This article was downloaded by: [Open University] On: 16 September 2013, At: 00:11 Publisher: Routledge Informa

Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Planning Perspectives
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rppe20

The Barcelona model: and an original formula? From reconstruction to strategic urban projects (19792004)
Francisco-Javier Moncls
a a

Departament d'Urbanisme i Ordenacio del Territori, Universitat Politcnica de Catalunya, Escola Tcnica Superior d'Arquitectura de Valls, Barcelona, Spain E-mail: Published online: 01 Dec 2010.

To cite this article: Francisco-Javier Moncls (2003) The Barcelona model: and an original formula? From reconstruction to strategic urban projects (19792004), Planning Perspectives, 18:4, 399-421, DOI: 10.1080/0266543032000117514 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0266543032000117514

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the Content) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Planning Perspectives, 18 (October 2003) 399421

The Barcelona model: an original formula? From reconstruction to strategic urban projects (19792004)
S* F R A N C I S C O - J AV I E R M O N C L U
Departament dUrbanisme i Ordenacio del Territori, Universitat Polit` ecnica de Catalunya, Escola T` ecnica Superior dArquitectura de Vall` es, Barcelona, Spain (e-mail: javier.monclus@upc.es)

Downloaded by [Open University] at 00:11 16 September 2013

The experience of Barcelona from the start of the 1980s up until the end of the 1990s has been widely described in academic and professional media alike. However, it is not easy to find global interpretations from an urban planning perspective. Some authors refer to the Barcelona model, focusing on design issues and the quality of public urban spaces. Others highlight the capacity to manage unique flagship events such as the 1992 Olympic Games, converting them into levers and strategic instruments of urban renewal and regeneration. Both versions tend to consider the Barcelona model as something singular, something almost unique in the panorama of international urbanism. To what extent can the Barcelona model, in fact, be considered as a unique phenomenon? Starting out from the diversity of the interpretations concerning the changes produced in the international planning culture and, at the same time, an approach closer to the processes and strategies developed in Barcelona during this period, this paper seeks to analyse the so-called Barcelona model, in order to reach a better understanding of its connections, the parallels and its specific characteristics compared with experiences in other cities.

Introduction Many architects, planners, urban designers and planning historians from different parts of the world have expressed special interest in the changes that have taken place in Barcelona in the last two decades. The experience has been widely cited and described in academic and professional media alike, although it is not easy to find global interpretations that take into account the different variables at play, even from a strictly urban planning perspective. Some have highlighted the formal dimension of these changes, the good design and the quality of the public urban spaces [1]. For others, the most significant element would be the capacity to manage a unique flagship event such as the 1992 Olympic Games, converting it into a lever and strategic instrument of urban renewal and urban regeneration [2].
*Francisco-Javier Monclus is an architect and Titular Professor of Urban Planning at the Polytechnic University of Catalonia (Barcelona). He researches aspects of planning history and theory in Spanish cities and is convenor of the 11th IPHS Conference to be held in Barcelona in July 2004. He was co-editor of the Historical Atlas of European Cities and editor of La ciudad dispersa. Suburbanizacion y nuevas periferias, published by the Centre de Cultura Contemporania ` de Barcelona. Planning Perspectives ISSN 0266-5433 print/ISSN 1466-4518 online 2003 Taylor & Francis Ltd http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals DOI: 10.1080/0266543032000117514

400

Monclus

Downloaded by [Open University] at 00:11 16 September 2013

In addition to these dual perceptions, it is interesting to note a certain contrast in the extensive literature generated over the last few years, between the approaches used by those who observe the Barcelona experience from outside and the more local visions over the same process which have come forward from within, often from those managers and professionals directly involved in the said experience [3]. On few occasions has there been any attempt to combine the international perspective with the local perspective. However, if one wishes to understand the degree of originality of the urban processes and the planning strategies undertaken in this period, it would seem clear that both perspectives need to be taken into consideration. To what extent can the Barcelona model be considered as a unique phenomenon? Or, on the contrary, is it possible to consider this model as a more or less original version of the discourse and urban planning practices experienced in other cities in the same period? Starting out from the diversity of the interpretations concerning the changes produced in the international planning culture and, at the same time, an approach closer to the processes and strategies developed in Barcelona during this period, this paper seeks to analyse the so-called Barcelona model to reach a better understanding of its connections and parallels with experiences in other cities. In addition, it seeks to discover the specifics and relative originality of the said model. In genera, the Barcelona experience tends to be seen as a unique episode, especially in the local literature referred to previously. In one instance, the originality

Figure 1. Barcelona and the first metropolitan ring, with the four Olympic Areas and other areas of urban intervention in the 1980s and 1990s (source: Atlas historico de ciudades europeas, vol. 1).

The Barcelona model: an original formula?

401

of the Barcelona experience was attributed to the special situation of the city, in the context of the then recently achieved democracy and of citizen movements, together with the singular role of the planners who had already formed the bases of the new Barcelona in the 1970s [4]. In contrast to these more local views, some foreign authors place it in the framework of the increasingly globalized planning of the 1980s and 1990s, albeit as an internationally unique thought [5]. In any event, it appears clear that the Barcelona experience has become a type of reference point and model, especially in the area of the local powers and for planners from other European and Latin American cities. As McNeill indicates from a critical perspective, the New Barcelona is a city considered as efficient, clean, cultured . . . a model of how the cities should look in the New Europe [6]. Other authors coincide in this consideration of Barcelona as an authentic planning model, becoming . . . one of the most potent international models of urban planning of the late 20th century [7]. As much from the most critical assessments as from the most official accounts, there seems to be an agreement in the recognition that what one is faced with is a unique case, in which a formula or model has been used which has shown to be successful. What is less clear is whether this formula has been discovered by Barcelona, or whether Barcelona is simply the place where the model has been able to be applied more or less correctly and efficiently. Of course, there are different ways of understanding the meaning of a model. However, the concept of a planning model has been drawn upon frequently in urban and planning historiography in the last decades. Furthermore, from Haussmanns Paris in the nineteenth century to Londons green belt concept and the United Kingdoms New Town planning in the post-war period, to Berlins IBA (Internationale Bauaustellung International Building Exhibition) in the 1980s, different formulae or models have been implemented in certain cities and in different time periods. The case of Barcelona could simply be considered as one more in a long series of formulae widely considered as a synthesis of what should be done in cities, especially within the time frame of the 1990s. Furthermore, for one of the key professionals directly involved in Barcelonas planning, the important thing was that urban transformations and the Olympic Games put Barcelona on the map and the Barcelona model was propagated as its modus operandi [8]. The way in which the official British circles have embraced Barcelonas planning is significant. In 1999, the professional body of British architects, the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA), awarded its prize to the city of Barcelona. This marked the first time that a city had achieved the prize, previously awarded to architects. Prior to this, in 1987, the city had achieved the American Harvard prize for its good design. However, the RIBAs Royal Gold Medal for Architecture in 1999 was given to the politicians and professional architects of the city council, for their commitment to planning, including the combination of spectacular urban projects and of small-scale improvements of squares and streets [9]. Therefore, the small-scale operations relating to public open space were highlighted as much as the larger strategic urban projects, representing two types of urban planning intervention associated with corresponding periods of the citys renewal. On the other hand, also in 1999, in the widely publicized report Towards an Urban Renaissance prepared by a group of experts and co-ordinated by the leading architect Richard Rogers at the request of the then new Labour Government there were significant references to the case of Barcelona. In this document, it is suggested that in the quality of our urban design and strategic planning, we

Downloaded by [Open University] at 00:11 16 September 2013

402

Monclus

Downloaded by [Open University] at 00:11 16 September 2013

are probably 20 years behind places like Amsterdam or Barcelona [10]. In the report, attention is focused on two types of planning intervention in Barcelona: the capacity to regenerate or treat central spaces through small operations of urban reform but also strategic projects characteristic of later intervention. Of particular significance is the fact that the former mayor of Barcelona, Pasqual Maragall (1982 97) was also asked to provide the foreword to the said publication. Maragalls message is clear: It is critical to understand that improving public spaces is relevant to solving social and economic problems. The initial small-scale operations were followed by large-scale strategic urban planning projects. The trick in Barcelona was quality first, quantity after [11]. In the texts previously referred to, just as in the observations from the Rogers Report, two dimensions of urban planning which have attracted international attention stand out: qualitative urban planning and strategic urban planning. It proves necessary, therefore, to clearly differentiate between these two components and two phases in the elaboration of the Barcelona model. These two lines of action are not, however, that far from corresponding traditions of international planning culture. What, therefore, is the originality of the Barcelona experience? Is it basically a question of a process of adaptation from these urban planning traditions? Or can it be better described as an elaboration of such importance that it represents a model from which other cities are learning? In a recent essay, Stephen Ward suggests the possibility that both hypotheses are not mutually exclusive, but rather complementary:
Today, paradoxically, Barcelonas planning and other lessons are being widely studied, borrowed and, to varying degrees, adapted in both the post-industrial and Hispanic developing worlds. . . . Maragall has played on the world stage, importing and adapting external planning models (for example, from Baltimore) and, even more, promoting the international spread of the Barcelona model [12].

What is absent from the report cited above, is reference to the metropolitan processes that in these same twenty years have transformed the wider structure and form of the metropolitan Barcelona the real city to which Maragall often refers into a metropolitan region ever more dispersed and less Mediterranean. Neither the green urban planning nor the metropolitan planning of Barcelona is considered as a relevant model in these works. The contrast which some authors observe between the important involvements of the British planning system in some of these aspects, such as controlling suburban growth, and the generalized weakness of the corresponding initiatives in Barcelona as in other cities of Southern Europe is striking [13]. Furthermore, such weaknesses seem to be a sufficient motive to explain this lack of interest or the more critical visions of other British authors.

The reconstruction of the city and qualitative planning: the projects of recovering public space during the 1980s In addition to considering the specific features of the city of Barcelona in the first half of the 1980s corresponding to a special historical moment (the change in the political situation with the recovery of democracy in Spain) it is important to understand the extent of this complete revision and change in the planning cycle at the international scale. If one wishes to understand Barcelonas planning during this early democratic period, it seems important to

The Barcelona model: an original formula?

403

refer as much to the new conditions deriving from the final stages of earlier urban growth, as to the atmosphere and the conceptual references in which urban planning practice developed in the new period. Without excessively stressing economic determinism, it is important to point out the parallels between the spread of the new planning ideas and the substantial changes that were produced both by the slowing of demographic and urban growth in European cities and the effects of the economic crisis of the 1970s and early part of the 1980s. It is certainly not possible to establish a simple and mechanical relation, because the movements that question conventional planning and functional urbanism based upon the Athens Charter actually date from the 1960s and early 1970s. It was in those years when, in Europe as much as in North America, there grew a new appreciation of the traditional city and its traditional collective components: streets, squares, closed street-blocks, etc. This contrasted with the negation or the abstract role of public space and a proliferation of blocks in the schemes of modern urbanism. It is also in that period when detailed morphological analysis of the city and identification of the architectural types began to be adopted, making consideration of the urban context the starting point of any small-scale project or planning development. It is possible to speak of a new generation of plans and projects and of a whole cycle of urban planning during the 1970s and early part of the 1980s interested in context and in restoring the links between architecture and urban planning. In particular, the formal aspects of urban planning were emphasized, while fundamentally architectural urban projects were also seen to be successful. All of this occurred, with different variants, also in Spanish cities, with Barcelona in the lead [14]. It is necessary to recall the energy with which these new urban planning conceptions were spreading as a reaction to the abstraction and limitations of modernist urban planning, which had dominated the actions carried out during the years of significant urban growth (1950s 1970s). Despite different meanings in each cultural and national ambit, various discourses and their corresponding slogans seem to run through architectural and urban planning culture, from the 1970s up to the early 1980s. The first of these is that of the architecture of the city, stemming from the book of the same title by Aldo Rossi (1966) [15], but also from a current with a particular echo in Italy, France and Spain (especially in Barcelona). Another of these slogans was the reconstruction of the European city, with different meanings, but which revealed the renewed interest for the existing city. In the more instrumental sphere, it is interesting to note the progressive importance of the urban project, as a more or less architectural alternative to the generalist planning that, with certain variants, had become consolidated in the years of high urban growth. All this tended to bring an overall vision to situations that, logically, reflected diverse historical and urban circumstances. It is not difficult to find similarities and affinities in the ideas that dominate even the most distinctive operations during the 1980s in different cities: as much those produced in Barcelona, as the grands projets and operations remodelling parts of Paris, or above all, those of the IBA in Berlin [16]. The shared elements are clear: new appreciation of the historic city (especially that of the nineteenth and early part of the twentieth centuries), the reclaiming of traditional public spaces (streets, squares and parks), the integration of urban planning and architecture as a reaction to the abstraction of an all-encompassing planning. In relation to urban planning, the idea of tackling urban problems through specific projects, especially the regeneration of public space and community facilities, gained ground gradually everywhere [17].

Downloaded by [Open University] at 00:11 16 September 2013

404

Monclus

The problem posed in the urban planning historiography is that the same phenomena have been interpreted from somewhat specialized or sectional points of view. Some have centred their attention on the deregulation of urban planning and the decline of the conventional plan [18] while others have been more interested in the formal dimension, closer to architecture and urban design [19]. Finally, there are those who consider all these changes as part of the emergence of so-called post-modern urbanism [20]. It is certain that the roots and trajectory of this movement are many and varied, and that they develop over a longer period than that of the crisis (from Jacobs in the 1960s to the Krier brothers in the 1970s and early 1980s). However, nearly always, one finds a notable dissatisfaction with and mistrust of the principles and methods of modern urban planning. It proved to be significant in the return, in a cyclical historic or pendular movement, more or less directly to the principles of previous urban planning: some from the nineteenth century, others from Urban Art from the start of the twentieth century, but all predating the formulations of the Modern Movement [21]. The situation recalls that at the end of the nineteenth century, when Camillo Sittes culturalist conceptions of urban planning were dominant, along with others concerning with the artistic construction of the cities [22]. The re-issue in different languages of certain classic texts from the urban planning of the nineteenth and early part of the twentieth centuries is clearly indicative of this. In effect, the texts of Sitte, along with those of Raymond Unwin or Werner Hegemann began to be reconsidered, with new prologues authored by renowned contemporary theorists [23]. It is interesting, therefore, to consider the affinity between these international currents and the attention to the existing city and its possibilities of reconstruction in the specific case of Barcelona. The fluid dialogue between Barcelona and the different schools of urban design (Venice, Milan, Geneva, Brussels, Versailles and Paris, etc.) is a clear manifestation in this sense. Although the more historicist versions of the discourse of the reconstruction of the European city led by the Krier brothers have not had a direct impact in Barcelona, the differences are not that great, as demonstrated by the translation of a number of their most important texts and projects and the interest which some of them gained in the local planning culture [24]. It is unusual, though, to see this return to a more architectural, qualitative and contextualist urban planning approach in considering the possibilities offered by actions in Barcelonas public spaces in the wider relationship to these cultural trends in European urban planning. Certainly, part of the movement of regeneration relates to the citys own needs and approaches so that excessively simplified visions of lineal diffusions of thought and architectural practice from other countries make little sense. The results, in Barcelona and elsewhere, actually show extremely varied forms, reflecting both the nature of each movement and the historical circumstances of the different cities. However, there is an element that has a central role in the interventions of Barcelona and also has an important place in the discourse of the reconstruction of the European city. This relates to the renewed interest for the role and the formalization of public space. Following a long period of disinterest in this theme, from the mid 1970s the need to recover streets and squares, hitherto empty spaces in housing developments, was pursued as a means of improving urban quality. The progressive obsolescence and abandonment of extensive properties in more or less central city locations, such as former industrial areas, port and railway facilities, all contributed to this change of vision. In a similarly pragmatic fashion, action on public space was conceived as requiring economically viable projects capable of relatively simple management.

Downloaded by [Open University] at 00:11 16 September 2013

The Barcelona model: an original formula?

405

Downloaded by [Open University] at 00:11 16 September 2013

Figure 2. Del Liceu al Seminari Project for new public spaces and cultural facilities in the Old City (source: Barcelona City Council).

The so-called culture of the urban project was highlighted in the City Councils first publications, albeit in an absolutely empirical fashion. However, it is in the well-known book by Oriol Bohigas Director of Planning between 1980 and 1984 titled significantly Reconstruccio de Barcelona, in which the principles of a new architectural and contextualist form of urban planning are put forward [25]. In the book the efficacy of small-scale urban projects as an alternative to the abstraction of conventional planning was proposed. The message is simple but strong: to overcome the limitations of planning one has to give way to architecture. At the same time the public spaces of the historic city, its squares and streets, etc., are recovered. It is not necessary to think in terms of a literal adoption of the principles

406

Monclus

Downloaded by [Open University] at 00:11 16 September 2013

Figure 3. View of the Old City (Raval) and Museum of Contemporary Art (MACBA).

of the reconstruction of the European city. However, a number of the convergent elements are clear. Above all, there is an understanding of the city essentially as architecture and an extraordinary emphasis on its morphology. This conception struck a chord as well with the visions of the fragmentary construction of the city or city collage of Colin Rowe [26]. Parallels can also be found in the ideas which dominate the urban transformations of other cities during the 1980s. Bohigas himself cites Berlin as the clearest reference in affirming that an interesting way has been experienced there: a city in which a reconstruction of the centre starting from the absolute respect for the road and the traditional form of the street [27] is carried out. Yet, despite this apparent similarity between the discourses of the reconstruction of the European city and that of the Barcelona model in its first phase, one should not forget the unique historical circumstances of Barcelona. In particular, the conjunction of the recovery of democracy and the important role played by the neighbourhood associations has justifiably been highlighted [28]. It is also important to bear in mind the special role played by the architects, in relation to other professionals and civil engineers, in particular. This was possibly one of the most distinctive aspects of the Barcelona experience during the 1980s [29]. Excessively generalized interpretations have tended to see a progressive abandonment of overall planning in this period. However, in Barcelona this was precisely when urban planning actions that were based upon the Plan General Metropolitano de Barcelona (PGM), formally adopted in 1976, were consolidated. It seems true, though, that the PGM became converted into a mere framework, or starting point, enabling the actual

The Barcelona model: an original formula?

407

Downloaded by [Open University] at 00:11 16 September 2013

Figure 4. New urban public spaces: Via Julia and Parc Nord (source: Barcelona City Council).

operations of qualitative urban planning to be carried out. Through the City Councils numerous publications (another characteristic of Barcelona), it is possible to analyse and explain the way these discourses were implemented in relation to urban form and the importance of the treatment of public spaces as a key strategy in the regeneration of the city. In reality, it is possible to see the different actions, through plans and municipal projects, as a way of redefining the urban structure, passing from projects of the urban sector to those at city and metropolitan scales [30]. Finally, it is appropriate to highlight Barcelonas urban planning in relation to other cities which shared the same general principles about necessary improvements, but where comparable urban planning operations were not carried out. Within Barcelona, approximately 150 operations of creating or recovering public space were realized during the 1980s, bringing international attention and awards.

408

Monclus

Strategic planning: infrastructure and major urban projects of the mid-1980s and the 1990s As in the early 1980s, what occurred subsequently in Barcelona can be understood as part of an international movement that, with distinct temporal rhythms and technical variations, developed in different North American and European cities. The quickening experienced with the economic regeneration from the mid 1980s relates to a trend that was obviously not exclusive to Barcelona. Yet the citys success, in October 1986, in winning the 1992 Olympic Games marks the fundamental difference between Barcelona and other locations. Again, therefore, the imposition of the new strategic visions associated with the urban planning culture of the 1990s resulted from a process initiated earlier. Here, the intention is not to refer exclusively to the so-called Strategic Plans, but to a more generic attitude centred in the functional and productive dimension of the city. This manifests itself in the roles of a diverse range of large urban projects and infrastructures. Understood in this way, those ideas would not necessarily be novel. In reality, modern urban planning grew out of the idea of the city factory and sought to apply Taylors thesis in its proposals, in which the city would acquire the character of a company [31]. All of this can be seen as a reaction to the architectural urban planning of the previous period. Similarly, it recalls the change produced at the start of the last century in North American cities, when the City Beautiful was replaced by the City Efficient slogan [32]. Once again, then, a pendular or cyclical movement is apparent, with some components returning to important elements of a previous cycle. Thus the late twentieth century planning trends recall the great city aspirations of many European cities, including Barcelona, at the start of the century. In a certain way, the urban ambitions of the 1990s, seeking to convert Barcelona into the Capital of the West Mediterranean, can be seen as a realization of the much earlier dreams of the Great Barcelona as Paris of the South [33]. Now, though, it sought to adapt the city to the pressures and opportunities derived from economic globalization, a process that accelerated in the 1990s and from which no large city would want to be excluded. One has to remember, though, that the crisis of the models of conventional urban planning and the new strategic activities occurred long before the economic recovery, during the crisis of the 1970s. At first, the large projects were seen as an antidote to economic and urban decline. Later, a number of projects were undertaken as a mechanism for the recovery and re-launching of cities. It was then that urban marketing became general, the different variants of urban promotion, and the renewal of the image of the city, coherent with the conversion of an industrial economic base into one of services. A discourse directed at improving the competitiveness of cities and their ranking in the international urban league and so widespread that some commentators have even interpreted it as a unique urban planning thought which would continue to have an effect throughout the 1990s [34]. This discourse was encouraged as a variation of the Eurocities conception, particularly by socialdemocratic local governments [35]. As indicated by Peter Hall, urban planning underwent a substantial modification during the 1970s:
planning turned from regulating urban growth, to encouraging it by any and every possible means. Cities, the new message rang loud and clear, were machines for wealth creation; the first and chief aim of planning must be to oil the machinery. The planner increasingly identified with his traditional adversary, the developer; the gamekeeper turned poacher.

Downloaded by [Open University] at 00:11 16 September 2013

The Barcelona model: an original formula?

409

Downloaded by [Open University] at 00:11 16 September 2013

Figure 5. Place promotion (international press advertisement 1986).

The art of leverage was the formula that spread in the form of the strategic urban projects throughout all Europe (with a clearly North American source). Hall explains that the London Docklands followed the US model, in the fundamental respect of using public capital to encourage private investment [36]. Yet, it is important to stress that the strategic conceptions of planning dominant in the 1990s cannot be mechanically associated to the neo-liberal ideas of urban planning associated with British Thatcherism or its international homologues (although neither can it be understood without these precedents). It is rather a case of a new attitude, based upon the conviction that urban planning interventions must be selective and orientated towards improving the economic and functional efficiency of the city. Also, within this new cycle, some planners invented diverse slogans to characterize this new form of urban planning. References appeared to third generation plans and to strategic urban projects. As in the previous case of qualitative urban planning, there exist different roots and versions: from the more traditional urban projects with certain strategic components to the socio-economic Strategic Plan. In this way, it is possible to distinguish those led by the public sector from those resulting more from business initiatives. Portas characterizes these third generation urban projects in terms of the mediation processes involved in their realization and the preference for these large projects, one of whose principal objectives would be that of facilitating the consensus and compromise of the actors [37]. A particular typology of the new urban strategic projects comprises those corresponding to the planning of large international flagship events. The Olympic Games constitute a clear example of such events [38]. A two-fold objective is pursued in all of them: the renewal of the image of the city and the use of the events as catalysts for pursuing specific operations of urban redevelopment. In this sense, there is an important contrast between the Olympic Games of Los Angeles (1984) and those of Barcelona. Most commentators have stressed the differences between the largely dominating private logic in Los Angeles, as opposed to public leadership in the case of Barcelona. The originality of Barcelona lies in the efficiency of public

410

Monclus

Downloaded by [Open University] at 00:11 16 September 2013

sector leadership, reflecting the significant political and social consensus of the moment. However, certain parallels exist when consideration is given to the other conceptions beyond the scope of the Olympic Games. Some commentators have argued that the Strategic Plan of Barcelona was presented in a rising economic cycle, more akin to that of Los Angeles than to other cities affected by economic crisis [39]. In both cities, the respective strategic plans were conceived in contexts of economic growth, rather than the economic crisis that was usual in most cities. Therefore, it was not a question of finding an antidote, but a tool to motivate and guarantee growth. On the other hand, it is useful to compare other cities that have concentrated their renewal strategies on a strong idea: that of the renewal of river frontages or waterfronts. In this area, some have found more or less direct inspiration in the models from the USA: Baltimore, Boston and other North American ports [40]. Effectively, the remodelling of Barcelonas Old Harbour (Port Vell) reflects these influences: the conversion of former port facilities for recreational, leisure and tourism uses in the Rouse style (after the developer of Baltimore Harborplace and Bostons Quincy Market, James Rouse). If Port Vell has a clear pedigree, a wider view gives a more complex picture. The Barcelona waterfront includes a wide variety of operations, according to its different sections. It is important also that the redevelopment of the Barcelona waterfront within the former port area was the responsibility of the Port Authority, whereas the redevelopment of the section stretching from Barceloneta to Poble Nou was the responsibility of the City Councils Planning Department. Besides Port Vell there is about six kilometres of seafront, in which a more Mediterranean variant of the international waterfronts was applied [41]. In particular, the conception of the Olympic Village (between 1982 and 1987) reflected a more complex vision of the generalized conversion of port and industrial facilities into thematic parks, in contrast to what happened in the Port Vell. In addition to the formalization of this urban area, there was a sort of project-plan that sought to reconcile the global scale of the plan with the demands of the

Figure 6. View of Barcelona waterfront, 1992 (source: Atlas historico de ciudades europeas, vol. 1).

The Barcelona model: an original formula?

411

Downloaded by [Open University] at 00:11 16 September 2013

Figure 7. View of Port Vell redevelopment (source: Barcelona City Council).

urban context. This can be seen as an example of these intermediate scale plans or complex projects reinvented by the Barcelona architects and planners [42]. In addition to the coastal and waterfront projects directly linked to and spurred on by the Olympic Games, there was another series of large projects in the city. These were developed and formalized from the mid-1980s and also fell into this category of strategic urban projects. These include the so-called areas of new centrality, the interventions in the city road system and other projects centred on large infrastructures, associated with the implementation of the ring roads and road accesses (Fig. 8). In relation to the ten areas of new centrality, it must be said that these developed ideas already foreseen in the PGM of 1976. They borrowed from the Italian Centri Direzionali, as in the inter-municipal Plan of Milan [43]. Their novelty is that they were now extended with a view to achieving a redistribution of central land uses. To these the two new Olympic sectors were also added (Montju c and Diagonal), making a total of 12 areas. These benefited from special planning conditions to attract the new types of management and tertiary uses in the services and facilities sectors, in spaces with obsolete uses but with good accessibility [44]. Meanwhile, there would also be operations associated with the remodelling of the port, the transport hub in the Delta del Llobregat, the airport, the high speed train and the Sagrera area, the Diagonal Mar operation, etc. [45]. During this last phase, in the period leading up to the preparation for the Olympic Games, these more strategic visions were imposed and the message of leverage was better understood. Barcelona was not an exception in the context of European planning, dominated as it was by city entrepreneurism during the 1980s and 1990s [46]. Undoubtedly, Barcelonas urban policy was focused on converting it into a more competitive and dynamic city, using the Olympic Games as an occasional catalyst for these strategic projects. This strategy proved so convincing that another major event currently underway the Forum of

412

Monclus

Downloaded by [Open University] at 00:11 16 September 2013

Figure 8. Arees de Nova Centralitat/New Downtown in Barcelona, 1986 (source: Barcelona City Council). 1, Diagonal-Sarria ` (Operating surface: 34 ha. Functional Program: residential, offices, hotels, sports and recreational, commercial). 2, Carrer Tarragona (Operating surface: 12.5 ha. Functional Program: offices, hotels). 3, RENFE-Meridiana (Operating surface: 30 ha. Functional Program: residential, offices, hotels, commercial). 4, Plaa Cerda ` (Operating surface: 11 ha. Functional Program: residential, offices, hotels, commercial). 5, Carles I- Av. Icaria* ` (Operating surface: 55 ha. Functional Program: residential, hotels, commercial). 6, Port Urba/Port ` Vell (Operating surface: 12 ha. Functional Program: offices, commercial). 7, Plaa Glories ` (Operating surface: 67 ha. Functional Program: residential, offices, hotels, industrial). 8, La Vall dHebron* (Operating surface: 72 ha. Functional Program: residential, commercial). 9, Sagrera (Operating surface: 80 ha. Functional Program: residential, offices, commercial, industrial). 10, Diagonal-Prim/Diagonal Mar (Operating surface: 35 ha. Functional Program: offices, commercial). 11, Diagonal-Les Corts* (metropolitan facilities). 12, Montju c* (metropolitan facilities).

Cultures 2004 and the second opening to the sea has been planned on lines not dissimilar to those of the international Olympic Games [47]. This is despite its exceptional nature, and its not being linked to a more typical and formally recognized urban event [48]. What also stands out in these years is the efficacy of the Barcelona model in its ability to deploy all sorts of political and planning instruments to motivate the large-scale projects. For the majority of observers, Barcelona has been converted into a winning city in the new

The Barcelona model: an original formula?

413

Downloaded by [Open University] at 00:11 16 September 2013

Figure 9. New Strategic Projects with the Forum of Cultures 2004 and new Seafront (source: Barcelona Regional).

international economic and urban order. Such is the extent of this that the Barcelona model has also been identified with this second strategic component of its planning development. Its diffusion or export to different Latin American cities is a truly curious phenomenon, as indicated by some Brazilian authors. Thus, Arantes refers to the fact that the increasing number of cities, in Brazil and in Latin America in general, that are contracting the consulting services of the Catalans and their disciples, or using their teachings, is impressive [49]. It is in this sense that one can observe the maximum extent of the promotion of the Barcelona model: from publications edited by the World Bank to reports prepared by Jordi Borja and Manuel Castells for the Habitat II Conference (Istanbul), in which the virtues of the model were presented [50]. As well as the task of advising on large-scale urban projects (for example the waterfront redevelopment in Lisboa Expo98 or in Puerto Madero, the new waterfront of Buenos Aires) and Strategic Plans for many other cities [51]. On the other hand, it is necessary to consider some differential features, indicating the limits of the Barcelona formula. Up to this point what has been referred to is the legal city as defined by its municipal limits, and not the real metropolitan urban region, the only one with which other large European cities can effectively be compared. This metropolitan Barcelona has more than 4 million inhabitants and occupies a territory of more than 3000 km2 (4.2 million inhabitants in an immediate area within a radius of 30 45 km of Barcelona). It would seem appropriate to refer briefly to the initiatives carried out or, perhaps, more correctly the weaknesses therein in this real and metropolitan city.

414

Monclus

Downloaded by [Open University] at 00:11 16 September 2013

Figure 10. Decentralization in the Metropolitan region of Barcelona: location of big companies, 1994 (source: J. E. Sanchez, op. cit. [55]).

Urban renewal and suburbanization: metropolitan perspectives One of the pretensions of the Barcelona model lies in the formulation of a European alternative to the North American models characterized by the processes of central urban renewal and the increasingly extensive suburbanization. The idea of Barcelona as a compact city seems to have been converted into another slogan associated with the strategies developed in recent years [52]. However, what is certain is that the processes of metropolitan decentralization experienced a spectacular acceleration precisely in the last 15 20 years, a period in which the municipal local authority of Barcelona lost almost 250 000 inhabitants, declining from 1 752 617 in 1981 to 1 508 000 in 1996, and coinciding with the decentralization of a significant number of jobs and economic activities [53]. In this context some have put forward the hypothesis that Barcelona would be expelling its problems to the rest of the metropolitan region. The traditional process especially in southern European cities of opposition between the centre and the peripheries would thus seem to be persisting in the renovated structure of the metropolitan Barcelona. To what extent is this, in fact, true? Can it be explained by a simple change in scale to the metropolitan ambit? Conversely, is it a matter of similar processes to those that take place in other North American or European cities, in which the central renewal forms part of the reconversion of the traditional cities in renewed urban regions? This is one of the most significant and important debates that has been developing in recent years. If it were certain that the model were dual, in the traditional sense of the processes that characterize European cities from the nineteenth century, the limits of the Barcelona model would be much more evident. In the authors opinion, it seems excessively forced to think of a repetition of the traditional processes characterized by the improvement of urban centres, contrasting with the proliferation of peripheries without quality. It is better to think in terms of a progressive

The Barcelona model: an original formula?

415

convergence with the most advanced models of sprawl in the North American cities and which increasingly affect the European cities. The theses enunciated by K. T. Jackson do not appear out of step, in this sense, in which the argument is made that suburbanisation can best be seen as part of an urban growth developmental model . . . American cities are not so much different from those of other countries as ahead of them [54]. Clearly, the urban realities of the decentralized North American cities are still a long way off. However, it does not seem that one is facing a simple expansion of the compact and traditional urban structure of Barcelona. Whether it be called an urban region, a metapolis, a metropolitan region or a city of cities, what is certain is that a substantial modification of this urban reality is being produced which finds its most notable expression in the proliferation of the so-called new peripheries. This is a Latin European version of the processes of decentralization and sprawl, but not as original as the excessively local interpretations at times seek to assert [55]. The abundance of available data concerning recent metropolitan growth and transformations indicate an accelerated process of change. Some of the more significant indicators include those relating to the occupation of land from 21 482 hectares in 1972 to 45 036 hectares in 1992, with a negligible overall growth. There has also been an exponential increase in mobility the daily entrances and exits of private vehicles in Barcelona increased from 600 000 in 1988 to 1 200 000 in 1998. In turn, this is associated with processes of decentralization and integration of the metropolitan region in 1990, 64.4% of the population worked within the same locality as their place of residence, changing to 59.5% in 1995 and 52.4% in 2000 (according to the most recent Metropolitan Survey 1995 2000). All of this has taken place in the Metropolitan region, without taking into account the phenomena of seasonal suburbanization, which extends the urban area far beyond the diffuse limits of the real city of Barcelona. What can also be witnessed is the clear incorporation within the overall metropolitan region of areas of formerly second homes now for first residential use. In reality, the decentralization phenomena alluded to previously are common throughout other large Spanish cities [56] and continue, albeit not necessarily in phase, with what has happened in other large European cities. As O. Nel.lo indicates it is necessary to note that this evolution is in no way original. On the contrary, it faithfully follows the path of metropolitan transformation found in the majority of large Spanish and European cities [57]. The consequences of this substantial change in the real city of Barcelona have been widely stated. There exists a certain degree of agreement in relation to the positive aspects associated with the reduction of excessive densities and the general improvement of the metropolitan territory, derived from the outward shift of former centrality and the creation of community facilities. However, the problems arising from the new forms of metropolitan growth are increasingly demonstrated, by way of environmental, economic and social costs. The dispersed city turns out to be more costly than the compact city. The question posed here is that of the inevitability, or not, of the new forms of sprawl. This already historical debate in English and North American cities is now becoming increasingly familiar in the Southern European setting. A number of researchers have highlighted the complexities and the paradoxes of the anti-sprawl campaigns [58]. In any event, both sides of the phenomenon have to be distinguished. On the one hand it suggests decentralization and on the other, extreme physical and uncontrolled dispersion. The first process proves difficult to avoid. Not

Downloaded by [Open University] at 00:11 16 September 2013

416

Monclus

even the countries benefiting from a firmer planning system have achieved this, as in the case of the Netherlands and the decentralization of the Randstad. The second aspect, in contrast, may be tackled with certain possibilities of relative success. There exists an important scope with regard to the accelerated occupation of land, to the emergence of suburban residential, industrial and commercial models of low-density development and the consequential unnecessary fragmentation and artificialization of open spaces. Certain urban planning strategies have proved decisive in other countries. Decentralized growth can be produced in a more or less controlled and compact manner, with or without indifference to the precise limits between urbanized areas and natural surroundings. Good examples of these are offered by the English cities, with a long tradition of strategies of containment and green belts [59]. It seems clear that Barcelona still has a considerable amount to learn from certain green and metropolitan urban planning traditions. Seen from this perspective the Barcelona model can be considered more a follower than a leader [60]. In effect, the green urban planning which constitutes one of the most important components of any advanced urban planning model of recent years, is still somewhat far from the comparable maturity found in other Northern and Central European countries. With regard to the maintenance of a sustainable, or simply a reasonable, urban structure with a progressive integration of metropolitan growth in the agricultural, forestry and natural environment, Barcelona has a considerable amount to learn and little to show. In this sense it seems that a certain lack of concern for what would occur beyond the existing, consolidated city, has been relevant in understanding the lack of capacity to control these types of processes. Barcelona has followed a path common in other cities, undergoing central urban renewal and a conversion into an increasingly less Mediterranean urban region, i.e. a less compact and more dispersed urban region. One could imagine that at this point what lies ahead is a Latin European variant of these processes [61]. In other cities in which these same dispersal processes are in a more advanced phase, the dominant concern is now with maintaining the vitality of the central areas. Nevertheless the unordered nature of the new peripheries in these Latin European cities is also notable. What has taken place in Barcelona is an urban planning resulting from the original re-elaboration and, above all, from the application of formulae outlined in other locations, relating to qualitative and strategic urban planning. However, from the metropolitan perspective it is more a question of an urban planning that appears to be thinking locally (in the legal city) and implemented globally (in the real city). It is, therefore, the reverse of the environmentalist movements maxim (thinking globally and acting locally) which has tended to prevail in recent years.

Downloaded by [Open University] at 00:11 16 September 2013

Epilogue and conclusions The main point to highlight is that the so-called Barcelona model has been extremely successful in the renewal and redevelopment of the existing nuclei of the city the centre and other metropolitan nodes. At the same time, however, it has limitations as an alternative to the extensive and dispersed form of urban planning so characteristic of North American and, increasingly, other European cities. What is being faced is not a

The Barcelona model: an original formula?

417

reference in the struggle for a greener and sustainable urban planning. Not even examples of high quality landscaping can detract from a lack of effective control of the new periurban landscape and of the new peripheries, even though they may be interesting palliatives. It is understandable, therefore, that those who analyse Barcelonas experience from the outside have focused on the impressive results of qualitative and strategic urban planning. With regard to the former component of the model qualitative urban design it seems clear that the reconstruction of Barcelona initiated strongly in the first part of the 1980s, constitutes an improved version of what has been carried out subsequently in other cities. For its quality and integration, Richard Rogers affirmation regarding the 20 year time lag in relation to the British cities does not seem exaggerated. A vast number of high quality redevelopments and urban improvements have been carried out in the central areas, maintaining and increasing the vitality and urban quality of the different urban centres (taken to mean not just the official central business district, but also all the central nuclei of the metropolitan region of Barcelona). It is precisely here where the most creative and novel aspects of the model have been demonstrated. All of this, despite the perhaps excessive trust in the good design, can help to explain not only the scant consideration for the wider metropolitan problem, but also what occurred at the same time in the citys new recreation/leisure and cultural commercial areas. In this sense, it is important not to lose sight of the nature of these successful new public/private spaces, such as Maremagnum at Port Vell, La Maquinista and Glorias. These large-scale shopping centres have experienced a genuine boom, contrasting with (or complementing, according to the optimists) the urban quality of the traditional squares and streets. In the case of the Illa Diagonal development, it involved an intrinsically interesting model of urban design that, especially in its exterior, was somewhat removed from the rhetoric of the Mediterranean city. Yet, the design also facilitated the developments redefinition in use, in the more private and autonomous sense. Turning to the second component of the Barcelona model the strategic planning associated initially with the preparations for the Olympic Games this has been subsequently maintained with as much, if not more, energy. This has promoted Barcelona into a high position in the international urban ranking. The negative consequences, relating to polarization and social exclusion, so much denounced in other cities, do not appear to have been produced in Barcelona. This is despite the greater importance given in the last post-Olympic phase to the logic of the private sector and flexible planning, whereby certain processes of a clearly North American origin, such as marketing and theme labelling of the city, have accelerated. These correspond to a highly globalized type of planning especially that associated with Strategic Plans which at the same time has converted Barcelona into a reference for other cities, especially those in Spain and Latin America. In any event, the capability demonstrated by the new Barcelona to borrow, adapt and elaborate original syntheses relating to the most advanced formulae of international urban planning culture, allows one to consider the possible reorientation of its objectives and urban planning strategies over the next few years. In particular, the operations associated with the Forum of Cultures 2004 will probably indicate Barcelonas capacity to tackle the challenges that are still outstanding. Until now, the notable success of city marketing strategies, linked to the new symbolic economy or cultural economy and based upon urban tourism, the

Downloaded by [Open University] at 00:11 16 September 2013

418

Monclus

media and leisure, contrasts with much less attention paid to other important aspects: public transport and, above all, housing. Tackling these issues in a more convincing way would mark a second stage of a wide reaching and really successful planning model, although likely to remain somewhat under-proportioned in relation to the concerns with image and economics. Thus, the culture of the city as a promoter of values (as advocated by the Eurocities movement) would remain, for the time being, notably subordinate to culture as a motor of industrial, economic and tourism development.

Acknowledgements An earlier version of this paper was given to the 10th IPHS Conference in London (2002). The author is grateful to the anonymous referees for their useful comments.

Downloaded by [Open University] at 00:11 16 September 2013

Notes and references

1. See, for instance: P. Buchanan, Barcelona, A City Regenerated. The Architectural Review, August (1992); P. Buchanan, Regenerating Barcelona: Projects versus Planning Nine Parks and Plazas. The Architectural Review, June (1984); P. Rowe, The Urban Public Spaces of Barcelona 1981 87. Cambridge, MA : Harvard University Press, 1991; and P. Rowe, Civic Realism. Cambridge MA and London: The MIT Press, 1997; B. Sokoloff, Barcelone, ou comment refaire une ville. Montre al: Les Presses Universitaires de Montre al, 1999; J. Gehl and L. Gemzoe, New City Spaces. Public spaces, public life. Copenhagen: The Danish Architectural Press, 2001. 2. T. Marshall, City Entrepeneurialism in Barcelona in the 1980s and 1990s. European Planning Studies 4, 2 (1996) 147 165; N. Portas, Lemergenza del progetto urbano. Urbanistica 110 (1998); S. Ward, Planning the Twentieth-Century City: The Advanced Capitalist World. London: WileyEurope, 2002, pp. 51 65. 3. J. Acebillo, El progresivo cambio de escala en las intervenciones urbanas de Barcelona (1980 1992). Urbanismo COAM 17 (1992) 35 42; J. Busquets, Barcelona. Evolucion urban stica de una capital compacta. Madrid: Mapfre, 1992; J. Borja, Barcelona: a model of urban transformation 1980 1995. Quito-Ecuador: Urban Management Series (PGU-LAC), 1995; J. Esteban, El projecte urban stic. Valorar la perif` eria i recuperar el centre. Barcelona: Aula Barcelona, 1999. See, also, the main official publications of the Barcelona City Council, all published by Ajuntament de Barcelona, Barcelona: Plans i projectes per a Barcelona, 19811982 (1983); Plans cap al 92 (1987); Barcelona. La segona renovacio (1996); 1999 Urbanisme a Barcelona (1999); Barcelona 1979 2004. Del desenvolupament a la ciutat de qualitat (1999). 4. J. M. Muntaner, El modelo Barcelona. Geometr a 10 (1990) 2 19; N. Calavita and A. Ferrer, Behind Barcelonas Success Story: Citizens Movements and Planners Power. Journal of Urban History 26, 6 (2000) 5. D. McNeill, Urban Change and the European Left. Tales from the New Barcelona. London: Routledge, 1999; O. Arantes, C. Vainer and E. Maricato, A cidade do pensamento unico. Desmanchando consensus. Petropolis (Brasil): Ed. Vozes, 2000, 2nd edn. 6. D. McNeill, ibid., pp. 114. 7. S. V. Ward, op cit. [2], p. 371. See also S. V. Ward, Re-examining the International Diffusion of Planning, in R. Freestone (ed.) Urban Planning in a Changing World. The twentieth century experience. London: E & FN Spon, 2000, pp. 40 59.

The Barcelona model: an original formula?

419

8. J. A. Acebillo, El modelo Barcelona desde el punto de vista urban stico. Espacio urbano y complejidad, in Pasqual Maragall (ed.) Europa proxima. Europa, regiones y ciudades. Barcelona: Ed. U. Barcelona and UPC, 1999, p. 229. 9. P. Wintour and V. Thorpe, Catalan cool will rule in Britannia. Barcelona to set the style for regeneration of 10 cities. The Guardian (May 1, 1999). 10. R. Rogers, Towards an Urban Renaissance. Final Report of the Urban Task Force Chaired by Lord Rogers of Riverside. London: E & FN Spon, 1999. 11. P. Maragall, Foreword, in R. Rogers, ibid., p. 5. 12. S. V. Ward, Re-examining . . . op. cit. [7], p. 56. 13. M. Hebbert, El Grupo de Trabajo Task Force y el nuevo enfoque del urbanismo britanico. Urban 4 (2000) 82 90. 14. F. Teran, Historia del urbanismo en Espana (vol. III). Siglos XIX y XX. Madrid: Catedra, 1999. 15. Aldo Rossi, Architecture of the City. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1982. 16. P. Rowe, Civic Realism, op. cit. [1]; B. Sokoloff, op. cit. [1]. 17. It is important to point out that this process has not been exclusive to Barcelona, having been experienced in other Spanish cities and starting in Madrid: R. Lopez de Lucio, Madrid 1979 1999. La transformacion de la ciudad en 20 anos de Ayuntamientos democraticos . Madrid: A. Madrid, 1999. 18. P. Hall, Cities of Tomorrow. An intellectual history of urban planning and design in the twentieth century. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1988. 19. G. Broadbent, Emerging concepts in urban space design. London-New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1990; A. Corboz, Lurbanistica del XX secolo: un bilancio. Urbanistica 101 (1990). 20. N. Ellin, Postmodern Urbanism. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, 1996; G. Amendola, La Ciudad Postmoderna. Madrid: Celeste ediciones, 2000. 21. M. de Sola-Morales, ` La segunda historia del proyecto urbano. UR 5 (1987) 21 27. 22. A. Sutcliffe, Why Planning History?. Built Environment 7, 2 (1981). 23. F. J. Monclus, Arte urbano y estudios historico-urban sticos: tradiciones, ciclos y recuperaciones. 3ZU. Revista dArquitectura 4 (1995) (ETSAB-Ambit) 92 101. 24. R. Krier, Stuttgart. Teor a y practica de los espacios urbanos. Barcelona: G. Gili, 1976; L. Krier, Preface to W. Hegemann and E. Peets, The American Vitruvius: an Architects Handbook of Civic Art (1922). New York: Princeton A. P., 1988. 25. Barcelona City Council, Plans i projectes . . ., op. cit. [3]. O. Bohigas, Reconstruccio de Barcelona. Barcelona: Edicions 62, 1985 (also in Spanish, Madrid: MOPU, 1986). 26. C. Rowe and F. Koetter, Ciudad Collage. Barcelona: G. Gili, 1981 (English edition, 1978). 27. O. Bohigas, op cit. [25], p. 118. 28. N. Calavita and A. Ferrer, op cit. [4]. 29. Ll. Moix, La ciudad de los arquitectos. Barcelona: Anagrama, 1994. 30. J. Esteban, op. cit. [3]. 31. F. Ascher, Me tapolis, ou lavenir des villes. Par s: Ed. Odile Jacob, 1995. 32. P. Hall, op. cit. [18]; J. L. Cohen, Learning from Barcelona; vingt ans de projects urbains et leur reception, in P. Subiros (ed.) Ciutat real, ciutat ideal. Barcelona: Centre de Cultura Contemporania de Barcelona, 1998, pp. 99 108. 33. F. J. Monclus, Barcelonas planning strategies: from Paris of the South to the Capital of West Mediterranean (The European Capital City, Amsterdam). GeoJournal 51, 1 2 (2000) 57 63. 34. O. Arantes, C. Vainer and E. Maricato, op cit. [5]. 35. Barcelona being a leading player in or inspiration behind the model of the Eurocity which other (often Left controlled) urban regimes have followed. D. McNeill, op. cit. [5], p. 132. 36. P. Hall, op. cit. [18], pp. 355 and 368.

Downloaded by [Open University] at 00:11 16 September 2013

420

Monclus

37. N. Portas, Lemergenza del progetto urbano. Urbanistica 110 (1998). 38. B. Chalkley and S. Essex, Urban development through hosting international events: a history of the Olympic Games. Planning Perspectives 14 (1999) 369 394. International Exhibitions could be seen in a similar perspective: A. Garc a-Espuche, M. Guardia, F. J. Monclus and J. L. Oyon, Modernization and urban beautification: the 1888 Barcelona Worlds Fair. Planning Perspectives 6 (1991) 125 138. 39. The Barcelona economist Antoni Castells (director of the Commission supporting the Economic and Social Strategic Plan Barcelona 2000), clearly points in this direction: L.A. shares more similarities than other U.S. cities with the case of Barcelona, which is why we have been more interested in knowing about it . . . A. Castells, Los Angeles 2000: a Model of Strategic Planning. Barcelona Metropolis Mediterrania ` 15 (1990) 121 128. 40. J. Busquets, Spanish Waterfronts. Aquapolis 3 4 (1999) 50 6; A. Font, Reforma del Port Vell de Barcelona. La explotacion parasitaria de la centralidad urbana. Urbanismo COAM 27 (1996) 32 37; S. V. Ward, Re-examining . . . op. cit. [7]. 41. M. Sola-Morales, ` La ciutat i el port: la historia ` continua. Barcelona Metropolis ` Mediterrania ` 1 (1986). O. Nel.lo, A transformaao de frente de mar de Barcelona. Cidade ol mpica, Diagonal Mar e Besos, ` in V. M. Ferreira and F. Indovina (org.) A cidade da Expo98. Lisbon: Bizancio, 1999. 42. D. McKay, La recuperacio del front maritime. Aula Barcelona, 2000; H. Meyer, City and port. Urban planning as a cultural venture in London, Barcelona, New York and Rotterdam. Changing relations between public urban space and large-scale infrastructure. Utrecht: Utrecht International Books cop., 1999. 43. N. Calavita and A. Ferrer, op cit. [4]. 44. Barcelona City Council, Arees de nova centralitat /New downtown areas. Barcelona: Ajuntament de Barcelona, 1987. J. Esteban, op cit. [3]. 45. BARCELONA REGIONAL, Barcelona New Projects. Barcelona: Ajuntament de Barcelona, 1999 46. T. Marshall, op cit. [2]. 47. J. Clusa, La experiencia urban stica de Barcelona 1986 1992 y las expectativas del Forum 2004. Ciudades 5 (1999) 85 96. O. Bohigas characterizes this new stage as the second phase of the Reconstruction of Barcelona: O. Bohigas, Ciudad y acontecimiento. Una nueva etapa del urbanismo barcelone s. Arquitectura Viva 84 (2002) 23 27. See the website of the Forum of Cultures 2004: www.barcelona2004.org. 48. In addition to this continuity in the visions of economists and architects, it is also interesting to show the use of a culturalist discourse as a replacement variant in the urban strategy adopted by the City Council. Replacing the usual discourse on Expos or Olympics, a new discourse on the culture of cities is now emerging as can be seen in the words of Joan Clos, the present Mayor of Barcelona at the 2002 Eurocities meeting: [notes-ext]Culture is becoming, more and more, a strategic instrument for our cities development. The challenges posed by globalisation, the multiculturality of our societies and the technological trends of our economies, require answers to achieve the management of cities. For this reason, we must also consider culture as a priority strategy to create cities as real shared civic spaces . . . (J. Clos, opening of Eurocities Conference, Barcelona, 2002 (website: www.bcn.es/eurocities2002barcelona/)) An interesting discourse which could be also seen from a more critical perspective: S. Zukin, The Cultures of Cities. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, 1995. 49. O. Arantes, C. Vainer and E. Maricato, op cit. [5]. 50. J. Borja, op cit. [3]; J. Borja and M. Castells, Local & Global. London: Earthscan: 1997. 51. F. Santacana, El planejament strategic. Barcelona: Aula Barcelona, 2000, p. 36.

Downloaded by [Open University] at 00:11 16 September 2013

The Barcelona model: an original formula?

421

Downloaded by [Open University] at 00:11 16 September 2013

52. J. Busquets, op cit. [3]. 53. Mancomunitat de Municipis del Area Metropolitana de Barcelona, Dinamiques ` metropolitanes a larea i regio de Barcelona. Area Metropolitana de Barcelona, Barcelona, 1995. Different studies consider that the legal city of Barcelona is increasingly becoming converted into the CBD of the metropolitan region: see T. Vidal, Barcelonians: from 1996 into the future, in Autores varios, 1856 1999. Contemporary Barcelona. Barcelona: CCCB, 1996. For a global view of metropolitan planning in Barcelona: M. Torres Capell, La formacio de la urban stica metropolitana de Barcelona. Lurbanisme de la diversitat. Barcelona: A.M.B. Mancomunitat de municipis de Barcelona, 1999. 54. K. T. Jackson, Crabgrass Frontier: The Suburbanization of the United States. Oxford C: Oxford U.P., 1985, p. 303. 55. F. J. Monclus, (ed.), La ciudad dispersa. Suburbanizacion y nuevas periferias. Barcelona: Centre de Cultura Contemporania ` de Barcelona, 1998. See, especially, J. E. Sanchez, Barcelona: transformaciones en los sistemas productivos y expansion metropolitana, in F. J. Monclus (ed.), ibid., pp. 81. See also: O. Nel.lo, Ciutat de ciutats. Barcelona: Ed. Empuries, 2001. 56. Again, comparisons with Madrid show many similarities: J. Angelet, La descentralizacion del empleo y de la residencia en las areas metropolitanas de Barcelona y Madrid. Efectos sobre la movilidad urbana. Urban 4 (2000). 57. O. Nel.lo, op cit. [55], p. 115. Other studies by a key actor who was Head of Planning at the Generalitat (Regional Government of Catalonia) during the 1980s and 1990s adopt different perspectives: J. A. Solans, Locupacio de en el sistema metropolita ` central durant el per ode 1980 1998, in AA.VV., Ciutat compacta, ciutat difusa, Papers. Regio Metropolitana de Barcelona 36 (2002) 5172. 58. R. Bruegmann, The paradox of anti-sprawl reform, in R. Freestone (ed.) Urban Planning in a Changing World. The twentieth century experience. London: E & FN Spon, 2000, pp. 158 70. 59. M. Hebbert, op cit. [13]. 60. S. V. Ward, op cit. [2]. 61. F. J. Monclus, Decentralization, containment and green corridors: Compact city strategies in Spanish cities, in R. Freestone (ed.) The twentieth Century Urban Planning Experience: Proceedings of the 8th International Planning History Society Conference and 4th Australian Planning History Conference, Sydney: University of New South Wales, 1998, pp. 647 53.