragraph. According to Seawright & Gerring (2008) the cases of the case study have to be typical cases, because cities with a relatively young and modern city centre are typical form of cities. So the cases of this case study must be only representative for cities with a relatively young and modern city
centre. Nevertheless, it will be not possible to find cases which
represent all cities perfectly, because according to Yin (2009) this "...analysts fall into the trap of trying to select a 'representative' case of set of cases. Yet, no set of cases, no matter how large, is likely to deal satisfactorily with the complaint” (p.38). In order to explain what kind of cities is meant by cities with a relatively young and modern city centre, the opposite term – cities with an old- or historical city centre – should be explained first. By historical city centre in this research is meant an inner city that is there for many centuries. It has traditionally grown as city centre over decades and consists of old buildings, heritage and an old urban structure, for example Amsterdam. However, in the research question is referred to cities that have a relatively young and modern city centre. By ‘relatively young’, cities are meant that have no historical city centre and therefore had to (re)build another kind of city centre. By the modern part is meant that cities decided to not rebuild the situation as it was before the bombing, like for example Munster did. This modern part is added because the research is focusing on cities that have no traditional city centre to rely on, with rebuilding the original situations, these cities could still use their traditional city centre. Nevertheless although the city centre of a city is the specific character of the cities of this research. The research scale will be the entire city and not only the city centre, the administrative boarders will be used as the limits. Of course the city identity of an entire city can be based on only a part of the city, but it is not evident that this is always the city centre. Although the scale of the entire city is large, some cities will relate their city identity to the identity of a broader region. In this research, however, the focus will be limited to the scale of the city only.
So the cases has to be typical cases for cities with a relatively young and modern city centre, but besides that there are some variables that should be the same because previous research has shown that a differences in can influence the outcomes of the research. First of all both cases must have about the same population, because two studies by Cheshire (1990; Cheshire and Carbonaro, 1996) have shown that cities with a higher population rate are more successful in terms of competitiveness. Identity is part of this competitiveness. Second the city centres of both cities have to be about the same age. This is already a little named in the term relatively young. However, in order to make the differences in this as little as possible, the cases of this research must lost their
- 16 -
city centre as a consequence of a bombing in World War II. Finally the third aspect that has to be about the same is the economic situation of the country in which the city is located. According to Lever (1999) it does matter in which country a city located, because the most competitive cities - in terms of economy - are be found in the most successful nation-states.
Besides the similarities, the case selection is also done by making sure two differences. First of all the country the city is in and second the geographical position. By selecting the cases while they differ on these variables, the research can prove that these variables will not have an influence on the way a city identity is developed.
3.2.2 Cases
In total two case studies will be done. Because the research question is focussing on The Netherlands and Germany, in every country one case study will be done. Furthermore, these countries also preforming well in terms of economics and therefore can be seen as almost similar on this variable. The Dutch city selected for the case study is Rotterdam and the German city is Frankfurt am Main. Both cities will be specified more independently to prove their similarities and differences on the other variables as set in the previous paragraph.
Rotterdam
Rotterdam is with 616.294 inhabitants the second city of The Netherlands in terms of population (Centraal Bureau voor de Statestiek, 2014). Geographical the city is located at the west coast of The Netherlands in the Maas delta. During World War II the city centre of Rotterdam was bombed. Almost the entire city was destroyed. Immediately after the War the reconstruction of the city began. In a drive for innovation and modernization the city decide not to rebuild the old city centre, but to create a new city centre with a lot of attention for the accessibility by car. During the 1960s the harbour of the city was growing very fast and in 1962 it was officially the biggest harbour of the world. For a certain time this formed part of the identity of the city. However, today the harbour has moved to the west out of the city centre. This made the city searching for a new city identity.
Frankfurt am Main
Frankfurt am Main is the fifth city of Germany in terms of residents but has about the same number of residents as Rotterdam. With a population of 691.518 inhabitants (United Nations, 2014) the city is a little bit bigger than Rotterdam. The geographical position of Frankfurt am Main is in the middle of Europe along the river named Main. However, Frankfurt am Main is not located at a coast nor a delta and therefore has a different geographical position. Frankfurt am Main was also bombed during World War II and almost the entire city centre was destroyed. After the War Frankfurt also decided not to rebuild the old city centre, instead they chose to become a modern city. After the War Frankfurt lost the battle of becoming the capital of Germany from Bonn. However, the city became the financial centre of West Germany and later of unified Germany and even of the whole of Europe.
- 17 -
By studying these two cases it will be possible to draw conclusions on how cities in Germany and The Netherlands which have a relatively young and modern city centre because they were bombed in World War II, develop their city identity. And therefore it will be possible to answer the research question. The case study must also reveal of the fact that a city is located in another country or on another geographical position has an influence on the city identity development, since these are the aspects on which the cities differ from each other.
3.3 Units of analysis
This research will investigate all four components of the City branding model of Kavaratzis (2008). Therefore different sources will be used. First, there are the policy and branding documents and second there are the interviews with the informants. This makes the research design an embedded multiple case study (Yin, 2009).
3.4 Data collection method
As mentioned in the section above, different sources will be used in order to collect the data. According to Yin (2009) this is also preferable in case of a case study research design. For explaining the data collection method, it is important to point out that the research question of this research actually consists of two questions. In simplified terms the first question is; WHAT is the identity a city wants? And the second question is; HOW does a city try to get this identity? For both questions a different kind of data collection method is necessary.
For the first question – the WHAT question – it is important to find out what kind of identity the municipality and the city makers of a city prefer and why. To do this the most logic way of starting is by analysing the marketing and/or branding documents of the city. These documents must give a first insight in the preferred identity for the city and why that identity is preferred. However, it is possible that these documents give only a general idea about the preferred identity. To find out more about the details of this identity also policy documents will be analysed. However, every city has a lot policy documents on very different policy fields. It would be impossible to analyse all these different policy documents, therefore the focus will be on physical and spatial related policies. When the preferred city identity of a city change or when a cities has multiple preferred city identities, the research will be done for every preferred city identity, and in the last case also the relation between the preferred identities will be analysed. Besides this document analyses also interviews will be done with key persons in the process. This will be done because this document analysis alone will not give much insight in the possible identities that has not been chosen and it will possibly also not tell much about the process in which this identity was formed and chosen.
- 18 -
The second question of the research question is the HOW question. The basic for answering this question will be the model of Kavaratzis (2008), figure 3 and 6, as explain in paragraph 2.3.
Figure 6 – City Identity Framework, based on Kavaratzis, 2008.
Every city will be researched on all four components. However, because of limitations of time it will not be possible to research every component as comprehensive as Kavaratzis describes. Or actually as Kavaratzis not describes, because in some occasions he uses very broad terms, without further explanation, like for example the urban design projects that has to be researched for the
landscape strategy component. Because Kavaratzis does not
further explain what these urban design projects are, they could be anything between the redevelopment of the local playground to an regional restructuring plan. Therefore, for each component some limits are formulated to make it possible to research the components in the limited time of this research.
Landscape Strategy
This component is all about the build environment (see paragraph 2.3). However, in every city there are many architecture-, urban design- and public space projects, which cannot be investigated all. Therefore this component has to be delimit further. First of all Kavaratzis (2008) already gives a limitation in his own theory, when he argues that the purpose of the projects must be the creation of something new or redeveloped, but cannot be a maintenance project. A second limit is that the project has to contribute to the city identity on the scale of the entire city. Not larger, for example the identity of the region, but also not smaller, like the identity of a neighbourhood. Although architecture is named in this component, only architecture part of a large scale project will be researched. The fact that the project has to be a large scale project instead of a single building is therefore the third limitation for this component. Nevertheless in order to keep architecture not completely out of this component, a fourth criteria about the symbolic meaning of the projects is added based on Demski & Salet (2009). Demski & Salet (2009) argue that “symbolic mediation is essential to the reaffirmation of
Landscape strategy o Architecture o Urban Design o Public Space
Behaviour
o Vision of the city o Quality of service o Events o Incentives Organizational Structure o PPPs o Citizens’ Participation Infrastructure o Accessibility o Audience o Facilities
City Brand:
- 19 -
institutional meaning”(p. 623). So translating this to city branding it can be said that projects only contribute to the city brand if they are recognised and believed, from both an outsider and an insider perspective (Demski & Salet, 2009). Concrete for this research this means that the policymakers should add a symbolic marker in the project. This symbolic marker can be a landscape, landscape architecture, monument or artist performance (Demski & Salet, 2009). This is the fourth criteria for deciding if a project will be researched as a landscape project or not. Finally, when a large scale project is named in an interview by one of the key informants as an important project for the city identity of a city, then this project will also be researched.
In this research this component will be researched by examine which large scale projects are initiated in the period 1990-2014. ‘Initiated’ in this research means that the ideas of the project are in the strategic plans of the city in the period of 1990-2014. In practice this can mean that the project exists on paper but that it has not been built in reality, for example because of the economic crisis. It can also mean that something was built in the period 1990-2014, but that it was part of an older strategy. In this last case the project will not be part of the research. For this component the strategic spatial plans of a city will be analysed first. In additional the plans of the individual projects will also be analysed in order to get a deeper understanding of the project and its relation with the city brand and city identity.
Behaviour
Paragraph 2.3 explained that the behaviour component is about the vision of the city, events, and financial incentives. However, first of all a city develops a lot of visions for many different subjects. Therefore this research will only look at documents about the physical development of the city in the future. Secondly, cities also organise a huge amount of events that cannot all be researched. Therefore only events will be researched where the city had to compete for with other cities and events that contribute to the city as a whole and not only a part or neighbourhood of the city. For events that cities want to organise an extra requirement is that there has to be an official bid in which the city explains their plans for the event. Finally, there will also be a look on what kind of financial incentives cities gave, to attract people or businesses.
So for researching this component, in the first place strategic spatial plans will be analysed to reveal the vision on the future development of the city. Second, a list will be made of events the city organised and or which events the cities made a bid. Finally, the strategic plans will be used to see if the cities use financial incentives to attract people or businesses.
Organisational structure
In order to limit the research of the organisational structure component a branding theory of Hankinson (2004) will be used. Hankinson (2004) developed a branding theory that argues that the success of a brand depends on the relation of the brand with its surrounding. Hankinson (2004) separates four relationships. The first two, Primary Service Relationship and Brand Infrastructure Relationship, are relationships with the physical environment and therefore not relevant for this component. The third is about the relation with the media, described by Hankinson as Media
- 20 -
Relationship, which is according to Kavaratzis (2008) a form of secondary communication and therefore also not relevant for this component. But the final one is the Consumer Relationship and is about the relation with the users (Hankinson, 2004). In this case the users of the city are the citizens, interest groups and private partners. Combining this theory with the research method of Kavaratzis, this means that for researching the organisational
structure component, this investigation will only look at the
different involved stakeholders who actual use the city.
This will be done by researching the branding documents and strategic spatial plans, but these documents probably will give some little information about who are involved in the process. Interviews with key persons in the process will be the most import source for reconstructing and analysing this process. For every city two interviews will be done. In both cases one interview will be done with a policymaker and one will be done with a representative of a community network group or with a representative of an involve private party. Goal of the interviews was to reconstruct the process of decision making on the preferred identity of a city and the way Public Private Partnerships were created with actors who are also users of the city.
Infrastructure
For the infrastructure component, not every hotel with a conference room can be researched. Therefore, in order to limit the
infrastructure component, this thesis will focus solely on facilities
that contain a distinctive character. For judging the distinctiveness of a facility, the facility must be unique in the country of the city or a maximum of two other cities in the country may have the same facility. This number is chosen because truly unique facilities would bring up too little facilities for a good analysis and absolute uniqueness is not necessary for supporting the analysis, but more than three facilities in one country would make a facility too general and the contribution to the city identity too small. Besides the uniqueness of the facilities, the facilities should also be part of a bigger network or infrastructure that the city has in mind. Nevertheless, here it only concerns infrastructures in which the facilities are in more or less the same sector, like for example culture. So the infrastructure component is not about infrastructure in a way of an area where multiple different functions can be found. Beside the facilities themselves also the target group of the facilities will be analysed. This will reveal if the city is focusing on one specific group or on a broader audience to create the preferred city identity.
The unique facilities will be found by looking into the different strategic plans of a city. Once the unique facilities are found the specific plans for these facilities will be analysed to find out what the target groups of the facilities are.
- 21 -
Besides the different documents developed by the cities of the case studies, also additional scientific literature about the cities will be sought to support the findings of research. Figure 7 gives an overview of the research sources per component.
Landscape Strategy Behaviour Organisational Structure
Infrastructure Strategic spatial
plans (up from 1990)
Plans of individual projects
Strategic spatial plans (up from 1990) Branding documents Policies about attracting businesses and visitors
Events and bids
Interview policymaker Interview representative citizens or private partner Branding and strategic documents Strategic plans Plans of the specific individual projects
Figure 7 – Overview research sources per component.
Although the components are numbered as first, second, third and fourth all components are equal and can be research independently in any order. In this research first the question of what kind of city identity a city prefers will be examined before this model of Kavaratzis (2008) will be used to examine the way a city tries to develop this preferred identity. In order to structure the research process even more the Behaviour component will be research first because this also includes the vision of a city. This is in line with the search for the preferred city identity of a city. Next the
Landscape strategy and the Infrastructure component will be
analysed. The Organisational Structure will be investigate last, so the interviews can also be used to get information about the other components that could not be found the described way. However, this following order is a guideline that helps to structure the research, but it will be used very flexible. In practice it will probably turn out that during researching one component also data about the other components will be found. This is no problem because all the components can be researched independently and therefore there is no need to wait to start analysing the next component without finishing the previous one.
3.5 Data analysing method
Once all the preferred city identities of both cities are analysed on all four components of the city branding model, the findings will be compared with each other. This comparison will consist of three different parts. First of all the development of cities will be compared. This must reveal the kind of direction the city wants to develop. For example if the city wants to grow any further or if it does want to stay about the same size. Second, the preferred city identities of the cities will be linked to the development of the city to see if these two aspects are in line with each other or not. Finally the preferred city identities will be linked to the four branding components. This must reveal which components the cities used to develop the preferred city identity. By comparing the two cities it must become clear if there can be found some similarities in the way they develop their preferred city identities. The comparison of the cities will form the prelude to the conclusion.
- 22 -
Figure 8 – Skyline Rotterdam.
Reprinted from: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Gl1dr4h7mj0/UoqIa8aTH3I/A AAAAAABBCk/7wQaSlFzYHs/s1600/foto-798467.JPG
- 23 -
4 Rotterdam
4.1 Historical context
Today Rotterdam is the second largest city of The Netherlands with 616.294 inhabitants in 2013 (CBS, 2014). The city is situated along the river Maas in the Maas Delta. This is where the Maas flows into the North Sea (Figure 9). Because of this strategic geographical position Rotterdam was able to develop itself as a strong port city. The contemporary history of Rotterdam is closely bound up with the development of the port (Braun, 2008).
Figure 9 – Geographical position of Rotterdam
During the Second World War Rotterdam was bombed by the Nazi’s. This bombardment destroyed the entire city centre and parts of the port. The destruction brought the growth of the city to an end. However, after the Second World War the reconstruction of the city centre and the port became the driving force behind the growth of the city (Braun, 2008). The city of Rotterdam decided not to rebuild the entire city centre as it was before and the destruction of the port was used as an opportunity to modernise the infrastructure of the port. Instead of rebuilding the city as it was before the bombing, like many European cities that were bombed during the Second World War did, Rotterdam decide to build a new modern city centre. The reconstruction plan for the city centre was called “Basic Plan”. The plan envisaged new functions in the city centre and a considerably expanded road network (McCarthy, 1998). In the plan similar uses were located close to each other. This create different areas, namely a banking area along the West-Blaak, shopping centres along the Coolsingel and cultural uses at Schouwburgplein. The number of houses in the city centre was
- 24 -
limited since it was assumed that people would prefer to live in the suburbs (Harding, 1994). Although the plan was already made in 1946, national priority was given to the reconstruction of the port. The modernisation of the port infrastructure along with the development of new port areas such as the Botlek (1955), Europort (1957) and the first Maasvlakte (1967) helped Rotterdam to become the largest port of the world in 1962 (Braun, 2008).
In the early 1980s Rotterdam had to face a new challenge, namely the economic recession. The city saw a lot of the traditional industry leave the city. Although the service sector was growing at that time, it could not compensate the job losses. During the recession Rotterdam lost about 70.000 jobs and the unemployment rose to almost one fifth of the labour force. In the mid-80s the international economy recovered and Rotterdam began to grow again. The port was no longer the only ‘job generator’, also business services, finance, leisure and retail became import economic functions of the city (Braun, 2008). However, these service-based businesses were much more footloose and therefore Rotterdam had to compete with other cities to attract and keep these companies in the city (Florida, 2006). This new approach asked for a more ‘entrepreneurial’ style of local economic development (Harvey, 1989). In practice this meant that the city was run like a businesses and marketing and promotion became important aspects in running the city. From there it was only a little step for Rotterdam to start thinking about how to promote the city.
- 25 - 4.2 City Identity of Rotterdam
Looking further in to the process of creating a city identity of Rotterdam, the year 1987 seems to be an important year for the city. Van Ulzen (2007) named it the ‘magical year’ for Rotterdam. Originally, the starting point of this research was 1990, however, in order to give a complete overview and to do justice on the processes going on in Rotterdam, the year 1987 will be used as starting point. This will give a more structured and more complete overview of the way the Rotterdam developed its city identity.
4.2.1 Before 1987
Under influence of the ‘flowerpower’ movement of the late 1960s and early 1970s, large scale city development was associated with negative elements as traffic noise, air pollution and brutal capitalism (van Ulzen, 2007). This resulted in a depopulation of the large cities. Also the poor quality of the housing stock contributed to this process. Besides the depopulation also a lot businesses left the city and went to ‘overflow cores’, in 1972 called ‘groeikernen’ (growing cores). The reason for the businesses to leave the cities was the policy of the National Government to focus on ‘decentralisation’. Facilities should be spread out over the country, in order to give the local economies in the periphery a boost. Unsurprisingly cities feared depopulation, therefore policymakers started trying to give the city a more peripheral and village-like atmosphere (Burgers, 2002).
This trend also had its influence on Rotterdam. Dissatisfaction rose with the city centre of Rotterdam. According to a lot of citizens and policymakers Rotterdam had a unwelcome feeling and there was too less urban activity. Rotterdam was seen as a city where it, although it had shown a great performance in terms of economic recovery after World War II, was no pleasure to stay or to live in (van Ulzen, 2007). Politically, J. Mentink represented this dissatisfaction. From 1974 to 1978 he was the alderman of Spatial Planning, Transport and Public Works in Rotterdam. Under his administration the wish for a more small-scale approach became visible in the city centre. He announced a stop in building of high-rise office buildings in order to focus on the housing stock and to prevent mono-functional environment (van Aalst, 1997). Cars were kept out of the city with a strict parking policy, but probably his most daring act was the reduction of road lines on the Coolsingel, from six to four (van Ulzen, 2007). His acts were not standalone, but part of the view of the city government. The approach of the city government changed from an integral approach to a problem-orientated approach. A new ideal was formulated:
“building-for-the-neighborhood” (van Aalst, 1997, p.137). In 1982 de Haan &
Haagsma (1982) argued that this small-scale development was not a temporary trend, but the salvation of the city.
Looking back, it becomes clear that the small-scale development was in fact nothing more than a temporary trend. It was a logical response to the way people looked at the city at that time. Nevertheless, it is important to outline this temporary trend in order to get a better understanding of the impact of change of policy in 1987.
