J.-C. GARCIA-ZAMOR
ments like economics, infrastructure or cultural development
are viewed in their common context. The different institutions
and players that are involved in urban development planning
processes have to communicate and to cooperate.
This integrated planning approach as it is manifested in the
Leipziger Stadtentwicklungskonzept 2020 (SEKo 2020) will be
discussed in the next section. Then cultural promotion will be
described as a possible way of developing urban areas. Fur-
thermore, the development of Leipzig’s cultural scene over the
past 20 years will be outlined. What role does “culture”, or
more precisely “social culture”, play in the thematic framework
of urban development? To what extent could it be “used” for
the latter and how can it be funded in practice? To pursue these
questions, my research assistant interviewed the district man-
ager of Leipziger Westen, Mrs. Peggy Diebler, who described
the implementation practices that were implemented in the
districts of Lindenau and Plagwitz.
Leipzig’s Urban Development Plan “SEKo
2020” as an Integrative Approach
Cross-linking different sectors, “SEKo 2020” provides a
binding framework that serves as a guideline for the develop-
ment of the city in the years to come. It is the basis for budget
planning and sets priorities for the future use of municipal
funds and grants by designating main topics and priority areas
of action. A key package of measures and specific implementa-
tion options was developed to reach the objectives defined by
SEKo 2020. The concept is a basis for goal-oriented cross-
departmental actions not only within the local urban develop-
ment authorities, but also for the cooperation with various
stakeholders outside the municipal administration. That kind of
inclusiveness is a required condition for any project applying
for funding to the Free State of Saxony. Another cross-depart-
mental funding option is the European Regional Development
Fund (ERDF). In contrast, other programs like the federally
funded Stadtumbau Ost (urban restructuring in East Germany)
are rather project-oriented. They are neither limited to certain
areas, nor do they require the cooperation of the applicants and
local actors. To be financed from federal or other funding pots,
projects must above all fulfill the requirement of sustainability.
Extensive discussions during the preparation of SEKo have
created new structures of communication and coordination
within the Leipzig city council. These need to be maintained
and even intensified in order to ensure an efficient implementa-
tion of SEKo. Among other things, this concerns the coopera-
tion with municipal subsidiaries, in particular the housing and
construction company in Leipzig (Leipziger Wohnungs-und
Baugesellschaft, LWB), the municipal waterworks (Kom-
munale Wasserwerke Leipzig, KWL) and the energy supplier
“Stadtwerke Leipzig” (SWL). Just as important is the interac-
tion with non-administrative players such as clubs, individuals
or local businesses.
The integrated urban development plan SEKo 2020 will
eventually be successful. Even if the objectives set for 2020
cannot be entirely reached by then, it is planned to further pur-
sue the concept. With regularly scheduled monitoring and eva-
luation, it will continue to evolve.
Cultural Promotion as a Component
of Urban Development
After the German reunification, most of Leipzig’s districts
lacked cultural leisure services that would have been fit for all
age groups and close to their homes. In the early 1990s, the
establishment of such urgently needed socio-cultural centers
was initiated on the one hand by official authorities (the mu-
nicipality and the Kulturamt) and on the other by the citizens
themselves. Six initially municipal buildings are now inde-
pendently operated. The city has not only subsidized this trans-
formation but is also responsible for the structural maintenance
of the houses. By the mid-90s, several socio-cultural centers
were privatized, but only a few of them retained their function
as cultural sites. Many newly founded associations and initia-
tives strove hard to maintain the existing or to develop new
(albeit sometimes only temporary) cultural activities. In order
to implement the latter, they were not only interested in the
already established cultural sites, but particularly in former
industrial structures or other buildings with a rich historical
background. These urban environments offered vast opportuni-
ties for artists, the independent scene, cultural workers and
creative industries alike. In that way, several districts—primar-
ily Plagwitz and Neulindenau—have developed a characteristic
neighborhood culture which is not at all defined by institutions
of the so called high culture (although they consume a large
portion of the city’s cultural budget). Instead, independent sub-
cultural phenomena are constitutive elements. By now, the larg-
est and best known of these probably is the “Baumwollspinne-
rei” complex at the western extremity of Karl-Heine-Straße.
Socio-cultural facilities like the “Mühlstraße e.V.” in Leip-
zig’s east are important focal points and drivers of cultural and
social life in the district. They boost active citizenship and play
an important role in the process of integration of marginalized
population groups into the social fabric. Certain negative ef-
fects of demographic change (such as loneliness in old age, to
name just one example) can be mitigated through them. The
municipal funding of socio-culture has to start, where both
deficits in the existing supply structure and potentials for future
development can be observed. If urgently needed, new facilities
with additional services can of course be created. Cultural pro-
motion, however, is primarily designed to stabilize the net-
works that are already in place. Hence, Leipzig’s culture is
shaped by the successful coexistence of private creative busi-
nesses as well as public institutions and the publicly funded
independent scene—the latter certainly suffering less from the
pressure of being economically efficient. That freedom gives
them the opportunity—but also the obligation—to work on an
elevated artistic level and to be highly innovative and experi-
mental at the same time. Nevertheless, socio-culture must—just
like the private sector—take into account the financial situation
of their respective target group. As a result of declining net
incomes in certain districts, as well as an increasing proportion
of mini- and midi-jobbers or recipients of welfare benefits, it is
necessary to adapt concepts and projects in order to meet the
changed demands of the stakeholders and to actively prevent a
loss in revenues.
A large number of Leipzig’s cultural institutions originated
from civic engagement and were then, in times of economic
recovery, incorporated into municipal ownership. Nowadays,
they are threatened to be re-privatized as the city’s means of
cultural funding are gradually reach their limits. Given the cur-
rent economic situation, the preservation of cultural networks is
far from being granted. It should be remembered, that Leipzig’s
diverse cultural landscape functions as a decisive advantage for
the city in a way that cultural funding is also an important in-
Open Access
88
