The article substantiates the essence and necessity of the use of innovative approaches to the formation and implementation of public policies of urban revitalization in the context of the latest concepts of urban development, namely: Compact City, Green City, Smart City, Creative City, Inclusive City, Cittaslow, Happy City, Learning City. The relevant proposals on the innovation policy of revitalizing cities are brought forward based on the analysis of the provisions of each of the chosen concepts. It is determined that there does not exist a single city where only one of the latest concepts of city development was implemented. In practice, we observe the multi-vectorness and combination of urban policies, which came to replace traditional sectoral views. Regarding the policy of urban revitalization, innovative approaches focus on the transformation of degraded areas into urban environments favourable for human life and activities in line with the needs and interests of their inhabitants. Revitalization should be considered both in terms of its impact on a specific degraded area and as having long-term synergetic effects on the city as a whole. It was found that the basis for innovative policies of urban revitalization is laid by human-oriented programmes of sustainable renewal of areas. The programmes are premised on taking into account a variety of concepts and combining a number of activities, specifically: organization of a compact multifunctional environment (Compact City); formation of an ecologically friendly environment for human life and activities (Green City); arrangement of urban space taking advantage of modern technologies and innovations (Smart City); creating conditions for life, activities and cooperation of creative people (Creative City); ensuring a full-fledged multidimensional inclusion of all the inhabitants (Inclusive City); realization of the internal potential of an area depending on local identity (Cittaslow); raising the level of public and individual happiness (Happy City); promotion of the culture of lifelong learning of all the inhabitants (Learning City). It is noted that innovative solutions for overcoming the crisis phenomena of degraded urban areas should be individualized depending on the local specificity and potential, the state of economic, physical, human and other capital of a particular city. In this case, the development of human capital of an area is increasingly becoming the key factor of its renewal, which presupposes organization of the inhabitants’ training, improving their qualifications and skills. It was substantiated that the revitalization policy is expedient to develop from the perspective of ensuring multiplicative impact on the development of a city as a whole. The efficiency of the policy implementation depends on the leveraging of resources (financial, intellectual, etc.) from different sources through partnerships. The main criterion of policy effectiveness is the ability of a revitalized urban area to develop sustainably, satisfying the needs of all stakeholders. Indicators of the policy success is not only the living standards and quality of life of the inhabitants, but also the condition of the natural environment, levels of tolerance, trust, empathy, social cohesion, education, happiness, etc.
How to Cite
urban revitalization, sustainable development, Compact City, Green City, Smart City, Creative City, Inclusive City, Cittaslow, Happy City, Learning City
Akotia, J., & Opoku, A. (2018). Sustainable regeneration project delivery in UK: a qualitative analysis of practitioners’ engagement. Journal of Facilities Management, vol. 16(1), pp. 87–100.
Anttiroiko, A. V., & de Jong, M. (2020). The Inclusive City: the theory and practice of creating shared urban prosperity. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 127 p.
Boussaa, D. (2018). Urban regeneration and the search for identity in historic cities. Sustainability, vol. 10(1), pp. 1–16.
Brdulak, A., & Brdulak, H. (Eds.). (2017). Happy City – how to plan and create the best livable area for the people. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 332 p.
Bryx, M., Lipiec, J., & Rudzka, I. (2015). Green urban regeneration projects. Warsaw: CeDeWu, 126 p.
Cittaslow International head office (2021). Cittaslow. International network of cities where living is good. Available at: https://www.cittaslow.org.
European Green Capital Secretariat (2021). Winning Cities. European Green Capitals Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/europeangreencapital/winning-cities.
Eurostat (2010). Combating poverty and social exclusion: a statistical portrait of the European Union 2010. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 111 p.
Florida, R. (2012). The rise of the creative class. Revisited. New York: Basic Books, 483 p.
Garcia-Fuentes, M. A., Quijano, A., de Torre, C., Garcia, R., Compere, P., Degard, C., & Tome, I. (2017). European cities characterization as basis towards the replication of a smart and sustainable urban regeneration model. Energy Procedia, vol. 111, pp. 836–845.
Giffinger, R., & Pichler-Milanović, N. (2007). Smart cities: Ranking of European medium-sized cities. Available at: http://www.smart-cities.eu/download/smart_cities_final_report.pdf.
Jacobs, J. (2016). The death and life of great American cities. Reissue ed. New York: Vintage, 462 p.
Jang, H. J., & Jung, T. (2015). Go slow and curvy: Understanding the philosophy of the Cittaslow slowcity phenomenon. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 176 p.
Jaszczak, A., Kristianova, K., Pochodyła, E., Kazak, J. K., & Młynarczyk, K. (2021). Revitalization of public spaces in Cittaslow towns: recent urban redevelopment in Central Europe. Sustainability, vol. 13(5), pp. 1–24.
Korkmaz, C., & Balaban, O. (2020). Sustainability of urban regeneration in Turkey: Assessing the performance of the North Ankara urban regeneration project. Habitat International, vol. 95, pp. 1–14.
Kusiak, J. (2019) Revitalizing urban revitalization in Poland: towards a new agenda for research and practice. Urban Development Issues, vol. 63, pp. 17–23.
Landry, C. (2012). The creative city: A toolkit for urban innovators. 2nd ed. London: Earthscan, 350 p.
Lehmann, S. (2019). Urban regeneration. A manifesto for transforming UK cities in the age of climate change. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 229 p.
Montgomery, C. (2013). Happy city: Transforming our lives through urban design. London: Macmillan, 359 p.
OECD (2012). Compact city policies: a comparative assessment. Paris: OECD Publishing, 284 p.
Oyekunle, O. A. (2017). The contribution of creative industries to sustainable urban development in South Africa. African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development, vol. 9(5), pp. 607–616.
Roberts, P., Sykes, H., & Granger, R. (Eds.). (2017). Urban regeneration. 2nd ed. London: Sage, 360 p.
Ruming, K. (ed.). (2018). Urban regeneration in Australia: policies, processes and projects of contemporary urban change. London – New York: Routledge, 398 p.
Tubridy, D. (2021). The green adaptation-regeneration nexus: innovation or business-as-usual?. European Planning Studies, vol. 29(2), pp. 369–388.
UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning (2017). Learning Cities and the SDGs: a guide to action. Available at: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000260442.
UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning (2021). UNESCO Global Network of Learning Cities. Available at: https://uil.unesco.org/lifelong-learning/learning-cities.
Wolfram, M. (2019). Assessing transformative capacity for sustainable urban regeneration: A comparative study of three South Korean cities. Ambio, vol. 48(5), pp. 478–493.
Yi, Z., Liu, G., Lang, W., Shrestha, A., & Martek, I. (2017). Strategic approaches to sustainable urban renewal in developing countries: A case study of Shenzhen, China. Sustainability, vol. 9(8), pp. 1–19.
Zheng, W. (2017). A multi-scale decision support framework for sustainable urban renewal in high-density cities: a case of Hong Kong. Hong Kong: The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, 227 p.