Urban Benchmarking step-by-stepUSESPON workshop on Urban Benchmarking
6.11.2013 Dorota Celińska-Janowicz
Urban Benchmarking step-by-step
• Aim
Scope
• Data: gathering & analysis
Visualisation
• Interpretation
Discussion
Urban Benchmarking step-by-step
• Aim
Scope
• Data: Gathering and analysis
Visualisation
• Interpretation
Discussion
Step 1: Aim and scope
• Aim
Diagnosis (assessment)
Development goals (strategic documents, consultations)
Communication about achievements
• Scope
Type of analysis: processes vs results
Type of reference group – other cities, external standards
Thematic scope
Reference group – selection criteria, final choice
TRAP:Starting analysis
without defining an aim
ESPON FOCI, SGPTD, ESPON
typologies
Identification of cities for a reference group
ESPON FOCI: Typology of metropoltan areas,based on GDP dynamic 1995-2004
Urban Benchmarking step-by-step
• Aim
Scope
• Data: Gathering and analysis
Visualisation
• Interpretation
Discussion
Step 2: Data and visualisation• Gathering data
Sources: national, Eurostat, ESPON Completeness - time, territorialComparability - methodology of indicators (important also during
interpretation) Final selection of indicators (accurate, understandable, interpretable, adequate
number) Qualitative elements – yes/no Preliminary database
• Calculations relativisation– per capita, density, percentages,
combining categiories, standarisation of units, currencies Final database
• Visualisation: maps, graphs
TRAPS:- Concentration on
easily measurable factors
- Outdated indicators
ESPON Database, Hyperatlas, CityBench
Visualisation
Benchmarking of Warsaw, Berlin and Paris metropolitan areas
Source: www.mojapolis.pl
TRAPS:- Map: choice of presentation method (cartogram, diagrams), adequate intervals
- Information oversupply – lack of readability
ESPON Best Metropolises
Visualisation
Source: Eurostat
Aim of the analysis – diagnosismade by experts (specialists)
Aim of the analysis – communication to public audience
Visualisation
Source: www.fastcoexist.com/
Urban Benchmarking step-by-step
• Aim
Scope
• Data: gathering and analysis
Visualisation
• Interpretation
Discussion
Step 3: Interpretation and discussion• Unusual results (outliers)
Calculation mistakes Data quality
• Comparison to the reference group Which values are good – high, low, medium Our city compared to others – strenghts and weaknesses >> causes>> ways of
improvement Qualitative aspects – now they can be included into analysis
• Trends (historical data) Postive/negative/neutral Possible causes – universal, specific for our city
• The aim Diagnosis >> improvement plan >> benchmarking as monitoring Development goals Identification of the lider – source of good practices Communication – broader discussion
TRAPS:- Misinterpretation
- Ranking rather than Benchmarking
- Best practices copy-paste approach
Useful links
Źródło: Eurostat
• ESPON FOCI http://www.espon.eu/main/Menu_Projects/Menu_AppliedResearch/foci.html
• ESPON SGPTD http://www.espon.eu/main/Menu_Projects/Menu_AppliedResearch/SGPTD.html
• ESPON BEST METROPOLISES http://www.espon.eu/main/Menu_Projects/Menu_TargetedAnalyses/bestmetropolises.html
• ESPON CityBench http://espon.geodan.nl/citybench/#
• ESPON Database database.espon.eu/db2
• ESPON Hyperatlas http://hypercarte.espon.eu/HyperCarte/initLicense.action
• EUROSTAT – Metropolitan Regions http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/region_cities/metropolitan_regions
• OECD Regional Statistics and Indicators www.oecd.org/gov/regional-policy/regionalstatisticsandindicators.htm
Thank you