Systemic City analysis

Politecnico di Torino I FacoltĂ di Architettura Corso di Lurea Specialistica in Design del Prodotto Ecocompatibile

Tesi di Laurea -Master Thesis

SCA - Systemic City Analysis Sustainability assessment for urban environment

In collaboration with Except - Integrated Sustainability The Rotterdam Collective A. A. 2010/ 2011 Author Angelo Sandron

Supervisor Marco Paolo Tamborrini

Table of Contents

Rotterdam 68 »» History 68

Introduction 4 EU policies & UN millennium development goals 5 »» Summary of relevant policy, instruments and legislation 10 »» Agenda 21

10

»» EU policies

11

»» Aalborg Charter and Aalborg+10 commitments

12

»» UN millennium development goals

13

Sustainable development : some definitions

»» Conurbations

69

»» Rotterdam in 2014

70

»» Sustainable Rotterdam

70

Rotterdam SCA »» Table of figures: Data list »» Rotterdam SCA: Maps and Tables »» Some considerations

72 72 74 114

Conclusions 114 Web bibliography 116 Annex 1. SCA Indicator List 119 Maps Legend 127

15

The Urban environment 17 »» Urban planning 17 »» Main steps

17

»» Some aspects to consider

18

»» The Urban System

22

»» The Plan: Milan

26

Systems Theory »» Systemic Design »» Symbiosis in Development (SID) The City is an open system »» The urban open system

29 33 37 38 39

SCA - Systemic City Analysis 42 Indicator set 43 »» SCA - First Steps 49 »» SCA Categories

51

»» Detecting indices

53

»» The Generalized Entropy Index

54

»» Correlation Coefficient

55

Neighborhood Analysis 57 »» Living fields analysis 58 GIS software 59 »» Workflow 61 Cloud Computing 65 Application development 67

Systemic City Analysis

3

Introduction Today the planet is facing numerous worldwide changes from the environmental, social and economic point of view.

New challenges have to be faced by the civil society if we want to keep and improve the general welfare in the future global sustainable context.

Worldwide the urban systems are in constant expansion, the cities are the most powerful, 75% of European population is estimated to live in cities by 2050.

Cities are the biggest human-designed systems that impacts our environment, economy and society.

The behaviors of a complex relationship system as a city, can not follow predestined passages because the variables that influences the system-behaviors are too numerous and the interaction between them could lead to unforeseen results.

The city is an open system that involves innumerable exchanges of materials, energy and informations within a global context.

Many environmental issues are particularly acute in urban areas, and with four out of five European Union citizens already living

in cities, the quality of the urban environment is important for us all.

The objective of sustainable urban development is to improve the quality of the environment and reduce the adverse impact on the wider environment of cities.

The resulting high quality of life attracts investments and skilled labour, which, in turn, contributes to a vibrant and competitive economy.

Though the scale and urgency of the issues vary, most urban areas worldwide face common environmental problems. Nevertheless, every city and its context are unique, and calls for tailor made solutions.

We are living in a transition era, and converting our cities into sustainable functioning systems must be one of the main goals to achieve within the next 20 years.

Climate change

!

4

Biodiversity loss Air Pollution Water Contamination Social Disparity Health problems increasing ...

EU policies & UN millennium development goals Today Europe is home to around 600 million people and covers about 5.85 million km2.

With an average of 100 people per km2 , Europe is one of the most densely populated world’s area.

The research reports that although urban areas cover only 4% of the area in Europe, they are home to almost 75% of the European population. As population and activity hotspots European cities (and urban areas) impose environmental pressures far beyond the borders of their own territory into their global hinterland through the resource requirements of their production and consumption activities.

Accelerating global demand threatens the natural systems that sustain us.

For this reason European Union and neighboring countries have delivered substantial environmental improvements. Yet major challenges remain, the most important are listed in the 5 targets for the EU in 2020: 1. Employment 75% of the 20-64 year-olds to be employed 2. Research & Development / innovation 3% of the EU’s GDP (public and private combined) to be invested in R&D/innovation

3. Climate change / energy Greenhouse gas emissions 20% (or even 30%, if the conditions are right) lower than 1990 20% of energy from renewables 20% increase in energy efficiency 4. Education Reducing school drop-out rates below 10% at least 40% of 30-34 year-olds completing third level education 5. Poverty / social exclusion At least 20 million fewer people in or at risk of poverty and social exclusion Europe: facts and prevision European cities depend heavily on the stocks of natural capital and flows of ecosystem services that lie within and beyond Europe’s borders.

Two fundamental questions arise from this dependency. Are the stocks and flows today being used sustainably to supply essential benefits, such as food, water, energy, materials, as well as climate and flood regulation? Are today’s environmental resources,

Systemic City Analysis

5

i.e. air, water, soil, forests, biodiversity, secure enough to be able to sustain people and economies in good health in the future?

This is also one of the key warnings of The European environment — state and outlook 2010 (SOER 2010), the European Environment Agency’s (EEA) flagship assessment.

Overall, SOER 2010 confirms that the natural capital in our ecosystems is essential for our health, our wellbeing and our prosperity. It delivers services that drive our economies and create the conditions for life itself, purifying water, pollinating crops, decomposing waste and regulating the climate, to name just a few.

SOER 2010 demonstrates that the longstanding demand for natural resources to feed, clothe, house and transport people is accelerating because of global pressures.

Taken together, these mounting demands on natural capital point to greater threats to Europe’s economy and social cohesion.

However SOER 2010 shows our increased understanding of the links between climate change, biodiversity, resource use and people’s health, and how these all point to growing pressures on land, rivers and seas.

These complex interconnections, both within Europe and globally, increase environmental uncertainties and risks.

More should be done to value the environment in monetary terms and reflect such values in market prices, for example using environmental taxes. We should strengthen our understanding of the environment’s state and outlook.

Examining each of the EU’s strategic environmental priority areas, the story is broadly the same. We are making progress but we will jeopardise the wellbeing of current and future generations if we don’t step up our efforts.

In the area of climate change, we have cut greenhouse gas emissions and we’re on track to meet our international commit6

EU27 net imports of natural gas, oil, solid fuels and the sum of these, by country of origin, as a % of fuelspecific gross inland energy consumption - Eurostat.

ments under the Kyoto Protocol.

The EU is expected to reach its target of reducing emissions by 20 % by 2020 if existing legislation is implemented. We’re also expanding our use of renewable energy and we’re on course to meet our 2020 target of sourcing 20 % of final energy consumption from renewable sources.

In the area of nature and biodiversity, Europe has expanded its Natura 2000 network of protected areas to cover some 18 % of EU land. We are making progress in halting the loss of biodiversity; common bird species, for example, are no longer in decline. The quality of fresh waters has generally improved and air and water emissions legislation has reduced pressure on biodiversity.

Past and projected emissions of the main air pollutants CO, NMVOC, NOx, NH3 PM2.5 and SOx

Nonetheless the marine environment is heavily affected by pollution and over-fishing. As a result of fishing pressures, 30 % of Europe’s fish stocks (for which information exists) are now fished beyond their safe bio-

logical limits and since 1985 there has been a general decline in fish catches. Terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems are still under pressure in many countries despite reduced pollution loads. Forests, which are crucial

Systemic City Analysis

7

for biodiversity and ecosystem services, are heavily exploited. Intensified agriculture has had major consequences for biodiversity.

In the area of natural resources and waste, Europe’s waste management has shifted steadily from landfill to recycling and prevention.

Resource use is increasing but at a lower rate than economic output. This partial decoupling is encouraging but Europe is still using ever more resources. In the EU-12, for example, resource use increased by 34 % from 2000 to 2007. What’s more, we consume more than we produce, with over 20 % of resources used in Europe now imported (notably fuels and mining products). As a result, European consumption leads to significant environmental impacts in exporting countries and regions. Meanwhile, water use is stable or decreasing across Europe but resources are overexploited in some countries and river basins.

As reported in SOER 2010, in the area of environment, health and quality of life, water and air pollution have declined. There have been notable successes in reducing levels of sulphur dioxide (SO2) and carbon monoxide (CO) in ambient air, as well as marked reductions in nitrogen oxides (NOX). Lead concentrations have also declined considerably with the introduction of unleaded petrol.

But ambient air and water quality remains inadequate and health impacts are widespread. Too many urban dwellers are exposed to excessive pollution levels. Exposure to particulate matter (PM) and ozone (O3) are still major health concerns, linked to reduced life expectancy, acute and chronic respiratory and cardiovascular effects, impaired lung development in children, and reduced birth weight. Widespread exposure to multiple pollutants and chemicals, and concerns about long-term damage to human health, together imply the need for more large-scale pollution prevention 8

programmes.

Europe’s environmental challenges are complex and can’t be understood in isolation.

According to the Urban Metabolism report for the European Environment Agency, authors have already started to systematically quantify the physical inflows and outflows to urban systems and used the “metabolism” as a metaphor to describe physical exchange processes (Wolman 1965).

Urban areas are highly dynamic and accordingly their metabolism changes: with improving accessibility and stronger connectivity, urban development moves from single cities to a more disperse urban pattern across Europe and the formation of metropolitan areas. Urban areas increasingly use resources from abroad, impacting on areas far away, and thus become more and more dependent on remote areas influencing also their resilience. These factors, as well as demography and lifestyles, change the metabolism regarding intensities, distribution, dependencies and resilience.

We live in, and depend on, a highly interconnected world, comprising multiple related systems — environmental, social, economic and so on. This inter-connectivity means that damaging one element may cause unexpected impacts elsewhere, harming an entire system or even triggering its collapse. For example, as temperature increases, so does the risk of passing ‘tipping points’ that could initiate large-scale changes, such as accelerated melting of the Greenland ice sheet followed by a sea level rise.

European policy-makers aren’t only contending with complex systemic interactions within the continent. Global drivers of change are also unfolding that are expected to affect Europe’s environment in the future many of them beyond Europe’s control. For example, the world population is forecast to exceed nine billion by 2050 with ever greater

Human appropriation of net primary production in percentage

numbers expecting to move from poverty and aspiring to higher consumption.

More economic growth?

This consumption trends have huge implications for global demand for resources.

Cities are spreading. Consumption is spiralling. The world expects continued economic growth. Newly emerging economies will grow in economic significance. The ‘race into the unknown’ offers opportunities but will also bring new risks.

The world’s stocks of natural resources are already decreasing. Over the coming years, rising demand and falling supply could intensify global competition for resources.

Ultimately, this will further increase pressure on ecosystems globally, testing their

capacity to deliver sustained flows of food, energy and water.

While SOER 2010 does not present any warnings of imminent environmental collapse, it does note that some thresholds are being crossed.

European environmental policies have had many economic and social benefits in numerous countries: for example, human health has improved and a quarter of all European jobs are estimated to be linked to the environment. Full implementation of environmental policies in Europe therefore remains paramount, as many targets have yet to be met.

By showing the many links between different challenges, environmental and otherwise, SOER 2010 encourages us to better integrate different policy areas. For exam-

Systemic City Analysis

9

ple, some measures to address air pollution also help combat climate change, whereas others will actually exacerbate it.

We also need to get better at balancing the need to preserve natural capital and using it to fuel the economy. Increasing the efficiency of our resource use is a key ‘integrating response’ here. Recognizing that our consumption levels are currently unsustainable, we basically need to do more with less. Encouragingly, this is an area where the interests of the environmental and commercial sectors are potentially aligned: businesses prosper or falter based on their ability to extract maximum value from inputs, just as preserving the natural world and human wellbeing depends on us doing more with a limited flow of resources.

World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) held in Johannesburg, South Africa from 26 August to 4 September 2002.

Summary of relevant policy Instruments and legislation

Social democratic participation to decision making process is also included as an important step through a sustainable society:

Agenda 21

“7.4. The overall human settlement objective is to improve the social, economic and environmental quality of human settlements and the living and working environments of all people, in particular the urban and rural poor. Such improvement should be based on technical cooperation activities, partnerships among the public, private and community sectors and participation in the decision-making process by community groups and special interest groups such as women, indigenous people, the elderly and the disabled.”

Agenda 21 is a comprehensive plan of action to be taken globally, nationally and locally by organizations of the United Nations System, Governments, and Major Groups in every area in which human impacts on the environment.

Agenda 21, the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, and the Statement of principles for the Sustainable Management of Forests were adopted by more than 178 Governments at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) held in Rio de Janerio, Brazil, 3 to 14 June 1992.

The full implementation of Agenda 21, the Programme for Further Implementation of Agenda 21 and the Commitments to the Rio principles, were strongly reaffirmed at the 10

In the Agenda 21 plan interesting objectives related to the Urban environment and future cities development are included, in fact in Section I: Social & Economic Dimensions, Chapter 7, Is discussed how to promote sustainable human settlement development and why a change in consumption model and resources exploitation is needed. “ 7.1. In industrialized countries, the consumption patterns of cities are severely stressing the global ecosystem, while settlements in the developing world need more raw material, energy, and economic development simply to overcome basic economic and social problems.”

Also in the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development participated democracy is considered as one of the main guide principle trough a real sustainable growth process.

EU policies

“Principle 10: Environmental issues are best handled with the participation of all concerned citizens, at the relevant level. At the national level, each individual shall have appropriate access to information concerning the environment that is held by public authorities, including information on hazardous materials and activities in their communities, and the opportunity to participate in decision-making processes. States shall facilitate and encourage public awareness and participation by making information widely available. Effective access to judicial and administrative proceedings, including redress and remedy, shall be provided.”

Cities are also considered as one of the main problem that needs to be managed properly in the next future. “ Basis For Action - 7.13.

By the turn of the century, the majority of the world’s population will be living in cities. While urban settlements, particularly in developing countries, are showing many of the symptoms of the global environment and development crisis, they nevertheless generate 60 per cent of gross national product and, if properly managed, can develop the capacity to sustain their productivity, improve the living conditions of their residents and manage natural resources in a sustainable way.

7.14. Some metropolitan areas extend over the boundaries of several political and/or administrative entities (counties and municipalities) even though they conform to a continuous urban system. In many cases this political heterogeneity hinders the implementation of comprehensive environmental management programmes.”

As we can read on the Renewed EU Sustainable Development Strategy (SDS) of 2006 (European Council DOC 10917/06), “Unsustainable trends in relation to climate change and energy use, threats to public health, poverty and social exclusion, demographic pressure and ageing, management of natural resources, biodiversity loss, land use and transport still persist and new challenges are arising. Since these negative trends bring about a sense of urgency, short-term action is required, whilst maintaining a longer term perspective.”

The EU SDS sets out an approach to policymaking based on the principle that sustainable development needs to be integrated into policy-making at all levels.

In 2006 the strategy sets overall objectives and concrete actions for seven key priority challenges to face until 2010, many of which are predominantly environmental: »» Climate change and clean energy »» Sustainable transport »» Sustainable consumption & production »» Conservation and management of natural resources »» Public Health »» Social inclusion, demography and migration »» Global poverty and sustainable development challenges In addiction in the Policy Guiding Principles, section participated democracy is mentioned: Open And Democratic Society Guarantee citizens’ rights of access to information and ensure access to justice.

Systemic City Analysis

11

Involvement Of Citizens Enhance the participation of citizens in decision-making. Promote education and public awareness of sustainable development. Inform citizens about their impact on the environment and their options for making more sustainable choices.

Aalborg Charter and Aalborg+10 Commitments Another meaningful step in sustainable policies adoption and new decision-making strategies started in 1994.

The European Sustainable Cities and Towns Campaign was launched at the end of the First European Conference on Sustainable Cities and Towns that took place in Aalborg, Denmark.

The Conference adopted the Aalborg Charter which provides a framework for the delivery of local sustainable development and calls on local authorities to engage in Local Agenda 21 processes.

More recently, in 2004 the 4th European Sustainable Cities and Towns Conference (“Aalborg +10”) adopted the Aalborg +10 Aalborg - Denmark

12

Commitments. These commitments are an important step forward in turning sustainable urban development from words into real actions.

“We, European cities & towns (...) are convinced that sustainable human life on this globe cannot be achieved without sustainable local communities.

Local government is close to where environmental problems are perceived and closest to the citizens and shares responsibility with governments at all levels for the well-being of humankind and nature.

Therefore, cities and towns are key players in the process of changing lifestyles, production, consumption and spatial patterns(...)”

The Aalborg Charter is one of the most famous policy statements for local sustainable development world-wide. It gave birth to the Sustainable Cities & Towns Campaign in 1994. More than 2500 local and regional governments from 39 countries have committed themselves to the goals of the Aalborg Charter, thereby participating in this unique European Campaign.

UN millennium development goals The Millennium Development Goals (MDG) adopted by the UN member states in the year 2000 are broad goals for the entire world. They address essential dimensions of poverty and their effects on people’s lives attacking pressing issues related to poverty reduction, health, gender equality, education and environmental sustainability.

These can serve as a background context for decisions in environmental management and beyond.

The UN MDG are: » Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger. » Achieve universal primary education. » Reduce child mortality. » Promote gender equality and empower women » Improve maternal health. » Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases. » Ensure environmental sustainability. » Develop a global partnership for development.

Systemic City Analysis

13

International spread of environmental policies - Source European Environmental Agency

14

Sustainable development : some definitions Sustainability has been defined in many ways during the last 30 years, and new definitions are constantly developed by the environmental scientific community.

Sustainable development could be introduced as a process or evolution. Numerous definitions of sustainable development are attainable but, in principle, they are main similar to the one from 1987. In this year the World Commission on Environment and Development (i.e. Brundtland’s Commission) defined sustainable development as ‘‘ Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs’’.

Sustainable development emphasizes the evolution of human society from the economic point of view, in accordance with environmental and natural processes.

Therefore, the political dimensions are cen-

tral elements. Furthermore, in a sustainable development paradigm the limitations of economic, societal and environmental resources are considered in order to contribute to present and future generations welfare and can be applied on local, regional, national and international levels, based on political will.

In the Renewed EU SDS of 2006 sustainable development is described as an over-arching objective of the European Union governing all the Union’s policies and activities.

It’s considered about safeguarding the earth’s capacity to support life in all its diversity and is based on the principles of democracy, gender equality, solidarity, the rule of law and respect for fundamental rights, including freedom and equal opportunities for all. It aims at the continuous improvement of the quality of life and well-being on Earth for present and future generations.

To that end it promotes a dynamic economy with full employment and high level of education, health protection, social and territorial cohesion and environmental protection in a peaceful and secure world, respecting

Classic sustainable development concept, graphic representation Systemic City Analysis

15

Individual

(Health & Happiness)

Matter

Life

(Ecosystems & Species)

(Energy & Materials)

Actions

(Purpose & Utility)

Symbiosis in Development Sustainable Actions concept, graphic representation

Society

(Culture & Economy)

cultural diversity.

More comprehensive perception of society brings to a detailed description of what is attended by sustainable development and our common future.

In the Aalborg Charter we find that the concept is even more wide, the ecosystem safety is considered as much as human’s. “ Environmental sustainability means maintaining the natural capital. It demands from us that the rate at which we consume renewable material, water and energy resources does not exceed the rate at which the natural systems can replenish them, and that the rate at which we consume nonrenewable resources does not exceed the rate at which sustainable renewable resources are replaced. Environmental sustainability also means that the rate of emitted pollutants does not exceed the capacity of the air, water, and soil to absorb and process them.

16

Furthermore, environmental sustainability entails the maintenance of biodiversity; human health; as well as air, water, and soil qualities at standards sufficient to sustain human life and wellbeing, as well as animal and plant life, for all time. “ Recently new sustainability definition have been created, one of this is that from the Symbiosis in Development theory, developed

by Except, Integrated Sustainability: “Sustainability is a state of a complex, dynamic system. In this state a system can continue to flourish without leading to its internal collapse or requiring inputs from outside its defined system boundaries.

Applied to our civilization, this state is consistent with an equitable and healthy society, as well as thriving ecosystems and a beautiful planet.”(A.N.A. Bosschaert & E.M. Gladek)

The Urban environment

Urban planning

There are many ways to define the complex combination of variables that draws our Urban environment.

City as been defined as “the place that maximize meetings and exchanges among people” (Roncayolo) ; “a point of people, production, fun and equipment accumulation” ( Crattari), so a space characterized by the concentration of several flows.

“In cities, men project in a real living space some of their hopes, ambitions and utopias” ( Francastel).

Our cities are complex systems of relationship between humans and the surrounding environment.

Cities in a different approach can be compared to living creatures, in fact like organisms, they need energy and resources such as fuel, water or food as inputs to sustain life. These input are processed and ultimately released back to the environment as wastes. (Abel Wolman - 1965) The urban environment is the product of an historical stratification process, during which people interacted with nature, modifying and transforming it in more or less deeply ways, sometimes respecting it, abusing it some others.

It’s a complex reality from the uses attribution point of view that can lead to conflicts among alternative and antagonistic uses.

It’s a complex reality from the different possible readings, a lot of different knowledge and professions can express this different point of view like sociologist, geographer, economist, geologist, naturalist, historian, and even the transport engineer and so on.

Urban Planning can be considered as the rational art of spatial and social decision making. In traditional urban planning redevelopment processes usually starts from an investigation and gives top priority to the study of the house, next, has to be considered the community facilities. Then it goes to green spaces, museums, places for the show and finally to the road infrastructure.

Over time, the list of variables to consider has lengthened and made into a process that recognizes and names this subjects, among them, for instance, there is the university campus, heterotopia of the city, not only for the specificity of the activities it hosts, and their timing, but also for its being an integrated part of the urban fabric.

Urban planning today, incorporates areas such as economics, design, ecology, sociology, geography, law, political science, and statistics to guide and ensure the orderly development of settlements and communities.

An urban planner or city planner is a professional who works in optimizing the effectiveness of a community’s land use and infrastructure and in order to do this he\she needs a really wide perspective of the city environment. He\she formulate plans for the development and management of urban and suburban areas, typically analyzing also land use compatibility as well as economic, environmental and social trends.

Main steps Analyze •Land use •Form and function of settlements •Values

Systemic City Analysis

17

Design • Functions • Relationships • Wardship • Management • Actors • Processes

Some aspects to consider The urban structure is normally built of an inner area, where the most important activities take act, administrative, financial and important trades. The near surrounding area is usually used part as residential and part as offices. A more peripheral area with medium-low price houses, basic services is often mixed with industrial factories and, on the city edge, a semi-intensive construction area. There are several aspects to consider while developing a new urban project.

Aesthetics Towns and cities in the past centuries, have been planned with aesthetics in mind.

Planners can help manage the growth of cities, applying tools like zoning and growth management to manage the uses of land.

Historically, many of the cities now thought the most beautiful are the result of dense, long lasting systems of prohibitions and guidance about building sizes, uses and features.

These allowed substantial freedoms, yet enforce styles and safety in practical ways.

Many conventional planning techniques are being repackaged using the contemporary term smart growth, as we know today, they were already environment friendly in the past.

Safety and security

18

One of the principle aspect that have to be considered by urban planners is citizen’s safety.

In order to achieve this goal risk assessment is a good start. Cities have often grown onto coastal and flood plains at risk of floods and storm surges.

Urban planners must consider firstly these threats. If the risk areas can be localized then the affected regions can be made into parkland or green belt, often with the added benefit of open space provision.

Risk assessment process basically consist in: »» Identification of possible risks in the study area »» Assessment of potential damage to urban structures, the population and to buildings, »» Evaluation of the extent and depth of the damage and its spatial distribution The overall risk is the result of three factors - Hazard Analysis - Analysis of Exposure - Vulnerability Assessment Extreme weather, flood, or other emergencies can often be greatly mitigated with secure emergency evacuation routes and emergency operations centres.

Many cities also have planned, built safety features, such as levees, retaining walls, and shelters.

Socio-architecture Some city planners try also to control criminality with structures designed from theories such as socio-architecture.

These theories say that an urban environment can influence individuals’ obedience to social rules and level of power.

The theories say that psychological pressure develops in more densely developed, unadorned areas. This stress causes some

crimes and some use of illegal drugs. The antidote is usually more individual space and better, more beautiful design in place of functionalism.

As Oscar Newman says, large blocks of flats surrounded by shared and disassociated public areas, are hard for residents to identify with. As those on lower incomes cannot hire others to maintain public space such as security guards or grounds keepers, and because no individual feels personally responsible, there is a general deterioration of public space leading to a sense of alienation and social disorder.

depopulation, economic restructuring, property abandonment, high unemployment, fragmented families, political disenfranchisement, crime, and desolate urban landscapes.

During the 1970s and 1980s, urban decay was often associated with central areas of cities in North America and Europe.

This pattern was different than the pattern of “outlying slums” and “suburban ghettos” found in many cities outside of North America and Western Europe, where central urban areas actually had higher real estate values.

Slums

The “broken-windows” theory argues that small indicators of neglect, such as broken windows and unkempt lawns, promote a feeling that an area is in a state of decay.

Urban planners also have to deal with the unplanned behavior of peripheral areas expansion. The rapid urbanization of the last century caused more slums in the major cities of the world, particularly in developing countries.

Slums are characterized by substandard housing and squalor and lacking in tenure security. Planning resources and strategies are needed to address the problems of slum development.

According to the United Nations, the percentage of urban dwellers living in slums decreased from 47 percent to 37 percent in the developing world between 1990 and 2005. However, due to rising population, and the rise especially in urban populations, the number of slum dwellers is rising.

One billion people worldwide live in slums and the figure will likely grow to 2 billion by 2030.

Slums are often “fixed” by clearance but this seems just a temporary solution.

Suburbs - urban sprawl

Urban decay Urban decay is a process by which a city, or a part of a city, falls into a state of disrepair and neglect. It is characterized by Systemic City Analysis

19

Anticipating decay, people likewise fail to maintain their own properties. The theory suggests that abandonment causes crime, rather than crime causing abandonment.

Urban density As we will see in the new Milan metropolitan development plan, urban fabric density is considered as a new approach to quality.

The Floor area ratio is often used to measure density. This is the floor area of buildings divided by the land area.

Ratios below 1.5 are low density. Ratios above five constitute very high density. Most exurbs are below two, while most city centres are well above five.

Skyscrapers easily achieve densities of thirty or more.

City authorities may try to encourage higher densities to reduce per-capita infrastructure costs. Increasing development density has the advantage of making mass transport systems, district heating and other community facilities (schools, health centres, etc.) more viable.

Dispersion In the late ‘60s Aldo Rossi studied the city as continuous construction and definition of the topological character of urban space process. In those years exploded the urban sprawl of suburbia, taking on the characteristics of what in Europe will take the form of “urban sprawl”.

Sprawl means “lie”and in some countries, declining satisfaction with the urban environment is held to blame for continuing migration to smaller towns and rural areas.

Successful urban planning can bring benefits to a much larger hinterland or city region and help to reduce both congestion along transport routes and the wastage of energy implied by excessive commuting.

20

Environmental planning Environmental protection and conservation are of utmost importance to many planning systems across the world. Not only are the specific effects of development to be mitigated, but attempts are made to minimize the overall effect of development on the local and global environment. This is commonly done through the assessment of Sustainable urban infrastructure and micro-climate.

In most advanced urban or village planning models, local context is critical. In many, gardening and other outdoor activities assumes a central role in the daily life of citizens.

Environmental planners focus now on smaller and larger systems of resource extraction and consumption, energy production, and waste disposal.

An urban planner can use a number of quantitative tools to forecast impacts of development on the environmental, including roadway air dispersion models to predict air quality impacts of urban highways and roadway noise models to predict noise pollution effects of urban highways.

Transportation planning Very densely built-up areas require high capacity urban transit, and urban planners must consider these factors in long term plans.

Although there is a complex relationship between urban densities and car use.

Transport within urbanized areas presents unique problems. The density of an urban environment increases traffic, which can harm businesses and increase pollution unless properly managed. Parking space for private vehicles requires the construction of large parking garages in high density areas, but this space could often be more valuable

Sound & Light In urban planning, sound is usually measured as a source of pollution.

The urban canyon effect is a colloquial, non-scientific term referring to street space bordered by very high buildings. This type of environment may shade the sidewalk level from direct sunlight during most daylight hours.

Light pollution as well, has become a problem in urban residential areas, not only as it relates to its effects on the night sky, but as some lighting is so intrusive as to cause conflict in the residential areas and paradoxically intense improperly installed security lighting may pose a danger to the public, producing excessive glare.

Top to bottom plan

Traffic jam

for other development.

Problems can often occur at residential densities between about two and five.

These densities can cause traffic jams for automobiles, yet are too low to be commercially served by trains or light rail systems.

The conventional solution is to use buses, but these and light rail systems may fail where automobiles and excess road network capacity are both available, achieving less than 2% ridership.

Good planning uses transit oriented development, which attempts to place higher densities of jobs or residents near highvolume transportation.

Prior to the 1950, Urban Planning was seldom considered a unique profession.

Planning focused on top-down processes by which the urban planner created the plans.

The planner would know architecture, surveying, or engineering, bringing to the town planning process ideals based on these disciplines. They typically worked for national or local governments.

Some planning methods might help an elite group to control ordinary citizens. For example Haussmann’s renovation of Paris created a system of wide boulevards which prevented the construction of barricades in the streets and eased the movement of military troops. In Rome, the Fascists in the 1930s created ex novo many new suburbs in order to concentrate criminals and poorer classes away from the elegant town.

Other social theories point out that in Britain and most countries since the 18th century, the transformation of societies from rural agriculture to industry caused a difficult adaptation to urban living. These theories emphasize that many planning

Systemic City Analysis

21

policies ignore personal tensions, forcing individuals to live in a condition of perpetual extraneity to their cities.

Changes to the planning process over past decades have witnessed the metamorphosis of the role of the urban planner in the planning process.

Draw the house for a society means express it. Since when modern Urban planning borne, these means that the link between planning and building a democratic society is essential.

The term advocacy planning was coined by Paul Davidoff in his 1965 paper, “Advocacy and Pluralism in Planning” which acknowledged the political nature of planning and urged planners to acknowledge that their actions are not value-neutral and encouraged minority and under represented voices to be part of planning decisions.

Democracy is not some abstract formula, more citizens calling for democratic planning & development processes have played a huge role in allowing the public to make important decisions as part of the planning process.

Community organizers and social workers are now very involved in planning from the grass-roots level.

Ozawa and Seltzer (1999) advocate a communicative planning model in education to teach planners to work within the social and political context of the planning process. They demonstrated the importance of educating planners beyond the rational planning model in which planners make supposedly value-neutral recommendations based on science and reason.

Recent theories of urban planning, espoused, for example by Salingaros see the city as an adaptive system that grows according to process similar to those of plants. They say that urban planning should thus take its cues from such natural processes. Such theories also advocate participation by inhabitants in the design of the 22

urban environment, as opposed to simply leaving all development to large-scale construction firms.

Conflict of interest Nevertheless urban development is an area where different and often contrasting interest interact.

NIMBY or Not In My Back Yard, is the acronyms often used to describe those conflicts where inhabitants protest against some useful but annoying implant that they would see better in someone else neighborhood.

Usually this kind of conflicts starts because the implant is actually harmful, or because a lack of information, so scarce transparency of the plan.

The city environment is an intricate web of networks layers.

The Urban System The urban environment doesn’t exist in nature, is the ending point of a dynamic, stratified, articulated cyclic civilization process.

It’s a complex relationship system between communities, cultures and the environment (A. Magnaghi).

The Urban environment shouldn’t be considered just as an area where this different aspects and subjects rely all together.

All the aspects of this environment are related each other, modifying something in one of those, all the others will be affected in some way.

For instance, opening a new supermarket in a peripheral part of the city leads to a traffic increase in that area, so the area will require bigger streets, parking areas and so on.

At the same time, the customers presence

stimulate other shops and new services opening.

In the same way, enlarge a street to make the traffic more fluid means an increased capacity of the road network, that will require a whole enlargement operation leading to more traffic.

Holistic Urban Planning Urban planners have also another responsible rule such to be capable of look at the whole city system, in a holistic, perspective of reality.

As we know, the entire urban area is an integrated set of different components, the urban planner should be able to don’t lose himself into the part analysis and don’t forget about the context that pull together those parts.

Something is certain, is not possible manage the parts if we don’t understand the whole system, in the world of poet Eugenio Montale:“the whole is more important than the parts”.

This fact is often forgot by our planners.

In Italy for example they’ve transformed the country face with occasional intervention, promoted by different temporary needs.

Small changes, like a small new piece of street, a new industrial implant authorization or making a storehouse into a discotheque. Then the public green areas became residential and a flood risk area became suitable for a new factory.

In these case the urban planner have to play a hard role between interest, he have to think about all the consequences that a wrong decision could lead.

So the urban environment is a system in which the human’s transformation patterns and their impact, generates new equilibria but also some external effects, even far from the transformation areas and apparently disconnected from it.

The systemic approach brings to reflect on

the fact that in addition to the environment, is fundamental to consider the human activities and all their connections.

Statistic Observing reality is possible have a series of information about the individuals of a population. Statistical surveys and measurement could be very helpful tools to draw up an effective urban plan.

For instance if we want to understand if there is a direct relationship between two variables, see if they behave following a similar pattern we can calculate the covariance.

To establish the exact relation between this two variables we should use the simplest possible equation and estimate a regression line. In linear regression, data are modeled using linear functions, and unknown model parameters are estimated from the data.

An other important aspect of urban analysis is the space relationships between variables.

For instance the Central place theory explains the urban centres location dependency on existing thresholds in the consumption of a range of goods.

If we suppose the existence of two classes of goods. The first are urban goods, the second agricultural goods. Urban goods are those goods and services needed by the entire population, so urban centres must be those places where urban goods and services are distributed.

For each goods correspond a maximum distance that people are willing to cover to buy it.

This is a crucial aspect in the theory, if this maximum distance did not exist then it wouldn’t generate the central localities.

Systemic City Analysis

23

The economic base theory One theory that have been used for years by urban planners argues that the urban growth is deeply related to the goods exportation.

Firstly urban activities are divided in two groups: one depending on urban population request, the service sector; the second sector depends on external request and is called the base sector. In this second sector are included jobs that provides goods and services to the city surrounding area.

In an economic system, interdependence exist between this different sectors, the interdependence is based on the fact that a good is produced using intermediate goods that comes from other economic activities.

Therefore is possible analyze all the input and output for each sector.

This could lead to think that if some productive activities have an high interchange, this activities tend to group spatially in a single centre or just locate themselves one near to the other.

Power and interests

interest and some political compromise.

The actors taking part in this process are many and their relevance relays on the economic power of their sector.

In a city where the base sector is represented by services, public and private service providers will play an important role in the decision making phase, in a city economy based on industries manufacturers associations will have this power.

All the power centres lives in the same society and are involved in the decision process by politicians who organizes all this interests in a complex and comprehensive way in order to draw a whole picture.

Practically each power centre will have a positive or negative opinion and interest in every decision that has to be taken.

This make the decision making process even more complex, since the solution should be approved by all this groups.

This is equivalent to a continuos revision and optimization process that practically doesn’t fit with social dynamics timing.

If a decision takes too much time, the situation will change by itself, leading to start over the process. Usually, due to time reason, works better face one problem in time, limiting the connections considered to the strictly necessary.

Economic Influence

The urban spatial organization is the result of an interaction between a lot of different factors which are regulated by public authority.

City administration staff Urban planning and economic influence is usually elected by the National population, so during a decision making process, the electors interest must Regional be considered.

A decision in the urban environment is always Local submitted to an economic evaluation but also to the public opinion, the opinTerritorial Influence ion of different groups of

implementation

Urban planning and economic influence - Urban planning course Catania University 24

Urban Sustainable development The importance of the urban planner is increasing throughout the 21st century, as we begin to face issues of increased population growth, climate change and unsustainable development. Urban planner could be considered as a green collar profession.

Sustainable development and sustainability influence today’s urban planners.

Some planners, according with the opinion of several environmental institution such as the European Environmental Agency, argue that modern lifestyles use too many natural resources, polluting or destroying ecosystems, increasing social inequality, creating urban heat islands, and causing climate change.

However, sustainable development is a recent, controversial concept. Wheeler, in his 1998 article, defines sustainable urban development as “development that improves the long-term social and ecological health of cities and towns.” He sketches a ‘sustainable’ city’s features: compact, efficient land use; less automobile use, yet better access; efficient resource use; less pollution and waste; the restoration of natural systems; good housing and living environments; a healthy social ecology; a sustainable economy; community participation and involvement; and preservation of local culture and wisdom.

Urban sustainability planning is perhaps the most complex challenge that a Government has to face nowadays.

Assessing the sustainability level of a city requires a valuation of the urban environment with a multidisciplinary perspective.

There has been a renewed interest in the potential role of urban planning since the environmental impact of the accelerating urbanization became a key subject of global and local debate in the 1990s. This is receiving a renewed impetus with the global understanding that the way our cities grow

is both a key driver of climate change and at the same time makes the urban population very vulnerable to Climate Change impacts.

Better planned cities would be more energy efficient, in particular when combined with a push for green buildings and related building codes, sustainable transport, energy and waste management and the greening of cities. Urban planning and urban design have also the potential to reduce vulnerability to the different climate change related hazards like floods, sea-level rise, and landslides and to build in resilience for further climate change.

Also in the Aalborg Charter we can find that cities are already committed to reach this goal, in fact we can read: “We are convinced that the city or town is both the largest unit capable of initially addressing the many urban architectural, social, economic, political, natural resource and environmental imbalances damaging our modern world and the smallest scale at which problems can be meaningfully resolved in an integrated, holistic and sustainable fashion. As each city is different, we have to find our individual ways towards sustainability. We shall integrate the principles of sustainability in all our policies and make the respective strengths of our cities and towns the basis of locally appropriate strategies(... )sustainability is a creative, local, balance-seeking process extending into all areas of local decision-making.(...)

By building the management of a city around the information collected through such a process, the city is understood to work as an organic whole and the effects of all significant activities are made manifest. Through such a process the city and its citizens may make informed choices(...)We shall ensure that all citizens and interested groups have access to information and are able to participate in local decision-making processes”.

Systemic City Analysis

25

The Plan: Milan Milan the dense City Let’s see now how most recent urban planning and analysis techniques are applied.

The 2010 development plan for Milan metropolitan area, works around a main statement: density is the new approach to quality.

One area many cities In order to obtain an in-depth overview and understanding of the Milan metropolitan area, an initial survey used diverse investigative tools from several disciplines, and took into account various scales of reference. Traditional urban mapping was accompanied by geographic, sociological, historical, economic, statistical, archeological, architectural and engineering surveys. The result was an overall picture of the different morphological features, scales of reference, pace of development, lifestyles, and forms of connection that exist in the inner city area and it peripherals units.

This starting analysis highlighted the fact that in terms of urban planning, Milan must be seen as one vast metropolitan area. At the same time, however, it must be borne in mind that greater Milan comprises many urban units with distinct characteristics.

In addition, this multiple-centres metropolitan urban fabric stands in stark contrast to the hub-and-spoke configuration of the city centre and its immediate periphery.

For the planners,the way forward is to create a future city no longer based on the hub-and-spoke model, but one that can transform the outlying areas of Milan into a series of multiple identities that are part of the metropolitan network.

This approach entails enhancing the specific identities of the various neighborhoods 26

and districts. These are considered an extraordinary resource for the entire metropolitan area. They will contribute to achieving the goal of creating a seamless urban fabric encompassing the innermost city and distant outreaches.

Local Identity Nuclei The general survey took into account the different micro or neighborhood levels, recording the demands of the local populations for a more livable urban environment.

The bases for the survey were: meetings with local and build a dedicated website Goals and Strategy adopted Drivers 1 An attractive city 2 A livable city 3 An efficient city Goals »» A house for everyone »» Encouraging creativity and a pro-active tertiary sector »» Safeguarding neighborhoods identities the historic city and landscape

Local identity Nuclei subdivision

The Plan: Drivers

»» Remediation of contaminated or decommissioned areas »» Water, an essential element »» The new energy policy

service requirements, new projects should fit all of this needs, so they’ve prepared a neighborhood project checklist: »» Everyday living places

»» Free-flow time »» Management and upkeep of green public spaces »» Subsidiarity to link public and private Consultation with citizens implies widespread, continuos monitoring of their

»» Development of a contemporary identity »» Project for a system of linked Centres »» Project for a local park or system of gardens »» Direct connection with urban public transport system

Systemic City Analysis

27

»» Direct contact with environmental system or connection with a “green network” system »» Functional mix »» Social mix »» Pedestrian connections among the centres, public transport and local services »» Separation of local and trough traffic Rethink the city as a vast regional network

The Plan: Goals

28

of connection and flows also means a more balanced service designation based on a series of “quality densification nodes”.

Better service distribution allows previously under-serviced peripheral areas to acquire greater autonomy and efficiency.

Neighborhood services means the provision of parks and squares, roads and underground railway, schools and hospitals, places of worship and cultural institutions, corner shop and creative centres.

Systems Theory “Solving a problem simply means representing it so as to make the solution transparent.”

Herbert Simon Systemic Thinking

Systems are not the real world but just a way to analyze it.

Systems are complex objects composed by interactive elements.

This interaction leads to results that wouldn’t be obtained if each component had worked alone.

A system can strain to an equilibrium state if there is a way to control it’s trajectory, furthermore a system can appear stable or instable depending on which variable is observed.

A system is a dynamic and complex whole, interacting as a structured functional unit.

Energy, material and information flow among the different elements that compose the system.

In a urban analysis the system is a community situated within an environment.

Energy, material and information flow from and to the surrounding environment via semi-permeable membranes or boundaries; Systems are often composed of entities seeking equilibrium but can exhibit oscillating, chaotic, or exponential behavior.

The systems thinking approach incorporates several tenets: Interdependence of objects and their attributes- Independent elements can never constitute a system.

Holism - emergent properties not possible to detect by analysis should be possible to define by a holistic approach.

Goal seeking - systemic interaction must

result in some goal or final state Inputs and Outputs - in a closed system inputs are determined once and constant; in an open system additional inputs are admitted from the environment.

Transformation of inputs into outputs - this is the process by which the goals are obtained.

Entropy - the amount of disorder or randomness present in any system.

Regulation - a method of feedback is necessary for the system to operate predictably.

Hierarchy - complex wholes are made up of smaller subsystems.

Differentiation - specialized units perform specialized functions.

Equifinality - alternative ways of attaining the same objectives (convergence).

Multifinality - attaining alternative objectives from the same inputs (divergence).

Systems theory Systems theory serves as a bridge for interdisciplinary dialogue between autonomous areas of study as well as within the area of systems science itself.

Contemporary ideas from systems theory have grown with diversified areas, as a transdisciplinary, interdisciplinary and multiperspectival domain, the area brings together principles and concepts from ontology, philosophy of science, physics, computer science, biology, and engineering as well as geography, sociology, political science, psychotherapy (within family systems therapy) and economics among others.

Systems theory as an area of study, specifically developed following the World Wars from the work of Ludwig von Bertalanffy, Anatol Rapoport, Kenneth E. Boulding, William Ross Ashby, Margaret Mead, Gregory Bateson, C. West Churchman and others in the 1950s, specifically catalyzed by the cooperation in the Society for General Systems Research.

Systemic City Analysis

29

Cognizant of advances in science that questioned classical assumptions in the organizational sciences, Bertalanffy’s idea to develop a theory of systems began in 1937 when he presented the General Theory of Systems for a conference at the University of Chicago.

During interwar period, he published “An Outline for General Systems Theory” in the British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, Vol 1, No. 2, where assumptions in Western science from Greek thought with Plato and Aristotle to Newton’s Principia have historically influenced all areas from the hard to social sciences, the original theorists explored the implications of twentieth century advances in terms of systems.

Von Bertalanffy, then described his whole theory in a book titled “General System theory: Foundations, Development, Applications” (GST)in1968.

His theory attempted to provide alternatives to conventional models of organization.

GST defined new foundations and developments as a generalized theory of systems with applications to numerous areas of study, emphasizing holism over reductionism, organism over mechanism.

The systems view was based on several fundamental ideas.

First, all phenomena can be viewed as a web of relationships among elements, or a system.

Second, all systems, whether electrical, biological, or social, have common patterns, behaviors, and properties that can be understood and used to develop greater insight into the behavior of complex phenomena and to move closer toward a unity of science.

Von Bertalanffy’s objective was to bring together under one heading the organismic science that he had observed in his work as a biologist. His desire was to use the word “system” to describe those principles which are common to systems in general.

30

In GST, he writes: ...There exist models, principles, and laws that apply to generalized systems or their subclasses, irrespective of their particular kind, the nature of their component elements, and the relationships or “forces” between them. It seems legitimate to ask for a theory, not of systems of a more or less special kind, but of universal principles applying to systems in general.

Systems theory gradually became a nomenclature that investigators used to describe the interdependence of relationships in organizations by defining a new way of thinking about science and scientific paradigms.

A system from this frame of reference is composed of regularly interacting or interrelating groups of activities.

System philosophy, methodology and application are complementary to this theory, an example is the influence in organizational psychology as the field evolved from “an individually oriented industrial psychology to a systems and developmentally oriented organizational psychology” ,with this shift was recognized that organizations are complex social systems and that reducing the parts from the whole reduces the overall effectiveness of organizations.

This is different from conventional models that center on individuals, structures, departments and units separate in part from the whole instead of recognizing the interdependence between groups of individuals, structures and processes that enable an organization to function.

The relationship between organizations and their environments is now recognized as the foremost source of complexity and interdependence. In most cases the whole has properties that cannot be known from analysis of the constituent elements in isolation.

Similar ideas are found in learning theories that developed from the same fundamental

concepts, emphasizing how understanding results from knowing concepts both in part and as a whole.

Systems theory, a multidisciplinary approach Many early systems theorists aimed at finding a general systems theory that could explain all systems in all fields of science.

As we can imagine, term goes back to Bertalanffy’s theory. Since then system theory has been involved in several scientific investigation fields, for example, Ilya Prigogine, of the Center for Complex Quantum Systems at the University of Texas, Austin, has studied emergent properties, suggesting that they offer analogues for living systems.

The theories of autopoiesis of Francisco Varela and Humberto Maturana are a further development in this field.

Von Bertalanffy opened up something much broader and of much greater significance than a single theory: he created a new paradigm for the development of theories.

In organizational studies The systems framework is fundamental to organizational theory as organizations are complex dynamic goal-oriented processes.

One of the early thinkers in the field was Alexander Bogdanov, who developed his Tectology, a theory widely considered a precursor of von Bertalanffy’s GST, aiming to model and design human organizations.

A systemic view on organizations needs to be transdisciplinary and integrative. In other words, it transcends the perspectives of individual disciplines, integrating them on the basis of a common “code”, or more exactly, on the basis of the formal apparatus provided by systems theory.

As we know the systems approach gives primacy to the interrelationships, not to the

elements of the system. It is from these dynamic interrelationships that new properties of the system emerge. In recent years, systems thinking has been developed to provide techniques for studying systems in holistic ways to supplement traditional reductionistic methods. In this more recent tradition, systems theory in organizational studies is considered by some as a humanistic extension of the natural sciences.

System sociology Systems theory has also been developed within sociology.

Miller’s living systems theory was particularly influential in sociology from the time of the early systems movement.

Living systems theory is an offshoot of von Bertalanffy’s general systems theory, created by James Grier Miller in 1978, which was intended to formalize the concept of “life”.

According to Miller’s original conception a “living system” must contain each of 20 “critical subsystems”, which are defined by their functions and visible in numerous systems, from simple cells to organisms, countries, and societies. In Living Systems Miller provides a detailed look at a number of systems in order of increasing size, and identifies his subsystems in each.

He constructed his general theory of living systems by focusing on concrete systems— nonrandom accumulations of matterenergy in physical space-time organized into interacting, interrelated subsystems or components. Slightly revising the original model a dozen years later, he distinguished eight “nested” hierarchical levels in such complex structures: cell, organ, organism, group, organization, community, society, and supranational system. Each level is “nested” in the sense that each higher level contains the next lower level in a nested fashion.

Living systems according to Parent (1996)

Systemic City Analysis

31

are by definition “open self-organizing systems that have the special characteristics of life and interact with their environment”.

Living systems can be as simple as a single cell or as complex as a supranational organization such as the European Union.

Regardless of their complexity, they each depend upon the same essential twenty subsystems (or processes) in order to survive and to continue the propagation of their species or types beyond a single generation”.

Systems biology Systems biology is a term used to describe a number of trends in bioscience research, and a movement which draws on those trends. Proponents describe systems biology as a biology-based inter-disciplinary study field that focuses on complex interactions in biological systems, claiming that it uses a new perspective (holism instead of reduction).

An often stated ambition of systems biology is the modeling and discovery of emergent properties of a system, whose theoretical description is only possible using techniques which fall under the remit of systems biology. The term systems biology is thought to have been created by Ludwig von Bertalanffy in 1928.

System dynamics System Dynamics was founded in the late 1950s by Jay W. Forrester of the MIT Sloan School of Management with the establishment of the MIT System Dynamics Group.

At that time, he began applying what he had learned about systems during his work in electrical engineering to everyday kinds of systems.

As an aspect of systems theory, system dynamics is a method for understanding the dynamic behavior of complex systems. The 32

basis of the method is the recognition that the structure of any system — the many circular, interlocking, sometimes time-delayed relationships among its components — is often just as important in determining its behavior as the individual components themselves. Examples are chaos theory and social dynamics. It is also claimed that, because there are often properties-ofthe-whole which cannot be found among the properties-of-the-elements, in some cases the behavior of the whole cannot be explained in terms of the behavior of the parts. An example is the properties of these letters which when considered together can give rise to meaning which does not exist in the letters by themselves. This further explains the integration of tools, like language, as a more parsimonious process in the human application of easiest path adaptability through interconnected systems.

Systems psychology Systems psychology is a branch of psychology that studies human behavior and experience in complex systems. It is inspired by systems theory and systems thinking, and based on the theoretical work of Roger Barker, Gregory Bateson, Humberto Maturana and others. It is an approach in psychology, in which groups and individuals, are considered as systems in homeostasis(is the property of a system that regulates its internal environment and tends to maintain a stable, constant condition of properties).

In systems psychology “characteristics of organizational behavior for example individual needs, rewards, expectations, and attributes of the people interacting with the systems are considered in the process in order to create an effective system.

Systemic Design Practical application of system theory The systemic way of thinking allow us to find out which the real problems of our society are, in fact, if we try to solve just isolated problems that we meet along the way, we’re never going to find out the main problems causes.

If we are not really trying to find the causes, we’re never going to solve our problems definitely.

Our scientists already uses to think in the relationship between cause and effect, is the base of all our physical laws, systems design just apply this concept within a complex relationships context.

All the human’s designed systems, just like the natural systems, have a complex net of relationship that has to be further analyzed to actually understand what is going wrong and how to fix it.

Systemic design is a new discipline in development at the Politecnico di Torino, since about ten years by the research team of Industrial Design in the Department of Architectural and Industrial Design directed

by Professor Luigi Bistagnino.

A new design approach that deals not with singular products, but with the whole industrial production systems. This developed approach prefigures the accomplishment of sustainable productive systems, which take care existing flows and linkages.

Systemic Design is a discipline that allows us to define and schedule the matter flows from one system to another in a continuous metabolism aiming to decrease the carbon footprint and generate a significant economic flow.

It’s a practical application of system thinking, a process of understanding how things influence one another within a whole industrial process.

The systemic design production model favors resources close from those away and actives, through the output of a system that becomes the input of another, a virtuous collaboration between production processes, the system of animal kingdoms, the local context and communities. It creates a network of open relationship that revitalizes the area and characterizes it in its primary qualities.

Systemic Design can be considered an approach to problem solving and sustainability design, by viewing “problems” as parts of an overall system, rather than reacting to specific part, outcomes or events and potentially contributing to further development of unintended consequences.

A Systemic project organizes and optimizes all actors and stakeholders within its scope, so they can grow consistently evolving with each other. The individual parts of the system are intertwined, forming a virtuous network relations between the flows of matter, energy and information.

The dealings look on links with involved territory, producers, consumers and companies, both public and private ones; to design a system that is very close and related with culture, technical and practical skills and traditions of the specific area.

The systemic designer should be able to manage and maintain the project development at all stages, with a constant mutual dialogue between the various actors of this new cultural terrain. Systemic Design has the theoretical basis in the disciplines like systems theory, cybernetics and sociology , in this fields, during twentieth century, theorists have begun to consider the processes as a network of relationships that involves input and output with self-regulating feedback mechanisms

Systemic City Analysis

33

Holistic Analysis

Ortofruit Coop Holistic Analysis sample map - Systemic Design, EcoDesign Politecnico di Torino -2010

Systemic Design is a change of perspective, from a linear approach on design problems to an holistic point of view, it is intended to analyze all the relationships existing within system boundaries and start the design process considering all of them. Acknowledging that an improvement in one area of a system can adversely affect another area of the system, it promotes organizational communication at all levels.

Systems thinking techniques may be used to study any kind of system — natural, scientific, engineered, human, or conceptual.

Systemic Design Guide lines Input Output The outputs of a system become input for another, resulting in: increased economic flow and new job opportunities.

34

Relations The reports generate the system itself: all systems are strategic elements; relations can be internal and external.

Self-generation Autopoietic systems sustain and reproduce themselves, defining its scope, and coevolve together.

Acting locally In the context in which they operate: they exploit the resources of local people, culture, matter, local issues are resolved by creating new opportunities.

Man at the center of the project The man related to its environmental, social, and ethical culture around.

Systems Design could be applied on all artificial and naturals systems,such as an object, an house, an industry, a city even the entire world is considerable as a whole complex system.

Holistic Analysis The holistic analysis is the first step in systemic design process, it consider all the inputs and the outputs of the system, and how them are related each other.

Holism (from holos, a Greek word meaning all, whole, entire, total) is the idea that all the properties of a given system (physical, biological, chemical, social, economic, mental, linguistic, etc.) cannot be determined or explained by its component parts alone.

Instead, the system as a whole determines in an important way how the parts behave.

Scientific holism holds that the behavior of a system cannot be perfectly predicted, no matter how much data is available. Natural systems can produce surprisingly unexpected behavior, and it is suspected that behavior of such systems might be computational irreducible, which means it would not be possible to even approximate the system state without a full simulation of all the events occurring in the system.

Study a system means to know its whole behavior and not only the one related to single components, understanding the system by examining the linkages and interactions between the elements that compose

Ortofruit Coop Systemic project map - Systemic Design course EcoDesign Politecnico di Torino -2010 Systemic City Analysis

35

the entirety of it.

The analysis of inputs and outputs is the starting point of each systemic design process and it must be of two orders: »» Quantitative to know the amount of products involved and the intervention scale of impact. »» Qualitative in depth to find out what are, if there are, the ethics foundations of the production system analyzed.

This simple task allows you to have a very specific context: »» Resources that you need, on their characteristics and their origin. »» Waste or residues of processing, quality and specifications of their final fate. »» What happens in the processes by comparing the specific differences of what enters and exits.

We thus provide data on materials and energy in and out and on their nature, how they were generated and what fate will be downstream of a process that has seen them being more or less energy transformations, more or less sustainable more or less coherent with the context material culture and the resources in which the process occurs.

A system can be understood only in context, so this design process is expansionist, which is to say that the discourse expands to include the broader situation within which the immediate problem exists.

36

Symbiosis in Development (SID) Another main methodology has been applied developing this project, is the Symbiosis in Development (SiD).

SiD is a new methodology developed in house by Except Netherlands for solving complex, multi-faceted problems such as that of sustainable design. It guides designers and decision-makers in incorporating problems beyond material and energy use, extending to include social, ecological, economic, and political issues.

SiD is based on the ELSIA Relationship System.

The ELSIA system helps map the larger set of relationships between the project at hand and the ways in which it will influence the world around it. This system can be used for management and policy issues as well as design problems. It is essentially a tool for “systems thinking” that functions by systematically allowing the user to map

relationships between objects.

ELSIA takes its name from five main categories this categories are: »» Energy & Materials (Matter) »» Life (Species & Ecosystems) »» Society (Economy & Culture) »» Individual (Health & Happiness) »» Actions (Utility & Purpose) The categories of ELSIA are functionally nested within each other. All materials are made from energy, and all ecosystems are made of materials. The economy is a subset of culture, just as each individual is always a part of society, and so on. Using the ELSIA relationship system one can prevent developing systems that improve specific domains, but externalize issues to other key areas.

Symbiosis in development- ELSIA nested category system

Systemic City Analysis

37

The City is an open system

if we think how difficult can be define the boundaries of a metropolitan area while the surrounding region is whole urbanized.

System theory in a urban context

The history of a complex system may be important. Because complex systems are dynamic systems they change over time, and prior states may have an influence on present states.

In fact, the history of cities greatly influenced the new development plans, urban planners often find themselves trying to renew the city and to preserve the original character built over the centuries at the same time.

If we want to consider the urban environment as a whole system, there are some aspects that can be highlighted.

First, the city system behaves as a continuous system, so a system that has been ongoing changes to its interior, subtle when considered as a whole.

The urban environment is a complex system and, as an organization, consist of different connections and characteristics.

The differences within the system mean that every single component gives new qualities to the whole, the connection and bond between the components defines rules and restrictions on the behavior of the system.

Complex systems as a city, may have the following features: Cascading Failures

Complex systems may have a memory

Complex systems may be nested The components of a complex system may themselves be complex systems. For example, a city economy is made up of organizations, which are made up of people, which are made up of cells - all of which are complex systems.

Relationships are non-linear

In practical terms, this means a small perDue to the strong coupling between compo- turbation may cause a large effect, a pronents in complex systems, a failure in one portional effect, or even no effect at all. or more components can lead to cascading In linear systems, effect is always directly failures which may have catastrophic conproportional to cause. sequences on the functioning of the system. Relationships contain feedback loops, both For example if we consider the high internegative (damping) and positive (amplifying) dependency between land use designed by feedback are always found in complex sysurban planners, climate change and natural tems. The effects of an element’s behavior disaster, we can understand how this two are fed back to in such a way that the elecomponent of the system affects each other. ment itself is altered.

Difficult to determine boundaries It can be difficult to determine the boundaries of a complex system. The decision is ultimately made by the observer. Especially 38

The urban open system.

Complex systems, like cities, are open systems. They exist in a thermodynamic gradient and dissipate energy. In other words, complex systems are frequently far from energetic equilibrium: but despite this flux, there may be pattern stability.

Basically an open system is a system which continuously interacts with its environment.

The interaction can take the form of information, energy, or material transfers into or out of the system boundary.

Open systems have a number of consequences, for instance a closed system contains limited energies, the definition of an open system assumes that there are supplies of energy that cannot be depleted; in practice, this energy is supplied from some source in the surrounding environment, this is how cities survives.

We know, based on the first law of thermodynamics, that energy is conserved and that the budget will be balanced, but we know that the capital available for other transformations decreases irreversibly.

The balance of our cities is essentially an imbalance: speaking of balance, sustainable means control this imbalance, that is almost impossible to be revoked according to Bettini: the direction is from order to disorder, the same direction that city has taken the same direction as every anthropogenic processes. This does not mean that we need to think to “lock” the city in a form of absolute equilibrium: dead cities can only aspire to that. We need to reason with other instruments: “In open systems, such as urban systems, it is essential to calculate, as well ... negative entropy produced within the system (order) and the positive entropy atmosphere created by the external environment (disorder).”

The fact is that the “city-metropolis creates chaos inside and outside itself, ergo the urban ecosystem is always inducer of

growing disorder, producing always degraded energy”.

The city is really a “hot spot” where a hectare metropolitan area consumes 1000 times more energy than an equivalent area to the rural economy. The city simplifies the environment, makes it equally degraded, losing all ability of dialectical relationship with the environment and, paradoxically, become less flexible and more rigid. “To think of how a city can maintain a balance, you must refer to a model of biophysical economic process that takes the capital and labor inputs as intermediate products from the only real primary factor of production: matter and energy with low entropy “.

This consideration does not involve a loss in quality of life, but a modification in a more balanced state renouncing to myth “more is better”.

On the same positions we also find Enzo Scandurra in the book “The city that does not exist”, in 1999 drew a deep criticism of the cultural, historical and epistemological paradigms that led modern society to live in places, cities, uninhabitable. In particular, he focuses on the idea that you can not separate from the urban social and political relations because isn’t possible separate, how our culture does, the mind from the body “the discipline of urban studies, the attitude corresponding to the dual metaphor of mind and body, created the city’s physical separation from the living (the body thinking the activity) but also separate the subject (the city planner, one who observes and intervenes in reality) from the object (the city, communities, residents). The city can’t live just in projects, so the question is aware citizens ‘political’ consciousness, as referring to the polis, all citizens and this is a matter of education. The passes, variants, tunnels, dams, furniture, etc.. obviously are great business, but it should be more evident and then more openly said that are just political-economic dogmas that often have

Systemic City Analysis

39

nothing to do with the quality of life if not from the viewpoint of a destructive development without brakes.

So there is the necessity to share informations between citizens and administrators in a transparent way and let the citizens participate in the decision making process.

First of all the citizens should be educated to sustainability and systemic thinking, the construction of representations of the city system, is the first step, mapping the urban landscape and its uses, expectations, problems.

From system analysis to Urban planning The city system relationships organization determines the proper land use for each urban area. The holistic analysis, as we have seen, case can help urban planners to understand which are the real needs and problems, considering this area in the territorial context, considering also the flows and the relations in which the area is involved.

According to studies by Maturana and Varela, systems are subject to two main types of relationships, those that make up the structure and those that defines the organization.

The system structure is defined from the set of components and relationships that, in practice, vary continuously while keeping unchanged the organization of the system, the structure exchanges with the external environment, exchanges of matter, energy and information needed to feed the survival of each open system.

The organization instead is defined within the system from the set of relationships that must exist to recognize the identity and the membership to the system itself.

A system so defined have also a certain autonomy, that is the ability of to subordinate the internal exchanges to maintain its 40

organization unchanged.

Affecting the whole system, changing the behaviors, means change the organization, act on the invariant structure that determines the relationships within the system itself.

In order to reach a more sustainable context, the internal relationships of the system needs to be redesigned, new variables can be inserted and old highly dispersive connections have to be removed from the flows pattern. Once the new organization model is complete, real changes can be planned and adopted.

A study on the proximity between the new activities included and the context of existing activities with which to establish a symbiotic connection, allows to establish the exact spatial location of new interventions.

More detailed analysis on individual activities are subject to the planners.

Applications of system urban planning The Hannover Principles is a good example of application of system thinking in urban development guidelines.

Originally developed in 1992 by William McDonough and Michael Braungart (in response to a commission by the city of Hannover Germany as a design spec for the facilities the city would build for the 2000 World’s Fair), the Hannover Principles have been applied successfully to a broad range of built products. “Insist on the right of humanity and nature to co-exist in a healthy, supportive, diverse and sustainable condition.

Recognize interdependence. The elements of human design interact with and depend upon the natural world, with broad and diverse implications at every scale. Expand design considerations to recognize even distant effects.

Respect relationships between spirit and matter. Consider all aspects of human

settlement, including community, dwelling, industry and trade, in terms of existing and evolving connections between spiritual and material consciousness.

Accept responsibility for the consequences of design decisions upon human well being, the viability of natural systems and their right to coexist. (...)

Eliminate the concept of waste. Evaluate and optimize the full life cycle of products and processes to approach the state of natural systems, in which there is no waste.

Rely on natural energy flows. Human designs should, like the living world, derive their creative force from perpetual solar income. Incorporate this energy efficiently and safely for responsible use.

Understand the limitations of design. No human creation lasts forever, and design does not solve all problems. Those who create and plan should practice humility in the face of nature. Treat nature as a model and mentor, not as an inconvenience to be evaded or ignored.

Seek constant improvement by the sharing of knowledge. Encouraging direct and open communication between colleagues, patrons, manufacturers and users to link long-term sustainable considerations with ethical responsibility to and to reestablish the integral relationship between natural processes and human activity.�

Systemic City Analysis

41

SCA - Systemic City Analysis Sustainability assessment for urban planning Urban sustainability planning is perhaps the most complex challenge that a Government has to face nowadays. Assessing the sustainability level of a city requires a valuation of the urban environment with a multidisciplinary perspective.

New studies and reports are produced every year by the scientific community and a City Government should be able to access the research results in a fast and easy way.

The goal of this project is promote the sustainable development of our cities by creating a useful analysis method to assess sustainability in a city environment.

Introducing SCA The Systemic City Analysis (SCA) is a tool to perform sustainability assessment of an urban context.

The SCA project is born of a collaboration between Except Integrated Sustainability, Politecnico di Torino, the Rotterdam Collective and the City of Rotterdam.

The SCA is designed to collect, analyze, evaluate and represent relevant GIS data from several research fields in order to achieve a faster and sustainable decision making process for city officials as well as an educational tool for urban research and planning. The better we know our cities, the better we can develop them in the future.

How analyze the whole city system?

To effect the usefulness of the holistic anal42

ysis, data about the city must be analyzed and represented. Using a system of maps, data can be represented clearly and communicated in a simple and efficient way to a wide audience.

The main purpose of this project is educational, the systemic city analysis aims to inform the citizens and the city administration on the health of the urban system using a set of indicators.

The system could also be analyzed as a single body, a black box, but looking at the city from this point of view, the results of the analysis would be of little importance for the local population and land use planning. Instead, what we want to create is a useful administration tool for spotting and promptly remedy the deficiencies of the urban system.

To obtain sufficiently detailed analysis, this tool requires a comprehensive data capture, as accurately as possible to locate the critical points of the system.

The collection of such amounts of data can sometimes be expensive and is not always necessary, in fact are included also broad indicators to help identify fields where research should be further explored.

Project Goals The goal is valuate the health of the city system through an indicator set that helps the community to find where the main city problems are located and which are the causes.

To show the relationship between the different system components, we should map as many data as possible.

The internal system relationship, the causes and the effects, could be represented clearly and communicated in a simple way to a big audience.

The main goal of the project is inform and educate the citizens on sustainability.

Indicator set

my, Culture, Mobility, Health and Happiness.

The indicators regards all the main characteristics of a human city and the lives of living beings. The goal is to locate redundant behaviors in the system to find relationships of cause and effect.

The SCA is developed following the guideline of ELSIA relationship system developed

by Except. ELSIA system helps maps the larger set of relationships between the project at hand and the ways in which it will influence the world around it.

The SCA indicators system is using several indicators for each ELSIA category.

There are a lot of indicators set already developed by the scientific community to be applied in several fields.

To develop SCA indicators set, the first step was search and analyze how the existing indicators set works, and if some of this indicators could be useful or adapted to SCA. Indicators choice is fundamental for describe a whole picture of the city.

The criteria for the selection were: - Reliability of measures - Data availability - Recognized as international standard - Easy to interpret and communicate - Related each with the other indicators - Representing all the ELSIA categories - Including Input and Output of the system.

Project targets The Systemic City Analysis project targets are: » Using a system-based classification, create an Indicator Set to organize urban information in several categories including: Air Quality, Water Quality, Urban Metabolism, Energy flows, Ecosystem, Species, Econo-

» Include Network analysis indicators like resilience in order to evaluate the whole system. » Collect data and produce evaluation maps developing an ArcGIS software extension pack. » Map the indicators in space, time and context. » Develop predefined context map for an easier consultation of the database. » Provide a citizens sustainability education platform through a web based consultation service. » Support the SCA growth, the data providing and the software upgrades by the creation of a multidisciplinary scientist community. » Develop periodic software upgrades.

The SCA system user will be able to detect and monitor the main city problems, discover the relationship existing between the several indicators, find redundant behaviors in the system to understand, in an empirical learning process, the cause-effect relationships that drives the city system. The user will be able to make responsible decisions considering all the consequences that this process involves.

How sustainability assessment are performed ?

New sustainability assessments are constantly being developed by the researcher’s community in much of Europe and the Americas. The data evaluated derive from studies in several specific

Systemic City Analysis

43

fields.

Usually the studies produces an indicatorset and analysis report containing complex and specific data and language.

Policy makers should be able to evaluate each report and understand the consequences of their policy decisions in an increasingly interconnected world, they should be able to formulate hypotheses with long-term foresight of the ramifications of their decisions in a systemic and multidisciplinary context.

The lack of standard simplified models and indicator systems make this process long, tedious and sluggishly responsive to face the current global crisis.

Why indicators set?

Basically an indicator is something that helps you understand where you are, which way you are going and how far you are from where you want to be. A good indicator alerts you to a problem before it gets too bad and helps you recognize what needs to be done to fix the problem.

For instance, environmental indicators are essential tools for tracking environmental progress, supporting policy evaluation and informing the public. Since the early 1990s, such indicators have gained in importance in many countries and in international fora.

Individual indicators are designed to translate complex information in a concise and easily understood manner in order to represent a particular phenomenon. In contrast, indicator systems, when seen as a whole are meant to provide an assessment of the full environment domain or a major subset of it.

Environmental indicators have been defined in different ways but common themes exist.

“An environmental indicator is a numerical value that helps provide insight into the state of the environment or human health.

44

Indicators are developed based on quantitative measurements or statistics of environmental condition that are tracked over time.

Environmental indicators can be developed and used at a wide variety of geographic scales, from local to regional to national levels.”

Some indicator systems have evolved to include many indicators and require a certain level of knowledge and expertise in various disciplines to fully grasp. A number of methods have been devised in the recent past to aggregate this information and allow for rapid consumption by those who do not have the time or the expertise to analyze the full set of indicators. In general these methods can be categorized as numerical aggregation (e.g. indices), short selections of indicators (e.g. core set or headline indicators), short visual assessments (e.g. arrows, traffic signals), and compelling presentations (e.g. maps or the dashboard of sustainability). Many prominent environmental indicator systems have adjusted their indicator systems to include or report solely on a limited “indicator set”.

Sustainability indicators Indicators of a sustainable community point to areas where the links between the economy, environment and society are weak.

They allow you to see where the problem areas are and help show the way to fix those problems.

Communities are a web of interactions among the environment, the economy and society.

From the systemic point of view we should be able to describe the relationships that structures the system, for instance if we think about a city many linkage should be taken into account, like the natural resource base that provides the materials for production on which jobs and stockholder profits

depend. Jobs affect the poverty rate and the poverty rate is related to crime. Air quality, water quality and materials used for production have an effect on health. They may also have an effect on stockholder profits: if a process requires clean water as an input, cleaning up poor quality water prior to processing is an extra expense, which reduces profits. Likewise, health problems, whether due to general air quality problems or exposure to toxic materials, have an effect on worker productivity and contribute to the rising costs of health insurance.

Sustainability requires this type of integrated view of the world, it requires multidimensional indicators that show the links among a community’s economy, environment, and society.

Classical economic assessment on countries development rate are not useful if we have to address the problem source.

For example, the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), a well-publicized traditional indicator, measures the amount of money being spent in a country. It is generally reported as a measure of the country’s economic well-being: the more money being spent, the higher the GDP and the better the overall economic well-being is assumed to be. However, because GDP reflects only the amount of economic activity, regardless of the effect of that activity on the community’s social and environmental health, GDP can go up when overall community health goes down. For example, when there is a ten-car pileup on the highway, the GDP goes up because of the money spent on medical fees and repair costs. On the other hand, if ten people decide not to buy cars and instead walk to work, their health and wealth may increase but the GDP goes down.

Trying to run a complex society on a single indicator like the Gross National product is like trying to fly a 747 with only one gauge on the instrument panel ... imagine if your doctor, when giving you a checkup, did no more than check your blood pressure.”

Hazel Henderson Indicators of sustainable community are useful to different communities for different reasons. For a healthy, vibrant community, indicators help monitor that health so that negative trends are caught and dealt with before they become a problem. For communities with economic, social, or environmental problems, indicators can point the way to a better future. For all communities, indicators can generate discussion among people with different backgrounds and viewpoints, and, in the process, help create a shared vision of what the community should be.

The principal objective of sustainability indicators is to inform public policy-making as part of the process of sustainability governance.

Sustainability indicators can provide information on any aspect of the interplay between the environment and socioeconomic activities.

SCA: Indicators Set To build up the SCA indicator set many existing internationally recognized models have been taking into account. The idea was to aggregate a set of indicators b ​ y analyzing the individual indicators present in the reference models.

The indicators that were found to be in multiple categories simultaneously within the ELSIA system, have been taken into greater

Systemic City Analysis

45

consideration.

The ELSIA relationship system defines the set of relations that are the basis of existence and life so it helps find more comprehensive indicators.

A further selection was made among the indicators in the same category, between those that describe similar phenomena, the most inclusive have been privileged in this case. Another selection criterion applied was the ability of individual indicators to establish international standards.

The presence of a given indicator across multiple evaluation systems has been considered as well as the indicator property to survive in the scientific research field, that is determined by a continuous supply of new studies addressing the characteristic subject of the indicator. Only a constant flow of opinions and research can ensure the development of a useful tool.

The main international indicators set analyzed were: »» Eco Indicator ‘99 - PRé consultants »» Impact 2002 + - Swiss Federal Institute of Technology »» Living planet Index - WWF »» Ecological footprint index - WWF »» Environmental Performance Index Yale University. »» OECD -KEY ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS »» Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) »» UK national suite »» Eurostat Structural Indicators »» Eurostat Sustainability Indicators »» SEBI 2010 - EEA Let’s have a quick overview on some of them.

46

HAI: Habitat Agenda Indicators Accepting the Millennium Development Goals the international community has made a commitment to the world’s poor, the most vulnerable, in precise terms, established in quantitative targets.

The United Nations System has set numerical targets for each goal and it has selected appropriate indicators to monitor progress on the goals and attain corresponding targets.

A list of 18 targets and more than 40 indicators corresponding to these goals ensure a common assessment and appreciation of the status of MDGs at global, national and local levels.

The United Nations System assigned UNHABITAT the responsibility to assist Members States monitor and gradually attain the development targets.

Habitat Agenda indicators comprise 20 key indicators, 8 check-lists and 16 extensive indicators which measure performances and trends in selected key areas.

Together, they should provide a quantitative, comparative base for the condition of cities, and show progress towards achieving the Habitat Agenda.

UN-HABITAT has been a pioneer organization in the collection of urban indicators.

In 1991, it initiated the Housing Indicators Programme, it then became Urban Indicators Programme in 1993 in order to focus on a larger range of urban issues. The programme produced two main databases in 1996 and 2001.

For this new phase, data are collected through different mechanisms. Data experts will be selected from National Statistics Offices, Ministries responsible for urban issues at the National level, Municipal and Metropolitan authorities representing urban agglomerations.

SEBI 2010 The Pan-European SEBI 2010 (Streamlining European Biodiversity Indicators) initiative was launched in 2005 to develop a European set of biodiversity indicators to assess and inform about progress towards the 2010 targets.

SEBI has been a partnership between the EEA (the European Environment Agency), its Topic Centre on Biological Diversity (ETC/ BD), DG Environment of the European Commission, the Czech Republic (as lead country for the Kiev Resolution action plan on biodiversity indicators, ECNC (the European Centre for Nature Conservation), UNEP/ PEBLDS Secretariat, and UNEP-WCMC (the World Conservation Monitoring Centre).

In 2005 the Coordination Team set up six Expert groups involving around 120 experts nominated by European countries as well as Non-Governmental Organizations.

These Expert Groups compiled information about existing biodiversity indicators and explored possibilities for developing new ones, based on the CBD focal areas.

The compilation of a large set of candidate indicators culminated in a selection process at the end of 2006 to choose a first limited set of European biodiversity indicators (the current 26 indicators set). These were used in several reports to assess European progress towards the 2010 targets.

From the very beginning, the proposed set of indicators has been seen holistically, stressing mutual relationships among the individual indicators and their power to deal with uncertainty.

In 2010 the SEBI indicators were made available on-line through the EEA Indicators Management System (IMS) as part of the launch of the EEA managed European Biodiversity Data Centre and of the Biodiversity Information System for Europe.

EPI Environmental Performance Index 2010 The 2010 Environmental Performance Index (EPI) tracks national environmental results on a quantitative basis, measuring proximity to an established set of policy targets using the best data available.

It ranks 163 countries on 25 performance indicators tracked across ten well-established policy categories covering both environmental public health and ecosystem vitality Specifically, the 2010 EPI: »» Highlights current environmental problems and high-priority issues; »» Tracks pollution control and natural resource management trends at regional, national, and international levels; »» Identifies policies currently producing good results; »» Identifies where ineffective efforts can be halted and funding redeployed; »» Provides a baseline for cross-country and cross-sectoral performance comparisons; »» Facilitates benchmarking and offers decision-making guidance; »» Spotlights best practices and successful policy models.

Eurostat Sustainable Development Indicators The request for indicators in the strategy Chapter 40 of Agenda 21 recognized the need of information for decision-making and called on countries and the international community to develop indicators of sustainable development. It is in this spirit that the strategy requires the development of statistical indicators to cover in depth the complexity of sustainable development and to allow for an appropriate assessment of

Systemic City Analysis

47

progress.

In 1996, the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development (UNCSD) proposed a list of 134 indicators, defined by reference to the principles and policy guidance provided by Agenda 21, to be tested in selected countries. In 1997, as a contribution to the UN official international testing phase, Eurostat produced a pilot study, ‘Indicators of sustainable development’, based on the UN list, containing 46 European indicators.

In 1998, Eurostat also hosted a meeting with the European countries which were testing the UN list of indicators, to review progress and present results with the aim to advance the methodological understanding of the way in which SDIs were being developed and used across the Member States.

As a result of the international testing phase, the United Nations Department of

LCA ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE INDEX

Living Planet Index

48

Economic and Social Affairs opted for a revision of the indicator list. The overall framework and structure of the SDI set were adapted, resulting in a reduced but more policy-oriented set of selected indicators.

In 2001, drawing upon and extending the UN revised list of 59 core SDIs, a second publication was issued by Eurostat, containing some 63 indicators.

In September 2001, the Statistical Programme Committee established a task force to develop a common response from the European statistical system to the need for indicators on sustainable development.

The task force, comprising statisticians, researchers, members of national governments, and representatives from other European Commission services, developed an indicators list that was deliberated on and endorsed by the Commission in February 2005, in a communication which introduced the conceptual framework and the commonly agreed set of SDIs. The strategy also anticipates the possible political endorsement and adoption of a limited set of indicators.

#!?

Sustainability assessments VS City administrators

City council

Last but not least, the strategy refers to the use of SDIs both in the monitoring report by Eurostat and in the Commission progress report.

SCA - First Steps

Except - Brainstorming Session Plan 05/05/2011

To begin the selection of indicators a brainstorming session was organized with some members of the Except Integrated Sustainability team. The aim was to expand the observation point thanks to the contribution of different professionals, different reference models have been considered and a first set of indicators was developed.

The brainstorm was planned to understand the idea that different professionals have about how a city could be watched through the ELSIA system.

Topic: Systemic City Analysis »» Step 1: Expose Question - What do you think about how a city could be watched through the ELSIA system? »» Starting from Elsia 8: Energy, Materials, Ecosystems, Species, Culture, Economy, Health, Happiness, everyone try to thinks about 2 topics for each ELSIA component and why this topics should be useful to describe how the city works. »» Step 2 : Choose 2 topics from each samples categories. »» Step 3: discuss and choose the most relevant.

City analysis Brainstorming

Electric Fossil Biomass Hydro Nuclear Wind Geo (periodic table) Water Land Phosphate Rare Earth

Livestock genetic IUCN Red List Index Living Planet Index (zoological Society of London, WWF) Global Wild Bird Index (BirdLife, RSPB) EQ Ecotoxicity (EI 99)

Energy

Ecosystems

Culture

Health

Materials

Species

Economy

Happiness

Marine trophic Index Habitat (Parks) birds (SEBI 2010) butterflies (SEBI 2010) Habitat connectivity (UK suite) Critical Load (SEBI 2010)

Ideology Education Religion Language Trade Agreements Transport Currency

Cardiovascular health Personal Growth Freedom of Choice Free Time Depression Levels

ELSIA Components

ELSIA Categories

Choose four topics for component

Systemic City Analysis

49

SCA

Metabolism

Water Q Air Quality

SCA - Ideal Indicators List Materials O3 No2 Pm10 SO2 Disolved Oxygen Total Phosphorous Total Nitrogen Ph Materials pro capita Food Water

%Food Imported % of water treated %Food wasted Waste pro capita - % Emissions - % Recyclable - % Hazardous - % Burned - % Recycled - % Treated localy % Sewage Energy

Indicators set

Îźg/m3

mg/L

ton/ year Kg/ year

Ecosystem / Species km 2

tgoe/ year km #/year

First Indicator List developed after the brainstorming session 50

# Total work vacacies % Primary % Secondary % Tertiary % Quaternary % Unemployment % Looking for a job % Full time employes % having a safety net Income inequality

0<#<1

Culture # Languages spoken

Electricity total use % city energy use/production % renewable used/Installed kgoe/ year % used for transport % fossil fuel % natural gas Land Use Agricolture Park/ Natural Areas Residential Areas Production Areas Industrial areas Others %Infrasctructures Building areas CO2 Absorbtion Power Green Areas Connectivity Birds Critical Load

Demography Total population % Male % Female % Households Density Average age % Temporary Migrants Economy

Services % Secondary& Higher education # Festivals / Events for free or discounted # of Web services for the citizens Structures # Schools/ Education facilities Social surface

km 2

Health / Happiness # Health facilities % Public % Private Daly Radiation Carcinogenic effects % People social partecipation Free time

05

SCA Categories

Expanding the list

Ec o

h ealt

Species

Happines

s

W Qu ate ali r ty

tem sys Eco

The next step in the development of SCA The categories in the system ELSIA as inwas searching for information, numerous cluding they could be, are incomplete if we sources were consulted for each category want to describe the major themes of urand new indicators were gradually added to ban analysis. In fact, some aspects such the system to outline a more comprehenas mobility would be included in sive framework of information. broader issues and then The expansion of the take second place in set of indicators is Urban the resulting set due to numerEn ity metabolism l of indicators. a erg ous consulQu For this y Air tations reason with it was

De

mo

p gra

H

%

n o my

architects, urban planners and industrial ecologist, specialists in various fields who have contributed to the increasing specialization of the system. The consultation of specific texts in relation to other fields of investigation, and existing databases has led to a further revision of the set.

Culture

Systemic City Analysis

hy

bil it

y

decided to expand the categories, from 8 to 12, including transportation, demographics, and subdividing the major categories, such as materials, so as to highlight important issues such as water and air quality. The same breakdown occurred with regard to the ecosystem and animal species.

51

Mo

Materials O3 No2 Pm10 SO2

Air Quality

Disolved Oxygen Total Phosphorous Total Nitrogen Ph

Water Quality

Ecosystem/ Species

Radiations level

Urban Metabolism

Food consume pro capita % Produced % Imported % Exported % Wasted before consume Water consume pro capita % Treated Waste amount pro capita % GHG Emissions % Recyclable % Hazardous % Burned % Recycled % Sewage % Treated locally Light Pollution level Noise Pollution level Energy Electricity pro capita % Produced % Renewable used % Renewable Installed Fossil fuel pro capita % FF Used for transport Natural Gas consume pro capita % Nuclear

Land Use: Territory % Agriculture % Natural Areas % Production Areas - %Industrial - % Commercial Surface % Residential (owned) % Residential (rented) % Residential (social) Building Areas Building Density CO2 absorbtion Power Green Areas Connectivity Critical load Economy

# Work Vacacies % Primary % Secondary % Tertiary % Quaternary % Full time employes % Unemploied people % Looking for a Job % Have a safety net Culture

# of laungueages spoken Services - Internet accessibility - % Secondary & Higher education - # of Festivals & Events for free or discounted - # Web services for the citizens - # Sustainability projects - Public Data accessibility Structures - # Education Facilities - % Public - Collective Equipment - Social Surface

Second Indicator List developed after further consultations 52

Mobility

Public transport accessibility Exchange nodes #/mq Roads km Bike roads km Pedestrian area km Ship trafficNavi al giorno Train traffic Treni al giorno Plane traffic aerei al giorno Health and Happiness

# Health facilities - % Public - % Private Life expectancy % People socially involved Free time average Happy Planet Index Demography

Total Population % Male % Female % Households Density by neigborouds Average Age % Temporary Migrants % Stable Migrants Birth amount System Indicators: Concentration Indexes related to the population density, General Entrophy Index Applications: - GE for Energy / Area - GE for Animals/ Species ( Biodiversity) - GE for Waste/ Area - GE for Icome Inequality (Robin Hood Index) - GE for Public services / Area - GE for Public Order / Area - GE for Health / Population

Indi

Ma

Detecting indices With the increase in the number of indicators a new problem came to light, how to ensure that the system would be easy an practical to use?

Our answer: Detecting indices.

Several reference systems use indexes to provide an overall result of the analysis, but enclose the results of extensive data collection can produce the negative effect of hiding what are the motivations that underlie this result. The detecting indices on the other hand, can be used as tools for preliminary analysis.

Detecting indices are based on statistical concentration indices.

The use of concentration indices in the analysis allows to drastically reduce the search field.

The concentration ratio of an element of the system indicates the level of equity in the distribution of that element within a second distribution considered, such as population or space.

The model index used was the Generalized Entropy Index derived from the Gini Index.

The entropy index measures order, disorder, randomness inside a distribution.

The generalized entropy index is a general formula for measuring redundancy in data.

The redundancy can be viewed as inequality, lack of diversity, non-randomness, compressibility, or segregation in the data.

The primary use is for income inequality.

It is equal to the definition of redundancy in information theory that is based on Shannon entropy which is also called the Theil index (TT) in income inequality research.

Completely “diverse” data has no redundancy so that GE=0, so that it increases in the opposite direction of a diversity index. It increases with order rather than disorder, so it is a negated measure of entropy.

Through concentration indices we can iden-

tify imbalances within the system, related to their field of reference.

If we consider an index of concentration for each system category is possible to identify in which areas are generally much greater disparities and then focus the analysis in the latter.

Open systems tend to progress in the direction of increasing entropy. In Isolated or closed systems, entropy never decreases.

The concentration may be related to the concept of entropy, entropy of the high level reached by the system in a given area indicates a high level of disorder in which a high concentration of a particular good is distributed among many elements of the system.

Higher is the entropy level, more the systems is in a status of disorder, there is more movement and exchanges. If we apply this concept to a city system, we can consider entropy as an indicator in consume increasing, more trades, an increasing in material flows. But more entropy means also less available energy for the future, less future trades, less species survival possibilities.

The concept of entropy pose a limit to the system sustainable “development”. The development concept itself is by definition the growth of the city system and produce an increasing of entropy level, constantly over times.

Use of materials and energy with a low entropy level could help our cities to maintain a “sustainable equilibrium” of the entropy level.

Entropy reveals the energetic inefficiency level of an open system, negative entropy imported from the system’s outside helps the system to regulate itself.

If the system is closed, increases in entropy correspond to irreversible changes in a system. We can consider the whole world as a semi-closed system, as it exchanges energy with the solar system but not materials. (Rifkin)

Systemic City Analysis

53

The Generalized Entropy Index

Formula

GE Waste / Area GE Animals / Species GE Energy / Area

GE Public Services / Area

%

GE Public Order / Area GE Health / Population

GE People / Income SCA Detecting indices, Generalized Entropy index application 54

Correlation Coefficient

SCA application

In statistics, dependence refers to any statistical relationship between two random variables or two sets of data. Correlation refers to any of a broad class of statistical relationships involving dependence.

Familiar examples of dependent phenomena include the correlation between the physical statures of parents and their offspring, and the correlation between the demand for a product and its price.

Correlations are useful because they can indicate a predictive relationship that can be exploited in practice. For example, an electrical utility may produce less power on a mild day based on the correlation between electricity demand and weather. In this example there is a causal relationship, because extreme weather causes people to use more electricity for heating or cooling; however, statistical dependence is not sufficient to demonstrate the presence of such a causal relationship.

Formally, dependence refers to any situation in which random variables do not satisfy a mathematical condition of probabilistic independence. In loose usage, correlation can refer to any departure of two or more random variables from independence, but technically it refers to any of several more specialized types of relationship between mean values. There are several correlation coefficients, often denoted ρ or r, measuring the degree of correlation. The most common of these is the Pearson correlation coefficient, which is sensitive only to a linear relationship between two variables (which may exist even if one is a nonlinear function of the other). Other correlation coefficients have been developed to be more robust than the Pearson correlation — that is, more sensitive to nonlinear relationships.

The correlation coefficient allows us to define a statistical relationship between the selected indicators. It does not indicate a direct relationship of cause and effect.

Based on the correlation coefficients can be identified pairs of indicators on which to continue the process of analysis.

The spatial analysis of the single indicator allows us to understand the trends over time and compare the different neighborhoods and their evolutions. The comparison in time between two types of data allows to understand if the two indicators have a similar behavior. The maps may show two or more contextual indicators at a time and give us the possibility of a direct graphic comparison.

In statistics, the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient is a measure of the correlation (linear dependence) between two variables X and Y, giving a value between +1 and −1 inclusive. It is widely used in the sciences as a measure of the strength of linear dependence between two variables. It was developed by Karl Pearson from a similar but slightly different idea introduced by Francis Galton in the 1880s.

The correlation coefficient is sometimes called “Pearson’s r.”

Systemic City Analysis

55

SCA Correlation Coefficient application examples

SCA Correlation coefficient between some of the indicators

Category: Economy Indicator 139: Average disposable household income Unit Measure: 1000â&#x201A;Ź / Category: Economy Indicator 198: % Houses Rented Unit Measure: %

Household income/ % Houses rented 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2002

2003

2004

2005

Household income

2006

2007

2008

% Houses rented

Category: Economy Indicator 141: total employment Unit Measure: Number of people / Category: Culture Indicator 222: number of crime reports

Employment / Crime reports 350.000 300.000 250.000 200.000 150.000 100.000 50.000 0 2002

2003

2004

Employment

56

2005

2006

2007

Number of crime reports

2008

Neighborhood Analysis At the base of the system concept, there is the possibility of analysis and control of the overall system. The control can be done within certain limits, determined by the physical limits boundaries chosen to define the system, ethical limits on privacy and freedom of the population and uncertainty.

The main component of the urban system is indeed the city population, the actions we perform every day affect positively or negatively on the behavior of the system.

To control the urban system so it would be necessary to analyze and monitor continuously the behavior of citizens, the people placed under close observation could discover morally bound to follow the rules that govern the system. A distributed control network, however, should actively involve the citizens in the dual role of controlled / controller. The incentive to self-control comes from an increase in welfare that affects the entire population, and the possibility of feedback showing the constant improvement of the habits of the other citizen.

The interest for the common good should overpower the habits imposed by todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s

individualistic, consumerist.

The system must then appeal to the sense of belonging of the individual to the community, accessible through social cohesion.

Feeling member of a community is difficult if the frame of reference is the entire urban system, in the modern metropolis sense of belonging develops only in areas which may be smaller such as school, church, sports or voluntary associations, etc. . The wider geographical area in which citizen can identify with, is their own neighborhood, so projects involving single neighborhood awaken this sense of belonging, leading to socializing and community welfare. The community could be also an active part of the data collection, in the holistic analysis, and design solutions. In addition, the possible comparison between the districts analyzed, significantly affects the residents clearly showing their internal differences and possible improvements to the urban environment already done by others.

The consumer citizen becomes an active part of the democratic process, responsible and conscious subjects as the role it plays in society. The opportunities for participation provided by the system, improves if most citizens are supported by a communication network system suitable for the purpose, that adapts and reflects the structure of the city itself. Sharing and access SCA Neighborhoods / Administrators consultancy

Systemic City Analysis

57

> Example of a policy map in the field of living, living environment and economy, work and income, derived from the report Assisted Living: ontmoetingsplekken in woonservice gebied Oud-Charlois, een instrumentarium, Veldacademie 2010.

Ligp

laat

oofd

th Grien

Pons erpad

at tra

at ëls

at ps tra t aa

Van

tr.

Slo tbo om s

Krom mmee Zand weg w straat

Drierie emorgenm str.

Lepela laarsingel

at

Eksterstraat Fazzan zaantstraa t

Korhaanstraat

do (Pr

aa

sam (Pr

sp pr wo

on (Pr

ge

Lepelaarsingel

Roerdo rdompl mplaan a

t

t

ve

Zanglijjssterstraa Zanglijst Z erstraat rst t Kromm mee Zandweg

100m

SL

U

aaatt

schaal: 1: 5000

GE

w

Korhaanstraa

an

asw

Pa

f

w straat

Fazantstraat Fa

Alb l a tro sla

Mezen-

Tap a uitstraa

MezzenM Mezenhoff

Wiel W ieelew eewaa waal wa alstra strraaaat st at

DORPS PSW WEEEG G

t

Aals Aa llsc scch ho ollv lve verst raat

aa

Boomk B mkl kle llev ever ersst str. tr.

str

Win nte ter k n ko ingst rr.

Ta lin tr gs Alb osp Alba ttra ad at

Boerg ergoe oens oen ne evliet li

B rgoensev Boe vlililiet

Krom K me Z Wiig andw gb bo olld eg dssttrra d

Fu FFuu uut uts tstra sttrraaat at

en

ge /e v (St Pro

eid

ho

M

Korhaanstraat K

anst

ez

de

IN

Rood R oodb o borst orstsstraa traatt

Nachtegaalplein Nach Na N achtegaalplein alplein

M

Bre

Korh Ko haanstra

raat mst

Wul ulp pstr.

Tapuitstraat

raat

tr.

Fazantstraat

els

Nach ac tega egaa g alstr lstr..

Ze ge ns tra at

r.

stra at

Po m K St are ou l d te e str . st r Bo er g oe ns e

Slotboom Slo otb boom boo m plei plein

Zwaluw Z wst stra r at

rst

Spechtstraat

Sp erw e

ng

za

ild

W

Kaatttee

Meerkoetstraat Mee

Lepelaarsingel

td u es W Ze ge ns tra at

Sch hilp Bo i pe roo er rtst go raat en se vli et erg oe ns ev lilie t

Bo De Qu ack str st traa at

Bu B uiizeerd rrdsstr traaat at

Stteerns Ster nstr traa aaatt

Slot boo

Jaer svel tsst str t

Van n Diees st stssttr raaaatt

Jae rsv straeltat

Spu

Zuid hoek

Nieeu uween hoo rnst raat

errm man sstra att

str.

Grutto Grut G Gr tostr traa aat

Lan

Akk

erstrr.

land

Grutttos Gru tostraa ra t

Ar en ds we g

Bou Bouw ouwm uwm mans anstr traat aat

Zaai

Port

dm

Ver boo mst raat at

k hoe

Wolph aerts boc

Peen nd n drreecch httssttrra aaatt

f

Nieu N wen hoor nssttra raat

k Va ijc sd Ever V sd

er Ev

ho ne

Zuid

K La aten ge d nd rec ijk ht se

FF.Be kker e str.

Port rtla land straat

• p

f

Verb rbo om stra at

Ro ock ckkaan anje strrraaaa je st at at

Kw art

Baakkk kke kerrssttr raaaatt

Veerrb bo oom straat

tra

m Cle t

ss tra a Cle m en

Gro ndh eren strra att

Gro n Kaa dheren tts d baan baa aan an n ijk

ikad e

Plom kade Spui

Oostv tvo oo oorrn rn nssse sstttrraaa aaatt ee--

AA

M

n Zo

Pllo om perrt tssttrr aat

rt roo ilpe str.

Sch

N EI PL EL NN U ST

Ha bs bu rg aat raa ra str sttra ensseesMa aa oeen go t xim oeeerrg Bo im iliiaa an str aa t

DO RPS WE G

ks

en

st

Do

ra at

Sint-Janshaven

Sint-Janshaven

Bijlstraat

per tstr aat

straat

• cl

Karel Kare eell de Stouteplein Stouteplei outeplein

ho

Van n Bl omm este ijnst r.

Gou uw

an

ge

Lent WAA straaaat t LHA VEN O.Z Z.

kla

Ho

Waa

Do

eg

Na te t rs we

N

atw stra

Sch ulp weg

n

tse

SStru uiite tenw eg

l

ave

rd

Van Bllo om mest s eij jn nwe g

Waa

ofd

am"

Do

Vo orn sev liet

Oud enh oorn stra at

Huism maan straat

eho

erd

AA

at tra rts

e ha

isi s e

el g geel ng sin sin

g

Schulp p plein

olp

r lo

Beekkk B kkeerrsst trraaaat at

Baar end reg tsttr aaatt

Plom per tstraa t

Cha

W

t

olp

W

Kerkk

Voo rnssees sttrr.

lstraa

of tsh er ha

t ch bo

58

DO KL

rts ae ph ol

Rie iettd dijijkk

Vaan V nB Blom omm eesst ste te teijijn ijjn nweg nw eg

chts

Rott

ash

laan okkla Do D

AAN

W

Many subjects are involved in this analysis, such as economy and health, in order to understand what citizens really needs and improve their life quality.

fd Hoo

avveen av en N .z .z. z.

K Plom orte perrt tssttrr..

• ov

dre

hip

erf

esw Me

KL DO

t

aten

msc

Ma

Charloisse h l i H Hoofd f

se e kad

»» Observation: on-site validation of data.

iss

lois

ns Frraa

»» GPS-tracking: provides insight into the space-time use of individuals in the urban environment.

de ska

»» Visual stimulus method: method for data collection in which photo’s are used during a conversation.

ent egri Kerk

»» Interviews: with contact points, residents and actors for deepening topics.

lo

e

ar

3e K

too

ppe ip

Sch

n en

Spui u stra at

A similar case of new urban analysis has been developed is the Veldacademie in Rotterdam. Veldacademie is a collaboration project between the City of Rotterdam end the Delft University of Technology.

The project started in 2009 and is getting bigger every year. In the Living Fields Analysis a huge work with people has been done

ar

Ch

s "S

ad mp r Blo

Bon

Sp pu uiissttrr. .

Living fields analysis

Ch

Dokhaven D okhavven n Park Park Par

Vla

to information by the individual nodes of the network must be easy for everybody in order to create a network of citizens aware.

The nodes of the network define the urban structure of the system, the central government can be considered invariant organization governed by the laws of individual States and the European regulatory system.

The sharing of information and values be​​ tween the structure and organization may lead to improvement of the laws that define the organization itself. The objective of the common good can therefore be pursued with the participation of all actors of the urban system. Active participation should be considered as added value and be pursued as a primary objective for citizens and administrators.

Pri pol

Inleiding leefvelden analyse

Livingfield analysis sample map Livingfield analysis: students performing the analysis

T

pa zo

> Legend

GIS software A geographic information system is a system designed to capture, store, manipulate, analyze, manage, and present all types of geographically referenced data.

Understanding the spatial distribution of data from phenomena that occur in space constitute today a great challenge to the elucidation of central questions in many areas of knowledge, be it in health, in environment, in geology, in agronomy, among many others.

Such studies are becoming more and more common, due to the availability of low cost Geographic Information System (GIS) with user-friendly interfaces.

These systems allow the spatial visualization of variables such as individual populations, quality of life indexes or company sales in a region using maps.

To achieve that it is enough to have a database and a geographic base (like a map of the municipalities), and the GIS is capable of presenting a colored map that allows the visualization of the spatial pattern of the phenomenon.

The emphasis of Spatial Analysis is to measure properties and relationships, taking into account the spatial localization of the phenomenon under study in a direct way.

The central idea is to incorporate space into the analysis to be made.

Representation of GIS spatial analysis

private enterprises for explaining events, predicting outcomes, and planning strategies.

What goes beyond a GIS is a spatial data infrastructure (SDI), a concept that has no such restrictive boundaries.

Therefore, in a general sense, the term describes any information system that integrates, stores, edits, analyzes, shares and displays geographic information for informing decision making.

GIS in agriculture GIS is used in a variety of agricultural applications such as managing crop yields, monitoring crop rotation techniques, and projecting soil loss for individual farms or entire agricultural regions.

GIS 3D data representation

GIS technology integrates common database operations such as query and statistical analysis with the unique visualization and geographic analysis benefits offered by maps. These abilities distinguish GIS from other information systems and make it valuable to a wide range of public and Systemic City Analysis

59

GIS in business A GIS is a tool for managing business information of any kind according to where itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s located. You can keep track of where customers are, site businesses, optimize sales territories, and model retail spending patterns. A GIS gives you that extra advantage to make you and your company more competitive and successful.

A GIS enables you to better understand and evaluate your data by creating graphic displays using information stored in your database. With a GIS, you can change the display of your geographic data by changing the symbols, colors, or values in the database tables.

GIS in electric/gas utilities Cities and utilities use GIS every day to help them map and inventory systems, track maintenance, monitor regulatory compliance, or model distribution analysis, transformer analysis, and load analysis.

GIS concentration levels display

riety of applications. You too can use GIS to study geologic features, analyze soils and strata, assess seismic information, or create 3-dimensional displays of geographic features.

GIS in hydrology You can use GIS to study drainage systems, assess groundwater, and visualize watersheds, and in many other hydrologic applications.

GIS in the environment

GIS in land use planning

GIS is used every day to help protect the environment. As an environmental professional, you can use GIS to produce maps, inventory species, measure environmental impact, or trace pollutants. The environmental applications for GIS are almost endless.

People use GIS to help visualize and plan the land use needs of cities, regions, or even national governments.

GIS in forestry Today, managing forests is becoming a more complex and demanding challenge.

With GIS, foresters can easily see the forest as an ecosystem and manage it responsibly.

GIS in geology Geologists use GIS every day in a wide va60

GIS in local government People in local government use GIS every day to help them solve problems. Often the data collected and used by one agency or department can be used by another.

GIS in mapping Mapping is an essential function of a GIS. People in a variety of professions are using GIS to help others understand geographic data. You donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t have to be a skilled cartographer to make maps with a GIS.

GIS in the military Military analysts and cartographers use GIS in a variety of applications such as creating base maps, assessing terrain, and aiding in tactical decisions.

GIS in risk management A GIS can help with risk management and analysis by showing you which areas will be prone to natural or man-made disasters.

Once identified, preventive measures can be developed that deal with the different scenarios.

GIS in Site Planning People around the world use GIS to help them locate sites for new facilities or locate alternate sites for existing facilities.

GIS in transportation GIS can be used to help you manage transportation infrastructure or help you manage your logistical problems. Whether monitoring rail systems and road conditions or finding the best way to deliver your goods or services, GIS can help you.

GIS in the water/wastewater industry People in the water/wastewater industry use GIS with the planning, engineering, operations, maintenance, finance, and administration functions of their water/wastewater networks.

How GIS Works A GIS stores information about the world as a collection of thematic layers that can be linked together by geography. This simple but extremely powerful and versatile concept has proven invaluable for solving many

real-world problems from tracking delivery vehicles, to recording details of planning applications, to modeling global atmospheric circulation.

The major challenges we face in the world today overpopulation, pollution, deforestation, natural disasters, have a critical geographic dimension.

Workflow Input.

Before geographic data can be used in a GIS, the data must be converted into a suitable digital format. The process of converting data from paper maps into computer files is called digitizing.

Modern GIS technology can automate this process fully for large projects using scanning technology; smaller jobs may require some manual digitizing (using a digitizing table). Today many types of geographic data already exist in GIS-compatible formats.

These data can be obtained from data suppliers and loaded directly into a GIS. Manipulation It is likely that data types required for a particular GIS project will need to be transformed or manipulated in some way to make them compatible with your system.

For example, geographic information is available at different scales (detailed street centerline files; less detailed census boundaries; and postal codes at a regional level).

Before this information can be integrated, it must be transformed to the same scale (degree of detail or accuracy). This could be a temporary transformation for display purposes or a permanent one required for analysis. GIS technology offers many tools for manipulating spatial data and for weeding out unnecessary data.

Systemic City Analysis

61

GIS Spatial analysis

Query and Analysis

Visualization

Once you have a functioning GIS containing your geographic information, you can begin to ask simple questions such as

For many types of geographic operation the end result is best visualized as a map or graph. Maps are very efficient at storing and communicating geographic information.

While cartographers have created maps for millennia, GIS provides new and exciting tools to extend the art and science of cartography. Map displays can be integrated with reports, three-dimensional views, photographic images, and other output such as multimedia.

Who owns the land parcel on the corner?

How far is it between two places?

Where is land zoned for industrial use?

And analytical questions such as Where are all the sites suitable for building new houses?

What is the dominant soil type for oak forest?

If I build a new highway here, how will traffic be affected?

GIS provides both simple point-and-click query capabilities and sophisticated analysis tools to provide timely information to managers and analysts alike. GIS technology really comes into its own when used to analyze geographic data to look for patterns and trends and scenarios.

62

GIS SCA application

Geographic References

Make Better Decisions

Geographic information contains either an explicit geographic reference, such as a latitude and longitude or national grid coordinate, or an implicit reference such as an address, postal code, census tract name, forest stand identifier, or road name. An automated process called geocoding is used to create explicit geographic references (multiple locations) from implicit references (descriptions such as addresses). These geographic references allow you to locate features, such as a business or forest stand, and events, such as an earthquake, on the earth’s surface for analysis.

The old adage “better information leads to better decisions” is as true for GIS as it is for other information systems. A GIS, however, is not an automated decision making system but a tool to query, analyze, and map data in support of the decision making process.

GIS technology has been used to assist in tasks such as presenting information at planning inquiries, helping resolve territorial disputes, and siting pylons in such a way as to minimize visual intrusion.

GIS can be used to help reach a decision about the location of a new housing development that has minimal environmental impact, is located in a low-risk area, and is close to a population center. The information can be presented succinctly and clearly in the form of a map and accompanying report, allowing decision makers to focus on the real issues rather than trying to understand the data. Because GIS products can be produced quickly, multiple scenarios can be evaluated efficiently and effectively.

Vector and Raster Models Geographic information systems work with two fundamentally different types of geographic models - the “vector” model and the “raster” model. In the vector model, information about points, lines, and polygons is encoded and stored as a collection of x,y coordinates. The location of a point feature, such as a bore hole, can be described by a single x,y coordinate. Linear features, such as roads and rivers, can be stored as a collection of point coordinates. Polygonal features, such as sales territories and river catchments, can be stored as a closed loop of coordinates.

The vector model is extremely useful for describing discrete features, but less useful for describing continuously varying features such as soil type or accessibility costs for hospitals. The raster model has evolved to model such continuous features. A raster image comprises a collection of grid cells rather like a scanned map or picture. Both the vector and raster models for storing geographic data have unique advantages and disadvantages. Modern GISs are able to handle both models.

ArcGIS ArcGIS and its predecessors, ArcView and Arc/Info, are the most popular GIS software suites at the time of this writing. The Arc suite of software has a larger user base and higher annual unit sales than any other competing product. ESRI, the developer of ArcGIS, has a world-wide presence. ESRI has been producing GIS software since the early 1980s, and ArcGIS is its most recent and well-developed integrated GIS package.

ArcGIS is designed to provide a large set of geoprocessing procedures, from data entry through most forms of hardcopy or digital data output.

As such, ArcGIS is a large, complex, sophisticated product. It supports multiple data formats, many data types and structures,

Systemic City Analysis

63

and literally thousands of possible operations that may be applied to spatial data. It is not surprising that substantial training is required to master the full capabilities of Arc/Info.

ArcGIS provides wide flexibility in how we conceptualize and model geographic features.

Geographers and other GIS-related scientists have conceived of many ways to think about, structure, and store information about spatial objects. ArcGIS provides for the broadest available selection of these representations.

% %

%

%

%

% Space

SCA software application development The SCA application will be developed as an add-in for ArcGIS Viewer basic license, in order to maximize the potential of modern architecture GIS. The map design goal is to communicate the information acquired in a simple and user friendly configuration.

The maps produced by ArcMap will be then analyzed and elaborated graphically for ease of comprehension.

Time

Context GIS SCA ArcGIS extension features: Space, Time and Context analysis

64

Cloud Computing The SCA system is designed to be widely shared in all its components. It was created a platform for online collaboration,based on Google Docs, which allows all those involved in the project to collaborate remotely in real time.

Google Docs is Google’s office suite.

Documents, spreadsheets, presentations can be created with Google Docs, imported through the web interface, or sent via email. Documents can be saved to a user’s local computer in a variety of formats .

Documents can be tagged and archived for organizational purposes. 1 GB of storage is included for free. Google Docs serves as a collaborative tool for editing amongst in real time. Documents can be shared, opened, and edited by multiple users at the same time.

Users can usually see where in the document or file a particular editor is currently writing, since in most of the suite’s products, an editor’s current position is represented with an editor-specific color/cursor.

Google Docs is one of many cloud computing document-sharing services. The majority of document-sharing services require user fees, whereas Google Docs is free.

Its popularity amongst businesses is growing due to enhanced sharing features and accessibility.

In addition, Google Docs has enjoyed a rapid rise in popularity among students and educational institutions.

The concept of cloud computing to which we refer to, is not so much the sharing of computing power as the ability to share knowledge of each through the use of this

SCA Google Docs Work platform

new tools.

In the SCA working platform takes place the list of indicators, accompanied by definitions, units, literary references and links to data resources.

In another tab of this platform, there is a cataloged library of documents on which the indicators are based, categorized by title, author, year, tag, and a benchmark.

Mendeley, build your own library The same collection of texts is found in the library created on Mendeley. By using this service you can store and share large amounts of documents with your team. The documents that have been uploaded, are available to be viewed by others organized by topics, so as to facilitate the consultation of the collection.

Systemic City Analysis

65

Mendeley is a desktop and web program for managing and sharing research papers, discovering research data and collaborating online.

It combines Mendeley Desktop, a PDF and reference management application (available for Windows, Mac and Linux) with Mendeley Web, an online social network for researchers. Mendeley requires the user to store all data on its servers.

Database creation The most expensive work, in terms of time, was the collection of data related to the city of Rotterdam. An analysis as the SCA requires an enormous amount of information about the city. The municipality of Rotterdam has helped by providing some of the GIS data in their possession, the rest of the information was collected from the statistics department of the municipality of Rotterdam, and the databases of the European Environmental Agency and Eurostat.

The filing system used by European entities is complex and the amount of information included in their database is huge. An indepth sorting of the data was necessary in order to find useful information for analysis.

The formats in which these data are organized are numerous and often different. In some cases, for example, air quality data, have been found in a GIS data set ready for use. To complete the SCA database, was required to work on the rest of the data conversion, starting with tables arranged in different ways, we have developed a unique system of classification that has been used in building a geodatabase for analysis.

The data included in the SCA have different references, according to their origin. Some data are national, others affect the whole city, and one part covers the individual neighborhoods. In order to complete the database with data on the specific area a dedicated statistical survey is needed.

SCA Database Categories

Energy Happiness

Urban metabolism

Health

Air Quality

SCA Mobility

Water Quality Database

%

Ecosystem Species

66

Demography Economy

Culture

Application development

interest that should be considered for the calculation of the indicators.

This allows the system to be continuously updated, but also allows the addition of new indicators and new data for analysis.

The logic of the system is essentially based on the calculation of the indicators on the basis of the data contained within the geoThe SCA application will obtains data to be database and then on display in the map analyzed in a central database, georeferresults. enced, upgradable and fully configurable The application will be built entirely on. NET through an XML configuration file. platform, framework 3.5 and Visual Studio The application will use the data from the database, calculates and displays the status 2010 development environment.

The programming language used is C #. of the indicators of interest that are then The application will be distributed as an displayed in ArcMap. add-in for ArcMap with a basic license, In addition to the feature calculation and display of indicators, one of the key features so no set-up necessary, but it is installed through add-in manager integrated into of the architecture of the application is the ArcMap. complete adaptability to any type of data, thanks to the presence of a configuration file in XML. With the configuration file it is possible to select between several fields in the tables of the geodatabase and map the values of SCA Database schema

Systemic City Analysis

67

Rotterdam Rotterdam is the second-largest city in the Netherlands and one of the largest ports in the world. Starting as a dam on the Rotte river, built in 1270, Rotterdam has grown into a major international commercial centre. Its strategic location at the RhineMeuse-Scheldt delta on the North Sea and at the heart of a massive rail, road, air and inland waterway distribution system extending throughout Europe deliver the reason that Rotterdam is often called the Gateway to Europe.

Located in the Province of South Holland, Rotterdam is found in the west of the Netherlands and at the south end of the Randstad. The population of the city proper was 616,003 in November 2011. The population of the greater Rotterdam area, called “Rotterdam-Rijnmond” or just “Rijnmond”, is around 1.3 million people. Rotterdam is one of Europe’s most vibrant and multicultural cities. It is known for its university (Erasmus), its cutting-edge architecture, and lively cultural life.

The largest port in Europe and still one of the busiest ports in the world, the port of Rotterdam was the world’s busiest port from 1962 to 2004, at which point it was surpassed by Shanghai. Rotterdam’s commercial and strategic importance is based on its location near the mouth of the NieuErasmus Bridge

Rotterdam map - 1839

we Maas (New Meuse), one of the channels in the delta formed by the Rhine and Meuse on the North Sea. These rivers lead directly into the centre of Europe, including the industrial Ruhr region.

History »» Approx. 1250 Dam in the river Rotte; originated as a fishing village »» Approx. 1323 The Port begins to develop with construction work on old Port »» 1340 Count William IV grants Rotterdam town privileges »» Late 16th century New expansion to the port (population: 20,000) »» Mid 19th century Rotterdam’s population reaches 100,000 »» 1872 The opening New Waterway »» 1878 First permanent cross-river connection with »» Left Maas Bank (Willemsbrug) »» Early 20th century Expansion of the

68

port and industry; population grows to 400,000 »» 14 May 1940 Bombardment destroys the town centre of Rotterdam »» 1953 Opening of the Lijnbaan, the first pedestrian shopping precinct in Europe »» 1962 Rotterdam becomes the largest port in the world »» 1964 Population peak of 731,564 »» 1968 The first underground line opened »» 1974 Urban renewal begins »» 1996 The opening of The Erasmus Bridge (nickname ‘the Swan’), a 790-meter cable stayed bridge linking the north and south of Rotterdam »» 2001 Rotterdam European Capital of Culture

Port

»» 2008 Start of construction of the Maasvlakte 2 project

Rotterdam has the largest port in Europe, with the rivers Meuse and Rhine providing excellent access to the hinterland upstream reaching to Basel, Switzerland and into France.

In 2004 Shanghai took over as the world’s busiest port. In 2006, Rotterdam was the world’s seventh largest container port in terms of twenty-foot equivalent units (TEU) handled.

The port’s main activities are petrochemical industries and general cargo handling and transshipment.

From Rotterdam goods are transported by ship, river barge, train or road.

In 1872, the Nieuwe Waterweg (‘New Waterway’) opened, a ship canal constructed to keep the city and port of Rotterdam accessible to seafaring vessels as the natural Meuse-Rhine channels silted up.

The canal proper measures approximately 6.5 kilometers from the western tips of its protruding dams to the Maeslantkering (‘Maeslant Barrier’). Many maps, however, include the Scheur as part of the Nieuwe Waterweg, leading to a length of approximately 19.5 kilometres.

»» 2009 Rotterdam European Youth Capital

Conurbations Rotterdam is located at the southern end of the Randstad. Having a population of 6.7 million, the Randstad is the sixth-largest metropolitan area in Europe.

The southern part of the Randstad (i.e. the part located in the Province of South Holland) is called the “South Wing” (Zuidvleugel). Including Leiden, The Hague, Zoetermeer, Delft, Vlaardingen, Schiedam, Capelle aan den IJssel, Spijkenisse and Dordrecht, the Zuidvleugel has a population of around 3 million.

At the heart of the Zuidvleugel are the conurbations surrounding The Hague and Rotterdam. They are close enough to be almost a single conurbation with a population of about 2.5 million. They share the Rotterdam The Hague Airport and a light rail system called RandstadRail.

Systemic City Analysis

Randstad conurbation

69

Covering 105 square kilometers, the port of Rotterdam now stretches over a distance of 40 kilometers.

It consists of the city center’s historic harbor area, including Delfshaven; the Lloydkwartier; the Maashaven/Rijnhaven/ Feijenoord complex; the harbors around Nieuw-Mathenesse; Waalhaven; Vondelingenplaat; Eemhaven; Botlek; Europoort, situated along the Calandkanaal, Nieuwe Waterweg, Scheur and the reclaimed Maasvlakte area, which projects into the North Sea. The construction of a second Maasvlakte received initial political approval in 2004, aiming for the first ship to anchor in 2013.

Rotterdam in 2014 The city of Rotterdam aim to became a sustainability capital, there are several goals planned to be accomplished by 2014.

1. Being a front runner in reducing the CO2 emissions of the city and the port-industrial Zuidvleugel conurbation

area 2. Improving energy efficiency 3. Making a transition towards sustainable energy and biomass as feedstock 4. Stimulating sustainable mobility and transport 5. Reducing noise nuisance and improving air quality 6. Making the city greener 7. Increasing sustainable investments and advancing sustainable products and services 8. Increasing the basis for sustainability and anchoring sustainability in education and research 9. Adapting to the consequences of climate change 10. Promoting sustainable area development

Sustainable Rotterdam Some interventions planned are: »» Agreement with at least 1 consortium to approach at least 10% of private homes in Rotterdam leading to 30-50% reduction in CO2 per home »» 160,000 m2 additional green roofs and gardens »» Implementing a project for smart grids in homes and a project in which homeowners invest in a collective solar energy generation system (self-supply) »» Extra cycle paths linked to the main cycle path network in the city »» Replacement of at least 4,000 petrol fuelled scooters by electric scooters »» Heating the city with residual heat from the port Agreements with RCI partners and businesses to stimulate biomass applications, leading to a 0.6 Mton reduction in CO2 emissions by 2015 »» Development of a set of instruments

70

(SlimBereikaar – SmartAccessible, stimulating the availability and use of car sharing, Inner City Service, European project Ecostars and water transport) to promote mobility management to and from the inner city »» 1000 (re)charging points throughout Rotterdam for registered electric vehicles »» Agreements with schools and businesses regarding continuing and extending the project Schools for Sustainability »» Drawing up a (city council) strategic knowledge agenda for sustainability »» Floating buildings in the Nassau Harbour »» Noise control plan »» Increasing the market for local products Selling local products in the city’s canteens

City sustainability plans and commitments

Rotterdam Sustainable Port Milieudefensie (Friends of the Earth Netherlands) and the Port of Rotterdam Authority are presenting the ‘Agreement on a Sustainable Maasvlakte’. This year both parties are having a study carried out to determine whether and how the emissions of fine dust, NOX, SO2 and CO2 originating from activities of the current Maasvlakte and the Second Maasvlakte can be reduced.

The joint ambition is a reduction of airpolluting substances by 10% as of 2020. In view of this result Milieudefensie will refrain from taking legal measures against the construction and use of the Second Maasvlakte.

A part of the agreement is a study into the most effective measures for realizing the emissions reduction. This includes such things as the use of shore-based electricity for sea-going vessels which are berthed in the port, the use of port dues as an incentive for shippers to invest in environmental measures, and increasing the environmental zone on the Maasvlakte so that only cleaner trucks are welcome in other parts of the port area.

Some 21,000 deaths in the Netherlands, or 14% of the total, are caused each year by environmental pollution, according to a report published by the World Health Organization.

Around 3,600 people die due to air pollution, which causes cardiovascular disease, cancer, respiratory complaints and accidents.

Systemic City Analysis

71

Rotterdam

SCA

Table of figures: Data list Indicator 1: Indicator 13: Indicator 2: Indicator 3: Indicator 4: Indicator 5: Indicator 10: Indicator 36: Indicator 24: Indicator 31: Indicator 32: Indicator 33: Indicator 50: Indicator 51: Indicator 52: Indicator 53: Indicator 54: Indicator 55: Indicator 56: Indicator 57: Indicator 58: Indicator 60: Indicator 61: Indicator 62: Other figures: Indicator 36: Indicator 65: Indicator 64: Indicator 75: Indicator 76: Indicator 77: Indicator 78: Indicator 79: Indicator 81: Indicator 82: Indicator 83: Indicator 87: Indicator 88: Indicator 89: Indicator 90: Indicator 91: Indicator 92: Indicator 93: Indicator 94: Other figures: Other figures: Indicator 95: Indicator 97: 72

O3 - Ground level Ozone Non-methane volatile organic compounds - NMVOCs Nitrogen oxides -NOX Particulate matter - PM10 Sulphur dioxide SO2 Ammonia - NH3 Carbon monoxide - CO Water consumption Consumption of certain foodstuffs per inhabitant Import of goods and services Import of goods and services Total sales of pesticides Generation of hazardous waste - Agriculture, forestry and fishing Generation of hazardous waste - Mining and quarrying Generation of hazardous waste - Manufacturing Generation of hazardous waste - Electricity, gas, steam ...

Generation of hazardous waste - Water supply, sewerage, ...

Generation of hazardous waste - Construction Generation of hazardous waste - Services Generation of hazardous waste - Wholesale of waste and scrap Generation of hazardous waste - households Waste incineration Waste recycling Landfill Waste treatment regional Municipal Generated Waste Greenhouse gas emissions, base year 1990 Noise Pollution Final energy consumption - Industry Final energy consumption - Transport Final energy consumption - Residential Final energy consumption - Agriculture Final energy consumption - Services Final energy consumption of petroleum products Final energy consumption of natural gas Final energy consumption of electricity Primary production of natural gas Primary production of nuclear energy Primary production of renewable energy Renewable energy primary production: biomass Renewable energy primary production: hydro Renewable energy primary production: geothermal Renewable energy primary production: wind Renewable energy primary production: solar energy Share of electricity generated from renewable resources Energy consumption by fuel Share of renewable energy in gross final energy consumption Energy dependence

Air Quality

Urban metabolism

Energy

74 74 75 76 77 78 79 79 80 81 81 81 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 83 83 83 83 84 84 85 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 88 88 88

Other figures: Other figures: Indicator 124: Indicator 102: Indicator 121: Indicator 122: Indicator 117: Indicator 161: Indicator 165: Indicator 168: Indicator 200: Indicator 201: Indicator 202: Indicator 139: Indicator 138: Indicator 141: Indicator 162: Indicator 164: Indicator 198: Indicator 199: Indicator 214: Indicator 207: Indicator 211: Indicator 209: Indicator 213: Indicator 222: Indicator 217: Indicator 234: Indicator 237: Indicator 228: Indicator 231: Indicator 232: Indicator 247: Indicator 249: Indicator 239: Indicator 248: Indicator 256: Indicator 260: Indicator 270: Indicator 268: Indicator 269: Other figures: Indicator 282: Indicator 283: Indicator 285: Indicator 277:

EMAS registration 89 Organic farming 89 Rainfall in the reference year 89 % Natural Areas 90 Average temperature of warmest month 90 Ecosystem Average temperature of coldest month 90 Average living area in Urban Audit cities 90 Proportion in part-time employment 91 Proportion of households reliant upon social security

91 Proportion of companies gone bankrupt 91 Average annual rent for housing 92 Households in social housing 92 Average price for a house 92 Average disposable household income 93 Total population at working age 94 Economy Total employment 95 Number more than 1 year job seekers 96 Total number of welfare recipients 97 Houses rented 98 Houses owned 99 E-government on-line availability 100 Level of internet access - households 100 Students in tertiary education (ISCED 5-6) living in Urban Audit cities 100 Prop. of working age population qualified at level 1 or 2 ISCED 100 17 - 22 no qualification 101 Culture Number of crime reports 102 Number of education facilities 103 Moves to city during the last 2 years/moves out of the city during the last 2 years 103 Population growth 104 Population growth 105 Total number of households 106 Demography Density by neighborhood 107 Proportion of journeys to work by car or motor cycle 108 Proportion of journeys to work by foot 108 Number of stops of public transport per km2 108 Proportion of journeys to work by bicycle 108 Mobility Average time of journey to work 108 Available hospital beds 109 Infant mortality rate 109 Healthy life years 109 Obesity 109 Health Unhappiness 110 Freedom of the press 110 Depression level 110 Had a period of anxiety last year 110 People that are satisfied with their neighborhood 111 Happiness Correlation Coefficient Representation 112

%

Systemic City Analysis

73

Rotterdam SCA: Maps and Tables Air Quality Netherlands

13 Non-methane volatile organic compounds 250.000 200.000 150.000 Tonnes

100.000 50.000 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

+ Constant reduction

Category: Air Quality Indicator 13: Non-methane volatile organic compounds NMVOCs Unit Measure: t/year Definition: NMVOCs, important O3 precursors, are emitted from a large number of sources including paint application, road transport, dry-cleaning and other solvent uses. Certain NMVOC species, such as benzene (C6H6) and 1,3-butadiene, are directly hazardous to human health. Biogenic NMVOCs are emitted by vegetation, with amounts dependent on the species and on temperature.

Air Quality Neighborhood O3 - 2005

1 O3_2005 µg-m3 1521,3 - 2251,8

O3_2005 µg-m3 1521,3 - 2251,8 1336,4 - 1521,2 1199,3 - 1336,3

1336,4 - 1521,2 1199,3 - 1336,3

0

4.625

9.250

18.500

27.750

37.000 Meters

-

Category: Air Quality No recent data available Indicator 1: O3 - Ground level Ozone Unit Measure: µg/m³ Definition: Ground level Ozone is an atmospheric pollutant related indirectly to fossil engine emissions. It produce peroxyacetyl nitrates which are irritants. Is not possible to find precisely the source of Ozone because it moves following the air flows.

74

0

4.625

9.250

Air Quality Neighborhood

NOx - 2005

Nox-2005 Nox-2005

µg-m3

µg-m3 22,0 - 26,5 26,6 - 42,8

22,0 - 26,5

42,9 - 46,7

26,6 - 42,8 42,9 - 46,7

0

2

4.625

9.250

18.500

27.750

Nitrogen oxides

450.000 400.000 350.000 300.000 250.000 Tonnes

200.000 150.000 100.000 50.000 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

+ Constant reduction

NOx - 2008

37.000 Meters

Category: Air Quality Indicator 2: Nitrogen oxides NOX Unit Measure: µg/m3 or t/ year Definition: Nitrogen oxides are emitted during fuel combustion, such as by industrial facilities and the road transport sector. As with SO2, NOX contributes to acid deposition but also to eutrophication. Of the chemical species that comprise 0 4.625 NOX, it is NO2 that is associated with adverse affects on health, as high concentrations cause inflammation of the airways and reduced lung function. NOX also contributes to the formation of secondary inorganic particulate matter and tropospheric (groundlevel) ozone.

Nox_2008 Nox_2008 t/year

t/year

363,1 - 550,4 278,6 - 363,0 218,5 - 278,5

363,1 - 550,4

145,2 - 218,4 16,8 - 145,1

278,6 - 363,0 218,5 - 278,5 145,2 - 218,4 16,8 - 145,1 0

4.625

9.250

18.500

27.750

Systemic City Analysis

37.000 Meters

75

PM10 - 2005

Air Quality Neighborhood

3

Pm10-2005

Average per year µg-m3

Pm10-2005 27,257000

27,257001 - 32,144000 32,144001 - 34,143000

Average per year µg-m3 34,143001 - 34,639000 34,639001 - 34,864000

27,257000 27,257001 - 32,144000 32,144001 - 34,143000 34,143001 - 34,639000 34,639001 - 34,864000

0

4.625

9.250

18.500

27.750

37.000 Meters

Category: Air Quality Indicator 3: Particulate matter - PM10 Unit Measure: µg/m3 or t/year Definition: Annual average concentration of PM10 (Gg/year), in terms of potential to harm human health, PM is one of the most important pollutants as it penetrates into sensitive regions of the respiratory system. PM is emitted from many sources and is a complex heterogeneous mixture comprising both primary and secondary PM; primary PM is the fraction of PM that is emitted directly into the atmosphere, whereas secondary PM forms in the atmo0 NOX, 4.625 sphere following the oxidation and transformation of precursor gases (mainly SO2, NH3 and some volatile organic compounds (VOCs)).

- LN

ocalized problem o improvements

PM10 - 2008

Pm10_2008

Pm10_2008 t/year

t/year 77,6 - 112,2 43,1 - 77,5 33,7 - 43,0 13,3 - 33,6 3,4 - 13,2

77,6 - 112,2 43,1 - 77,5 33,7 - 43,0 13,3 - 33,6 3,4 - 13,2

76

0

4.625

9.250

18.500

27.750

37.000 Meters

9.250

SO2 - 2005

Air Quality Neighborhood

Average per year µg-m3 5,4 - 5,7

Average per year µg-m3 5,4 - 5,7

0

4

4.625

9.250

18.500

27.750

Sulphur oxides

80.000 70.000 60.000 50.000 40.000

Tonnes

30.000 20.000 10.000 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

37.000 Meters

Category: Air Quality Indicator 4: Sulphur dioxide SO2 Unit Measure: µg/m3 or t/ year Definition: Sulphur dioxide is emitted when fuels containing sulphur are burned. It contributes to acid deposition, the impacts of which can be significant, including 0 4.625 adverse effects on aquatic ecosystems in rivers and lakes, and damage to forests.

+ Constant reduction SOx - 2008

Sox_2008 tonnes 7,1 - 20,9 21,0 - 36,9 37,0 - 126,7

Sox_2008 tonnes 7,1 - 20,9 21,0 - 36,9 37,0 - 126,7

0

4.625

9.250

18.500

27.750

Systemic City Analysis

37.000 Meters

77

Air Quality Neighborhood

5

NH3 - 2008

Nh3_2008

Nh3_2008 tonnes

0,2 - 0,7

tonnes

0,8 - 7,6 7,7 - 14,8 14,9 - 23,7 23,8 - 39,2

0,2 - 0,7 0,8 - 7,6 7,7 - 14,8 14,9 - 23,7 23,8 - 39,2

0

4.625

9.250

18.500

27.750

Ammonia 180.000 160.000 140.000 120.000 100.000 Tonnes

80.000 60.000 40.000 20.000 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

78

37.000 Meters

Category: Air Quality Indicator 5: Ammonia - NH3 Unit Measure: t/year Definition: Ammonia, like NOX, contributes to both eutrophication and acidification. The vast majority of NH3 emissions â&#x20AC;&#x201D; around 94% in Europe â&#x20AC;&#x201D; come from the agricultural sector, from activities such as manure storage, 0 4.625 slurry spreading and the use of synthetic nitrogenous fertilizers.

9.250

Air Quality Neighborhood CO - 2008

10 CO_2008 t/year

CO_2008 t/year 696,7 - 835,4

696,7 - 835,4 557,9 - 696,6 419,1 - 557,8 50,1 - 419,0

557,9 - 696,6 10,1 - 50,0 2,5 - 10,0

419,1 - 557,8 50,1 - 419,0 10,1 - 50,0 2,5 - 10,0

0

4.625

9.250

18.500

27.750

37.000 Meters

Category: Air Quality Indicator 10: Carbon monoxide - CO Unit Measure: Âľg/m3 or t/year Definition: Carbon monoxide is produced as a result of fuel combustion. The road transport sector, businesses and households, and industry are important sources. Long-term exposure to low concentrations of CO can result in neurological problems and potential harm to unborn babies. Carbon monoxide can react with other pollutants to produce ground level ozone. Elevated levels of ozone can cause respiratory health problems and can lead to premature mortality.

0

Water Quality

18

Netherlands

Consumption of water per inhabitant

47,5

47 46,5 46 45,5 45

4.625

cubic metres per year

44,5

Category: Water Quality Indicator 36: Water consumption Unit Measure: m3 per year Definition: Consumption of water per inhabitant

+ Constant reduction

-N

o recent data available

44

Systemic City Analysis

79

80

0,000

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

180,000

1999

Meat - Total Cheese Processed tomatoes

Rice - Total

Drinking milk

Oranges

2002 Wheat Total

2001

2003

2005

Potatoes

Vegetable fats and oils

Meat Cattle

Common wheat

2004

2007

Sugar (equiv white sugar)

Apples

Meat Pigs

Durum wheat

2006

Wine (lt/head)

Grapes

Meat Poultry

Maize

2008

2009

24

Cereals (excluding rice)

2000

Consumption of certain foodstuffs per inhabitant (kg per capita)

Category: Urban Metabolism Indicator 24: Consumption of certain foodstuffs per inhabitant Unit Measure: kg per capita

Netherlands Urban metabolism 2010

Netherlands Urban metabolism

31

Category: Urban Metabolism Indicator 31: Import of goods and services Unit Measure: t/year

Imports of goods and services

30.000 25.000 20.000 15.000

Euro per inhabitant

-I

ncreasing resources consumption and dependence

10.000 5.000 0 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

32

Category: Urban Metabolism Indicator 32: Import of goods and services Unit Measure: t/year

Exports of goods and services

30.000 25.000 20.000 15.000

Euro per inhabitant

10.000 5.000 0 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

33

Category: Urban Metabolism Indicator 33: Total sales of pesticides Unit Measure: t/year

Sales of pesticides

12.000 10.000

8.000 6.000

tonnes of active ingredient

4.000

-I

ncreasing soil pollution

2.000 0 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Systemic City Analysis

81

50 - 58

Netherlands Urban metabolism 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10%

2004 2006

0%

Category: Urban Metabolism Indicator 50: Generation of hazardous waste - Agriculture, forestry and fishing Unit Measure: kg per capita

du ct re t ta n ns o

+C

-

U

c se te on o ch st f o ni ru ld q ct ue io s n

io

n

2008

Category: Urban Metabolism Indicator 55: Generation of hazardous waste - Construction Unit Measure: kg per capita

Category: Urban Metabolism Category: Urban Metabolism Indicator 51: Generation of hazardous waste Indicator 56: Generation of hazardous - Mining and quarrying waste - Services Unit Measure: kg per capita Unit Measure: kg per capita

Category: Urban Metabolism Category: Urban Metabolism Indicator 52: Generation of hazardous Indicator 57: Generation of hazardwaste - Manufacturing ous waste - Wholesale of waste and scrap Unit Measure: kg per capita Unit Measure: kg per capita Category: Urban Metabolism Category: Urban Metabolism Indicator 53: Generation of hazardous waste Indicator 58: Generation of hazardous Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply waste - households Unit Measure: kg per capita Unit Measure: kg per capita

Category: Urban Metabolism Indicator 54: Generation of hazardous waste - Water supply, sewerage, waste management and remediation activity Unit Measure: kg per capita 82

Rotterdam Urban metabolism

Waste treatment - Zuid-Holland 60% 50% 40%

Category: Urban Metabolism Other figures: Waste treatment regional

30% 20% 10% 0% 2000

60

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Material recycling

Other forms of recycling

Total incineration

Landfill

%

Category: Urban Metabolism Indicator 60: Waste incineration Unit Measure: % Definition: Proportion of solid waste arising within the boundary processed by incinerator

%

Category: Urban Metabolism Indicator 61: Waste recycling Unit Measure: % Definition: Proportion of solid waste arising within the boundary processed by recycling

Proportion of solid waste arising within the boundary processed by incinerator

72 70 68 66 64

2009

+ Energy production

62 60 58 1989_1993

1994_1998

1999_2002

2003_2006

2007_2009

Proportion of solid waste arising 61 within the boundary processed by recycling

25 20 15 10

-I

5

nsufficient recycling

0 1989_1993

62

1994_1998

1999_2002

2003_2006

2007_2009

Proportion of solid waste arising within the boundary processed by landfill

2 1,5 1

%

Category: Urban Metabolism Indicator 62: Landfill Unit Measure: % Definition: Proportion of solid waste arising within the boundary processed by landfill

0,5 0 1989_1993

1994_1998

1999_2002

2003_2006

+ Constant reduction

2007_2009

Systemic City Analysis

83

Rotterdam Urban metabolism

36

Category: Urban Metabolism Indicator 36: Municipal Generated Waste Unit Measure: kg per capita Definition: Collected solid waste in Urban Audit cities

Waste generated

640 630 620 610

kg per capita

600

+ Constant reduction

590 580 19992000200120022003200420052006200720082009

65

Category: Urban Metabolism Indicator 65: Greenhouse gas emissions, base year 1990 Unit Measure: CO2 eq Definition: Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Total Green House Emission

104 102 100 98 96 94 92 90

84

CO2 equivalent indexed to 1990

+ Constant reduction

2004 Traffic noise - 2002

Urban Neighborhood metabolism Traffic_noise % population suffer from noise 3 - 12 13 - 18 19 - 24 25 - 31 32 - 47 Main Roads City center Fast transit roads 0

4.600

9.200

64

18.400

27.600

36.800 Meters

Category: Urban Metabolism Indicator 64: Noise Pollution Unit Measure: % Definition: Prop. of residents exposed to road traffic noise >55 dB at night time

% of people complain on traffic noise

25 20 15 average

10

-I

nsufficient sound barriers

5 0 2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Traffic noise - 2009

Traffic_noise % population suffer from noise 3 - 12 13 - 18 19 - 24 25 - 31 32 - 47 Main Roads City center Fast transit roads 0

4.600

9.200

18.400

27.600

36.800 Meters

Systemic City Analysis

85

Netherlands

Energy

75-79

Category: Energy Indicator 75: Final energy consumption - Industry Unit Measure: %

Final energy consumption

35% 30% 25%

Category: Energy Indicator 76: Final energy consumption - Transport Unit Measure: %

20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 transport

services

Agriculture/Forestry

Industry

Residential

-I

nefficient transport system

Category: Energy Indicator 77: Final energy consumption - Residential Unit Measure: % Category: Energy Indicator 78: Final energy consumption - Agriculture Unit Measure: % Category: Energy Indicator 79: Final energy consumption - Services Unit Measure: %

81-83

Category: Energy Indicator 81: Final energy consumption of petroleum products Unit Measure: %

45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0%

Category: Energy Indicator 82: Final energy consumption of natural gas Unit Measure: % 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 petroleum products

86

electricity

natural gas

Category: Energy Indicator 83: Final energy consumption of electricity Unit Measure: %

Category: Energy Indicator 87: Primary production of natural gas Unit Measure: %

87-89 120% 100% 80%

Category: Energy Indicator 88: Primary production of nuclear energy Unit Measure: %

60% 40% 20% 0% 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Natural gas

Nuclear energy

Renewable energy

-H

igh dependence on only one resource

90-94

Category: Energy Indicator 89: Primary production of renewable energy Unit Measure: %

Category: Energy Indicator 90: Renewable energy primary production: biomass Unit Measure: %

100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Biomass and renewable wastes

Hydro power

Geothermal Energy

Solar energy

Wind power

Electricity generated from renewable sources 10,00%

Category: Energy Indicator 91: Renewable energy primary production: hydro Unit Measure: % Category: Energy Indicator 92: Renewable energy primary production: geothermal Unit Measure: % Category: Energy Indicator 93: Renewable energy primary production: wind Unit Measure: % Category: Energy Indicator 94: Renewable energy primary production: solar energy Unit Measure: %

8,00% 6,00% 4,00% 2,00% 0,00% 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

+ Constant increase

Systemic City Analysis

Category: Energy Other figures: Share of electricity generated from renewable resources 87

Energy Netherlands

Category: Energy Other figures: Energy consumption by fuel

50%

-H

40%

igh dependence on non-renewable fuels

30% 20% 10% 0% 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Renewable energies

Total petroleum products

Nuclear heat

Solid fuels

Natural gas

Category: Energy Indicator 95: name Share of renewable energy in gross final energy consumption Unit Measure: %

95 15,00% 10,00% 5,00% 0,00% 2006

2007 Netherlands

97

2008

2020 TARGET

Energy dependence

45,00%

-H

40,00%

igh dependence on energy import

35,00% 30,00% 25,00% 20,00% 15,00% 10,00% 5,00% 0,00% 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

88

Category: Energy Indicator 97: Energy dependence Unit Measure: %

Ecosystem Netherlands

Category: Ecosystem Other figures: EMAS registration

Organisations and sites with EMAS registration

-C

onstant reduction

35 30 25 20 number

15 10 5 0 2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Category: Ecosystem Other figures: Organic farming

Area under organic farming

+ Constant increase

3 2,5 2 1,5

%

1 0,5 0 2000

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Ecosystem

Rotterdam

124

Rainfall in the reference year

Category: Ecosystem Indicator 124: Rainfall in the reference year Unit Measure: liter/m2

1100 1050 1000

litre/m2

950 900 850 1989_1993 1994_1998 1999_2002 2003_2006 2007_2009

Systemic City Analysis

89

Ecosystem Rotterdam Average temperature of warmest month 19,1

121

19 18,9 18,8 18,7

°C

18,6

Category: Ecosystem Indicator 121: Average temperature of warmest month Unit Measure: °C

18,5 18,4 18,3 18,2 1989_1993 1994_1998 1999_2002 2003_2006 2007_2009

Average temperature of coldes month

122

4,5 4 3,5 3 2,5

°C

2

Category: Ecosystem Indicator 122: Average temperature of coldest month Unit Measure: °C

1,5 1 0,5 0 1989_1993 1994_1998 1999_2002 2003_2006 2007_2009

Average living area in Urban Audit cities 36

117

35,95 35,9 35,85 35,8

m² per person

35,75

Category: Ecosystem Indicator 117: Average living area in Urban Audit cities Unit Measure: m² per person

35,7 35,65

+ Improves air quality Ecosystem Neighborhood Legend green areas

Neighborhood green percentage green areas

Legend

Neighborhood

0-5

green percentage 0-5 6 - 11 12 - 18 19 - 28 29 - 59

6 - 11 12 - 18 19 - 28 29 - 59

90

Category: Ecosystem Indicator 102: % Natural Areas Unit Measure: Percentage of territory covered by parks and protected areas

Green Areas

102

Economy Rotterdam

161

Proportion in part-time employment 40 35 30 25 20

%

15 10 5

Category: Economy Indicator 161: Proportion in parttime employment Unit Measure: % Definition: Percentage of workers employed in part-time ( < 20 hours/ week)

0 1989_1993

165

1994_1998

1999_2002

2003_2006

2007_2009

45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0

%

1989_1993

167

Category: Economy Indicator 165: Proportion of households reliant upon social security Unit Measure: %

Proportion of households reliant upon social security

1994_1998

1999_2002

2003_2006

16 14 12 10 8 4

igh dependence on social system

2007_2009

New businesses registered

6

-H

proportion of existing companies

Category: Economy Indicator 167: New businesses registered in proportion of existing companies Unit Measure: %

2 0

168

Category: Economy Indicator 168: Proportion of companies gone bankrupt Unit Measure: %

Proportion of companies gone bankrupt 1,4 1,2 1 0,8 %

0,6 0,4

-O

ld data

0,2 0 1989_1993 1994_1998 1999_2002 2003_2006 2007_2009

Systemic City Analysis

91

Economy Rotterdam

200

Category: Economy Indicator 200: Average annual rent for housing Unit Measure: € per m2

Average annual rent for housing

50,5

50 49,5 49 48,5 48

€ per m2

47,5 47 46,5 46 45,5 1989_1993 1994_1998 1999_2002 2003_2006 2007_2009

201

Category: Economy Indicator 201: Households in social housing Unit Measure: %

Households living in social housing

51

50,5 50 49,5 49 %

48,5 48 47,5 47 46,5 1989_1993 1994_1998 1999_2002 2003_2006 2007_2009

202

Category: Economy Indicator 202: Average price for a house Unit Measure: € per m2

Average price for a house

1440 1435 1430 1425

€ per m2

1420 1415 1410 1989_1993 1994_1998 1999_2002 2003_2006 2007_2009

92

Economy

Neighborhood Household average disposable income - 2002

Household_income value_ind 12 - 21 22 - 24 25 - 28 29 - 32 33 - 36 37 - 40 41 - 44 45 - 49 50 - 55 56 - 63

0

30

139

4.625

9.250

18.500

27.750

37.000 Meters

Category: Economy Indicator 139: Average disposable household income Unit Measure: 1000 â&#x201A;Ź

Household income

25

-S

20

low increase

15

Average

10

+ Inequality index: 0,2

5 0 2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

Legend

2008

Average disposable household income - 2008

Household_income value_ind 12 - 21 22 - 24 25 - 28 29 - 32 33 - 36 37 - 40 41 - 44 45 - 49 50 - 55 56 - 63 0

4.600

9.200

18.400

27.600

36.800 Meters

Systemic City Analysis

93

Economy

Neighborhood

Total population at working age - 2002

Working age_2002 Number 0 - 132 133 - 745 746 - 1675 1676 - 3012 3013 - 4027 4028 - 5097 5098 - 6063 6064 - 7671 7672 - 11293 11294 - 15895

138

0

4.600

9.200

18.400

27.600

36.800 Meters

Category: Economy Indicator 138: Total population at working age Unit Measure: Number of people

Total Population at working age

415.000 410.000 405.000 400.000

Num

395.000 390.000 385.000 380.000 1989_1993 1994_1998 1999_2002 2003_2006 2007_2009

Total population at working age - 2008 Working Age Number 0 - 132 133 - 745 746 - 1675 1676 - 3012 3013 - 4027 4028 - 5097 5098 - 6063 6064 - 7671 7672 - 11293 11294 - 15895

94

0

4.600

9.200

18.400

27.600

36.800 Meters

Economy

Neighborhood

Employment - 2002

Employment value 0 - 510 511 - 1206 1207 - 2067 2068 - 2948 2949 - 4001 4002 - 5455 5456 - 7460 7461 - 10104 10105 - 17223 17224 - 27449 0

4.600

9.200

18.400

141

27.600

36.800 Meters

Category: Economy Indicator 141: Total employment Unit Measure: Number of workers

Employment

315.000

-S

310.000

low recovery

305.000 300.000

Total

Highest productivity sector

295.000 290.000 285.000 2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Employment - 2008

Employment value 0 - 510 511 - 1206 1207 - 2067 2068 - 2948 2949 - 4001 4002 - 5455 5456 - 7460 7461 - 10104 10105 - 17223 17224 - 27449 0

4.600

9.200

18.400

27.600

36.800 Meters

Systemic City Analysis

95

Economy

number> 1 yr. unemployed job seekers - 2000

Neighborhood

unemployed Num 0,0 - 39,0 39,1 - 108,0 108,1 - 212,0 212,1 - 455,0 455,1 - 740,0

162

0

4.600

9.200

18.400

27.600

Category: Economy Indicator 162: Number more than 1 year job seekers Unit Measure: Number of unemployed working force

Number> 1 yr. unemployed job seekers

25.000 20.000 15.000

total

10.000

36.800 Meters

-I

ncreasing number

5.000 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

number> 1 yr. unemployed job seekers - 2010

unemployed Num 0,0 - 39,0 39,1 - 108,0 108,1 - 212,0 212,1 - 455,0 455,1 - 740,0

96

0

4.600

9.200

18.400

27.600

36.800 Meters

Economy

Neighborhood

Welfare Number

Total number of welfare recipients - 2000

5 - 77 78 - 187 188 - 313 314 - 463 464 - 643 644 - 829 830 - 1034 1035 - 1263 1264 - 1592 1593 - 2122 0

4.600

9.200

164

18.400

27.600

36.800 Meters

Category: Economy Indicator 164: Total number of welfare recipients Unit Measure: Number of people

Total number of welfare recipients

50.000 45.000 40.000 35.000 30.000

-I

ncreasing number

25.000

Total

20.000 15.000 10.000 5.000 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Total number of welfare recipients - 2008

Welfare Number 5 - 77 78 - 187 188 - 313 314 - 463 464 - 643 644 - 829 830 - 1034 1035 - 1263 1264 - 1592 1593 - 2122 0

4.600

9.200

18.400

27.600

36.800 Meters

Systemic City Analysis

97

Economy

Neighborhood % Homes rented - 1999

Houses_rented % 10 - 17 18 - 32 33 - 40 41 - 49 50 - 58 59 - 67 68 - 76 77 - 85 86 - 94 95 - 100 0

4.600

9.200

18.400

198

27.600

36.800 Meters

Category: Economy Indicator 198: Houses rented Unit Measure: %

% Houses rented

78

+ Constant decrease

76 74 72 70 68

average

66

Working area

64 62 60

% Homes rented - 2010

Houses_rented % 10 - 17 18 - 32 33 - 40 41 - 49 50 - 58 59 - 67 68 - 76 77 - 85 86 - 94 95 - 100 0

98

4.600

9.200

18.400

27.600

36.800 Meters

Economy

Neighborhood % Homes owned - 1999

houses_owned % 0-6 7 - 14 15 - 23 24 - 32 33 - 41 42 - 50 51 - 59 60 - 67 68 - 78 79 - 90 0

4.600

9.200

199

18.400

27.600

36.800 Meters

Category: Economy Indicator 199: Houses owned Unit Measure: %

% Houses owned

40,0

+ Constant increase

35,0 30,0 25,0 20,0

average

15,0 10,0 5,0 0,0

% Homes owned - 2010

houses_owned % 0-6 7 - 14 15 - 23 24 - 32 33 - 41 42 - 50 51 - 59 60 - 67 68 - 78 79 - 90 0

4.600

9.200

18.400

27.600

36.800 Meters

Systemic City Analysis

99

Culture Netherlands

214

E-government on-line availability 100 90 80 70 60 50

%

40 30

+ Constant increase

20 10 0 2001

2002

2003

2004

2006

2007

2009

Category: Culture Indicator 214: E-government on-line availability Unit Measure: % Definition: Percentage of online availability of 20 basic public services

2010

Culture Rotterdam

207

Percentage of households with Internet access at home 60 50 40 30

%

20 10 0 1989_1993

211

1994_1998

1999_2002

2003_2006

209

number of students per 1000 inhabitants

45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0

%

100

2003_2006

2007_2009

Category: Culture Indicator 211: Students in tertiary education (ISCED 5-6) living in Urban Audit cities Unit Measure: number of students per 1000 inhabitants

+ Constant increase

Category: Culture Indicator 209: Prop. of working age population qualified at level 1 or 2 ISCED Unit Measure: %

Prop. of working age population qualified at level 1 or 2 ISCED

1999_2002

+ Constant increase

2007_2009

Students in tertiary education (ISCED 5-6) 50 49 48 47 46 45 44 43 42 41 40

Category: Culture Indicator 207: Level of internet access households Unit Measure: % Definition: Percentage of households who have internet access at home

+ Constant decrease

CultureNeighborhood

% 17_22 No qualification - 2007

No_qualification % 0,0 0,1 - 10,0 10,1 - 13,0 13,1 - 16,0 16,1 - 19,0 19,1 - 21,0 21,1 - 25,0 25,1 - 31,0 31,1 - 38,0 38,1 - 69,0

213

0

4.600

9.200

18.400

27.600

17 - 22 no qualification

1600 1400 1200 1000

800

Total

600 400

36.800 Meters

Category: Culture Indicator 213: 17 - 22 no qualification Unit Measure: People number Definition: Amount of citizen aged 17-22 with no secondary level qualification.

+ Decreasing

200 0 2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

% 17_22 No qualification - 2010 No_qualification Sheet1$.Num 0,0 0,1 - 10,0 10,1 - 13,0 13,1 - 16,0 16,1 - 19,0 19,1 - 21,0 21,1 - 25,0 25,1 - 31,0 31,1 - 38,0 38,1 - 69,0

0

4.600

9.200

18.400

27.600

Systemic City Analysis

36.800 Meters

101

Culture Neighborhood Number of crime reports - 1999

Crime_reports number 0 - 177 178 - 393 394 - 613 614 - 850 851 - 1130 1131 - 1444 1445 - 1892 1893 - 2775 2776 - 4350 4351 - 7778 0

4.600

9.200

222

18.400

27.600

36.800 Meters

Category: Culture Indicator 222: Number of crime reports Unit Measure: Number

Number of crime reports

90000 80000

+ Constant decrease

70000 60000 50000 Total

40000 30000 20000 10000 0 199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010

Number of crime reports - 2009

Crime_reports number 0 - 177 178 - 393 394 - 613 614 - 850 851 - 1130 1131 - 1444 1445 - 1892 1893 - 2775 2776 - 4350 4351 - 7778 0

102

4.600

9.200

18.400

27.600

36.800 Meters

Culture Neighborhood Number of educational establishment - 1999 Facilities Number 1-4 5-8 9 - 11 12 - 14 15 - 17 18 - 20 21 - 24 25 - 28 29 - 33 34 - 40

0

4.600

9.200

18.400

27.600

36.800 Meters

Category: Culture Indicator 217: Number of education facilities Unit Measure: Number

217

Number of educational establishments

1200 1000

800 600

total

+ Constant increase + More areas covered

400 200 0 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Number of educational establishment - 2010 Facilities Number 1-4 5-8 9 - 11 12 - 14 15 - 17 18 - 20 21 - 24 25 - 28 29 - 33 34 - 40

0

4.600

9.200

18.400

27.600

Systemic City Analysis

36.800 Meters

103

% Demography Rotterdam

234

Category: Demography Indicator 234: Moves to city during the last 2 years/moves out of the city during the last 2 years Unit Measure: %

Moves in the last 2 year

1,2

1 0,8 0,6 0,4

% Moves to city during/moves out

0,2 0

237

Total annual population change

0,6 0,4 0,2

0 -0,2 -0,4 -0,6 -0,8

104

% over approx. 5 years

Category: Demography Indicator 237: Population growth Unit Measure: % Total annual population change over approximately 5 year

Total po

% Demography Neighborhood Total

Total population 1999

population Value 0 - 516 517 - 1365 Total population Value 0 - 516 517 - 1365 1366 - 2667 2668 - 4934 4935 - 7289 7290 - 9112 9113 - 11765 11766 - 14900 14901 - 19225 19226 - 28893

1:100.000

1366 - 2667 2668 - 4934 4935 - 7289 7290 - 9112 9113 - 11765 11766 - 14900 14901 - 19225 19226 - 28893

1:100.000

228

Category: Population size Indicator 228: Population growth Unit Measure: Number total population

Population

615.000 610.000 605.000 600.000 595.000 590.000 585.000 580.000 575.000 570.000 565.000

Total

+ Increasing + Fast recovery

Total po

Total population 2010

Total population Value 0 - 516

Total population Value 0 - 516 517 - 1365 1366 - 2667 2668 - 4934 4935 - 7289 7290 - 9112 9113 - 11765 11766 - 14900 14901 - 19225 19226 - 28893

1:100.000

517 - 1365 1366 - 2667 2668 - 4934 4935 - 7289 7290 - 9112 9113 - 11765 11766 - 14900 14901 - 19225 19226 - 28893

1:100.000

Systemic City Analysis

105

% Demography Neighborhood

Total number of households - 2004

Number_of_households total 0 - 375 376 - 1131 1132 - 2147 2148 - 2937 2938 - 3659 3660 - 4735 4736 - 6276 6277 - 8042 8043 - 10264 10265 - 14284 0

4.600

9.200

18.400

231

27.600

36.800 Meters

Category: Demography Indicator 231: Total number of households Unit Measure: Number

Total number of households

320000 315000 310000 305000

Total

300000 295000 290000 285000 2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Total number of households - 2008

Number_of_households total 0 - 375 376 - 1131 1132 - 2147 2148 - 2937 2938 - 3659 3660 - 4735 4736 - 6276 6277 - 8042 8043 - 10264 10265 - 14284 0

106

4.600

9.200

18.400

2011

27.600

36.800 Meters

% Demography Neighborhood

Population density - 1999

Population density Pop/Kmq 0,0 - 55,3 55,4 - 350,3 350,4 - 1008,9 1009,0 - 1423,0 1423,1 - 1870,7 1870,8 - 2604,2 2604,3 - 3298,3 3298,4 - 4884,6 4884,7 - 6332,3 6332,4 - 8262,9

232

0

4.600

9.200

18.400

27.600

36.800 Meters

Category: Demography Indicator 232: Density by neighborhood Unit Measure: Population/km2

Density Population/kmq

2320 2300 2280 2260 2240 2220

average

2200 2180 2160 2140

Population density - 2010 Population density Pop_Kmq 0,0 - 55,3 55,4 - 350,3 350,4 - 1008,9 1009,0 - 1423,0 1423,1 - 1870,7 1870,8 - 2604,2 2604,3 - 3298,3 3298,4 - 4884,6 4884,7 - 6332,3 6332,4 - 8262,9

0

4.600

9.200

18.400

27.600

Systemic City Analysis

36.800 Meters

107

Mobility Rotterdam

239

Category: Mobility Indicator 239: Number of stops of public transport per km2 Unit Measure: Number

Stops of public transport per km2 16 14 12 10 8 6

Number of stops

4 2 0

247

-O

ld data

248

Proportion of journeys to work by public transport

Proportion of journeys to work by bicycle 14,2 14

25,2 25 24,8 24,6 24,4 24,2 24 23,8 23,6 23,4

13,8 13,6 13,4 % rail, metro, bus, tram

%

13,2 13 12,8 12,6 12,4 1989_1993 1994_1998 1999_2002 2003_2006 2007_2009

Category: Mobility Indicator 247: Proportion of journeys to work by car or motor cycle Unit Measure: % Increasing

Category: Mobility Indicator 248: Proportion of journeys to work by bicycle Unit Measure: % Increasing

249

256

+

+

Proportion of journeys to work by foot

Average time of journey to work

6

33,5 33

5

32,5

4

32

3

%

2

31

1

30,5 30

0 1989_1993

1994_1998

1999_2002

2003_2006

2007_2009

Category: Mobility Indicator 249: Proportion of journeys to work by foot Unit Measure: % 108

minutes

31,5

1989_1993 1994_1998 1999_2002 2003_2006 2007_2009

Category: Mobility Indicator 256: Average time of journey to work Unit Measure: minutes

Health Netherlands

Category: Health Indicator 268: Healthy life years Unit Measure: years

268Healthy life years and life expectancy at birth

-U

68 66

nhealthy lifestyle

64 62 60 58 56 54 1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2005

males

269

2006

2007

2008

2009

females

Category: Health Indicator 269: Obesity Unit Measure: %

Obesity

60

-O -I

50

ld data

40 30

ncreasing

20 10 0 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 % Men

% Women

% Total population

Health Rotterdam Infant Mortality rate per year

Available hospital beds 6,8 6,6 6,4 6,2 6 5,8 5,6 5,4 5,2 5

7

260

5 4

per 1000 inhabitants

Category: Health Indicator 260: Available hospital beds Unit Measure: Number per 1000 inhabitants

270

6

3

per 1000 live births

2 1 0

Category: Health Indicator 270: Infant mortality rate Unit Measure: %

-I

ncreasing

Systemic City Analysis

109

Happiness Netherlands

283

Category: Happiness Indicator 283: Depression level Unit Measure: %

Depressed and down

8,00%

+ Decreasing

7,00% 6,00% 5,00% 4,00% 3,00% 2,00% 1,00% 0,00% 2001

2002

2003

2004

Total

285

2005 Men

2006

2007

2008

2009

Women

Category: Happiness Indicator 285: Had a period of anxiety last year Unit Measure: %

Had a period of anxiety last year

20,0%

+ Decreasing

15,0% 10,0% 5,0% 0,0% 2001

2002

2003

2004

Total

2005 Men

2006

2007

2008

2009

Women

Unhappy 25,0%

16 14

20,0%

12 10

15,0%

8

10,0%

6 4

5,0%

2 0

0,0% 2001

2002

2003 Total

2004

2005 Men

2006

2007

Women

Category: Happiness Other figures: Unhappiness Unit Measure: %

110

282 Freedom of the Press

2008

2009

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003 Score

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Free

Category: Happiness Indicator 282: Freedom of the press Unit Measure: Freedomhouse Score level

Happiness Neighborhood

Satisfaction with neighborhood - 2002

Satisfaction % 31 - 56 57 - 67 68 - 76 77 - 84 85 - 97 0

4.600

9.200

277

18.400

27.600

Suburbs

36.800 Meters

Category: Happiness Indicator 277: People that are satisfied with their neighborhood Unit Measure: %

% That are satisfied with their neighborhood

84 82 80 78 76 74 72 70 68 66 64

+ High level average

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

-D

ecreasing

2009

Satisfaction with neighborhood - 2009

Satisfaction % 31 - 56 57 - 67 68 - 76 77 - 84 85 - 97 0

4.600

9.200

18.400

27.600

36.800 Meters

Systemic City Analysis

111

Correlation Coefficient Representation Correlation households disposable income % homes rented = -57%

Household_income value_ind !

12 - 21

!

22 - 24

!

25 - 28

!

29 - 32

!

33 - 36

!

37 - 40

!

41 - 44

!

45 - 49

Household Income/ Houses Rented 2002 ! !

!

!

!

50 - 55

!

56 - 63

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

Houses_rented

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

%

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

10 - 17

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

18 - 32

! !

! !

!

!

!

!

! ! !

33 - 40 41 - 49 50 - 58

!

!

!

0

4.600

9.200

18.400

27.600

36.800 Meters

59 - 67 68 - 76 77 - 85 86 - 94

Household income/ % Houses rented

95 - 100

80

Category: Economy Indicator 139: Average disposable household income Unit Measure: 1000â&#x201A;Ź / Category: Economy Indicator 198: % Houses Rented Unit Measure: %

70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2002

M ore Income = Less renting Household_income

2003

2004

2005

2006

Household income

2007

2008

% Houses rented

value_ind !

12 - 21

!

22 - 24

!

25 - 28

!

29 - 32

!

33 - 36

!

37 - 40

!

41 - 44

!

45 - 49

Household Income/ Houses Rented 2008 ! !

!

!

50 - 55

!

56 - 63

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

41 - 49

!

0

4.600

9.200

18.400

27.600

36.800 Meters

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

33 - 40

95 - 100

!

!

!

!

!

18 - 32

86 - 94

!

!

10 - 17

77 - 85

!

! !

68 - 76

!

!

!

!

59 - 67

!

!

%

50 - 58

!

! !

!

!

!

Houses_rented

112

!

! !

Correlation Coefficient Representation Correlation Crime - Employment = 67%

Employment value !

0 - 510

!

511 - 1206

!

1207 - 2067

!

2068 - 2948

!

2949 - 4001

!

4002 - 5455

!

5456 - 7460

!

7461 - 10104

!

10105 - 17223

Employment/Number of crime reports - 2002 !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

17224 - 27449

! ! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! ! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

394 - 613

!

! !

!

!

!

178 - 393

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

0 - 177

!

!

!

!

Crime_reports number

614 - 850

!

! !

!

!

!

!

! !

!

0

4.600

9.200

18.400

27.600

36.800 Meters

851 - 1130 1131 - 1444 1445 - 1892 1893 - 2775 2776 - 4350 4351 - 7778

Employment / Crime reports

Category: Economy Indicator 141: total employment Unit Measure: Number of people / Category: Culture Indicator 222: number of crime reports

350.000 300.000 250.000 200.000 150.000 100.000 50.000

More employment= More crimes ?

0 2002

Employment

2003

Employment

value !

0 - 510

!

511 - 1206

!

1207 - 2067

!

2068 - 2948

!

2949 - 4001

!

4002 - 5455

!

5456 - 7460

!

7461 - 10104

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Number of crime reports

Employment/Number of crime reports - 2008 !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

10105 - 17223

!

!

!

17224 - 27449

!

! ! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

394 - 613

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

178 - 393

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

0 - 177

!

!

! !

Crime_reports number

614 - 850

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! ! !

!

! !

!

0

4.600

9.200

18.400

27.600

851 - 1130

36.800 Meters

1131 - 1444 1445 - 1892 1893 - 2775 2776 - 4350 4351 - 7778

Systemic City Analysis

113

Some considerations

Conclusions

The city of Rotterdam has proved an excellent subject for develop the SCA prototype, as most relevant data are already public and available online, and the City administration has been available to reach an agreement to provide GIS data in their possession.

The availability of information has made â&#x20AC;&#x2039;â&#x20AC;&#x2039; possible the integration of a system of indicators that was based primarily on theoretical research with real analysis of the facts.

The search for additional information was quite expensive in terms of time. The organizational complexity of European databases and the poor organization of their web sites has also brought a great deal of time.

The most relevant information shown by the analysis have been highlighted for a more rapid interpretation. All the analysis results and observations are related to time intervals for which data were found and therefore not all of them should be considered significant for a picture of the current situation.

Fortunately, information on neighborhoods are the most up to date and the recognized spatial patterns can be considered useful for the development of future plans.

The analysis shows how the overall performance of the system is positive, if we consider also the sustainable development plans already announced, the city points definitely to a steady improvement.

The analysis presented should be considered a prototype, the data collected are not sufficient to complete the analysis. A statistical dedicated survey is necessary to obtain complete results.

The information covering different time spans so they are only partially comparable.

The prototype of investigation is based on the assumption that if there are national data, the database must be local to the base, and then with a wider participation of local authorities, the database can be enriched with information already existing in a short period of time. The use of instruments of spatial representation is effective for the purposes of education and communication project, the creation of a user friendly interface for consulting the system remains a priority if we want to make available these communication skills to a wide audience. The indicator system should be reevaluated by a team of experts in each field to obtain a set less numerous and more efficient. The data collected, unlike most of the existing indicators analyzed, lend themselves to a clear understanding of nonspecialists, enclose complex information in compound indicators can be efficient for consultation timing, but if could be opaque understand how the data are aggregated.

Indicators are often organized by a system of weights based on some priorities that may be subjective, this is not the purpose of this analysis.

The system of cataloging and organizing information on which the database was built proves effective, easy to use and understand.

The integration of systems thinking with GIS technologies may be a response to the

114

problem of communication and representation of complex systems. The spatial visualization is easily understandable even to non-specialists, thereby transforming a list of confusing data and tables, into an educational tool as simple and intuitive as maps are. The possibility of sharing information then widens, by publishing maps on the web, making the system usable by multiple users simultaneously. The identification of problem areas or risk is immediate for administrators, which then will be able to react quickly to emerging issues. To be effective the system needs to be updated as frequently as possible, a way to make this system directly linked with the various city agencies, research institutions and universities should be established and maintained constantly.

Actions to coordinate the various existing databases with the SCA system are necessary if we want to use these data in the best possible way and be able to make better decisions for the future of our cities.

Thanks to Tom Bosschaert Eva Gladek Yan He Richard Boeser Egidio Sandron Giovanni Destro Prof. Luigi Bistagnino Prof. Marco Paolo Tamborrini Jeroen Boon Alberto Zamora My family The Except team The Rotterdam Collective Politecnico di Torino

Systemic City Analysis

115

Web bibliography »» Developing a pragmatic approach to assess urban metabolism in Europe, Dr. Jan Minx, Dr. Felix Creutzig, Verena Medinger, Tina Ziegler, Anne Owen and Dr. Giovanni Baiocchi, Department of Climate Change Economics - Technische Universität Berlin, 2011 - www.climatecon.tu »» Climate impact atlas promotes the use of climate information in policy making, Goosen Hasse, Bessembinder Janette, Stuyt Louis, Veraart Jeroen, Knowledge for Climate, 2009 - http:// knowledgeforclimate.climateresearchnetherlands.nl »» Appendix b : map methods and notes, Ken Radin, Dr. Irina V.Sharkova, Population Research Center - Portland State University, 2006 - http://clfuture.org/, http://www.equityatlas.org »» Climate action in megacities, Aggarwala Rohit T. ,Desai Rishi, Choy Benson, Fernandez Andrea, Kirk Paula, Lazar Alina, Smith Tania, Watts Mark, Yan Anson, Arup; C40 cities, 2011 - http:// www.arup.com/News/2011_06_June/01_ Jun_11_C40_Climate_Action_Megacities_Sao_Paulo.aspx »» Poverty,Tony Blakely, Simon Hales, Alistair Woodward, World Health Organization Protection of the Human Environment, 2004 - http://www.who.int/quantifying_ehimpacts/publications/ebd10.pdf »» Country profiles of environmental burden of disease, World Health Organization, 2009- http://www.who.int/quantifying_ehimpacts/eurocountryprofiles2004. pdf

116

»» The European environment | State and outlook 2010, Jock Martin, Thomas Henrichs, 2010 http://www.eea.europa.eu/ soer/synthesis/synthesis/at_download/ file »» 2010 environmental performance index, Jay Emerson , Daniel C. Esty, Christine Kim, Tanja Srebotnjak, Marc A. Levy ,Valentina Mara, Alex de Sherbinin, Malanding Jaiteh, GIS Specialist, Yale University , Columbia University, 2010 - http://epi.yale.edu/ file_columns/0000/0157/epi2010_report. pdf http://www.yale.edu/envirocenter , http://ciesin.columbia.edu »» Urban indicators guidelines, United Nations Human Settlements Programme, United Nations, 2004 - http:// ww2.unhabitat.org/programmes/guo/ documents/urban_indicators_guidelines. pdf »» 2008 environmental performance index, Daniel C. Esty, Christine Kim, Tanja Srebotnjak, Marc A. Levy, Alex de Sherbinin, Valentina Mara, Yale University , Columbia University, 2008 - http:// www.yale.edu/epi/files/2008EPI_IndicatorsMetadata.pdf http://www.yale.edu/ epi/files/2008EPI_Text.pdf »» Preventing disease through healthy environments, A. Prüss-Üstün and C. Corvalán, World Heath Organization, 2006 - http://www.who.int/quantifying_ehimpacts/publications/preventingdisease.pdf »» International union for conservation of nature, IUCN - The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, 2003 - http://www. iucnredlist.org/documents/reg_guidelines_en.pdf »» Urban climate resilience, Kristina Noel Katich, Massachusetts Institute Of Technology, 2009 - http://dspace.mit.edu/ bitstream/handle/1721.1/49698/436265681. pdf?sequence=1 »» Biodiversity indicators, Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology, 2010 - http://www.parliament.uk/documents/ post/postpn312.pdf

»» Tissue, Tarja Häkkinen, Ed., Specific Targeted Research, 2005 - http://www.vtt. fi/inf/pdf/publications/2007/P643.pdf »» Cities data-book, Peter W. Newton, Asian Development Bank, 2001 - www. adb.org/documents/books/cities_data_ book/02chapter2.pdf »» Air pollution in Europe 1990–2004, Martin Adams, Kevin Barrett, Maarten van het Bolscher, Steinar Larssen, Frank de Leeuw, Tinus Pulles, Maarten van Loon, Addo van Pul, Rob Swart., European Environmental Agency, 2007 http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/ eea_report_2007_2/at_download/file »» European union emission inventory report 1990–2009 under the unece convention on long-range trans boundary air pollution (lrtap), Sabine Göttlicher, Michael Gager, MelanieTista, European Environmental Agency, 2011 - http://www. eea.europa.eu/publications/eu-emissioninventory-report-1990-2009 »» Eurostat structural indicators, Eurostat ,2010 - http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/ portal/page/portal/structural_indicators/ documents/Complete_list_indicators.pdf »» Preparatory study on food waste across eu 27, BIO Intelligence Service ,2010 - http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ eussd/pdf/bio_foodwaste_report.pdf »» The omnivore’s dilemma, Michael Pollan, 2006 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ The_Omnivore’s_Dilemma#Food_chains_ analyzed »» World income inequality database user guide and data sources, United Nations University , 2005- http://62.237.131.23/ wiid/WIID2c.pdf »» Communication from the commission to the European Parliament, the council, the European economic and social committee and the committee of the regions, Commission Of The European Communities, 2009 - http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ. do?uri=COM:2009:0591:FIN:EN:PDF

»» Eurostat - data explorer Rotterdam, Eurostat, 2011 - http://epp.eurostat. ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/statistics/search_database »» Rotterdam buurtmonitor, City of Rotterdam, 2011 - http://rotterdam.buurtmonitor.nl/ »» Eurostat data navigation tree,Eurostat, 2011 - http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/ portal/page/portal/statistics/search_database »» City form and natural process, Whitford V., Ennos A.R., Handeley J.F, Landscape and Urban Planning, Journal, vol.57, 2001 - http://linkinghub.elsevier. com/retrieve/pii/S016920460100192X »» Biodiversity indicators, Parlamentary office of science and technology - UK, 2008 - http://www.parliament.uk/documents/post/postpn312.pdf »» Critical loads - assessment of uncertainty, Barkman Andreas, Department of Chemical Engineering II Lund University, Sweden, 1998 - http://www2.chemeng. lth.se/publications/pdf/ABThesis.pdf »» Accessibility modelling for healthcare facilities development : using GIS tools, Titidezh Omid, Loughborough University, UK , 2009 - http://proceedings. esri.com/library/userconf/health09/docs/ tuesday/accessibility_modeling_for_ healthcare_facilities_development_a_ case_of_reconfiguration_using_gis_tools. pdf »» The social value of public spaces, Worpole Ken,Knox Katharine, Joseph Rowntree Foundation, 2007 - http://www.jrf. org.uk/sites/files/jrf/2050-public-spacecommunity.pdf »» European atlas of soil biodiversity, Simon Jeffery, Ciro Gardi, Arwyn Jones, Luca Montanarella, Luca Marmo, Ladislav Miko, Karl Ritz, Guénola Pérès, Jörg Römbke and Wim H. van der Putten., European Environmental Agency, 2010 - http://eusoils.jrc. ec.europa.eu/library/maps/biodiversity_ atlas/Documents/Biodiversity_Altas.pdf

Systemic City Analysis

117

»» Living fields analysis: Charlois analysis, Veldacademie, 2009 - http://www. scribd.com/full/19561250?access_ key=key-1g1fpumun5u60t4vo68j »» Inequality : methods and tools, Litchfield Julie A., World Bank, 1999 - http:// www.clsbe.lisboa.ucp.pt/docentes/url/ analeco2/Papers/Litchfield_Inequality_Methods_Tools.pdf »» Environmental issue report no 30, Lavalle Carlo, Demicheli Luca, Kasanko Marjo, McCormick Niall, Barredo Jose, Turchini Maddalena,Maria da Graça Saraiva, Fernando Nunes da Silva, Isabel Loupa Ramos, Filipa Pinto Monteiro, Caetano Mário, European Environmental Agency, 2002 - http://www. eea.europa.eu/publications/environmental_issue_report_2002_30/ »» National accounts of well-being : bringing real wealth onto the balance sheet, Juliet Michaelson, Saamah Abdallah, Nicola Steuer, Sam Thompson, Nic Marks, New economics foundation , 2009 - http://cdn.media70.com/nationalaccounts-of-well-being-report.pdf »» Freedom in the world 2011 Puddington Arch, Freedom house, 2011 - http:// www.freedomhouse.org/images/File/fiw/ FIW_2011_Booklet.pdf »» Freedom of press 2010, Karlekar, Karin Deutsch, Freedom house, 2010 - http:// www.freedomhouse.org/uploads/pfs/371. pdf »» Sustainable development indicators: proposals for the way forward, Pintér László, Hardi Peter, Bartelmus Peter, International Institute for Sustainable development, 2005 - http://www.iisd.org/ pdf/2005/measure_indicators_sd_way_ forward.pdf »» Design sistemico, Luigi Bistagnino, 2009, Politecnico di Torino - http:// editore.slowfood.it/editore/ita/dettagli. lasso?cod=9788884991898

118

»» Uomo al centro del progetto, Claudio Germak, Luigi Bistagnino, Flaviano Celaschi, 2008, Politecnico di Torino http://www.allemandi.com/university/ Progetto_Uomo_INTERNO.pdf »» Wikipedia - wikipedia.org »» The Theory of Open Systems in Physics and Biology, Ludwig Von Bertalanfy, Department of Biology, University of Ottawa, 1950 - http://www.sciencemag.org/ content/111/2872/23.full.pdf »» Charter of European Cities & Towns Towards Sustainability - European Conference on Sustainable Cities & Towns in Aalborg, 1994 - http:// ec.europa.eu/environment/urban/pdf/ aalborg_charter.pdf »» European Common Indicators (ECI), Ambiente Italia Research Institute, 2003 - http://www.gdrc.org/uem/footprints/eci_final_report.pdf »» What SOER 2010 tell us? - http://www. eea.europa.eu/soer/what-is

SCA indicators1. list SCA Indicator List Annex idIndicator category_name

indicator_name

1 Air Quality

O3

2 Air Quality

Nitrogen oxides ‐ NOX

3 Air Quality

Particulate matter ‐ PM

4 Air Quality

Sulphur dioxide ‐ SO2

5 Air Quality

Ammonia ‐ NH3

6 Air Quality

Polychlorinated biphenyls ‐ PCBs

7 Air Quality

Hexachlorobenzene ‐ HCB

8 Air Quality

Hexachlorocyclohexane ‐ HCH

9 Air Quality

Heavy metals

10 Air Quality

Carbon monoxide ‐ CO

11 Air Quality

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs)/Benzo(a)pyrene (BaP) ‐ PA

12 Air Quality

Dioxins and furans ‐ PCCD/F

13 Air Quality 14 Water Quality

Dissolved Oxygen

15 Water Quality

Total Phosphorous

16 Water Quality

Total Nitrogen

17 Water Quality

Ph

18 Water Quality

Water consumption

19 Water Quality

Territorial water extraction

20 Water Quality

Waste water treated

21 Water Quality

Water scarcity

22 Water Quality

Drinking Water

23 Urban Metabolism

Food consumed per capita

24 Urban Metabolism

Consumption of certain foodstuffs per inhabitant (tsdpc330)

25 Urban Metabolism

% Produced

26 Urban Metabolism

% Imported

27 Urban Metabolism

% Exported

28 Urban Metabolism

Food Waste

29 Urban Metabolism

Domestic material consumption

30 Urban Metabolism

Domestic Extraction Used

31 Urban Metabolism

Import

32 Urban Metabolism

Export

33 Urban Metabolism

Total sales of pesticides (tag00084)

34 Urban Metabolism

Production of environmentally harmful chemicals, by environmental

35 Urban Metabolism

Production of toxic chemicals, by toxicity class (tsdph320)

36 Urban Metabolism

Municipal Generated Waste

37 Urban Metabolism

Generation of waste by economic activity ‐ Total

Systemic City Analysis

119

idIndicator category_name

120

indicator_name

38 Urban Metabolism

Generation of waste by economic activity ‐ Agriculture and forestry

39 Urban Metabolism

Generation of waste by economic activity ‐ Fishing and aquaculture

40 Urban Metabolism

Generation of waste by economic activity ‐ Mining and quarrying

41 Urban Metabolism

Generation of waste by economic activity ‐ Manufacturing

42 Urban Metabolism

Generation of waste by economic activity ‐ Electricity, gas, steam an

43 Urban Metabolism

Generation of waste by economic activity ‐ Water collection, treatm

44 Urban Metabolism

Generation of waste by economic activity ‐ Waste collection, treatm

45 Urban Metabolism

Generation of waste by economic activity ‐ Construction

46 Urban Metabolism

Genera�on of waste by economic ac�vity ‐ Services (except wholes

47 Urban Metabolism

Generation of waste by economic activity ‐ Wholesale of waste and s

48 Urban Metabolism

Generation of waste by economic activity ‐ Households

49 Urban Metabolism

Generation of hazardous waste ‐ Total

50 Urban Metabolism

Generation of hazardous waste ‐ Agriculture, forestry and fishing

51 Urban Metabolism

Generation of hazardous waste ‐ Mining and quarrying

52 Urban Metabolism

Generation of hazardous waste ‐ Manufacturing

53 Urban Metabolism

Generation of hazardous waste ‐ Electricity, gas, steam and air condi

54 Urban Metabolism

Generation of hazardous waste ‐ Water supply, sewerage, waste ma

55 Urban Metabolism

Generation of hazardous waste ‐ Construction

56 Urban Metabolism

Generation of hazardous waste ‐ Services

57 Urban Metabolism

Generation of hazardous waste ‐ Wholesale of waste and scrap

58 Urban Metabolism

Generation of hazardous waste ‐ households

59 Urban Metabolism

Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) (env_waselee)

60 Urban Metabolism

Waste incineration

61 Urban Metabolism

Waste recycling

62 Urban Metabolism

Landfill

63 Urban Metabolism

Light Pollution level

64 Urban Metabolism

Noise Pollution

65 Urban Metabolism

Greenhouse gas emissions, base year 1990 (t2020_30)

66 Urban Metabolism

CO2 intensity of production

67 Urban Metabolism

CO2 intensity of transportation

68 Urban Metabolism

CO2 intensity of residential users

69 Urban Metabolism

CO2 from Electricity production

70 Urban Metabolism

Soil ph

71 Urban Metabolism

Soil pollution

72 Urban Metabolism

Connection to services

73 Energy

Gross inland consumption of primary energy (ten00086)

74 Energy

Final energy consumption (ten00095)

75 Energy

Final energy consumption ‐ Industry

76 Energy

Final energy consumption ‐ Transport

idIndicator category_name

indicator_name

77 Energy

Final energy consumption ‐ Residential

78 Energy

Final energy consumption ‐ Agriculture/Forestry

79 Energy

Final energy consumption ‐ Services

80 Energy

Final energy consumption ‐ Other

81 Energy

Final energy consumption of petroleum products (ten00096)

82 Energy

Final energy consumption of natural gas (ten00098)

83 Energy

Final energy consumption of electricity (ten00097)

84 Energy

Total production of primary energy (ten00076)

85 Energy

Primary production of coal and lignite (ten00077)

86 Energy

Primary production of crude oil (ten00078)

87 Energy

Primary production of natural gas (ten00079)

88 Energy

Primary production of nuclear energy (ten00080)

89 Energy

Primary production of renewable energy (ten00081)

90 Energy

Renewable energy primary production: biomass

91 Energy

Renewable energy primary production: hydro

92 Energy

Renewable energy primary production: geothermal

93 Energy

Renewable energy primary production: wind

94 Energy

Renewable energy primary production: solar energy (ten00082)

95 Energy

Share of renewable energy in gross final energy consumption (tsdcc1

96 Energy

Energy efficiency of transportation

97 Energy

Energy dependence (tsdcc310)

98 Energy

Smart grid

99 Energy

Share of renewable energy in fuel consumption of transport (tsdcc34

100 Ecosystem

City size

101 Ecosystem

% Agriculture

102 Ecosystem

% Natural Areas

103 Ecosystem

% Production Areas

104 Ecosystem

% Extraction

105 Ecosystem

%Industrial

106 Ecosystem

% Ports Area

107 Ecosystem

% Airports

108 Ecosystem

% Offices and private services

109 Ecosystem

% Public services

110 Ecosystem

% Commercial Surface

111 Ecosystem

% Homes

112 Ecosystem

% Residential (rented)

113 Ecosystem

% Private rental

114 Ecosystem

% Other / unknown

115 Ecosystem

Construction Areas

Systemic City Analysis

121

idIndicator category_name

122

indicator_name

116 Ecosystem

Building Density

117 Ecosystem

Average living area in Urban Audit cities

118 Ecosystem

Carbon sequestration

119 Ecosystem

Green Areas Connectivity

120 Ecosystem

Critical load

121 Ecosystem

Average temperature of warmest month

122 Ecosystem

Average temperature of coldes month

123 Ecosystem

Average number of hours of sunshine per day

124 Ecosystem

Rainfall (litre/m2) in the reference year

125 Ecosystem

Local climate Rainfall

126 Ecosystem

Radiations level

127 Species

Livestock genetic

128 Species

IUCN Red List Index ‐ Mammals

129 Species

IUCN Red List Index ‐ Amphibians

130 Species

IUCN Red List Index ‐ Corals

131 Species

IUCN Red List Index ‐ Reptiles

132 Species

IUCN Red List Index ‐ Birds

133 Species

Alien invasive species

134 Species

Soil biodiversity

135 Species

Marine trophic index

136 Species

Temperature sensitive species

137 Economy

City GDP

138 Economy

Total population at working age

139 Economy

Average disposable household income

140 Economy

Average disposable household income, standardized

141 Economy

Total employment

142 Economy

% Employment agriculture, forestry and fishing

143 Economy

% Of persons mining

144 Economy

% Industrial personen progress of works

145 Economy

% Employment prod. ekektriciteit and distribution, natural gas, stea

146 Economy

% Employment production and distribution of water, sewerage, wast

147 Economy

% Persons employed construction

148 Economy

% Persons employed Wholesale and retail trade, repair of motor veh

149 Economy

% Employment transportation and storage

150 Economy

% Employment accommodation, meal and drink provision

151 Economy

% Employment information and communication

152 Economy

% Employment settings finaciële

153 Economy

% Employed persons and rental of commercial real estate

154 Economy

% Employment consultancy, research and other spec. business servic

idIndicator category_name

indicator_name

155 Economy

% Of persons renting of movable property and other business servic

156 Economy

% Public administration employment, government services and com

157 Economy

% Employment education

158 Economy

% Employment health and welfare

159 Economy

% Employment culture, sport and recreation

160 Economy

% Of persons other diesntverlening

161 Economy

Proportion in part‐time employment

162 Economy

number> 1 yr. unemployed job seekers

163 Economy

% Looking for a Job

164 Economy

Total number of welfare recipients

165 Economy

Proportion of households reliant upon social security

166 Economy

Number of startup

167 Economy

New businesses registered in proportion of existing companies

168 Economy

Proportion of companies gone bankrupt

169 Economy

number of branches farming, forestry and fishing

170 Economy

number of mining sites

171 Economy

number of industrial establishments personen

172 Economy

number of branches prod. ekektriciteit and distribution, natural gas,

173 Economy

number of production and distribution facilities of water, waste and

174 Economy

number of construction sites personen

175 Economy

large number of offices and retail, repair of motor vehicles

176 Economy

number of branches transportation and storage

177 Economy

number of accommodation facilities, food and beverage delivery

178 Economy

of information and communication facilities

179 Economy

number of outlets financial institutions

180 Economy

number of offices and commercial rental property

181 Economy

number of consultancy offices, research and other spec. business ser

182 Economy

number of offices and rental of movable property other business ser

183 Economy

of public administration offices, public and compulsory soc. Facilities

184 Economy

number of educational establishments

185 Economy

number of branches of health and welfare

186 Economy

number of branches culture, sport and recreation

187 Economy

number of other locations diesntverlening

188 Economy

% Agriculture

189 Economy

% Manufacturing utilities, construction

190 Economy

% Finance, Insurance, Real estate and other businessservices

191 Economy

estate and other business

192 Economy

% Community, personal and other services, domestic

193 Economy

% Governance

Systemic City Analysis

123

idIndicator category_name

124

indicator_name

194 Economy

% Other

195 Economy

City deficit

196 Economy

Citizens average debts

197 Economy

Total number of homes

198 Economy

% Rented

199 Economy

% Homes

200 Economy

Average annual rent for housing per m2

201 Economy

Households in social housing

202 Economy

Average price for a house per m2

203 Economy

Number of roofless persons per 1000 pop

204 Economy

Price of a m3 of domestic water

205 Economy

Price of telecommunications

206 Culture

# of languages spoken

207 Culture

Level of internet access ‐ households

208 Culture

‐ % Secondary & Higher education

209 Culture

Prop. of working age population qualified at level 1 or 2 ISCED

210 Culture

Prop. of working age population qualified at level 3 or 4 ISCED

211 Culture

Students in tertiary education (ISCED 5‐6) living in Urban Audit cities

212 Culture

% Employment education

213 Culture

% 17_22, No qualification

214 Culture

E‐government on‐line availability

215 Culture

Local environmental plans

216 Culture

Public Data accessibility

217 Culture

‐ # Education Facilities

218 Culture

‐ % Public

219 Culture

Public Space

220 Culture

Art/ Creativity industry

221 Culture

Amount of Historic Areas Preserved

222 Culture

number of crime reports

223 Culture

% Population compared to crime reports

224 Culture

number of nuisance alerts

225 Culture

% Reporting nuisance compared to population

226 Culture

Safety Index

227 Culture

safety index (score)

228 Demography

Population size

229 Demography

% Male

230 Demography

% Female

231 Demography

total number of households

232 Demography

Density by neighborhoods

idIndicator category_name

indicator_name

233 Demography

Average Age general

234 Demography

Moves to city during the last 2 years/moves out of the city during th

235 Demography

% Temporary Migrants

236 Demography

% Stable Migrants

237 Demography

Population growth

238 Mobility

Public transport accessibility

239 Mobility

Number of stops of public transport per km2

240 Mobility

Length of public transport network per inhabitant

241 Mobility

Number of buses (or bus equivalents) operating in the public transpo

242 Mobility

Proportion of buses running on alternative fuels

243 Mobility

Exchange nodes

244 Mobility

Roads

245 Mobility

Bike roads

246 Mobility

Length of public transport network / land area

247 Mobility

Proportion of journeys to work by car or motor cycle

248 Mobility

Proportion of journeys to work by bicycle

249 Mobility

Proportion of journeys to work by foot

250 Mobility

Proportion of journeys to work by public transport (rail, metro, bus,

251 Mobility

Pedestrian area

252 Mobility

Ship traffic

253 Mobility

Train traffic

254 Mobility

Plane traffic

255 Mobility

Number of deaths in road accidents per 10000 population

256 Mobility

Average time of journey to work

257 Mobility

Car pooling

258 Mobility

Bike Sharing

259 Mobility

Car Sharing

260 Health

Available hospital beds per 1000 inhabitants

261 Health

‐ % Public

262 Health

‐ % Private

263 Health

Health facilities accessibility

264 Health

Access to improved sanitation

265 Health

Number of practising physicians per 1000 residents

266 Health

Number of practising dentists per 1000 residents

267 Health

Diarrhoea

268 Health

Healthy life years

269 Health

Obesity

270 Health

Infant Mortality rate per year (per 1000 live births)

271 Health

Number of food related risk alert

Systemic City Analysis

125

idIndicator category_name

126

indicator_name

272 Health

Respiratory desease

273 Health

Disability Adjusted Life Years (DALY)

274 Happiness

Restorative landscape ‐ Availability and accessibility of green and op

275 Happiness

Volunteer work

276 Happiness

Social Index

277 Happiness

Satisfaction with neighborhood

278 Happiness

Personal well‐being

279 Happiness

Social Well‐ being

280 Happiness

Well‐being at work

281 Happiness

Freedom Rate

282 Happiness

Freedom of press

283 Happiness

Depression Levels

284 Happiness

Suicide level

285 Happiness

Had a period of anxiety last year