Thessaloniki ’97 European Capital of Culture
as an establishing mechanism of elite
partnerships & coalitions of development:
Towards a regime approach ?
Anestis D. Mantatzis
Regional & Urban Planning MSc
London School of Economics
ECOC 3-pillar intervention logic
Source: ECOTEC (2009)
ECOC 3-pillar intervention logic

Respond to rather broad objectives
From…
Promotion of “Idea of Europe” via cultural activities
…to
Economic benefits for cities

Put Culture under the service of non-cultural initiatives
1.
Tourism flows as evaluation criteria
Financial support depending on the economic benefits legitimated
Candidate rhetoric
2.
3.

“Common European cultural policies” or “European
cooperation around policies for culture”
ECOC as cultural

“ large-scale cultural events which have a dramatic character,
mass popular appeal and international significance”
(Roche 1999)

“ contribute to short-term revenues, national/international
significance, putting the city in world stage investment
competition”
(Burbank et al 2001)
ECOC as cultural
Cultural
tourism
benefits
1 time
assignment
Media
coverage
3rd
dimension
Image
Promotion &
city marketing
Urban
regeneration
“common
Spirit ”
Source: Palmer Associates I (2004)
Why to boost such a mega-event strategy ?
Is strategic planning really important ?

“Planning is an essential ingredient not only for the short term
success for the event itself but also in realizing the longer term
benefits for the community in the holding of such events”
(Hall 1989)

“Provides a sense of ownership among stakeholders in the selected
objectives, increase commitment & cooperation” (Bromwell 1997)
However…
 political processes + involved actors value things differently
constant struggle of power
How urban leadership & local interests influence ECOC
mega-event production
Urban Power : Concepts & Debates
Elitism
Pluralism
Powerful individuals
hold power
Government holds
power
Share commitment
Conflicting group &
individual interests
Urban Regime
Approach
Urban Power : Concepts & Debates
 Informal but stable networks
 Influence on setting the urban policy agenda
…but why are so appealing ?
 Setting alliances for high “priority problems”
 “Build bridges” with other interests towards common
objectives
 Match concerns about the importance of long term vision
and strategic planning
Did Thessaloniki '97
European Capital of Culture
mega-event acted as a
formulation mechanism of
"elite" coalitions for
economic development
between powerful political
and economical local
players ?
Political Elitism
"3rd dimension"
Economic
Development
Strategi
c
Plannin
g
Vision
1st
Researc
h
Questio
n
Urban
Regime
Approach
Can these "elite" coalitions
be explained within the
urban regime conceptual
framework ?
2nd
Researc
h
Questio
n
Political Pluralism
The research process
 In-depth interviews
 Contacts on personal basis
 Recorded material extracted & analyzed : different questions
synthesized respond to each attribute
Tested regime criteria according to Davies (2003)
The story of Thessaloniki ‘97
Source: European Communities. (2009)
Thessaloniki as a mechanism of
‘elite’ coalitions


Diffused but blurred vision for the economic, international role of the city
1997 ECOC as a unique opportunity to tackle long-standing problems for
the city
infrastructures
“Formalistic” consultation process

Numerous proposals from all different
institutions & lobbies, wide participation
But….

Not a clear orientation of the hosted ECOC mega event

Also, lack of strategic development plan for the city minimized economic
benefits on 3rd dimension deliverables after 1997

A tie for “elite” interests was absent
Towards an Urban Regime ?
 Lack of clear orientation & objectives left
space for pressures & personal interests
…and conflicts !
 Low motivation for private investors
 Huge state financial support
How independent was
decision making ?
Source: Palmer R. et al. (2004)
Towards an Urban Regime ?
One-sided interdependence towards formal government….
….& not distributed between all local, private actors
But


State influence on decisions is not clear, depends on the
perspective…
"What was really dominated was the element of central programming far from the people and the local
vehicles involved. (...) "In terms of capital infrastructure, minister's influence was caltalytical, whereas
in the artistic programme power distribution was more balanced. My personal feeling now and then is
that politicians did not share the same long-term commitment for economic development but served
rather short-term political interests". [Interview material]
“Central government tried to upgrade the whole attempt internationally beyond local range only.
Political responsibility from government authorities was beneficial from the whole programming and the
ministers presence and support bring money in this effort.”
[Interview material]
Towards an Urban Regime ?

City was benefited narrowly on infrastructure and renewal projects
But…

Lack of strategic development planning after 1997
Networks & coalitions did not sustain themselves
Towards an Urban Regime ?
50000
Stays overnight
45000
Persons
40000
35000
30000
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
ar
19
96
M
ay
19
96
Ju
ly
19
96
S
ep
t1
99
6
N
ov
19
96
Ja
n
19
97
M
ar
19
97
M
ay
19
97
Ju
ly
19
97
S
ep
t1
99
7
N
ov
19
97
Ja
n
19
98
M
ar
19
98
M
ay
19
98
Ju
ly
19
98
S
ep
t1
99
8
N
ov
19
98
Source: Palmer R. et
al (2004)
M
Ja
n
19
96
0
Source: National Tourism Organization data
Total persons and overnight stays in Thessaloniki hotels
(1996-1998 Monthly data)

A vision is necessary to motivate & collaborate local “elites” for a
common objective…
... but need something more


Fundamental strategic development plan to preserve “elite”
networks in the long-run & boost the local economy
No regime networks
Does it really serve European
culture or local interests under the
veil of the EU ?
For your comments….
A.Mantatzis@lse.ac.uk