T H E G E R M A N M A R S H A L L F U N D O F T H E U N I T E D S TAT E S

transatlantic
connections
transforming
communities
The Comparative Domestic Policy Program
Recognizing the importance of sustained transatlantic coopera-
tion and exchange at the grassroots level, the German Marshall
Fund launched the Comparative Domestic Policy (CDP) pro-
gram to continue its long tradition of facilitating and promoting
the exchange of best-practices across the Atlantic in the urban,
regional, and social policy arenas. Through partnerships with
community foundations, think tanks, and major European and
American foundations, the CDP program:
n Exposes civic leaders to alternative approaches to urban
and regional challenges;
n Provides a forum for brainstorming and networking among
leaders in European and American cities and regions;
contents
n Encourages an active exchange of information and best
practices on pressing societal challenges that are applicable
beyond the local level; and
n Informs national policymakers and practitioners of inno-
vative approaches to local and regional policy challenges.
GMF works with its partners and in-house research fellows to
identify domestic policy challenges where the sharing of trans-
atlantic experiences and knowledge would be particularly timely
and welcome, concentrating primarily on urban and regional
development, agriculture and rural communities, energy and the
environment, and changing demographics and social policy.
The material collected in this report is the result of an inexhaust-
ible effort on the part of Chelsea Strange, who, at press time,
is a junior at George Washington University’s Elliot School of
International Affairs and an intern at GMF. To obtain a broad
cross-section of GMF grants and their impacts on European and
American communities over time, Chelsea tracked down and
contacted close to 280 former grantees in the fields of environ-
ment, urban planning, social policy, and education. Thirty-three
returned completed questionnaires, and all were interviewed. We
would like to express our profound appreciation and gratitude to
Chelsea for her unflagging efforts and intellectual contributions
— please visit www.gmfus.org/CDP to access the full report, or
to share your own story of transatlantic learning.
Letter from the President 1
Executive Summary 2
Environmental Policy 4
Urban Policy 10
Social Policy 16
Economic Policy 22
letter from the president
hen I was a young program officer at
a Midwestern foundation, a friend of
mine introduced me to the German
Marshall Fund and its efforts to expose
American public policy practitioners
to the best ideas of Europe. I was skeptical initially. What could
Chicago, Cleveland, or Milwaukee possibly learn from Ham-
burg, Turin, or Manchester? But my doubts disappeared as I met
government officials, nonprofit leaders, and others who had been
informed and inspired by their association with GMF’s pro-
grams. Years later, when seeking to become the president of GMF,
I could honestly say that I had firsthand knowledge of how GMF
study tours had changed the thinking and outlook of countless
professionals in the economic development field.
Study tours, fellowships, and other transatlantic dialogues
have been critical activities for GMF from the very beginning.
GMF’s founding mandate in 1972 was to focus on “the compara-
tive consideration of problems of advanced industrial societies
in Europe, the United States, and elsewhere, and the study of
problems of international relations that pertain to the common
interests of Europe and the United States.” Since that time, GMF
has invested millions of dollars in exchange programs that con-
nect national and local policymakers, practitioners, scholars, and
civic activists with innovative approaches to challenges common
to communities on both sides of the Atlantic.
These investments have led over time to considerable
improvements and exciting initiatives in our cities and regions
today. From the founding of the European Business Council for
Sustainable Energy to the creation of the U.S. Mayors’ Institute
on City Design; from the “pedestrianization” of many Ameri-
can cities to the re-design of workforce development plans in
Germany; from developing business incubators in Europe to
contributing to the redesign of the World Trade Center site, GMF
has played an important role in bringing together the experts,
policymakers, and practitioners who have been able to make a
difference back home.
While foreign policy challenges have dominated the transat-
lantic landscape of late, the start of the 21st century nonetheless
offers a unique historical moment to reinvest in this transatlantic
exchange on domestic policy challenges. In Europe, EU enlarge-
ment is changing the economies of cities and regions as billions
of euros are invested by the EU Structural Fund, in addition
to funding from local, regional, and national governments.
American cities and regions have developed economic and social
models of interest to European cities struggling with the ris-
ing costs of the social welfare state. Public-private partnerships
between universities and the business and medical sectors, higher
education financing, integration of immigrants and inter-ethnic
relations, and the role of the philanthropic sector in social service
delivery all present different approaches for European communi-
ties faced with similar dilemmas.
In the United States, cities and regions have experienced a
dramatic restructuring over the past decade, with cities that once
were thought beyond hope now experiencing a renaissance. They
are also looking to Europe for innovative strategies to address the
environmental, transportation, and social challenges created by
sprawling development.
As we advance deeper into this century, the rapidity of change
affecting cities, regions, and entire nations — and the policy
responses to that change — will have a profound impact on the
lives of Europeans and Americans. Clearly, the time for insightful
transatlantic exchange could not be more opportune for policy-
makers, researchers, and practitioners.
Craig Kennedy, President
Transatlantic Connections Transforming Communities 
executive summary
oth Europe and the United States have While there is a cultural, political, and
substantial experience in creating and historical specificity to the issues core cities
implementing urban and regional policy
to solve pressing challenges, and they face in the U.S., our trip to Europe…reminded
often look to each other for inspiration. us that the challenges we face are part of a
History is replete with examples of such
global trend and the solutions will not always
transatlantic cross-fertilization, includ-
ing the proliferation of garden cities, the come from within our nation’s borders. It is to
development of social housing, models our benefit to continue to pursue dialogue with
for urban renewal, mega-project development in central cit-
ies, and waterfront development. Since its inception in 1972, our sister cities in Europe and beyond, and to
the German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMF) has promote learning between our countries.
provided significant financial support for study tours, fel- — Kim Burnett, Program Officer, Surdna Foundation,
lowships, conferences, and other related activities that have New York, NY. 2004 study tour, weak market cities.
provided opportunities for just this sort of exchange and
transatlantic learning among policymakers and practitioners
at the national, state, and local levels.  
In launching the Comparative Domestic Policy program,
GMF felt it was important to revisit its investments in transat-
lantic exchange over the last two decades, to assess the impact
over time of those grants and programs, and to determine the
effectiveness of our models of exchange — individual fellow-
ships, study tours, and networks for practitioners, policymak-
ers, civic leaders, and grassroots activists tasked with solving
some of the more intractable problems facing our societies.
GMF has found study tours and fellowships to be some
of the most valuable learning methods for leaders looking
for new and innovative approaches to common challenges.
Participants not only develop valuable professional contacts
with their counterparts abroad, but also build much-needed
social capital by traveling with other civic leaders whose
expertise and support are critical to the success of new ideas
implemented at home.
In an admittedly unscientific sampling of the countless in-
dividuals who have taken part in a GMF-funded or -organized
study tour, fellowship, or exchange over the past 30 years, we
contacted approximately 280; received 33 questionnaires in
response, and conducted interviews of all 33.
The pages that follow contain only a small portion of the
outcomes from over three decades of grants and programs
designed to stimulate new approaches to some of our societ-
ies’ most challenging issues. The full report can be found at
www.gmfus.org/CDP.

 The German Marshall Fund of the United States

what we learned…
New perspectives promote new thinking.
Face-to-face, peer-to-peer exchange and experiential
learning across cultures are invaluable.
Small investments can lead to big changes over time.
Some of the least expensive initiatives have generated
the largest returns on investment.
Developing and engaging strong civic leaders is critical
to the success of a transatlantic exchange.
With the right communicators, the ripple effect within a
broader community cannot be underestimated.
Patience is critical.
Initial investments in study tours may not pay off for several
years, but once the groundwork is laid by the civic leaders
the results are indisputable.
Learning from other communities’ successes and failures
leads to faster, more effective change at home.
Communities avoid re-inventing the wheel or repeating
others’ mistakes.
Transatlantic connections create strong networks
over time.
Forging bonds among “alumni” can lead to long-term
collaboration within a community, region, nation, or across
the ocean.
The group dynamic we established was at the core
of why this trip was so successful. We came to think
as a team and saw how all of our work could be
layered together more effectively. As practitioners,
we were really inspired by what we saw, came back
with a reinforced spirit of collaboration, and were
re-committed to the city and its neighborhoods.
— Ann Zoller, Executive Director, ParkWorks, Cleveland, OH. 2004
study tour, urban development and neighborhood revitalization.
Transatlantic Connections Transforming Communities 
environmental policy
Since its inception, environmental issues have played
a prominent role in GMF’s programming. With an eye toward
improving the quality of life for American and European
citizens, GMF has invested in activities that have promoted
sound environmental policymaking, from protecting clean
air and water and preserving open spaces to improving waste
management and recycling methods. Some of the topics
have changed over the years in our efforts to address the
most pressing and relevant challenges of the day, while others
— such as energy conservation strategies and climate change
— have remained fairly constant themes in GMF’s work.
In the 1980s, GMF’s grantmaking had a strong focus on
transboundary air pollution abatement (acid rain) and waste
disposal, including better hazardous waste disposal methods,
recycling, and alternatives to landfills. Also prevalent in our
grantmaking at the time was energy efficiency in the trans-
portation and building sectors. In the 1990s, shortly after the
fall of the Berlin Wall, GMF focused on the environmental
challenges of the former Soviet states in Central and Eastern
 The German Marshall Fund of the United States
Europe. One major initiative that GMF undertook, in part-
nership with several other foundations, was the establishment
of the Environmental Partnership for Central Europe (EPCE),
independent foundations working to address environmental
concerns in the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, and Slova-
kia (and eventually in Romania and Bulgaria). More recently,
GMF has concentrated its resources on addressing the polar-
izing environmental issue of climate change.
Through strategic grantmaking, support of fellowship
programs, and study tours, GMF has contributed significantly
to an exchange of best-practices in the environmental field
that has had concrete results at many levels. Several examples
are described in the testimonials on these pages including the
results of a travel grant for one individual that led to improve-
ments in waste management in Massachusetts and Rhode
Island, a fellowship that led to cleaner diesel emissions in
New York, and a study tour that led to increased cooperation
between the United States and Germany on climate change.
My fellowship had two major Strong partnerships emerged out of this trip — e5, the European
impacts on my work and ca- Business Council for Sustainable Energy, was founded with the
reer. First, seeing the greater help of the U.S. Business Council for Sustainable Energy and
use of diesel emission control
Worldwatch. Germanwatch later became co-editor of the German
technology in Europe advanced
edition of the Worldwatch Report. And GMF, EDF, and Germanwatch
my thinking about the need to
initiated a joint dialogue program with NGOs and businesses in
reduce diesel pollution without
throwing out the greater effi- 1996, which inspired the German debate and strongly influenced
ciency of diesel engines. Within the attitude of German NGOs toward emission trading.
three years, I helped develop — Christoph Bals, Germanwatch, Berlin, Germany. 1994 study tour on emission trading,
NGO-business coalitions, incentive systems.
a New York City Transit clean-
up plan that reduced fleetwide
particulate soot emissions by
more than 95%. Second, cli-
mate change was a much more
active, local issue in Europe’s
cities than in American cities
then; I learned about many pro-
grams to cut greenhouse gas
emissions locally and started to
think about whether we could do
something similar or better here
even in the absence of federal
leadership on climate change.
The experience whetted my ap-
petite for thinking about applying
lessons learned across borders.
I now spend more than half my
time helping developing coun-
tries adopt clean fuel and vehi-
cle pollution programs modeled
on the U.S. and European best
practices. I would not be doing
what I’m doing without my 1997
GMF fellowship experiences.
— Richard Kassel, National Resources
Defense Council, New York, New York.
1997 environmental fellowship on
transportation policy at the urban level.

Transatlantic Connections Transforming Communities 

When I went to Europe, I was
exposed to regional parks, land-
scapes, where planning had been
done not just for conservation
purposes. They were populated.
People lived in the landscape;
people were integrated in the
landscape. The study tour had
a lot to do with my evolving
thinking about what was impor-
tant and how issues could be
approached.
— Deborah Schimberg, Social Venture
Partners of Rhode Island; Verve, Inc., Provi-
dence, Rhode Island. 1990 study tour on
land trusts, land use and planning.

Recycle or Bust
By Gretchen Brewer • Grant amount: $12,500 over two trips

hen I made the de- seeing the viability of collection and sort- tated creation of the Plastics Recycling
cision in 1978 to ing of commingled recyclables from house- Applied Research Institute (PRARI) in
make a career in holds, as pioneered in Germany through conjunction with Lowell University, other
recycling, I could the green bin system, and development of New England governments, and private
not have imagined sorting plant technologies. This approach industry. This later led to formation of the
the course that it
has since become state-of-the-art in North Chelsea Center for Recycling Economic
would take. In 1986, the German Marshall
America. I helped to plant the seeds for Development at Lowell University, which
Fund gave me the opportunity to travel to
innovative approaches to waste manage- pioneered many recycling research and
several European cities for my research.
ment in a propitious time when profession- development projects until 2003. Thus,
As a result of visiting breakthrough
als in the recycling field were looking for while I moved on to other assignments
systems utilizing technologies designed to
new methods. What I learned on my GMF and venues, the benefits for Massachu-
make new end-products from mixed plas-
study tour was certainly advantageous setts communities continued.
tics, I gained a far better understanding of
for this. The tenacity of others in my field I also believe that the study tour experi-
polymers and of the potential to simplify
coupled with this new information set the ence armed me with advanced knowledge
plastics recycling by instructing citizens to
stage for about 500 sorting plants (called and skills that were in high demand till
set out anything they recognize as plastic.
MRFs, or material recovery facilities) to the mid-1990s. With my plastics recycling
This offered a way to avoid complicated ex-
come on line in North America since the expertise, I was able to change careers
planations to laypersons on which plastics
late 1980s, and commingled collection and become an independent recycling
can or cannot be recycled, and it became
— called single stream recycling here — is consultant advising the plastics industry,
a key part of the Plastics Recycling Action
becoming the prevalent collection method. the San Diego County government, Naval
Plan I wrote for Massachusetts and Rhode
Findings from my first study tour facili- Station San Diego, and other clients. In
Island. The other important finding was

 The German Marshall Fund of the United States

Meeting with business lobbyists
and conservative think tanks
gave me a new perspective on
I found examples of sustainable development in European moun-
the U.S. climate debate and its
tain areas that are geographically similar to our region, and some
constraints. My increased knowl-
of these ideas were then applied in Colorado. There have been
edge about the conditions and many developments in the state that were modeled after European
constraints of U.S. climate policy examples. There are new pedestrian malls in Denver, which is one
helped my peers and me in devel- of the leading cities for climate change. Telluride, Colorado, lies in
oping realistic policy options. I a valley and is very prone to pollution problems. There was a resort
managed to introduce a trainee town springing up over the hill, and they stipulated that a free chair
lift for citizens of Telluride be created so that they could go to the
system to Germany’s environmen-
town without using cars. Parking restrictions and traffic circles in
tal NGOs based on a model devel-
places like Vail and Grand Junction also cut down on emissions.
oped by the Nature Conservancy. — Kate Fay, Kate C Fay & Associates, Inc., Boulder, Colorado. 1996 study tour on
— Sascha Müller-Kraenner, Heinrich Böll environmental policy.
Foundation, Berlin, Germany. 1995
environmental fellowship on energy policy,
climate change.

looking back, I believe that the information
I brought from Europe definitely widened
my horizons, and I think that it was very
influential nationally in shaping U.S. ap-
proaches to plastics recycling and to multi-
material collections.
In 1990, I participated in a second
GMF-funded research program. Probably
the most important result of this second
tour was that Webster Industries, Inc. of
Massachusetts became so interested in
Sorema — an Italian technology able to
purify highly contaminated waste plastics,
such as agricultural films, and produce
pellets that could be used in the most
demanding applications, namely, making
new film — that they asked me to arrange
a plant tour for their executives. Webster
subsequently purchased and installed the
first plant in the U.S. to make 100 percent
post-consumer recycled plastic trash
bags. This plant went online in Missouri in
1991, and I believe it is still operating. In
essence, the Sorema technology proved
that recycled plastic trash bags could be
made at comparable quality and price with
virgin plastic bags, which opened the way
for a law in California mandating the sale
of minimum 25 percent recycled content
trash bags in the state. Webster Indus-
tries’ plant was the first to qualify to sell
its product in California, and this raised
the bar so that other U.S. companies
either had to do the research and devel-
opment or to purchase the technology in
order to access the California market.
Similarly, many U.S. companies imple-
mented technologies (Sorema or home-
grown systems) to produce recycled-con-
tent plastic grocery sacks and detergent
bottles in response to consumer pressure
in the 1990s.
My experiences with German Marshall
Fund-supported projects enabled me
to make professional contacts, acquire
specialized knowledge, and share that
knowledge with many colleagues to help
advance the recycling field in the U.S. I
feel I was very fortunate to be in the right
place at the right time to gather many
promising European “seeds” to plant in
fertile American soil. The multiplier effect
of this type of study tour is clearly shown
in the United States’ recycling and solid
waste management programs.
— Gretchen Brewer is Regional Planner IV,
Bureau of Waste Prevention, Massachusetts
Department of Environmental Protection,
Boston, Massachusetts.

Transatlantic Connections Transforming Communities 

 The fellowship gave me confidence to pursue
involvement in the diplomatic side of carbon
policy work, and it helped me win a role as a
Department of Energy representative on U.S.
climate change negotiating teams from 1993 to
1998. Beyond that, I could not begin to count the
number of carbon trading policy documents pre-
pared when I was a U.S. government official, or
reports prepared when I was working for Environ-
mental Defense, or business plans, documents,
and speeches during my work at Natsource — all
of which benefited from the tour in some way.
I think the value of this type of project is pretty
clear: there is a continuing need for building
bridges between U.S. and European policymakers
on climate change. With such a complex and en-
during issue, there are regular needs for building
these connections. People in government rou-
tinely move in and out of positions of influence
on this complex issue — and having a regular
way of promoting dialogue is important. Certainly,
this is done through official government visits on
a routine basis, but there is a “neutrality” about
a GMF fellowship that enables an individual to
explore ideas more freely than if on an official
government mission.
— Dirk Forrister, Natsource Europe Ltd., London, England.
1992 study tour on potential for emissions trading in Europe.

 The German Marshall Fund of the United States

Transatlantic Connections Transforming Communities 
urban policy
Much of GMF’s work on comparative domestic policy has
focused on issues that affect cities and urban regions. On both
sides of the Atlantic, policymakers and practitioners at the
municipal and, increasingly, regional levels struggle to develop
transportation, affordable housing, neighborhood revitalization,
brownfield redevelopment, and economic development policies
that will contribute to building vibrant, successful communities.
Over the years, GMF has heavily invested in study tours that
provided opportunities for Americans and Europeans to travel
to the other side of the Atlantic to learn from the experiences of
their counterparts and share their own ideas and knowledge on
these and a host of other urban issues. Many of these exchanges
have resulted in profound changes in communities across the
United States and Europe, from the implementation of a hybrid
10 The German Marshall Fund of the United States
bus fleet in Bremen, Germany, to the development of a
light rail system connecting Denver, Colorado, and its
surrounding suburbs. A fruitful ongoing partnership
between the Northern Virginia Regional Commission and
the Stuttgart Verband Region, launched through a small
$12,000 grant to the NVRC in 2000, has led to a number of
initiatives benefiting those regions, including implement-
ing innovative German traffic calming and environmental
management practices in Northern Virginia, and the cre-
ation of HOV (high occupancy vehicle) commuter lanes in
Stuttgart. Other regions in the United States have learned
from Europe’s expertise in long-term urban planning to
establish smart growth policies and have redesigned parks,
public spaces, and urban centers in response.
I met with an engineer in Cologne who helped me
to understand how to get people to use bikes. It
is an entire package in terms of education and
traffic laws; they provided maps of bike routes
every year to residents. This helped to shape our
regional bicycle program here. We also visited
a brownfield area in Germany where they had
changed a previously industrial area into a sort
of park. They had painted old, abandoned facto-
ries to make them look like works of art. They
had also made trails in order to preserve the
area because it was a part of the region’s heri-
tage. I took what I learned abroad and applied it
to the Kansas City area. We made a trail along
the riverfront that goes through some fairly indus-
trialized areas. Now people can see it all from a
different perspective and appreciate it.
— Marlene Nagel, Mid-America Regional Council, Kansas
City, Missouri/Kansas. 1999 environmental fellowship on
non-motorized transit and land use.
The three study tours in which I took part have had
significant impacts on my work. In Germany, I saw
for the first time how regional planning could be
integrated into brownfield strategies. In the Neth-
erlands, I learned about open-space preservation
and community planning. And Denmark taught me
incredible lessons about urbanism, healthy commu-
nities, and integrated transportation. I have worked
with those in my field to bring some colleagues that
I met in Europe back to the U.S., including Tomas
Grohé from Emscher Park and Jan Gehl from Copen-
hagen. Gehl continues to stay in touch with us and
has lectured in New York and New Jersey at events
that we have organized. I am convinced that his
work will (eventually) have a major impact on the
pedestrianization of Manhattan.
—Tom Wright, Regional Plan Association, New York, New York.
multiple study tours beginning in 1996 on brownfield strategies
and regional planning.
Transatlantic Connections Transforming Communities 11
 There has been an enormous impact both on my personal career There is an ongoing exchange
and on the groups we have worked with and helped, and the benefits in the field of car-sharing
of that are ongoing. What we saw on the trips convinced skeptical developments and of alternative
city council members that you can do brownfield revitalization. This fuels/propulsion. We are con-
type of work has since been done in Williamsburg and Greenpoint.
sidering the use of buses with
There is also an ongoing exchange between New York City and Berlin
diesel-electric hybrid propulsion
that started 30 years ago and continues today. It deals with issues
such as housing rehab, environmental issues, participation, etc., and can use the already existing
and has really been a two-way street. In 2002, a plan that started experience of Seattle and
some nine years earlier by a community planning effort and then an Portland with similar buses.
exchange enabled us to bring leaders from the IBA Emscher Park — Michael Glotz-Richter, City of Bremen
Department for Construction, Environment
region to New York to share ideas. One individual was so impressed and Transport, Bremen, Germany. 1997
that he helped to fund a lot of the planning work for major develop- study tour on transport and environment.
ment efforts in the Williamsburg/Greenpoint area. GMF partially
funded a group to go to Berlin after 9/11. Several individuals went
on to design the memorial on Ground Zero. I do not think GMF
knows what a profound impact it has had.
— Dr. Ron Schiffman, Pratt Center for Community Development, New York, New York.
multiple study tours beginning 1976, urban development.

12 The German Marshall Fund of the United States

Study Tour Participants Become Leaders of Smart Growth
Movement in California
By James Corless • Grant amount: $360,000 over three years to the Surface Transportation Policy Project
for six study tours (total of 60 participants)

s California Director of
the Surface Transpor-
tation Policy Project, I
participated in two study
tours with the German
Marshall Fund. I had been working in the
areas of transportation, growth manage-
ment, and regional planning. In California,
the issues surrounding air quality have
forced many public agencies to rethink
their policies and adopt smart-growth
planning. Federal transportation money is
at risk if these issues are not addressed.
The opportunity to travel to Europe with the
German Marshall Fund in order to study
different policies and to interact with key
individuals presented itself in 1999, and
again in 2002.
I never expected that the experiences
would have such a profound impact in
terms of professional networking and the
exchange of ideas. I had anticipated that
our delegation would meet with other Eu-
ropean officials, but not that the outcomes
would be so significant and widespread.
The American elected officials partook in
peer-to-peer learning with their counter-
parts and even built personal relationships
with them. Many of these officials were
inspired by what they learned and upon
their return to the United States, began
a series of initiatives in California. One
member of the delegation, Contra Costa
County Supervisor Mark DeSaulnier, a
study tour participant in 1999 and 2002,
is now running for the California State
Assembly and has avidly championed
issues of air quality, regional planning,
and smart growth. Another member of the
delegation, Kim Belshé, has since become
secretary of the California Health and Hu-
man Services Agency. West Sacramento
Mayor Christopher Cabaldon, a 2002
study tour participant, went on to chair the
Sacramento Area Council of Governments
and lead their award-winning smart growth
“Blueprint” planning program. State Sena-
tor Tom Torlakson — a participant in our
2002 European study tour — has become
the leading champion in the legislature
for new funding and incentives for smart
growth. These individuals and many others
have carried much of what they learned
on their study tour into their professional
and elected positions, implementing these
ideas wherever possible.
Smart growth and regional planning
that better integrates transportation, land
use, and air quality are now almost stan-
dard practice in many agencies through-
out California. Part of the reason for this
tremendous shift in priorities over the last
decade is the broad support that many
decision-makers across the state have
shown for these concepts, supported in no
small part by some of the outstanding in-
dividual leadership that many of our study
tour participants have shown as a result of
their European visits.
— James Corless is a Senior Planner at the
Bay Area Metropolitan Transportation Com-
mission in Oakland, California.

Transatlantic Connections Transforming Communities 13

 The “car-free” housing systems in Amsterdam and Freiburg were profoundly inspiring and have changed
my professional approach to development. The car-sharing operations in Amsterdam, Freiburg, and
Switzerland led me to support the establishment of a car-sharing organization in my region. I helped
found City Carshare, a successful car-sharing organization in the San Francisco Bay area, and served on
its Board of Directors. The establishment of car-sharing in Berkeley in 2002 has reduced the impacts of
vehicle ownership, especially in our parking-scarce downtown. By providing a flexible, convenient alterna-
tive to vehicle ownership, car-sharing is a critical element in managing demand for employee travel in
Berkeley while reducing demand for parking. I also work to reduce parking requirements in new develop-
ment through the provision of car-sharing and other transportation programs. These issues were directly
influenced by my GMF fellowship.
— Matthew Nichols, City of Berkeley Principal Transportation Planner, Berkeley, California. 1999 environmental fellowship on car
sharing, transit, bicycling, parking, and land use.

Seeing light rail in Strasbourg changed my outlook

on the issue. You could see that it was not loud and
there could be developments right next to it. After
the study tour, I could campaign for light rail more
effectively because I had seen it in Europe and knew
that it could work. Our light rail system along I-25
has been under construction for some time and will
open to the public in mid-November.
— Polly Page, Public Utilities Commission, Denver Colorado.
1999 study tour on light rail.

14 The German Marshall Fund of the United States

Overall what was very formative for me was the
high value afforded the public realm. Toward
the end of the trip, we were in a small city in
England where they were restoring a waterfront
— putting in trees that were not cheap and
using expensive building materials. It all came
together that what I had been seeing throughout
the tour was that they valued the public realm. I
realized that there is no reason to be timid in in-
vesting in this area because there is a profound
acceptance of the value of the public realm
— downtown areas, sidewalks, streets, parks,
and squares. There is an understanding of the
importance of those things because they belong
to everyone. This has shaped the way I do work
here and was instrumental in creating the May-
ors’ Institute on City Design. I was inspired by
the investment in the public realm that I saw on
the study tour. As a result, we worked to restore
the historic district of Charleston and built a
beautiful waterfront park, which was created for
the public. My experiences with the GMF study
tour play a role every day in my work as mayor
and in my work with the mayors of our country. I
can trace all of these networks back to the GMF
trip. It was a seminal experience for me, which
continues to shape what I do.
— Joseph P. Riley, Mayor, Charleston, South Carolina.
1979 study tour on urban restoration initiatives.

Transatlantic Connections Transforming Communities 15

social policy
The United States and Europe differ significantly in their
cultural attitudes toward social policy. With a strong social state
as the prevailing model in Europe and an emphasis on indi-
vidualism in the United States, it would appear on the surface
that these fundamental differences would hinder cross-cultural
transatlantic learning. What we have discovered, however, is that
at the most local levels, practitioners on both sides of the Atlantic
struggle to meet the same basic needs of their citizens. From pre-
venting high school dropouts to improving health care services
to the poor and elderly to integrating immigrants, American and
European policymakers and practitioners have appreciated the
opportunity to look for new approaches and methods to tackle
these common challenges.
From the very beginning, the German Marshall Fund has
had a focus on social policy. Early on, GMF supported exchanges
for German teachers of English to spend time teaching at a U.S.
school to develop a better understanding of the United States
16 The German Marshall Fund of the United States
and the English language. Europeans came to the United
States to look at ways to decrease unemployment while
Americans traveled to Europe to examine their youth ap-
prenticeship programs. Immigration and integration has
been a theme throughout GMF’s history, and continues to
be an important part of GMF’s work. Projects in the 1970s
and 1980s focused on integrating guest workers and stem-
ming illegal immigration; the 1990s saw a shift to projects
that took a holistic approach involving sending countries
in the transatlantic dialogue. The focus today has shifted
to refugee policy and combating social exclusion among
minority populations. In keeping with this social policy
tradition, GMF has more recently started working with
community foundations and their staffs to help the devel-
opment and advancement of this philanthropic field that
focuses on the needs of local citizens.
I was impressed by steps taken in Switzerland
and Denmark to make apprenticeship more
flexible and adaptable. Because both countries
are much smaller than Germany, they have to
do some things differently and those differ-
ences suggested approaches that might better
fit the U.S., where no single centralized system
is likely to develop. The Youth Apprenticeship
Demonstration Project, which was shaped in part
in response to what I learned on my study tour,
has been maintained by the community (Broome
County, NY) since we withdrew in 1995 after
directing it for four years. It is a program for high
school students relying heavily on the coopera-
tion of local employers and collaboration among
multiple school districts.
— Professor Stephen F. Hamilton, Cornell University, Ithaca,
New York. 1991 research grant on apprenticeship.
The employment programs we visited in
Baltimore focused on the personal involvement of
the people participating. Although the situation in
Spain is completely different, we developed several
programs asking for the highest personal involve-
ment and commitment from the participants. The
state-of-the-art local development and the evolution
of city centers and metropolitan areas in the States
allowed me to better understand urban polices in
Europe in contrast. We now have a stronger focus
on business growth in our entrepreneurship and
business incubator programs.
— Mateu Hernández, Barcelona Activa, Barcelona, Spain. 2003
study tour, economic and workforce development.
Transatlantic Connections Transforming Communities 17
Youth Apprenticeship and Service Programs Move Forward
with GMF Support
By Dr. Roger Landrum • Grant amount: $9,000
n 1979, Harris Wofford and I
authored Youth and the Needs
of the Nation, based on a year
of deliberations by a blue ribbon
Committee for the Study of
National Service hosted by the
Potomac Institute. Based on
this work, in 1980 with German
Marshall Fund sponsorship, I traveled
extensively in West Germany and France
reviewing substantial alternative non-mili-
tary programming available to youth who
were conscientious objectors to military
service (a status easily obtainable under
the West German constitution with a sim-
ple declaration, but assigned primarily to
18 The German Marshall Fund of the United States
youth from elite backgrounds in France).
I returned with a strong impression of
how government attitudes and practices
related to national service in two Western
countries could play out in such widely
varying ways, depending upon leadership
and policies, with profound consequences
for participating youth.
In 1984, I was contacted by The Ford
Foundation and asked to undertake a
consultancy examining local and state
youth service programs which might form
an initial framework for a new national
program, and to make recommenda-
tions to the foundation for a new grants
program to leverage such an initiative.
Based on what I had learned from the
Youth and the Needs of the Nation study
and observations in West Germany and
France — as well as the thin existing con-
stituency for a national service program
in America — I recommended that Ford
direct grants to achieve two goals: (1) to
strengthen and replicate the existing local
and state programs and (2) to redefine
the framework of national service in
such a way that part-time service at the
secondary and university levels and full-
time service in youth corps (conservation
corps, Peace Corps, VISTA, the military
services) be viewed as parts of a unified
voluntary national service system in which
photo provided by John Gillooly/PEI ©
government at all levels and civil society
were partners. This would cut across
age levels and institutional boundaries,
creating a much broader constituency for
youth service programming without wait-
ing for government legislative initiative or
the inefficiencies and political liabilities
of government management. What I had
seen in West Germany and France was
fundamental to thinking in these new
directions.
Ford also asked me to create a new
organization in Washington called Youth
Service America. The organization’s focus
was to work on unifying the emerging field
and its leaders, identifying, publicizing
and programming best practices that cut
I returned with a strong
impression of how government
attitudes and practices related to
national service in two Western
countries could play out in such
widely varying ways, depending
upon leadership and policies,
with profound consequences for
participating youth.
— Dr. Roger Landrum
across age levels and types of programs.
It also promoted policy ideas with gover-
nors and Members of Congress, and most
of all communicated the vision of a grow-
ing voluntary national program.
The grass-roots field then grew rapidly.
Typical of our efforts were annual leader-
ship conferences with the goal of ex-
panding the network, and National Youth
Service Day (NYSD), to attract publicity
for local programs at all levels across the
country. NYSD is now the largest service
event in the world. Within the swirl of activ-
ity, programs proliferated and entrepreneur-
ial ventures such as City Year, Teach for Probably most important were
America, and YouthBuild were established. the ways that relationships
This emerging field reached national
policy levels with breathtaking speed. The among members of the team from
first President Bush gave a speech about Milwaukee were strengthened.
youth service during his campaign for the
We worked together better and
presidency, and when elected, hammered
out with Congress the elements of the Na- found new ways to work together.
tional and Community Service Act of 1990, Further, the team had a common
which passed with bipartisan support and
language on the importance of
included funding for programming at sec-
ondary, university and youth corps levels. training and the importance of
Senator Ted Kennedy led the negotiations
employer leadership in training
in Congress. Bill Clinton then campaigned
that were strengthened substan-
for an expanded national service program
and, when elected, engineered the revised tially by the time and experience
National and Community Service Act of
in Germany.
1993. This legislation established the
Corporation for National and Community — Laura Dresser, Ph.D., Associate Director,
Center on Wisconsin Strategy, Madison,
Service. with expanded federal funding for
Wisconsin. 1999 study tour, workforce
both youth corps (AmeriCorps) and service- development and labor relations.
learning (Learn and Serve America).
The debate about national service
continues. Now the question is whether
there will be a next stage of growth (in the
U.S. and internationally), who will lead the
effort, and what policy principles might
underlay such an effort.
— Dr. Roger Landrum is founder and
former president of Youth Service America
and currently president of Youth Service
International.
Transatlantic Connections Transforming Communities 19
 The visits to job centers in Milwaukee were very
eye-opening. These were very inspiring and laid
the basis for the redevelopment of our welfare-
to-work policies in Germany and in the state
of Hessen. We have adopted some ideas for
our local employment policy, including the
welfare-to-work policy, entrepreneurship support
programs, and micro-loan policies. The Wisconsin
W2 model has inspired much of the social reform
politics in Germany since 2000. Much of that
came through the exchange between the state
of Hessen and Wisconsin in this policy area,
which was pioneered by my visit and the
impressions I have brought back.
— Matthias Schulze-Böing, MainArbeit GmbH and City Council
Offenbach, Offenbach, Germany. 1998 study tour on welfare
reform, economic development.

20 The German Marshall Fund of the United States

Transatlantic Connections Transforming Communities 21
economic policy

In keeping with the Marshall Plan legacy, economic policy

has been an integral part of GMF’s grantmaking and programs.
Since the early 1980s, increasing globalization and competition
have brought waves of new economic challenges to Europe and
the United States. On both sides of the Atlantic, the success or
failure of urban and regional economies now hinges on their
ability to compete not just within their nations’ borders, but with
other cities and regions around the world.
GMF’s economic policy grantmaking and programs have
consistently focused on the exchange of best-practices to pro-
mote local economic development and assist cities and regions
in the transition to the new economy. From urban enterprise
zones to workforce development and retraining to mortgage
lending practices to public-private partnerships in the delivery
of public services, American and European public officials and
private-sector leaders have been able to adapt innovative solu-
tions through intensive peer-to-peer exchanges provided by an
individual fellowship or focused study tour.

22 The German Marshall Fund of the United States

Timely Support Benefits Many
By Dr. Krassen Stanchev • Grant amount: $15,000

he Institute for Market Eco- facilitating their response to the growing are due to this project, and they are not.
nomics (IME) and the German demand. But it is obvious that we managed to sup-
Marshall Fund have had a long The trip to Washington, D.C., Pennsyl- port a market development for the benefit
and rewarding history. Together vania, and Minnesota took place in 1999, of many, if not all.
they worked to help Bulgaria and involved visits and deliberation with — Dr. Krassen Stanchev is executive direc-
to develop a tradition of public institutions and various organizations. tor of the Institute for Market Economics in
hearing and impact analysis for By mid-2000, the Mortgage Bonds Law Sofia, Bulgaria.
policies, laws, and regulations. The part-
nership cultivated the first Internet educa-
tional vehicle in economics in Bulgaria and
strongly supported capacity building.
One particular ad hoc partnership
between IME and GMF had the most exem-
plary positive impact: a project to support
the emergence of a secondary mortgage
market in Bulgaria. This was accomplished
by drafting and promoting a framework for
the education of provisional players in how
such markets work. The immediate im-
pacts of the project included lower interest
rates on residential mortgages as well as
revitalization of the market. This contrib-
uted to making Bulgaria the fastest growing
real estate market in Europe since 2002.
The idea for the project came to the
IME board (bankers and businessmen),
from Frank Bauer, a former mortgage
banker and CEO of the Bulgarian American
Enterprise Fund (BAEF). Private homeown-
ership was well protected in Bulgaria
— even under communism, 85 percent
of homes were privately owned. New had passed committee, plenary hearings,
houses and blocks of flats were financed and was adopted. Members of the group
through private mortgages extended by that visited the U.S. were instrumental in
one bank, the state-owned DSK bank, explaining to legislators how a developed
since the 1960s. With the high inflation market works.
of 1990-1997 (averaging 210% each year, When the project started in 1998, the
and 240% in February 1997) mortgages average mortgage interest rate was about
virtually disappeared; with the economic 16 or 17 percent, and the longest term of
stabilization from March to July 1997, credit was less than nine years. One year
they started re-emerging. We believed after private banks applied the new mort-
that the primary market (credits to finance gage financing, the interest rate dropped
houses and flats) would be re-established down to 12 percent and hit 9 percent
by the demand itself, after many years of the following year. The maturity grew to
disinvestment in new construction and 16 years, and then to 19 years in 2003.
maintenance, so we decided to focus on Since 2003, the construction industry con-
secondary market instruments (mortgage tributes to 12 percent of GDP and grows at
bonds), in order to provide for longer-term 15 percent a year. It would be an exaggera-
resources for mortgage lenders, thus tion to claim that all these developments

Transatlantic Connections Transforming Communities 23

In 1996, I was faced with a large professional chal-
lenge — the construction of a business incubator in
Brandenburg, Germany. The trip with GMF showed
me that it was worth it to pursue this goal. It also
assured that the company would continue to exist
and to work successfully, which it does even today.
For my personal work, I gained good motivation and
impulses — part of that being not losing determina-
tion when faced with large bureaucratic hurdles.
I believe the study tour gave me the courage and
endurance to approach my work in Germany.
— Dr. Veit-Stephan Zweynert, Technologie und Gründerzentrum
“Fläming” GmbH, Belzig, Germany. 1996 study tour on economic
promotion of small and medium enterprises.

24 The German Marshall Fund of the United States

The German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMF) is a nonpartisan American public policy and
grantmaking institution dedicated to promoting greater cooperation and understanding between the United
States and Europe.

GMF does this by supporting individuals and institutions working on transatlantic issues, by convening
leaders to discuss the most pressing transatlantic themes, and by examining ways in which transatlantic
cooperation can address a variety of global policy challenges. In addition, GMF supports a number of
initiatives to strengthen democracies.

Founded in 1972 through a gift from Germany as a permanent memorial to Marshall Plan assistance, GMF
maintains a strong presence on both sides of the Atlantic. In addition to its headquarters in Washington, DC,
GMF has six offices in Europe: Berlin, Bratislava, Paris, Brussels, Belgrade, and Ankara.

Photo credits
Jeff Pfitzer cover, pp. 11, 12, 24
Ellen Pope cover, pp. 1, 3, 5, 6, 13, 14, 16, 17, 19, 22 – 24
Matteo Robiglio cover, pp. 2, 8 – 9, 10, 13, 15