INTREPRENUALISM
AND
PATTERNS
OF
EXCLUSION
CASE
OF
BRUSSELS
INTERNATIONAL
DEVELOPMNET
PLAN
(IDP)
Payam
Tabrizian
I
H02N1a
I
Strategic
Spatial
Planning
I
Final
assignment
Department
of
Architecture,
Urbanism
and
Planning
Katholieke
Univeristeit
Leuven
I
Spring
2011
ABSTRACT
Realization
of
an
International
Development
Plan
(IDP)
by
the
regional
government
at
the
end
of
2007
reveals
a
significant
shift
in
urban
policies
in
Brussels.
Highlight- ing
ten
Strategic
sites
in
the
city,
IDP
marks
essentially
the
formalization
of
a
relatively
new
framework
for
Brussels
aiming
development
of
significant
portions
of
the
regional
territory
for
the
purposes
of
private
real
estate
developments
of
a
speculative
character.
Conceived
to
operate
as
strategic
levers
of
marketing
and
urban
revitalization
IDP
seems
to
be
transparent
in
regarding
its
impact
on
the
social
fabric
particularly
on
the
low-income
central
neighborhoods
of
the
city.This
research
aims
to
categorize
IDP
as
a
model
for
a
project
based
planning
which
been
realized
to
establish
the
exceptionality
measures
in
planning
and
policy
procedures
of
the
city
and
finally,
it
encourage
rehabilitation
of
citys
historic
centres
intensify- ing
the
social
and
spatial
divisions.
In
the
first
part,
the
paper
elaborates
a
theoreti- cal
framework
based
on
previous
case
studies
as
a
lens
to
inspect
relationships
between
local
and
global
dimensions
of
IDP
as
a
large
scale
urban
development
project.
This
as
an
analytical
method
will
be
employed
in
the
second
part
to
analyze
the
political,
social
and
institutional
dynamics
and
socio-economic
processes
of
polarization/exclusion
in
different
spatial
scales.
Keywords:
International
development
plan,
Brussels,
Large
scale
urban
development
projects,
Social
exclusion
and
inequalities,
Entrepreneurial
policy,
city
branding
1
INTRODUCTION:
IDP,
the
content
and
the
objectives
Brussels
as
well
as
many
other
European
cities
has
been
facing
a
significant
growth
in
social
and
spatial
inequalities
during
the
past
30
years
(Kesteloot
et
al
2009,Van
Criekingen
2009,Loopmans
et
al,
2006,Moulaert
et
al,
2003,).
This
has
been
charged
by
global
shifts
and
transformation
of
contemporary
cities
intensified
or
mediated
by
local
urban
policies
and
strategies
(Swyngedouw
et
al,
2003).
The
reflection
of
such
transfor- mation
has
resulted
to
a
significant
transition
towards
a
more
elite-driven
market-led
urban
planning
policy 1
emphasizing
the
promotion
of
territorial
resourcesand
large-scale
development
projects.
1
For example available and well-situated
pieces of vacant land, a qualified and multilingual workforce, Enhanced architectural heritage, etc.). The organization Enhanced architectural heritage, etc.). The organization of events with wide media coverage or the realization of large-scale real estate projects (e.g. museums, stadiums, blocks of flats or office towers, stations or air terminals, etc., adorned with the signature of a worldfamous architect) are recurring characteristics of such new urban policies.
International
Development
Plan
for
Brussels
(IDP),
launched
in
2007
by
the
Brussels
Government
pushed
such
new
type
of
urban
political
action
into
the
foreground
forming
new
priorities
in
political,
social
and
economic
order
of
the
city.
Through
introduction
of
the
IDP,
Brussels
inscribed
within
a
rationale
based
on
interurban
competition,
and
narrowed
its
ambitions
down
to
consoli- dating
its
place
within
international
business
ranking.
(Van
criekingen,
2008)
Today,
most
studies
comparing
the
competitive
position
of
European
cities
place
Brussels
between
the
4th
and
the
6th
position.
The
maintenance
of
this
situation
is
not
guaranteed.
(Feuille
de
route,
p.1)
The
primary
objective
of
the
regional
government
within
the
framework
of
IDP
is
expanding
the
regions
tax
basis
through
Valorization
of
large
territories
within
the
Brussels
region
(BCR)
and
implementation
of
large-scale
supra- regional
facilities
(such
as
a
shopping
mall,
a
football
stadium,
exhibition
spaces,
congress
and
concert
halls).
Focusing
on
certain
areas
within
of
the
territory
designated
as
strategic
sites,
these
developments
are
thought
to
be
conduct- ed
by
new
public-private
coalitions,
and
framed
by
ad
hoc
planning
procedures
(e.g.
speeding-up
the
procedures
for
granting
building
permits)
(Van
Criek- ingen,
2009).
The
primary
plot
of
the
Plan
for
Interna- tional
Development
of
Brussels
(PWC- report)
presented
in
August
2007
and
its
approved
successor
Fuille
the
route
(the
road
map)
released
in
January
2008.The
PWC
report
has
been
elaborated
by
a
ENTREPRENEUALISM
AND
PATTERNS
OF
EXCLUSION
Case
of
Brussels
IDP
worldwide
known
consultancy
office
Price
Water
Coopers,
under
the
authori- ty
and
launched
by
the
Brussels
Govern- ment.
The
first
chapter
of
the
plan
is
an
evaluation
of
Brussels
international
position.
Through
benchmarking
analysis
and
interviews
with
55
experts,
this
international
role
is
assessed
by
indica- tors
referring
to
its
international
busi- ness-climate.
Outlining
5
directive
guidelines,
the
IDP
states
that
a
future
vision
should
be
based
upon
the
SWOT- analysis
that
resulted
from
the
previous
benchmarking
analysis
and
expert- interviews.
The
second
chapter
puts
forth
a
city-marketing
strategy
for
achieving
this
vision.
In
the
third
chapter,
the
report
highlights
ten
strategic
areas
for
the
future
of
Brussels
(Feuille
de
route,
p.6)
announcing
several
major
projects,
including
a
conference
centre
(3,000
seats),
an
exhibition
hall
(15,000
m2),
a
concert
hall
(15,000
seats),
a
stadium
which
would
meet
FIFA
standards
(in
the
framework
of
a
possible
Belgian-Dutch
bid
for
the
2018
football
World
Cup)
and
a
new
shopping
centre
(60,000
m2).
New
office
areas
and
housing
are
also
an- nounced
in
most
of
these
areas
(figure
1).
This
concerns
large
sites
which
are
uninhabited
or
emptied
of
their
inhabit- ants
(e.g.
West
station
and
Tour
and
taxis),
whose
(re)
development
cannot
take
place
by
simply
accumulating
individual
building
renovation
opera- tions,
but
requires
the
injection
of
a
large
amount
of
capital.
Together,
these
ten
areas
represent
a
combined
surface
area
of
about
7%
of
the
regional
territory,
and
cover
the
main
part
of
the
Regions
last
remaining
land
stock
(Van
Criekingen,
2008,Vermeulen,
2009).
The
budget
allocated
for
development
of
strategic
areas
of
the
IDP
was
130
million
as
a
result
of
a
cooperation
agreement
between
the
Region
and
the
federal
state
(Beliris,
amendment
n10,
period
2008- 2010).
A
closer
inspection
of
IDP
scheme
reveals
its
fundamental
orientation
in
favour
of
marketing
real
estate
stakes
and
inter- ests.
Perhaps,
initiation
of
the
IDP
can
associated
with
the
current
situation
of
the
Brussels
real
estate
market.
For
instance
the
renewal
of
existing
vacant
and
relict
offices 2
can
be
regarded
as
important
stake,
in
particular
in
the
city
centre
(administrative
quarter,
European
quarter,
e.g.).
This
paper
argues
that
IDP,
cannot
be
simply
perceived
as
another
comprehensive
plan
for
the
city,
it
marks
a
significant
transition
toward
new
forms
of
governance
(economic
and
urban)
and
establishes
a
new
relationship
between
the
strategic
projects
and
political,
social
and
economic
power
relation
in
the
city
(Moulaert
et
al,
2003).
2
THEORITICAL
FRAMEWORK:
Neo- liberal
urban
policy
and
bypassing
strategies
As
a
result
a
comparison
between
13
large-scale
development
projects
in
Europe
(URSPIC-research),
Moulaert,
Swyngedouw
and
Rodriguez
(2003)
developed
an
model
to
analyze
the
2
In
this
respect,
the
office
market
shows
obvious
signs
of
oversupply,
with
almost
2
million
m2
of
unoccupied
space
in
the
regional
territory
(general
vacancy
rate:
18%),
of
which
only
just
over
one
third
is
available
on
the
market.
The
remainder
(i.e.
the
empty
offices
which
are
not
on
the
market)
13
doubled
between
1994
and
2008
(i.e.
from
600,000
to
1.2
million
m2),
whereas
the
total
stock
of
offices
only
increased
by
37%
during
the
same
period
(AATL
and
SDRB,
2009).
ENTREPRENEUALISM
AND
PATTERNS
OF
EXCLUSION
Case
of
Brussels
IDP
dynamics
between
global
economic
dynamics
and
transforming
urban
policies
and
changing
political
priorities
between
most
North-American
and
Western
European
cities
(Moulaert
et
al,2003).There
they
identify
contributing
elements
of
the
contemporary
shift
from
the
former
classic
(modernist/fordist)
comprehensive
plan
and
their
statutory
legislation
to
the
post-fordist
emblematic
project.The
post-fordist
project,
they
argue,
relies
on
marketing
purposes,
benefits
from
flexibility,
targeted
actions
and
symbolic
capacity
to
mobilize
economic
growth
and
mutates
segments
of
the
city
into
emblems
of
restructuring,
improvement
and
economic
suc- cess(Vermeulen,2009).
The
main
objective
of
these
projects
is
to
obtain
higher
social
and
economic
returns
and
to
revalue
prime
urban
land,
and
to
re- enforce
competitive
positions
of
the
economy
of
a
city.
(Swyngedouw
et
al,
2002)
Such
Large
scale
urban
development
projects
(UDPs),
like
museums,
sport
stadium,
Concert
venues
etc.,
are
often
represented
as
emblematic
projects
in
a
spatially
targeted
area,
Intimately
in
touch
with
real
estate
development
and
realized
through
privatization
of
public
funds,
but
often
executed
by
local
authorities.
The
main
argument
of
URSPIC-research
is
that:
Large-scale
UDPs
have
increasingly
been
used
as
a
vehicle
to
establish
exceptionality
measures
in
planning
and
policy
proce- dures(Swyngedouw
et
al,
2002).
It
is
argued
there
that
exceptionality
is
a
fundamental
component
of
the
the
new
urban
policy
a
project-based
urbanism,
as
noted
above.
UDPs
normally,
replace
existing
planning
instruments
and
legislation.
Furthermore,
the
primary
conception,
design
and
implementation
of
them,
is
often
situated
at
the
margins
of
formal
planning
structures.
Decision- making
therefore,
is
equally
positioned
in
the
area
of
non-democratic
decision- making,
bypassing
statutory
procedures
(Swyngedouw
et
al,
2002,
Van
criekengen,
2008,
Vermeulen,
2009,).
Shifting
political
priorities
and
govern- mental
justifications
range
from
scale
issues,
the
emblematic
character
of
the
operation,
timing
procedures,
the
need
for
more
flexibility,
efficiency
criteria,
etc.
On
the
practical
level,
these
measures
of
exceptionality,
encompass
the
following
by-passing
strategies:(a)
Freezing
of
conventional
planning
tools,
(b)
Bypass- ing
of
statutory
regulations
and
institu- tional
bodies,
(c)
Changes
in
national
or
regional
regulations
and
(d)
emergence
of
project
agencies
with
special
or
excep- tional
powers
of
intervention
in
decision- making
(Swyngedouw
et
al,
2002,
Moulaert
et
al,
2003).
These
results
as
an
analytical
model
will
serve
this
research
to
understand
mentality
of
the
transformation
process,
the
actors,
agents
and
institutions
involved
in
IDP
from
the
concept
devel- opment
to
valorization
of
the
plan.
This
would
allow
the
paper
to
achieve
its
main
premise
which
is
examining
the
IDP
effectiveness
in
addressing
/intensifying
the
process
of
social
polarization
and
exclusion
in
Brussels.
Two
official
documents,
The
basic
scheme
(PWC,
2007)
and
the
revision
(Fuille
the
route,
2008)
will
be
central
as
sources
in
this
paper.
ENTREPRENEUALISM
AND
PATTERNS
OF
EXCLUSION
Case
of
Brussels
IDP
3
DYNAMICS
OF
IDP/
BYPASSING
STRATEGIES
AND
PATTERNS
OF
EXCLUSION
3.1The
new
urban
/
economic
policies
The
UDPs
reflect
and
embody
a
series
of
processes
that
are
associated
with
chang- ing
spatial
scales
of
governance;
these
changes,
in
turn,
reflect
a
shifting
geome- try
of
power
in
the
governing
of
urbaniza- tion.
(Swyngedouw
et
al,
2002)
The
first
and
the
most
important
aspect
of
IDP
as
a
statutory
reform
is
its
significant
contradiction
with
the
planning
models
that
has
been
employed
during
the
post- war
period
of
strong
economic
growth
in
Brussels.
Introduced
as
a
vehicle
for
steering
the
regional
policies
in
the
years
to
come
(Feuille
de
route,
p.1),
IDP
adopts
an
entirely
different
approach
from
the
former
comprehensive
plan
of
Brussels
Regional
Development
Plan
(RDP)
and
renders
a
significant
change
in
political
priorities
of
the
government.
IDP
can
be
conceived
as
a
shift
towards
a
full- fledged
entrepreneurial
policy
by
attracting
international
investors,
foreign
visitors,
tourists
or
conference
delegates,
and
whatever
extra-local
clienteles
of
consumers
and
residents
by
opening
up
vacant
lands
and
brownfield
sites
to
speculative
real
estate
development
projects.
Contrary
to
the
revitalization
Strategies
of
RDP,
which
is
based
on
the
vision
of
the
local
middle
classes
as
the
true
city
saviours
and
mediums
of
Social
mix
(Van
Criekingen,
2008).
IDP
recon- ceptualise
social
mix
(as
well
as
multi- culturalism)
as
a
vehicle
for
marketing
towards
extra-local
clients
(investors,
tourists
and).
These
marketing
policies
aiming
to
establish
exceptionality
measures
addressing
the
well-to-do
customers
mark
a
noticeable
increase
in
polarization
and
inequalities
between
social
groups
(OECD
2008)
and
territories
(Marcuse
&
van
Kempen
2000,
Moulaert
et
al.
2003,
Berry-Chikhaoui
et
al.
2007,Van
Criek- ingen,
2008).
Regarding
the
liberal
character
of
renting
regulations
in
Brussels3
and
since
many
of
the
designat- ed
strategic
sites
are
located
in
the
low- income 4
neighbourhoods
(Molebeenk,
Anderlecht,
Schaerbeek
etc.),
gentrifica- tion
and
spatial
reorganization
of
the
vulnerable
social
fabric
will
be
a
inevita- ble
consequence
of
this
process.
For
instance
increased
impoverishment
of
certain
local
populations
(e.g.
due
to
the
increased
rent
within
the
household
budget)
or
the
eviction
of
certain
inhabit- ants
of
revitalized
neighborhoods
(Van
Criekingen
2006).
In
this
regard
IDP
seems
be
completely
ignorant
in
regard- ing
the
social
externalities
of
gentrifica- tion
policy.
It
even
encourages
forcing
the
working
classes
out
of
inner
city
neigh- bourhoods.
"
[The
plan
advocates
to]
develop
a
city
marketing
strategy
at
the
neighborhood
scale
notably
for
the
most
impoverished
neighborhoods,
in
order
to
increase
their
value
as
well
as
to
prevent
their
negative
3
i.e.
very
little
social
housing,
an
ineffectiveness
of
the
rules
for
limiting
an
increase
in
rent
between
two
leases,
and
housing
benefits
limited
to
very
small
segments
of
the
total
amount
of
housing
available
for
rent.
4
These
neighborhoods
accommodate
a
relatively
high
percentage
of
unemployed
inhabitants
with
average
of
45
percent
unemployment
of
young
.
37
percent
of
the
earn
inhabitants
below
the
the
average
income
of
Brussels
.
ENTREPRENEUALISM
AND
PATTERNS
OF
EXCLUSION
Case
of
Brussels
IDP
image
from
transcending
their
boundaries
and
harming
the
international
image
of
the
city
("Bronx"
effect)
Social
mix
must
be
a
main
thread
of
urban
development
in
Brussels.
One
must
enforce
both
outgoing
flows
from
priority
zones
[i.e.
inner
working-class
neighborhoods]
in
order
to
avoid
the
concentration
of
poverty
in
social
ghettos,
and
ingoing
flows
into
these
zones
by
stimulating
the
installation
of
middle
class
populations"
(Price
Water
house
Coppers,
2007:
72-3
Translation
Van
Criekingen,
2009).
Another
remark
on
IDP
urban
vision
can
regard
its
downscaling
the
urban
vision
from
regional
development
to
project
base
local
regeneration.
Locating
10
development
zones
selected
in
the
IDP,
the
spatial
process
of
polycentric
devel- opment
is
visible.
This
might
indicate
segmentation
of
labour
market
and
further
decentralization
of
current
socio- economic
pattern
of
the
Brussels
region.
The
choice
of
such
a
rather
de-centralized
development
increases
polarization
within
urban
policy
itself.
While
urban
actors
choose
to
continue
with
the
development
of
neighbourhood
contracts
(area-based
local
interventions
to
improve
social
cohesion
and
adaptation
of
the
labour
market,
a
noticeable
concern
will
be
the
increasing
separation
between
remaining
local
communities
and
the
incoming
workforce.
3.2
The
Actors
and
instruments
of
bypassing
strategy
The
other
necessary
step
in
understand- ing
the
intentions
and
mentality
behind
IDP
is
looking
at
the
contributing
actors
and
agents
in
the
decision-making
or
implementation
process.
As
discussed
before,
The
IDP
plan
is
basically
initiated
by
economic
elites
pushing
neoliberal
agendas,
that
is,
as
argued
by
Wilson,
Supporting
strategies
"[dedicated
to]
resuscitate
cities
a
sites
for
capital
accumulation"
(Wilson,
2004).
More
precisely,
it
has
been
founded
based
on
contributions
from
a
selected
panel
of
city
actors,
among
which
real
estate
business- es
(i.e.
developers,
investors,
consultants)
and
federations
of
enterprises
were
predominant
(Van
Criekingen,
2009,
Vermeulen,
2009).
Among
these,
real
estate
operators
(brokers,
consultants,
developers,
investors)
were
best
repre- sented
(12
out
of
45
institutions
inter- viewed),
followed
by
employers
federa- tions
(Brussels-based,
Belgian
and
European
7
out
of
45
institutions),
seven
semi-public
institutions
in
charge
of
the
economic
and
commercial
devel- opment
of
the
city,
five
architectural
firms,
major
performing
arts
institutions
five
and
higher
education
institutions.
Trade
unions
or
local
communities
and
associations
were
not
included
neither
the
simple
inhabitants.
(Van
Criekingen,
2008).
The
adoption
of
the
IDP
seems
thus
to
indicate
the
formal
emergence
of
a
new
"glocal"
growth
coalition
in
Brussels,
operating
in
three
different
dimensions:
First
is,
a
coalition
between
the
regional
political
elites
and
the
trans
-nationalized
economic
elites
operating
Brussels
and
pushing
forward
a
fully-fledged
neoliberal
urban
project
(Van
Criekingen,
2008,Swyngedouw
et
al
2006).
Conse- quently,
the
parties
who
were
traditional- ly
advocating
the
"revitalization"
agenda
have
been
consciously
kept
out
of
the
elaboration
of
the
new
"international
development"
strategy.
(Van
Criekingen,
2009).
ENTREPRENEUALISM
AND
PATTERNS
OF
EXCLUSION
Case
of
Brussels
IDP
The
second
form
of
a
coalition
is
between
public
and
semi-public
actors,
for
instance
between
regional
government
and
SNCB
(the
national
rail
way
company
of
Belgium)
in
the
case
of
4
sites
along
the
rail
way
line
namely
Tour
and
Taxis,
Schaerbeek,
West
station
and
South
station.
The
decision
making
for
launch- ing
the
projects,
negotiations
for
selling
the
lands
to
private
stakeholders,
are
usually
made
by
steering
committees
and
boards
of
directors
of
SNCB
in
forms
of
private
meeting
and
kept
from
public
scrutiny.
The
third
type
of
coalition
forms
as
public-private
partnerships
PPPs 5
to
share
the
risks
of
developing
ten
large- scale
projects,
which
requires
injection
of
a
large
amount
of
capital.
As
mentioned
before,
office
renewal
strategy
is
an
important
stake
for
the
public
sector.
This
hand
in
hand
with
on-going
increase
in
private
housing
projects
realized
for
high- end
clients
(e.g.
expatriate
company
executives)
and
the
emerging
interest
of
young
middle
class
households
wishing
to
settle
in
the
city
on
the
other,
has
attract- ed
private
investments
towards,
hybrid
complexes
composing
offices,
shops
and
housing,
community
facilities
(stadium,
event
hall,
cultural
facilities,
etc.)
or
re- using
the
vacant
office
plots
into
exclusive
housing.
Evidently,
realization
of
such
projects
requires
new
vacant
sites,
easier
access
to
permits
or
the
opening
of
infrastructure
markets
to
be
obtained
in
a
public-private
partnership
(museums,
stadiums,
schools,
prisons,
etc.)(Van
Criekingen,
2008,
Aveline-Dubach
2008).
5
In
a
broad
partnership
across
institutional
boundaries
or
borders
public
/
private
(Price
water
coopers,
2007,p.27).
These
forms
of
coalition-formation
at
the
level
of
project
formulation
and
imple- mentation
mark
a
sharp
division
between
actual
governance
and
civil
society
in
terms
of
alliance
of
public
/private
interests
in
one
side
and
growing
group
of
marginalized
on
the
other
(Swyngedouw
et
al,2002).
On
the
other
side,
these
kind
of
partnerships
sometimes
results
in
freezing
the
projects
in
different
stages,
either
due
to
continual
disagreements
between
different
private
and
public
partners
as
with
Tour
et
Taxis
(whose
formulation
procedure
lasted
two
Years),
or
due
to
the
realization
of
lengthy
technical
feasibility
studies
which
were
imposed
belatedly
on
the
consultancy
firm,
as
in
the
case
of
the
West
Station
(where
the
finalization
and
adoption
of
project
has
been
pending
since
January
2008).
3.3
The
Institutional
reorganization
of
the
bypassing
strategy
As
discussed
before,
and
also
mentioned
by
Swyngedouw
,Moulaert
and
Rodriguez,
the
new
system
of
governance(alliance
between
public
sector
and
economic
elites)
goes
hand
in
hand
with
estab- lishment
of
centralized
and
more
auto- cratic
forms
of
management,
which
privileges
direct
appointments
(Swyngedouw
et
al
,2002)
and
marks
new
form
of
institutional
reorganization
both
in
project
formulation
and
imple- mentation
procedure
.The
Establishment
of
ATD
can
be
a
clear
instance
of
such
interventions.
Aligned
with
the
bypassing
agenda
and
in
order
to
accelerate
the
revitalization
of
the
highlighted
strategic
sites,
a
non- profit
institution
established
directly
ENTREPRENEUALISM
AND
PATTERNS
OF
EXCLUSION
Case
of
Brussels
IDP
supervised
by
the
national
state
executive
power.
This
institution
is
called
ATD
(The
Agency
for
Territorial
Development
and
introduced
as
the
operational
tool
for
regional
strategic
plans,
in
charge
of
the
management
of
major
projects
such
as
the
facilities
included
in
the
IDP
(Feuille
de
route,
p.
18).
ATD
is
responsible
to
valorize
land,
with
an
explicit
priority
to
those
areas
selected
in
the
IDP.
ATD
takes
Strategic
missions,
which
are
either
new
(city
marketing,
e.g.)
or
transferred
from
the
regional
administration.
In
this
respect,
the
IDP
announces
the
possibility
of
establishing
special
procedures
for
the
issue
of
permits
for
certain
strategic
areas
at
European
and
international
level
(Feuille
de
route,
p.
18),
which
is
a
task
included
in
the
current
organisational
and
statutory
reform
of
the
Code
Bruxellois
de
lAmnagement
du
Territoire
(COBAT)
(Van
Criekingen,
2009,Vermeulen,
2009).
In
principle
local
municipalities
are
in
charge
of
these
permits.
Now,
the
regional
government
can
operate
autonomously
to
develop
the
zones
delineated
in
the
IDP
in
a
more
flexible
way.
It
seems
compulsory
to
observe
that
these
forms
of
coalitions
or
better
say
family
ties-in
favour
of
private
elites
can
result
to
high
level
of
freedom
given
to
private
developers
in
project
formulation
and
implementation
phase.
This
often
allows
the
real
estate
developers
take
over
the
development
and
putting
the
public
authorities
outside
the
picture.
This
as
a
risk
previously
mitigated
by
an
institution
called
SAF.
(Socit
dAcquisition
Foncire,
SAF)
founded
2005
and
was
in
charge
of
buying
strategic
grounds
from
the
landowners
such
as
Belgian
National
Railway
Company
(SNCB)
in
the
Leverage
areas
or
areas
of
regional
interest.
This
was
allowing
the
public
sector
to
obtain
a
pivotal
role
in
the
future
development
of
these
sites
in
order
to
avoid
the
territorial
fragmentation
and
controlling
the
land
rent
growth.
In
the
framework
of
IDP
there
is
no
policy
regarding
the
necessity
of
involving
SAF
in
development
of
the
strategic
sites.
Consequently
huge
portions
of
strategic
sites
are
being
negotiated
directly
with
the
international
real-state
developers
for
speculative
projects.
For
instance,
The
Association
Project
T&T
signed
a
buying
agreement
with
SNCB
for
developing
tour
and
taxis.
The
concept
development
and
project
formulation
normally
happens
in
atmos- phere
of
global
competition
between
the
worlds
leading
architects
and
engineering
consultancies
with
slight
preference
(and
sometimes
biased)
in
selection
of
Belgian
firms.
These
international
competitions
are
held
aligned
with
branding
strategy
of
cultural
capital
,
and
mobilizing
the
political
power
positions
at
local,
regional
and
national
level.
For
instance
tour
and
taxi
development
competition
held
between
several
national
and
interna- tional
firms
(Vigano
and
secchi
,
Bereau
Bas
Smets
,
etc.)
Two
other
institutions,
both
subsidized
by
regional
government,
namely
Brus- selse
Raad
voor
het
Leefmilieu
(BRAL)
and
Inter-Environnement
Bruxelles
(IEB)
appointed
to
establish
the
dialogues
directly
with
the
inhabitants
as
a
participatory
process.It
obvious
then
to
observe
that
the
participation
of
inhabit- ants,
which
was
so
widely
heralded
a
priori
and
spoken
so
highly
of
a
posterio- ri,
did
not
lead
to
the
expected
outcomes
either
due
to
a
lack
of
clearly
defined
objectives,
methods
and
limits
or
ambigu- ity
of
the
presentation
models
and
plans
.
ENTREPRENEUALISM
AND
PATTERNS
OF
EXCLUSION
Case
of
Brussels
IDP
In
a
much
more
obvious
way,
as
regards
the
projects
related
to
the
Tour
and
Taxi
and
the
West
Station,
one
would
have
to
look
hard
to
find
evidence
of
demands
made
specifically
by
citizens
in
terms
of
content
proposals
such
as
those
regarding
the
transparency
of
procedures.
Finally,
for
each
of
the
projects
studied,
the
participation
of
inhabitants
was
organised
essentially
in
the
form
of
information
meetings
or
workshops
by
BRAL
(for
the
state
administrative
district
and
Tour
et
Taxis)
and
IEB
(for
the
West
Station
and
the
European
quarter),
which
were
given
this
mission
by
the
public
authorities,
in
consultation
with
the
selected
consultancy
firms.
The
latter
sometimes
had
to
learn
to
'communicate'
about
relatively
abstract
projects
and
above
all
to
justify
in
real
time
the
decisions
made
with
politicians
as
regards
the
orientation
of
these
projects.
4
CONCLUSION
In
previous
section
we
observed
that
how
IDP
and
its
parallel
interventions
can
be
an
instance
for
bypassing-strategies
typical
for
neo-liberal
urban
policy.
Establishing
exceptionality
measures
through
realizing
emblematic
projects
and
branding
strategies,
mobilizing
land
stock
by
speculative
real
state
projects
through
new
forms
of
coalition,
freezing
conventional
planning
tools
and
institu- tions,
introduction
of
new
forms
of
autocratic
management
through
the
project
agency
ATO
and
the
adaptation
of
regional
planning
regulations
the
COBAT).
The
paper
also
tried
to
reveal
the
inefficiency
of
IDP
as
a
successful
integra- tive
plan
to
address
the
neighbourhood
problems
specific
to
Brussels
and
relatively
intensifying
the
citys
spatial
and
social
divisions
in
different
dimen- sions:
Geographically
how
it
leads
to
spatial
fragmentation
of
deprived
neighbourhoods
in
relation
other
neighborhoods
and
with
the
larger
urban
region
as
a
whole.
Socio
-economically,
how
it
results
in
exclusion
in
accessing
the
urban
labor
market
and
housing
market
and
finally
how
it
delimits
the
neighborhood
from
obtaining
access
to
the
decision
making
process
and
finding
a
democratic
expression
for
their
political
demands.
For
Brussels
the
challenge
still
remains:
to
find
an
ambitious
and
integrated
development
strategy
planning
that
addresses
both
qualitative
building
projects
with
a
sustainable
urban
plan
for
the
city
as
whole,
that
evaluates
local
impacts
and
anticipates
upon
eventual
negative
effects,
that
involves
all
actors
during
the
planning
and
design
process
of
the
projects
proposed
by
the
plan.
ENTREPRENEUALISM
AND
PATTERNS
OF
EXCLUSION
Case
of
Brussels
IDP
REFERENCES
AVELINE-DUBACH
N.
(2008)
Immobilier
-
L'Asie,
la
bulle
et
la
mondialisation,
Paris,
CNRS
Editions.
BEGG,
I.
Cities
and
Competitiveness.,
(1999),
Urban
Studies,
Vol.
36,
No.
5-6,
pp.
795-809.
CORIJN
E.,
VANDERMOTTEN
C.,
DECROLY
J.
-M.,
SWYNGEDOUW
E.
(2009)
"tats
gnraux
de
Bruxelles.
Bruxelles,
ville
internationale",
Brussels
Studies,
Note
de
synthse
n13
DECLROY
J,
VAN
CRIEKEGEN
M.
(2009),The
Brussels
International
Development
Plan
(IDP):
Real
estate
development
promises
and
growing
inequalities?
,
Brussels
Studies
,issue
25,
11
may
2009.
DEJEMEPPE,
P.
(2008)
Plan
de
Dveloppement
International
Feuille
de
route,
DELMOTTE.F,
HUBERT.M
and
TULKENS.F
(2009),
The
master
plans:
what
comes
next?
Questions
about
the
future
of
urban
development
in
Brussels,
Brussels
Studies,
Issue
30
DELNOY,
M.
(2007),
La
participation
du
public
en
droit
de
lurbanisme
et
de
lenvironnement,
Brussels,
Larcier,
,
937
pp.
HARVEY
D.
(1989)
"From
managerialism
to
entrepreneurialism:
the
transformation
in
urban
governancein
late
capitalism",
Geografiska
Annaler
B.,
71,
3-17
HUTCHINSON,
A.
Gewestelijk
Ontwikkelingsplan
I.
1995.
[Regional
Development
Plan].
KESTELOOT,
Chr.
LOOPMANS,
M.
(2010)
,Social
inequalities
,Brussels
Studies
,Symosion
no
15
LOOPMANS
M.
(2008)
"Relevance,
Gentrification
and
the
Development
of
a
New
Hegemony
on
Urban
Policies
in
Antwerp",
Belgium,
Urban
Studies,
45,
12,
2499-2519
MOULAERT
F.,
RODRIGUEZ
A.,
SWYNGEDOUW
E.
(eds.)
(2003)
The
Globalized
City.
Economic
Restricting
and
Social
Polarization
in
European
Cities,
Oxford
Oxford
University
Press
PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS,
Plan
de
Dveloppement
International
Schma
de
base.
Rapport
final,
31
August
2001.
[PWC-report]
SWYNGEDOUW,
E,
MOULAERT,
F.
AND
RODRIGUEZ,
A.
(2004)
`
Neoliberal
Urbanization
in
Europe:
Large-scale
Urban
Development
Projects
and
the
New
Urban
Policy
',
Anti- pode
34
(3):
54277
VAN
CRIEKINGEN,
M.
(2008).
Towards
a
geography
of
displacement.
Moving
out
of
Brussels
gentrifying
neighbourhoods.
Journal
of
Housing
and
the
Built
Environment,
23(3),
199-213
Van
Criekingen,M.
and
Decroly,
J.M.
(2009),
Het
Plan
voor
Internationale
Ontwikkeling.
Belofte
van
vastgoedprojecten,
maar
toenemende
ongelijkheden?,
Brussels
Studies,
Vol.
25
2009,
pp.1- 16
VANDERMOTTEN,Chr,
LECLERCQ,E.,
CASSIERS,T.,VAYENS,B.(2009,
)
The
Brussels
Economy.
Brussels
Studies,
Synopsis
nr.
7,
26
january
2009
WILSON
D.
(2004)
"Toward
a
Contingent
Neoliberalism",
Urban
Geography,
25,
8,
771-783
ENTREPRENEUALISM
AND
PATTERNS
OF
EXCLUSION
Case
of
Brussels
IDP
10
INDEX
1
1.Heysel - shopping centre (60.000 m ), conference centre (>50.000 m ), concert hall (15.000 seats), football stadium meeting FIFA stantards 2.Tour & Taxis - housing (40%), o ces (40%), facilities (20%), park 20 ha, open-air swimming pool (MP) 3.West Station - RER-mtro-bustram station, new housing, o ces and community facilities (MP) 4.South Station neighbourhhod new housing, o ces for international businesses, hotels, 'convivial and safe neighbourhood' 2 3 5 4 9 5.Monts des Arts Brussels Information ,Point Square Meeting Centre (BIP),Magritte Museum, shops 6.Delta - new housing, o ces, urban indutries (MP) 7.European district - eco-neighbourhood with o ces ,shops, House of Europe - "mixed and convivial neighbourhood , housing(MP) 8.State Administration City o ces (35%),shops (6%), community facilities (5%) (MP) ,(53%), housing 9.Josaphat - eco-neighbourhood with o ces, housing, community facilities 10.Schaerbeek Formation logistics activities, o ces, housing, football stadium meeting FIFA standards (?) (MP)
1 10
8 7
Figure 1. The ten strategic areas of the Brussels International Development Plan. Sourcewww.demainbruxelles.be (Brussels Capital Region, 2008)
ENTREPRENEUALISM
AND
PATTERNS
OF
EXCLUSION
Case
of
Brussels
IDP
11
