IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wiw/wiwrsa/ersa15p639.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Contest as a method of exposure of the quality of municipal strategies

Author

Listed:
  • Boris Zhikharevich
  • Taras Pribyshin

Abstract

Objectives. Find the answer to the question ?What are the qualities of a ?good? municipal strategy of socio-economic development??. Methods. In order to reach a consensus about the quality of municipal strategy it was proposed to use the Contest of the urban strategies, which was held in the cities in Russia with population over 100.000 people. The contest resulted in division of the participants in 3 groups: winners: Orsk, Samara, Cherepovets; finalists: Vologda, Irkutsk, Kaliningrad, Novoshakhtinsk; semifinalists: Bryansk, Krasnoyarsk, Sochi, Tambov, Ulan-Ude. The contest created three sources to define a good strategy: feedback from the jury; analysis of strategies of the winners; feedback from mayors of the finalist cities. Results. 1. Analysis of the feedback from the jury gives us the following list of successful strategy characteristics: Frequently occurring: ? Existence of monitoring system and established implementation mechanism ? Ambitiousness correlative with the city scale and implementation mechanism ? Existence of title projects Less frequently occurring: Involvement of the head of the city and the whole community; Human-oriented; Focus on specific projects etc. 2. The content of all the strategies was coded with the special code developed by Leontiev?s Center to formalize the comparison of the leading and outsiders strategies. Common features of leading strategies: -ambitiousness -complexity (big number of declared and elaborated routes) -active use of title projects -attention to economical diversification issues -usage of institutional and constitutional economic support -special attention to educational and cultural development -special attention to implementation via mechanisms of civil autonomy and effectiveness of local authorities 3. Leading cities mayors stated that a good strategy is the one which is: Cooperative ? a strategy elaborated collectively leading to consolidation of local community and key authorities; Independent ? a strategy elaborated by the local community with no governmental influence, irrespective; Deliberative - a strategy elaborated by the local community considering its own interests; Ambitious - a strategy elaborated to reveal the potential of local resources and inspired by enthusiasm of locals; Realistic ? a strategy based on adequate situation analysis and establishing achievable goals and purposes; Realizable ? a strategy provided with an elaborated mechanism of implementation; when goals and purposes are being ambitious but provided with clear instruments of resource mobilization, performance control and results overview; Stable ? a strategy that does not change dramatically despite radical changes or possible power shifts. The prevalent opinion in Russia in 2014 is: a good municipal strategy is supposed to be ambitious, provided with an elaborated mechanism of implementation and monitoring, focusing on title projects, developed under control of city head in cooperation with key participants of urban development which is clear and approved by local community.

Suggested Citation

  • Boris Zhikharevich & Taras Pribyshin, 2015. "Contest as a method of exposure of the quality of municipal strategies," ERSA conference papers ersa15p639, European Regional Science Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa15p639
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www-sre.wu.ac.at/ersa/ersaconfs/ersa15/e150825aFinal00639.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Municipal strategic planning; strategies; socio-economic develjpment;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • R11 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Regional Economic Activity: Growth, Development, Environmental Issues, and Changes

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa15p639. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Gunther Maier (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.ersa.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.