The three reports posted by Amanda Crichton as post-conference publications should be seen as complementary in providing an overview of the 11th PASCAL Conference held in Hong Kong in November.

The Co-rapporteurs Overview Report gives a good brief summary of what was a broad and diverse canvas addressed in the conference crossing a range of sectors and themes relevant to cities learning together. As the four strands of the conference (Economic, Environjment, Health & well-being, Social) were particularly important in conveying the reach of the conference, the strands Full Report is a necessary supplement to the Overview Report in understanding a number of key developments in learning city aspirations, some still embryonic. 

These conference strands came out of PASCAL work in the PIE project on EcCoWell directed at finding ways to progress beyond sectoral silo development in cities towards more holistic and integrated approaches. The city of Cork has taken up this challenge in convening an EcCoWell seminar in March, followed by an International Conference focussed on the EcCoWell concept in September. Glasgow followed up with a further EcCoWell event in December.

A key question arising from the Hong Kong conference, therefore, is how far the conference succeeded in progressing the holistic/integrated ideas brought forward in the PASCAL work on EcCoWell. Is this best undertaken at the level of individual cities so that all contextual factors canj be taken into account, as has been happening in Cork.

Learning city development in East Asian cities such as Shanghai and Beijing have shown how learning city ideas can be applied in mega cities this size. This is an important development in the evolution of learning cities which has also had the effect of focussing attention on the key role of local communities as the basic building block in the successful implementation of learning city initiatives in cities of whatever size. While the Hong Kong conference addressd this question, much remains to be done. Docxuments coming from the Shanghai and Beijing initiative give examples of very interesting cross-sectoral projects such as eco-community developments in local communities.

I suggest then, that the three documents tabled by Amanda should be seen in a broader historical context of learning city development which collectively points the way to the bfuture. 2013 has been a big year for learning city development with the Hong Kong conference one of a number of important developments, perhaps highlighted by the UNESCO Beijing conference with its Beijing Declaration on Building Learning Cities and Key Features of Learning Cities. While PASCAL with its PIE initiative has contributed, as have individual cities such as Cork, Shanghai, and Glasgow with their initiatives, a particular contribution has also been made by the special learning city issue (59/4) of the International Review of Education which has drawn attention to similar developments in the netwo0rk of Educating Cities around the world, the plight of learning city development in Africa, and progress that has been made in the evaluation of learning city initiatives and in monitong learning development overall in cities.

The cumulative impact of these developments in 2013 provides a framework to take the learning city concept forward in 2014 towards a new generation of learning cities that link sustainability objectives with the traditional humanistic aspirations of learning cities in innovative strategies for addressing the big issues confronting cities. This suggest that 2014 should be a year of reflection, connecting up, and focussed innovation that builds o0n the insights provided by the rich pool of knowledge available from the 2013 events.

My personal view is that the learning city concept should be seen as a process rather than as a product so that there is particular value in case studies that document processes and outcomes involved in these initiatives in a range of contexts. I see the value oif the PIE stimulus papers in this way with the papers, for example, on the Hume, Shanghai, and Limerick initiatives showing stages of development over time with the policies adopted in these stages. This view aligns well with work undertaken on the evaluation of learning communities and cities by Cara and Ranson and Preisinger-Kleine who have recognised the need to explore the stages in the development of learning cities. Such an approach is also responsive to the growing diversity in learning city/educating city development around the world- diversity that will surely increae.

Progress in the past year raises the question whether the learning city should be seen as a pathway to a universal learning society, the vision articulated in 1972 by the UNESCO Faure Commission report.  If this view is taken, a related question arises concerning urban/rural links and whether successful learning cities can contribute to similar objectives in rural areas This is an important issue that joins the themes identified in the PASCAL conference. So what are the next steps in 2014?