2. Introductory remarks 1.Cities are drivers for development now and in the future; this is recognised in Europe 2020 2.Openness links well with the EU-Agenda on Smart, sustainable and inclusive growth 3.A challenge to remain committed to openness in times of recession (be aware of “openness = vulnerability”) 4.Openness is a two-way process: both cities and citizens (old and new) need to make an effort

3. A continued need to reconsider openness after the economic crisis 1.Public opinion is affected by the crisis (“desolidarisation”) – a strong discourse about foreigners (Vienna) 2.A resentment against being ‘too welcome’ (Geneva) 3.Impact of crisis is very diverse and can be economic (incl. youth unemployment) but also psychological 4.Some cities have recently seen emigration (e.g. Dublin); Other cities are confronted with remigration (e.g. Poznan) 5.Public funding for local policies have been affected – budget cuts are still expected

4. Key messages on achievements: 1.A better understanding of Openness by experts and citizens: Openness CAN now be understood by citizens and translated to day-to-day life (E.g. an Open city is a welcoming city) – 40,000 school schildren, 300,000 visitors, 10 mln. radio listeners) 2.Local Action Plans being submitted and ready to go ahead 3.Openness is multi-faceted: Integration, internationalisation and innovation 4.An Open city is also an honest city 5.Openness requires an open mind – to diversity in all of its aspects

5. About measuring 1.Measuring openness is essential – not only to compare across cities but also over time (‘Early warning’) 2.Openness can be measured – as demonstrated by the Open cities monitor 3.Important to know what to use the monitor for 4.Challenge is to better capture the inclusion dimension and the ‘sentiment’ 5.Important to explore synergies with other initiatives/institutions (Urban Perception Survey, Council of Europe, etc.)

6. Key messages from partner city experience 1.Project experience tells that integrating economic and social considerations IS possible (Belfast/Talk IT, Vienna/ZENTROPE) 2.Importance to involve and create ownership from partners (private and public) for funding and sustainability (all) 3.Partners are often closest to the target group – (Belfast/Talk IT, Duesseldorf/Welcome Center) 4.Be specific to the needs of particular target groups and their concerns (Bilbao/Gender project)

7. Key messages from partner city experience (2) 5. Project experience tells that you can be successful with limited resources (Cardiff/Dublin) a. Be practical b. Do something new c. Work in partnership d. Work with international populations e. Focus on outcomes 6. Link to broader ambitions and policies (Sophia Cultural Capital campaign) 7. There is no ‘One size fits all’ approach – diversity also in scale, budget and theme!

8. About Openness policy 1.The elephant in the room – changing national contexts that put a brake on migration and that can hurt cities and their policies (e.g. London, Vienna) 2.Economic and social policies need to go hand in hand: equality and diversity are bottom-line policies for businesses too (diversity = innovation!) 3.Instruments include use of dedicated organisations, platforms/fora (London 2012 Equality and Diversity Forum) 4.Need to be willing to overcome very practical barriers (‘separate toilets for the fire brigade’)

9. About Openness policy (2) 5.A range of policy fields to be orchestrated: 1) language training; 2) housing; 3) employment; 4) skills and enterprise; 5) health; 6) community safety; 7) community development and participation (e.g. London, Duesseldorf) 6.Procurement as a powerful tool to drive forward diversification and openness policies 7.Leadership is essential: promoting openness requires strong shoulders and a thick skin (London) 8.The need to engage with the media – and to draw up specific strategies (“Anti-rumour network” in Barcelona)

10. Future of work on Openness 1.What we did not discuss: the importance of migration for an ageing society – openness policies will remain 2.Cities involved are committed to continue to use the OPENCities brand – a need to disseminate results 3.Need to be rigorous and monitor and measure Openness over time (need to demonstrate impacts!) 4.Execution of the Local Action Plans will remain a challenge – (political) leadership and funding are important 5.A need to engage with (political) leadership throughout the project – it takes time to build political commitment – URBACT can help here too

11. About the functioning of urban networks 1.International cooperation is always hard work - it is up to you to keep cooperation going (social networking?) 2.There is a large number of urban networks already – and their complementarity not always clear 3.An opportunity to ‘mainstream’ openness in these networks (e.g. Cultural Capitals) 4.A need for cities to be strategic and selective: what is their specific aim, and how can such networks be used as a tool 5.The need to make a concrete impact - for ‘facts’ more than words 6.The need to involve elected officials (for growing commitment and future funding)

12. Future on urban policy 1.Learning on urban policy exchange is an evolving process – and still a world to win 2.Continued need to disseminate good practices – to higher numbers 3.Next URBACT call is going to focus on: - support to Local Support Groups - partnership with Managing Authorities - Support to elaboration of Local Action Plans - Specific support to elected representatives 4. A new programme on urban policy exchange to emerge behind the horizon (2014 – 2020)

13. Thank you to: Committee of Regions Speakers and fellow moderators Greg Clark (not with us) BAK BASEL Bilbao, Cardiff, Dublin, Duesseldorf, Nitra, Poznan, Sofia, Vienna URBACT team (Jean-Loup Drubigny and colleagues) City of Belfast The British Council The British Council office in Brussels which has managed the logistics of the event YOU!