Foreigners often tend to see the central, built-up zone of Malta as a single urbanised area on the periphery of Europe – a minor city sprawling from Attard to Tarxien and from Pembroke to Kalkara. Yet the fierce separateness of identity in our towns and villages, once physically divided by open spaces, can work to our advantage.

Key to this argument, which has been pushed by the Maltese government at EU level, is that different administrative levels may be more creative about solving their particular urban problems in a variety of ways while achieving the same overall and widely agreed aims. However, some consistency is also needed in certain cases.

A particular problem faced by traffic managers in Malta is partly caused by conflicting definitions of urban areas among the Electoral Commission, National Statistics Office, local plans and so forth – none of which seem to line up over where a town begins and where it ends.

This has led to difficulty when imposing speed limits in certain areas, a challenge that Transport Malta is doing its best to overcome, according to TM traffic expert David Sutton.

Speaking on the EU urban agenda this month at a public meeting at Meusac’s Europe House, planner Joseph Gauci said:

“We are moving away from the concept of administrative boundaries and looking more at the function of an area. Solutions have to be tailor-made to an area, region or country. When sectoral policies are drawn up we need to see what it means on the ground.”

Gauci gave an example from the education sector where the decision to build more schools is having a spatial impact.

Open green spaces in urban areas must be preserved, yet land owners have no option but to surround them with walls to prevent them being used for dumping.

In defence of Malta’s unique situation as a small island at the very toe of Europe, he added: “Peripherality allows us to be more creative and develop niches. It is not a question of capacity but of value added.”

In 2011, a lack of any harmonised definition of ‘a city’ to enable comparisons and analysis of different cities across the world led to the OECD-EU definition of an urban area. A city was considered as such if it had at least 50,000 inhabitants, including its commuting zone.

However, due to Malta’s size and the unique situation of its urban areas, a one-size-fits-all approach may not work so well here. Instead, a place-based approach is preferred, and due note has been taken at EU level.

Even though our urban conglomeration contains nearly half the country’s population, Malta has rightly baulked at the idea of its central built-up area being lumped together as a single city, or larger urban zone (LUZ).

It has since been noted by the European Parliament that the Maltese government is in favour of an EU urban agenda promoting “a broad framework of principles which is sufficiently flexible to take account of difference in administrative levels within member states”.

Challenges facing Europe today – the economy, environment and society at large – all have a strong urban dimension. Cities are also where a number of global challenges can best be tackled. As consumers of 80 per cent of the energy supply, cities also have a major role to play in the fight against climate change.

Creating a high-quality urban environment is a priority of the renewed Lisbon Strategy to enhance Europe’s potential for economic growth and job creation. But many European cities are suffering heavily from congestion, pollution, high noise levels and social exclusion

Creating a high-quality urban environment is a priority of the renewed Lisbon Strategy to enhance Europe’s potential for economic growth and job creation. But many European cities are suffering heavily from congestion, pollution, high noise levels and social exclusion.

There are no EU directives or regulations on urban affairs. On the other hand, decisions made about sectoral or cohesion policies in the areas of transport, environment and social affairs can have a significant impact on cities and on their capacity to deal with these challenges.

An integrated urban development policy, combining all these policy areas and involving actors at local, regional, national and European levels is clearly needed. Enter the urban development agenda, up for public consultation this month.

With nearly three-quarters of the EU’s population living in urban areas there is a growing focus in Europe on creating low-carbon, climate-resilient cities. It is part of a larger idea that has been growing since 1997 when it was noted that cities face a number of common problems. At the same time it was recognised that on a European scale, opportunities exist for potential solutions.

Values and objectives of the ideal European city, and a vision of Europe’s cities for the future, was first outlined by European ministers at a meeting on urban development and territorial cohesion, organised by the German EU presidency in 2007.

There has been consensus on specific urban objectives and values, how these aims should be reached and the role cities can play in implementing the Europe 2020 goals. The Leipzig Charter for Sustainable European Cities called for the sustainable development of cities through the greater use of integrated urban policy approaches, helping to ensure that cities are healthy and pleasant places to live in, with a specific focus on deprived urban neighbourhoods.

The idea was to attract people, activities and investment back to declining city centres while putting an end to urban sprawl as this generally increases traffic, energy consumption and land use.

The 2010 Toledo Declaration emphasised the role of cities for Europe’s 2020 strategy through the use of integrated urban regeneration projects in such areas as energy efficiency, housing renovation or improving public transport.

However, these declarations were not binding on member states, and calls for more concrete action came from the Netherlands and Belgium as things were moving too slowly. Having an EU presidency that switches its focus every six months proved to be a drawback as it did not allow enough time for real change to happen. Binding three countries to an 18-month work programme in a ‘trio’ presidency – an idea hatched by the EU council last year – may offer better chances of success.

Starting next January, the incoming trio made up of the Netherlands, Slovakia and Malta will each be taking their six months at the wheel, efficiently sharing resources and sticking to a common work programme. The 18-month programme of the trio should be finalised next month and will include an agenda for a secure energy and climate future, which is among the European Council’s five strategic agendas.

Challenges must be dealt with cohesively, in a consistent way across Europe and solutions must not be mere interim measures but be sustainable for future generations.

http://meusac.gov.mt/newsdetails?ns=1794