National Cities Research Program – a prospective research agenda

AHURI is developing the National Cities Research Program to support the reform agenda of all governments seeking solutions to the fundamental economic, social and environmental challenges that face Australian cities.

Australia’s 21st century urban challenges and opportunities are well articulated in the Australian Government’s National Urban Policy Discussion Paper. The Discussion Paper rightly highlights the importance of a national approach to urban policy founded upon the overlapping responsibilities of the Federal Government in partnership with State, Territory and local governments, as well as the industry and community sectors.

These principles of a national and partnership-based approach to urban policy in Australia will also underpin the operation of AHURI’s National Cities Research Program.

Creating a constructive national dialogue between research and policy networks, managed by a dedicated broker (the not-for-profit management company AHURI Limited), the National Cities Research Program will co-ordinate the existing national research effort, optimising coverage of priority urban policy issues and maximising the value of existing investments.

The coordination process and facilitation of partnerships between the policy and research communities will help identify gaps in the policy relevant evidence base and priorities for new research investments. The National Cities Research Program will provide a vehicle for partnership investments by all levels of government and universities in such new research activities, with AHURI’s unique financing models enabling highly cost-effective research investment.

Through the agency of the dedicated broker (AHURI Limited), a partnership between research and policy networks will be created through all stages of an evidence-informed policy development process—from the identification of policy-research priorities to drawing out the implications of research findings for policy and practice in roundtables, seminars and conferences.

The objectives of the National Cities Research Program are to:

  • deliver an evidence base that will be relevant to and integrative across urban policy issues
  • deliver an evidence base that will be unimpeachable and independent
  • create constructive partnerships between the policy and research communities
  • facilitate dialogue between business, community, and government
  • engage Australian and overseas experts on comparative work
  • inform public discussion of these important issues.

Developing the research agenda

As part of the process of developing the National Cities Research Program, AHURI has undertaken wide ranging consultations about policy priorities and the research and information needs of such issues. These consultations have been with politicians and officials across all levels of government and with representatives from the industry and community sectors.

To develop a research focus upon the priority policy issues, AHURI responded to the publication of the State of Australian Cities 2010 report (Major Cities Unit, Australian Government 2010) by publishing a discussion paper The State of Australian Cities 2010 – towards a national research agenda that took the key issues raised and sought to develop an understanding of the sorts of research questions that would need to be addressed to deliver a better understanding of such issues.

The State of Australian Cities 2010 report placed Australian cities in an international context and then covered the following issues: population and settlement; productivity; sustainability; liveability; social inclusion and equity; and governance. Hence, The State of Australian Cities 2010 – towards a national research agenda articulated research questions against each of these headings. For example, in relation to population and settlement we posed the questions 'Are Gen Y and Gen Z more focussed on urban living, smaller properties, different tenures and using public transport? To what extent is this by choice or constraint? Will these urban outcomes meet their cultural expectations, if so, are we seeing a trend towards a significant intergenerational shift in the way we view and use our towns and cities?'

We then invited comments and responses from diverse stakeholders on this developing research agenda via the AHURI website. We were delighted by the range of organisations that responded and the thoughtful comments they provided—our thanks to all those who contributed their time and energy.

The responses took two forms: substantive debate of the issues raised, and guidance about the relative priorities of proposed research directions. In developing a research agenda for the National Cities Research Program, it is the latter set of comments that were particularly valuable.

The general tenor of these types of responses is that the economic productivity of cities and how this links to urban form, metropolitan governance structures and social structures within cities should be a priority focus. In part, this is because respondents believed the research effort in matters such as sustainability and population and settlement were more developed already.

Therefore, a National Cities Research Program research agenda that is focussed upon the economic productivity of cities could focus on the following sorts of questions:

Economic productivity and cities: a prospective research agenda

  • City specialisation

    • What are the competitive advantages and potential specialisations of different cities (comparing nationally and internationally) and how might a National Urban Policy best support city specialisation in the national interest?
    • Which cities, and which links between cities, will generate the most significant productivity gains from communications/connectivity/broadband and the innovation and knowledge sector economies?

  • Urban form and infrastructure

    • Given the apparent benefits of agglomeration economies, i.e. networks of contacts, services and resources available to individuals in different parts of the city and the economic benefits they can bestow, how can the ‘benefits of density’ be supported through National Urban Policy to create an economic productivity dividend through the structure and form of our cities?
    • What is the economic productivity dividend from agglomeration economies?
    • What aspects of agglomeration drive productivity?
    • What roles can urban planning play in shaping the key aspects of agglomeration?
    • What forms of infrastructure investment (transport, sewerage, water, energy) provide the greatest improvement to productivity growth and why?
    • How can ageing infrastructure most effectively and efficiently be upgraded to maximise productivity growth?
    • What are the positive and negative productivity related dividends of CBD-based concentrations of employment, versus multiple decentralised employment nodes throughout the metropolitan area?

  • Governance

    • What are the implications of the governance circumstances of our cities for productivity, sustainability and liveability outcomes?
    • Conceptually, how do we determine which institutions of urban governance are fit for purpose? Which roles and responsibilities should lie with which level of government? How can local democratic rights and interests be respected yet metropolitan goals secured?
    • Which industry and employment policies and practices of the three levels of government are co-ordinated (temporally and spatially) to produce the land use patterns that contribute to productivity gains, which policies and practices do not, and what benefits in productivity growth could be realised through the further coordination of the three levels of government policy and practice?
    • What urban outcomes are obtained from the different governance structures in operation across Australia’s major cities? Why have the varying governance circumstances of our capital cities evolved as they have?
    • How do land use planning systems and processes impact upon the economic productivity of cities and what reforms would advance productivity gains?

  • Human capital

    • How do geographic concentrations of poor health and high crime rates impact upon human capital formation and labour supply, and in turn what impacts does this have upon economic productivity?
    • What are the key factors affecting the geographic mobility of human capital to ensure efficient labour supply (housing market, transport infrastructure, employment hubs)?
    • What are the current workforce strengths and weaknesses of the urban development sector, what training, skilled migration and support programs are required to ensure the capacity of the sector is attuned to the needs of the nation?

  • Social inclusion and equity

    • Concentrations of disadvantage within urban areas can generate concerns for governments on a number of dimensions. Alongside the moral and cultural disquiet for a nation that celebrates the ‘fair go’ are the impacts of the geography of opportunity on economic productivity and social inclusion.
    • How does the geography of inequality in employment, education and services impact on health outcomes, community wellbeing, crime rates, etc.?
    • What is it about the nature of capital cities that generates greater levels of inequality? What are the implications of these heightened levels of inequality for the quality of life in capital cities and in middle and old outer suburban areas in particular?
    • To what extent and how, might a more equal distribution of income and opportunity contribute to greater competitiveness and prosperity in the future?
    • Persistence in the degree of cumulative disadvantage between regions over time implies that there has been an absence of government interventions to redress these outcomes, or the interventions tried have not delivered as expected. Yet, there is a wealth of practical experience in international settings about how governments can successfully address such matters. What interventions have been used to address cumulative disadvantage across regions? Why have they not worked? What practices would be more effective in reducing the negative outcomes from cumulative regional disadvantage?

As AHURI continues to support the development of national urban policy by developing cross-government funding for the National Cities Research Program, we will also continue to consult on the relative priority of these research questions and to refine the focus for a national research effort to underpin effective and informed policy development and practice.

If you would like to know more about National Cities Research Program please contact:

Dr Ian Winter
Executive Director

Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute
Level 1, 114 Flinders Street
Melbourne Victoria 3000
Phone: 03 9660 2300
Fax: 03 9663 5488

Email: ian.winter@ahuri.edu.au

Icon: Printer  Printer friendly version        Icon: Envelopes  Email to a friend        Icon: Small book  Send feedback