World Cities Summit 2010 Conference Proceedings

a

b

c

Liveable & Sustainable Cities for the Future: World Cities Summit 2010 Conference Proceedings Published in Singapore by Centre for Liveable Cities www.clc.org.sg Š Centre for Liveable Cities, 2011 Editor: Dinesh Naidu Editorial assistants: Sharon Anne Chia Elaine Foo Hoe Yu Ying Kok Yong Han Emeric Lau Lim Shin Hui Lin Sh Liang Maryam Malek Layout design: Splash Productions Pte Ltd Printer: Craft Print International Ltd This publication contains edited transcripts and reports of presentations made at the World Cities Summit 2010, which was held in Singapore from 28 June to 1 July 2010. The views captured here do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for Liveable Cities, or the co-organisers, supporting agencies or sponsors of that event.

d

Contents 1

Foreword

4 12 22 28

Plenary Sessions Opening Plenary Plenary 1 Plenary 2 Closing Plenary

36 44

Ministers and Mayors Programme Ministerial Dialogue: Leading the Change World Cities Summit Mayors Forum

62 68 74

Lee Kuan Yew City World City Prize Programme Lee Kuan Yew World City Prize Lecture Lee Kuan Yew World City Prize Forum Dialogue with Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew

80 92 100

Expert Panel Session 1: Planning for a World-Class City Making Cities Sustainable and Endearing: Strategies for Success Pathways to Growth: Analysis from the Global Liveable Cities Index Cities in Southeast Asia: Opportunities and Challenges in the Age of Globalisation

110 120

Expert Panel Session 2: Maintaining a Competitive Economy Financing of Municipal Infrastructure Sustainable Urban Solutions: Role of Innovation and Industry

128 136

Expert Panel Session 3: Shaping a Liveable Environment Shaping World-Class Built Environments Beyond Affordable and Quality Housing: Gracious and Harmonious Living Environments

146 152 158

Expert Panel Session 4: Working Towards Environmentally Sustainable Cities Cities and Climate Change Sustainable Waste Management –Turning Trash into Resource Moving Beyond Plans to Implementation

168

Expert Panel Session 5: Balancing Resource Conflicts and Competing Demands Challenges that Cities Face –Nexus of Energy, Water and Food Security

180

Expert Panel Session 6: Enhancing Cities’ Biodiversity Urban Biodiversity and Ecology for Sustainable Cities

197

Acknowledgements

e

f

foreword

by Mr. Khoo Teng Chye Executive Director Centre for Liveable Cities Cities have always been great centres of enterprise, governance, technology and art. From the 18th century, the Industrial Revolution produced cities of unprecedented wealth, power and sophistication, but also extreme poverty and environmental degradation.

Today, the scale and speed of growth in the developing world is many times greater. Overburdened megacities struggle to supply essentials like water and shelter to residents, but they have also lifted hundreds of millions out of poverty. Cities are now also more inter-connected and share more anxieties, from financial crises and rising inequality to terrorism and climate change.

Against this backdrop, liveability and sustainability have become central concerns for many urban leaders in both developed and developing countries. We believe that liveability and sustainability are timeless principles for designing and leading cities. A liveable city is prosperous, healthy, harmonious and vibrant, while sustainability speaks to the resilience of our environmental, social and economic systems over the long term.

Since our independence as a city-state in 1965, Singapore’s extreme resource constraints have compelled us to confront liveability and sustainability with clear eyes and level heads.

Although sometimes difficult to reconcile, Singapore holds that liveability and sustainability are compatible with industrialisation and modern life. Our approach has been to improve our governance and integrated planning, while constantly seeking better ideas and technologies to organise and run our city. Let me give some examples of this.

Lacking large rivers or lakes, we progressively engineered our city to try to capture and recycle each drop of rainwater.

Unable to site industries far from populated areas, we rejected some lucrative investments to avoid pollution, while enticing cleaner industries to operate under strict environmental regulations. Incapable of supporting urban sprawl, we sought to build affordable and attractive high-rise housing. Lacking space for large nature areas or parks, we

targeted our efforts so green areas are near everyone, and the city contains substantial green cover and biodiversity.

Unwilling to sacrifice too much land for roads and cars, we restricted vehicle ownership and use, while delivering extensive public transport.

Like all cities, Singapore is an imperfect work in progress.

Nonetheless, the Singapore model seems to be robust and functional, and well regarded by others. We have tried to focus on good governance and integrated planning, applied to the principles of liveability and sustainability. In addition to devising our own innovative solutions, we have also consulted foreign experts and studied other cities, to adapt their ideas to our local context. Our experience has convinced us that learning from each other is invaluable. We feel Singapore has much to share, as do many other cities and experts. We therefore set up the World Cities Summit (WCS) as a platform for sharing practical knowledge and experiences.

Held from 28 June to 1 July, WCS 2010 drew 1,175 delegates from around the world to join a conversation on ‘Liveable and Sustainable Cities for the Future’. Among them were more than 200 high-level participants from 50 countries, including ministers, mayors, governors, senior officials, and heads of MNCs and International Organisations. The event included Plenary sessions, a Ministerial Dialogue, Expert Panel Sessions, Learning Journeys and networking events. Mayors and governors from 28 cities participated in the World Mayors Forum.

The inaugural Lee Kuan Yew World City Prize attracted 78 entries from 32 countries, while the WCS Expo featured 50 exhibitors and drew 3,000 visitors over three days. The summit was also co-located with two other major events: Singapore International Water Week, and World Urban Transport Leaders Summit. In short, WCS 2010 was a premier event, which gathered the world’s leading minds in the fields of city governance, planning and development.

These conference proceedings aim to distil and share the latest technologies, debates and best practices that surfaced at WCS 2010. I hope that the many practical and inspiring ideas in these pages will help readers effect changes that will make our cities more liveable and sustainable for present and future generations.

1

2

plenary sessions

3

opening plenary

sustainable cities: leadership and governance Speakers presented diverse perspectives on leadership and governance in relation to the goal of sustainable cities.

Minister Mah Bow Tan’s opening speech set the tone by highlighting successful examples of sustainability leadership in Bilbao, China’s Yellow River and Curitiba. Similarly, speakers from Korea and the Netherlands referred to the work of their governments in addressing issues of carbon emissions and rising sea levels, respectively. Presenting an alternative perspective, two UN Under-Secretary-Generals called for participatory government involving women and children, and a greater role for civil society and the private sector. Indeed, the speaker representing private enterprise spoke of how his products and technologies contributed to lower carbon emissions and clean water production. Urban leaders from Bahrain and China presented their own viewpoints of sustainability, with a strong emphasis on economic and social sustainability, while a speaker from India rejected the resource-intensive Western model, advocating instead practices like walking, recycling and integrating smart technologies.

Left to right: Prof. Tommy Koh, Dr. Han Seung Soo, Mrs. Anna Kajumulo Tibaijuka, H.E. Dr. Jumaa Ahmed Al Kaabi, Dr. Noeleen Heyzer, Mr. Huang Qifan, Mr. Wim Kuijken, Dr. Sadayuki Sakakibara and Mr. Amitabh Kant 4

Mr. Mah Bow Tan Minister for National Development, Singapore Mr. Mah Bow Tan noted that the need for sustainable development has never been stronger. The global population is expected to rise to 9 billion in the next 40 years. Over the second half of the 20th century, the world’s population doubled, food intake tripled and energy consumption more than quadrupled. In meeting the needs of our people, it is increasingly evident that we face natural resource limitations. Indiscriminate use of natural resources over many years has resulted in the climate change issues facing many countries today.

Mr. Mah stressed the role of cities in sustainable development. About 200,000 people move into cities and towns every day, and every 3 days a new city the size of Seattle or Amsterdam springs up. By 2050, 70% of the world’s population will live in cities as compared to 50% today. Planners and developers must rapidly scale up urban infrastructure to provide for more than 6 billion city dwellers, who will need good access to energy, water, mobility and affordable housing. Due to their economic development and high population density, cities are hotspots for high energy consumption, pollution and deforestation. However, they also have the economic and human capital, and technology to counter these problems.

Mr. Mah then articulated the basic principles underpinning sustainable urban development: strong governance, citizen engagement, balancing development and environment, prioritising and proper allocation of resources, stakeholder engagement, innovation, and international collaboration. He also shared three success stories: the urban transformation of the Spanish city of Bilbao; the successful management of its flood-prone water basin by the Yellow River Conservancy of China; and innovative urban planning in the Brazilian city of Curitiba.

Bilbao City Hall, winner of the inaugural Lee Kuan Yew World City Prize, used an integrated and holistic approach to urban transformation. This approach was backed by visionary leadership, commitment to long-term planning, strong processes and supporting infrastructure. As a result, Bilbao has transformed from an obsolete industrial port to a bustling centre of knowledge and culture in 25 years. The critical ingredient that differentiates Bilbao from other cities is its active citizenry. The city formulated ‘Bilbao Ria 2000’ in close consultation with key public and private stakeholders to instil in citizens a sense of ownership and responsibility in sculpting their city. This was the main catalyst for the vast improvements in Bilbao.

The Yellow River Conservancy Commission of China implemented an integrated water basin management system that is unrivalled in scale. In 10 years, China’s second longest river was transformed through innovative and sustainable water policies and solutions. It achieved its aims of securing water for over 100 million people, restoring extensive areas of wetlands and biodiversity, and protecting some 90 million people living in flood-prone areas. These efforts earned the Commission the 2010 Lee Kuan Yew Water Prize.

Curitiba’s comprehensive and integrated public transit system, as well as its pedestrianised downtown walkways, helped to significantly reduce its people’s dependence on motor vehicles. The driving force behind this change was Mr. Jaime Lerner, who envisaged the city as one for people not cars. Curitiba has inspired and influenced the transportation policies of many other cities.

Mr. Mah also elaborated on the importance of international collaboration in elevating the standards of sustainable development practices. The Sino-Singapore Tianjin Eco-City project shows how a vision shared by two governments, to build a thriving, environmentally friendly and resourceefficient city based on the concept of harmonious urbanisation, has spurred innovation in both technology and methods of governance for sustainable development.

5

Dr. Han Seung Soo

Mrs. Anna Kajumulo Tibaijuka

Former Prime Minister, Republic of Korea, and Honorary President, Korea Water Forum

UN Under-Secretary-General and Executive Director, UN-HABITAT

Dr. Han Seung Soo noted that clean and safe water was increasingly scarce due to growing urbanisation and climate change. Water security was therefore becoming an important international issue. He observed that average global temperature have gone up by one degree centigrade over the past 10,000 years, of which 0.74 degrees rose since the Industrial Revolution.

Global temperature is projected to rise 6.4 degrees by the end of this century, if no action is taken to mitigate carbon emissions. Powerful hurricanes and cyclones, such as Hurricane Katrina, are clear reminders that the scale and pace of changes wrought by global warming are unprecedented. Dr. Han emphasised that as environmental problems transcend boundaries, we have all become stakeholders and there is the need to encourage global cooperation. He also emphasised the symbiotic relationship between economic growth and environmental sustainability.

Mrs. Anna Kajumulo Tibaijuka began by highlighting Singapore as an example of a newly sustainable, inclusive, friendly and green city. She informed the audience that one billion people still lived in slums in squatter settlements across the world. Many slum dwellers and urban poor were in the Asia Pacific region, but the greatest challenge was in Africa, where the depth of urban poverty and squalor was greatest. About 70% of Sub-Saharan Africa’s urban population lived in slums and squatters without water, sanitation, durable housing or secure tenure. One approach to address this challenge was to share the best practices of countries that had successfully solved the housing problem for the urban masses, such as Singapore, where the lowincome were able to afford housing as well.

In his native country, South Korea, the government adopted a strategy of ‘low carbon, green growth’ on 15 August 2008. It aimed to transform the current quantity-oriented growth paradigm into a new quality-oriented model. The government hopes to create new engines of higher growth, while ensuring climatic and environmental sustainability.

Korea has introduced various measures to set ‘low carbon, green growth’ into policy. Examples include the presidential commission on green growth, which was set up in February 2009, as well as a five-year green growth plan. The National Assembly also passed a framework on low carbon, green growth, which came into force in April 2010. This framework was the first of its kind in the world. The Korean government has declared its intention to cut carbon emissions by 30% by 2020. It also established the Global Green Growth Institute, chaired by Dr. Han, to promote South Korea’s ‘low carbon, green growth’ paradigm across the world.

6

Mrs. Tibaijuka explained that UN-HABITAT promoted the idea of participatory governance, where women and children could participate in developing safe and clean habitats. She noted that, in particular, the development of clean sanitation would greatly improve their human dignity. Progress has been made, and about 227 million slum dwellers have been raised out of poverty. However, another 55 million became slum dwellers during this time. Mrs. Tibaijuka also emphasised that we must continue to prepare for new challenges, such as rising sea levels, which will cause people to lose their homes.

H.E. Dr. Jumaa Ahmed Al Kaabi

Dr. Noeleen Heyzer

Minister of Municipal Affairs and Agriculture, Kingdom of Bahrain

UN Under-Secretary-General and Executive Secretary, Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UNESCAP)

Dr. Jumaa Ahmed Al Kaabi shared Bahrain’s plans for sustainable urban development. Bahrain is located at the heart of the Arabian Gulf, with an area of 750sqkm and a population of 1 million people. He emphasised that collaboration is needed to find innovative and serious solutions to issues like formulating development policies, encouraging investment, integrated transportation, safe environment, and sustainable and social development.

Dr. Al Kaabi said Bahrain has become a modern state where much emphasis is given to public participation in decisionmaking and comprehensive sustainable development.

Development policies at the local level are managed by an elected council. As part of the world’s aim to attain the Millennium Development Goals, Bahrain has outlined a vision and formulated an initial strategy with 2030 in mind, designed to give a central focus to the principles of sustainability, competitiveness and fairness.

Bahrain has shifted from an oil-based economy to a competitive and productive economy on an international scale. The private sector now plays a key role in boosting the economy, with the aim of increasing productivity levels.

Bahrain aims to emphasise high-potential local sectors, emerging economy possibilities, and building internationalstandard infrastructure. To realise this vision, a national plan has been developed, taking into consideration various economic, environmental, social and urban planning factors.

Dr Noeleen Heyzer highlighted the Asia Pacific region’s four urban challenges. The first was the sheer scope and rapid pace of urbanisation. Cities in the Asia Pacific are home to 1.6 billion people, and by 2025 they will house 2.3 billion.

This means we must provide jobs, housing, water, energy, transport, education, health and cultural infrastructure for an additional 120,000 people every day for the next 15 years. This mission is especially daunting, as governments find it difficult to provide for existing city dwellers, and the situation is made more complex by unplanned urban growth.

The next challenge was unsustainable development. The region had achieved spectacular economic growth, social progress and poverty reduction, and cities are at the forefront of this. Ho Chi Minh City’s per capita GDP was almost three times that of Vietnam. Mumbai, Singapore and Shanghai were centres of regional and international business and connectivity. However, a ‘grow first, clean up later’ strategy came at a cost. The ecological footprint of some cities is three to five times global per capita averages. Our cites account for 67% of all energy use, 71% of all greenhouse gas emissions, and 300 million tonnes of solid waste a year. They face problems of congested roads, and energy and water shortages. Urban waterways in some cities are so polluted that no life can survive in them. Maintaining this trajectory would be environmentally, economically and socially devastating.

The goal of the national plan was to show Bahrain’s evolution and expansion through thoughtful land use and economic growth. It aimed to develop Bahrain into an intelligent island and the financial, business and banking capital of the Gulf region, with private-sector driven financial businesses.

7

Climate change was the third challenge. Over half of the Asia Pacific’s urban residents live in low-lying areas. They are at risk from extreme weather such as floods and typhoons, which can wipe out years of development and poverty reduction measures in hours or days. The frequency and intensity of such extreme weather will grow with climate change, affecting energy, water and food security. Natural disasters affect both rich and poor, but it is the poor who suffer most as they do not have assets to cope with risks.

The final challenge was the ‘urbanisation of poverty’, manifested in slums and squatter settlements. Around 35% to 40% of the region’s urban residents live in slums. Urban Asia reveals persistent disparities in income and access to services and opportunities. Left unaddressed, these can lead to social grievances that can be mobilised for crime, violence and social unrest.

Given existing and future needs, we must rethink our development paradigms and lifestyles. Development should be economically productive, environmentally sustainable, socially inclusive and just, participatory in decision-making, culturally vibrant, internationally and regionally connected, and resilient to climate change and other disasters.

To realise these ideals, Dr. Heyzer advocated inclusive, low-carbon, green growth strategies. Urban planning and infrastructure design should make cities compact and eco-efficient, and maximise the benefits of public transport system. We should also invest in eco-efficient buildings and infrastructure, clean water, better waste management and smart energy grids. More efficient resource use will reduce greenhouse gas emissions and make societies more resilient to shocks, like volatility in food and fuel prices.

We must engage civil society and businesses to reduce consumption and promote sustainable lifestyles. The private sector should embrace the wellbeing of people and our planet, while generating profits. The right incentives could encourage markets to adopt this agenda. We would need to start internalising the real cost of using natural resources, particularly water and energy.

8

Cities and communities, especially the poor, must grow resilient to climate change. We need to identify vulnerable areas in cities, and integrate disaster preparedness in urban planning and management. We should also ensure the poor have access to safer and more secure housing, and strengthen their ability to recover from disasters through strategies like urban-based finance and microinsurance schemes.

Dr. Heyzer acknowledged that adopting inclusive and sustainable development strategies would not be easy. It will require transforming the way we manage, plan and govern our cities. But she felt we must move from piecemeal planning and management to inclusive and integrated approaches, which viewed urban and rural areas as part of a continuous system. This would let us coordinate national and local government efforts with civil society and communities. Governments had to foster constant learning, from both their own experiences and also other countries facing similar situations. Finally, she advocated the development of institutions that were inclusive, integrated and adaptive to ensure our future.

Mr. Huang Qifan Mayor of Chongqing, China Mr. Huang Qifan outlined Chongqing’s commitment to harmonious living and sustainable development for its residents. Chongqing has an area of 82,000sqkm, and 32 million people, with half living in cities. The municipality is undergoing rapid industrialisation and urbanisation to become a leading economic zone and world-class metropolis. In the next 10 years, urban areas will double from the current 500sqkm.

Chongqing has many small urban areas under its jurisdiction. It aims to link these through efficient transport and industry integration into a megacity. As part of this, the government advocates five attributes: environmental conservation, seamless connectivity, liveability, peace and health. It aims to solve environmental issues and increase green cover from 35% to 50%. Transport networks are being built, with eight railways and eight expressways linking surrounding cities. Following Singapore’s example, Mayor Huang said Chongqing aims to build 40 million public housing apartments. The municipality’s public safety index is now at 95%, and the average mortality age for residents is at an acceptable 77 years old.

Chongqing’s developmental strategy was necessarily people-centred. This meant providing jobs for residents.

The government was developing new industries to create employment, focusing on six sectors: automobiles, telecommunications, equipment manufacturing, heavy chemical engineering, materials supply and energy production. The government had also raised residents’ educational levels via better access to higher education.

A comprehensive social security framework was also being developed, to meets the people’s healthcare needs.

Mr. Wim Kuijken Government Commissioner for the Delta Programme, the Netherlands Mr. Wim Kuijken noted that coastal regions and deltas across the globe benefit from their strategic locations, but also face many challenges.

These mostly relate to changing sea levels and climate, freshwater supply and water management.

With a long history in water management, the Netherlands saw for itself a

global responsibility and role in sharing its expertise. This was seen in cooperation between the Dutch and many foreign countries. A quarter of the Netherlands lies below sea level, with some areas almost 6m below sea level. Almost a third is prone to flooding from rivers. Hence, more than half the country is flood-prone, and these are densely populated areas, where two-thirds of GNP is earned and where the main ports are located. However, due to consistent efforts, this is also the world’s best protected delta.

On 1 February 1953, the fatal combination of a northwesterly storm and spring tide drove sea levels up.

Dykes burst and water flooded a large part of the country.

Over 1,800 people drowned. In response, the Dutch then built their famous deltaworks to keep their land safe.

The population grew from 11 million in 1960 to 16.5 million today, and invested capital has increased enormously.

The government thus believes the land deserves additional protection. With rising sea levels and decreasing soil levels due to global warming, the Netherlands will face drier summers and wetter winters. If nothing is done, the Netherlands may face water shortages in summer, and winter flooding. Although they cannot predict exactly the speed of these changes, the Netherlands’ policy is to act instead of react. Government has planned for the future in consultation with stakeholders from NGOs, research institutes and private sector.

Rotterdam is Europe’s largest port, and is a major force in the Dutch economy. It is near an open river and open sea, but is also part of a large urban region. The government is studying a few options. One is to build open levees, with higher and wider dykes. These may even contain residences. Another idea to build closed levees with locks, or closable open dams with a system of flood barriers. The government is also concerned that freshwater supplies will be disrupted if sea levels rise, as saltwater will enter via river estuaries. It is examining how to use water storage basins to regulate freshwater supply. Dramatic physical intervention requires sufficient implementation time, sometimes over 30 years. Therefore, there is a need to look further ahead, to the end of century.

9

In view of these concerns, the Netherlands set up the Delta Programme to safeguard their economy and ensure future generations will inherit a safe country to inhabit. Funding for this programme has been guaranteed through a dedicated fund, with 1 billion Euros per year from 2020, and the programme will be updated yearly. Mr. Kuijken emphasised it is important to not look at safety in isolation, but in relation to other aspects. The Netherlands must retain a pleasant, attractive and open landscape, and not become a watertight bunker. The Dutch government considers issues like urban development, agriculture and recreation. It seeks to incorporate both safety and quality of spatial planning in future plans, to make safety attractive. Recognising the importance of citizen inputs, government works with ministries, provincial water boards, citizens and focus groups, while cooperating with knowledge institutes and firms. This water partnership network brings together private firms, government, knowledge institutions and NGOs. One such venture is one with Singapore’s Public Utilities Board, which culminated in the opening of the Netherlands water house in Singapore.

Dr. Sadayuki Sakakibara Chairman of the Board and CEO, Toray Industries, Inc Dr. Sadayuki Sakakibara explained Japan’s approach to global environmental issues, focusing on industries. He described the Japanese decision to invest in green innovation.

In September 2009, Japan announced ambitious targets for greenhouse gas reduction. The government was advised to promote green innovation, as the country had various advanced technologies to contribute to solving global environmental

10

issues. The government thus decided to invest heavily in environmental technologies, including water treatment.

Next, Dr. Sakakibara gave examples of industries where Japan was trying to pursue green innovation. With components like LCDs, ceramic condensers and lithium ion batteries, Japan contributed to the mobile phone industry.

Another example was the desalination industry. Japan sought to raise the competitiveness of desalination plants using components like reverse osmosis membranes and high-pressure pumps. In the last 10 years, Japan fostered cooperation between industry, academia and government to develop radical and innovative solutions for water needs.

In 2009, the All-Japan Collaboration scheme was set up to solve global water issues by providing total solutions using cutting edge components, materials and technologies.

A new growth strategy also committed the government to supporting a wide range of water projects. Toray Industries, which Dr. Sakakibara headed, was dedicated to developing advanced materials, products, technologies and services for a sustainable planet.

Toray manufactured carbon fibre, used in cars and aircrafts.

This lightweight material was superior to steel in tensile strength. Manufacturing one tonne of carbon fibre emitted 22 tonnes of carbon dioxide. However, if used to replace conventional automobile components, a tonne of carbon fibre would cut carbon dioxide emissions by 70 tonnes over the vehicle’s lifespan. Likewise, one tonne of carbon fibre would cut carbon dioxide emissions by 1,400 tonnes over an aircraft’s ten-year lifespan. Another Toray product, the reverse osmosis membrane, was used to desalinate seawater and treat wastewater. These membranes produced some 16 million tonnes of water a day, supplying drinking water to 60 million people globally. Compared to conventional distillation, reverse osmosis membranes emit 80% less carbon dioxide. Dr. Sakakibara said that, collectively, these two products would cut 220 million tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions by 2020. Advanced material products would play a key role in emissions reduction.

Mr. Amitabh Kant CEO & Managing Director, Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor Development Corporation Mr. Kant noted that India would become a mostly urban country by 2040, with close to 350 million new urban residents. A new India was being built, with around 80% of infrastructure being created. This was happening while India was still young. 65% of Indians were between 15 and 65 years old, and the country was undergoing a demographic transition. Urbanisation in India thus needed visionary leadership, capacity building and creative decision-making.

The Indian government’s key objective is to sustain current growth rates of 9% to 10% annually, over the next three decades. To achieve this, India was developing world-class industries, and had quarried New Delhi and Mumbai for this purpose. India aims to enhance its manufacturing and reduce logistic costs. On both sides of the Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor, 24 new cities were planned. This was a unique opportunity to plan, develop and build new cities, which were both ecologically and economically sustainable.

access to gas, water and other public resources. However, today’s world is far more complex and crowded, and we have more limited resources. New cities must be dense, compact and polycentric, with mixed developments.

Massive recycling of water and waste was critical, as were methods to reduce energy consumption. He also stressed the need for public transport, cycling and walking.

To meet these aims, Mr. Kant felt smart technology, and the converging and integration of technology, were key. India was working with four Japanese consortia to introduce smart cities in India. India recognised that smart cities were not just about hardware, but also about softer elements like art, culture, parks museums and theatres. These facilitate social clustering and community interaction. In this regard, the DelhiMumbai Industrial Corridor Development Corporation faced immense challenges, as it was a public-private partnership, and not a state-driven approach. Over their 30-year lifespan, each city was already very economically viable. But in the initial 10 to 11 years, revenue-expenditure mismatches had occurred. Therefore, cities had to bring in large financial instruments, capable of providing lending over a long period of time at low interest rates.

Mr. Kant concluded by stressing the importance of India’s development to the world. With its enormous population, Indian development will have a critical impact on global sustainability.

Mr. Kant told the audience India had completed masterplanning various cities, with help from some of the world’s greatest planners, including Singapore and the United States. A strategic approach was being adopted, with huge consequences for future generations.

Urbanisation presented major challenges, but also huge opportunities. He noted that most planners persist with models based on the West, where people had cheap

11

plenary 1

sustainable and high growth cities: balancing development and environment This session focused on two aspects of the city. First, cities are major generators of national wealth, and act as engines of poverty reduction in developing countries. Next, cities are sources of environmental problems, but also of solutions.

Moderator Patricia Clarke Annez noted a ‘pragmatic optimism’ during this session, combining a sober assessment of the scale and urgency of problems, with a can-do sense of excitement. There was a reversal of the old message that urbanisation was too rapid. Rather, it was now embraced as key to poverty reduction, linking populations to global flows of investment and technology, and a source of positive change, from falling birth rates to higher energy efficiency. But for it to be socially, economically and environmentally beneficial, urbanisation had to be ‘done right’. Several urban issues were already well understood. One consensus was that Los Angeles style urban sprawl nurtured an undesirable reliance on cars.

Most speakers advocated compact, high-density cities with a high quality of life. Speakers discussed ideas for promoting renewable energy, improving efficiency, retrofitting buildings and recycling water and waste. There was also attention to the issue of how to effect changes, including ways to compel or incentivise green industries and behaviours, and how to improve technical capacities in the smaller cities of developing nations.

Left to right: Dr. Patricia Clarke Annez, Mr. Lee Tzu Yang, Prof. Saskia Sassen, Mr. James Adams, Ms. Katrin Lompscher, Dr. Ursula Schaefer-Preuss, Mr. Majid Al Mansouri and Mr. Peter Schwartz 12

Ms. Katrin Lompscher Senator of Health, the Environment and Consumer Protection, Berlin

the EU strategy: 2020 targets, Berlin’s responses Before presenting Berlin’s achievements and success in environmental policy, Ms. Katrin Lompscher qualified that Berlin was different from many Asian cities. Berlin’s population size was relatively stable. In fact, it may decline in the future, requiring immigration for continued stability. It was not a high growth city, and did not need many new buildings or infrastructure. Berlin was also not as dynamic as Asian cities in terms of economic development. Its urban infrastructure was already highly developed and matched its economic needs.

Lastly, Europe, and especially Germany, had a tradition of environmental thinking and policies, starting as early as the 1980s when the first Environmental Act came into force.

European Union (EU) collaboration enabled global issues like climate protection and sustainable development to be addressed. The first report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in 1990 stated that carbon emission reductions of 60% to 80% were needed to stabilise atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases. Since then, the EU has been at the forefront of global efforts to fight climate change. It developed a new energy strategy for 2011 to 2020, which promoted a resource-efficient Europe and a commitment to deliver ‘20-20-20’ targets. These aimed to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 20%, increase renewable energy use by 20%, and save 20% of the energy used in the EU, compared with 1990. Under certain conditions at the international level, the EU was even aiming for a 30% reduction in its greenhouse gas emissions. As the EU’s biggest economy, Germany has played a leading role in climate protection policy. In 2009, the federal government raised its carbon emissions reduction target to 40%, a goal shared by the city-state of Berlin.

development of a highly efficient energy supply system, and the reorganisation of urban traffic to be more environmentally friendly, as key issues to tackle.

Ms. Lompscher gave a short overview of Berlin’s climate protection measures, which began with the 1990 Energy Saving Act, followed by the founding of the Berlin Energy Agency in 1992. In 1994, the first energy concept was developed. Since then, energy programmes were launched every five years. Berlin Energy Agency was responsible for the 1996 energy saving contracting programme which aimed to reduce the energy needs of public buildings. This was made possible by making it attractive for both building owners and the private contractors who invested in the energy efficiency of buildings. Owners were guaranteed cost savings of 16% to 36%, which would be shared with contractors. Contractors could then refinance their investment through energy cost savings, within a period of 8 to 15 years.

To meet the 40% target for carbon emission cuts, Berlin also concluded 12 self-committing partnership agreements for private and public companies, including energy providers, city cleaning firms, housing associations, hospitals and the zoo. More such agreements were underway. As these efforts still fell short of the targets, Berlin fostered the use of solar energy, biomass and other renewable energy sources for heating buildings. A Climate Protection Bill would come into force in 2011. It stipulates that all existing buildings must use renewable energy for heating and warm water supply.

All building owners must also take measures to cut energy use. As a result, a further reduction of about a million tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions per year was expected. Due to these initiatives, Berlin’s 2050 greenhouse gas emissions would be 85% less than 1990 levels, making it a sustainable and climate-friendly city.

Like other cities, Berlin faced the challenge of climate change. According to forecasts, it would have to adapt to a climate currently typical in Rome or Madrid in 50 years.

This threatened not just Berlin’s water supply and cultural landscape, but also its people’s livelihoods and health.

To mitigate this, the city decided to improve energy efficiency in all sectors and to increase the use of renewable energy, focussing on the building sector. Buildings accounted for more than 40% of the city’s energy use. Berlin also identified the

13

Dr. Ursula Schaefer-Preuss Vice-President, Knowledge Management and Sustainable Development, Asian Development Bank (ADB)

ADB’s strategy 2020: balancing the economy and the environment - liveable and sustainable cities for asia and the pacific Dr. Ursula Schaefer-Preuss observed that Asia’s urbanisation was multifaceted and involved a complex process. 1.5 billion Asians lived in cities in 2010, rising to 3 billion by 2030. Asia and the Pacific’s urban infrastructure deficit were estimated to be about US$60 billion a year.

Supplying infrastructure to these cities without damaging the environment would be a major challenge in the coming years. She also observed that Asian cities were merging along trade corridors into ‘city-regions’, massive urban areas that were larger in size and importance than the 20th century’s megacities. City-regions were fast becoming engines of growth. Managing these areas, to balance economic development with improved quality of life and sustainability, would be a great challenge. Cities generated the majority of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in most countries, but cities or urban consumers, were responsible for 75% of greenhouse gas emissions on average.

In terms of poverty reduction and quality of life, Dr SchaferPreuss said cities had performed relatively well. The 2010/11 UN Habitat reports showed that slum upgrading had moved 227 million people out of slum conditions since 2000.

However, more effort was needed as the absolute number of slum-dwellers grew from 770 million to 827 million in the same decade. 505 million slum dwellers were in Asia. The poor were also most vulnerable to the impact of climate change, like flooding and other incidents of violent weather.

Hitherto, ADB’s urban lending of over $13 billion had focused on physical infrastructure, but Dr Schaeffer-Preuss recognised that new, multifaceted approaches were needed.

The priorities of ADB’s 2020 Strategy for the environment and climate change included economic development and poverty reduction. Guided by a new Urban Operation Plan, ADB was adopting the 3E approach to sustainable urban development, focusing on the Environmental, Economic and Equity dimensions.

It was essential to understand how to cut urban energy demand and the undesirable environmental impact of

14

economic growth. ADB’s Green Cities Agenda tried to address this by bolstering the role of cities in improving quality of life, as well as mitigating and adapting to climate change.

The challenge was to support the component cities of urban corridors and regions in growing more productive industry and spreading the benefits of growth. To do this, ADB would target assistance at key supports for successful industry clusters, identified as infrastructure, differentiated skills development, research and development, specialised finance, and regional cooperation. ADB would also assess cities’ vulnerability to climate and other related disasters.

Dr. Schafer-Preuss ended by saying ADB would support governments by financing investments in the three core foundations of liveable cities. To build efficient, sustainable, and equitable cities for the future, she pledged that ADB would proactively respond to current and anticipated needs of its development partners. ADB’s focus was on practical ways to improve the environment and cities, support economies, and foster proper investments.

Mr. James Adams Vice-President, East Asia and Pacific Region, World Bank

paradox of urban poverty versus wealth creation in cities Mr. James Adams said the World Bank worked closely with governments to provide world-class infrastructure in urban areas. It viewed its objectives as improving investment climates, and enabling the urban poor and disenfranchised to move into productive activity.

Mr Adams noted that more than half the world now lived in cities. Even more significantly, 90% of urban growth would be in the developing world over the next 20 years. The challenge to deliver urban services and support to two billion new urban residents would be considerable. Much of this growth would be in small and medium sized cities. Already more than half the world’s urban population lived in cities smaller than half a million residents. The challenges faced were broader, and went beyond those of global cities.

Urbanisation’s scale and pace posed major challenges to public policy. Rural-urban migration was a problem faced by many governments. As a result, poverty was urbanising. World Bank data showed that in the next 20 years, all regions except Eastern Europe would face rising urban poverty. Massive urban congestion would also bring fundamental structural changes to cities, with multifold growth in built-up areas and urban sprawl. This raised complex issues of urban management, higher infrastructure costs and irreversible environmental challenges. In the next 20 years, built-up areas in developing countries would expand to an estimated 400,000sqkm, equal to the world’s total built-up area in 2000. Recent events, such as natural disasters and the financial crisis, brought additional challenges to developing countries and policy-making.

Despite these problems, Mr. Adams argued urbanisation provided remarkable opportunities for growth and development. The World Bank 2009 World Development Report found that much national wealth was created in cities, with a strong correlation between urban and overall economic growth. It noted that no country had achieved advanced development levels without urbanising.

In particular, large primary cities were gateways to the international economy. They provided access to trade and globalisation, which play a key role in economic growth.

The report also found that density was critical for efficient service delivery. Done properly, service delivery can reduce per capita costs, attract investments and facilitate growth.

A key message in the report reversed the old message that rapid urbanisation was problematic. Besides being inevitable, urbanisation was essential to driving economic growth, bringing prosperity and reducing poverty. The report underlined the need to rethink how urbanisation could be managed, within a sustainable framework. It also concluded that urban development and high growth could be achieved effectively and sustainably, through appropriate government policies and investments.

Based on its 2009 World Development Report, World Bank devised a framework for the East Asia region called ‘Eco2 Cities’. Mr. Adams called this an operational analytic framework, to help cities design and develop sustainable pathways for growth. Providing a set of methods and tools, recommendations, and access to financial resources, it was a city-based approach which focused on the capacity and strategies of local government. It provided an expanded platform to collaborate on design and decision-making,

engaging all key stakeholders. As a one-system approach, it let key stakeholders work on issues simultaneously. It was also an investment framework, focused on sustainability and resilience. Indonesia, Laos, the Philippines and Vietnam, were now adapting the Eco2 Cities framework for their work programmes with the World Bank, and other development partners, like ADB. The World Bank was also developing an urban hub in Singapore. Two key areas of focus were firstly, to tap onto Singapore’s successful urbanisation experience, and secondly, to draw on Singapore’s strong skills, to provide support for World Bank regions. The urban hub would showcase global best practices in urban management and financing. It would help cities and counties to adapt specific models, providing a basis for working with local and national governments in implementing successful urban frameworks. The World Bank would also work with governments to improve technical capacity at national and sub-national levels to address urban challenges. Mr. Adams ended by saying the World Bank looked forward to working with governments, the private sector and donor partners to provide both financial and analytic support, and to strengthen urban programmes, so as to provide a basis for sustainable growth in East Asia and the Pacific.

H.E. Mr. Majid Al Mansouri Secretary-General, Environment Agency - Abu Dhabi

developments in Abu Dhabi Mr. Majid Al Mansouri said that, as one of the world’s fastest growing cities, Abu Dhabi faced many challenges. Its government was trying to diversify the economy away from a heavy dependence on oil and gas, to other sectors like services.

Three years ago, it introduced a new policy agenda, which focused on achieving a sustainable balance between the environment, economy and social development.

15

The ‘Estidama’ programme promoted a new way of constructing buildings and built environments, by focusing on energy and water-saving. Abu Dhabi is now highly dependent on natural gas for its energy needs, but the government projected that by 2020, it aimed to derive 7% of its energy from renewable sources, solar energy in particular.

A new US$600 million, 100MW solar energy project was underway. A nuclear plant would also supply around 30% of the country’s energy. For mobility and transport, the government would put in place measures to convert 20% of public and government transport to compressed natural gas (CNG) by 2012. To support this, government would invest US$1 billion in CNG infrastructure. This would cut emissions and improve air quality.

Abu Dhabi aimed to reduce ground water depletion by reusing treated sewage water. There were plans for a new irrigation system and utilising new agricultural technologies.

By locally cultivating vegetables to meet 40% of consumption, Abu Dhabi could significantly reduce its ecological footprint.

Another recent government policy allowed a maximum of 10% of waste to be sent to the landfill, while the rest would be reused and recycled. A few years ago, the government also launched the ‘Masdar initiative’ to turn Abu Dhabi into a global hub for renewables. Now under construction, Masdar City will host many innovative and new technologies, while the Masdar Institute, started in collaboration with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, would be the region’s main renewables research centre.

The government had begun to raise public awareness of sustainability and environmental issues faced by a new and fast growing city like Abu Dhabi. By 2030, the government planned to reduce the future growth of Abu Dhabi by 30%.

Under the ‘Abu Dhabi Urban Planning 2030’ initiative, 30% of the city’s population would shift to a new capital district of the United Arab Emirates. This would also reduce the number of buildings in the city. The government also sought to facilitate mobility, by raising the provision of public transport, including underground trains and stations, under its ‘Abu Dhabi Mobility 2030 plans’. Ultimately, these measures aimed to address the challenge of environmental sustainability, while seeking to ensure that a high quality of life in the city was preserved.

16

Prof. Saskia Sassen Robert S. Lynd Professor of Sociology, Columbia University

globalisation and cities Prof. Saskia Sassen observed that much had been said about how globalisation made cities similar to each other. However, she argued this was only partly correct.

She emphasised that this era of globalisation was not just economic, but also political and cultural. It ‘pulls out, develops, values, the specialised differences of cities’. The deep economic and cultural histories of cities would grow in importance. Previously, and particularly during the Keynesian era and in the West, there was more standardisation across cities. Today, the variability of cities should mean that knowledge – for example, about the environment, or how to handle a financial crisis – should emerge from the particularities of cities. This represented a ‘marriage between fairly standardised, often extremely abstract forms of knowledge, and the specifics of a place’.

Prof. Sassen spoke of the particularity of the current financial crisis. There had been a number of financial crises, especially if country-adjustment crises were counted. There had been more than 70 crises, including a few big ones. The particularity of the current crisis involved leveraging, and extremely speculative activity. Regions were also affected differently. Expected bank losses were largest in the United States, followed closely by Europe, with significantly lower losses expected in Asia. The compositions of these crises were also different. The critical component of the current crisis was that it was ‘Made in America’. From 2001 to 2007, credit default grew from US$1 trillion to US$62 trillion – larger than global GDP. The estimated notional value of derivatives was US$600 trillion, 14.5 times that of global GDP. Prof. Sassen said the crisis was so severe that it offered an opportunity for innovating, rethinking and trying alternatives. She described the West as dominated by financial logic, and the idea that a financial crisis could be addressed through a financial solution. She saw this as problematic.

Turning to the environment, Prof. Sassen argued that complexity in cities allowed for ‘a bridge between the multiple ecologies of the city and the multiple ecologies of the biosphere’. The approach should not be to flatten or reduce problems to common denominators, but rather to use the complexity of the city. She cited two aspects of cities that should allow for such bridging: cities were multi-scalar, and they had multiple ecologies. She noted that other presenters would address environmental issues from the perspective of science and biology, which she would not elaborate on. Instead, she proposed the notion of ‘reorienting the material and organisational ecologies of cities’. Cities already had multiple bridges with the biosphere, but these were mostly negative and destructive.

Prof. Sassen posed the question of how the balance of these bridges could be altered, so that they could protect and be conducive to environmental sustainability.

Mr. Peter Schwartz Co-founder and Chairman, Global Business Network

climate change: urgent and real Mr. Peter Schwartz said his presentation would convey two main points: one, climate change was urgent and real, and two, choices made about the future of cities would have the most important impact on climate change in the long run. He described the two decisions made by US policy-makers that shaped the environment and energy use for decades. These were, first, building the inter-state highway system, and, second, providing cheap loans to Korean War and Second World War veterans to buy suburban homes on small land plots. This resulted in people being spread across the landscape and they had to use cars for everything. This has shaped America’s energy and environmental policies over the last 50 years.

Mr Schwartz stressed that climate change would not unfold in a gradual pattern. Climate change was already underway and it would come ‘suddenly, abruptly and extremely’. We faced an era of global climactic extremes and variability, such as droughts, severe storms and rising sea levels. He warned that climate change was already upon us and would occur quickly, dramatically and in more places than we could imagine. The situation was extremely urgent and we did not have decades to wait.

Referencing Peter Calthorpe’s forthcoming book, Urbanization in the Era of Climate Change, Mr Schwartz said urban density was one of the most important factors determining energy and environmental impact. Manhattan was the most energyefficient place in the US, as buildings were close together and everybody walked, rode elevators and took public transport.

Energy use could be reduced in this way. ‘New Urbanism’ patterns were developing in ‘transit villages’, as also seen in Singapore. Finally and most importantly, urbanisation led women to move to cities and enter urban economies, resulting in lower birth rates. A falling global birth rate was a key factor in our long-term environmental future. Therefore, the city was among the most important engines for reducing environmental impact.

There were two basic arenas where change could occur: land use, and policies relating to energy alternatives. Decisions about the distribution of land and people were key. Also key were energy standards and costs, building efficiency and retrofitting, and the use of renewable energy or coal.

A standard pattern of extreme automobile use could be seen in all emerging markets. Auto-oriented development was predominant, with some degree of compact growth and a modest degree of urban infill. Instead, Mr Schwartz advocated a smart growth model. This would be 10% autooriented, and with 55% more compact growth and urban infill to increase densities and use otherwise wasted land.

In the policy arena, he highlighted the role of energy choices, fuel use, renewable energy portfolio, and especially, building efficiency standards.

17

Mr. Schwartz explored future scenarios involving two dimensions of uncertainty. To continue with standard development and policies, we would likely see continued sprawl across the world, akin to Los Angeles or São Paolo.

By relying on new technology, we would only bring about ‘green sprawl’. In other words, we would drive more efficient vehicles, but we would drive further. Just managing land use and development patterns, but without using green technologies, would produce ‘simple urbanism’. Mr. Schwartz argued for the model of ‘green urbanism’, which involved controlling land use, as well as using new transport, building and electricity technologies. The policy combination of managing sprawl and improved technologies for energy use, production and efficiency, would be the most important lever in the long run to reduce the impact of development, and the likelihood of devastating climate change.

Mr. Lee Tzu Yang Chairman, Shell Companies in Singapore

world faces transition to energy future Mr. Lee Tzu Yang noted a consensus that the world faced a transition to a new energy future. Global population was expected to reach 9 billion by 2050, with much of that growth in Asia. Rising affluence would propel demand for cars, air-conditioners and computers, while development would address the problem of poverty. As such, energy demand could double by 2050.

Addressing the issue of sustainable mobility, he said car numbers could double to 2 billion by 2050, with much growth, again, in Asia. Vehicles in Southeast Asia were expected to triple to 92 million by 2030. The critical question was how to meet the demand for energy, or rather, mobility, while enabling our cities to be liveable. Mr Lee responded with three points. First, the quest for mobility was a given, but how we met this demand would impact local and global conditions. Next, cities could meet this challenge through planning and design. Finally, low carbon options were being developed but more had to be done.

18

To stress the point that the quest for mobility was undeniable, Mr Lee noted that transport accounts for half the world’s oil production, a third of its energy use, and 25% of carbon dioxide emissions. Demand for fuels would likely grow, much of it still in the form of liquid hydrocarbons. Every day, 14,000 new cars arrive on Chinese roads. Shell anticipated that renewables could form up to 30% of the world’s total energy mix by 2050. This represented unprecedented growth, compared to 4% today. However, this shift would take 40 years, and only if we hurried. Nuclear and fossil fuels would still make up the remaining 70%.

The critical questions for transport was ‘how to get the most out of every drop’, in terms of efficiency, fuel usage, choice of fuel type, journeys taken and variety of transport modes. He asked how we could incentivise the most efficient transport.

Currently, there was great inequality in fuel efficiency. The average car in Europe was 40% more efficient than in the US. This saved Europe around 3.5 million barrels of imported oil daily, equivalent to the total oil consumption of France and the UK. Raising the kilometre per litre would emit less carbon dioxide per litre. More countries were now addressing this.

China had leapfrogged the US with higher fuel efficiency standards for its car production. The winner of the Shellsponsored Eco Marathon had set a record of 4,896km to one litre, enough to drive from Singapore to Beijing. This showed what could be achieved if we put our minds to it.

Mr. Lee felt the future of sustainable mobility was hybrid.

Varied fuels – from conventional gasoline to bio-fuels and electricity – would meet future transport needs. Bio-fuels were part of the mix as they could use existing infrastructure.

They were already a feature of the mandated approach in several countries. Not all bio-fuels were the same, and the end-to-end impact on greenhouse gas emissions had to be understood. Brazilian sugarcane ethanol was judged by most to be among the most carbon-efficient, and so Shell concluded a deal with Brazilian bio-fuel producer Cosan.

Next generation bio-fuels look promising, like algae grown in seawater. While electric vehicles would also be part of the energy mix, the full benefits of lower carbon dioxide emissions may not be realised if they were powered by coal-fired power plants. In contrast, natural gas plants emit half the carbon dioxide for the same amount of electricity.

Compact cities like Singapore, which use natural gas to generate electricity, were ideal for testing electric vehicle use. However, replicating it elsewhere may not be so easy.

Electric vehicles would improve air quality, but their impact on global warming depended on electricity sources.

Mr Lee said travel needs could be minimised through city planning and design, such as by locating homes and schools closer to offices and services, or promoting e-access and e-working. Public transport could be integrated with city facilities, and connectivity improved between different parts of the public transport system. More passenger kilometres could be achieved with fewer vehicle kilometres. Staggered work hours could cut congestion, improve fuel efficiency and save time for people. Compact cities were said to use a third less energy than sprawling ones.

Other green city measures include green lungs and green roofs, to curb the urban heat island effect and reduce air-conditioning. Bicycle paths, comfortable walkways and pedestrian-friendly precincts would also encourage human energy use. Better telecommunication infrastructure and connectivity could spur online services and change working methods, reducing the need for travel. It also made the movement of goods more efficient. Online ordering allowed for better logistics planning, from manufacturing scheduling to delivery. But even with the best designs, mobility needs would endure, as people would still want to go out to work, play, meet face-to-face and live without doing everything at home or in virtual reality.

Mr. Lee said the critical question was how to make alternatives worthwhile, so consumers, companies and communities adopt low carbon options in both fuel and materials. A key step would be to put a price on carbon dioxide emissions, through a carbon emissions market.

A market that limited emissions and capped allowances, while enabling allowances to be traded, would shape consumption via higher prices of goods and services.

Businesses would be motivated to channel ingenuity and investments to find the most efficient way to reduce emissions. This was why Shell backed a cap-and-trade system. Mr. Lee recognised there were difficulties associated with this system, like setting realistic and acceptable baselines for countries, and monitoring and certifying outcomes. Discussions in Copenhagen and Cancun were the first steps of a necessary journey. While countries and cities could tax emissions to discourage consumption or favour particular technologies, such measures would not ultimately produce the best alternatives. Taxes risked distorting outcomes, while impacting competitiveness.

Mr Lee concluded that whatever short-term measures were adopted, the importance of a market-based approach in the long term could not be ignored.

Providing mobility infrastructure, like roads and buildings, was now carbon dioxide intensive. Low-carbon alternative materials were needed. Shell created a line of bitumen products that allowed roads to be laid at lower temperatures, thus lowering energy use and carbon dioxide emissions by 30%. Beyond environmental benefits, technologies like ‘Instapave’ minimise disruptions by enabling rapid road surfacing. This saved time whilst connecting communities.

Mr. Lee noted something as basic as proper road maintenance helped lower carbon dioxide emissions.

Concrete was another big source of emissions. It required cement, which was made from limestone conversion at high temperatures. Every tonne of cement generated 0.8 tonnes of carbon dioxide. Using sulphur as the base instead of cement, Shell developed ‘Thiocrete’, a concrete substitute for selected applications. On a life cycle basis, it cut carbon dioxide emissions by 30% to 50%. As it did not need water, it also cut water-related energy and infrastructure costs.

19

discussion Dr. Patricia Clarke Annez (moderator) Research Director, ‘Making Cities Work for Growth Project’, and Non-Resident Senior Fellow, Brookings Institution

Dr. Patricia Clarke Annez opened the discussion by noting that speakers had painted a rich tableau, touching on different points of scale. While there was some sober talk on the scale of the challenge, she also observed a can-do, pragmatic optimism.

Responding to the first question on the challenge of green urbanisation, Mr. Schwartz stressed two elements: one, the need for consensus on the reality, scale and urgency of climate change, and two, an agreement that urbanisation could be a powerful force, if done right. This meant raising urban density, effectively managing energy use, and ensuring the right energy sources were used. The answers were obvious, not very difficult, nor particularly controversial, but people desired single-family suburban houses as an ideal.

He cited Singapore as a vital alternative, where people lived richly and deeply, with minimal environmental impact.

Emulating several of Singapore’s policies could provide the urban development most likely to provide a high quality of life and a growing economy with minimum environmental impact.

Another participant observed there seemed a consensus that urban sprawl led to significant energy waste and environmental problems. Cities like Los Angeles, São Paolo and Mexico City spread out, instead of inwards or upwards.

He asked if there were realistic signs that urban sprawl was changing, and if there was an actual shift towards the Singapore model. Prof. Sassen felt this was not a simple issue. ‘Sprawl’ may not be the most appropriate term for what occurred in megacities. Many slums had considerable density, and São Paolo, Mumbai or Mexico City were quite different from LA. Ironically, slums were often more ecologically reasonable than parts of LA; many garbage pickers there were self-defined eco-entrepreneurs. She saw Singapore’s model as expensive, although it would incur lower costs than the LA model. Even so, she felt it was probably not feasible for much of the world to aspire to Singapore’s model. For every Singapore, there would be many global slums. We would have to change our systems radically to achieve the Singapore model across the globe.

Therefore alternative models to the Singapore model were needed as well.

20

Referring to her discussion of bridges between cities and biosphere, a participant asked Prof. Sassen about environmental services that could be applied using this idea. Prof. Sassen described work she was doing with a biologist, a nanotechnologist and an environmental engineer, to capture complexities in cities and biospheres and to identify linkages. A central problem was to identify activities now occurring in factories, which could be ‘delegated back to the biosphere’. One example was self-healing concrete.

Bacterium thrives here, where it builds calcium, creates insulation, and purifies air. Experiments were now being done with sidewalks. In general, Prof. Sassen felt the city was ‘pregnant with possibilities’. Unlike other approaches to efficiency, which flattened differences, she advocated recovering particularities.

Dr. Annez noted Mr. Adams had described future population growth as mostly in smaller and poorer cities in developing countries. She asked him and Dr. Schaefer-Preuss how to reach cities with less capacity, and which were not as tidy as larger global cities. Dr. Schaefer-Preuss cited ADB’s Cities Development Initiative in Asia, supported by the German, Swedish and Spanish governments. This helped mediumsize cities tackle future problems by looking into climate change, congestion and various social issues. Support and advice were given to help partner cities develop capacity and get better organised. Mr. Adams highlighted three ways the World Bank engaged clients. One, decentralisation allowed resources to be deployed locally so decisions could be made there. The World Bank recognised that cities everywhere were experimenting with different ways of doing things and developing their own best practices. Where federal governments faced many difficulties and found movement difficult, a more dynamic range of services and actions were available at the local level. The second issue was how the World Bank could generalise these best practices appropriately so they could be made available more broadly.

The final issue was capacity building, which presented special problems with small cities. This was one area the urban hub in Singapore would try to address, so that skills could rise to levels where they could make a difference in small urban areas.

A participant asked how to overcome sanitation and waste management challenges in developing cities. Even without climate change or population growth, there were tremendous challenges in cities where only 10% to 15% of wastewater was treated. Pathogens and chemicals that affected the environment, human health and productivity were not treated. He asked if speakers had any strategies, policies

or technologies that could address this need. Mr. Al Mansouri cited Abu Dhabi as a fast-growing city that had a strategy for wastewater treatment. Government policy was to treat sewage as a water resource, and to change public perceptions of sewage water. Abu Dhabi now treated all sewage, and a new strategy was being developed to divide the water equally between landscaping and vegetable production so that 40% of vegetable consumption could be met locally. To do this, Abu Dhabi was working with a Dutch university to adapt the latest greenhouse and crop development technologies. In addition, indigenous plants would be incorporated into urban landscaping. This would mean all sewage-treated water could be recovered and reused. The impact on ground water and desalination would also be reduced.

Ms. Lompscher noted that when Europe underwent industrialisation, its urban infrastructure was quickly developed through large investments in public and private partnerships. She stressed the importance of integrated development of infrastructure and other urban sectors. If this did not take place, the problems highlighted would surface.

Prof. Sassen added it was important to recover practices and knowledge from the past. For example, the poor in Latin America devised their own ways of purifying contaminated water, as in the Rio Grande. She cited the two cycles of nitrate, the nitrogen and carbon cycles. In the nitrogen cycle, algae cleaned and revived water bodies. In the carbon cycle, similar processes let us ‘delegate back to nature’. While this was inapplicable to severe contamination like sewage, it could apply to ‘chemically-killed water and earth’. We should not be too focused on finding yet another new technology, but rather use knowledge we already have from biology and the sciences, to let nature do what she can do.

Dr Annez noted a lot of the discussion involved things that were already known. She asked Mr. Lee how we could mobilise this diversity of ideas into investments. Although he had spoken about higher energy prices, she noted the fluctuations in recent years and asked if a floor for energy prices was required. Mr. Lee described himself as a ‘technological optimist’ and said there was already a great deal of technology, which if deployed correctly, could improve lives tremendously. Still, there was a need to further incentivise technology development and deployment.

This was where the right economic signals were required.

Fluctuating energy prices and market expectations worked against long-term investments. Mr Lee agreed with Dr. Annez on the pitfalls facing new technologies. Our environmental problems demonstrated the failure of current market

mechanisms. We had to price greenhouse gases into consumption, for individuals, businesses and communities.

This was why prices had to go up. In the short term, this would be partly addressed by municipalities or countries that use taxes to bring prices to a level where it formed a base layer and helped bring prices to a level that may incentivise change. However, the key question was whether the revenue from these taxes would go back into the development of new technologies needed for the future. He felt the market was still needed to direct some of those resources into the most efficient technology and deployment methods.

A participant noted a trend where failed technologies or obsolete vehicles were exported from Singapore to Africa.

He asked Mr. Lee how this could be stopped, as it just shifted environmental degradation from a developed to developing country, and sweeping the problem under the carpet. The same vehicle would still pollute the environment be it in Africa or Asia. Mr. Lee was unfamiliar with this specific trend, but he knew that Singapore’s secondhand vehicles used to be exported, as the government gave tax returns for taking the vehicle off the road. He did not know where the vehicles went, but he believed they could have gone to New Zealand and even Africa. He did not have an economic solution to this problem, but from a technical sense, it would help to improve the fuel used even in an older vehicle, albeit not as much as replacing the vehicle. In terms of energy efficiency, the biggest factor was driving behaviour, and this was true of both old and new vehicles. When and how one chose to drive were the biggest determinants of how much fuel was used.

A participant from the floor felt excitement was missing from this plenary. He wanted to hear more about how cities should be organised so that development and the environment could be balanced. He cited Singapore’s example of balancing open spaces and density. Singapore was successful in bringing into the city, public parks, water features, green open spaces and areas where water technologies could be developed, bringing excitement and fun into the city. Dr. Annez disagreed and said that while there was a lot of sober realism and a sense of urgency conveyed by the speakers, there was also a great sense of optimism and excitement. She stressed the ‘answers were there already’. The key was to find the answers for each given place. As highlighted by Prof. Sassen, there was ‘a lot of diversity out there’. While Singapore had a unique and tremendously successful model, each and every country had to ‘strap on their safety belts’ and ‘start moving’ to prepare for change.

21

plenary 2

harmonious, creative & liveable cities: balancing community needs As globalisation raises competition among cities to attract talent, the issues facing urban governance have sharpened intensely.

Much as cities draw talented and high net worth individuals, they are also destinations for people seeking better jobs, livelihoods and opportunities. The confluence of wide-ranging cultures, interests and beliefs could be complimentary, but are also often jarring. These differences grow more pronounced due to shrinking public spaces arising from heightened urban migration.

Apart from seeking sustainable and high-growth strategies, a particular challenge for policymakers and urban planners involves balancing the needs of urban communities, to create more harmonious urban societies, and more liveable cities.

Left to right: Mr. Jonathan Mills, Mr. Richard M. Rosan, Dr. Vivian Balakrishnan, Mr. Ong Keng Yong, Mrs. Carrie Lam and Mr. Jim Clifton 22

Dr. Vivian Balakrishnan

Mrs. Carrie Lam

Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports, Singapore

Secretary of Development, Hong Kong SAR

living with one another: Singapore’s management of diversity Dr. Vivian Balakrishnan discussed how to balance community needs, while building a harmonious society.

He pointed out that Singapore came about almost by an historical accident of trade and immigration. Lacking natural resources, the country’s basic challenge had always been how to make a living. For it to survive as a city-state, Singapore had to remain economically vibrant, to create jobs and businesses.

A second order – but no less fundamental – question was how to live with one another. As an immigrant nation, Singapore did not choose its ethnic composition. Ethnic Chinese made up about 75% of the population, 15% were Malay, while 8% originated from the Indian sub-continent. Managing diversity was difficult, and it was a challenge faced by all cities, because cities – by definition – attract diverse peoples.

Dr. Balakrishnan said Singapore manages diversity based on three principles. First, it provided a safe and secure environment that was attractive to people. Next, it gave space for individuals to express their uniqueness. Finally, it ensured a sense of fairness. If people did not feel they were treated fairly, they would not live peaceably side-by-side. There were ample examples from history of previously harmonious communities that eventually broke-up due to a lack of a sense of fairness.

Dr. Balakrishnan reiterated that Singapore would always face the challenge of how to make a living, and how to live with one another. Security, the willingness to give space to one another, and the willingness to be fair, would always be the cornerstone of its approach.

conservation of central: meeting diverse needs of the community in Hong Kong Mrs. Carrie Lam used the conservation of Hong Kong’s Central District to explain the city’s attempt to embrace social harmony, liveability, creativity, and ultimately, to meet community needs, even as it developed to remain competitive as a global city. For a city with a small land area like Hong Kong, catering for sustained growth necessitated tighter planning through land zoning and infrastructure integration. This approach has involved highdensity development and maximising land use. Against this backdrop, the conservation of Central District represented a paradigm shift as far as the Hong Kong government was concerned.

In addition to being an internatioal financial centre, Central was a dynamic and culturally diverse place. In 2009, while many countries were developing new financial districts, the Hong Kong government decided to redevelop Central. Mr. Donald Tsang, Chief Executive of Hong Kong SAR, set out the rationale for Central’s redevelopment: ‘Central in Hong Kong is a very distinctive business district endowed with rich cultural and historical heritage, which we will do our best to preserve.

This reaffirms my belief that Central has unique historical and cultural features suited to sustainable development that have yet to be realised.’

Given the district’s prime location, Mrs. Lam pointed out that each development site would be worth billions of Hong Kong dollars, if sold on the commercial market. Instead, through a series of innovative projects, the government planned to conserve various old buildings and revitalise them with new purposes. For example, the New Central Harbourfront site would be developed into a civic node of low-rise structures for exhibition, retail, entertainment, civic and community uses. Other projects included transforming the Police Married Quarters into a creative industries landmark, the Central Police Station Compound into a contemporary hub of heritage, arts,

23

culture and tourism, and the Sheng Kung Hui Compound, where the Anglican church will redevelop and preserve its historical buildings and open its doors to the community with a new Community Complex. The church redevelopment was the only non-government initiative in the eight Central projects.

sector also encouraged compact developments, to reduce car dependency, ease traffic congestion and reduce carbon emissions. Taken together, these developments gave rise to more community spaces. With green infrastructure and thoughtful planning, many public spaces have drawn residents and economic activities, thereby improving residents’ quality of life and creating new jobs.

Mr. Richard M. Rosan

Mr. Rosan concluded that a growing urban population has elevated the importance of open spaces. Well-designed open spaces can better connect people with their environments, redefine urban lifestyles, and contribute to a sense of liveability in dense urban environments.

President, Urban Land Institute Foundation

liveability through well-designed public space Mr. Richard M. Rosan observed that the most successful cities foster liveability through welldesigned public spaces.

Well-laid out public spaces draw people and stimulate economic development. They also engender a sense of ownership and belonging in the community. For instance, Campus Martius Park in Detroit turned around one of the city’s poorest areas by making it a place where people wanted to spend time. Its 2.5 million visitors a year catalysed US$700 million worth of adjacent development.

One approach that had led to successful urban revitalisation involved incorporating green infrastructure. Mr. Rosan referred to examples from across the world, like Singapore’s Southern Ridges, the Hong Kong Wetland Park, Olympic Sculpture Park in Seattle, and Dublin’s Elm Park. In particular, he highlighted China’s Zhongshan Shipyard Park and the High Line in New York City as industrial areas that were converted into public places. Mr. Rosan believed that such creative uses of urban space to trigger economic development would gather momentum, as cities sought to attract people by becoming more appealing places to live and work.

Many cities in the United States had revitalised public spaces to boost their competitiveness. A recent surge in urban migration, particularly by affluent and educated individuals, was driven by their desire to live in places that were well-connected to work and recreation. At the same time, older and younger people were increasingly living in smaller homes near transit nodes. For its part, the public

24

Mr. Jim Clifton Chairman and CEO, Gallup Organization

Gallup’s world path Mr. Jim Clifton’s presentation centred on Gallup’s ‘World Path’ – a global study involving interviews with a million people, and which aimed to discover what was on people’s mind. The study highlighted the link between each individual’s contributions, and a country’s success. Across the world, from Khartoum to Kansas City, the study found that people were primarily concerned about jobs. This implied that every decision by policymakers had to have an impact on job creation. Furthermore, these efforts had to be visible to their constituents.

Brain Gain

Quality GDP Growth

Wellbeing

Good Jobs Institutions & Infrastructure Law & Order

Food & Shelter

Gallup World Path: a behavioural economic model for social well-being

Mr. Clifton went on to list the key factors for job growth, or what he called the Petri dish of job creation. The most important of these was law and order. If people lived in a state of fear and insecurity, they were not mobile. The statement that best reflected this was, ‘I feel safe to walk alone in my community at night’. In Ethiopia, a woman could not walk 300m from her home without fear of being raped or robbed. She therefore could not actively participate in, or contribute to, the economy. Drawing on his own experience, Mr. Clifton said his wife decided their family should not venture out of home after dark, after a spate of crimes in their affluent neighbourhood in Washington, D.C. Indeed, sales in neighbourhood restaurants and bars had dipped.

This showed that the question of security cut across all economic levels. Mr. Clifton stressed that this was behavioural economics; if the sense of security were enhanced, it would lead to economic growth.

The next factor for job creation was food and shelter. Without adequate food, water and shelter, one would lack the energy to be productive. Cities where more residents had sufficient food and shelter had a larger pool of productive energy. For cities starting from a low base, the good news was that even a small improvement was enough to impact GDP growth.

Confidence in institutions and infrastructure was the third factor. Institutions referred to education, transport and court systems. The problem of corruption, which was especially crippling to job creation, was captured under this heading.

Good jobs were next on the World Path. Citizens had to feel they were making a contribution and doing something important in a good job. This helped to establish their relationships with their family, their city and the world.

Under the next element, well-being, Mr. Clifton drew attention to the idea of hope. This was reflected in the question ‘do you think the best part of your life is behind you or ahead of you?’ Leaders had to appreciate that cities with hope could empower them, to lead and effect change. Finally, Mr. Clifton said that every city was somewhere on the path to brain gain, but each may use different levers to impact productivity and create employment. This led to the good jobs produced by quality GDP growth, the final step in the World Path.

Mr. Jonathan Mills Festival Director and Chief Executive, Edinburgh International Festival

festivals and liveability Mr. Jonathan Mills said that, like the reclamation of land for public space, festivals revitalise space through activities involving people. He felt the festival phenomenon was the best way to explore ideas of community engagement and liveability. Festivals were an important and enduring part of cities and residents’ lives.

They were also opportunities for collective hope. While acknowledging the efficacy of the hardware and software paradigm, Mr. Mills said it was not the only way to approach urban challenges. While there was an engineering future, he felt there was also a design future.

The Edinburgh International Festival began in 1947, in the aftermath of the Second World War. At a time when the tragedies of Auschwitz and Leningrad were still fresh in people’s minds, this festival brought together different cultures, to embrace values of fairness, respect and hope.

Since its inauguration, and without central control, Edinburgh Festival had spawned nine festivals. These include the fringe, international, tattoo and book festivals, and even one for politics, attesting to the entrepreneurial spirit. Collectively, it sells more tickets than any other event, except the World Cup and the Olympics. It attracts 950,000 visitors from around the world to a city of just 400,000.

Mr. Mills went on to observe that our senses were sensitive to the uniqueness of our environments. As French philosopher Maurice Merleau-Ponty said, ‘just as places are sense, senses are placed.’ We were able to get a sense of our space through sensory stimuli. Defining cities were those that allowed their uniqueness to engage our senses. In that regard, Mr. Mills cautioned against following fads, to prevent different cities from converging into composite versions of each other.

25

discussion Mr. Ong Keng Yong (moderator) Ambassador-At-Large, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Singapore

The importance of leadership in urban governance, though not the immediate subject of this plenary, surfaced in the discussion that followed. Responding to a question about how a big city like Mumbai, with wide-ranging socioeconomic struggles, could address the different needs and aspirations of its population, speakers were almost unanimous in their views on good leadership. Mr. Clifton felt that, left to their own devices, people tended to make shortterm decisions that were not beneficial to their lives.

Leaders had a role to play in taking the longer-term view.

For example, when Rwandan President Paul Kagame said his people wanted to earn their success and did not want aid, he forfeited immediate grants. But by changing his people’s state of mind, he reinvigorated them, creating a sense of hope and pride. Conversely, Detroit had declined from being the world’s richest city 40 years ago, to its current poor state due to weak leadership in various sectors.

Mr. Rosan agreed, and cited Mr. Lee Kuan Yew’s leadership, and Singapore’s remarkable success. He added that some American cities had recently enjoyed extraordinary leadership. Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley was known for his leadership, while allowing many voices in the community to be heard. In particular, government transparency was critical. While Mumbai’s task was daunting, he believed that leadership, either by an individual or group, could make a huge difference. Mr. Ong added that leaders needed strong political will to ensure implementation.

Dr. Balakrishnan drew on Singapore’s experience to suggest that different development phases required different tools and emphases. When the British military withdrew 50 years ago, Singapore’s greatest challenge was high unemployment. As it lacked the entrepreneurs to create enough jobs, the city welcomed multinational corporations to develop its infrastructure and people. As jobs were created and people were drawn to the city, housing became the priority. Singapore did not have slums today. 86% of people lived in public housing, and over 90% owned their homes. These numbers did not evolve naturally, but were due to sheer political will and organisation. Existentialist challenges remained, but the focus had changed as people had moved beyond the basics.

Mrs. Lam felt that even in mature cities that were developing quality city projects, there were still problems of a rich-poor

26

divide. The challenge was how to bridge that gap. She then spoke of the role of social enterprises. While the private sector’s main goal was profit maximisation, and government may not be efficient in many ways, there was an emerging school of thought that a third sector was needed. In this regard, Hong Kong’s government was trying to develop social enterprises.

Issues of public engagement and inclusiveness also emerged in the discussion. Dr. Balakrishnan highlighted the need to engage and win support from the whole population.

The social edifice would collapse if people felt insecure, if they could not welcome new people with new and disruptive ideas, and if they were not ready for the changes that would occur. Agreeing, Mrs. Lam said Hong Kong also embraced community engagement, because it valued collective wisdom and the process of devising solutions.

The government there reached out through web-based debates, Facebook discussions, town hall meetings and idea shops. She added that, no matter how governments chose to engage people, they needed the right mindset: to be prepared to listen and change course.

Mr. Clifton reported that engaged employees were more likely to create new business opportunities. He was particularly proud of the high level of engagement among Gallup employees, having spun-off 100 companies in the last 22 years while he was CEO. Moscow, on the other hand, had very low employee engagement, which he believed would hold back job creation. He added that volunteerism was key to personal well-being and was highly associated with employee engagement. Employees who were actively involved in the community – coaching teams, heading rotary clubs, or working on soup lines – were more fulfilled individuals and had more energy. They were also more likely to create new business for the company. Higher incomes enhanced well-being only up to a point, while volunteerism brought happiness beyond that.

Mr. Clifton lamented that insufficient effort had been put into real job creation. As this was difficult, governments tried to get away with ‘pretend job creation’ by generating more innovation and creativity. Unfortunately innovation and creativity were not scarce; what society needed was more entrepreneurship. Responding to feedback from a delegate on the bureaucratic hurdles faced by Singapore entrepreneurs, Dr. Balakrishnan agreed that government should not be in the business of judging the quality of entrepreneurial ideas. This was the job of the market. Government’s role was to facilitate their work, and not get in their way.

Responding to a participant on the role of spirituality in governance, Dr. Balakrishnan said the best guarantee for religious freedom was a secular system, where everyone could profess his or her own faith. Rules and common spaces had to be imposed fairly on all. Once people understood that it was not a matter of competition between different religious groups, and that fundamentalism and violence were not tolerated, the situation became one of greater religious freedom, and people could seek spiritual fulfilment. The paradox of religious freedom was that it needed a brutally fair system based on secular values. Dr. Balakrishnan said this was why Singapore would never be a theocracy, and would not let any single religion dictate the agenda or set the norm for society. Mr. Clifton reported that while Gallup had not found any link between spirituality and good governance, it found that religious individuals were more disciplined.

Dr. Balakrishnan felt three elements contributed to happiness: a good family, a good job, and a good future. These were guides to policymakers. Singapore sought to be attractive to people with families, as this set the tone for society. People with families were, by definition, invested in the future. They were prepared to create and leave something for their children.

Singapore had to be a place of opportunity, because without that, young people would move elsewhere. In the midst of diversity, a sense of cohesion or community was also needed.

He asked why people would want to stay, be engaged and contribute if they were unable to identify with each other. He added that this remained a great challenge for Singapore.

Even after its hardware was completed, the country had to keep reinventing and renovating its software and soul. The challenge for planners and administrators was how to ensure their cities remained attractive to people. People had to believe their best years were ahead of them, and that they could make a positive change. Everything policymakers did had to centre on making cities attractive to a wide range of people, giving them opportunities to express themselves, feel they made an impact, and that they could create the future.

Mrs. Lam felt that, in places like Hong Kong and Singapore, people took for granted basic elements like law and order and job security. Instead they were interested in higher order issues of brain gain and well-being. She wondered if a point of saturation would be reached, when people grew fatigued with innovation, creativity and the arts, and were driven back to the basics. Mr. Mills countered that creativity and innovation were in fact basics. To see them as optional extras would be a mistake. He saw the elements in the Gallup World Path as an integrated whole, and felt that a society cannot opt out of any of them. Taking Dr. Balakrishnan’s point on creating space, he submitted that society had to work out

how creative, intelligent individuals could express themselves in intimate ways within any kind of system.

Picking up a question on public transport, Mr. Mills lamented that a third of the space in almost every city was dedicated to automobiles, while only 4% was set aside for parks. Beyond efficient transport infrastructure, cities should dedicate space for pedestrians. Perambulatory experiences transformed our appreciation of, and our relationships with, cities. Successful regeneration in cities like Copenhagen had included well planned pedestrian precincts as part of urban masterplans.

Mr. Rosan added that insufficient funds were allocated to public transport, to the detriment of urban mobility.

Asked to elaborate on his concept of a design future, Mr. Mills shared his experience in teaching architectural students, who were gifted in visual terms. When asked to describe their works, students used exclusively visual terminology, and were stunned when asked how their works would sound. Mr. Mills felt there was a strong correlation between multi-sensory engagement and ecological design. If architects only used their visual sense to design buildings, they would not be ecologically sustainable. All five senses had to be used to ensure more sustainable design. He cited the example of the building within which the conference was held, as being inefficiently designed. It was visually designed, acoustically renovated, and then economically designed. The process of integrating such elements made for sustainable design. Such solutions were design-driven, not merely engineered.

Dr. Balakrishnan stressed the need for balance in governance.

Singapore had to strike balances between urban sprawl and greenery, between different races, languages and religions, and between modernity and tradition. One of the greatest contemporary challenges was inequality. As an open and globalised city, Singapore offered immense opportunities for talented people. But it also had to consider those who lacked the same skills or opportunities. It had to maintain a sense of unity, for people to coexist peaceably in a small city-state.

Striking a balance across several dimensions was vital to places like Singapore.

Mr. Ong closed the plenary with three observations. First, a strong mental make-up, will and capacity were needed to face urban governance challenges, and to enforce plans and solutions. Next, there was no one-size-fits-all solution. Each city had to find its own path, from the slums of Mumbai to the scarcity of green spaces facing Singapore. Finally, inclusiveness was critical to building harmonious cities. Even if we could not include everybody’s idea, people needed a sense that they were contributing to determining their city’s future.

27

closing plenary

liveable and sustainable cities: the way forward The closing plenary highlighted the multi-dimensional and interconnected considerations in city planning, enriched by the panellists’ personal experiences. The session covered issues of culture, society and demography. Other topics that emerged included the day-to-day functioning of cities, and preserving cities’ unique identity and character. The central theme was the role of sound governance and community engagement in designing cities for people, regardless of size, prevailing constraints, or stage of development. The plenary pointed the way towards developing better-informed policies and solutions, as well as capabilities that cities need to invest in today, for a better home for tomorrow.

Left to right: Dr. Vishakha N. Desai, Dr. Lui Thai Ker, Dr. Dieter Salomon, Mr. Joshua Cooper Ramo, The Rt. Hon. Robert Doyle and Mr. Joel Kotkin 28

Dr. Vishakha N. Desai

Dr. Liu Thai Ker

President, Asia Society

Director, RSP Architects Planners & Engineers Pte Ltd, and Chairman, Centre for Liveable Cities Advisory Board

culture: the soul of a city Dr. Vishakha N. Desai launched the plenary session by addressing the role of culture in city development.

With her background in political science and art history, Dr. Desai said she had always been interested in the intersection of culture and policy. She observed that 19th century Western urban models influenced many Asian cities. This was despite Asia’s own ancient civilisations, each with its own rich historical and cultural legacies.

From her frequent travels across Asia, she noted that cultural considerations appeared to be consistently lacking in city planning in this region. She felt that culture went beyond artistic expression and museums; it was also about lifestyles and cultural traditions, and how people behaved and acted in their environment. A city stood out, and was perceived as inviting, by the intangibles it offered, such as the quality of its lifestyle. This pointed to the importance of the cultural dimension in city development.

At the same time, this argument did not diminish the importance of hardware issues. Drawing from her experience in New York City, she found the ‘culture of that city is as important a part the economic engine of the city, as it is about the quality of life’. Culture could thus be considered from the perspective of how or why it makes a city attractive. It was as much as about our soul as it was about the urban economic engine. Dr. Desai concluded by arguing that Asia’s fast growing cities had to consider cultural dimensions as an integral part of their pursuit of economic development.

the ‘machine’ at the core of city planning City planning is a longrange envisioning exercise.

It was often translated into masterplans, which project inspiring visions of a city’s future into subsequent decades. Planners played an instrumental role in connecting these visions to the masterplan. Recounting Singapore’s experience, veteran city planner Dr. Liu Thai Ker argued that, beyond interpreting future ideals, planners had to be in touch with day-to-day pragmatic realities. He believed that urban design brought out a city’s soul and culture, which could be manifested in iconic buildings and glamorous projects. But this did not replace planning, which he called the ‘machine’ that kept a city functioning, and which met the basic needs of residents’ daily lives.

As part of this mechanism, wide-ranging considerations had to be factored into planning, including social, economic, political, environmental, technological and aesthetic factors.

This information was fed to planners to help them make decisions, which then cascaded down to city planning.

Soft and hard data came from various levels, like the precinct or building levels. Seen in this way, the city could not be seen as purely hardware, because of the range of social and cultural considerations that were taken into account. In Singapore, this translated into a clean, green, functioning and beautiful environment, which was conducive for people to work, live, play and move around.

Dr. Liu observed that city planning in fast-moving Asia tended to be short-term, and largely project- and imagedriven. He was concerned that inadequate attention was given to longer-term, eco-system dimensions of planning, which demanded a conscious commitment to ‘things that we must do’, as opposed to ‘things that we like to do, or we can do’. While Singapore had its share of sexy projects, like the integrated resorts and other iconic buildings, these lay on the base of a solid, functioning machine. This approach had worked well, considering that four-fifths of the country had been built in the last fifty years. Not only did the machine work, he said it worked beautifully.

29

Masterplanning was a receptacle of ideas. The planning approach had to be comprehensive and long-term, to give a coordinated agenda for ideas to be implemented. Such plans had the best chance of survival in adverse environments.

Dr. Liu acknowledged the word ‘machine’ could be jarring, but said it was crucial to city planning. To keep the citymachine running, he called for training for more ‘urban mechanics’. Describing himself as a planning mechanic, Dr. Liu pointed to his twenty years in public housing, before becoming chief planner and drawing up Singapore’s 1989 Masterplan. He said that Singapore’s public housing considered every detail, like the location of clinics and schools. For those who saw this work as soulless, he recalled that he was supported and advised by up to 12 doctoral sociologists. Prior to drawing up the Masterplan, the government spent four years calculating spatial needs for basic infrastructure, like the number of schools and hospital beds. Planners took these raw numbers and converted them into spatial projections. The entire process was quantitative, sociologically based and hierarchical.

In the initial phase of public housing, Dr. Liu was guided by the philosophy of planning ‘ahead of people’s aspirations’.

This meant going beyond the immediate need for shelter, to build communities that forged a sense of identity and belonging. How big should communities be to create a sense of belonging? Again they turned to sociological research to define the optimal size of community clusters, or ‘precincts’, with essential facilities to cater to the needs of the neighbourhood.

Freiburg had bucked the trend of declining populations and jobs, seen elsewhere in Germany. Historically, the city lacked significant industries. Instead, its growth was powered by knowledge, science and research. It had one of the largest universities, with many supporting institutions and companies. On top of attracting talents with ample jobs and opportunities, Freiburg offered a culture of civility, sporting activities and leisure time.

Dr. Salomon recounted how he was elected mayor after he joined the Green Party as a state legislator. During his term, he observed that people had very high expectations of their mayor, but the office-holder was only vested with limited powers. People could not see beyond their personal views and immediate interests, and could not appreciate the full picture. This was human nature, and Dr. Salomon observed it was difficult to manage people’s expectations and self-interests.

When asked about the biggest mistake he had made, the Lord Mayor related an episode from four years ago, when his city faced a huge financial problem. A proposed solution involved riding the high market prices to sell 8,000 public flats. The proceeds could have paid off the city’s debt and upgraded aging infrastructure. However, a referendum overwhelmingly rejected the sale, so they had to find alternative solutions. Although the situation had improved, Dr. Salomon felt it had been a mistake to try and solve the problem in one broad stroke.

The Rt. Hon. Robert Doyle Lord Mayor, Melbourne

Dr. Dieter Salomon Lord Mayor, Freiburg, Germany

Freiburg’s growth as a city Lord Mayor Dr. Dieter Salomon shifted the discussion to his city, Freiburg. This 900-year-old German city with a population of 200,000 was today a global model for sustainable urban development, based on its long-term commitment to sustainability. It had set a target to cut by 40% its carbon dioxide emissions by 2030. This would be achieved through a range of measures, including energy conservation and efficiency, renewable energy, car traffic reduction, and environment-friendly transport. A critical success factor was a strong network connecting active citizens with science, industry, transport companies and other institutions.

30

preserving Melbourne’s identity and character Certain cities possess a unique identity, character and charm, qualities that leave lasting impressions on people. Melbourne was such a city, according to its Lord Mayor, the Rt. Hon. Robert Doyle. Growing up in a small town in Northeast Victoria, his connection to the city began with boyhood

excursions there with his grandmother. He recalled his childhood impression of the city as magical, particularly during Christmas, when he admired the colourful displays in department store windows. This emotional connection inspired his initiative to reinvigorate Melbourne’s little laneways, which were now filled with quaint restaurants, galleries, quirky shops, funky bars and even graffiti. People now came from around Australia and the world to see and experience this side of Melbourne.

Recently, the Lord Mayor commissioned a study on how to maximise Melbourne’s competitive advantage as a financial hub. Having sought academic advice, he expected typically professorial and economics-centric findings. Instead, the unanimous recommendation was to enhance the city’s liveability. Business owners and professionals asked him to make the city pleasant for living. They told him to maintain street vibrancy, so as to attract the talents needed to grow businesses. Mr. Doyle said the takeaway he wanted to share with other mayors was: ‘great streets make great cities’.

If mayors concentrated on making streets that work for people, that were important for the ‘machine’ to function, they would make great cities.

Mr. Doyle also warned politicians against being out of step with their own communities. Recounting his experience of trying to revitalise a main thoroughfare some years ago, he found that his intention to return traffic to the street was the opposite of what people wanted, which was to fully pedestrianise it. This episode also brought across the importance of engaging stakeholders in the community.

Ultimately, elected officials had to strike a balance. They had to know when to champion unpopular causes, and when to humbly admit that they did not have all the wisdom needed to make the right decisions. Make a mistake, Mr. Doyle reminded the audience, and it might be the last you make in office.

demographics, he found that well-run smaller cities, which fit into the global economy, were much more important than bigger cities. He cited Singapore as an example of a small city-state that was extraordinarily successful.

In the face of growing urbanisation, Mr. Kotkin warned that the way cities were built made them ‘toxic to the formation of families’. This was a major problem, as cities faced an aging population down the road. He lamented that the dynamic urban experience associated with earlier cities was beginning to disappear, as families moved to the suburbs to raise children. City folks were facing increasing stress due to intensifying competition. This had begun to produce undesirable effects. People were not dating and were choosing to remain single, or married couples were not procreating. Mr. Kotkin found it ironic that the very factors that once made cities grow and prosper were now leading to their demise.

On a more optimistic note, Mr. Kotkin observed that smaller cities in suburban areas were attracting families. This was borne in net migration trends, from increasingly unaffordable and space-starved megacities like New York, to suburban locations like Hudson Valley, Montclair in New Jersey, and Fargo in North Dakota. He argued that the challenge facing urban planners was to create dense urban spaces that could accommodate families.

Another issue that Mr. Kotkin raised was upward mobility.

He highlighted three cities — London, Mumbai and Mexico — where he observed a worsening situation of class divides. He also observed the widening income gap between urban and rural areas, and within urban populations, which he found to be most accentuated in cities, including those in China.

Mr. Joel Kotkin Distinguished Presidential Fellow in Urban Futures, Chapman University, and Adjunct Fellow, Legatum Institute

urbanisation and its impact on families In urban history, bigger was perceived to be better. A city’s dominance was associated with its size and population.

But urbanist Joel Kotkin argued that the experience of megacities had challenged this notion. In his work on city

31

discussion Mr. Joshua Cooper Ramo (moderator) Managing Director, Kissinger Associates, USA

Dr. Desai wondered if the question we should ask about families was ‘are cities inhabitable for families anymore?’

She asked if people left big cities because of their high density of, or if people had always moved out, as they earned more and sought more space in the suburbs. She noted a common view that density was key to sustainability, and that living in cities reduced carbon footprints.

Mr. Kotkin responded that it was not an urban/suburban question, but rather, how intelligently we could plan our living environments. Some city dwellers had big carbon footprints due to frequent travel and consumption of imported goods.

In the next 20 to 30 years, he foresaw more people would work from home or in employment centres near suburban communities. This would help to significantly reduce carbon footprints. Mr. Kotkin stressed the need to find ways to make various environments sustainable, rather than encouraging everyone to live in dense urban areas.

He added that, for the less well-to-do, high-density city life could be very unpleasant.

Mr. Doyle felt that families might not want to live in city centres for certain reasons. Melbourne in the pre-dawn hours could not be called family-friendly. However, city leaders could create the conditions to attract diverse residents, including families. This required careful street-level planning. He described family-friendly measures undertaken

by Melbourne: funding for family-oriented activities and festivals, sports and cultural activities on city streets, and converting a city-owned commercial building to residential apartments in the mid-1990s. The last measure was aimed at convincing private developers there was a market for city centre residences. The number of dwellings in Melbourne’s central business district had grown from 400 in the mid-1990s, to 17,000 currently. This had contributed to Melbourne’s vibrancy and soul.

32

The discussion then turned to designing cities for people, including living spaces that let people meet and bond, reviving multi-generational diversity, and building communities through integrated planning. A Swedish delegate said city life was not just about the hardware of traffic and buildings, it was more about bonds and bridges between people. A city attracts people from diverse backgrounds, and the challenge was to develop places of congregation for different groups, who do not usually get a chance to meet. These congregation points could become the real soul of the city. He cited an example from his city, where young people from diverse backgrounds gathered at a skate park during the World Cup Finals because of this shared interest. He also noted a reversal of the trend of people moving to the suburbs. In his city, people were returning. At the same time, they demanded changes in the city, to suit their desired lifestyles. These were time-pressed folks who sought smaller carbon footprints by cycling to work, but who also wanted to raise families in the city and to have access to nature. Indeed, he noted a trend of deurbanisation in some Swedish cities.

Beyond the ageing population issue, a Melbourne delegate noted a rise in single-person households. This implied inefficiency, in terms of sustainability. There were also concerns that such individuals could grow disengaged from their community. Mr. Kotkin echoed a similar concern, seen in cities that designed certain zones to cater to the lifestyles of those in their 30s, while building other zones to cater to older folks. He suggested cities bring back multigenerational constituents into the same neighbourhood, with facilities catering to young and old. One would find preschool children mingling with seniors in such communities.

Sustainable societies should not be just about having clean water and air, but also about having enough generational diversity to thrive.

Another delegate asked how these issues could be incorporated into city design. Dr. Liu replied by first noting that Singapore’s low birth rate should not be entirely

attributed to its physical environment. A recent survey found that Singaporeans were the world’s most hardworking people. This was a result of Singapore being a regional centre, with a small labour force that embraced good work ethics and a commitment to deliver. Workers ended up being spread too thinly, generating much stress, thus partially contributing to the low birth rates.

On urban design, Dr. Liu spoke of Singapore’s attention to software, not just hardware. Conscious community-building efforts extended to helping new residents settle in, with support from community groups. Communities were made up of precincts, each being three to five hectares in size, with 700 to 1,000 families. He also reminded the audience that, in general, urbanites were seen to be less ready to make new friends. Dr. Liu then described the deployment of sociologyled design principles in planning for public housing in Singapore. For example, single points of entry were planned for neighbourhoods, to create opportunities for people to meet. Sociological inputs were also used to determine the length of access corridors in blocks of flats. Earlier designs had featured long corridors across entire floors, but sociologists advised shortening these, to link six to eight families at most, thus creating conditions for neighbours to connect with one another within smaller clusters.

Dr. Desai said affluent families were returning to her Upper West Side neighbourhood in New York, attracted by the larger co-op apartments there, which were mostly owned by seniors. This brought multi-generational diversity to the community. In Asia, multi-generational living was the traditional norm. She asked what changes could be made to living environments to encourage this practice.

With good jobs and schools, such districts were able to attract families. Parents knew their children were safe and occupied while they worked. These districts also managed to be nearly carbon neutral, which projected a positive image. When asked how he helped build social relationships in his community, Dr. Salomon said it was necessary to build infrastructure that provided a safe environment for people to come together and build trust. If social life was to develop, one had to be able to trust that neighbours were friends, not enemies. Then social life could develop, by making an effort to have interactions and sporting activities.

The final comment was from Singapore National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan. He cautioned against the idea that high-rise, high-density living was undesirable.

He said there could be many sociological reasons behind declining dating and birth rates. Many cities, particularly in Asia, had no choice but to accept high-density living.

Singapore had made the best use of limited space through design considerations for housing estates. Each accommodated an average of 200,000 people living in highrise apartments. Each estate had access to a wide range of essential facilities for work, education, transport, sports, recreation and worship. ‘Void decks’ on the ground floors of apartment blocks offered common spaces for residents to interact, and could be converted into childcare and elder care facilities. They were also used for weddings, funerals and community events. While cities varied in size, he felt our urban environments could be made liveable and sustainable if we consciously devised urban plans, policies, measures, and designs for the people.

Dr. Salomon felt the answer lay with integrated planning.

Previously, Freiburg had built communities quickly, without the necessary amenities, and this caused many problems later. The new approach was to plan ahead and put infrastructure, like schools, in place within new districts.

33

34

ministers and mayors programme

35

ministerial dialogue

leading the change: building liveable and vibrant cities What makes a city liveable and vibrant? Is there a one-size-fits-all model? Many dictionaries define ‘liveable’ as a place fit for human living, and ‘vibrant’ as pulsing with energy and activity. While these may be the basic requirements of a liveable and vibrant city, they are not comprehensive in today’s context. Urban society increasingly associates liveability and vibrancy with sound governance, security, economic success, environmental quality, neighbourhood amenity, quality of living, and individual wellbeing. What are our visions and priorities for liveable and vibrant cities, especially in a post-crisis world?

Were these abstract theories, or ones we could realise? This session gathered past and present government officials, urban theorists and planners from around the world to address these questions.

Left to right: Dr. John So, Mr. Lim Guan Eng, Mrs. Carrie Lam, Ms. Grace Fu, Hon. Robinson Njeru Githae, Prof. Dr. Marat R. Safiullin and Dr. Jaime Lerner 36

Ms. Grace Fu

Mrs. Carrie Lam, JP

Senior Minister of State for National Development and Education, Singapore

Secretary for Development, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region

opening remarks

As cities grow, they continued to focus on basic requirements, like functioning infrastructure, good communications, efficient transport, sufficient housing and access to educational and recreational facilities. However, were these enough to make a city liveable and vibrant?

Ms. Grace Fu opened the session by noting that while Singapore’s per capita GDP was $53,000, this did not necessarily make it liveable and vibrant. Singapore was rated highly for its low crime rates, ease of setting up business and prompt emergency services, but it ranked poorly in indices measuring happiness. In a Mercer Quality of Life survey, Singapore was ranked 22 and called a ‘pleasant practicality’. In the Hub Culture 2010 Zeitgeist index, Singapore ranked 14, with the comment ‘sturdy Singapore is increasingly synonymous with terms like private wealth, medical tourism and resort living’. Monocle, a lifestyle publication, warned that Singapore had slipped to 21 on its list of the most liveable cities, as others were doing a better job. There was room for improvement in Singapore, due to high stress levels, relatively high living costs, and self-censorship. After 50 years of selfgovernance, the city-state still struggled to define what it meant to be a liveable and vibrant city.

starting with the vision: the Hong Kong experience

Mrs. Carrie Lam began by dispelling the misconception that Hong Kong was a concrete jungle. Although vertical density had served it well, Hong Kong also preserved its countryside.

Despite containing seven million residents within 1,100sqkm, built-up areas covered only 24% of the land. Development was not allowed on the 46% of land designated as country parks. Compared with other developed cities, Hong Kong also had a very low carbon footprint, and among the lowest per capita lengths of public roads and lowest private car ownership rates.

Hong Kong knew it had to go beyond economic competitiveness to develop into a quality city in future.

In his 2007 policy address ‘New Direction for Change’, Chief Executive Donald Tsang articulated the 2030 vision for sustainable balance and diversified development. This envisioned planned land use through zoning (statutory instruments to control development parameters and building heights), and legislation for building safety and energy codes.

Furthermore, government set an example by reusing historic buildings, like a former magistracy building that was turned into an arts and design college. It also promoted electric vehicles and green buildings, and required government buildings to aim for platinum or gold ratings in BEAM (Building Environmental Assessment Method), Hong Kong’s green building standards.

Mrs. Lam said that while legislation and planning were good, money was still critical. Hong Kong had set aside US$2.5 billion to turn a 40ha reclamation site into the West Kowloon cultural district. Other developments included turning the old airport into a green leisure place with an international cruise terminal, enhancements to Victoria Harbour, and a more

37

extensive rail network. Hong Kong also invested in older areas through maintenance, urban regeneration, carbon audits and energy efficiency in existing buildings. Mrs. Lam concluded that change happened in Hong Kong because it involved its people in the process.

Hon. Robinson Njeru Githae Minister of Nairobi Metropolitan Development, Kenya

getting the basic infrastructure in place: the Nairobi experience Nairobi represented 21% of Kenya’s urban population.

The city’s population had grown from about 350,000 in 1963 to over 3 million in 2005, and rising to a projected 8 million by 2030.

Mr. Robinson Njeru Githae outlined a mandate by the Kenyan President to turn Nairobi into a world-class metropolis by 2030. But while this mandate was clear, the challenge lay in knowing where to start, as Nairobi grappled with several major problems like urban migration, solid waste management and housing.

The city had 3.5 million people during the day and more than 4 million at night. More than 500,000 people came to or through Nairobi each day. Since most Kenyan youths sought jobs in the city after graduating, Nairobi set up a Youth Enterprise Fund, which youths could tap on to set up businesses. A similar Women Enterprise Fund was also set up. As it was impossible for everyone to get a job in the city, these funds were meant to encourage people to engage in productive businesses on a small scale, in the informal sector. By 2005, 50% of Nairobi’s labour force worked in this sector. Government had also begun to offer education loans, so youth could access training programmes.

38

Relating his experience with solid waste management in Nairobi, Mr Githae felt that the challenge lay in getting the 15 local authorities and 15 municipal authorities to work together. Each authority had its own administrative structure, political and executive arms. They were also used to autonomy, and fearful their mayors would lose their jobs. The local authorities’ political dynamics presented a challenge in service delivery. The rise in solid waste volumes was not matched by growth in the capacity of relevant urban authorities to deal with the problem. The City Council of Nairobi collected about 40% of Nairobi’s waste and private firms handled another 20%, while the rest remained uncollected. Other issues included cleaning up the river that ran through Nairobi, and providing adequate housing for the population. Mr. Githae concluded by saying Nairobi faced several challenges but was intent on tackling them and turning itself into a world-class metropolis.

Mr. Lim Guan Eng Chief Minister, Penang, Malaysia

towards becoming an international city: the Penang experience Mr. Lim Guan Eng said Penang’s focus was on using human resources to propel it towards becoming an international city, with a GDP of US$20 billion and a per capita income of $15,000 by 2020. Penang’s GDP had grown from US$400,000 in 1970 to US$10 billion to date. This was largely due to the manufacturing sector, comprising 39% of the economy, while services accounted for 57%. As an industrial state, Penang contributed nearly a third of Malaysia’s exports, and more than half its electronic exports.

Mr. Lim listed the factors which made Penang attractive to multi-national corporations: [1] availability of human talent, [2] effective and efficient supply chain management, [3] competent and reliable logistics and communications, [4] strong intellectual property protection, [5] good governance and strong leadership, [6] creativity and innovation in science and technology, and [7] a liveable city.

Mr. Lim said that to be a ‘software valley’, Penang had to be a liveable and vibrant city. He cited an ECA international survey, which ranked Penang the 8th most liveable city in Asia. Penang was also ranked 2nd for best food in the world, one of the 30 global business process outsourcing centres of the future, and was a UNESCO World Heritage City for its cultural diversity and living heritage. He attributed Penang’s position as Malaysia’s most liveable and vibrant city to [1] security and stability, [2] good governance, [3] economic vibrancy, [4] quality of life and diversity, [5] environmental friendliness and sustainability, [6] heritage conservation, and [7] being an intelligent city encompassing human, collective, digital, institutional and integrity intelligence.

Penang believed sustainability allowed for balanced economic growth, and equitable development for all. It recognised it had to find its own niche as an international city.

It therefore focused on quality, reliability, safety, sustainability and integrity as part of its branding. Other aspects included social cohesion and a shared society that allowed democratic participation, respect for diversity and individual dignity, equal opportunity, prohibition of discrimination, and equal opportunities for the young and talented, which would be crucial for Penang to be the ‘smart shop’ of the new knowledge-based economy.

Mr. Lim said the Penang government believed in Public Private Partnerships, while maintaining the principles of competency, accountability and transparency through open tenders, international participation, and providing the best regulatory framework.

Prof. Dr. Marat R. Safiullin Minister of Economy, Republic of Tatarstan, Russia

a sporting city: the Kazan experience Prof. Dr. Marat R. Safiullin described Kazan, the capital of Tatarstan, as over 1,000 years old and home of the revolutionary Lenin. Having top teams in football, hockey, basketball, ice hockey and grass hockey, it had earned the status of the sports capital of Russia. Located at the centre of the Russian Federation, Tatarstan was one of the most developed regions in Russia, and had doubled its GDP in the last 10 years with a per capita income of US$18,000.

Tatarstan’s good economic ratings could be attributed to its focus on quality of life, and its investment in infrastructure and social programmes. Among its most successful social programmes was a social mortgage programme. Lower income and young families were given a leg-up to achieve homeownership through discounted flats and lower interest rates. This contributed to city centre modernisation, as well as infrastructure development.

Prof. Safiullin said that Tatarstan had enjoyed more than 400 years of peaceful coexistence of Islam and Orthodox Christianity, its two main religions. This had sparked the interest of international social scientists to study their model of religious harmony. One feature of this was the national holiday of Sabantui, when each religion could represent its culture, food and tradition.

Prof. Safiullin concluded by saying that Tatarstan planned to improve the quality of its institutions and create a knowledgebased economy by using Singapore as a model.

39

Dr. John So Former Lord Mayor, Melbourne

strength in diversity: the Melbourne experience Dr. John So shared the factors that consistently rated Melbourne as one of the world’s most liveable cities, including a 2010 Economist Intelligence Unit global liveability report. More than 80% of Australians and more than half the world’s people lived in cities. Many recognised the need for a liveable, enjoyable and sustainable way of life. As people and money grew more mobile, cities had to transform themselves through urban design, to be well-positioned to compete for influence and investment. Melbourne observed that careeroriented people preferred to work in cities that offered the best quality of life. They were needed to drive economic growth, and to transform the city’s industries from low-yield manufacturing to high-yield knowledge industries. To attract the best workers, top firms also sought offices in cities offering a great lifestyle. Melbourne was attractive to people as it had an abundance of parks and beaches, modern transport, information and communications technology, community infrastructure, and public investment in sports, arts and cultural events.

Melbourne’s population growth was the highest in Australia, and its diversity had grown in tandem with its population. The city was home to people from over 200 countries, speaking more than 230 languages. Diversity worked for Melbourne, as people actively shared their customs and traditions with one another, and the community was actively engaged in shaping city life.

By 2050, Melbourne’s population was expected to double to seven million. This would lead to higher housing densities, with most development occurring along transport routes.

40

This would save the city’s green spaces from further development, and let people work and play closer to home. Dr. So predicted that local communities would be strengthened, and education broadened, to prepare the young for life in a globalised world. He concluded by saying ‘a liveable city must also be a sustainable city, one that exists in balance with nature, and provides for all citizens’.

Dr. Jaime Lerner Former Mayor, Curitiba, former Governor, Parana State, Brazil, and former President, International Union of Architects

a turtle city – live, work and play together: the Curitiba experience

Dr. Jaime Lerner likened a city to the turtle, which had to live, work and move with its shell as a single unit. Separating any of those functions would cause the turtle to die. Similarly, if a city were separated by urban functions, or by income, age or religion, this would not be good for it. Curitiba’s vision was to ensure it had a structure of living and working together. With that in mind, Curitiba introduced several improvements, including its public transport infrastructure and green environment. For example, its green area per inhabitant had grown from 0.5sqm to 52sqm. From the improvements he had witnessed, Dr. Lerner was convinced any city in the world could create impactful change in under three years.

He reflected that while speed was important in implementing changes, clear priorities were equally important in investing in urban growth and development.

Dr. Lerner felt a city was not about iconic buildings designed by celebrity architects. Ultimately, the soul of a vibrant and liveable city came from its people’s diversity, self-esteem, identity, and sense of belonging. Teaching children about

their cities was important in getting people to like their cities.

A city with a good quality of life would also attract more business, as people would see it as a place of opportunities.

Curitiba successfully attracted US$20 billion of new investment in five years just by providing a good quality of life to its inhabitants.

Mr. Tom Murphy Former Mayor, Pittsburgh, and Senior Fellow, Klingbeil Family Chair, Urban Land Institute

from manufacturing to entrepreneurship: the Pittsburgh experience Mr. Tom Murphy described Pittsburgh as a severely polluted industrial centre for most of the 20th century.

But in 2009, both Forbes and The Economist ranked it as one of the most liveable cities. He attributed Pittsburgh’s success, firstly, to its decision to be a different city. He likened Pittsburgh to Singapore 50 years ago, when it was difficult for Singaporeans to imagine progressing from a third-world to first-world city. Pittsburgh reduced its dependence on heavy manufacturing from 60% to less than 5% by transforming its environmental, educational and economic foundations through Public Private Partnerships.

hospitals got translated into product development, and it needed early stage financing. From being one of the least entrepreneurial cities in the United States in the 1980s, Pittsburgh experienced the highest growth of venture capital invested in start-ups from 1997 to 2007. This indicated a huge change in attitude: from a city that had been defined by big corporations and unions connected to the steel industry, to one that was entrepreneurial in attitude. This was a critical lesson for local governments on creating an entrepreneurial climate in the private sector and an attitude of risk-taking in start-ups.

In 2009, Pittsburgh’s single-minded focus on education paid off when it appeared in the top 10 of an educational ranking of 100 metropolitan areas. Mr. Murphy highlighted that Pittsburgh also focused on cleaning up its environment, by repurposing old mill sites for new uses. He concluded that transformations in its environment, schools and economy were essential to repositioning Pittsburgh for the success it has experienced.

Mr. Murphy said Pittsburgh lost 150,000 jobs from 1978 to 1985, as the steel industry shut down. This led to a huge population loss of over 500,000 people, as many did not see job opportunities in Pittsburgh. The city decided to redefine itself by creating an entrepreneurial business climate based on universities and hospitals, and their underlying research. Although the traditional infrastructure of roads, sewer and water lines were critical, the new economy required a different ‘infrastructure’, venture capital. It had to understand how promising research at universities and

41

discussion Ms. Grace Fu (moderator) Senior Minister of State for National Development and Education, Singapore

The discussion started with a question on how to get enough funding for all the projects a city wanted to undertake. Mr. Murphy felt that lack of funding was an excuse, and that it was more important to get a city’s priorities right. Pittsburgh was bankrupt and had lost a lot of its population, but it chose to invest in the future, despite the political risks. To do this, the city cut its operating budget, took the savings and created a US$100 million investment fund. This gave Pittsburgh more autonomy to invest in land and development with private partners, as it was not dependent on the federal or state government for funding.

Public Private Partnerships with universities and educational institutions were cultivated by painting a future direction for the city. Furthermore, city leaders ‘acted like entrepreneurs’ and saw the money as leverage capital, turning every dollar of public money into $10 of investment.

Dr. Lerner added that too much money was not good and every problem had a corresponding solution. Curitiba lacked a public transport system so the city designed a privatepublic initiative that began a few years ago and moved 2.3 million passengers daily. The system paid for itself and did not need subsidies. Another example was the lack of landfills for all the garbage that Curitiba generated. To overcome this, the city taught children to separate waste at home, thus reducing the amount generated by a third.

Curitiba now had the world’s highest garbage separation rate, with 70% of people separating garbage at home.

When the city lacked funds to clean up a polluted bay, it made an agreement with fishermen whereby the latter could keep any fish they caught but if they hauled in garbage, the city would buy it from them. This novel idea led to a clean bay and more fish. Dr. Lerner concluded that sometimes problems did not need to be solved by investments but simply by careful thought, and he encouraged every city to find good win-win solutions.

42

A delegate from Citibank in New York asked if a city’s success always had to be CEO-led, i.e. if leadership had to come from the top. Mr. Tom Murphy said that he had seen many examples of civic leadership, even in small neighbourhoods that local governments had written off.

He highlighted Cincinnati as a city with a weak political establishment, but where major corporations like Procter & Gamble and others provided enormous civic leadership. He felt that incremental changes were sometimes insufficient when the situation called for wholesale change. For instance, he felt New Orleans tried to respond incrementally to the monumental problem of Hurricane Katrina, when they should have responded in a broader way.

Responding to a question on Public Private Partnerships, Mrs. Lam said Hong Kong was a capitalist city with a market-driven economy and advocated a small government.

There were many examples of public-private cooperation, like the construction of the Cross Harbour tunnels. However, she acknowledged it was difficult to convince people to have an entrepreneurial spirit, and not to always expect government to take ownership. Mr. Githae added it was necessary to communicate visions constantly, and to build goodwill with the people. Nairobi had started a ‘Clean Up Day’ every third Saturday of the month, when everyone was expected to clean the area they were in. Although it initially met resistance, people gradually saw the value of the initiative and began to support it.

Mr. So argued for formulating policy and vision first, and then consulting the community and convincing people.

He noted how strong leadership was essential when Melbourne was in deep recession in 1991. To turn the city around, the City Council brought the people and business community together to bring life back into the city centre by encouraging city living. The number of residential dwellings had grown from 400 in 1991, to 17,000 today. The property tax windfall was then used to implement social reforms. To take the lead in environmentally sustainable development, a six-star graded energy building called Council House II was built amidst scepticism. However, the Council was redeemed when an independent report by Ernst and

Young stated the building had recovered its costs within seven years. Riding on that success, the Council and business community started work on refurbishing other office buildings to make them more environmentally-friendly.

These were examples of government leading the way, with the support of the business community.

A member of the audience asked if real estate was the key force in urban transformation. Prof. Safiullin said that although Kazan had tried to attract infrastructure investments through marketing programmes, the results were not spectacular. But once the city won a sports championship, it was a great marketing tool as many investors and foreigners were attracted to it. Mr. Githae agreed that infrastructure was important but said that making decisions based on priorities was even more critical.

For example, once the Kenyan government decided to move towards becoming a modern metropolis, they built more roads and public housing in five years than in the previous 40.

Dr. Lerner argued it was necessary to have a good strategy in governing a city. This involved balancing the needs and potentials of people. If it focused only on needs, there would be no change, but if it focused only on the potentials, or new ideas, the leader would be detached from his people.

To keep a balance, it was important to propose and communicate a vision that everyone understood and found desirable. If they understood it and found it desirable, people would help to make it happen. He warned that leaders do not have all the answers, but it was important to start, to be open to ideas, and to change track if necessary.

Mr. Lim felt the importance of real estate varied at different stages of development. What he thought was key to success was stakeholder engagement and involvement.

Sharing the vision, and the ability to inspire confidence, were also crucial. Inspiring confidence required certainty and clarity in policy implementation. As a government gained the confidence of people, it would be easier to implement policies. Confidence, like quality of life, was intangible and could not be bought.

Responding to the question of how to assimilate immigrants, Mr. So said Australia was a young nation built by migrants.

Society had changed from an early monoculture to the present multi-culture due to newcomers. As Melbourne’s population was expected to double in 40 to 50 years from immigration, the city had to ensure new immigrants were fully integrated.

The local government had to create a living space that welcomed and supported diverse communities by allowing them to apply their culture and heritage, and to integrate them into city life. While there could be some resistance from the community, it was important to make Melbourne attractive to immigrants as people today were more mobile and would move to places that offered the best quality of life. This was a challenge Melbourne and the world faced.

Mr. Lim added that Georgetown considered diversity a strength. It was important to respect diversity but also to have common values, like inter-religious harmony. Ultimately, he said, all of us belonged to the human race. Dr. Lerner felt the best way to assimilate immigrants was through children’s education and ensuring equal opportunities. For Curitiba’s 80,000 mostly migrant street children, his wife organised private initiatives and religious organisations to build 230 day care centres to care for them and ensure they had the same opportunities as any other child in the city. Mr. Githae believed non-discriminatory laws were essential in ensuring immigrants felt at home and could integrate well.

He cited unequal transport fares, and the lack of property rights, as examples of discriminatory laws.

The discussions highlighted common themes in making a city vibrant and liveable: having a shared vision for the city, strong leadership that worked towards that vision, and the support of the private and people sectors. While funds and infrastructure made city life more convenient, a city’s soul came from the dreams, confidence and aspirations of the people.

43

world cities summit mayors forum

cities as growth engines in a post-crisis world The World Cities Summit Mayors Forum was a global platform for city leaders to share challenges, experiences and innovative solutions. It explored the role of urban governance in rebuilding confidence in turbulent times. The Forum also examined how cities could reinvent themselves to achieve high growth, eco-friendly and liveable communities, and how inter-city cooperation and networks could facilitate the creation of liveable cities.

44

Mr. Mah Bow Tan (Forum Chair) Minister for National Development, Singapore

opening remarks

Minister Mah Bow Tan highlighted the challenges facing mayors, and their duty to continually improve their people’s quality of life in an age of rapid urbanisation, population growth, climate change, and uncertain economic conditions.

Although the mayors gathered come from diffent countries, they faced similar challenges. Mr. Mah explained the Mayors Forum aimed to share experiences and overcome common challenges. He then introduced the scope of each of the forum’s three sub-themes.

Sub-theme 1: Leadership and Governance in Turbulent Times.

Leadership and governance were critical in leading cities through turbulent times. While central governments controlled policies, local governments had to implement them. This sub-theme explored innovative solutions undertaken by some mayors in the face of crisis, and how they not only turned their cities around but also inspired local populations.

Sub-theme 2: Eco-friendly and Liveable Communities.

This showcased how some cities provided not only basic infrastructure but also supported eco-friendly and liveable communities in the longer term. Practical concerns, such as funding and the funding mechanism to be employed, were part of this discussion. International organisations like the Asian Development Bank and World Bank would also share their initiatives to assist cities on this front.

Sub-theme 3: Promoting Communities of Best Practices among Cities. This explored how global platforms like the World Cities Summit could promote communities of best practices among cities in three areas: [1] How to co-organise and participate in knowledge sharing events, where cities facing common challenges could learn from one another.

[2] How to develop training programmes and capacity building for mayors and city officials, so that the ideas and energy generated during WCS could carry on, long after the forum ends. [3] How to share learning resources, such as online portals to share case studies.

Mr. Mah reiterated the Forum’s objectives, which were, firstly, to have mayors freely share ideas and best practices, and secondly, to identify key areas for further study and collaboration, for possible follow-up after the Forum. He hoped that all members of the forum could contribute to the forum actively and emphasised that the views and ideas of the mayors would allow them to learn from each other, shaping the World’s City Summit Mayors Forum into a global platform for the sharing of best practices.

Prof. Richard Burdett Centennial Professor in Urban Studies, and Director, Cities and Urban Age Programme, London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE)

global challenges in an urban age

Prof. Richard Burdett noted that half the world’s population lived in cities, and this would increase to 75% in 30 to 40 years. Among city dwellers, one third did not have access to basic amenities like water and transport infrastructure.

Beyond their ability to generate wealth, cities also consumed vast resources, contributing up to three-quarters of global carbon dioxide emissions.

Prof. Burdett discussed the interplay among city planners, transport planners and local populations, and how the actions of one party affected others. On one hand, there were urban planners who tried to create urban development for residential and other uses. Then there were transport planners who tried to improve accessibility within and among cities, as they developed. And finally, there were local people, who would settle in these cities given their social, economic and political climate.

He gave examples of how planners have unintentionally inscribed social inequity in cities, through poor planning and land use policies. San Paulo’s slums have been there for 30 or 40 years, and they still suffered from floods and inadequate drinking water. On the other hand, the city also has houses belonging to the wealthy, with swimming pools on each terrace. The same could be said about badly conceived transport plans, which added to traffic woes and a poor

45

quality of life. He gave the example of Mexico City, where it took an average of three to four hours to commute to work, resulting in wasted time and energy that hinders social life.

Prof. Burdett described cities as ‘cradles of creativity’, where many problems were located but where solutions were also to be found. His research showed that despite having a smaller proportion of national populations, cities ‘punch above their weight’ in national economies. More citizens in cities earn more in terms of GDP per capita than the rest of the nation (with Berlin as the sole exception to this rule).

The challenge for city planners now was to build sustainable cities that improved quality of life while reducing energy footprints. He noted that Freiburg and Scandinavian cities had been especially successful in this aspect. The key to success was for planners to think ‘compact, well-connected and integrated’ in their planning solutions.

Cities today were overwhelmed by informal and unplanned development, and this was likely to continue into the future.

He raised the possibility of creating a dense yet integrated environment with a high quality of life, citing New York as an example. The ability to bring people together in well-designed environments with good public services was what cities were about. It was not about creating a city of walls, as seen in cities like Johannesburg, where there were high levels of violence.

He highlighted that cities in India and Istanbul had gated communities with people who were not connected to each other. In such cases, connectivity was key. Prof. Burdett felt it was critical to have public transport that was mainly railbased and not dependent on fossil fuels. This could extend towards a wider network area in metropolitan areas. For example, Bogota in Columbia had led the way in building a series of informal cycling networks out into the mountains.

When informal urban areas emerged, they enveloped these routes and there was now a combination of cycle paths and dedicated bus transit systems adapted from Curitiba.

Prof. Burdett not only argued that liveability, design and quality of life should come together, but that it was possible for mayors to do something about it. Chicago had turned a barren carpark into their Millennium Park, improving the

46

quality of life significantly. Medellín used to be the most violent city in the world, but after its mayor introduced many public parks right in the heart of the most difficult areas, crime was reduced dramatically by 30 to 40%.

When dealing with the idea of sustainable cities, Prof. Burdett felt the discussion too often centred only on environmental issues. This should not be the case, and he was glad the Forum included the other equally important issues of social equity and governance.

On governance, he highlighted the importance of giving mayors the power to make planning decisions relating to issues like land use, water and housing, which could make or break a city over the longer term. This would empower people who lived in the area, and let them make decisions that would work for them. London was an example of a city which, with the right governance approach, had been able to reap much success. In a short time it was able to do three things. First, it reinforced its green belt and prevented excessive urban sprawl beyond its boundaries. Next, it used tax regulations and other forms of support to insist that industrial areas should achieve higher densities, as long as they were well-provided with public transport. Thirdly, it implemented a congestion charge, thereby cutting central London traffic by 22%, and reducing carbon emissions by a quarter.

With regards to housing, mayors often asked ‘how do you do it, how do you design it and how do you pay for it?’

One of the biggest issues banks and governments faced was how to raise money for housing. He cited a creative collaboration between designers and politicians in Chile.

They designed modular houses, which allowed units to be added on over time as families earned more money. In this way, tens of thousands of people were housed in a dignified way. This initiative was so successful that it was now part of a national programme.

Prof. Burdett concluded that, despite numerous social, environmental and governance challenges facing cities, mayors could be optimistic as institutions and platforms like the World Cities Summit brought together creativity and knowledge to seek new solutions.

wcs mayors forum

leadership and governance in turbulent times Cities are key economic and cultural centres, and drivers of development. With rapid urbanisation, cities worldwide were experiencing economic challenges, population growth, climate change, growing community needs, and related issues brought forth by urbanisation.

Strong leadership and good governance was necessary to steer cities through these challenging times, and to inspire confidence both locally and globally. This sub-theme explored how cities could rebuild confidence in times of uncertainty, seize opportunities to reposition themselves, invest in the development and improvement of infrastructure, and build capacities and capabilities.

Mr. Abdulaziz Bin Adbulrahman Al-Hussiyen Mayor, Al-Madinah Al-Munawarah, Saudi Arabia Mr. Abdulaziz Bin Adbulrahman Al-Hussiyen delivered a presentation on Madinah’s Observatory System, which won a UN award for its use of data collection for governance and smart urban planning. Madinah, a state with 30 municipalities, consisted of 800 cities, towns and villages spread over 150,000sqkm. The mayor’s office was responsible for planning at the state, city and town levels so that Madinah was prepared for turbulent times. When planning, the mayor had to take into account religious and social values, as well as government and national goals.

The annual Muslim pilgrimages (the Haj and Umrah posed tremendous challenges to Madinah in terms of accommodation, crowd control, health and security.

Additionally, there were unexpected natural calamities, including earthquakes, volcanic eruptions and flash floods, as Madinah was located in a volcanic zone. In terms of developing the infrastructure to cope with the influx of visitors, the central area of Medinah was demolished to make way for

mosque expansion. The slum area surrounding Medinah was also rebuilt to increase the accommodation capacity from 50,000 to 300,000.

Madinah’s Observatory System had many uses. For example, it monitored flood waters at three levels – the region, city and neighbourhood. This information was fed to the ground, so that the authorities could better prepare people. The data collected from the system had also enabled the monitoring of Madinah’s Millennium Development Goals, poverty alleviation and upgraded informal settlements. Mass media helped disseminate information from the Observatory, updating residents about developments in their cities. The system had been so successful that it was being replicated across the other regions in Saudi Arabia.

Mr. Jiang Sixian (speaking in Mandarin) Vice-Governor, Hainan Province, China Mr. Jiang Sixian congratulated Singapore for being a modern and well-designed city. A major preoccupation for mayors was

47

how cities could be better designed to enhance residents’ living standards. The ongoing Shanghai Expo served the same objective, and had an expected attendance of 70 million people. This reinforced the idea that everyone was putting focus on the topic of urban development.

Urbanisation was now a priority in China, with many developments being accelerated. When facing the global economic crisis at the start of the new millennium, China used urban development policies as a breakthrough to readjust the economy and realign developmental methods.

Preferential policies were also granted on visa applications, golf tourism and the opening of water bodies for yachting.

Besides urbanisation, there were also two other major policy changes in China: from having the largest population to being the most resource-intensive country, and from ‘Made in China’ to ‘Export from China’. Some of these changes were already apparent, and China now had the world’s largest special economic zone.

Hainan was no different. Being China’s smallest inland province, its strategy was to position itself as a metropolis.

The province was small and most of its development was focused on the city centre. As one of the biggest special economic zones, and China’s only tropical island, Hainan aimed to be a world class resort island and the focus of the tourist industry. Its tagline was ‘Heavenly Hainan’. This required international experience, support and collaboration.

Hainan’s urban planning strategy was based on its vision of becoming a metropolis through integrated infrastructure.

Expressways, railways and roads were planned to integrate the whole province, linking cities to villages. Water and waste were to be managed through an integrated system.

Two international airports were also built, opening up 254 international and domestic air routes. The new infrastructure allowed commuters to travel from one point of Hainan to another quickly, thus improving accessibility.

However, Hainan was fast experiencing ‘city sicknesses’, like rush hour traffic, which was becoming a hindrance to urban development. The challenge now was to extend transport into rural areas so that the benefits of urbanisation could be introduced there.

48

Mr. Babatunde Raji Fashola Governor, Lagos State, Nigeria At a time when the world was plagued with conflict, financial crises, climate change and related natural disasters, Mr. Babatunde Raji Fashola emphasised the importance of leaders with intellect, resourcefulness and skills to see cities through difficult times. He felt that a good understanding of global geography, including our relative locations and how we were connected, was key to solving some of these challenges.

Mr. Fashola believed that the problems facing the world’s cities were similar — they were all about people. The only difference was in intensity. In some places, crime problems related to robbery, while in others, it was white collar crime or gang wars. The same could be said of the health and education sectors. Despite its strong infrastructure, America was struggling to get 32 million people to receive healthcare coverage. For developing countries, the problem lay in incomplete healthcare infrastructure. It was important for city leaders to understand their city’s development and the profile of their people, so as to devise solutions that worked.

What worked for one country may not work on another although both faced similar problems.

In the recent years, Mr. Fashola had focused on infrastructure renewal and development to return order to Lagos. With better infrastructure, there was less chaos and frustration, and the image of the city had improved over time. 60% of the government’s budget was devoted to capital expenditure to build schools, hospitals, roads and rail. With these improvements, violent crime had fallen by more than 80% in the last three years. About half a million jobs were also created, classrooms were renewed for a quarter of the student population in public schools, 110km of public roads had been built and, in view of the population growth, an additional 13,000 people had been employed in the public sector.

As cities develop, the nature of their problems also changed.

Mr. Fashola cited the example of laying roads in rural areas that did not use to have roads. Amid the construction, residents asked for measures to reduce the dust from construction. In another example, after garbage collection was introduced, residents asked for garbage collectors to come at wee hours of the morning so that garbage trucks would not compete

with other road users on their way to work. An endless cycle of problems were created, even as older issues were solved.

Mr. Chen Guoying (speaking in Mandarin) Mayor, Tangshan, Hebei Province, China Mr. Chen Guoying shared with delegates his vision to turn Tangshan into a scientific city. Covering 13,000sqm at the core of the Bohai Rim, Tangshan is a key area in Hebei province.

It is also a city rich in heritage. Its proximity to Caofeidian Harbour is also a main draw for foreign businesses and investors. Today, Tangshan is recognised as one of the best 50 Chinese cities for investments.

Tangshan is known as the industrial cradle of China. As a city rich in natural resources, it is learning from other successful cities around the world to accelerate its growth. It aims to develop its industries and maximise its good location along sea routes to achieve rapid economic development. The steel and machinery sectors were taking off and their production methods were based on eco-friendly technologies.

Many cities focused on sustainability and liveability, and this was no different for Tangshan. Throughout its developmental phases, the preservation of environment and biodiversity had always been an important consideration as it sought to become a modern eco-city. Its urban planners looked closely at biodiversity preservation, scientific planning and city outlook as their guiding points. Mr. Chen attributed Tangshan’s current day developments to the lessons they learnt from Sweden and Singapore.

There were now two major projects in Tangshan: Nanhu Eco-city and Tangshan Bay Eco-city. Nanhu Eco-city was designed as a multi-faceted city suitable for business, sports, recreation and tourism. A nature reserve park, twice the size of Hangzhou’s West Lake, would be developed in the city centre. It received an award from UN-Habitat and the 2016 Horticulture Expo would be staged there.

Tangshan Bay Eco-city aimed to be a model city that would improve Tangshan’s quality of life. It would be an international platform for Tangshan to interact with the rest of the world.

Mr. Chen stressed the importance of urban governance, and in particular, citizen-centric information management, so that the city’s development could capitalise on the unique strengths of Tangshan and its people.

roundtable discussion Given the range of cities from around the world represented at the Forum, Mr. Osama Al-bar, the Mayor of Mecca, saw considerably opportunity for the exchange and crossfertilisation of ideas. He felt the main point of these discussions was not identifying problems, as countries all knew about the challenges the world faces. Instead the issue was how we could transform challenges into opportunities, using either Public Private Partnerships or other means to draw investors, infrastructure, urban development and connectivity.

Mr. Bob Harvey, Mayor of Waitakere City in New Zealand, emphasised the importance of leadership and vision, which he felt was absent from the discussions. Good leadership would provide the energy and power to transform cities. He cited a speech by Singapore Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew the previous night, on leadership and vision. Mayors were conduits for national leadership, and implementers of national policies. With integrity and the trust of their people, mayors were in the best position to transform cities. He proposed setting up a school for mayors, to better understand their jobs and hone skills to make a difference in their cities.

Mr. Mah Bow Tan agreed with the comments made. Strong leadership and good governance were critical in any city’s development, and were common factors in successful cities like Bilbao or New Delhi. While a school for mayors could be established to teach the principles of governance, he felt the personalities of those involved in city management — political leaders, mayors, governors and ministers — was more important.

Mr. James Chan, Mayor of Kuching City in Malaysia, agreed with Mr. Harvey about the role of mayors vis-à-vis national leaders. Part of his job was to understand and believe in his Chief Minister’s vision so that he could translate that vision into implementable policies, and to work with the people of Kuching to make the city clean and liveable. He felt it was not

49

possible for mayors to decide what they wanted the city to be, without consulting national leaders. He also felt that, in turbulent times, it was essential to strike a balance between growth and liveability. He quoted Mr. Lee Kuan Yew as saying that sometimes we had to lower growth rates in order to achieve a liveable city. He hoped the Forum would discuss how to better strike that balance. Mr. Mah Bow Tan asked Mr. Chan if he shared his Chief Minister’s vision for Kuching to be a liveable city. Mr Chan said he did, and explained that he felt a liveable city had many components, so what had to be discussed was how city-specific policies could be implemented.

Mr. Fashola noted the ethos and political vision of the national government may not always be aligned with a city’s vision, as cities or provinces could be governed by opposition parties.

He called for a new governance model for cities, where more power was devolved, especially to mayors to implement policies. He felt some mayors had to manage and run their cities according to rules and law formulated almost 70 years ago, when there was less pressure on cities. He called for a global platform for interaction among city mayors, on a scale similar to the United Nations and G20. There, mayors could speak to each other freely without fear of offending their respective governments. Mr. Mah found the idea of a global platform for mayors interesting, and worth further discussion.

He also proposed the Forum organisers collate the contact details of all mayors present to be shared with one another.

Yokohama Mayor Ms. Fumiko Hayashi (via a translator) noted that cities were growing in size and reminded the Forum of the need to work with local populations. If people’s mindsets did not change, it would be hard to address the problems cities faced, even with good leadership. Mayors would be better able

50

to implement national policies if they worked in partnership with the peope and businesses who would be directly impacted by both the positive and negative impacts of city developments.

Mayors had to be sure that the attitudes and mindsets of their populations were ready to support development plans. Mayors should try to educate them and have avenues for these groups to share their points of view.

Mrs. Anna Tibaijuka, the Executive Director of UN Habitat, acknowledged that there were no existing platforms for the UN to work with mayors, as all interactions with the UN were via central governments. However, within the UN, the UN Human Settlements Programme was the contact point for mayors who operated at sub-national level. In addition, a special resolution had been passed to make it possible for mayors to present their views through the Governing Council of UN Habitat, a branch of the UN General Assembly, so that issues of governance at subnational level could be aired for discussions. There was no world charter on local self-government. However, there were other platforms for mayors to discuss issues of governance, like the international association Metropolis, the Barcelona-based United Cities and Local Governments, and the US Congress of Mayors.

Mrs. Tibaijuka said UN Habitat was keen to see greater decentralisation to mayors. However, given that mayors had limited authority in legislating tax laws and loan financing, this was difficult in practice. She conceded that, without empowering the mayors, it would be difficult for them to carry out their handson work in their communities, especially in times of crisis when mayors were directly involved in rescue efforts. She assured all mayors that the UN Habitat Regional Office in Japan was ‘always available to assist, interact’ with them, and that it would do its bit, as best as it could.

wcs mayors forum

eco-friendly & liveable communities To sustain development, modern cities had to go beyond providing basic infrastructure needs for the present and look to creating eco-friendly and liveable communities in the long term. Current challenges faced by cities were opportunities to adopt innovative and sustainable solutions. The session discussed priorities for cities in the new century, and how cities could achieve high growth while being eco-friendly and liveable. Mayors shared their cities’ priorities and agendas, best practices, innovative plans, projects and solutions.

Mr. Ilmar Reepalu Lord Mayor, Malmo, Sweden Malmo had a history of being a very competitive, industrial city. In the 20th century, it enjoyed good economic growth and was the economic hub of Sweden. It had the world’s biggest shipyard and the world’s tallest crane, which had become the symbol for Malmo. However, 15 years ago, the shipyard moved out of Malmo, and in a period of five years, 26,000 jobs disappeared, resulting in unemployment of about 22%, a significant rise from the previous 2%. Considering the deterioration of the economy, it was deemed a disaster which impacted all aspects of society.

However, Lord Mayor Ilmar Reepalu saw this as an opportunity to recreate the city. A visioning exercise, involving citizens, businesses, academics and leaders, was carried out.

They decided to rebrand the city into a knowledge-based centre, conscious of environmental concerns. The site of the old shipyard became part of the city centre, and was now the site of a European housing exhibition. 500 flats were constructed using only locally produced renewable energy, and due to its good location close to the sea, it had become a meeting place for people of up to 175 different nationalities.

Mr. Reepalu cited three challenges faced by Malmo. The first was how to fight climate change and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. One initiative was to have solar panels on houses, so that summer heat could be used to warm houses in winter.

Malmo collected heat from the sun in summer and directed it to heat water in wells. This water was then pumped 70m below ground, where limestone contained the heat like a thermos. In winter, water was pumped up and used to heat homes. At the same time in winter, cold water was pumped down and stored. In the summer, this was pumped up for use

in cooling houses. Another source of energy was wind energy, which had also been harnessed for electricity generation (up to 2 megahertz). This produced a good balance of energy sources, helping to insulate houses and make them more energy efficient. On average these systems lowered energy needs by about 60%. The Twisting Torso, a building fully fuelled by locally produced renewable energy, was now the new symbol of Malmo, replacing the crane. Malmo’s wind park was the world’s second biggest sea-based one. It produced energy for about 40,000 houses. A photovoltaic plant with a new sterling engine using solar heat powers another electric generator.

The second challenge Malmo faced was how to keep storm water out of the sewage system, so the city would not flood.

In just one hour, Malmo could receive 550mm of water, which could flood the sewage system, resulting in dirty water flowing into residential areas. Green roofs were an effective solution, as they diverted excess water into ponds, which also created a more pleasant living environment, and increased urban biodiversity.

The last challenge was how to deal with waste. In Malmo, all that could be recycled was recycled. Organic waste was then separated, and the remaining solid, non-recyclable waste was sorted. Solid waste was incinerated to generate electricity and heat water. In one year, waste generated the energy equivalent of 173,000cbm of oil or 243,000 tonnes of coal. In 2000, about half of waste went to landfills, but today it was only 4.8%. Malmo emitted only a tenth of the EU cap on emissions of harmful gases or particles. Malmo also had a digestor, which produced biogas from biowaste. City buses were fuelled by biogas instead of fossil fuels.

Additional measures included encouraging cycling. 40% of city transport was by bicycle, as it made more sense to

51

cycle instead of driving cars and then cycling in gyms later for exercise. Malmo constructed 425km of city bike paths to facilitate this. The rail link between Malmo and Copenhagen enhanced long distance train commuting, which had grown 300% in the last eight years.

Mr. Reepalu highlighted the involvement of citizens, including children and businesses, in the city’s efforts. Toyota was building a new factory which would use the water and green roof concepts, and they planned to lower the emission rate of harmful gases and particles in the new factory. The new Ikea facility was carbon dioxide neutral, used aquifer storage for heating, and used LEDs instead of bulbs. Free buses also helped to avoid excessive traffic.

Malmo received UN Habitat’s Scroll of Honour award for its holistic approach to becoming a 21st century eco-city.

Mr. Reepalu felt that the most important lesson was to involve citizens and children in school to let them to understand what was involved in creating a sustainable city. He added that it was important to tell all the people when the city received international prizes, so they felt that their efforts were recognised.

Dr. Dieter Salomon Mayor, Freiburg, Germany Dr. Dieter Salomon underlined the idea that sustainable urban development was key to creating a good future by ensuring ecological stewardship and a desirable quality of life in our cities. Given resource constraints and limited open space, sensible energy use was extremely important for any city’s future development.

Freiburg was well known for its sustainable urban development initiatives. It presented its model for socially, economically and ecologically sustainable development at Expo 2010 in Shanghai. It had guidelines on sustainability as part of an integrated urban development concept, to carefully guide its use of open space. Its energy policy was based on saving energy, using it efficiently and generating renewable energy. It was also seen in its constant expansion of local and regional public transport systems. All these guidelines and policies were manifested in an ambitious climate protection target, aimed at cutting carbon dioxide emissions by 40% in 2030.

52

What was unique about Freiburg’s city planning was that it holistically took into account political, economic, geographical, and psychological factors. It also had a clear focus on sustainability and quality. Cultivated over decades, Freiburg was fortunate to be able to tap on the experience and competencies of leading solar energy research centres, a cooperative economy open to environmental ideas, and an active and ecologically minded population as well as significant majorities in the city council as the basis of all political action.

Freiburg’s pioneering work has received much international recognition. Its ‘Green City’ tag was not only about achieving environmental objectives but was also synonymous with a dedicated citizenry that actively took part in creating a policy of sustainability and quality of life. A green city stood for the growing economic impact of its environmental objectives. A green economy generates growth and creates jobs in futureoriented industries. Being eco-friendly no longer means being less economically viable. In and of itself, eco-friendliness is therefore a competitive factor in the evaluation of cities.

Dr. Salomon emphasised that we can only master future challenges if we share our experiences with others. He qualified that Freiburg’s approach was not the only route to successful development. Each city had to define the focus and objective of its environmental policy. But despite any differences, all cities shared a common task and had to act locally. They could rely on external solutions or salvation from above.

Mr. Philip Gordon Mayor, Phoenix, Arizona Phoenix was the fifth largest city in the United States, with a metropolitan population of over five million, from just 500,000 less than five decades ago. It had become a model for redeveloping an urban core to create a more liveable city.

Mayor Philip Gordon attributed his city’s success to ‘ACE’, or Action, Community and Engagement. From the start of his first term in office, he recognised that sustainability was about leadership and that all mayors had to use the power of the press to push their vision.

Mr Gordon defined ‘action’ as the leadership’s action. As a community leader, he had to articulate a vision for Phoenix, which would define the community and allow it to grow in

harmony with its environment. He stressed that sustainability did not only encompass renewable energy and resource conservation. In Phoenix, they defined sustainability as the quality of life, including a safe environment free from criminals, educational opportunities for all, well-paid and sustainable jobs that would not be exported in future, and a healthy environment where families could live, play and be together.

Mr. Gordon felt sustainable growth was not just about the environment, but was highly personal as well. When he took office, the city was devoid of life and vitality; being green was less of a priority. The community, city and private sector focused on three priorities (ACE) to inject life into the city.

Recognising that universities were key partners of 21st century cities, they created two universities, a genomic research institute and science high schools, all in the same campus.

He emphasised the importance of expressing the city’s vision personally in each neighbourhood, to garner citizens’ support.

In 2006, citizens overwhelmingly voted to spend a billion dollars on redevelopment. Today, visitors do not see emptiness but 15,000 students and faculty – the life and future of Phoenix.

Partnerships between multiple levels of government and the private sector had become the norm in Phoenix. This cooperation was essential in today’s fast moving world.

Phoenix used every chance it had to activate business partners, non-profit organisations, and community partners to leverage their minds and vision. For example, the 17-point Green Phoenix plan to become the first carbon neutral and green city in the US was a collaborative effort, involving all aspects of the society to incorporate and promote sustainable future practices.

Mr. Gordon felt that mayors had the primary responsibility to lead cities into better conditions for future generations.

Mayors did not simply take on issues; they took on cultures.

It was up to them to create a structure in their community against overwhelming odds, and to let their cities succeed.

He emphasised that no idea could become reality without a commitment to action. In Phoenix, this had always meant going forward and taking chances – and refusing to take no for an answer.

Mr. Zhao Xiaowei (speaking in Mandarin) Mayor, Rizhao Municipality, China Mayor Zhao shared with the Forum his city’s goal of building a blue economic zone, and a city with distinctive marine features.

Rizhao was located at the southern end of the Shandong Peninsula, in the middle of China’s coastline. He described this as a great location, with beautiful natural scenery and rich cultural heritage influenced by the Longshan culture. It was a city of vibrant characteristics and had won many awards from international organisations. Rizhao was blessed with geographical advantages, including golden beaches, deep sea harbours, a temperate climate and easy access from any direction. Mr Zhao felt they had a duty to protect, develop and pass on their natural resources and biodiversity.

Rizhao adopted four strategies in its development: it capitalised on its port, strengthened its industries, focused on education and sciences, and built an eco-city.

Furthermore, the city’s planners insisted on wide-scale

53

planning, high-quality capacity building, and efficient management in developing infrastructure like transport, water and waste systems. Waste water treatment and daily waste management had achieved rates of 87% and 95.4% efficiency respectively. Solar powered water heater use was above 95% in the city, and above 33% in villages. Other clean energy sources were constantly being explored.

Besides the green economy, which focused on being eco-friendly, Rizhao aimed to develop a ‘blue economy’.

This focused on using the ocean as a resource, having the capacity to build deep water harbours and being renowned as the originator of water sports in China. Rizhao aimed to build a new urban complex with marine features, combining marine science and education. There were also plans to incorporate the marine industry and marine tourism. All these efforts have paid off, and Rizhao was awarded the UN Habitat Scroll of Honour.

Dr. Amy Khor Mayor, Southwest District, and Senior Parliamentary Secretary, Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources, Singapore Dr. Amy Khor reiterated the points made by Mr. Lee Kuan Yew and Mr. Mah Bow Tan on how sustainable development had been imperative for Singapore since its independence 45 years ago. Given the city-state’s limited natural resources, it had to engineer economic growth. Maintaining a quality living environment was key to ensuring immigrants from China and India would stay. Judicious land use planning and street pollution controls were put in place to keep the air and water clean. As a result, Singapore was now seen as one of the world’s most liveable cities. Efforts to build on past achievements and embed sustainability in all future policy initiatives were guided by the Sustainable Singapore Blueprint. This was launched in April 2009 with the vision of making Singapore a liveable and well-loved city in the next 20 years. The blueprint contained a four-pronged strategy to boost resource efficiency, enhance the urban environment, build new capabilities and foster community action.

Beyond government initiatives, policies, legislation and infrastructure, the support of the community — including

54

community action and citizen engagement — was vital to building a sustainable economy and environment. For example, an eco-friendly building with state of the art green design and technologies would not achieve desired energy and other savings if occupants did not adopt ecofriendly practices. Furthermore, liveable communities were not just about physical attributes but social attributes like cohesiveness, sense of ownership, volunteerism and sense of social equity. Hence, organisations and forms of local government at the grassroots level played a huge role.

One such organisation was the Community Development Council (CDC). Singapore had five CDCs, each headed by a Mayor overseeing local administration in a district. The mission of each CDC was to achieve social cohesion, foster self reliance and community self help. Today, CDCs work to fulfil this mission using the ‘ABC’ rubric: Assisting the needy, Bonding the people, and Connecting the community.

Dr. Khor shared her experience in rallying some 800,000 residents of Southwest CDC into action for a cleaner, greener, and more cohesive and caring community. Since 2001, SWCDC had embarked on initiatives to promote sustainable development to bring residents together and facilitate community bonding. To date, they had worked with close to 1,500 volunteers and about 1,250 corporate partners, including firms like Chevron and Phillips. Their partnership with Chevron challenged students to save energy and organise energy efficiency activities. The energy saved was matched dollar-for-dollar by Chevron and the CDC, and the money was channelled to needy students in the district. This was an example of how SWCDC blended sustainability goals with community building and assistance. In recognition of its work, SWCDC received several accolades. The climax of its efforts — Eco Plan South West — was launched last year. This dovetailed with the Sustainable Singapore Blueprint. The 10-year plan comprised a set of easily understood goals, which addressed five key areas: energy and resource conservation, environmental awareness, ecological mindedness, social support, and community engagement.

One initiative was Cool Community, with support from Phillips. The SouthWest Phillips Eco Challenge helped low income households achieve at least 10% savings in their energy use. Another initiative was the weekly trash-for-cash recycling programme.

Sustainable development was an ongoing, long-term effort that would require all parties to participate. Numerous challenges remained at the implementation level, especially in terms of changing mindsets and convincing community stakeholders that eco-friendly practices were not just good for the environment but also for themselves, in terms of a higher quality of life, improved public health, and cost savings.

Mr. Michael R. Lindfield Principal Urban Development Specialist, Asian Development Bank (ADB) Mr. Michael R. Lindfield said ADB’s participation in WCS was important, as their role was to support Asian cities in their efforts to become more sustainable, a challenge that most Asian cities faced. The next 20 years would pose huge challenges to Asian cities as they grew more populous and urbanised, with at least 1.5 billion more people living in cities. And while cities were incredible economic giants, they were also very informal economies. Managing these sectors presented major challenges in Asia. These cities consumed about 85% of energy, and generated about 75% of greenhouse gases in the world. Carbon dioxide emissions per capita in many Asian cities were as high as the West.

Asian cities also faced enormous population growth, sometimes 3% annually, and they were especially vulnerable to climate change as most sat on coastal estuaries. Rising sea levels put much economic output and hundreds of

millions of lives at risk. If efforts were not stepped up, it was likely that half of the increase in greenhouse gas emissions over the next 20 years would be from Asian cities.

While legislation and plans to curb greenhouse gases were in place, they were not enforced. There were also no incentives for the adoption of energy efficient technologies.

Meanwhile, poverty issues remained unresolved, and community engagement was inadequate.

To help Asian cities, ADB devised its Strategy 2020 blueprint. ADB sought to supply more flexible, relevant and rapidly processed financial products. It could now lend directly to local governments. New mechanisms, like the urban financing partnership facility, gave grants and loan guarantees to local governments.

ADB would focus on three areas of sustainable environmental management. First, it would support inclusive economic development by focusing on city clusters and putting in place suitable infrastructure so eco-friendly industries could develop. Next, ADB would focus on key problems like slums upgrading. Finally, it would try to help communities grow more resilient to disasters. Projects undertaken to achieve these aims included the Step Up project in the Philippines, and a creek project in Shanghai.

New ADB financing mechanisms would fund urban development more flexibly. On top of the urban financing partnership, ADB worked with Germany, Sweden and Spain to devise the Cities Development Initiative for Asia

55

(CDIA). This would help cities structure, formulate and finance environmentally friendly infrastructure projects.

CDIA would help cities begin project development at an early stage, to make sure they did so in the cheapest and most effective way. These mechanisms would also help cities structure public-private partnerships. Mr. Lindfield concluded by reporting that ADB was now in 22 cities across 12 countries, with about USD$4.5 billion invested in environmental infrastructure.

roundtable discussion Mr. Gordon shared Phoenix’s experience of turning landfills into solar fields to generate revenue for the city. He said he would be happy to share the relevant contacts, if any mayors were keen. Referring to Mr. Gordon’s earlier presentation, Mr Reepalu agreed that while much investments was made to develop cities’ infrastructure, it was the people who would made cities come alive. Mayors should therefore think about the image they wanted for their cities, and then attract a good mix of people to live in these cities.

Melbourne Mayor Robert Doyle shared a similar experience.

Fifteen years ago, there was an urgent need to rejuvenate the city-centre. As private developers were not keen, the local government stepped in. It converted an old office building into apartments, and sold them. This proved to the private sector that it could be done, and that there was real market demand for downtown residences.

56

On the distinction between state and local government responsibilities, Mr. Zhao felt it should be analysed in the context of each city. Day-to-day management had to be responsibility of the local government and its citizens.

Dr. Khor and Mr. Mah wondered how Malmo convinced citizens to adopt eco-friendly practices, and how Mr. Reepalu secured the resources to fund eco-development. Mr. Mah also wanted to know how Malmo justified the expenditure, as the benefits were long-term while political leaders were up for election every three to four years. A similar question was posed to ADB and the World Bank, on how they ensured leadership continuity when projects were not yet completed.

The mismatch in project duration and voting cycles was a real concern and Mr. Lindfield urged local governments to fund projects which would directly and visibly provide better quality of service to its citizens. Projects with long gestation periods were naturally disadvantaged in this regard.

Waitakere Mayor Bob Harvey, from New Zealand, reckoned mayors needed courage. Three to five years was too short a time to realise a vision. If a mayor was convinced he was doing the right thing, he should be able to sell that vision and inspire people, who would then start to look beyond the short term. Agreeing, Tel Aviv Mayor Ron Huldai recounted how he had to find the courage to set a difficult goal and take the steps needed to ensure his city did not go bankrupt. Of the electorate, he assured the Forum that going by his own experience, they would re-elect a mayor if he showed results and won the trust of his people.

wcs mayors forum

promoting communities of best practices among cities Globalisation linked cities in many ways, from education and economics to sports and culture. This was a platform for cities to work together and collectively address local, trans-national and global issues. This Forum sub-theme discusses how global platforms like WCS Mayors Forum could provide opportunities for developing peer-to-peer learning networks that explored exchanges and shared best practices to create liveable cities in a systematic way. The discussion also generated ideas for future similar events.

Ms. Fumiko Hayashi Mayor, Yokohama City Government Ms. Fumiko Hayashi briefly introduced Yokohama, which opened as a port to the world in 1859 and had since become Japan’s second largest city, with a population of 3.7 million.

Today, the city played a critical role as a gateway between Japan and the world, allowing for exchanges in areas like culture and technology, setting an example for cities around the world.

Ms. Hayashi said Yokohama was full of character, with a unique blend of past and present. Having had much interaction with foreigners ever since the port opened, citizens were open-minded and enterprising. International exchange came naturally to them. With support from citizens, Yokohama actively promoted inter city exchanges. Yokohama was a key advocate of such exchanges at three levels: sister friendships, partnerships and the CITYNET level.

The most established level of city exchanges were the sister and friendship cities. Some sister city links having been cultivated for more half a century. Mutual understanding and cooperation were cultivated through programmes like sports exchanges. Yokohama also had a friendship city relationship with Shanghai, established in 1973. The two cities work together closely, as evidenced by the 500 Shanghai-based companies in Yokohama and the 200 Yokohama companies operating from Shanghai.

Partnership city exchanges were introduced only in 2006.

These involved Yokohama having exchanges with a city for

a fixed duration, with the aim of growth promotion. Projects included the construction of an airport 20 minutes from Yokohama city-centre, with direct international flights to countries like Canada and China. This helped increase mutual tourist visits and allowed for greater business opportunities.

Yokohama also conducted exchanges via CITYNET, its regional network of local government authorities for the management of human settlements. Founded in 1989, CITYNET promotes technology transfer and the integration of human resources. Its current membership includes over 100 cities from around the world. Citynet was recognised in 2002 when Yokohama received the prestigious UN Habitat award.

Mayor Hayashi mentioned that several cities were particularly interested in Yokohama’s garbage separation practices.

Working with citizens and companies, Yokohama had cut its garbage by about 40% from 2001 to 2008. She also shared how Yokohama showcased a new energy technology, in collaboration with private sector firms like Nissan, Toshiba and Panasonic. Her plan was to make that technology available throughout the city. The mayor concluded by saying that, given urban growth rates, she was convinced Yokohama had to collaborate and exchange ideas with other cities, in order to grow and develop further.

Mr. Robert Doyle Lord Mayor, Melbourne Lord Mayor Robert Doyle enjoyed the personal relationships made at platforms such as the World Cities Summit, and he

57

said he always made it a point to keep in touch. Referring to discussions he had with other mayors, he said he was inspired to implement similar ideas in Melbourne. Forum discussions were therefore less important than what mayors did when they returned home.

For example, he learned of white roofs from New York, where they paint a white acrylic polymer to reflect sunlight and thus cut energy demand in summer. Most importantly, the scheme reduced the ecological footprint of low rise buildings. He found that about 17% of Melbourne’s total area comprised roofs, and 92% of them could become white roofs. Mr Doyle also mentioned municipal funding mechanisms, as an example of something common around the world, but not in Australia. He also gave other examples of initiatives he introduced after talking to mayors from other cities.

Given the warm relationships among mayors, and their ability to work at grassroots levels, Mr. Doyle felt that mayors had become much more effective than the central governments at implementing policies.

Mr. Teo Ser Luck Mayor, Northwest Community Development Council (CDC), and Senior Parliamentary Secretary, Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports, Singapore Mr. Teo supported the idea of sharing mayors’ contact details, raised by Governor Fashola and Lord Mayor Doyle. He also suggested the organisers set up an online community for delegates, so they could stay in touch long after the Forum ended.

As a mayor, Mr. Teo saw his role as a community builder. He described his work as ABC – Assisting the needy, Bonding the people and Connecting the community. However, grassroots works, was manpower-intensive and the CDC could not do it alone. He thus had to partner volunteer groups to reach constituents. The CDC would then assume the role of a coordinator, to ensure that efforts were not duplicated and all needs were met.

58

Mr. Shi Yuchu Vice Chairman, Suzhou Industrial Park Administration Committee, China Mr. Shi Yuchu presented a brief overview of the Suzhou Industrial Park Project. This was a joint collaboration between the Suzhou and Singapore governments, which began in 1994. The project resulted in much exchange, including the transfer of economic and technological know-how. Today, it was the benchmark against which China’s collaboration with other countries was measured. Suzhou Industrial Park contributed about 16% of Suzhou’s GDP. In recent years, it had been ranked among the top industrial parks for its comprehensive development, compated with other developmental zones in China.

Mr. Zong Guoying Governor, Tianjin Binhai New Area, China Governor Zong Guoying introduced the city of Tianjin and the Binhai area, which saw its GDP increase by 25% on a year-on-year basis. Given its growth potential, Binhai area had been earmarked as China’s third economic growth pole, after Shenzhen and Pudong. With its solid foundation in industrial development and well established scientific and innovation systems, the Binhai area had attracted investments from more than 120 Fortune 500 companies. By 2015, Binhai’s GDP was expected to hit one trillion RMB, with a growth rate of 18%. To fuel development in the area, the government was willing to grant incentives in terms of land use, taxes, permits and financing options. The area was also well-endowed with a ready pool of green technology talent, which companies could tap if they operated out of Tianjin.

Mr. James Adams Vice-President, East Asia and Pacific Region, World Bank Mr. James Adams said the World Bank recognised the importance of urban development, and had spent the last

40 years working on urban sector issues. It had begun with sites and service development, but now the World Bank had a full range of instruments dealing with municipal financing, housing finance, as well as transport and other urban infrastructure requirements.

Given the rate at which cities in developing nations were growing, the issue of financing these developments would take centre stage in the next 20 years. Public revenue alone would be inadequate to fund infrastructure needs, and governments would need to look at additional private sector financing. Banks were already developing products for such customers.

There had been much discussion of Public Private Partnerships (PPPs), but this had not resulted in a level of PPP investment that the World Bank thought the region needed. The World Bank has also done much in developing bond and equity markets. By allowing developing countries to tap global experiences, the World Bank helped to improve regulatory requirements and corporate governance in the equity markets. It was also considering ways to improve the credit worthiness of governments, and how they could be better rated.

run. It was therefore important to win the trust of the people.

With trust would come more results. In this regard, the mayors of Phoenix and Waitakere had emphasised the need for action, and community engagement.

Third, there was a need for a global platform to continue the conversation among mayors. This idea was supported by several mayors. Mr. Mah recommended that the Centre for Liveable Cities work with interested strategic partners and cities to organise or co-organise similar thematic workshops and high-level dialogues in between each World Cities Summit. Discussions could focus on specific issues, like resource management, resource mobilisation, urban governance, infrastructure financing and the identification of practical, replicable and scalable solutions to be adapted to local situations.

Mr. Mah further proposed the Singapore Public Service organise training programmes and materials for senior city officials. He cited the Leaders in Urban Governance Programme for senior foreign officials, which could be replicated for mayors, deputy mayors and senior officials.

Such programmes could help in capacity building, and encourage networking opportunities and collaborations among cities. Finally, Mr. Mah suggested the discussions and findings of the various WCS events be published and shared with participating cities.

Mr. Mah Bow Tan (Forum Chair) Minister for National Development, Singapore

closing remarks

Mr. Mah thanked the Forum participants and apologised for cancelling the third roundtable discussion as time had run out.

He summarised the three main points that emerged during the Forum. First, leadership and vision were crucial. Cities like Lagos and Madinah had shared how integrated development could help solve problems. But they also noted how, as part of the cycle of problems, new problems would be created even after old ones were solved. Thus, without leadership and vision, nothing could get accomplished.

The second point related to the courage to do the right thing.

Some actions might not be politically expedient in the short term; their results would became visible only over the longer

59

60

lee kuan yew

world city prize programme

61

lee kuan yew world city prize

lecture

The Lee Kuan Yew World City Prize is a biennial international award to recognise individuals and organisations that have made outstanding contributions to the creation of vibrant, liveable and sustainable urban communities around the world.

The Prize recognises initiatives that display foresight, good governance or innovation in tackling urban challenges. These initiatives should incorporate principles of sustainable development and demonstrate an ability to bring social, economic and environmental benefits to communities in a holistic way. The Prize places emphasis on practical and cost-effective solutions and ideas that can be replicated across cities. The inaugural Lee Kuan Yew World City Prize Laureate, Dr Iñaki Azkuna, Mayor of Bilbao, received his award from Singapore’s Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew during the World Cities Summit. Dr. Iñaki Azkuna then delivered the Lee Kuan Yew World City Prize Lecture in Spanish, which was simultaneously translated into English.

Dr Iñaki Azkuna 62

Ladies and Gentlemen In Spain there is a region called the Basque Country or Euskadi, made up of three territories: Alava, Vizcaya and Gipuzcoa.

Bilbao, which is the largest city in the Basque Country, is the capital of Vizcaya. Bilbao was a provincial city during the 19th century until it was transformed into the leader of Spain’s economy. Its iron mines, the resulting iron and steel industry, the naval dockyards and the creation of the Bilbao and Vizcaya Bank, gave the city its industrial power that continued until the last decades of the 20th century.

This industrial transformation was largely due to the businessmen and entrepreneurs that had the vision and strength to plan for an industrial Bilbao. Bilbao’s estuary was critically important: it was the location of the port and along its banks – for some 15 kilometres down to the mouth of the estuary – various industries were situated. The city’s development was spectacular until the late 20th century when Bilbao was unable to withstand the global crisis that adversely affected industries during the decade from 1970 to 1980. Competition from emerging economies, poor adaptation to new technologies, rising oil prices and the challenges of globalisation led to a major crisis. As a result, there was decline of the industrial system, high levels of unemployment, environmental and urban infrastructural decline, immigration, population stagnation and the emergence of problems associated with social marginalisation.

In 1983, Bilbao suffered a great flood, which irrevocably damaged its industrial infrastructure. Parts of the city were also destroyed. To overcome the crisis that metropolitan Bilbao was experiencing, the Basque institutions of government put into place a strategic plan to rejuvenate Bilbao, subsequently extending the plan to the other municipalities of the metropolitan area.

Badly affected by this adversity, Bilbao saw the need to initiate a deep-rooted process of urban transformation, capable of generating new employment opportunities. We did not abandon our industrial traditions – the region continues to be industrial – but most of the employment created in Bilbao now is in the tertiary sector, commerce, tourism, leisure, culture, services, information, etc. This restoration process is based on the following factors: A. The Transformation of Bilbao

We have transformed the town through various means:

• External access to, and internal mobility within, the metropolitan area

[1] Bilbao Port, which has been moved from the city centre to its exterior at the mouth of the estuary, has been, and is still being, expanded. [2] A new airport has been constructed. [3] A metro with stations designed by Foster has also been constructed. Line 1 and a large part of Line 2 are already in service and the number of passengers is in excess of 80 million per year. Line 3 is being constructed at the moment. [4] The first line of the tramway is also in operation. Highly criticised during its construction, it now transports three million passengers per year.

• Urban environmental regeneration

[1] The Bilbao estuary took 20 years to de-contaminate, at a cost of 700 million euros. Arguably this has been the most important environmental project in the Basque Country. This has been paid for by the citizens in the form of an additional tax on their water bills. [2] The banks of the estuary have been restored with more than four kilometres of promenades, in place of the old port sheds.

63

• Investment in human resources and technological transformation

The investment in the university, professional formation, the formation-employment relationship, and business investment in human resources is the capacity building that drives us to become a metropolis of advanced services in an industrial region. This reflects the notion that industry and services are inseparable in the economic environment of the 21st century.

• The importance of culture

This has been an element of internal dynamism and for the promotion of the city abroad. An example of this is the construction of the Guggenheim Museum, the Convention Centre and Concert Hall, the restoration of the Museum of Fine Art and the construction of the Maritime Museum. The Guggenheim Museum is our international icon, but it has also caused increased interest in the Museum of Fine Art, which possesses a great pictorial collection. Our number of visitors has increased spectacularly. Tourism – inexistent before – has risen, but we have also seen the population of Bilbao and its surroundings turn towards the cultural offerings that were already in the city, which previously did not attract their attention. The last museum to be refurbished was the Museum of Reproduction, located right in the centre of the barrio of San Francisco in the ancient church of Corazón de María. This jewel contains reproductions of sculptures such as the Venus de Milo or Michelangelo’s Piety.

B. City-Port

Bilbao has one of the most important ports in the Atlantic. With the exception of Rotterdam, the amount of traffic makes it one of the largest ports on both the Atlantic coast and the Iberian Peninsula. Throughout 2006 it grew as a result of the new industrial zone in the port area itself, which deals fundamentally with petroleum products and natural gas, which comes from the Bahia de Bizkaia regasification plant.

Although the port still has working wharves in the Bilbao estuary, the traffic congestion was solved with the construction of the new port at its mouth, hence gaining many thousands of square metres to the sea. But the most important phenomenon is the birth of cruiser tourism, something unheard of in Bilbao until recently. In 2010 the large cruise ships are not only stopping in the port of Bilbao but also beginning and ending their cruises at our port. More importantly, the port collaborated with the city by handing over its ownership of strategic plots of land. For example, much of the area of Abandoibarra, from the Guggenheim to the Maritime Museum, was generously ceded by the Port. The Port means wealth and a positive relationship with the city means more wealth.

C. A Complete City

64

A city should be complete if it wants to respond to the needs of its citizens. What does a complete city mean? It seems logical to think that in a city there will be an airport and railway that links it to the exterior, some museums and sporting centres. But the city must also have all facilities and services for its citizens and its visitors: commercial, industrial, sporting, social facilities, etc. In some cases they will be of international standards – such as the Guggenheim – in others of national standards – such as the Concert Hall – and in others of local standards (district centres, local cultural facilities for the citizens). In this way the city has both global and local ambitions. Our ambition did not end with the Guggenheim Museum.

On land ceded by the Town Hall, the Basque Government built a new Music Conservatory whilst the Town Hall and the Spanish Society of Authors initiated the refurbishment of the old, ruined Campos Theatre. Members of the Nominating Committee, who visited Bilbao for the site assessment, had attended its inauguration.

With the booming economy during 2005–2006 and 2007, the municipality was able to buy an old building used for storing wine. Known as Alhóndiga, this has been refurbished by the French designer Philippe Stark. A magnificent building dedicated to culture and leisure, it contains a large auditorium, a large exhibition centre, an extensive library and a sports area. The end result is that Bilbao now has three great libraries: Alhóndiga, the Diputación (regional government) Library and the Jesuit Library which was constructed by Rafael Moneo.

On the other hand, Bilbao Ría 2000 society has healed the wounds that some of the train lines inflicted on the city during their construction at the beginning of the 20th century. This is being moved underground so that a grand boulevard can be built above it.

D. A Balanced City

There is little point in a city having an attractive centre if it is surrounded by urban areas in poor condition that are badly connected and have limited services. For this reason, growth must be harmonious and balanced with surrounding districts that are well-connected and with the best in health, sporting and social services.

In one of our most modern neighbourhoods, we are currently constructing a Sports Centre, which will be inaugurated this summer and will replace others in existing neighbourhoods that will still continue to function. Financed by the Town Hall and the territorial government of Vizcaya, a Fronton court for the sport of Basque ‘pelota’ is also being built, which as I understand, also exists in Shanghai and the Philippines.

On the Zorrozaurre Peninsula – a declining industrial district – the architect Zaha Hadid has designed a master plan of integrated rehabilitation that we are attempting to put into place through a body, which includes the Town Hall, the Basque Government, the Port and private companies. And in the district of San Mamés, the Athletic Football Club, in collaboration with the Vizcayan Government, the Basque Government, the Town Hall and the BBK bank, has already placed the first stone of a new stadium. This will have a capacity of 55,000 spectators and we hope that our team – which only uses Basque players or those from the Athletic youth system – continues to be one of the great teams of the Spanish league.

Beside the stadium, Bilbao Ría 2000 is working to develop a new entrance to Bilbao and thereby to do away with those that were constructed when there was very little sensitivity to environmental and citizenry issues.

E. An Intelligent City

During the previous regime, universities were placed well away from cities. These days we try to locate them in the centre of great towns and cities. In Bilbao, beside the Athletic de Bilbao’s stadium, we are currently building the Public University’s Faculty of Mining and Metallurgy, next to the famous, century-old School of Engineering. Next will be the School of Telecommunications and the relocation of the Faculty of Medicine from outside of the city to its centre. At the same time, the Jesuit University is about to inaugurate the new Business School. Being situated within a very industrial region, Bilbao also makes an effort to constantly advance its industrial technology.

F. A Transparent City

If all of the above is important, the most important for us is the concept of transparent administration. In both 2008 and 2009, an international body based in Madrid has analysed Spain’s municipal governments with regard to economics and public transparency. Out of a total of 100 municipalities analysed, Bilbao was ranked first in 2008 and second in 2009.

Perhaps this is one of the things that the current municipal government is most proud of.

65

Something else is important. Part of the transformation of Bilbao is a result of agreements with other institutions, both regional and in terms of the Central Government, and part is due to the planning and financing by the municipality itself. But we have been careful to be very well organised and prudent in this respect, for instance, we have been reducing the municipality’s debt over the past eleven years, to the point that it is now almost zero. This is thanks to some good years of economic prosperity, and a strong discipline with regard to our expenditure. To elaborate, the Town Hall has a certain capacity in terms of expenditure related to the efficiency of each matter. Spending more might turn out to be inefficient and even result in wastefulness. I will give two examples: with its resources the Town Hall can carry out a series of projects every year. To exceed this amount could result in out of control spending, but the Town Hall could choose to increase expenditure infinitely for example. Would this be responsible? That is where budget discipline has to be enforced, in this example and in others.

How have we managed this transformation?

With the support of all of the public bodies involved which worked in cooperation after the industrial crisis that Bilbao suffered.

We have had the support of the Basque and Vizcayan Governments and the Central Government via Bilbao Ría 2000, in which all of the administrations have participated and where agreement has been the norm. Its capital belongs to the Central Government, the Basque Government, the Territorial Government and the Municipal Government. This society was created with a political agreement between the central and Basque administrations. Land to be used in the centre of the city was generously ceded by various industries that had suffered the crisis. All of the land available between the Guggenheim Museum, a work

by Frank Gehry, and the Convention Centre, has been and is the object of various works carried out by private companies and architects of international renown such as Ricardo Legorreta, Rafael Moneo or César Pelli. The end-result has generated additional value and benefits for other things in degraded areas of the city, putting the train system underground and building bridges and public schools and promenades along the banks of the estuary. We can already see the advanced state of the Iberdrola Tower, a work by the architect Cesar Pelli. Beside it are two residential buildings, works by Ferrater, and closer to the estuary the UPV University’s Ceremonial Hall, property of the BBK Bank, a work by Álvaro Siza. Not forgetting the adjacent buildings of the Museum of Fine Art, a work by Krief and Cesar Portela.

As you can see, Bilbao Ría has been and is an instrumental organisation that depends on the land or the capital that are ceded by the current administrations in its Administrative Council. Bilbao Ría 2000 does not own ‘per se’ these elements, which are loaned or donated by the Administrations. They are necessary to energise Ría 2000.

But not everything has been so easy in the transformation of a grey, dirty city, into a cleaner, friendlier, open city. When construction of the Guggenheim Museum began, few were in favour of it. Almost everybody, including the media, was against it. When the idea of the Metro was aired, the people of Bilbao questioned whether it was necessary. These days no one has any doubt as to the benefits of the Metro for metropolitan Bilbao’s transportations system.

What are we doing now?

Continuing to transform the city. This summer a new sports centre will be started, financed by the Town Hall and the regional government. It will be brand new, but it will not replace those that are already in use, which will continue to be used in various districts of the city.

As already mentioned, the old and obsolete industrial district of Zorrozaurre will be rehabilitated under the direction of the Zaha-Hadid master plan. With the objective of reducing the river’s potential for flooding, we will open the Deusto canal along with the construction of its corresponding bridges, financed by the Town Hall and the Basque Government, just as both institutions have pledged.

66

In front, the construction of the Athletic Club’s new stadium has begun, a project financed by the Basque Government, the regional government, the Town Hall, the BBK Bank and the football club itself. In moments of economic adjustment these institutions have had the conviction that this can be a dynamic impulse for the construction industry, public works companies and service companies.

The railway line that crosses part of the city and that was constructed at the end of the 19th century is in the process of being moved underground. But if there is one project that Bilbainos want to see constructed it is the high-speed train that the Ministry of Public Works is carrying out. This will not only bring us closer to Madrid in record time but also to Paris and the rest of Europe.

Something important that we have done in Bilbao is create a ‘green belt’ around the city. In Basque, Bilbao is called the hole because the city is surrounded by mountains. In these, we have created a series of rural parks, relaxing places with many trees that are criss-crossed by paths. This June, we have inaugurated the remaining areas. The inauguration of the last area, with 340,000 m2, a plantation of 7,000 trees and corresponding outdoor furniture to be used by our citizens, coincides with the United Nations Plant for the Planet environmental programme.

In this way, in Bilbao we work to continue changing our city, making it more comfortable, liveable and better for coexistence.

This is our ultimate objective, to improve the lives of people. We have experienced years of economic boom. Now, Europe and Spain are in the middle of an economic crisis. But tenacity has been one of Bilbao’s characteristics. We will overcome this crisis, with effort, and if during bountiful times we have known how to use public money, we will do the same in hard times.

What is left is for me is to give thanks for the Lee Kuan Yew World City Prize. This is something unimaginable and we are full of pride and of gratitude to the city-state of Singapore. We and you live a long way from each other, but from now on, Bilbao will be much closer to Singapore. Many thanks to the government, the panel of judges and the people of Singapore.

67

lee kuan yew world city prize

forum

As the concentration of people in urban centres increased, cities faced the challenge of how to achieve sustainable and balanced development in terms of economic growth, social progress and environmental protection. The Lee Kuan Yew World City Prize was set up to facilitate the sharing of best practices in urban solutions, and to catalyse new technological and policy innovations related to sustainable urban development. In this forum, the three prize finalists shared their approaches to tackling problems we all face today. Speakers advocated simple and resource-light solutions, the coexistence of environmental sustainability with economic prosperity, and partnerships with people to effect transformation.

Left to right: The Rt. Hon. Robert Doyle, Dr. Alfonso Vegara, Dr. I単aki Azkuna , Mrs. Cheong Koon Hean, Mr. Jamie Lerner and Mr. Keeshav Chandra 68

Mr. Jamie Lerner Former Mayor, Curitiba, former Governor, Parana State, Brazil, and former President, International Union of Architects

simple ideas from Curitiba for a liveable and sustainable future

Mr. Jamie Lerner opened the session by noting how, despite limited financial resources, Curitiba achieved meaningful transformations by implementing simple ideas. He added that political will, strategy and solidarity were necessary in carrying out changes. Leaders also needed the ability to transform problems into solutions.

Before launching into Curitiba’s experience, Mr. Lerner shared his urban design philosophy. To him, the humble turtle best exemplified a good quality of life, because the turtle lived, worked and moved as a whole, with its shell.

City life, like the turtle’s shell, cannot be divided into parts, separated by functions, segregated by income, age or religion. Such a city would be unsustainable. Whatever the layout of a city, the elements of living, working and moving could not be separated from one another. On the other hand, automobiles were like guests who overstayed their welcome. They drank too much, coughed a lot and always demanded more: more road works, viaducts and freeways. Mr. Lerner was convinced that any city could make significant transformations in just three years, and it could do this without significant financial investments.

The role of public transport was not just to move people; it also had a key role in urban growth and development. When Curitiba sought a public transport solution to cater to its growing population, it chose a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system, instead of a metro like most cities. The BRT comprised a fleet of bi-articulated buses serving dedicated routes, with designated elevated bus stops that were handicap-friendly.

From an initial 25,000 passengers a day, it had grown to 2.3 million. Buses served commuters at frequencies of under a minute, and at shorter intervals during peak-hours. ‘Metronising’ the bus system also proved feasible; it paid for itself and did not require subsidies. Mr. Lerner cited this as an example of using available resources to build a smart public transport system. Smart systems could come in many forms: subways, buses, taxis, or even bicycles, like the Vélib’ in Paris. He said he was designing a shared electric car system for São Paulo, in collaboration with an energy company. Like the Vélib’, people paid for their usage or mileage.

This brought him to his next point on sustainability. Even with all our efforts in developing new materials, green buildings, new energy sources and recycling, cars were still responsible for 75% of total carbon emissions. Solving climate change in a fundamental way required more effective modes of urban transport. To have the most impact, we had to tackle the problem on several fronts – by reducing car use, separating garbage, living closer to work or working from home, and cutting waste. Curitiba successfully increased its greenery, from 0.5sqm to 52sqm per person, by turning old quarries and landfills into parks. Mr. Lerner also shared plans to convert spaces above São Paulo’s railroad system into linear parks that would be open to pedestrians and cyclists.

Once completed, they would be twice the size of New York’s Central Park. Instead of the usual government recycling campaigns, Curitiba targeted school children. Each child was taught to separate garbage, and they in turn changed their parents’ behaviour at home. Other ‘no waste’ ideas included the World Nature Games, held in open nature without spending money on stadiums or gymnasiums, and recycling old buses by turning them into mobile entertainment units that went to villages lacking entertainment amenities. Summing up this approach, Mr. Lerner declared: ‘If you want creativity, cut one zero from your budget. If you want sustainability, cut two!’

Preserving a diverse social fabric was also central to Curitiba’s success. Mr. Lerner felt solidarity involved maintaining individual identity, while respecting diversity in others. When Curitiba celebrated its 300th anniversary of cultural heritage and diversity, it built a memorial that told the story of the city and paid homage to each ethnic group’s contribution.

69

The city also had a tradition of naming places after groups, like Ukrainian Park, Japanese Square and German Park. To maintain balance between urban and rural areas, he initiated agrarian reforms to improve farmers’ quality of life. These reforms gave them better access to healthcare and education.

Mr. Lerner concluded by saying the problems faced by cities, and indeed all of mankind, were those of mobility, sustainability and social diversity. He encouraged leaders to communicate their dreams and vision to their people, so they could share these desires, and participate to make them a reality. For those who had yet to realise their dreams, he asked that they continue to dedicate themselves, and one day they would have the opportunity again.

The Rt. Hon. Robert Doyle Lord Mayor, Melbourne

sustainability and prosperity: the future of Melbourne Mayors across the world shared an interest in issues of liveability, competitive advantage, growth and prosperity. However, there was a misconception that these were mutually exclusive qualities. Lord Mayor Robert Doyle’s talk was based on his belief that we could have them all together. Like other cities, Melbourne was a work in progress. But since the 1990s, it underwent a renaissance that transformed it, from a central business district that only came to life during office hours, to one that was ‘sophisticated, cultured, cool, diverse and tolerant, clever and forward-thinking, intimate, easy-to-navigate and be a part of, sustainable in all its meanings, whatever they might be, caring and collaborative and prosperous’. He identified five elements that had brought about this change.

70

The first was urban design and development. Melbourne made massive investments in civic infrastructure. Its waterfront renewal project, Docklands, had attracted some $6 billion in investments, with another $10 billion to come in the next ten years. Other projects included a new convention centre, football facilities and stadiums. New civic spaces in the city-centre included Federation Square, which was essentially Melbourne’s city square. New park land at Birrarung Marr was created on the Yarra River, which ran through the city.

Melbourne had effectively retrofitted the city and created a high quality public realm. Mr. Doyle credited this to the work of Jan Gehl and Rob Adams, who laid the groundwork from the mid1990s. Their advice had been ‘plan your city for people’. The essence of city life lay in the vitality of streets and public places, and that was why Melbourne spent hundreds of millions of dollars on streetscape improvements, widened footpaths, storefront improvements, bringing retail to the streets, planting more than 3,000 trees in the city-centre, building civic spaces, creating street art, and a pedestrian network to make it easy to walk around the city.

To Mr. Doyle, buildings were entirely secondary considerations.

He felt urban design should first be about life, then spaces, and finally buildings. Agreeing with the Mayor of Bilbao, he said culture would help cities drive prosperity in the 21st century. Increasingly, the experiences, attitudes and mindsets we associated with culture were to be found in human-scale streets. Cutting-edge design, pilgrimage shopping areas, atmospheric lanes, and cultural, social and ethnic mixes reminded us the real heart of the city was people, not buildings.

The second element in Melbourne’s transformation was a campaign to bring people back to the city-centre. Mr. Doyle noted that no matter how beautiful buildings were, empty streets at night would not bring quality of life or sustainability to a city. Melbourne reduced its taxes and sped up its planning process to incentivise development. The city government also became a developer in its own right, by converting city offices into apartments to show the private sector it was commercially feasible. This resulted in the single biggest change of the city.

From just 400 dwellings in the mid-1990s, the city-centre now had 17,000, and this number was growing. This led to a property tax windfall due to a dramatic increase in the tax base.

It was therefore a massive return on investment.

The third factor involved investing in joint venture partnerships with the state government to draw worldclass events like the Commonwealth Games. This was a huge boost to the city. Large sites were created throughout the city for major events, like the Australian Open Tennis, Grand Prix and Melbourne Cup. As a result, Melbourne became known as the world’s number one sports city, and consequently, Australia’s most lucrative tourist destination.

As the city lacked natural beauty, it had to work harder to attract tourists. These major events were expected to contribute $18 billion to the economy over three years.

made economic sense. It was estimated that retrofitting 1,200 buildings over 10 to 15 years would generate about $2 billion of economic activity and 800 green jobs. It would also be the biggest step they could take to become carbon neutral by 2020. Mr. Doyle felt a green economy meant a green gold rush; it would be this generation’s greatest economic opportunity. We were now poised to create prosperous, sustainable and vibrant cities. Done well, sustainability would drive our prosperity, not draw on our budgets.

Next, the Lord Mayor spoke about business development. In its early days, Melbourne prospered on farming and maritime trade. Today, it had growing sectors in finance, manufacturing, advanced automotives, biotechnology, aeronautical research, fund management, retail, tourism, hospitality and education.

The city had reinvented itself, from one built on resources, to a knowledge-based economy. With plans for growth in financial services, Mr. Doyle commissioned a study to seek the views of decision-makers. The findings were unanimous. Instead of economic and technical solutions, they all asked him to focus on making the city liveable. In an attractive and sustainable city with streets that worked, financial firms were better placed to attract the top talents who would drive business growth. This led him to conclude that prosperity and sustainability were not mutually exclusive, but in fact interdependent.

Mr. Keeshav Chandra

The final element in Mr. Doyle’s presentation was sustainability.

Melbourne had a policy to achieve zero net carbon emissions by 2020. It was among the first in the world to set such a target. Planning for the future, Melbourne in 2050 was expected to double in size. With 80% of the infrastructure required by then already built, they planned for smarter utilisation. As the city was not very dense, intensified land use was the answer. By building more densely along transport corridors like train tracks, 3.3 million more people could be accommodated without further urban sprawl. Mr. Doyle observed that the infrastructure costs of getting the people to move into the city and use existing infrastructure better was about half that of sprawling growth at the city edge.

Melbourne was also retrofitting its commercial buildings to meet green standards. This was not done for cosmetic reasons or to appear socially responsible, but because it

Special Secretary to the Chief Minister, New Delhi

transformation through partnership with the people Mr. Keeshav Chandra called New Delhi a unique city, blending 14th century history with 21st century technology. It was also challenging to govern, as planning power lay with the federal government and the municipality did not fall under the city government. As India’s capital, New Delhi drew a big influx of rural people seeking opportunities. Its 16.3 million population was expected to keep growing. Industries also caused severe air pollution. Mr. Chandra felt it was remarkable that Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit, who came to office in 1998 with scant political experience but much common sense, had done so much to transform the city. He described three of these transformations.

‘Bhagidari’, or partnership, referred to the government’s consultative process. As it could not reach each of its 16.3 million residents, the city government engaged them in smaller groups. Officials sat with neighbourhood representatives, like resident welfare associations, and forged partnerships to solve their problems. First, they jointly chose the problem to tackle, and then devised the solution and implementation plan. The Bhagidari programme had achieved many successes. One example was a rainwater-harvesting project adopted by almost all neighbourhoods; this substantially raised the water table.

Major landfills were also turned into parks, and the municipality and citizen groups had developed 1,000 parks. This innovative programme had received international accolades for improving people’s lives. As the Bhagidari movement grew, it was institutionalised within government and overseen by the Chief Minister.

71

New Delhi had become one of the world’s greenest capitals. Total forest cover grew from 26sqkm in 1998, to 300sqkm. This was done by recruiting school children in a major tree-planting programme. Even the army set up an eco task force and joined the programme. To fight air pollution, commercial vehicles older than 15 years were taken off the road, and an overnight decision was made for all public transport vehicles to convert to CNG fuel. This initially met with stiff resistance from all quarters, but Chief Minister Dikshit stood her ground and implemented the policy. New Delhi now boasted the world’s largest public transport fleet running on CNG fuel.

More importantly, a change in ambient air quality was perceptible within three months. Other environmental programmes included incentives for electric cars, a campaign to end plastic bag use, cleaning up the Yamuna River, an anti-fire cracker drive, and the promotion of natural dyes at Holi celebrations. These efforts helped to substantially improve New Delhi’s living environment.

The third change involved power sector reform. In 2002, the city’s transmission and distribution losses constituted 52% of total electricity supply. Four to five hour blackouts were common. Besides inconveniencing people, these hit businesses. The Chief Minister instituted reforms by initiating joint management of powder generation by the government and private sector, in virtually a Public Private Partnership. Reforms aimed to cut transmission and distribution losses. The most successful firms then won bids to supply power to the city. Since reforms began eight years ago, the sector had seen tremendous improvement. Transmission losses had fallen to 18%, and were set to drop further. This had brought economic growth and improved people’s lives. Significantly, this was all done without raising electricity tariffs.

discussion Mrs. Cheong Koon Hean (moderator) CEO, Urban Redevelopment Authority, and Deputy Secretary (Special Duties), Ministry of National Development, Singapore

Mrs. Cheong Koon Hean shared six learning points the Lee Kuan Yew World City Prize nominating committee had observed from the 78 nominations it received for the prize.

First, strong governance and leadership were crucial to the success of cities. It was clear leaders needed foresight and tenacity to institutionalise new processes. This ensured sustained implementation of long-range plans despite leadership changes, and to achieve long-term objectives.

For example, Bilbao Ria 2000 institutionalised a process to see through all the proposed projects.

Next, to leverage the power of partnerships, grassroots involvement was critical, as were Public Private Partnerships with relevant stakeholders. Successful policies and programmes relied heavily on the involvement of the masses, as in New Delhi’s Bhagidari movement. Bilbao and Melbourne had extensive consultations with community stakeholders.

Mrs. Cheong said partnerships enabled alignment and support from all stakeholders.

Third, we had to optimise limited resources. Instead of green field development, brown field sites were redeveloped to accommodate growth. As a result, ageing and blighted areas were revitalised economically and socially. Upgraded cities drew people back, and avoided city sprawl. This innovative approach was multi-dimensional, solving many problems at once. A good example was how Curitiba’s drainage ran through parks, serving dual greenery and drainage roles.

Likewise, its rural villages provided basic housing, but also allocated farmland to people to make a living.

Mrs. Cheong’s next observed that planning priorities were increasingly people-oriented. Many cities had shifted focus from infrastructure planning to planning for people first. When Bilbao’s railway was rerouted, it focused on cleaning the

72

river and bringing the community back to enjoy the water in a pedestrian-friendly setting. Similarly, pedestrianised back lanes injected much life into Melbourne. Cities saw that public spaces and amenities were essential to vibrancy, liveability and quality of life.

The fifth point was that many cities were undertaking research and development. Facing numerous challenges, cities provided many opportunities to test new ideas. Mrs. Cheong noted that many submissions presented ideas that were being studied.

However, the committee sought implemented solutions, in order to ascertain if they worked. For those who submitted solutions still undergoing testing, the committee welcomed future submissions, after the ideas were found to work well.

Finally, there was a clear commitment to sustainability, from single buildings to medium-sized or city-wide developments.

Examples included mandating green buildings, rooftop greenery, better building materials, good transport systems, new energy sources, and greater energy efficiency. In particular, she highlighted Melbourne’s zero net emissions policy, recycling as a way of life in Curitiba, and New Delhi’s exemplary conversion of public transport to CNG fuel use.

A Filipino delegate asked how city authorities could work better with federal and provincial administrations. Mr. Doyle felt different levels of government had to set political differences aside and work towards good outcomes for cities.

He held up Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson as a shining example of someone who had knit together federal, provincial and city governments. Central governments had also come to realise that working with cities was the best way to drive prosperity, creativity, innovation and sustainability. Dr. Azkuna noted that sometimes it was more difficult to get agreement within the same political party, than with other parties.

Mr. Lerner suggested working fast, first to overcome the city’s own bureaucracy, next to overcome federal bureaucracy, and finally to overcome our own insecurities. Once we started, we would find it was not so hard after all. Mr. Chandra said it was important to seek the right partners in federal government.

Disagreements were often not along party lines, but rather due to different views on project merits or political costs.

A Hong Kong delegate wondered what happened to ideas from the community, and asked how we could represent all stakeholders fairly. Mr. Doyle said consultations took many forms. One involved telling constituents what government wanted to do. Another meant answering questions and listening to views, and taking these into consideration when making decisions. The final method was to hand decisionmaking to the people. Melbourne took the last approach and set up a ‘wiki’ to get feedback online. This resulted in an overhaul of the city government decision-making process, which was now based on feedback. He felt consultation should be a genuine meeting of minds between people and their elected representatives; a dynamic conversation about whether politicians should lead or follow the needs and demands of the community. Leaders had to know when to lead and make unpopular decisions, especially when constituents could not imagine future possibilities.

Dr. Azkuna mentioned the vocal minority; the politicallymotivated sometimes hijacked discussions. Mr. Lerner felt holding a discussion was hard if people could not grasp abstract plans, so scenarios had to be painted. Leaders also needed the humility to know they did not have all the answers, and the wisdom to listen to people when there was a need to change. But as leaders, they also had to know when to say no.

73

lee kuan yew world city prize

dialogue with minister mentor lee kuan yew The Lee Kuan Yew World City Prize is a biennial international award to recognise individuals and organisations that have made outstanding contributions to the creation of vibrant, liveable and sustainable urban communities around the world. The inaugural Prize was presented at an award ceremony and banquet during the World Cities Summit. The programme featured a dialogue with Singapore’s Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, moderated by Prof. Kishore Mahbubani, Chairman of the Lee Kuan Yew World City Prize Nominating Committee, and Dean of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy. The dialogue saw interesting questions from the audience, ranging from climate change and nuclear power to issues of governance.

Left to right: Prof. Kishore Mahbubani and Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew 74

Prof. Mahbubani began this session by noting that Singapore’s rapid transformation, from a third world slum at the time of independence, to a first world city was due largely to the vision and leadership of its first Prime Minister Mr. Lee Kuan Yew, who was Minister Mentor at the time of this dialogue. Long before the Green movement, Mr. Lee had a vision of making Singapore the world’s greenest and most efficient city. His leadership enabled Singapore to strike a balance between the conflicting pulls of economic demands and environmental protection in order to achieve sustainable development. This vision has also put Singapore on the path to water self-sufficiency, where it had once been largely dependent on imported water. Prof. Mahbubani said Mr. Lee’s remarkable achievements in developing Singapore made it apt that he address the audience.

Stand out from the rest or perish Asked by Prof. Mahbubani to outline the key policies and initiatives responsible for Singapore’s dramatic transformation from third world to first, Mr. Lee recalled the enormity of the challenge Singapore faced at the outset. In addition to its small size, lack of hinterland and water insufficiency, it had to make a livelihood around a set of newly-independent countries that were bent on cutting off trade with Singapore. The choice for Singapore was to differentiate itself from the rest of the region or perish.

Singapore decided to transform itself into a first world oasis in a third world region. It sought to make itself into a base, from which developed countries could foray into the region by building world-class infrastructure.

Industrialising without polluting One of the most difficult tasks facing the government, Mr. Lee said, was to carry out industrialisation and develop services and logistics without polluting the island. He cited Singapore’s first petrochemical complex, built by the Japanese firm Sumitomo in the 1970s, to show that even in the early days of industrialisation, the control of pollution had been an important policy consideration. Government insisted on higher standards of pollution control, which sparked off a row when Sumitomo sought to increase the price tag and Singapore had to bargain it down. Mr. Lee also cited the example of how overriding pollution concerns led Singapore to turn down a lucrative offer by an Australian national to rent one of its outer islands to set up an iron plant.

Changing mindsets – the biggest challenge The task of building Singapore’s infrastructure was not too difficult; the more difficult task in propelling Singapore from the ranks of the third world to the first world was changing the mindset and behaviour of the people. In fact, this was the biggest challenge he faced, said Mr. Lee in response to a question from the floor. The technologies for building good infrastructure would often be easily available for purchase to any nation, but getting the public to cooperate and buy into a first world mindset was harder but also the determining factor. It depended on the amount of discipline the people were prepared to observe.

Mr. Lee recalled how a people used to spitting in public places, rearing poultry and living in shanties with holes in the ground for toilets had to get used to living in high-rise flats with flush toilets. But, he said, the Singapore government managed to surmount the challenge by educating the people through their school-going children, through mass media and through exhortations by their leaders about the perils of maintaining the status quo. These efforts gave the people tremendous motivation to change their attitudes. He said Singapore also had to enact tough measures to curb littering and vandalism, which were rampant at one time. Mr. Lee observed that these measures were still in place and could not be abandoned if Singapore was to remain a clean, first world city, as evidenced by recent high-profile vandalism cases. Summing up, Mr Lee said the population was a resilient one that rose to the challenges of development.

Noting that Singaporeans seemed to have also developed a first world mindset in relation to marriage and child-bearing, one member of the floor asked about the implications of Singapore’s slow rate of population growth for its economic development prospects. Mr. Lee said changing attitudes to marriage and child-bearing were the inevitable result of women becoming

75

educated and having more job opportunities, as well as the removal of the glass ceiling in the public and private sectors. Women today would put their careers at least on par with marriage and child-bearing. He noted that of all the European countries, only Sweden and France have an indigenous population whose fertility rate is around 2.1, which is the natural replacement rate.

Singapore was trying to boost its population by taking in young, educated immigrants from neighbouring countries, especially Malaysia, India and China, who are attracted by the prospect of living a better life in Singapore, one which they would have to wait another 20 to 40 years to experience in their home country. Singapore’s population now comprises nearly 4 million residents and another 1.5 million non-residents. But, Mr. Lee pointed out, the problem was that once these migrants came to Singapore, they quickly picked up the attitudes of their Singaporean neighbours – they too were now trying to limit their family sizes as they had aspirations of giving their children the luxuries they could not have imagined in their own countries, such as kindergarten and ballet lessons. Mr. Lee lamented that Singapore might have to continue struggling with the demographic challenge for some time.

Mr. Lee also noted that with an influx of immigrants, there would also exist the concern of integration, as we would have to absorb these migrants, get them adjusted and acclimatised, and used to Singaporean behaviour and land use practices. He noted that language was an important factor – while most migrants from India speak English, those from China seldom do, hence the government is looking into providing English lessons for them.

Saving every drop of water from the sky One of the participants wanted to know whether Singapore could help his country replicate the kind of success it had achieved in managing its water resources. He said what he had in mind was for Singapore to offer not just advice but also leadership and expertise. Mr. Lee mentioned that a number of Singaporean companies such as Hyflux and SembCorp were open to such opportunities. He outlined the four steps that Singapore had taken towards achieving water self-sufficiency: [1] conserving every drop of water; [2] guarding against pollution; [3] collecting water; and [4] reclaiming water. Right from the time of independence, Singapore put in place measures to eventually overcome the political uncertainty of relying on a neighbouring country for its water supply.

Singapore had set out to systematically exploit every drop of water. In addition to water conservation efforts, it sought to minimise leakage through its underground water pipes, by developing a device to block the source of leaks without having to dig up the sewers. More important, Singapore had sewered up the whole island so that no sullage or industrial water went into its rivers and drains. Mr. Lee noted that the recycling of used water employing membrane technology cost half the price of desalination, another water supply method used in Singapore. He recalled that at one time, when Singapore’s water engineers told him water passing through the city was too toxic and therefore impossible to reclaim, he had told them to plan for the day when the right technology became available. Today, with the inclusion of a new reservoir in the city, the Marina Barrage, about three quarters of Singapore was a catchment area, and by the next decade the entire island would be a catchment.

‘No chance’ of energy independence In response to a question on how Singapore was planning to become energy independent, Mr. Lee felt this was an almost impossible goal. He pointed out that, across the world, renewable energy still constituted an almost negligible share of energy sources, with oil and gas continuing to top the list, followed by nuclear power and coal. In Singapore’s case, wind power was not feasible while solar power, though feasible, was still an expensive technology.

Taking up the point, the mayor of Rizhao in China’s Shandong province wanted to know what Singapore was doing to switch to cleaner energy. He noted that his prefecture-level city had been the only Chinese city that had won the inaugural World Clean Energy award in 2007, and the only Chinese city awarded the UN Habitat Scroll of Honour for 2009. The mayor pointed out that solar energy was being used for water-heating by some 95% of the residents in the urban areas of his prefecture and some 30% of residents from the rural areas. Major strides had also been made in using wind energy and natural gas, he said.

76

Responding, Mr. Lee noted that even as China was switching to clean sources of energy, it was still building two coalpowered stations every week to meet its significant energy needs. He said he had been impressed with China’s research and development in solar panels and had in fact asked Singapore’s environment officials to consider buying Chinese solar panels.

However, he had since learnt that China was subsidising the use of solar panels domestically in order to lead the world in renewable energy R&D. Singapore, however, was a small country that needed to take a cost-benefits approach and it was waiting for solar panels from China or elsewhere to be commercialised on the world market at more favourable prices.

The mayor of New Zealand’s Waitakere City, who is one of the members of the ‘Mayors for Peace’ movement which is trying to promote a nuclear-free world, wanted to know whether Mr. Lee thought the world could become nuclear-free by 2020, and whether the elder statesman could help mentor those who sought to achieve this goal.

Mr. Lee replied that every country should ideally emulate New Zealand’s nuclear-free policy but the reality was that nuclear energy was a more viable form of clean energy than most other sources. New Zealand, he noted, was well-endowed with gas reserves as well as powerful winds and tides that could serve as alternative energy sources, obviating the need for using nuclear power. However, other countries were less fortunate. Mr. Lee noted that even Britain had decided recently to go ahead with a massive programme for building nuclear plants in spite of a major nuclear disaster it had experienced several decades ago in Cumbria on its north-western coast.

Mr. Lee then discussed Singapore’s clean energy plans. Singapore was buying piped gas from its neighbours. But in order to hedge against possible price increases, Singapore was planning to diversify its sources of gas supply by building a liquefied natural gas plant that would enable it to buy and store gas from places further away, like Qatar. Nonetheless, Mr. Lee said, since gas was a costly option and not entirely clean, Singapore might have to consider nuclear energy, albeit with safeguards against accidents, which could be disastrous for a country of Singapore’s size.

Looking ahead Asked what his expectations of Singapore’s future was, Mr. Lee said the question had to be posed to the younger generation of leaders as he was not sufficiently clued into technology trends, which, in his view, would be the driver of change in the world.

When he took on the stewardship of Singapore some 50 years ago, he had a rolling plan that changed every five years in response to new opportunities and challenges. Many of the changes that had taken place today had been unimaginable in the early years.

For instance, Singapore had started out as a seaport, capitalising on its strategic location between the Indian and Atlantic Oceans. But the arrival of the aeroplane had allowed for air cargo and travel services, and airports such as Bangkok’s, which were more strategically located than Singapore’s Changi Airport, posed a challenge to Singapore’s hub status. Mr. Lee noted that Singapore had nonetheless managed to maintain its hub status by continuously striving to offer more efficient services than any other airport in the region. Singapore’s future, he suggested, would depend on how it dealt with the opportunities and challenges thrown up by new technologies.

Asked to name the greatest challenge the world would face in the future and what solutions there were to manage it, Mr. Lee singled out overpopulation. With the world’s population of six billion projected to grow to nine billion in 50 years’ time, Mr. Lee feared the earth’s biodiversity would be destroyed, and that our quality of life would be severely affected. The strain on natural resources as more food was produced to feed the additional numbers would be compounded by the effects of global warming.

Mr. Lee suggested that the best way of slowing down global reproduction rates would be to educate more women across the world and enable them to join the workforce.

77

78

expert panel session 1 planning for a world-class city

79

expert panel session 1a

making cities sustainable and endearing: strategies for success Cities in both developed and developing countries share many similar challenges, including enhancing economic competitiveness, attracting and absorbing diverse immigrants, addressing social disparities, improving environmental conditions, preserving heritage and reinforcing identity. This session featured leading thinkers and practitioners from Asia and Europe who drew on their research and professional experiences to address these issues. Many examples of recent best practices were shared, and new ideas for making cities more liveable were discussed. The quality of a city’s public spaces, and especially the conduciveness of its streets to walking and cycling, emerged as a particular area of interest. Another message from several speakers was that efforts to improve sustainability, identity and quality of life, in addition to being inherently desirable, could have considerable economic value for cities.

80

Prof. Jan Gehl Urban Design Consultant and Professor of Urban Design, Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts

people cities = sustainable cities

In his presentation, Prof. Jan Gehl argued that ‘people cities’ – where transport and urban planning were pedestrian-centric rather than car-oriented – were more sustainable and liveable.

Referring to architectural and planning orthodoxy over the last 50 years, Prof. Gehl noted that modernist planners had viewed and designed cities from a great height above the model or plan (‘airplane scale’), while building-centric modernist architects celebrated the form of individual, freestanding structures (‘helicopter scale’). Alongside these practices, cars started to invade Western cities, and so traffic engineers began shaping urban form to ‘make cars happy’. City planners were also car-centric, as seen in one planner’s comment that “the major purpose of housing was that it should look fine from the freeway.” Consequently, cities began to suffer ‘Brasilia syndrome’, where the layout of roads and landmark architecture looked good from a distance or when passing at a high speed, but did not work well at eye-level and street level, i.e. at the human/pedestrian scale, which was most important.

Prof. Gehl then presented several slides illustrating good and bad urban spaces, using these to discuss what people liked and what worked. He referred to the work of Jane Jacobs fifty years ago, including her idea of ‘street ballet’ and her warning against letting modernist traffic engineers and planners determine urban form. Prof. Gehl observed how unfriendly cities had become to pedestrians, in terms of how difficult it could be to cross the streets and highways that cut through cities. He also spoke of the little things that made city life more difficult and stressful, such as flashing pedestrian crossing signals, which created anxiety and urgency, instead of signals that showed how much time was left to cross the street. He felt that many such technologies were designed to aid traffic flow, but did not improve our quality of life. He noted there were few provisions for walking or cycling in developingworld cities, but it could be done, as in the case of Bogota.

In the next part of his talk, Prof. Gehl presented his ‘one stone, four birds’ strategy. ‘One stone’ referred to peoplecentric planning and architecture, which then achieved four objectives: safe, healthy, sustainable and lively or liveable urban environments.

Lively Cities: In the West, Prof. Gehl observed a growing interest in lively urban spaces, which were seen as key to liveability. In contrast to deserted or mono-functional districts, people liked lively public spaces where they could play, grow old and feel part of a community. As society became more privatised, there was now more interest in public life participation.

Safe Cities: Mixed-used areas tended to be safer spaces, with ‘lights in the windows’ and activities at street/eye-level, including operations that opened at night. These areas were safer and friendlier than deserted or mono-functional neighbourhoods.

Sustainable Cities: Prof. Gehl noted that cities oriented towards walking and cycling had lower energy consumption. Public transport itself encouraged walking and biking at either end of the journey. Instead of forcing people to use cars, TransportOriented Developments promoted walking or cycling to a public transport hub. People-centric architectural and urban design could encourage new choices, such as cycling to work or combining cycling with trains.

Healthy Cities: A city geared towards walking and cycling inevitably promoted daily exercise and a healthy lifestyle.

An hour of moderate exercise, such as cycling or walking half an hour in the morning and evening commute, could increase life spans by seven years while lowering society’s health care costs. This lifestyle was cheaper, more convenient and more likely to be adopted than expecting people to join gyms and run on treadmills.

Prof. Gehl also called on the audience to ‘lift our gaze from just mobility’, as walking was about much more than a form of transport. While walking, we talked, flirted, people-watched, made friends, learned from and interacted with fellow citizens.

This was integral to life itself and allowed us to be human beings in the city. He observed, ‘all the important things have to do with us being on our feet. We can’t take our cars into libraries, schools, parks or bedrooms. We need to get out of our cars to live’.

In the last part of his talk, Prof. Gehl surveyed several ‘one stone, four birds’ cities, especially those that had taken measures to promote walking and cycling.

81

Denmark: In 1962, as Jane Jacobs was critiquing the modern city, Copenhagen began to push back vehicular traffic as part of a reaction to the same problems. Squares that were parking lots were now people spaces, and there was more space for walking and enjoying city life. More people visited and spent time in the city, even in winter, which benefitted restaurants and businesses. Citywide bicycle lanes encouraged everyone from school children and pregnant women to businessmen and royalty to cycle. Car traffic had been stable for years, while bicycle numbers had grown. 37% of commutes to work and school were by bicycle. This had created a problem of congested bike lanes, so these were doubled in width at the expense of car lanes. As bike lanes carried five times more people than car lanes, it made sense to do this.

Australia: Prof. Gehl described Melbourne as ‘empty and useless’ about 25 years ago. But then sidewalks were widened as part of urban regeneration works, and this invited people to walk in the city. Today, walking in the city had increased by 40% in the daytime, and 100% at night. Four times more people sat, lingered and relaxed in public spaces, and participated in city events. Sydney had achieved less than Melbourne, but it was doing more now, had good plans, and was progressing fast. It aimed to remove vehicular traffic, and its first bicycle lanes had been launched.

North America: Seattle, Portland and Vancouver all had people-friendly policies, and they routinely appeared in the same lists of good cities as Melbourne and Copenhagen.

Prof. Gehl praised New York City for having done a great job over the last three years, which ‘has amazed the rest of the world’. He believed New York had gone about it the right way, with bicycle lanes in all the boroughs, and lines of parked cars protecting bike lanes. Parts of Broadway and Times Square had also been closed to create a more people-friendly city.

Mr. Goh Chye Boon CEO, Sino-Singapore Tianjin Eco-City Investment & Development Co., Ltd

Sino Singapore tianjin eco-city: reality vs debate

Mr. Goh Chye Boon revealed that there were 60 to 70 ongoing eco-city projects across China. All were attempting

82

to achieve similar goals, but using different people and approaches. Tianjin Eco-City was located in the Tianjin Binhai New Area along the Bohai Sea rim, 10km from the main port.

Being among the few relatively under developed areas on China’s northern coast, the site was chosen for its location within one of North China’s the most dynamic regions, and its potential to grow economically and attract businesses, jobs and residents. Mr. Goh stressed the need to focus on a strong economy, so that people would want to, and could afford to, live in this eco-city.

A collaborative effort of the Singaporean and Chinese governments, the project drew on the national resources of both sides. Singapore’s Urban Redevelopment Authority worked with its Chinese counterparts to prepare the masterplan. It began with four out of the 30sqkm earmarked for the city, to test ideas and seed urban development. To be developed in stages, the city would ultimately house 300,000 residents.

Before detailing several specific ideas that were being implemented, Mr. Goh outlined a few broad aspects of Tianjin Eco-City’s model of sustainable living. First, he spoke of their highly practical approach. This pragmatism meant that they did not pursue ideas just for the sake of technology. Neither did they lock themselves into goals, such as zero carbon emissions or zero waste. Rather, they acknowledged these as good ideas, and then worked towards them as targets.

This pragmatism also meant developing flexibility in terms of reserving options for future generations, as future needs and wants could not be fully anticipated. There was therefore a need to include a time dimension when planning and developing a new city.

Next, Mr. Goh touched on green transport. Besides electric buses and other vehicles, they wanted a ‘walkable’ city, and one that was cycling-friendly. In terms of energy, they had set an intermediate target of obtaining 20% of their energy from renewable sources in under 20 years. Solar water heating and geothermal heating were some of the practical and usable energy solutions already being incorporated into developments.

Energy efficiency was another low hanging fruit, and they were working with various firms to incorporate energy efficiency solutions from lighting systems to efficient home environments right from the start. Besides energy, clean water was another key issue, and the developers wanted Chinese residents to be confident enough to drink from the tap.

Finally, Mr. Goh spoke of trying new things to achieve environmental protection. They had set a 100% green building target. But rather than pursuing big, breakthrough and cuttingedge ideas in every area, they were focusing their efforts on incorporating and integrating simple ideas that could be adopted citywide. He noted that the challenge with many new green technologies lay in integration, as one might be able to do very well in one area, but would require substantial tradeoffs in other areas.

Before highlighting some specific ideas being implemented at Tianjin, Mr. Goh stressed again what he saw as his primary challenge: how to attract people to move to this eco-city. They would need, and be attracted by, good livelihoods. Drawing on Singapore’s experiences, he emphasised the importance of attention to economic development from the start, ‘to build an economic base that supports the eco-dream’. Economic clusters related to eco-technology were being encouraged.

These firms would not just cater to city residents but would use it as a base and a living example to sell goods and services to others. Business and industrial parks were being built to attract the right firms and the right jobs to draw residents to the city.

Several developers had come on board and there was now a good competition of ideas. The start-up area had already grown from four to eight sqkm. While some questioned if this growth was too fast, Mr. Goh explained they wanted to create a model that was useful, attractive and relevant right now, not something that required too much time to plan and develop.

In the second half of his presentation, Mr. Goh discussed 10 key ideas that were shaping the Tianjin Eco-City. First, he elaborated on the need to get the economics right, by attracting the right companies. These entrepreneurs valued economic opportunities and a good physical environment, where they could live and work while enjoying a high quality of life.

Following from this, Mr. Goh’s team decided to launch urban development in the 40 ha CBD. Instead of a typical CBD of densely packed buildings, they envisioned the CBD as a park, possibly covering the full 40ha. Buildings would be carefully ‘planted’ here like trees. One implication of this idea was that they would avoid roads cutting across the park, and so cars would be removed from the CBD. Basement carparks would help remove cars, while people would move around by walking. They envisioned ‘transforming the urban jungle into a walk in the park’.

Alternative transport options would be pursued, including a city Light Rapid Transit system. Within the CBD, alternatives to walking would be explored, like electric vehicles that did not need roads, especially for the 160 winter days. Still, walkability would be a key city feature, the goal being to get from point to point in a leisurely way and surrounded by activities.

Another idea involved moving some activities underground, beneath the park, partly to cope with winters. This could improve the mix of activities in the CBD and enable a better use of space at all times. Above ground, firms were developing eco-offices, using green technologies relating to data warehouses and servers. To achieve a mixed-use CBD, living spaces would be stacked above offices to create an activity hub, not just a workplace.

Mr. Goh was also keen to promote an eco-working lifestyle, which eco-city professionals and residents would embrace.

To go beyond talks with engineers and architects, ‘people panels’ were formed to consult those from all walks of life about what they wanted from the city, and then to plan based on this. Finally, new standards for eco-certification were being developed to replicate this eco-city model elsewhere.

Mr. Goh ended by reflecting that the biggest lesson they had learned was the importance of building a city that people and firms, including the developers themselves, wanted to live and work in.

Prof. Richard Burdett Centennial Professor in Urban Studies and Director, Cities and Urban Age Programme, London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE)

two parameters: social and environmental Prof. Richard Burdett highlighted two parameters – the social and environmental – that all cities from London to Caracas faced. He observed that a common failing of architects and urban professionals everywhere was their inability to create socially integrated environments. He set the stage with several statistics. 50% of the world’s population was now urbanised, and this could rise to 70% in the next 30 years. However, a third of urban residents occupied slums,

83

and this would grow. In addition, 60% to 80% of the world’s energy consumption occurred in cities, which contributed correspondingly to pollution.

Over the last five years, the LSE Urban Age team found increasingly in cities that social difference was ‘inscribed in stone’. While Sao Paolo’s favelas had endured over the last 45 years, towers for the rich had risen, with swimming pools on every level. Prof. Burdett argued this was less a critique of capitalism than of planners who solidified differences. Even as slum conditions improved, the wall between these worlds would remain. This was an issue that had to be addressed.

Another problem was urban sprawl, which Prof. Burdett called the Endless City. While not an issue in London or Singapore, it was apparent in many other cities including New York. As a result of sprawl, it took three to four hours to commute to work in Mexico City, Bangkok or Sao Paolo.

Coupled with inadequate public transport, this increased reliance on cars with serious environmental consequences.

It also impacted individual lives. Prof. Burdett asked the audience to consider the work performance of someone who spent three hours getting to work, or the impact on parenting when so much time was spent away from families. These were the human costs of urban sprawl.

Cities were also economic hubs. In all cases, they generated more wealth per capita than other parts of the nation. This revealed their capacity to harness creativity and productivity.

But equally, cities consumed energy disproportionately. Prof.

Burdett presented a graph showing a correlation between human development and energy consumption. Under current paradigms, we could not all afford to enjoy high human development, as the environmental implications would be unsustainable. The challenge was to create well-designed cities that enjoyed GDP growth while reducing energy consumption, as in Copenhagen.

In roughly fifteen cities Prof. Burdett had visited, he said 70% to 80% of new developments were mono-functional. They had little prospect of constituting real city spaces with active street life. Acknowledging it might be unkind to make this point, he noted that even as people in these places enjoyed material improvements, they faced a loss of ‘city-ness’.

Developing this point, he argued cities needed messiness.

While cities at the top of Mercer’s city rankings like Berne lacked this, it was critical in business hubs like New York,

84

London and Tokyo. This required attention to issues on ground. Managing density was key, especially supporting high density with good public transport infrastructure.

He felt Singapore had excelled at this. No other solution was possible, as sprawling, car-dependent cities were unsustainable. Counter-intuitively, Shanghai and Mumbai were among the most sustainable cities, purely from the viewpoint of density, albeit not other measures.

Cities changed as they absorbed diverse immigrants. Gated communities were sprouting in Johannesburg, where it was too dangerous to walk on the streets. Such cities then did not invest in pavements. Environments designed based on fear could not integrate differences over time. While gated communities were needed in high-crime cities, they now appeared in low-crime cities in India or Turkey. These were unfortunate examples of the spread of global ‘worst practices’.

Turning to examples of practical and inspiring city solutions, Prof. Burdett spoke of Bogota, Colombia. It faced massive drug wars and related security problems. Nonetheless, city leaders had been extremely creative in a low-tech, low-cost way. Before the city inevitably grew through immigration from the countryside, the mayor built cycleways that seemed to extend to nowhere. But as favelas emerged, these paths remained as veins, enabling people to cycle. In time, the network came to include a Bus Rapid Transit system (modelled on Curitiba), which let people combine cycling with public transit, as in Copenhagen. Bogota’s commuting times had dropped 35%. By enabling investment in an effective BRT system, the city also saved $20 billion on expensive underground train systems.

Prof. Burdett also highlighted Chicago’s Millennium Park.

The city’s Magnificent Mile of 1930s architecture previously overlooked a massive car park, and Chicago turned its back on its lakefront beauty. With private sector help and funding, Mayor Richard Daley invested over $400 million to build Millennium Park, a freely accessible public amenity. This would see returns of $6 billion, in terms of new developments that would be attracted around it. Prof. Burdett observed that we must not be naive and that we had to appreciate the economic motives at play.

Returning to Colombia, Prof. Burdett touched on Medellín, which had the world’s highest murder rate until 20 years ago.

There, an investment in well-designed, good quality parks

and schools in the middle of the worst neighbourhoods led to a drop in crime. This example demonstrated the clear link between a city’s spatial form and its social consequences.

Finally, Prof. Burdett spoke of London. He noted the importance of governance here, where the first elected mayor came to office 10 years ago and was put in charge of public transport and city planning. This made a great difference, and made him instrumental in winning the 2012 Olympic bid.

London had implemented a congestion charge modelled on Singapore, which saw a 22% fall in traffic and a 25% drop in carbon emissions. The present mayor was developing a bicycle scheme on the Paris model. Prof. Burdett noted that cities had to learn from each other. He also spoke of ethnic diversity as a key challenge facing 21st century cities. While it could be seen as a problem or resource, it was essential not to segregate people. In this regard, he found Singapore’s ethnic integration policies interesting.

Prof. Burdett saw the 2012 Olympics as an example of using large projects to get central government funds to retrofit cities, rebalance the social-economy and create a legacy. The Olympics would be in East London. East London had good transport links, but unlike the wealthy and leafy West, it also had more recent immigrants, was poorer and had a decaying industrial heritage. Instead of building new infrastructure, which existed, London would build a network of green spaces, redevelop waterways and erect temporary structures for the games around a new park. When the structures were cleared after the games, it would leave ‘space for the city to invade’. In other words, funds would be spent cleaning up a polluted area and “putting in place the ‘bones’ for a good city which then subsequently develops.” This area could be relatively car-free, with an emphasis on walking and public transport.

Ms. Louise Cox President, Union of International Architects

the architect’s vision: what does this really mean?

Ms. Louise Cox began by stating that ‘for too long, cultural heritage has been seen as an impediment to sustainability, rather than an asset’. Instead, she saw urban heritage as a source of identity, sustainability and quality of life in cities.

Meanwhile, she noted that urban sprawl had led to the loss of

both natural and cultural landscapes outside cities. Contemporary architecture could build on local heritage and context, and the wisdom of traditional sustainable building practices. Sustainability in architecture should be broadly defined to encompass equity, social responsibility, cultural identity, the use of local resources and resistance to natural disasters.

Architects were now looking for proven solutions, from both past practices and modern technology. One area to be addressed was international standards for sustainable design.

Instead of being prescriptive, these could be performancebased, and adaptable to different and unique local conditions.

For its part, the UIA had taken over the secretariat of the Habitat Professionals Forum (HPF) at the World Urban Forum in Rio de Janeiro in March 2010, and it had endorsed the draft HPF Charter. The HPF grouped architects with engineers, planners and other related professionals, and its Charter pledged members to sustainable and equitable development in partnership with communities, civil society, the private sector and government. Areas of interest included social, economic and environmental harmony, pro-poor, inclusivity, heritage, culture, sense of place, and impacts of climate change and disasters. The charter would result in [1] more inter-professional co-operation and communication, [2] the global promotion and updating of professional values and ethics, and [3] the promotion of innovation and best practices.

Ms. Cox also touched on some ways that architects and allied professionals could promote sustainable settlements. These included encouraging renewable energy use and promoting bicycles and electric vehicles to cut fossil fuel use. She felt it might be easier to work at the local level and in developing countries, noting that favelas could be more sustainable than modern high-rise buildings. In these environments, small changes were called for, such as paving mud paths to improve transport by walking or cycling, encouraging residents to grow vegetables and other plants in front of their homes, and collecting and recycling rubbish. Professionals had to work at a smaller scale with people on the ground. Often, communities could be empowered through small grants of money so that they took on projects themselves, which then became self-sustaining.

The building industry, covering the whole of life cycle from building to modifying to removing built structures, represented half of our opportunity to tackle climate change. Waste and water systems were also determined by built environments.

85

But technology alone could not solve our problems, and the approach to the problem had to be holistic.

UIA had articulated six sustainability objectives: [1] reducing the negative impact of the built environment on the global climate, [2] fostering awareness on how building design affects society’s environmental impact, [3] serving the Millennium Development Goals, acknowledging wisdom from past and being open to new ideas, [4] formulating global guidelines with clear objectives, criteria and methods for sustainable architecture, [5] establishing ‘Sustainable by Design’ as a universal architectural concept, and [6] requiring more education and training on sustainability by design.

In December 2009, in advance of the UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, UIA launched its ‘Sustainable

by Design’ strategy. UIA held that architecture had to utilise integrative methods from the smallest scale to that of city and regional planning. Careful and considerate design, and choice of materials, could reduce resource use, and cut greenhouse gas emissions from 50% to 80%. This work began at the earliest stages of a project, and had to involve designers, clients, authorities, contractors, consultants and the community. It also had to involve analysis of the full life cycle of the building, and all aspects of construction and future use.

The ‘Sustainable by Design’ strategy, [1] sought to optimise efficiencies, [2] recognised that all projects were part of a complex interactive system, [3] sought healthy materials, and ecologically and socially respectful land use, [4] aimed to reduce carbon imprints, hazardous materials and technologies, [5] improved the quality of life, promoted equity, and advanced economic well being, [6] recognised the interdependence of all peoples locally and globally, and [7] endorsed UNESCO’s statement on cultural diversity as a source of exchange, innovation and creativity, and as necessary for humankind as biodiversity was for nature.

UIA had assembled teams to develop implementable methods for executing this strategy. It also asked member countries to do the same at national level, and highlight good examples. Members were also asked about the current situations in their countries, including awareness levels, details and timelines for the development and implementation of sustainability plans.

86

In conclusion, Ms. Cox hoped for a shift from the use of ‘sustainable’ to ‘responsible’ as the preferred term for the behaviour necessary for our long-term collective well-being.

She also invited delegates to join UIA at its 2050 Tokyo congress, which would showcase successful sustainable projects from around the world.

Ms. Amanda Burden Chair, New York City Planning Commission, and Director, New York Department of City Planning

shaping the city: a strategic blueprint for New York’s future Ms. Amanda Burden observed the similar challenges facing New York City and Singapore: how to grow, welcome newcomers, stay young and remain competitive. She described New York as the world’s city of opportunities, but also a city of neighbourhoods. These gave a sense of place and history to residents. The city contained and welcomed immigrants of all backgrounds, and one could find speakers of 174 languages in a single neighbourhood. But New York had to compete with other global cities, like Singapore. Its challenge was how to expand and change, while keeping what was loved by the people. As Ms. Burden observed, ‘we need to preserve, but we also need to grow’.

Under Mayor Bloomberg, sustainability had become the blueprint for New York’s future. The city sought to attract people by providing amenities for play and recreation, and to return the human scale to the city. Great walkable places were critical, as a city was always judged by how it felt to walk its streets. As part of the focus on sustainability, New York aimed to reduce its carbon footprint, but also to enjoy cleaner air and water. An emphasis on transit-oriented development involved preventing growth in areas without mass transit.

New York City comprised five boroughs, of which four were islands. The city was built to its edges, so it had to grow in place, but where there was mass transit. Each borough required good planning. The goal was to grow and create jobs, with centres of economic activity in each borough.

Regional business districts were being created with housing, open space and offices for jobs. People lived in all five

boroughs and commuted by transit. The city had become more sustainable and pleasant to live in, while each borough had its own character.

the city. Importantly, it had also been a catalyst for 34 new developments, and many star architects were clamouring to build next to it.

Following this overview, Ms. Burden showcased three projects in Manhattan. She began with post-911 development in Lower Manhatten. Prior to the attacks, the area was already facing problems, as an office district that closed after 5pm. After 911, the city brought in new residential developments, public open spaces and a waterfront esplanade to recapture the waterfront and give life to the area, for locals and tourists alike.

Ms. Burden drew the lesson that investment in public space works. She also noted that iconic architecture was beneficial, as it kept tourists coming and kept the city young. She also said her team was not afraid to break the skyline of Manhatten with these new projects. But however iconic they were in the sky, each of these new buildings was required to be very respectful of the street. Besides iconic projects, the city dealt with infill buildings to help the city grow. These also met the city and street sensitively.

Next, Ms. Burden turned to the Hudson Yards on the Hudson River. These were part of New York’s CBD, but the railway yards had been zoned for industrial use and were frozen in time. It was also a very mono-functional area. When Mayor Bloomberg came to office, there was only one site available for new office development, and new space was needed for growth. Instead of just relying on zoning, the city created a three-dimensional design masterplan, with three key components. Firstly, a network of green public open spaces was designed through two avenues. This would create an identity for new real estate development. Mixed-use business and residential developments could then occur around an armature of green open space. The city received no transport funding from the federal government, so the differential in land value from the redevelopment of the area allowed the city to raise $2 billion in bonds. This was used to build a new subway line there, to promote the expansion of the business district to the Hudson River.

Finally, Ms. Burden presented the famous High Line in West Chelsea. West Chelsea was a gallery district that lacked new investments. An old elevated railway, which used to bring meat to the meat-packing district, ran through it. The structure had become ‘a sort of magical urban artefact’. While most people, including the former mayor, wanted to demolish the railway for redevelopment, the new administration saw an opportunity to create an identity for a new, cool neighbourhood, which would not only draw investments but also be a fabulous place to be. The railway ran 22 blocks and connected three neighbourhoods. One could walk its length in the heart of the city, and not encounter a single car. The city prepared a masterplan for new developments and to preserve old galleries.

The result was one of the world’s most unique parks, and an incredible garden in the sky. While only open for less than a year, it had already drawn two million visitors, and was one of the city’s most popular spots, offering special vantage points over

Waterfront redevelopment was another topic Ms. Burden touched on. As in Singapore, this was an area that was now receiving a major push in New York. New waterfront parks were being developed to get people close to and even into the water. These parks had to have seating, shade, sunny areas and recreation, to let people enjoy the water’s edge.

Also important were small public places across the city, which contributed to quality of life. These were very small, intimate and sociable spots that offered a respite from the city.

New York had learned the importance of bicycling and had laid 200 miles of bike lanes in three years. These had changed the city, making it young and sustainable. They helped to not just get people out of their cars, but to knit the city together. Key to getting people out of cars was the provision of great walkable environments. Ms. Burden stressed that streets and sidewalks were at the heart of the city. New developments had to plant street trees, and one million new street trees were being planted in New York.

These helped to create walkable environments, connect neighbourhoods, reinforce the human scale and make the city more friendly and less gritty.

Trees also captured rainwater, and water was at the heart of New York. It was used for leisure, transport, industry and development. People used the water to swim, boat and for recreation. Because of this, the city now had to resolve conflicts in the water, as competition grew to use the water and waters edge. Another related challenge was climate change and the special issues that coastal cities like New York and Singapore faced, including rising sea levels and storm severity.

87

Mrs. Cheong Koon Hean CEO, Urban Redevelopment Authority, and Deputy Secretary (Special Duties), Ministry of National Development, Singapore

urban innovations for developing sustainable and liveable cities Mrs. Cheong Koon Hean recounted the enormous urban problems Singapore faced when it became independent in 1965, from housing shortages, pollution and poor infrastructure to rapid population growth and high unemployment. These challenges were exacerbated by severe land and natural resource limitations. Despite these difficulties, Singapore had become a highly liveable Garden City with a thriving economy. The transformation was not easy, but it was made possible by urban innovations, which she grouped into three categories: planning, partnerships and people.

Planning: Limited resources had forced Singapore to pursue innovative plans and ideas. But their translation into reality was only possible if they were supported by a strong planning process. Singapore adopted a long-term and comprehensive planning approach. A Concept Plan was prepared each decade, which gazed 40 to 50 years into the future. This set directions for physical development. The Concept Plan cascaded into a Masterplan, which had a 15-year timeframe. This was used to prioritise investments in public infrastructure and guide development. In general, land-use plans were whole-of-government efforts. For example, eleven sub-committees from various government agencies helped formulate Concept Plan 2011. Both the Concept and Masterplans were regularly reviewed, and URA tried to ensure flexibility to accommodate change. Comprehensive planning involved ensuring there was enough land to meet all needs. It also meant that economic, social and environmental considerations were balanced and sustainable. a. Economic sustainability: Supporting economic growth through planning was critical. For example, vast swamps were transformed into the Jurong Industrial Estate in the 1960s. Later, islands were reclaimed to form the Jurong Island petrochemical complex. Marina Bay and one-north were more recent developments to position Singapore as a premier hub for finance, research and other knowledge-based industries. Economic growth had also been decentralised to regional centres, like Jurong Lake District. This brought jobs closer to homes, while reducing congestion in the city.

88

b. Social sustainability: To improve people’s quality of life, slums were eliminated through the public housing programme.

82% of people now lived in quality public housing, and 90% were homeowners. A good quality of life required leisure and lifestyle amenities. The park connector network encouraged walking, jogging and cycling by exploiting strips of land along roads and canals to link parks and bring greenery and recreation closer to people. The network was supposed to grow from 100km now to 300km in the next 10 to 15 years. The popular Southern Ridges was another example of ‘growing’ space. Here, a few isolated green hillocks were linked by beautiful bridges, built following international design competitions. The Public Utilities Board had also launched a programme to turn reservoirs and concrete canals into beautiful streams and lakes that people could enjoy for recreation. Conservation of built heritage was also important, and around 7,000 buildings had been conserved. These often comprised entire urban districts, not just isolated buildings. Singapore tried to balance economic and cultural considerations. Projects that mixed old and new developments, like China Square, Tan Quee Lan lofts and the Seaview clubhouse, showed how both the economic and cultural value of heritage properties could be retained. c. Environmental sustainability: Environmental sustainability has been important from the beginning. Given her limited land, Singapore cannot afford to expand roads very much, and so car growth and usage has been controlled since the 1970s, with schemes like car quotas and congestion charges. Singapore is also a transit-oriented city, with the rail network set to grow from 140km today to 278km by 2020.

The goal is for 70% of peak hour trips to be conducted by public transport. Singapore has also diversified her water sources, with ‘four taps’: local catchment, imported water, desalination and recycled water. $680 million has been allocated to develop capabilities in clean energy and water technologies. Meanwhile, half of all waste is recycled, most of the rest incinerated, and only 3% dumped as landfill.

Through careful management, Singapore’s only landfill at Pulau Semaku island is thriving with biodiversity, and New Scientist magazine calls it the ‘Garbage of Eden’.

Public-Private Partnerships: Recognising the importance of the private sector, the State used the Government Land Sales (GLS) programme to implement its plans. Under GLS, government sold land to the private sector, which provided the expertise, enterprise and funds to develop it. Singapore achieved many planning goals through GLS. For example, the metro network was

developed partly by developing land around new stations. GLS was market oriented and pro-business. It comprised two types of site sales, involving sites on either the confirmed or reserved lists. Government committed to releasing confirmed list sites on certain dates, thus ensuring a quantum of land was released to meet market needs. In contrast, reserved list sites were only triggered for sale when a minimum acceptable bid was received.

While State land was generally sold to the highest bidder, Singapore adopted innovations for strategic and landmark sites, like the ‘concept and price revenue’ tender and the ‘fixed price’ tender. With the former, developers submitted two envelopes, the first containing proposed designs and ideas, while the second contained monetary bids. Government assessed the first envelopes, and short-listed bids that met minimum criteria in terms of design and concept quality. Only then were the second envelopes opened, whereupon the land was awarded to the highest bid. The Southbeach project by Norman Foster was awarded this way. Under the Fixed price tender, the State fixed a land price, and then conducted a ‘beauty contest’ for the best design and concept. The integrated resorts at Marina Bay and Sentosa were awarded this way. Regardless of the method, GLS helped shape the city by imposing urban design guidelines, in terms of height, public space provision, protection of view corridors and pedestrian links. Today, a third of office space and half of retail and hotel space had been developed using GLS. People: Mrs. Cheong felt that Singapore was good at developing hard infrastructure, but less so in the area of ‘heartware’. Still, it was trying to do this, first by understanding what people wanted. As part of the preparation of various landuse plans, extensive public consultation was conducted face-to-face, online and through focus groups. Respondents from all walks of life gave views and raised issues from quality of life to ageing. Placemaking and place management were also important, and four pilot projects had been launched in different areas, each with its own character. The goal was to get people and stakeholders to generate ideas and activities for these areas, which would add to social and economic vibrancy. The government’s role was to provide the infrastructure, funding and legislative framework, as well as to facilitate the collaborative efforts by stakeholders. Some of the results so far included the Singapore River Festival and the Night Festival in the museum district. These activities had produced more lifestyle options for Singaporeans.

Mrs. Cheong said that many of the ideas she had raised were encapsulated in Marina Bay. The government had reclaimed land here from the 1970s, as a result of long-term planning and anticipated growth. This eased pressure on the city and enabled conservation. Marina Bay was planned as a mixeduse, 24/7, live-work-play district. A necklace of attractions – like the Esplanade, Flyer, integrated resort and Arts Science Museum – were linked by a 3.5km public waterfront promenade. Through good urban design, all buildings had good views to greenery and water, which made good business sense and raised property values.

Within Marina Bay, the Marina Barrage was among the world’s largest city reservoirs. Meanwhile, 100ha of prime land had been allocated for a Gardens by the Bay, with cooled conservatories for tropical montane plants, and ‘super trees’ to capture and harvest rainwater. Marina Bay was planned to be compact and high-density, with metro stations within five to ten minutes walking distance. Extensive underground and elevated pedestrian links would promote walking and cycling. The area was served by a Common Services Tunnel, containing water, electricity, district cooling and possibly pneumatic refuse collection lines. This meant roads would not be dug up for utility maintenance.

All new buildings in Marina Bay had to achieve a Green Mark ‘Platinum’ standard (Singapore’s environmental performance rating system). There were also incentives to provide vertical greenery. Microclimate studies were exploring how trees could be located and buildings sited to channel breezes.

An innovative GLS method was also used, i.e. an options approach to share risk with developers. At Marina Bay Financial Centre, the developer paid for the land in phases as it was developed; the price reflected changes in land values.

Marina Bay had attracted $20 billion in investments in the last eight years. URA was also engaging stakeholders in events like marathons, boat events, the first F1 night race and the first Youth Olympics. The New Year’s Eve countdown was an attempt to create a meaningful new tradition, during which 20,000 spheres were floated on the bay, with wishes for the new year written on them by people.

Mrs. Cheong concluded that transformative urban change was possible when innovative solutions were backed by a systematic planning process, and by harnessing the energy of the private sector and stakeholders.

89

discussion Dr. Alfonso Vegara (moderator) President, Fundacion Metropoli

Dr. Vegara launched the discussion by reflecting it was ‘a luxury to … see at the same time such an amount of… super talent.’ He was struck by the range in the scale of ideas, from city regions and megacities to small spaces for people. He called for optimism that cities were not the problem, but rather the solution, for our century. He then asked Prof. Burdett for his ideas about the future of slums in megacities. Prof. Burdett felt slums should not be understood as completely different from everything else. Italian towns built in middle ages were considered substandard or slums for a while, as they did not meet modern environmental standards.

But over time, they had been retrofitted. One of the world’s largest slums, Dharavi in Mumbai, felt very normal, and had active street fronts filled with businesses. Some structures had two storeys, and had been upgraded and rented out.

Prof. Burdett felt the answer to slums was not to slash and burn. In this regard, Singapore did something exceptional, to replace what was there with new housing because it had the financial wherewithal. This was not possible in Sao Paolo, Mumbai and elsewhere. Intelligent retrofitting was critical, and ground-up improvements could achieve impressive liveability.

For example, introducing running water and a sewer made all the difference. The task of the public sector, with private investment, was to work with what was there that worked.

Indeed, many of these unplanned environments had many of the conditions that Prof. Gehl described. Retrofitting covered two things: [1] provision of basic infrastructure, like water, electricity and sewers, and [2] stabilisation of built structures, especially as many were built on steep slopes and were subject to heavy rains. There was also a need for social institutions, like schools and clinics.

A Mexican delegate asked how we could replicate what Medellín did, i.e. to insert new parks and facilities that transformed the city. Prof. Burdett felt political will and a desire to invest were needed. What was remarkable in Bogota was that they got some of the best architects

90

to build good schools and libraries in some of the worst neighbourhoods. The sense of citizenship amongst residents changed. Bogota’s literacy levels went up to one of South America’s highest. So architecture could raises spirits. Ms Cox added that in Kenya, residents in the worst Nairobi slums were asked to build their schools themselves, after being given the materials and know-how. They felt a sense of achievement because they did it themselves. In Thailand, a young architect laid a concrete path in the middle of the street so people would not get their feet dirty. If we empowered people, she said, they would do it themselves. This would not cost communities much, and at the same time, they would feel civic pride. It could be done very simply in some areas.

Sometimes, architects were not even needed.

An audience member noted that much of the discussion was not about new technologies, like biomemetics or nanotechnology. Prof. Gehl replied that technology was interesting and some architects had done wonderful things with it, but he felt a major problem lay in programming our cities. While we were good at design and technology, we were bad at devising the right strategies and programmes for our cities. For example, the Athens Charter advocated separation of housing, work, recreation and communication in the 1950s.

Now we were aware that approach was wrong, but we had followed it for so long. Prof. Burdett added that the separation of work, live and play remained prevalent in many places, even Singapore. He also questioned the idea of above and below ground links and spaces, rather than activities on the ground.

He felt a climatic explanation for this approach was not necessarily sound, as there were traditional solutions to this.

Mrs. Cheong felt technology was important, but should not overwhelm us. A lot of green achievements could occur with good planning and passive design. She had looked at sustainability audits of Marina Bay and Jurong Lake District and found them to be pyramidal, in the sense that most of the gains at the bottom of the pyramid could be achieved very simply through things like the correct orientation of the buildings. She said that at the national and planning level, we had to balance social, environmental and economic aspects.

Then the architects could come in with the right orientation, for example. New technology only appeared in the last stretch.

Still, Singapore was not discounting this, and was exploring smart grids and electric cars. Responding to Prof. Burdett’s comments, she said Asian cities needed street life. Marina Bay was mixed use because Singapore made a mistake in zoning Shenton Way, which became lifeless after office hours.

It was not in the character of Asian cities to hide activities underground. In fact, it was a requirement in many areas in Singapore to have activity-generating functions at street level.

Another audience member asked Ms. Burden about the key factors, or ‘detonators’, for beginning the transformation around neighbourhoods like the High Line. She replied that the High Line was a quintessentially New York project as it had elements of preservation and public-private partnership.

As a planner, she was pleased that the true catalyser was zoning. Property owners under the High Line had been unhappy as their development potential was blocked by the structure. The federal government owned the structure, but would not sell it to the city until these people were satisfied.

So the city enabled these owners to sell and transfer their property development rights to others within an area.

Then, design guidelines were devised to ensure light and air came to the High Line. Many New York projects had to be controlled through a public process of acceptance in the Council. But as nobody could see the beauty of the structure from the street, a campaign was conducted using photography of the spaces above. She concluded that zoning and photography saved the project.

One delegate called for a ‘a zone of chaos’ in Singapore, where one could experiment with building. Unfortunately, given Singapore’s high land costs, there was no way to experiment with cheap land. Another audience member asked how New York organised itself to get rid of graffiti, and also, what happened under the High Line? Ms Burden felt graffiti had both good and bad sides. It was an expression of openness and creativity, but it could be bad when it created crime. To the second question, she said there were art installations and restaurants under the High Line. She felt it was better if the area grew organically, and that it was not for government to take action. She hoped there would be new things happening there that she could not even imagine.

A question from the floor queried how the climate of a city could affect cycling. Prof. Gehl felt exercise should be built into our lifestyles, and every nation had to consider its climate.

In Greenland, it was too slippery to cycle, while Jordan was just too hot. However, he stressed that we had to take into account seasonal climate across the year. A city might not be cycle-friendly in one season, but for the rest of the year it could be fine. He was a little doubtful about introducing cycling at the city planning level in Singapore, but felt it could work as a leisure sport. He added that we only used a third of the energy to cover one kilometre by bicycle, compared with walking, so it made much more sense to cycle. He added that more could be done for walking in Singapore.

The city should try to allow walking on the surface throughout the city, and not only underground. Ms. Cox added that in Singapore, cycling under the trees would be good.

Speaking from the floor, Dr. Pierre Laconte (Immediate Past President, ISOCARP) asked about microclimate. He noted there was enormous room for trees in our cities, and planting had to be done. He noted long tree-lined walks in Singapore, which were good, but suggested a more systematic network of canopies, for example in the financial district, so people could avoid walking under sun and rain. Mrs. Cheong said spaces under trees in Singapore were very pleasant, despite the hot and humid climate. A lot of the cycling in Singapore was recreational and within townships. The question was whether they could bring cyclers from town to town, and into the city, in the longer term. She believed it was possible, and that the park connector network was one way of making this happen. Prof. Gehl remarked that an interesting trend he noticed at this conference was that all cities were planting trees, from Melbourne to New York to Singapore. This had become a very good policy for everyone, improving the microclimate, cooling people, improving sustainability and making the city more beautiful.

91

expert panel session 1b

pathways to growth: analysis from the global liveable cities index The Centre for Liveable Cities (CLC) commissioned the Global Liveable Cities Index (GLCI) study in 2008. GLCI aimed to develop a balanced assessment of urban liveability based on the five key concepts of CLC’s ‘Liveability Framework’.

GLCI’s first run covered 65 developing and developed cities. This technical workshop featured two of its authors, who presented their methodology, results and a preliminary analysis of the cities examined. This session aimed to get feedback from city planners, policymakers and academics on the GLCI.

Left to right: Mr. Andrew Tan, Dr. Remo Burkhard, Dr. Tan Khee Giap, Dr. Chen Kang and Prof. Woo Wing Thye 92

Mr. Andrew Tan Director, Centre for Liveable Cities, and CEO, National Environment Agency, Singapore

opening remarks Mr. Andrew Tan began by explaining the background to GLCI. Upon reviewing existing city indices, CLC identified a gap it felt would be interesting to fill.

Many indices adopted a fairly specific perspective, depending on their focus.

With growing interest in liveability, many were also being adjusted to account for new imperatives. For instance, environmental sustainability was an area of great interest to many cities, particularly issues of climate change, pollution and quality of life.

The question that spurred GLCI was whether cities in various parts of the world had different development priorities. Would a Chinese city and an Indian one prioritise their goals similarly? The same could be asked of European and American cities. Differences in stages of development would also have to be considered when making comparisons. Anecdotal and empirical evidence showed that cities were very different from one another. The same questions on liveability might therefore get quite different answers, especially as limited resources meant cities could not tackle all the issues they wanted to, all at once.

CLC decided to break down the broad idea of liveability into five components. Mr. Tan admitted these were not comprehensive, but said they tried to capture as much as possible the different aspects of liveability. He then listed the five components as good governance, urban infrastucture, environmental sustainability, quality of life, and a competitive economy.

Mr. Tan said CLC faced the challenge of devising an index policymakers could use to analyse trade-offs in their work.

For example, an Asian city might put more stress on economic growth, due to its stage of development. This could come at the expense of other aspects of liveability, like quality of life, as this did not automatically accompany economic growth. The same applied to environmental sustainability; economic growth could come at a cost to the environment.

CLC was interested in how cities chose their priorities, and the trade-offs involved. What happened if priorities changed, and how would that affect the indicators? How would a city fare if more emphasis was put on building a competitive economy or quality infrastructure? CLC hoped the indicators could help policymakers better understand the impact of trade-offs made in the five key areas.

According to Mr. Tan, the challenge lay in deciding which indicators to include in each of the five categories. One factor was the availability of data from various cities, which would enable comparisons. Another issue was the definition of each indicator, which could differ from city to city. For example, a city in China may define its recycling rate differently from Singapore.

Despite these challenges, a first attempt had been made to compile as much data as possible on a total of 135 indicators. Mr. Tan stressed that, like the five categories, these were not comprehensive. Data on more indicators could become available via stakeholder engagement, as the subject was a dynamic one and cities were generating more data. This would allow for more comparability.

Mr. Tan hoped GLCI would spur discussion among those who looked at indices, as well as potential collaborators. He said it remained to be seen if CLC could devise a universal set of indicators, as these were very different in other parts of the world, like the Middle East. He also hoped the GLCI methodology could shift research in that direction, and that more cities would share data as they grew more conscious of the need to collect such information.

93

In conclusion, Mr. Tan clarified that CLC was not directly involved in GLCI research, beyond asking some pertinent policy questions. It had left it to the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy (or LKY School) and its collaborators to help address these questions.

gap in terms of urban liveability, which GLCI aimed to fill.

It also tried to be more balanced and broader in defining liveable cities. He hoped workshop participants could help fill any gaps in the study by suggesting indicators that were missing. He mentioned that he had received a suggestion about gender bias, which he acknowledged he had not considered. He also invited suggestions of data sources.

Dr. Tan Khee Giap

Dr. Tan highlighted that GLCI differed from other published indices or studies in its balanced and wider coverage, incorporating 135 ideal indicators. Its coverage of cities was geographically extensive, particularly cities in India, China and other parts of emerging Asia. As these cities would be developing, they would need the type of balanced development captured in the GLCI framework. He hoped more emerging cities could be added to the study’s list of Asian cities. He also stressed that GLCI was intended as a constructive study, not a beauty contest. It was meant as a tool for emerging cities to see how they might improve through policy simulations – the ‘what-if’ simulations that Dr. Chen Kang would talk about during his presentation.

Associate Professor, Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy

an empirical study on the ranking of global liveable cities and policy simulations (part 1) Dr. Tan Khee Giap said GLCI was the fifth index maintained by the LKY School’s Global Policies Research Unit (GPRU). The study included 64 global cities, and also separately studied 36 Asian cities from amongst them.

The work was done in partnership with ETH Zurich and Dr. Tan hoped GPRU’s competency in Asia would be complemented by ETH Zurich’s expertise in the West.

An ideal liveable city would usually be imagined as having vibrant economic growth, with links to, and integration with, the world economy. It would strike a balance with environmental friendliness and sustainability, a high quality of life with cultural diversity, as well as security coupled with social and political harmony. Presumably, these would only exist with good governance and effective leadership. The study proceeded with these assumptions in mind.

In his literature survey, Dr. Tan found different city studies concentrated on various aspects, like urbanisation, crisis management or the environment. However, there was a

94

Dr. Tan then elaborated on the subcategories under the five main GLCI categories. First, the study defined a liveable city as one that was economically vibrant and competitive. Under this heading, the study examined economic performance, economic openness and infrastructure. Likewise, under environmental friendliness and sustainability, the subcategories were pollution, natural resource depletion and environmental initiatives. The third category, domestic security and stability, looked at crime rates, threats to national security and civil unrest. Five subcategories appeared under quality of life and diversity: healthcare, education, housing and transportation, income inequality and demographic burden, and diversity and community cohesion. The final category, good governance and effective leadership, looked at policy-making and implementation, government system, transparency and accountability, and corruption.

Dr. Tan felt no one could say which of the categories were more important, so they were treated as equally important.

He qualified that more work could be done to empirically identify more important areas, as suggested by Dr. Wolfgang, a coauthor of the study.

Dr. Tan went on to present the ideal indicators under the five categories. In relation to economic vibrancy and competitiveness, Dr. Tan acknowledged that Gross Domestic Product (GDP) was not everything, and some places measured Gross National Happiness. When discussing environmental friendliness and sustainability, he mentioned an example of the type of problem the study faced. Specifically, unaccounted-for water i.e. leaked water from burst pipes was considered a depletion of natural resources. While Singapore had statistics on this, many other cities did not, so that indicator was omitted. In future, more data on this indicator would provide a better reflection of environmental friendliness and sustainability of GLCI cities. Dr. Tan noted the difference between GLCI’s ideal and practical indicators. From an original 135 ideal indicators, the list was whittled down to 23 practical indicators, due to data constraints. Another difficulty faced was the reluctance of some cities to make certain data public, even when they had the information.

Dr. Chen Kang Associate Professor, Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy

an empirical study on the ranking of global liveable cities and policy simulations (part 2) Dr. Chen Kang presented the GLCI methodology, which he described as a standard methodology used by most ranking exercises.

The raw data was first standardised, then ranked, followed by an aggregation

into the ranking by categories and subcategories. Following this, the more important work involved asking ‘what-if’ questions. Researchers performed simulations using their data. Looking at a city’s 20 top-faring and 20 worst-faring indicators, researchers studied the effect on a city’s ranking if it raised its 20 worst-faring indicators to the average level of the whole sample. This was the sort of question researchers felt would be useful to city governments.

For a representative sample, the selection of cities followed three criteria: geographic representation, population size and an emphasis on emerging cities in Asia. The study aimed to be useful to city officials in emerging economies, in terms economic growth and sustainability. Due to resource and other contraints, GLCI included only 64 cities, but researchers hoped to include more in future.

Dr. Chen then presented a tentative ranking of the top 35 GLCI cities. From the average scores, the top cities were Geneva, Zurich and Singapore. Hong Kong was ranked eighth, and Tokyo was 18th. These 35 cities were then ranked according to the five sets of indicators. Dr. Chen noted that this was based on available data. Under economic vibrancy and competitivenss, Geneva was third, Singapore was fifth and Tokyo was 31st. For environmental friendliness and sustainability, Singapore was 14th, and Tokyo was 13th. He then showed the rankings for domestic security and stability, followed by quality of life and diversity, where Singapore and Zurich shared the top spots. In the last category of good governance and effective leadership, Geneva and Zurich were first, Singapore was third, and Hong Kong was fourth. The 36 Asian cities were then ranked separately. Singapore, Hong Kong and Auckland were the top three. He then showed the rankings of Asian cities by category.

95

Summarising the results, Dr. Chen listed the five Asian cities among the global top 20: Singapore, Hong Kong, Osaka, Tokyo and Yokohama. In terms of cconomic vibrancy and competitiveness, Hong Kong and Singapore ranked fourth and fifth among the top 20 global cities. For environmental friendliness and sustainability, Tokyo, Singapore and Osaka were the only three Asian cities in the top 20. Asian cities did not rank highly in this category: China’s cities did not do well. On domestic security and stability, Singapore emerged on top, with Hong Kong second, albeit by a big gap in the standardised score. For quality of life and diversity, Singapore, Tokyo, Hong Kong, Osaka and Yokohama were among the top 20. Under good governance and effective leadership, Singapore and Hong Kong were third and fourth, respectively. They were the only Asian cities in the top 20 ranking.

Within the ranking of 36 Asian cities, Singapore and Hong Kong ranked in the top two positions. In individual categories, Hong Kong ranked first in economic vibrancy and competitiveness, overtaking Sydney and Singapore.

Auckland scored well in environmental friendliness and sustainability, taking the top spot. On domestic security and stability, Singapore, Hong Kong and Auckland were the top three Asian cities, with Singapore again pulling ahead in terms of its standardised score.

Dr. Chen concluded by pointing out three areas where he felt the study could be improved. First, it could add survey data to measure more aspects of the cities. Next, the study was restricted by the available data on indicators, resulting in much useful data that could not be used due to the lack of comparability across cities. The inclusion of more indicators was therefore one area for improvement.

Third, he called for the inclusion of more cities, so that comparisions would be more comprehensive. Dr. Chen hoped to improve GLCI in the future, and he invited comments from the audience.

96

Prof. Woo Wing Thye Professor, Economics Department, University of California, Davis, and Director, East Asia Program, The Earth Institute at Columbia University

comments on Chen-Tan’s ranking of global liveable cities Prof. Woo Wing Thye observed that while GLCI had many defects, similar studies suffered from the same issues. Although GLCI suffered those problems to a lesser degree, there remained much room for improvement. Prof. Woo also referred to three of the most prominent indices: the Global Power City Index by the Mori Memorial Foundation, the Mercer Index and the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) Index. The Mori Index’s first four cities – New York, London, Paris and Tokyo – were not in the other three lists.

Comparing the other indices, he said Mercer featured only two of Mori’s 10 cities, and EIU had one of the 10. GLCI had four of the 10 cities, as it was a more general index than Mercer or EIU. The EIU Index was so different from Mori due to the different purpose of each index.

The next point related to differing tastes. EIU bought its data from – and used the same data as – Mercer, but it reached different conclusions. Prof. Woo jokingly explained this by saying EIU did not like beer and sausages. He added that it put a huge emphasis on native English-speaking cities, which accounted for Calgary, Adelaide and Perth among its top spots. It could also reflect insularity among the customer base of The Economist magazine.

Prof. Woo observed that GLCI focused on liveability for average local families, not expatriates. He illustrated the difference by referring to US city rankings. Asked where they wanted to live, many would say San Francisco. But most people would find Detroit’s housing more affordable.

Due to its popularity, San Francisco was unaffordable for the average local. The Mercer Index studied affordability and quality of life for expatriates, who used facilities that were unavailable to the average local. Most expatriates had packages that freed them from worrying about access to healthcare or schools, whereas these were important issues for locals. Accessibility was given more weight in GLCI, and this was why it differed from the Mercer Index.

Prof. Woo felt GLCI made sense in measuring and comparing cities, rather than countries. He cited a study of ecological sustainability that measured the proportion of cemented land in a country. By this measure, city-states like Singapore did poorly, while a large country like China did well. This was why in most environmental sustainability studies, Japan fared worse than India, as Japan had cemented more of its land area. Prof. Woo said we had to compare apples with apples. He added that when discussing liveability, it made more sense to rank cities, not countries. Countries comprised many different places, with varying degrees of liveability.

Prof. Woo liked the fact that GLCI asked different questions about sustainability, compared with other studies. Many studies looked at national carbon dioxide emissions. However, the size of a country and its degree of industrialisation also mattered. An agricultural city would usually have lower emissions. Another problem with measuring local sustainability was illustrated by the example of Taiwan. Despite having dirty industries, typhoons regularly flush Taiwan’s air, which could skew measurements of its air quality and thus sustainability. Prof. Woo commended GLCI for rating environmental performance based on contributions to global sustainability, or ‘how seriously does a country

think globally and act locally?’ Also, instead of per capita carbon dioxide emissions, the study measured carbon dioxide per GDP dollar, which reflected development levels.

Prof. Woo felt GLCI’s most important contribution was its framework for thinking systematically about what made a city a habitat of choice for an individual. First, economic vibrancy and competitiveness addressed physical survival and freedom from want, i.e. having enough to eat, economic opportunities and mobility. Next, it considered the quality of a city’s software, like law and order as well as cultural and aesthetic factors. As the latter were exceedingly important, he felt a defect in GLCI was its inability to better account for this quality. One way might be to measure the types of publications available in a city, e.g. the range of special interest magazines, from cooking to the arts.

On improving GLCI, Prof. Woo made three suggestions.

First, it could be more sensitive in its use of some variables.

For instance, he found the inclusion of hotel occupancy rates ‘quite quirky’. Noting that rooms could be rented by the hour in parts of Tokyo or Singapore, he asked how that factor was dealt with and if it was important. The study could make clear the role played by various factors.

Prof. Woo also felt it made sense to rank cities by population size, as running a city of five million would be more challenging than a smaller city. People could choose to live in cities of varying sizes. It would therefore be helpful to break cities down by size and rank them separately.

Finally, Prof. Woo criticised how the indicators all had equal weight, which he called ‘maximum agnosticism’. He asked if a more scientific approach could have been used, like conducting surveys to ascertain what mattered to people.

Societies might set different priorities, based on their levels of economic development. Once a certain level of wealth was achieved, people would care more about quality of life, especially aesthetic inspiration. He suggested ranking countries at different levels of development using different weights.

97

discussion Managing Director, Singapore-ETH Centre for Global Environmental Sustainability

indicators, categorising the lake under the environmental indicators, and the seasons under climate. He added that there were indicators for quality of life, and a category on diversity to take culture into account.

Dr. Burkhard launched the discussion by observing that the presentations had found that the GLCI study focused on urban liveability for the average person, as opposed to expatriates. He then noted that the average person only knew the Mercer study. He asked the researchers who their target audience was – academics, policymakers or the average person – and how they would make GLCI as well known as the Mercer Index to the average person.

Dr. Tan replied the aim of the study was to help policymakers identify the strengths and weaknesses of their cities.

Public interest was also sought, as they could apply added pressure to city officials. On the question of branding, he entreated the audience to give their input so that GLCI could grow more comprehensive and accurate in reflecting liveable cities, and thus be better recognised as a brand. Prof.

Woo added that the most important use of the GLCI was to raise awareness of how cities compare with each other, as opposed to comparing with their own past to see their status and progression.

Next, Dr. Burkhard raised the example of fashion, which changed every season, and asked how perceptions of quality of life and urban liveability would change over time.

He wondered how this would affect making long-term comparisons. Dr. Tan said the indicators were subject to review from time to time, reflecting indicators that became more important or less important over time. Dr. Chen felt the questions Dr. Burkhard raised varied from person to person and season to season, and were probably not things that would be considered in defining the liveability of cities.

Prof. Woo said not every city was next to a clean lake, nor had four seasons. To make sense of this diversity, one should seek the ‘best average’ of different aspects. As an analogy, he said one did not ascertain the quality of a scientist by asking if he was good in physics and chemistry and biology.

Instead, one might ask if he was good in physics, and high-energy physics specifically. In other words, a narrower definition made comparisons easier. Being ‘number one’ was hard to define across a broad category. So one could seek the best average, rather than the best in every dimension.

Dr. Remo Burkhard (moderator)

Dr. Burkhard noted that some factors could not be represented in GLCI’s matrix, and asked how to deal with soft factors that could not even be featured in surveys.

Questions about the four seasons or about swimming in a pristine lake could not be asked for Singapore, which lacked such things. Dr. Chen replied this was as aspect of liveability and could be included later, if surveys were used in the study. He noted Prof. Woo’s point about regional variations in tastes and cultural preferences. People defined liveability in different ways, and cultural difference was very difficult to tackle. To allow comparability across cultures, he was inclined to exclude more subjective factors, to be more objective. Dr. Burkhard replied that in tourist magazines and among tourists, the image of the lake was ever present and perceived to be of the highest quality, so it was not just the preference of one culture. Dr. Tan felt the elements Dr. Burkhard mentioned were subsumed under the GLCI

98

Dr. Burkhard observed the difficulty in conducting professional surveys. He asked Prof. Woo how he would integrate surveys into GLCI, and if it would be an impossible task. Prof. Woo reiterated that tastes differed and he felt a key contribution of GLCI lay in providing a benchmark, so people could assess where they stood relative to others. He advocated the use of weightage drawn from surveys. Tastes changed, but they also converged. To study this, frequent surveys were needed.

A Penang researcher asked what GLCI was for. Mercer and EIU sold data to help multinational firms pay hardship allowances to expatriates. As GLCI was meant for bureaucrats, he asked what they were supposed to do with the data. Dr. Chen said GLCI was targetted at city officials and planners in high-growth emerging economies. Cities could choose different development patterns. If GDP was

the sole priority, infrastructure could be built, demolished and rebuilt without increasing liveability or living standards.

GLCI aimed to provide a comprehensive picture of the kind of city that planners should aim for. Agreeing, Dr. Tan added that they hoped the study would also inform citizens, who would then pressure planners to adopt a more balanced approach. He repeated Prof. Woo’s point on helping cities compare themselves with other cities, and not just with their own past.

Ms. Eileen Wong from SIM University lauded GLCI for including not just GDP growth but also quality of life indicators, as well as its focus on the average citizen, rather than expatriates. She suggested that the researchers should also consider accessibility for the disabled and elderly.

Mr. Austin Lee from the City of Melbourne said that 15 years ago, Melbourne made a similar attempt to develop an index. One problem faced was whether an index that ranked Melbourne first would be credible. He felt that should not deter GLCI researchers, and that Melbourne would be delighted to participate if given an opportunity to work together on the index. He added that surveying local residents to determine their priorities was an excellent idea, and that the conference had highlighted community participation and planning as critical elements. He said the index was a framework to guide cities in their community engagement, and his suggestion was for the study to be done from that perspective. He then asked how the study would be maintained as it was a mammoth task.

Dr. Tan agreed surveys should be done and that ordinary stakeholders should be of concern. He spoke of how the Gini coefficient only measured household income, while concerns like healthcare, housing and education were not reflected and wondered how they might be translated into dollar values for measurement. That would be more comprehensive than measuring household income and could be done through surveys.

asked about the definition of liveable cities, which she was struggling with in her plan. She noted it was a very broad concept, and people had various perceptions about it. She wanted to know how the GLCI researchers had arrived at the five categories to measure liveability and if there were any hierarchies arrived at in their logical process. She also wanted the parameters and attributes used by the researchers to assess governance and leadership.

A delegate from a Chilean municipality asked when the study would be done, and how he could include Chile in the rankings. He wanted to compare his city and learn best practices to apply to his population. Another delegate named several planned cities, like Curitiba, which he thought would be great comparators, but which were not on the list.

He also mentioned dynamic North American cities that were growing quickly and attracting many people, like Atlanta and Houston, but which did not appear in the ranking. He asked if the researchers had thought about including such places.

A Singapore city planner was concerned that by treating all five categories as equal, the meaning of liveability for each city was flattened. He asked if doing so would result in cities changing their understanding of liveability, as they were ranked equally. He suggested a different points system be used in the future, so each city was ranked on its own priorities. Dr. Tan agreed with this point.

A researcher from the NUS Centre for Sustainable Asian Cities, and a LKY School MBA student, asked if public participation was an indicator used to measure good governance. She also felt that liveability was not about the mere existence of housing, transport or education, but their affordability. She also disagreed with the idea of using carbon dioxide per GDP dollar as a measure for a city like Singapore. She said that while shipping and aviation emissions were not included, their contributions to GDP were. This made the measure unfairly favourable to citystates like Singapore.

Dr. K. Choe, Co-Chair of the Urban Committee of the Asian Development Bank (ADB), said she was preparing an Urban Operations Plan under Strategic 2020 and had done a similar study but with a different objective. She

99

expert panel session 1c

cities in southeast asia: opportunities and challenges in the age of globalisation This session dispelled a few myths about Southeast Asian cities and focused on the challenges and opportunities they faced. The five main themes discussed at the CLC-ASC regional workshops were presented here. Dr. Supachai Tanikom of Bangkok presented efforts to cut carbon dioxide emissions by 15% in 2012. Mr. Nurfarkih Wirawan of Jakarta emphasised the importance of inter-regional cooperation in the development of mega urban areas, while advocating more decentralised and balanced urban development. Tuan Haji Mohamed Atei Bin Abang Medaan of Kuching North brought the perspective of a small city in facing the challenges of urbanisation.

Left to right: Dr. Yap Kioe Sheng, Tuan Haji Mohamed Atei Bin Abang Medaan, Mr. Nurfakih Wirawan, Dr. Supachai Tantikom, Mr. Rodolfo Severino and Mr. Barry Wain 100

Mr. Andrew Tan

Mr. Rodolfo Severino

Director, Centre for Liveable Cities, and CEO, National Environment Agency, Singapore

Head, ASEAN Studies Centre

opening remarks Mr. Andrew Tan remarked that this session was the culmination of half a year of collaborative work between the ASEAN Studies Centre (ASC) and the Centre for Liveable Cities (CLC). CLC was most fortunate to have partnered ASC in bringing together experts in the region, to gain a better understanding of urbanisation trends and challenges and opportunities in Southeast Asia. The story of urbanisation gaining pace was a familiar one in many parts of the world.

Asia was unique in the sense that it had not crossed the halfway point of urbanisation yet, but would cross it very soon. Even China was about 45% urbanised at present, and it will be more than 50% urbanised by 2020.

Mr. Tan took the opportunity to thank Mr. Rodolfo Severino of ASC for embracing the idea so enthusiastically when it was first raised by the CLC. He said it was heartening to see the preliminary draft of the executive summary being circulated. This was a collective work of regional urban experts, 14 of whom were present at the session. Mr. Tan also highlighted that the panellists for the day represented a wide-ranging spectrum of the collective Southeast Asian experience in addressing urbanisation challenges. Each speaker brought with him a wealth of knowledge in urban governance and management, including experiences in small towns and big cities. Each panellist would also address a unique set of problems that their city faced.

Mr. Tan thanked Tuan Haji Onn bin Haji Abdullah, Mr. Nurfakih Wirawan, and Dr. Supachai Tantikom for taking the time to share their insights on Southeast Asia’s urbanisation process.

myths and realities of southeast asian cities Mr. Rodolfo Severino began by thanking Mr. Tan and his staff for organising the conference. He also thanked Dr. Yap, who was the resource person for the series of workshops that produced the study on urbanisation in Southeast Asian countries.

He said the draft report was a work in progress, and was open to suggestions and insights from the experts present.

The purpose of the session was to discuss some of the issues raised in the report, and to enrich the study.

Mr. Severino then focused on some myths about urbanisation in Southeast Asia.

The first myth was that Southeast Asia was a largely rural region. However, almost half of Southeast Asians lived in what could be called urban areas. Another myth was that cities, especially large ones, were a drag on development.

However, as Dr. Yap would show, they were engines of growth and the result of development. Yet another myth was that mega-cities like Jakarta, Bangkok, Manila, and Ho Chi Minh City were typical of urban Southeast Asia. In fact, most urban residents in the region lived in much smaller cities and towns, of up to 500,000 people. Mr. Severino then observed that people often noted the diversity of Asian cities. They felt this meant regional cities could learn very little from one another. However, the fact was that despite their diversity, cities in Asia faced many common problems and often many common opportunities.

101

Despite these facts, ASEAN lacked a proper forum dealing with urban issues. But as the draft study would show, urbanisation had a tremendous impact on people’s lives, in areas like fertility, ageing, water issues, political systems, society and culture. This was why ASC and CLC organised two workshops to examine the phenomenon of urbanisation in Southeast Asia. Both centres hoped the workshops, and the paper that the experts would be working on under Dr. Yap’s leadership, would be the start of ASEAN cooperation in this vital area. Mr. Severino hoped the session would be interactive and contribute to the study, which would impact the lives of those in urban Southeast Asia.

Dr. Yap Kioe Sheng Executive Summary Editor, Report on Urbanisation in Southeast Asia

ASC-CLC report on urbanisation in southeast asia Dr. Yap Kioe Sheng spoke on behalf of 15 authors who contributed to the report on urbanisation in Southeast Asia. The task given to them

by ASC and CLC was to identify urban challenges in various Southeast Asian countries, and to recommend to ASEAN the ways to deal with those challenges.

Two workshops had already been conducted, and the publication was expected to be published by the end of the year, to be presented at the ASEAN summit by early the following year.

In 1950, the rate of urbanisation in Southeast Asia was very low, at 15.5%. By 2010, this would rise to 41.8%. Dr. Yap

102

said most of the region’s urban population lived in towns and cities of less than 500,000 people; just 13.8% lived in cities larger than 5 million. Those who lived in small towns and cities were often neglected by national policies. They could not use the economic potential of towns to generate economic growth to create income, jobs and prosperity. To ensure that mega-cities did not grow further, there was a need to look at the growth of smaller towns and cities, and to build their capacity to support growing urban populations.

There was a need to support positive elements in cities, while addressing negative impacts. Sociologists, economists and other social scientists stressed that the size, density and diversity of urban populations generated creativity, innovation and growth. Cities enabled development.

However, more attention to urban issues should not be at an expense of rural poverty reduction, food security and agricultural development. Dr. Yap then introduced the paper’s five themes: cities as engines of economic growth, the need for inclusive cities, environmental issues, connectivity among cities, and governance and decentralisation. He went on to elaborate on these points.

The region’s urban economies had benefitted from globalisation over the last 20 to 30 years, but cities could not be complacent. They had to compete globally for investments to secure jobs. On the other hand, cities were also vulnerable to economic shocks like the Asian Financial Crisis of 1997. Previously, cities could compete on the basis of labour costs and lax environmental regulations.

But Southeast Asian cities could no longer afford this.

The global economy was shifting from manufacturing to capital and knowledge-intensive services, and regional cities would need to keep up with the global economy to remain competitive.

Housing was a major urban concern, as it was unaffordable to many city-dwellers. Many ended up in slum and squatter settlements, facing problems like access to adequate

water and proper sanitation. They also faced problems of inclusion and acceptance, as slum dwellers were sometimes not considered a real part of urban society. Still, cities generally offered better opportunities to people, like better access to education, healthcare, employment and upward mobility. Cities had to ensure opportunities were available to rural immigrants, and to provide capabilities to seize opportunities.

Turning to environmental issues, Dr. Yap noted that cities had large ecological footprints and faced many environmental problems, from air pollution to waste production. People’s lifestyles, rather than the city itself, were the problem. Southeast Asian cities were concentrated along low elevation coastal zones, making them vulnerable to rising sea levels and natural disasters.

Dr. Yap also observed that connectivity was important for economic growth, transport was key to poverty reduction, and energy efficient transport was critical for the environment. Connectivity was important in cities, and linking towns and cities was an area that needed more attention. People had to move efficiently in urban areas, but infrastructure was often focused on moving cars, rather than people. Public transport systems therefore had to be improved. Ho also said cross-border urban corridors offered new opportunities for economic development in border towns and smaller cities.

Finally, Dr. Yap said local city governments had to partner the private sector and civil society to achieve productive, inclusive and sustainable urban development. These governments had to be strengthened to achieve effective partnerships, to direct and regulate development, and to address myriad urban challenges.

Dr. Supachai Tantikom Member, Advisory Committee to the Governor of Bangkok

reducing greenhouse gas emissions in Bangkok Since 2007, the Bangkok Metropolitan Authority (BMA) had put in place plans to combat global warming.

Dr. Supachai Tanikom said its five-year action plan (2007-2012) aimed to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 15% in 2012.

In 2007, the city emitted some 43 million tonnes of carbon dioxide a year, or 7.1 tonnes per capita per year.

Although Bangkok had an official registered population of 6 million, an estimated 10 million people worked there in the day. This meant about 4 million people commuted daily from surrounding areas. Bangkok consumed about 28 million litres of gasoline per day for transport alone. This represented 21 million tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions annually. If nothing was done, annual greenhouse gas emissions by 2012 would be equal to 48.7 million tonnes.

BMA had launched several initiatives to realise its emissions target. The first was to improve public transport infrastructure. Bangkok planned to significantly grow its rail network, from 50km to 60km currently, to 250km in the next decade. Two new mass rapid transit lines would complement two existing lines. Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) would be further developed, as it was a cost efficient mode of transport. The road network would also be improved by new expressways, and bridges across the Chao Phraya River. Dr. Tanikom

103

admitted that while these measures might not eliminate traffic problems, they would let people travel faster. He added, if people felt unsafe using mass transit, they could still drive.

These initiatives would cut some 5.5 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions annually. Another initiative was to promote renewable fuels like biodiesel, gasohol, ethanol and CNG. This would help reduce another 0.6 million tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions annually.

In addition to these initiatives, Bangkok was working with international organisations like the World Bank to conduct studies on global warming. It was also hosting ‘Cool ASEAN, Green Capitals’ meetings, to work with other ASEAN countries to combat the effects of global warming.

Mr. Nurfakih Wirawan The third initiative was to improve electricity use in buildings.

This would first be implemented in BMA buildings, as the Authority employed 30,000 people and occupied many buildings in the city. BMA would also launch campaigns to promote energy conservation in private buildings. Measures would include energy efficiency labelling on electrical appliances, reduced air-conditioning use and energy saving light bulbs. These measures were expected to reduce 2.2 million tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions annually.

The fourth initiative was to improve solid waste management and waste water treatment. Bangkok generated 8,300 tonnes of solid waste a day, which was collected and buried. The city planned to build incineration plants to treat solid waste, and generate electricity at the same time. BMA would also promote recycling to reduce the amount of waste generated. Currently, one million cubic metres of wastewater could be treated daily. BMA wanted to raise this to 1.8 million. This would be done in conjunction with steps to reduce household wastewater.

These initiatives were expected to reduce 0.5 tonnes of annual carbon dioxide emissions.

BMA’s final initiative was to increase the city’s green spaces.

Bangkok now had 25 large parks and about 3,700 green recreation areas. The city was working with private sector and other organisations to buy land to develop four new large parks. If BMA acquired land on its own, it would need a lot of money, as Bangkok land prices were very high. Trees in these parks were projected to absorb one million tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions per year.

104

President Commissioner, Pembagunan Jaya Ancol, Jakarta, and Former Chairman, Jakarta Regional Planning Board

cooperation in mega urban areas around Jakarta Mr. Nurfakih Wirawan stressed the importance of studying urbanisation by noting that half the Indonesian people now lived in urban areas, growing to 68% by 2025. As manufacturing and services employed more than 70% of citizens, cities were critical economic growth engines.

Previous overcentralisation had produced unbalanced urban growth, with Jakarta dominating the country’s economy.

He felt urbanisation should be decentralised for more balanced development. Inter-regional cooperation between Jakarta and surrounding metropolitan areas should also be enhanced. This grew clearer when comparing population growth trends of the Jakarta Metropolitan Region (JMR) with that of Jakarta. While JMR experience increasing growth, Jakarta’s growth had slowed. JMR held 22 million people in 2005. This was due to large housing developments in cities around Jakarta. Many people who lived in JMR commuted to Jakarta daily, and transport services and infrastructure had to improve to serve commuters better.

Many cities, including Jakarta, faced problems of poverty.

Social programmes at local and national levels aimed to reduce poverty by funding community groups that supported business activities and infrastructure provision for the poor.

Providing affordable housing for low-income people was another big concern for local and national governments.

Jakarta had more than 1,500 ha of slums, or 4% of its total residential areas. Despite improvement efforts, slum dwellers still lacked drinking water and sanitation. The government had introduced regulations to ensure more balanced housing development. Developers who wanted to build luxury homes in the city had to undertake the building of three middle-income and six low-income units. Shopping malls had to set aside 20% of their space for informal businesses. But Mr. Wirawan lamented that these rules had not been effectively implemented due to a lack of clear sanctions for those who broke them.

Jakarta faced severe annual flooding in the rainy season.

In February 2007, 70% of the city was flooded, killing 57 people and displacing 450,000. The government had taken measures to construct new flood canals and dredge the existing ones. The scale of the Jakarta Emergency Dredging Initiative (JEDI) required World Bank help to remove nine million cubic metres of canal sediment.

Mr. Wirawan advocated urbanisation through regional cooperation. Jakarta had grown past its borders into surrounding JMR areas. To better manage development, inter-regional cooperation among the provinces, cities and districts in the JMR was needed. Badan Kerja Sama Pembangunan (BKSP, Development Coordination Agency) for the Jabotabek region (encompassing Jakarta, Bogor, Tangerang and Bekasi) was started in 1976 to facilitate coordination among JMR local governments. Unfortunately, it was not successful and its power had been reduced by decentralisation policies. Mr. Wirawan argued there was

a need to revitalise the institution, to more effectively and efficiently manage the mega urban region. Much could also be done to promote networking among urban development practitioners of the region and country. Jakarta’s experience in working with local institutions on urban development issues could be the focal point for networking efforts.

Tuan Haji Mohamed Atei Bin Abang Medaan Director, Commission of the City of Kuching North, Malaysia

urban development in a small city: Kuching north Tuan Haji Mohamed Atei Bin Abang Medaan said Kuching North’s experience represented the challenges of smaller cities. Kuching North was 150 years old, but was elevated to city status only in 1988. As a small city, it had a population of less than 0.5 million. Tuan Haji Atei recognised that to attract people with the brains, entrepreneurial skills and investments to generate prosperity, the city had to become liveable and sustainable.

A key success factor was that Dewan Bandaraya Kuching Utara (DBKU, the City of Kuching North Commission) had strong relationships with the federal and state governments, and other agencies. He credited Kuching North’s success to the Sarawak state government. This government had the role of planning and implementation, while DBKU assisted in implementation.

105

With the people’s participation, DBKU had clear goals to create a liveable modern city, which was beautiful, green and healthy, as well as economically and culturally vibrant.

It adapted to the challenges of urbanisation gradually, first by providing excellent municipal services to the people.

As the city’s Chief Administrative Officer, Tuan Haji Atei tackled challenges at the micro-level. He cited 10 such challenges. The first five were collated from complaints, and they included the drainage system, road network, tree maintenance, rubbish collection and clearance of rank vegetation. The other challenges were to be financially selfsustainable, to improve quality of life, to grow the residential and business communities, to bring jobs and business development to the local community, and to fully eradicate illegal business operations in the city.

Kuching North had taken steps to improve its liveability and sustainability. For its efforts, the city won the ASEAN Sustainable City Award in 2008. DBKU adopted the idea of a sustainable city as defined by the UN Centre for Human Settlements – Habitat, and made measurements based on the Malaysian Urban Indicator Network (MURNInet). Using the MURNInet analyses, DBKU put forward programmes for funding from the federal and state governments. For this Kuching North was awarded the Malaysian Smart

106

City Award and the ASEAN Environmentally Sustainable Cities Award in 2008. DBKU had put in place an ISO 14001 environmental management system as a show of the government’s commitment towards green practices.

Tuan Haji Atei was also proud that Kuching North was the only Malaysian city that was a member of the Alliance for Healthy Cities – an international network aimed at protecting and enhancing the health of city dwellers. Because of its commitment to promoting healthy activities, Kuching North was recognised by the World Health Organisation in 2004 as a garden city and a model healthy city in the West Pacific Region. 60% of the city was covered by forest, of which a third was primary forest. To increase its greenery, the city continued to plant trees in every nook of its streetscape.

In recognition of these efforts, Kuching North officials were asked to advise Kampala, Uganda, on beautifying the landscape during Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) 2007.

Proper planning, empowerment and clear delineation of responsibilities were contributing factors to Kuching North’s success as a safe, healthy and environmentally sustainable city. Good partnerships with the private sector and mutually beneficial networks with surrounding cities and towns also helped boost the city’s attractiveness and liveability.

discussion Mr. Barry Wain (moderator) Writer-in-Residence, Institute of Southeast Asian Studies The first question from the floor was on the issues of crime and natural disasters. A delegate noted that local governments in the region had recently grown more concerned about crime prevention and natural disaster risk reduction as part of their planning for urban safety.

She observed a paradigm shift, from responding to natural disasters to preventing them. Many cities had included flood prevention as part of their integrated urban planning. She asked if these issues could be included in the study. Dr. Yap replied that crime statistics were hard to compare, as there could be differences in the way they were reported. But he acknowledged that it was an important area of study.

It was also interesting to study if climate change had indeed brought about more natural disasters.

A Bahrain delegate commented on the centralisationdecentralisation dichotomy in city development. He felt most Asian countries opted for centralised development, which made a few key cities the hubs of business and infrastructure. This caused problems for environment, traffic, safety and security. On the other hand, European countries had opted for a more decentralised approach where development was spread throughout the country and people were able to find work in many areas. He felt the concept of sustainable development should cover all regions in the country, and not concentrated on just a few areas. Tuan Haji Mohamed Atei shared that the urbanisation of Kuching North, which began with an initial 100sqkm, had grown to an area three times its original size. As the population grew, urban development spread to surrounding regions, facilitated by good road links. He also emphasised the need to have good partnerships with regional neighbours, one aspect being community development.

DBKU kept communication channels open, and encouraged goodwill and civic mindedness towards public infrastructure.

It was also important to have a clear roadmap and to assess clearly the impact of what was being done, instead of just looking at outputs.

Next, a delegate asked if the panel recognised that cultural continuity was a part of sustainability, liveable and creative cities. Dr. Yap replied that cities around the world were replicating each other in their efforts to compete in the global economy. As a result, cities increasingly looked like clones of each other, through the destruction of local cultures and built environments. He felt it was important for cities to emphasise the uniqueness of local cultures.

The next delegate asked Tuan Haji Atei, as a non-elected official, how he knew if what he was doing was the right thing for the people. Tuan Haji Atei replied that the people were consulted on what they wanted through community development initiatives. The impact of what he had done could be clearly seen. If people were unhappy with the government, Kuching North Members of Parliament would not have won all their seats in the elections.

The final question asked was if cities of different sizes differed in their urbanisation experience. The questioner thought it would be interesting to examine if cities of different sizes would perform differently, and faced different challenges and impacts from globalisation. He also asked how this would affect their liveability. Were smaller cities more liveable? Dr. Yap agreed this was an interesting area to study. He added that the aim of this study was to encourage ASEAN members to come together and tackle the common challenges faced by cities of all sizes.

107

108

expert panel session 2 maintaining a competitive economy

109

expert panel session 2a

financing of municipal infrastructure Economies were recovering from one of the worst economic crises. Extraordinary stimulus packages and policies had secured a retreat from the brink of collapse and confidence was returning, but lending remained cautious. Two things were certain: first, cities would still grow rapidly, and second, better infrastructure would enhance access to services and facilities, generate growth and improve lives, if balanced with environmental considerations. Given this, how should we invest public funds in infrastructure, and how could industry and financiers partner governments to create sustainable growth? What new financing, operating and business models were needed in ‘the new normal’? What governance structures would ensure that new infrastructure led to rates of return beyond project balance sheets? Infrastructure had to position communities, cities and countries for connectivity and increased foreign trade; provide access to education, sanitation, water, and electricity at lower costs; and build liveable and sustainable cities. Organised by the World Bank and Centre for Liveable Cities, this session explored the challenges faced by cities in emerging and even developed economies, in raising private capital for public infrastructure. The panel featured diverse view, including from a central government regulator, credit rating agency, private sector advisor, multilateral donor, and city administrator.

Left to right: Mr. Kamran Khan, Prof. Paul James, Mr. Melvin A. Cruz, Mr. James Harris, Mr. Ping Chew, Mr. Coskun Cangoz and Mr. Michael Barrow 110

Prof. Paul James Director, RMIT Global Cities Research Institute, and Director, UN Global Compact Cities Programme

issues in financing infrastructure Prof. James gave an overview of the infrastructure challenges facing cities, and the larger issues cities that had to be considered before thinking about financing specificities. He said we were witnessing a range of crises in cities. Financing could no longer be seen as high-level activity conducted between governments, or with international organisations and financing committees. Rather, financing had to become public-private-civil society partnerships. He then detailed four crises that cities faced in the cultural, political, economic and ecological spheres.

Prof. James defined the cultural challenge as crises of meaning and expectation. People had either extremely high expectations of their cities, or deep cynicism. Based on an assumption that culture was critical to a city, he argued that financing a city’s culture was as important as any infrastructure, including hard or soft infrastructure.

Municipalities had to leverage money against community support and draw other public and private partners into the process. Prof. James had seen some city festivals collapse due to too much money, while others thrived by using partnerships well. How financing was used to develop culture was thus more important than acquiring massive funding.

Turning to the political crisis, Prof. James said that cities – beyond a few ‘soft authoritarian’ models – had lost their authority to make decisions for themselves. They thus needed not only external partnerships, as with the World Bank or Asian Development Bank, but also local partnerships within their communities. For instance, some Latin American nations had pioneered ‘participatory budgeting’, where financing was centred on taxation and what the community

offered in relation to private partners. Communities first took part in discussions to set high-level and high-profile priorities.

Only then were project management details returned to ‘good, solid infrastructure management’, rather than beating out a political programme.

On the economic front, Prof. James observed a crisis of growth, and one directly related to finance. Finance had grown so abstracted from day-to-day reality that the distinctions surrounding financing meant that a global financial crisis would bear down on places from Nairobi or Melbourne to the smallest town in Africa. These places were so enmeshed in the crisis that financing was now ‘a burden to us, rather than part of the support process’. He proposed a return to the basics, like mixed-economic planning and developing good projects with a large vision, and then leveraging the finance available within a framework that considered those projects as part of a city’s larger vision.

Prof. James said his interest in ecological issues lay in how ecological problems, from climate change to water management, related to financing. He said climate change adaptation costs were so high that financing an ecological crisis was ‘beyond all of us’. He therefore advocated bold and long term regulatory frameworks. An example was from the Mayor of Curitiba was a scheme to clean the city’s waterways, whereby the city paid fishermen who fished in garbage. This mechanism helped improve the environment.

Another example was from Port Alegre, a city to the south of Curitiba, where the government built its slums into its ecological reclamation programme. As a result, the slums were now part of the city’s recycling programme. There were countless such mechanisms that could be used. He said the choices depended upon the cities in question, and should be framed by public-private-civil society partnerships.

Instead of older forms of PPP, where cities signed over their rights to the firms they enticed in, this was a real and long term partnership where the contracts signed actually made demands on those firms, so that they became true partners in rebuilding the city.

111

Mr. Melvin A. Cruz Former Chief Financial Officer, Marikina City, Philippines

financing infrastructure: Marikina City Mr. Melvin Cruz brought his 18 years of experience as a city administrator to this discussion. He noted that Marikina City, which he called a highly organised city situated in a developing country, had won numerous awards for ecology, environmental management, and participatory management and budgeting. The city had also recently undergone a credit rating process by Standard & Poor’s.

Mr. Cruz began by describing some of the key challenges Marikina City faced in building infrastructure and improving liveability and competitiveness. Marikina had come a long way since it was allocated a tight $74 million budget in 1992.

He stressed that prioritisation was key during that time. Over the years, Marikina had placed a premium on infrastructure, including road and roadside construction, drainage system improvements, construction of schools, health centres, community centres and gymnasiums, renovation of the public market, setting up livelihood centres and establishing wireless integrated network systems.

Funding was always a fundamental challenge that had to be resolved. Mr. Cruz described Marikina’s experiences in trying to raise funding as a two-step process, which began with proper tax collection. The basic source of infrastructure funding was the city’s annual income, generated by real property taxes, business taxes and the internal revenue allotment, i.e. financial assistance given by the central

112

government to local authorities. The next step was to devise revenue-generating activities. Marikina developed several profitable local enterprises to augment its tax income.

Nevertheless, the funds needed for projects would always be insufficient. The local government’s share in national revenue allotment was not always enough to start and complete projects, while locally-generated revenue was needed to cover other city costs. Coupled with rising inflation, the growing cost of realising projects and programmes meant the local government struggled to create new infrastructure to meet financing needs.

As infrastructure needed time before reaching liquidity, the government pursued external funding. Banks had traditionally been their first choice. However, the city had been hindered in this respect by a law requiring local governments to only borrow from banks that were owned or accredited by government.

Mr. Cruz said good governance was a key factor that paid off for Marikina. After the city underwent a credit rating process, where it received a high rating, the International Finance Corporation (IFC) offered them collateral-free loans as part of a pilot lending programme. Marikina had set a real precedent in this respect, showing that a city could raise money in its own right, based on a good credit rating. However, the city then faced issues of legality and national sovereignty. The Philippine constitution, as interpreted by the Department of Justice, indicated that only the national government could deal with foreign creditors. It took 18 months of poring over voluminous documents and justifications before Marikina’s loan from an external creditor was approved. However, further negotiations had stalled due to recent local and national elections. Mr. Cruz hoped the incoming local leadership, which took over earlier that day, would pursue the IFC loan for the city’s infrastructure projects.

Mr. James Harris Chairman, International Project Finances Association, Asia Chapter, and Head, Hogan Lovells Infrastructure and Projects Practice for Asia

urban project finance: a professional advisor’s perspective Drawing on his experience helping cities prepare projects, Mr. James Harris shared the perspective of a professional advisor. He said he would focus on issues he had encountered, mainly in emerging markets, with a stress on legal issues, and the need for advisors.

He prefaced his talk by discussing the previously mentioned sub-sovereign limits on borrowing for infrastructure projects. He mentioned two UK cases in the 1990s, where the Hammersmith and Fulham city councils undertook innovative structured financing involving ‘fairly sophisticated swop deals’, which they were unauthorised to do. Subsequently, the court found the deals invalid, and thus unenforceable. Sub-sovereign borrowing restrictions had grown as a result.

As a project finance advisor in emerging markets, Mr. Harris identified two types of challenges: systemic, and ‘human nature’ challenges. He defined systemic issues as relating to regulatory or legal frameworks, especially constitutional limits on sub-sovereign procurement of assets and services.

India, Indonesia and the Philippines were some countries that faced such challenges. Vietnam and Indonesia were recent examples of countries that had begun to try and address this, with new regulations to allow sub-sovereign

borrowing for infrastructure projects on a PPP basis. Other systemic elements included competing priorities, political stability, political will, having political champions, and transparency. In Southeast Asia, another systemic issue he noted was the presence of ‘too many cooks’, i.e. having too many people trying to help on a particular problem. As a result, it was difficult for foreign investors or advisors to understand who was meant to do what, and how things came together. Poor planning and implementation were also systemic risks in the region.

Human nature challenges were about having access to useful information on what to do and how to get started. Many local government officials knew they wanted to procure something on a PPP basis, but did not know how to start and lacked the funds to start. Mr. Harris said the solution involved capacity building, and appointing credible consultants to elicit worldclass investment from all sectors. Stressing the need to understand risk, he recounted how many Finance Ministry officials asked him for presentations on the exact risks that would arise in different contexts and who should attend to them. He added that several projects were issued to market with completely unacceptable risk allocation regimes, which prevented transactions from going forward.

Another set of human nature challenges involved corruption, political interference, unrealistic timelines and false starts.

Mr. Harris said fear and self-preservation were involved in these issues, and he stressed the need to sensitive to such emotions. He also said predetermined outcomes based on feasibility studies could create false expectations, depicting projects as feasible when they were not, as this was the desired outcome. He warned countries against trying to start procurement with extremely difficult projects, and advised municipal officials to start with easier projects like simple water treatment facilities or transport projects, rather than a multi-million dollar stadium.

113

Turning to solutions, Mr. Harris argued the World Bank and Asian Development Bank had to ‘lead the emerging economies out of the quagmire of poor starts, poor advice, information voids, information overloads and competing interests’. Governments also had to work closely with the two bodies to ensure problems could be solved. He then listed the key responsibilities governments had to be aware of. First, World Bank or the Asian Development Bank action had to be in conjunction with key government officials who were fully supported by the central government. Viability gaps had to be acknowledged and addressed openly and sensibly. Accountability for fiscal management was crucial.

He noted that many problems involving foreign advisors arose due to poor accountability for fiscal management.

Finally, he advocated being able to embrace all types of investors in as many ways as possible, and reminded the audience there were no ‘one size fits all’ solutions.

or company, credit rating acts as a conduit for investors.

Investors use ratings in decision-making to gauge if they wanted to part with their money.

Mr. Ping Chew

Turning to bonds, Mr. Chew said, ‘a bond is almost as capitalist an instrument as you can get’. Once an entity sought financing via bonds, it had to play by the rules of the bond market. Underlying this was the development of a credit culture. This incorporated many factors: a risk pricing mechanism, investor protection, transparency and full disclosure, and predictability - giving investors confidence by letting them know what to expect from a partnership.

The legal frameworks and contexts of these partnerships affected all these individual aspects. Having a credit culture was very important to attracting investors, but these aspects had to be extrapolated into the long term. This meant developing a credit culture that was not only applicable to individual projects, but was inculcated throughout the community. In conclusion, Mr. Chew referred to Minister Mah Bow Tan’s comments at an earlier forum that strong and persistent leadership was needed not only to develop robust growth in a country, but also to inculcate a credit culture in a community.

Managing Director and Greater China Head, Standard & Poor’s

developing a credit culture Mr. Ping Chew used his agency’s extensive experience in credit rating sub-sovereigns in East Asia, Latin America and Eastern Europe to highlight the importance of credit culture in attracting financing. Referring to a question at the Ministerial Dialogue on how to find financing, he stressed ‘money is out there’ – the more important questions were ‘how do you entice money to come and how do you give [investors] confidence?’ In handling a municipality, sovereign nation

114

Mr. Chew focused on discussing what markets and investors sought. Rather than focus on institutional problems like previous presenters, he approached the issue from a ratings perspective. He explained that when investors considered financing a project, they assessed several factors, like the project’s standalone cash-generating ability and whether the project was viable and feasible. Other factors included the legal framework, country risk, political factors and even intergovernment fiscal relationships. These factors were key to investors, as a project finance could not exist on its own, and was always dependent on its context. In its purest form, project finance was a series of agreements between lenders, project sponsors, investors and so on. The legal framework and context for these agreements was therefore very important.

Mr. Coskun Cangoz Director General of Public Finance, Turkish Treasury

central regulations on sub-sovereign borrowing Arising from the World Cities Summit theme, Mr. Coskun Cangoz raised two questions, before illustrating how Turkey tried to answer them in its context. First, who would serve citizens to provide a sustainable and liveable environment – central or local government? How would they share this responsibility? Second, how would they finance this?

If infrastructure investment was carried out by central government, they could look at financing options. But, if responsibility was decentralised to local governments, financing facilities also had to be decentralised.

Turkey had attempted to answer these questions in its decentralised context. Mr. Cangoz gave an overview of Turkey’s government system. The unitary government was split into central and local government branches; local governments were further split into municipalities and special provincial administrations. Elected mayors ran municipalities, but special provincial administrations were central government branches within municipalities, run by State bureaucrats. The responsibilities of these two departments were different, and were both meant to serve citizens via different channels. Municipalities shared some responsibilities, and central government funds were transferred to them as part of decentralised governance.

As with most decentralised polities, municipal financing in Turkey was strongly linked to politics. Focusing on financial aspects of Turkey’s decentralised system, Mr. Cangoz described the Turkish experience with external financing for municipalities. He divided this into the markets-based system, as permitted from the 1980s, and the rules-based system, which had been in use since 2002, following bad experiences with borrowing from markets in the 1990s.

The markets-based system allowed municipalities to turn to markets for sustainable financing, with the belief that if

they had good projects, credible municipalities would be able to secure financing. If not, markets would punish them.

There were no limits on municipal borrowing in the 1980s and 1990s. The Turkish Treasury gave blanket guarantees for financing, while subsidising municipalities that borrowed funds, with transfers from the central budget. Municipalities were also able to borrow from domestic banks. In this period, municipalities had less funds and less control than under the current more regulated approach. This was because municipalities had not focused on raising their revenues, preferring to finance projects through external borrowing as this was considered an off-budget item, and was not included on their balance sheets.

The current rules-based system involved greater regulation, but municipalities were benefitting from more funds and more control. They now had to show their debts and interest on their balance sheets, seek permission from the central government for non-guaranteed domestic and external borrowing, and seek approval from municipal councils. If a Treasury guarantee was sought, it had to be within a limit set by parliament every year. Furthermore, any external borrowing had to be related directly to infrastructure investments. The priorities for such projects were set at the central level by the State bank, taking into account national, sectoral and environmental priorities and local issues.

These regulations aimed to raise the credibility of municipalities, and increase their transparency and accountability. A new financial accounting system, aligned with international standards, had also been introduced.

Making external and domestic borrowing more difficult had forced municipalities to grow their own resources and raise the efficiency of their financing operations, while reducing their financial dependency. Even with this system, half the municipalities were still completely dependent on the central government for financing. The central government was thus aiming to develop greater financial management capacities.

As Mr. Cangoz argued, if these municipalities did not have effective financial management capacities, they could serve their citizens in a sustainable way.

115

Mr. Michael Barrow Director, Private Sector Development, Asian Development Bank (ADB)

establishing a good system for pilot projects Mr. Barrow began by saying while he was from a large public-sector organisation, his perspective was very much informed by his private sector experiences prior to joining ADB. His talk was based on anecdotes he used to illustrate a few themes that had been discussed, in terms of what was needed to get private sector financing for municipal urban infrastructure.

His first example was the Phnom Penh water utility, which had cut its ‘non-revenue water’ (e.g. water lost to leaks) from 60% to single digit figures in the last few years. Donors were now ‘falling over themselves’ to provide funding, and the private sector wanted to finance projects. Mr. Barrow argued that Phnom Penh’s unexpected success was due to strong leadership. He credited one man single-handedly and consistently driving an agenda, and doing the right things.

He completely retooled the organisation, put it on track, and encouraged the belief in the outside world that this was a safe place to put money.

An opposing example, highlighting some ‘human nature’ challenges, was from a trip Mr. Barrow made when he first joined ADB to a minister regarding an urban transport project. While the minister was very keen on ADB assistance and funds to hire strong technical outside advisors, he lost all interest and the conversation drew to a close when Mr. Barrow noted that this process would also require a great deal of transparency. The minister was not interested in transparency. Eight years later, not a single project on the shopping list had occurred.

116

Next, Mr. Barrow mentioned an Asian city that had plans for a very expensive piece of infrastructure worth a couple of billion dollars. The city wanted to execute this as a publicprivate partnership (PPP), despite lacking any experience with PPP. One official, rather than a team, was assigned to do this. He was not given a budget, only a very specific set of instructions and a strict timeline for completing the project.

Despite lacking several key components, he launched a tender, due to the time demands on him. Mr. Barrow described the tender documents as having no intimation of the project costs, risks, revenue model, or who would pay for it. Some potential bidders expressed an interest in directing how the project should be conducted, with no consistency and no way of comparing these parties. Mr. Barrow felt the man spearheading the project was clearly determined to do a good job, but was unlikely to succeed, as he had not been equipped with the right resources and backing.

Mr. Barrow noted that governments often saw PPP as a panacea, thinking they could hand whole projects to the private sector. However, the reality was that a PPP represented an enormous amount of work for governments, in terms of preparation, bidding and mostly in the ongoing partnerships. Governments forgot that they could not wipe their hands off a PPP; they had to manage it for 15 or 20 years. Mr. Barrow said that time and again, what were supposed to be PPP centres of excellence in Western countries and advanced cities had gotten this wrong.

Beyond bidding for or doing a project, the work required a longer, ongoing relationship.

An example that illustrated the importance of taking the time to do careful and thorough project preparation came from ADB’s work in India’s water sector. ADB decided to do some PPP projects, but to do in advance all the preparatory work that went into eventually having a nice pipeline of transactions. They carefully chose Gujarat, a state that was the most progressive and had the most buy-in for private sector involvement in infrastructure. Within Gujarat, they selected three cities that had the clearest buy-in to

the whole PPP agenda, and cities that were prepared to do what was required, and to listen and take advice.

Two years were spent with those city governments laying out the ground rules, helping devise legal and regulatory frameworks, model contracts, selecting projects, preparing projects, and putting them on the market. The first projects were now going to the market. The first bidding process had been very hotly contested and the bidders had been very keen; the project had now been awarded. Each of the losing bidders came to the team and commented it was a well-designed process and that they would be happy to participate in the next one. By getting the first few projects right, a whole stream of later projects would be positively affected, and the entire process would get easier with time.

For his last example, Mr. Barrow described a city that did not have much PPP experience, but which still decided to do a number of big transport projects instead of choosing one or even two. They did some preparatory work, after which they went to the market. Rather than a real market preparatory tour, they simply told one of their ministers going to another country to discuss the matter there. After that, they carried out a bidding exercise. They received one bid for some projects, but no bidders for most. None of the projects had materialised, even though this happened years ago.

The lesson, said Mr. Barrow, was to start modestly, do the preparation work, find good pilot projects, and not try to do everything all at once. With a good system, the bidders would come, and projects would take off. The difference between deals that got a flood of interested investors and those that got no bids at all lay in a solid foundation of good planning and preparatory work, as well as strong commitment from the government.

117

discussion Mr. Kamran Khan (moderator) Programme Director, World Bank-Singapore Urban Hub

Mr. Khan summarised the points made by the speakers.

He noted there was money out there, but legal, institutional political and alignment was needed to facilitate good projects. This required internal capacity and resources to prepare projects, and institutional infrastructure for projects to look attractive and reliable.

A delegate asked for innovative ways to deal with currency risk. Mr. Khan noted this had been a problem in Brazil when they opened their sub-national market, and many local governments got tangled in foreign exchange risk. Mr. Harris replied there was no easy answer, and a lot of jurisdictions had strict impediments on local governments entering into any sort of direct funding with either multilateral or offshore groups, so financing was usually domestic. If currency exposure was an issue, it would be handled under the local regime.

Mr. Barrow added that ‘the facile answer is that you need to build up the domestic banking and capital markets’. By doing so, developing countries would mobilise local and international saving and funds. He said that when ADB financed projects, they did it in local currency. They were thus local currency players in whichever markets they operated in. But ADB did not yet provide local currency financing in some countries, like Laos or East Timor. To fund projects in local currency, ADB had to be able to access local currencies, through bond markets, swop markets, and so on. That was a long-term plan and part of what the ADB was doing in financial market development. He felt that not all 44 member countries in ADB were steaming ahead. At many so-called pan-Asian infrastructure conferences, most discussions focused on two or three countries. Although this was not ideal, there was no easy or immediate solution.

He added that ADB currently did a lot to encourage local lenders participate through its guarantee products and presence, but it was very much a long-term plan of action.

118

Mr. Khan described a method that several countries had used successfully. This involved short-term local financing and providing a guarantee for the refinancing risk. South Africa’s financing of a big coal-fired power plant was an example of this financing technique. He added that, if countries reached a point of enough credibility in PPP markets, investors would find ways to hedge themselves back into local currency, to participate in those economies.

He noted that developing countries had initially waited for investors to come to them, but the onus was on them to do the preparatory work and make projects attractive to financiers. While several speakers had spoken about the availability of money, countries still had to make projects attractive, as it was their responsibility to bring the money in. In Vietnam, Indonesia and many smaller countries, there was significant foreign and domestic investment, but not in public infrastructure. The challenge was to make PPP projects attractive, so investors would find it worthwhile to invest in public infrastructure rather a factory.

The next question related to foreign exchange risks when taking loans from external investors like ADB and World Bank. When a central government took on foreign exchange risks and funded municipalities via internal systems, what role could funding institutions play at the national level?

Mr. Cangoz said Turkey had a municipal bank, which was part of the Ministry of Infrastructure, but its shareholders were Turkey’s roughly 3,000 municipalities. The bank took money from municipalities, and then lent them funds via auctions. Municipalities had to prepare projects, with the bank providing advice and consultancy. The bank then hired firms to conduct the projects, and paid them directly; no money went to municipality bank accounts, to avoid complications. Mr. Cangoz said that most municipalities had strong financial management capacities, but each only had one or two accountants, and smaller ones lacked a designated accountant. The municipal bank therefore came in to undertake some of the responsibility.

Mr. Chew said that development banks could play a part, as in viability gap funding, but they should not be the only solution. They could even be part of the problem for a

longer-term bond market, and capital market development, as countries could grow dependent on them, and tied to the banks’ conditions or disadvantageous decisions.

He stressed the importance of a wide range of financing solutions, rather than relying on a single source of financing.

Another member of the audience asked if World Bank financial assistance depended on sovereign guarantees from central governments, even if there were no constitutional bans on external lending. Mr. Khan replied that the World Bank was required by its charter to get a sovereign guarantee before lending any money, a policy designed to ensure the World Bank would not ‘fish’ in countries without central governments’ approval, and to ensure responsibility and accountability. However, the World Bank did have a product called Sub-National Finance, which was specifically designed to address this issue, and which they planned to use in Marikina. It allowed the World Bank to make an investment in a city or sub-sovereign entity without a sovereign guarantee. Mr. Cruz added that one part of the loan package involved training and capacity-building. World Bank loans thus did not necessarily have to be in the form of money, but could be in terms of training and expertise.

An Indonesian delegate described the reluctance of her central government to provide a sovereign guarantee, as well as the reluctance of officials to proceed with any loans from external investors due to fears that this would open them up to corruption investigations. As a result, many public infrastructure projects, like the Jakarta Monorail, had come to a halt. She asked Mr. Cruz if his experiences in Marikina held any answers to this problem. Mr. Cruz said that with a new World Bank product, no one had any experience dealing with these matters. A lot of time was spent discussing definitions and legal interpretations.

The final question was how to get governments to pick appropriate, good, simple and isolated projects, and how to manage expectations of external financing and aid. Mr. Cruz said that identifying projects was part of the capacity building that external aid could provide. The World Bank gave Marikina a list of possible projects they could undertake, with

one of the restrictions being that projects could not have a political motivation. For example, settlement sites in the Philippines were heavily politicised, and so the World Bank did not want to get involved with local politics.

Prof. James added that no project was really simple and isolated to work on, and that selecting something small was different from choosing something simple. He stressed the importance of doing proper preparatory work and having a good understanding of the project. He had seen projects that lacked proper follow-through, even after millions of dollars had been invested. At the end of the project, governments had forgotten one or two basic things, and the project would fail within three years. He felt it was more important to conduct a project correctly than to choose the ‘right’ project.

Mr. Khan summarised the main points raised by the panel.

He said there first had to be a framework for thinking about what cities hoped to accomplish. Project parameters had to be identified, including financing, the environment, and participatory budgeting to ensure broad-based will behind the project. Next, legal and institutional issues had to be resolved, in terms of being able to borrow but also being able to have the right advisors to prepare projects. That led to advisory and capacity building functions. There was money out there, but projects had to be attractive enough to draw this money.

Infrastructure projects had some attractive features; one could park money for the long term and ride the growth in the country. But risks were not negligible in infrastructure projects. Next, if we wanted public agencies to partner private investors, either via PPP or to raise money, they had to have an ingrained credit culture otherwise they would not make credible partners. Finally, rules to increase sub-national credit were needed. Central governments obviously had a role – the question was how they would play this role. They could be proactive, and ensure the right environment was in place, so that when local governments met the requirements they were actually more attractive than they would have otherwise been.

Alternatively, central governments could use their power to discourage local governments from borrowing, which did not seem to help anybody.

119

expert panel session 2b

sustainable urban solutions: role of innovation and industry Rapid urbanisation in Asia and emerging economies presented a unique and immense market opportunity for solutions that could overcome land, water and energy constraints, and help cities worldwide achieve sustainable growth. Countries and companies around the world were increasing research into technological innovations in areas like renewable energy, the built environment, water treatment, waste remediation, as well as clean and intelligent transport systems. In this session, industry experts shared their experiences and perspectives on how the private sector could work in partnership with governments to meet the needs of urban environments by introducing novel, market-oriented and sustainable solutions.

Discussions covered issues like sustainable urban development, clean environment, climate change, good quality of life and economic competitiveness.

Left to right: Dr. Paul Ainslie, Assoc. Prof. Simon Tay and Mr. Bruno Berthon 120

Dr. Willfried Wienholt Vice President Urban Development, Siemens ONE, Siemens AG

making cities work – sustainable urban infrastructure Dr. Wienholt presented Siemens’ approach and experience in engaging cities at different levels to assess sustainable urban development. He recognised today’s cities as economic power centres, where decision-makers faced many challenges in ensuring urban sustainability. These included economic competitiveness, quality of life, finance capability and good governance. For truly feasible and sustainable urban development, the attractiveness of a city in the eyes of its citizens also had to be considered.

Dr. Wienholt explained that Siemens’ role was to service the entire energy chain. This included energy generation, distribution, transmission and consumption. The challenge for Siemens was to ensure greater energy efficiency all round. He revealed that it was possible for cities to become 20% to 30% more efficient, just by applying existing technologies. He argued that we had to focus on finding the best methods of applying such existing technologies.

Siemens used three different study methods to help cities identify and assess the options and costs of sustainable urban development.

Perception studies let cities understand and raise awareness of the major drivers of a city. Dr. Wienholt cited Siemens’ study of 30 European cities, which identified possible areas for improvement. Siemens found a need to better harness Information and Communications Technology (ICT) to improve cities’ operational efficiency. However, city residents had to understand the importance of ICT, and this could prove a psychological barrier. Therefore, such studies could

help cities prioritise their resources before incurring costly implementation.

Next, comparative studies across cities facilitated the identification and prioritisation of areas for improvement.

Dr. Wienholt said Siemens hoped to apply such studies across Asia, the Americas and Africa. These studies could be executed with the help of indices like the Asia Green City Index. The results of ongoing studies for this index would be published by the end of 2010. The processes of dialogue engagement, peer review and subsequent publication would ensure a system of checks and balances for validity.

Thirdly, implementation studies helped cities assess options for improving environmental sustainability by highlighting necessary support measures and providing city-specific, return-on-investment analyses. These could cover resource efficiency and carbon dioxide abatement studies. Decisionmakers would then be more aware of the costs or premiums needed to implement more sustainable energy models.

After the study stage, Dr. Wienholt said Siemens assisted firms in the implementation of innovative technologies to achieve more sustainable environmental outcomes for cities.

A Singapore-based example of such an innovation would be a pilot project on desalination technology conducted by Siemens. This has demonstrated 65% more efficiency than currently employed technologies. He also cited the study of a commercial area in China, where it was found carbon dioxide emission levels could be reduced by up to 46%, with a return on investment in three to four years. In Russia, Siemens demonstrated that if a basket of 12 fresh technologies was implemented, the country would attain an impressive 52% rise in energy efficiency. And in airport environments, Siemens found that up to three million Euros a year per airport could be saved using energy efficiency technology.

121

Dr Wienholt ended his presentation by noting the interconnectedness of sustainable urban development.

He therefore stressed the importance of consensus-based reasoning between the various actors and decision-makers in a city.

Mr. Bruno Berthon Global Managing Director of Sustainability Services, Accenture

sustainability as the common ground for cities and the private sector Mr. Berthon highlighted the importance of intelligent cities in terms of their attractiveness and economic competitiveness. Our transition to intelligent cities had been difficult, largely due to the slow pace of influencing and ensuring behavioural change across urban populations.

Other factors that could cause significant delays were inefficiencies, like a lack of governance, ineffective regulation, the complexity of city management, different incentives by countries and regions, as well as complexities arising from stakeholder involvement. He added that, regardless of their size or population growth rates, all cities faced growing resource demands, system inefficiencies, increased carbon dioxide emission levels, and complexities in funding mechanisms and procurement processes.

122

ICT was again highlighted as a way of providing operationally efficient solutions to address the three key domains of energy, buildings and mobility. In the energy domain, they sought to optimise the carbon content in energy, energy efficiency, and supply and demand management. In buildings, the goal was to optimise fluid consumption, such as electrical power and water. Finally, mobility measures focused on finding the right combination of public transport for the masses. He added that the drive towards efficiency could first be inculcated through education.

Mr. Berthon categorised cities into three types. Laboratory cities, like Singapore, had a tradition of implementing and experimenting with sustainable solutions. Spreading cities were those with a high rate of growth, and included Mexico City and many urban centres in China. Legacy cities referred to places such as Paris or Amsterdam, with renowned urban landscapes that were often impossible to alter. He stressed the need to tailor innovative and clean solutions that could address the growth imperatives in all three types, taking into account that each one had different profiles and contexts.

Citing lessons learnt from Amsterdam, which aimed to cut 40% carbon dioxide emission from 1990 levels by 2025, Mr. Berthon found the need for a series of pilot programmes that could identify how infrastructure could cope with expected behavioural changes, alongside approaches taken in mobility, sustainable living, as well as working and public spaces, using smart grid technology as an enabler.

Dr. Paul Ainslie Director, Advanced Product Development, Delphi Electronics & Safety, Delphi Corporation

sustainable transportation: green electrified vehicles and infrastructure integration Maintaining sustainable transport systems was very much in Delphi’s interests, Dr. Ainslie explained, because the firm was in the business of manufacturing vehicle parts. He highlighted two main challenges in sustainable transport – the first concerned energy costs, energy security and greenhouse gas emissions, while the second involved traffic management issues like congestion, accidents and traffic management, and the associated productivity losses. Dr. Ainslie then presented some of Delphi’s new sustainable transport solutions to both sets of problems.

Smart grid integration was a solution at the whole systemslevel. He noted that its application drove research and development, job creation, as well as the need for products like off-vehicle smart energy management. For example, electric vehicle plug-in charge points required citywide infrastructure. Being plugged in to the power grid then created opportunities for greater integration with the environment, like powering up or receiving information from communication devices. Delphi helped ensure communication devices had a minimal impact on transport safety. This encompassed interactions between the vehicle and its immediate environment, vehicle to vehicle, vehicle to

infrastructure, and navigation functions like integrated sensors and radar systems. Another solution concerned connectivity.

It enabled the integration of mobile phones in vehicle cockpits, to enhance the connectivity of cars and drivers.

Such technologies were already available today. For these sustainable transportation solutions to be realised, Dr. Ainslie called for both government leadership and market acceptance in the adoption of the relevant products.

Mr. Alexon Khor General Manager, Low CO2 Solutions, Shell International Petroleum Co.

smarter mobility in cities – let’s go Mr. Khor began his presentation with Shell’s philosophy that ‘sustainability starts with action now and not holding out on promises for the future’. The firm aimed to deliver smarter mobility to consumers by working with partners in the auto-manufacturing industry, governments and academia.

He explained that Shell’s approach was premised on three ‘smarter’ elements: smarter products from the private sector, smarter usage in terms of more prudent consumer behaviour, and smarter infrastructure like well-planned road networks.

Starting with smarter products, Mr. Khor gave examples of how Shell had been involved in innovation. In China, Shell provided 196 of the 2,000 fuel cell vehicles that were test-bedded at the Shanghai World Expo 2010. It also gave advice on safer operating procedures to the first hydrogen refuel station at Shanghai Tongji University. Although costly, hydrogen fuel cells could last up to 3,000 hours, which made this form of energy almost economically viable. He added that hydrogen was a proposition that Shell continued to study. In Singapore, Shell participated in the Daimler Smart

123

Car trial in 2008. This was an initiative to advocate small cars for congested cities. In Japan, Shell invested $15 to $18 billion in a plant in Niigata to produce gas-to-liquid fuel. Shell was also looking into producing second-generation biofuels using algae, and gasification through enzymes or codexis.

Such second-generation biofuels would avoid conflict with food crop production and the human food supply chain.

These initiatives would help convince governments and the public that a low or lower carbon economy was feasible.

In reference to smarter usage, Mr. Khor said citizens could switch from cars to public transport. He believed that people could be attracted to abandon their cars if public transport was kept clean.

Finally, he discussed smarter infrastructure. Shell was exploring how to recycle aggregates from the asphalt used

124

in roads. This abided by the idea of a circular economy, which espoused reusing the materials that entered a city.

For example, he pointed to elemental sulphur – a by-product of coal power plants. This could replace bitumen in paving roads, and cut costs by up to 20%. Another product was sulphur-enhanced concrete. This was used to build sea defence structures, thereby saving on the use of energyintensive cement. Shell had also designed light-coloured asphalt to brighten tunnels in Nice, France. This helped reduce accidents, while also saving energy.

Mr Khor concluded by noting that Shell had started discussions with the Shanghai government in 2008, on creating a low carbon economy. He said collaborations between governmentsand business partners were important for the various projects presented.

discussion Assoc. Prof. Simon Tay (moderator) Chairman, Singapore Institute of International Affairs

Assoc. Prof. Simon Tay noted that many panellists had suggested a lot of urban solutions were already at hand or in the pipeline. He asked about the obstacles to getting these solutions implemented, in order to solve our urban challenges.

Both Mr. Berthon and Dr. Ainslie said the technology that we needed was already at hand, even if it was not ‘product-ready’ for actual application. Dr. Ainslie said the obstacles faced included insufficient integration of existing technologies, and ignorance about the full range and costs of urban solutions. Mr. Khor bemoaned the continued operation of government organisations in silos. He felt that clear communication flows between organisations was crucial.

Dr. Ainslie elaborated that behavioural changes among city dwellers, and stimulus from governments and markets, were needed to facilitate implementation of urban solutions.

A delegate from New York City Management asked how far along we were in terms of implementing some of these solutions, and the possible timeframe for implementation. Dr. Wienholt said the rate of urban solutions implementation was often influenced by the efficiency of governmental decisionmaking processes, and whether the market was moving in tandem. Mr. Berthon felt implementation would probably occur at an accelerated rate once urban solution innovation moved beyond an inflexion point. However, Mr. Khor stressed the need to examine if the supply of urban solutions did indeed match demand side conditions.

Speaking from the floor, Ms. Teo Lee Lim of Accenture noted that each panellist had given examples of different pilot projects from around the world. She asked about their experiences in getting from such pilot projects to the fullscale adoption of solutions. Mr. Khor shared an example from Zurich, where research found 75% of residents supported a drive to cut energy use. He said key factors included leaders with vision, support from citizens, and the demonstration of successful cases. Dr. Wienholt also

cited the presence of corresponding market demand as an element that could facilitate the broad adoption of urban solutions that are at the pilot scale.

Prof. Tay reflected that the conference was taking place during a time of economic crisis. He asked how this affected governments’ appetite for change, in terms of adopting sustainable urban solutions. Mr. Berthon replied that studies had shown that sustainability was a strategic issue, especially in the Asia Pacific. Cities in the region, like Shanghai and Singapore, had anticipated trends towards sustainability, and had adopted sustainability as their mottos. Dr. Wienholt felt the collaborative nature required by sustainable urban solutions had also been perceived as creating benefits for organisations that had previously only worked in silos. Commodity price volatility over the last 10 years was also believed to have motivated cities to strive for sustainability, and doing more with less.

Prof. Tay asked if there was a danger of prescribing solutions only for successful, richer and more developed cities.

He asked if there were solutions that could be applied to cities with struggling economies. In response, Mr. Berthon and Dr. Ainslie both articulated the need to cross certain technological hurdles, before innovative urban solutions could be adopted. Dr. Wienholt acknowledged that, as solution providers, they bore the responsibility of adjusting solutions to fit cities with basic infrastructures. Mr. Berthon added that adequate governance structures and the need for significant behavioural change were possible ways of expediting the introduction of urban solutions to cities with basic infrastructure.

Prof. Tay then thanked the panellists for providing valuable insights into the role of technology, industry and the private sector in terms of sustainable urban solutions. He added that the discussion went beyond the economic aspects of urban solutions to address issues of governance, the required transformations, and social dimensions of behaviour and urban lifestyles. He concluded by quoting a French philosopher who once said ‘cities are a spatial representation of societies’. Prof.

Tay felt this was echoed in discussions at this expert plenary session, and also throughout the entire conference.

125

126

expert panel session 3 shaping a liveable environment

127

expert panel session 3a

shaping world-class built environments This session looked at what made cities liveable, in terms of the quality of built environments. This hinged very much on the effectiveness of the local building control regime. City authorities had to address the needs of changing demographics, as with barrier-free accessibility and connectivity for the elderly or physically challenged, while ensuring built environments were safe and well-maintained, within a carbon-constrained environment. In this session, regulators and experts shared their thoughts, strategies and experiences in meeting these challenges. Speakers reaffirmed that legislation played a critical role in maintaining minimum environmental and social sustainability standards, and making cities more liveable. Strategic urban governance to balance economic growth, societal wellbeing and environmental quality was critical, but governments could not achieve that alone. Future-proofing sustainable built environments required collaboration between the public and private sectors.

Left to right: Ms. Jane Henley, Dr. John Keung, Mr. Finn PetrĂŠn and Prof. Steffen Lehmann 128

Dr. John Keung CEO, Building and Construction Authority, Singapore

opening remarks Opening the session, Dr. John Keung noted that it had been mentioned many times during the conference that half the world’s population now lived in cities.

With the rapid urbanisation in Asia, that proportion was expected to grow. That made liveability in cities a pressing challenge that governments and city planners would need to take on with a forwardlooking and holistic approach.

Dr. Keung pointed out that the often cited Mercer qualityof-life survey had adjusted its latest 2010 ranking to identify cities with the best ecological ranking, in line with growing environmental concerns. He also said Singapore was rated highly in polls of that sort, perhaps because of its low crime rate, the ease of setting up business and its prompt emergency services. It showed clearly there were different facets to liveability and planning a city would need to take into account a range of issues. The session would focus on two such critical issues – sustainability and user-friendliness of the built environment, which formed two of the four pillars of the mission of the Building and Construction Authority, Singapore (BCA).

Dr. Keung proceeded to explain what Singapore had been doing to address those two areas. With an increasing global emphasis on environmental sustainability, BCA saw the need to drive Singapore towards the development of more ecologically friendly buildings. It therefore launched a green building rating scheme – the BCA Green Mark Scheme – in January 2005, to promote the adoption of sustainable building practices among industry practitioners.

In the latest Green Building Master Plan, BCA set itself a very ambitious target of greening 80% of all buildings, including existing buildings, by 2030. Apart from the Floor Area Bonus

Scheme for new buildings and a $100 million incentive scheme to encourage greening existing buildings, BCA’s plan included a framework to train 20,000 green specialists in 10 years to meet the need for a ‘green collar workforce’ in the building and construction industry.

The public sector was taking the lead, with all existing government buildings expected to achieve BCA’s Green Mark Gold Plus rating in 10 years, while all new public sector buildings were to achieve the highest level of Green Mark rating – Platinum. Dr. Keung was also glad to note the private sector’s initiative to further propel the local green movement in forming the Singapore Green Building Council (SGBC).

Dr. Keung went on to list the ways Singapore promoted its green building movement, establishing the business case for green buildings, and positively positioning the concept through public outreach programmes. It had successfully held its first Green Building Week at the International Green Building Conference the year before. Public awareness had been further elevated though BCA’s two-year roving green building exhibitions and continuing partnerships with local non-governmental organisations (NGOs) like SGBC. Online efforts to engage young audiences through popular social media platforms such as Facebook also helped to garner strong support from the ground. Dr. Keung announced that SGBC had won the hosting rights for the World Green Building Council International Congress 2010, to be held in September.

There still remained much to learn and a long way to go, as Singapore had greened only 8% of its existing building stock.

It had to take into account new areas like carbon footprinting for buildings. Dr. Keung looked forward to hearing Ms. Jane Henley discuss how the World Green Building Council (World GBC) was leading the union of national councils to accelerate the transformation of the built environment. He introduced the other areas Ms. Henley would cover in her presentation, as well as Prof. Steffen Lehmann’s presentation, in which he would share his perspective on holistic city planning, his recommendations for future-proofing cities, and best sustainability practices.

129

Apart from greening and preserving the built environment, user friendliness would also have to be taken into account, especially for cities with greying populations. One in five Singaporeans would be reaching the age of 65 in 20 years.

To meet that challenge, BCA mapped out an accessibility masterplan four years ago, addressing accessibility issues in existing and new buildings. The plan had so far included a $14 million accessibility fund to incentivise the upgrading of existing privately owned buildings, by defraying retrofitting costs. 60 projects had since benefitted from the funding, and close to all Tier 1 public buildings frequented by the public had achieved basic accessibility. BCA’s friendly building portal online listed more than 1,500 buildings with basic accessibility.

Complementing those efforts, the sensory garden at BCA Academy and the roving public exhibitions on accessibility had helped to bring the concept of universal design to the community. Singapore was fine-tuning its strategic plan to further this movement following a recent meeting with international experts on universal design. Dr. Keung stated that Singapore now had to step beyond legislative measures to focus on building the software required to sustain the movement. He then introduced President of EIDD Design for All Europe Mr Finn Petrén, who would share success stories from Stockholm’s accessibility project and the Swedish Design-for-All project.

Ms. Jane Henley CEO, World Green Building Council

unlocking the potential Ms. Jane Henley’s presentation was about the World Green Building Council’s role as a facilitator of the global movement.

She saw the Green Building Council movement as one of the leaders in unlocking the potential of transforming the building industry. The focus of her presentation would be

130

on climate change and carbon, and the complementary relationship between industry and government. She felt collaboration was how the challenges of the day could be met.

Green buildings were not new. Ms. Henley felt it was not about new technology, but about ‘doing things right the first time’ rather than fixing mistakes later. The principle of being more holistically thoughtful in decisions made in a single building, creating impact at a wider community level, a city level and then a country level, was starting to evolve as a conversation.

Green Building Councils (GBCs) were new. In the United States, the first was established about 15 years ago and there were now about 70. GBCs were about countries figuring out two things: making ‘smart decisions now’ and learning from other countries, or cleaning up some of the mistakes they had made. New towns, cities and eco-cities were using technology for new developments, but the bigger challenge was applying that to existing buildings and communities. The World GBC role was to harness some of that knowledge and experience with regional groups around the world. Ms. Henley said the GBC still had an important role to play and that was going beyond the building code.

Building codes sought the minimum requirement, and GBCs were about seeking the business case and reasons for building beyond code. Rating tools therefore played an important role in creating the value proposition and the communication to go beyond code. What were difficult to price in to a business case for a single building were things like carbon, health and comfort, and liveability.

With over 100 different rating tools using different definitions of what a green building was in different parts of the world, the challenge of the World GBC was to create a clear vision for understanding the role of the building industry in important global agendas like carbon reduction. The idea of a common language was a challenging one – with so many rating tools, how could a green building in Singapore be compared with one in a city in America? Ms. Henley explained that the World GBC was trying to get some ‘common threads’ from all countries, with a focus on carbon, water and waste.

These could then be woven into a common language for global communication. Rating tools were like the nutritional

information on a cereal box – a way to understand what one was purchasing. They could tell the reader how much natural light was in a building, the energy efficient targets, the waste produced in its construction, and so on. They would be communication tools used to price a building, giving buyers the necessary information that building codes, being about minimum requirements, did not provide.

Ms. Henley then presented a graph showing the impact of voluntary rating tools on the green building market in Victoria, Australia, by looking at the types of office floor space over the years. The market shift from high-end new buildings to the upgrade of existing buildings was, according to Ms. Henley, quite a rapid transformation over a short period, and that type of impact from voluntary rating tools was significant, reflecting one of the roles GBCs played in market transformation.

Although the business case for green buildings had been proven in many ways, the perception was still that green buildings cost 17% more, when they actually cost 0–4% more, even before pricing in the wider community-scale or city-scale benefits of large green buildings. The perception gap was a challenge that needed to be overcome.

All the data presented by Ms. Henley had been based on new buildings, but she said the focus had to shift to existing buildings and to performance – the amount of light or energy used on a weekly, monthly or annual basis. Most countries were not tracking that and did not have a rating scheme rewarding the actual performance of buildings. That was the next challenge. Data from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change indicated that buildings were one of the most cost-effective and economically viable ways to reduce carbon emissions in a country. But buildings were still not part of the climate solutions agenda, because the industry had not ‘got our shop in order’ – it did not have the necessary data, the global methodologies, or a way to verify them on a global scale.

In the World GBC’s work to find ‘common threads’, the first challenge was benchmarking. Rating tools were useful, as they had already gathered some benchmarking data.

The next step would be baselining – capturing data in the same way in every country. Without baselines, it would not be possible to compare built environment across cities.

The third aspect was to have some sort of complementary

carbon trading in the built environment mechanism. The World GBC proposed that when countries started to commit to carbon trading schemes, complementary measures be introduced to allow building owners to trade carbon savings made from greening their buildings for benefits. This would be an incentive towards greening existing buildings. But the building industry could not participate in such complementary measures if the other two steps were not in place.

Ms. Henley felt that such mechanisms were necessary to focus on existing buildings, because some of the economic challenges could only be addressed with incentives, such as tax incentives or carbon incentives, since existing buildings could not be given density bonuses and such like. A lot of the activity in the Asian region still focused on design because the industry had not yet figured out the performance aspect.

Steps like Australia’s mandatory disclosure of energy use by buildings were some ways governments were beginning to capture the data needed, which should also be shared. Ms. Henley concluded that participation and communication on a global level would be possible only with all three pieces of the puzzle and she looked forward to working with GBCs around the world to realise it.

Prof. Steffen Lehmann Chair, Sustainable Urban Development for Asia and the Pacific, UNESCO, and Chair and Professor, School of Architecture and Built Environment, University of Newcastle

green urbanism and resilient cities Prof. Steffen Lehmann welcomed the opportunity to talk about the very important issue of securing the liveability of cities. ‘To secure liveability, we have to look at sustainability.’ That had to be done as a matter of urgency.

He the presented a video capturing flight movements around the world over 24 hours and described it as showing ‘the interconnectedness of all cities worldwide in real time’. It also showed where

131

carbon dioxide was emitted, contributing to climate change and global warming.

Presenting three pictures of cities, he pointed out that the European, Asian and Australian/American cities were three distinctively different types of cities. However, cities shaped by globalisation became increasingly similar; the differences were being lost. Meanwhile, in terms of energy use, there was a focus on the Asia Pacific, where the future of urbanisation would be decided. The three key questions he had were therefore [1] what kinds of built environment would make a city more liveable for its residents and more resilient to climate change, [2] what effect changing demographics had on the city of the future, and [3] what international best practice strategies for low-to-no-carbon cities would deliver economic competitiveness and the highest quality of urban life.

Addressing the first question, Prof. Lehmann believed cities had to be reconceptualised. By 2030, the world would need to produce 50% more energy and 30% more food on less land, with less water and fewer pesticides. One very important topic was the urban heat island effect, which would grow as densities increased. More headroom for climate change had to be built for the future. Prof. Lehmann cited Hong Kong as an example where the urban heat island effect was starting to kick in due to building too densely. Its wall of very high towers stopped natural breeze from going through and cooling the city and it was trying to enhance the natural airflow with expensive technology. Other cities could avoid the same mistake.

Some cities were clearly leading in terms of liveability and sustainability, such as Barcelona, Vancouver, Curitiba, Singapore, Melbourne and Munich. It could be observed that they were setting benchmarks in strategic urban planning and high quality public space. Those cities were also showing leadership in urban governance and policies with a long-term urban vision, something in which Singapore had done very well. They were also developing the unique profile of the city, their creative culture and their own ‘urban flavour’, and not losing their distinctive identity. Dubai had lost and was trying to recover that, which was very difficult.

But Melbourne was doing well in this area. The leading cities were also increasing economic competitiveness by attracting the best workforce.

132

Prof. Lehmann believed Singapore had been extremely successful in four areas. It was a leading model in affordable and efficient public transport. The typologies implemented by the Housing and Development Board were fantastic.

And it was leading the way in water management and the integration of urban greenery. However, there were areas for possible improvement. One was pedestrian connectivity, since the public space network for walking and cycling was crucial for liveability. He observed that Orchard Road was cut into two parts, where pedestrians had to go underground to cross the road. He felt it had to become one connected pedestrian strip. Another area for improvement was citizen participation. Mechanisms for local residents’ bottom-up participation were very important for all urban societies.

Another suggestion was electro-mobility. Prof. Lehmann thought Singapore could take the global lead in complete conversion to electric cars by immediately changing the government fleet into electric vehicles and installing fastcharging infrastructure all over the city. In combination, there could be decentralised energy generation, where the electric vehicle and its battery became the storage for renewable energy. Singapore had no wind or geothermal energy, but it had solar energy and biomass. Biomass could be derived from organic composting and used to drive solar vehicles.

Dr. Lehmann emphasised his belief that Singapore was best placed to lead the world in that area.

Another thing that had to be done was compacting the city by moving away from inefficient car-dependent sprawl to mixeduse, compact and zero-carbon land use. The urban system had to be understood in a new way, where the city district became a power station, water catchment area and source of food supply. Having 90% of almost everything imported was not sustainable. Prof. Lehmann made Conclusion 1, which was that cities were engines of urban growth and social change and the design of cities was about inventing the future. A variety of eco-city demonstration projects, such as the Tianjin Eco-city, would be built by 2020, and would act as a test-bed for research innovation and technology. One learning point would be the need to be compact and mixeduse. In compact communities, people would walk everywhere.

Well-designed cars might need less fuel, but would still cause traffic jams. A transformation towards the city being not car-dependent was necessary. This was a challenge as car ownership, especially in the Asia Pacific, was increasing.

Prof. Lehmann’s Conclusion 2 was that the liveability of cities was not merely a technical matter of finding ecofriendly energy solutions. It was a question of holistic social sustainability and healthy communities. Most European cities were putting back the light railways that they had taken out in the 1960s and 1970s. Prof. Lehmann felt that was fantastic and said it was necessary that pedestrians and cyclists reclaim the public space from the automobile. Prof. Lehmann had developed a conceptual model of green urbanism in the previous 15 years, identifying three pillars – energy material, water biodiversity, and urban planning and transport. The important thing was the interaction between those pillars.

Giving Sydney as a case study of making cities less monocentric and moving towards polycentric urban villages, Prof. Lehmann described how most people in Sydney took an hour or more in the morning, driving up to 40 kilometres through congestion, to get to work in the Central Business District (CBD). That was getting more expensive with rising fuel prices. For houses furthest from the CBD, there was no public transport as they were all low-density, inefficient suburbs. It had therefore decided to create three CBDs, strongly interlinked by a new subway system or a light railway, in place of the current single CBD. Conclusion 3 was that cities could and must become the most environmentally friendly model of inhabiting the earth.

It was more important than ever to reconceptualise cities and their systems of infrastructure to be compact, mixeduse and polycentric. Speaking again of pedestrian-friendly public space, Prof. Lehmann said, ‘If you fix the street, you have 80% of the public space.’ Melbourne understood very well that it was about the streetscape, but in Singapore, he felt the streetscapes were not as good as they could be because sometimes air-conditioning from buildings blew in one’s face while walking on the street and there was nothing that attracted the eye.

Prof. Lehmann’s Conclusion 4 was that the vibrant city needed both top-down and bottom-up strategies, and it needed large-scale and small-scale initiatives all at the same time. New situations need not necessarily have to be designed, because of the danger of over-designing. They could develop by themselves out of what already existed. In his new book ‘Principles of Green Urbanism’, 15 principles

to achieve green urbanism were identified. Those principles were interconnected. To achieve green urbanism, in which liveability and sustainability were embedded, all 15 had to be done at the same time. Prof. Lehmann then referred the audience to the website slab.com.au for more information.

Mr. Finn Petrén President, EIDD Design for All Europe

planning and designing cities for all Mr. Finn Petrén declared that his mission at the conference was not to teach or preach, but to bring a message about human diversity as food for thought. ‘We are all people, but that is where the similarity stops.’ Mr. Petrén said he would talk a bit about people, give examples from Stockholm’s ambitious work in terms of accessibility and some ideas about how to go further from the Stockholm experience, before ending with some concluding remarks.

‘Cities are for people, obviously. But what are we talking about when we are talking about people?’ Mr. Petrén presented some images from a campaign he did, which featured a range of people and challenged the common conceptions of ideas like mobility, age, the use of sunglasses, and cultural diversity. Mr. Petrén said the images were from Sweden, but the same kind of pictures could be made anywhere in the world illustrating human diversity.

Talking about accessibility, he said it had traditionally been addressed via legislation and standards. The new Universal Design concept was, he believed, still a rather regulatory concept, as shown in the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, where Universal Design had been put in the context of a rights-based document.

Design for All did not belong to the regulatory agenda, he said. It belonged to the creativity and innovation agenda. It started with legislation and standards on the ground. Then

133

decision-makers and design professionals were challenged to go beyond compliance using their professional skills and empathy to do something that legislation and standards alone could never do – real user friendliness for everyone.

within each lifestyle, there was this human diversity. Mr. Petrén thought politicians and countries could benefit by seeing human diversity from the outset, instead of planning and designing for the average person.

As defined by EIDD Design for All Europe, ‘Design for All is design for human diversity, social inclusion and equality’. It was a new paradigm for both design and social development, starting at the outset with human diversity, instead of ‘an average user’. Mr. Petrén described EIDD Design for All Europe as a growing organisation, with member organisations from 22 European countries, and was unique as the only international organisation bridging social planning, architecture and design.

Referring to the images he had shown at the beginning of the presentation from the campaign illustrating human diversity, he explained the campaign started with a very public announcement seeking the ‘average person’, specified according to statistics. It had a tremendous impact, with interviews on radio stations for days. It really appealed to people, ‘and of course, there was no average person to be found’. In the continuation of the campaign, the question posed was why urban environments, buildings, transportation, services and products were designed to serve the non-existing ‘average person’. Further, the campaign asked ‘what if design and architecture could be seen as varied and exciting as the people they were intended for’.

Mr. Petrén said they saw human diversity as an asset and a source of richness.

Speaking of the Stockholm experience, Mr. Petrén described how 12 years before, Stockholm had decided to become the world’s most accessible city, in response to his challenge to the five Nordic capitals, when he was on the Nordic council of ministers, to come up with the best plan for developing the city’s accessibility. Mr. Petrén said Stockholm made a mistake by not developing a plan at the outset. It devoted approximately US$12 million a year for a 10-year period without a plan. So it was run as an accessibility project by the Traffic Office, by nine very skilful employees who did magnificent work. But something was missing in the premise.

Mr. Petrén presented pictures of some very good and elegant public facilities modified or built for accessibility under the project. He believed Stockholm had done very well, but that they could have done much better with a better plan from the beginning to mainstream the work into all the different departments.

Moving on to talk about Design for All, Mr. Petrén asked, ‘What is design?’ Some definitions he thought could be agreed on were: ‘design doesn’t show until it fails’, ‘good design enables, bad design disables’, and ‘design is the transformation of existing conditions into preferred ones’. It was only what the preferred conditions were that had to be agreed. Mr. Petrén felt that design and architecture could be used so much better than how it was used at the time. He then asked, ‘Design for who?’ For politicians, it was about ‘average persons’ at the outset, and then special categories were added: people with disabilities, children, elderly people and so on. Businesses talk about ‘lifestyles’, but forgot that

134

The challenge and message of the campaign was ‘Liberate diversity’. The campaign pushed the business case for society and regular businesses to design for diversity – real people, instead of the ‘average person’. It was about doing it right from the beginning and widening the customer base.

The campaign also said that only the best designers and architects considered all aspects of usage and combined those factors when creating challenging and exciting designs.

That appealed to the design community. It was a positive challenge to ‘go beyond compliance and do miracles’.

To conclude, Mr. Petrén said Design for All was about social innovation. For him, ‘the biggest barrier to innovation is what we already know, and therefore believe, not to be possible’.

To be open to different perspectives was a heroic effort, but it was necessary to be aware of the barrier to innovation and keep on working. What he was concerned about was accessibility. To him, it must be seen as a public interest, not a special interest. By doing it right the first time, by applying the human diversity perspective from the beginning, money could be saved and designers and architects could perform miracles once the brief was right.

discussion Dr. John Keung (moderator) Chief Executive Officer, Building and Construction Authority, Singapore

Dr. Keung opened the discussion with a question addressed to Mr. Petrén about the Stockholm accessibility project. One of the key problems in Singapore on enhancing accessibility in the built environment was the group of existing buildings under private ownership. Dr. Keung wanted to know how Stockholm managed that challenge.

Mr. Petrén acknowledged that it was a major global problem, not just in Singapore. 40 years before, Sweden had the 1-million programme to create a million new housing units.

40 years later, the gigantic building block was in deep need of renovation. When it was built, it was very modern and based on the world’s best standards, but the problem was that the world’s best standard in the 1960s were not good enough and not flexible enough anymore and it was stuck, though there were big efforts to do it right, to renovate them, because those buildings could last another 50 years.

A member of the audience said most cities existed for economic reasons, but that with greater accessibility, much traffic did not contribute to the economy, whereas businesses preferred traffic that contributed to the financial bottom line. She asked the panel to address such issues, and asked if there were studies on this subject.

Prof. Lehmann replied that some years back, there had been an idea to take out the car and pedestrianise a lot of the city centre, which hadn’t worked well at all. In Germany, many cities were bringing the traffic back. They found that the shops stopped making profit when the cars stopped passing by. The question then was what the role of the individual vehicle traffic in the city of tomorrow was. Prof. Lehmann strongly believed there would still be cars in the future city, but they would be electric cars, and that cities could not completely pedestrianise streets, for example Orchard Road.

The car had a role to play in the city of tomorrow, but it had to be negotiated. In terms of public space, what was being done for cities at the time was what was called civic improvement and public domain plans, where plans were

made that only showed the public space and how it was used by people – where they would walk, cycle, sit and meet – before considering where they would park and drive.

Mr. Petrén added that he had another answer. He said, ‘People differ. Cities differ.’ He illustrated by saying he had travelled to 12 different European capitals that year, ranging from Rejkjavik, which had 200,000 people, to Istanbul, which had 15 million people. He said there was also the issue of tourism. In the range of European capitals, Barcelona was almost small, but it had really succeeded in reclaiming the city for the pedestrians and they had benefitted from tourism.

So there were different aspects to it.

Mr. Jim Cox from New South Wales observed that the interesting discussions about energy efficiency seemed to mainly be about office buildings. He wanted to know the state of thinking about shopping centres, factories, warehouses or even residential dwellings.

Ms. Henley admitted that from the Green Building Council movement perspective, it had been driven by office buildings because it was much easier to make the decisions that influenced all of energy use within an office building. With retail, for example, there were issues around what could be controlled, and that related to tenancies. There were hundreds of tenancies in a shopping mall with lease agreements that influenced their energy use. So it was again about relationships. When things were industry-led, change took time. But when regulation was involved and a new shopping centre or a new industrial building had to meet a certain energy efficiency requirement, then that change happened overnight. Ms. Henley said it was a transition period. Office buildings had come first. Changes in residential and other buildings were happening slowly, with residential buildings probably coming last and mostly driven by regulation. There had not been much activity in terms of voluntary rating tools in the residential sector, as it was much harder to influence the public. Ms. Henley emphasised again the importance of the relationship between industry and government, saying that things would happen more slowly with industry-led initiatives and faster with government-led ones, but that everyone had to go along the journey together.

135

expert panel session 3b

beyond affordable and quality housing: gracious and harmonious living environments Housing played a key role in many great cities. In this session, experts and industry leaders discussed the shift from basic shelters to quality housing, and how to shape sustainable living environments where people lived together harmoniously.

Speakers highlighted various housing solutions and sustainable communities in Asia and Europe. Regulators and professionals shared their experiences in engaging communities and building identities. The panel explored strategies different cities used to promote social cohesion, gracious living and shared experiences. Another topic was the role of community bonding in making cities more liveable and endearing. Participants spoke of the need to go beyond providing shelter, to also engage people. Residents had to feel a sense of belonging in the communities they lived in and this was achieved by seeking their participation in decisions that affected them.

Left to right: Ms. Ada Fung, Mr. Daniel Biau, Mr. Tay Kim Poh and Dr. Suzanne Crowhurst Lennard 136

Mr. Daniel Biau Director,Regional and Technical Cooperation Division, UN-HABITAT, Nairobi.

meeting the challenges of housing and environment in asian cities Mr. Daniel Biau highlighted the magnitude of housing and urban challenges in Asia, based on the most recent UN statistics. Asian cities now housed an estimated at 1.75 billion people, of which 500 million, or 28%, lived in slums. Despite improved living conditions for 172 million slum dwellers in the last decade, the absolute number of Asian slum dwellers remained very high, with increased urban inequalities in several countries.

Mr. Biau noted Asia faced two transitions: demographic decline, and a change from a rural to urban society. Ageing and shrinking populations were a ‘very big risk in this century’, caused by low fertility rates everywhere. He cited Japan as an ageing society, while Singapore’s situation was a ‘disaster’.

Urbanisation was another trend that was becoming apparent. Asia was only 22% urban in 1970, rising to 42% in 2010 and reaching 64% in 2050. Urban populations had multiplied by four since 1970, although this was projected to only grow twofold in the next forty years. Without exponential urban growth, city populations would stabilise and ‘there is no need to panic’. A vast majority of the urban population would settle in small to medium sized cities. Mr. Biau emphasised that rising urbanisation would not necessarily be a problem in megacities like Guangzhou and Jakarta, but would instead affect smaller cities. We had to build capacities there to support this trend. Notwithstanding geographical limitations like coastal locations, well-run cities like Tokyo theoretically had no size limits.

Managing urban populations included providing adequate housing. Mr. Biau described Asia’s housing policies as falling into three categories. Public housing was a relative exception. Apart from China and Singapore, it was unknown in many countries except in the form of public land delivery, or what was called ‘site and services operations’. This was a useful solution, although in most countries it met only about 10% to 20% of the population’s needs.

Private formal housing involved private developers of various sizes, who provided housing solutions mostly to the middle and upper classes. Governments could encourage developers to provide more affordable housing for lower income groups through simple regulations, as governments usually controlled land distribution. This solution also catered to roughly 10% to 20% of the population, depending on the country.

The third category, private informal housing, referred to most Asians and included slum dwellers. A slum household was defined as one that lacked one or more of the following amenities: durable housing, sufficient living area, access to drinking water and access to improved sanitation. One could be a slum dweller even if one lived in a vertical building. Some Southeast Asian governments had devised programmes to improve slums, or to avoid them altogether. One example was ‘land sharing’, where developers shared land with low income groups. Meanwhile, Indonesia had conducted slum improvement from the 1970s, called ‘Kampung Improvement Programme’. Such community-led approaches featured an incremental process of improving lives in slums by improving one or two of the four amenities mentioned above.

Noting that home ownership was a unique feature of Singapore, Mr. Biau said that in many other cities, rental housing was an important housing solution. This was due to people’s need for mobility, particularly amongst younger and poorer people. About 30% of city dwellers lived in rental homes. Despite this, there were no policies to support the rental sector and this was terrible because the sector usually catered to lower income groups. For example, a good policy in Europe involved giving incentives to private developers to build more rental units, to satisfy the demand for housing.

137

Besides supplying housing, there was a need to pay attention to sustainable development. In this respect, three main concerns in Asia were water and sanitation, urban transport and air pollution, and the impact of climate change.

By 2006, over 96% of Asian city residents had access to basic levels of safe drinking water, which Mr. Biau called fantastic, as this was not the case 30 years ago. Still, there was a need to promote greater equality in water pricing to avoid the poor having to pay more for water. It was also important to ensure that water contamination was rare.

Nonetheless, he said Asia had been largely successful in water provision. However, inadequate progress had been made in sanitation, especially in South Asia. Experts had yet to agree what to consider adequate sanitation. While some recommended individual sanitation, this was unaffordable and impossible due to physical limits in slums. Shared facilities would have to be used instead. Sanitation should remain a focus in the next ten years.

The second set of issues facing Asian cities were urban transport and pollution. Asian cities were ‘some of the most congested on the planet’ and they were growing more congested with the rising use of private vehicles. There was a problem with developing effective mass transit systems, which contributed to the emission of greenhouse gases and air pollution. Mr. Biau pointed to Beijing and Shanghai, which were plagued by air pollution. This affected living conditions in both cities.

The third concern was the impact of climate change. In particular, he observed increased occurrences of flooding every year. Six of the ten cities most likely to be affected by climate change were coastal cities in Asia: Mumbai, Calcutta, Guangzhou, Ho Chi Minh City, Osaka and Kobe. Even inland cities like Phnom Penh and Wuhan suffered seasonal flooding. Mr. Biau predicted that there would be more flooding because of how cities were developing. He also noted a lack of evacuation contingencies. Governments had to take measures to improve flood protection for their cities.

138

In conclusion, Mr. Biau recommended the principle of good urban governance. This meant participatory governance – involving communities in discussions of long-term and shortterm goals. He felt this was the key to promoting sustainable cities and to dealing with the conflicting goals of reducing poverty, improving the environment, and raising productivity in cities.

Dr. Suzanne Crowhurst Lennard Director, International Making Cities Liveable Council

urban places for socially sustainable communities In her talk, Dr. Suzanne Crowhurst Lennard focused on social sustainability, and how it could be achieved through the design of public spaces. Carefully crafted public urban spaces let societies absorb new influences and adapt to new circumstances, while maintaining or even improving social, intellectual and spiritual health for all. She said the city was arguably mankind’s second greatest invention, after language. A multi-functional market square could be seen as the most important tool in city-making, as it fostered dialogue, which she called the primary function of the city.

Social sustainability required social capital, an investment that individuals made by spending time and effort in their communities. The community was thus a prerequisite for social capital. It grew in a place where members gathered or passed through in the normal course of their day. Achieving social sustainability required diverse citizens to come together to exercise citizenship, and this was most effective when it occurred in public spaces, open to all. She added that many European squares still served these functions.

Dr. Lennard pointed out that infants best learned how to communicate by observing interactions between adults in the public realm. Through such observations, they learned to show affection and strengthen bonds. They discovered how to resolve disagreements without coming to blows, how to pay attention to others, express tenderness and empathy. In addition, verbal and social skills were developed by conversing with unrelated adults. These interactions validated individuals as members of a community, and in turn let them validate others. Humanity existed only when this capacity unfolded. For example, children looked around to see adults engaged in civilised conversations on the Venetian campo, and they too emulated this behaviour.

and social success of a square. An example would be Plaza Mayor in Salamanca, which was lined with shops and cafes, a city hall facing the plaza, and residential buildings surrounding it.

Increasingly, modern city squares lacked the necessary characteristics to generate social interaction, unlike medieval European market squares. While each was unique, they shared several similar features that made them successful in fostering community life, and these could be replicated in our contemporary urban environment.

Amenities that ameliorated local weather conditions conveyed a hospitable feel for users of the square and this could include trees which provided shade, and cafes for refreshments. Stone square tiling enhanced this purpose by trapping cool air and dispersing it over the city square area.

Fountains and other forms of public art provided anchors in the public realm, serving as topics for conversation between strangers and a source of attraction for adults and children. It was essential for the works to be climbed on and played with by both children and adults, and that it was meaningful for the community, so children could learn about their society’s history and traditions. Paving ensured the area was marked for pedestrians, not for vehicles. It should be textured, easy to walk on, and decorative to enhance the sense of place.

The streets in Freiburg were decorated with pebble mosaics.

In Siena’s Piazza del Campo, the nine paved segments represented the council of The Nine, which was the first elected city council in Siena.

City squares were best sited at the centre of compact, human scale, fine grained urban fabrics. This made them a crossing point and destination for a large population who lived in the area. Those who crossed paths frequently recognised one another and become familiar. The compact urban fabric provided a rich diversity of uses, ranging from commercial to religious to residential institutions. Small-footprint, contiguous buildings created walls around the space and buildings there should ideally be no higher than six storeys.

The majority of buildings should be mixed-used shophouses. Apartments above shops provided ‘eyes on the street’, especially at a night. A residential population formed the core community and maintained informal jurisdiction over the square. Diverse shops generated a high level of commercial activity and those that served daily needs allowed residents to interact and widen their social networks.

The varied populations that were drawn to this untidy mix of uses and overlapping functions ensured the economic

Dr. Lennard said the development of social life was facilitated through the provision of seating for all occasions and all ages in the square. Seating encouraged people to linger and provided a platform for conversations. Seats with backrests were suitable for the old, while impromptu seats such as steps and walls catered to the young. Capri’s Piazza Umberto I was considered an urban design gem because of the availability of seats that catered to various tastes.

A square had to be visually enclosed, to focus attention on people and events. Crossing the threshold or entering beneath an archway or a narrow alley dramatised the experience of entering a common civic space. A civic building like a city hall provided a ‘beautiful backdrop for the drama of social life’.

The presence of a city hall kept elected officials accessible to their constituents and it encouraged citizen participation

139

as it represented the interests of all and not just a few. The most important building often provided a vertical dimension.

For example a clock tower marked the centre of the city and emphasised the value of civic and religious life.

A city square which was multi-functional should be used for community festivals and farmers markets. The celebration of various ethnic festivals encouraged the understanding of ethnic diversity and cultural interaction. Children and youth were given significant roles to play in festivals in Siena so as to aid their learning of community values. Eating and drinking in public was the most powerful way to build community and ensure social sustainability. Again, Siena was unique because of its strong neighbourhood community ties which arose from communal dinners.

Dr. Lennard concluded by bringing up examples from Europe where city squares had enriched the lives of surrounding communities. The Venetian campo was the archetypal neighbourhood community place, bringing residents together while remaining welcoming to strangers. As a result, Venice had been a stable and sustainable community for over a thousand years. Small European market towns like Tubingen, Germany have regained their social sustainability by eliminating the use of vehicles in the main square. Through the accommodation of varied activities by diverse users, the city square helped draw the community closer, promoting social and civic life, encouraging dialogue and inculcating the young with values, resulting in a stronger and more resilient society. City squares had proven to be the most powerful mechanism for achieving social sustainability.

Ms. Ada Fung Deputy Director, Housing Department, Hong Kong Special Administration Region

shaping a livable environment: the Hong Kong housing authority’s experience Ms. Ada Fung described how the Hong Kong Housing Authority’s (HKHA) caring culture dealt with the dense living environment in Hong Kong. She covered two main practices of the HKHA: designing and planning in harmony with nature, and engaging the community in promoting a gracious living environment.

Hong Kong was widely known for its high-density residential areas as land was a very scarce resource. About three quarters of its land comprised wooded areas unsuitable for development. Only 4% of the total land was available for urban residential development, and of this 41sqkm, private housing occupied 25sqkm, another 12sqkm was for public rental housing, and 4sqkm was for subsidised sale housing.

With a scarce residential land area and high population density, the optimal and efficient use of land for housing was essential to shaping a liveable environment. Depending on the district, the planning brief for land earmarked for public housing typically dictated a plot ratio of five to six. When planned according to a statistically predicted flat mix to meet housing demand, this density would translate into about 1,000 flats per hectare, or about 2,800 persons per hectare.

To accommodate such density, high rise buildings of 30 to 40 storeys had to be constructed.

At present, about 30% of Hong Kong’s population lived in public rental housing, and over 700,000 public rental housing flats were under HKHA management. To meet housing demand, HKHA had been building an average of 15,000 new flats per year. The average living space was about 12sqm for an average household size of 2.97. This allowed HKHA to meet the average three-year waiting time for flat completion.

Besides meeting housing demand, HKHA also aimed to build sustainable communities with a people-oriented approach to

140

meet prevailing social, economic and environmental needs without compromising the interests of future generations.

To meet these goals, HKHA made full use of the area around buildings by providing vertical greening and community farms whenever possible. Buildings were also built to be long lasting, for at least one hundred years. Outdoor spaces had been renamed community play areas, as they were now suitable for residents from various age groups. Handrails had also been put in place for the elderly.

The use of natural ventilation and natural lighting was optimised at the planning and design stage to reduce the use of air-conditioning and artificial lighting in the daytime, as much as possible. To capitalise on natural ventilation, buildings were oriented to best capture seasonal breezes without blocking the wind to the neighbourhood. Proven scientific technologies such as computational fluid dynamics and wind tunnel tests on physical models were used to determine correct orientations. To enhance natural ventilation across spaces within the estates, wind conditions at external garden areas, lift lobbies and corridors, living rooms and kitchens were being studied so that wind shields or wind deflectors could be installed wherever appropriate.

Sun-shading in the garden areas and daylight penetration to domestic flats were also being analysed. The length of window canopies had been varied depending on the floor to minimise solar penetration. These microclimate studies had been conducted during the design of all new estates since 2004. At the end of the construction process, the results were verified with the initial design to ensure building targets had been met. To date, about 36 estates had been designed with these tools.

To accomplish a people-centric approach at all stages of development, community engagement involving all relevant stakeholders had to be conducted. HKHA had moved beyond just planning and selling, to engaging the community in the building process. The engagement process was split

into four stages: information giving, issues investigation, ideas and options generation, hearing and discussion. It was through community engagement that communication between the project team and the end users was enhanced, thus increasing residents’ sense of belonging. One example involved getting celebrities to produce calligraphy of estate names and gifting these to the community. Another was the development of heritage galleries built in the style of old Hong Kong cafes, decorated with artefacts donated from tenants themselves.

The community was engaged through workshops at the planning and design stage, to get their views and to better plan for facilities like covered walkways to transport nodes and markets, footbridges and lifts for the elderly and disabled, public toilets, and preservation of heritage features like old trees or benches. Tenants were also shown plans for the new flats to ease the moving-in process. Stakeholders were also involved in creating iconic sculptures and artwork for each block.

During construction, contractors were encouraged to exercise corporate social responsibility. This included minimising construction nuisance, being proactive in greening, and helping nearby non-government organisations or schools. An Action Seedling programme was organised, where contractors distributed plant seedlings to nearby residents and school children. The latter took care of the seedlings for some months before returning to be planted in the completed estate.

At the post-occupation stage, residents were also engaged to offer suggestions for improvement. For example, decorative features that residents found unsightly were removed. HKHA worked to ensure that it provided quality housing, through its partnerships with developers, researchers and residents. Ms. Fung concluded that HKHA made use of innovative solutions to ensure they provided affordable but quality housing for their tenants.

141

discussion Mr. Tay Kim Poh (moderator) CEO, Housing Development Board, Singapore

A Vietnamese delegate asked Ms. Fung how HKHA made housing affordable for the poor, and if subsidies were available to them. He also asked about options for the poor should they fail to make rental payments. Ms. Fung replied ‘nobody would be rendered homeless in Hong Kong’. If they were eligible for public rental housing, people could apply to HKHA and the rent per flat would cost about HK$1,300.

If they were ineligible, they could consider interim housing, which was more affordable than public housing. Those who were jobless could also apply for comprehensive social service, and the government would provide them money for rent. At present, they were able to obtain the rent directly from the Social Welfare Department, so the money was not used for other purposes. Those who had jobs but were still unable to afford public housing could request for rent-relief.

Mr. Tay commented that Singapore’s public housing model was different from Hong Kong in that Singapore’s ran on a home-ownership basis, as opposed to Hong Kong’s rental housing model. He said one issue Singapore faced was that those who rented flats did not take good care of the flats, probably because they lacked a sense of ownership and a sense of belonging. He was therefore very impressed at the sense of community forged through the rental housing model and asked Ms. Fung how Hong Kong had been able to achieve this.

Ms. Fung replied that after the Shek Kip Mei fire, a very close-knit community was formed because of shared sanitation and cooking facilities. Community relationships

142

had been established through the years in rental housing. By tradition, residents had always got along very well. To instil a sense of ownership in rental housing residents, Mutual Aid committees and Estate Management Advisory Committees were formed so that residents could work together with the housing manager to discuss and decide on various issues concerning the estates. Engaging green groups to work with HKHA had helped to both inculcate a green living culture and foster a sense of belonging as residents had the opportunity to start growing their own plants in the estate. This has helped residents feel a sense of home ownership and they would thus avoid vandalising the rental property.

Mr. Tay asked Mr. Biau whether there was a optimum housing solution which could be adopted by different countries in Asia, given Asia’s diverse housing systems and conditions.

Mr. Tay also pointed out that even though Singapore created many public spaces, most people did not make use of these open spaces because of the tropical weather. Thus, he wondered if Dr. Lennard knew of any model which could apply successfully to Singapore’s tropical context.

Mr. Biau said the difference between cities and countrysides was their densities. The problem with modern cities was that public horizontal communication was disappearing and that there was a lack of connection between vertical buildings and public spaces. He stressed it was imperative that there were places for social bonding and brought up the mall as an example. He felt that malls were now excessively commercial and they had to serve a broader purpose than just being commercial. In his opinion, malls should have a mix of both commercial and social activities. The challenge was to recreate the open, communal places that Dr. Lennard mentioned, within the mall. However, he also acknowledged

that it would be a challenge for architects to redesign current city malls to incorporate this social aspect.

Dr. Lennard agreed with Mr. Biau and added that the shopping mall model was neither a social nor a public space. It could be closed off at will and the behaviour that happened in a mall could be controlled. Real public space should belong to everyone and all of them should be part of the dialogue which took place in the public realm. In response to Mr. Tay’s query, Dr. Lennard replied that for people to make use of public spaces, these spaces had to first be places that people would inadvertently have to pass through. They should also be multi-functional, as opposed to being purely commercial. These spaces had to be able to accommodate festivals, markets or other social activities.

People had to feel they belonged to a place and thus, there had to be residential areas overlooking the space, so people felt they had jurisdiction over the area. In Singapore’s tropical climate, it would be necessary for the space to be sheltered and have many trees. The place could also be designed such that breezes could be captured. Singapore should take the principles of public spaces and try to adapt them to the local context.

responded that moving forward, Hong Kong would have to build less and maximise every square metre of land to prevent more intrusion onto the land. They would also have to make rational use of their resources to combat the abuse of public housing. Wealthier tenants would be encouraged to move out of the rental flats. In addition, they would have to follow their guiding principles and continue to build in harmony with the environment.

An audience member from Singapore sought Dr. Lennard’s opinion on whether there was still a role for multi-functional squares to exist in community bonding, with the advent of social media. Dr. Lennard felt that new media could have very damaging effects on society, especially the young.

It was even more important to have public spaces where people can come together and interact face-to-face.

The same delegate also wondered how HKHA managed to strike a balance between the conflicting interests of building less and moving Hong Kong housing forward. Ms. Fung

143

144

expert panel session 4 working towards environmentally sustainable cities

145

expert panel session 4a

cities and climate change Moderator Ira C. Magaziner opened the session by noting any conference was bound to generate greenhouse gases.

He therefore urged delegates to address climate change after leaving, saying immediate and dramatic change was necessary. With a large proportion of the world living in urban areas, most our energy consumption occurred in cities.

This energy was derived mainly from burning fossil fuels, which contributed to climate change. Understanding cities and how they functioned was key to managing climate change, and to developing economic growth models that moderated energy use, minimised waste and increased efficiency. Speakers discussed balancing environmental sustainability with economic development through urban transformations, greater connectivity and good implementation, which in turn created competitive advantages for cities. They also explored how cities could mitigate and adapt to climate change from different angles.

Left to right: Prof. Vladan Babovic, Mr. Ira C. Maganizer, Mr. Sanjeev Sanyal, Dr. Sharon Nunes and Dr. Enki Tan 146

Mr. Sanjeev Sanyal President, Sustainable Planet Institute, and Honorary Senior Fellow, World Wildlife Fund

walkability: the design paradigm for tomorrow’s cities Mr. Sanjeev Sanyal focused on the idea of walkability, which he called the ‘single most important design paradigm for thinking about tomorrow’s cities’. Half the planet lived in urban spaces, which generated most of the world’s GPD and had substantial environmental impact. Urbanisation was accelerating at such speed that planning next generation cities was critical to future human civilisation. He argued that great cities were driven by innovation, the dynamic exchange of ideas, and urban buzz.

The Internet had also heightened these factors. As human capital clustered, cities were more important as economic engines than ever before. As an example of this, he observed that London was more important to the world economy today than at the height of the British Empire.

Mr. Sanyal said cities needed to be economically and ecologically sustainable, and socially inclusive. Ways of creating cities with these three qualities had to be simple, low cost and flexible, so they could incorporate new technology as they evolved. Cities were now designed for cars, and growing car numbers contributed to cities’ environmental impact. 21st century cities therefore had to be radically redesigned to make them more sustainable.

Walkability was a singular solution that met all these objectives. Mr. Sanyal explained that walkability was about urban design that let people use walking as an important, if not dominant, mode of transport for both work and leisure. It involved the design and provision of sidewalks, underpasses, overpasses and public toilets, as well as interconnecting spaces with other modes of transport. Walkability was an ideal solution as it was cheap, low-tech, scaleable and could be easily combined with existing transport systems. Most importantly, it resolved the three urban sustainability issues, being economically and ecologically sustainable, as well as socially inclusive.

As it was impossible to regularly walk great distances, walkable cities had to be denser. Density was also desirable as it maximised land use. Walkability also required minimum land-use and had a low energy footprint. As the first and last miles of all public transport systems were best walked,

walking was already an essential part of these systems. He added that walking was not just an environmentally friendly form of transport; a city designed for walking would take up less land compared with other modes of public transport.

Besides ecological benefits, walkability in urban design catered to human capital clustering. This encouraged networking, interaction and the exchange of ideas, through mixed-use public spaces. Mr. Sanyal listed Parisian street cafes – Central Park in New York City, Boston’s Charles River, and London pubs – as vital spaces for exchanging ideas. He felt these spaces were more important than laboratories for contributing to an environment of creative vibrancy.

Declaring that ‘walkable communities are by a long margin the most socially equitable’. Mr. Sanyal said walking was an excellent path to social inclusion. This was enhanced by a good public transport system, which enabled greater interaction between rich and poor. He said Mumbai’s poor traffic system necessitated public transport use, thus creating an ‘egalitarian ethos to the city despite ridiculous differences in income and wealth’. Developed cities like Seoul and New York were also realising the benefits of walkabilty, as they repurposed an old stream and unused rail track, respectively, for walkable paths. What had to be done now, he ended, was for developing nations to reverse the building of unwalkable cities in their rush to urbanise based on outmoded American models.

Assoc. Prof. Vladan Babovic Founding Director, Singapore-Delft Water Alliance

water-energy-temperature: the nexus of sustainability Prof. Babovic said water, energy and temperature were key elements in dealing with climate change. This called for better land and water management. At the urban level, energy and water were critical to sustainable cities; a constraint on one introduced constraints to

147

the other. We therefore had to close our water, energy and temperature loops. We forgot that treating water consumed much energy, and we also needed water to produce energy.

In addition, water was needed for life. Climate change had intensified the hydrological cycle, causing higher temperatures in urban centres.

For cities to remain economically attractive and to be futureproof, sustainable, and resilient, our water, energy and temperature loops had to be closed. This could be done with adaptable civil engineering and better land and water management. Unlike in the past, infrastructure now had to be designed for multiple roles and scenarios. Giving some examples of problems with existing urban infrastructure, Prof. Babovic observed that most cities were impermeable, being largely composed of roads. This reduced infiltration and washed surface pollution into water systems via large drains, resulting in more sediment and polluted runoff. High surface temperatures also resulted in more energy used for air-conditioning. This in turn pumped out more hot air, adding to rising temperatures, and creating an avalanche effect.

flexible and multi-functional. For example, drains in most cities were designed with only to quickly evacuate water, to alleviate flooding. Instead, he urged the transformation of such single-utility drains into rivers that could be enjoyed by people, and which could be planted with vegetation to treat water in low-energy ways, by naturally absorbing nutrients in the water. He urged governments to lay more porous roads and pavements, the know-how for which already existed, and which was another low-energy method of filtering and improving water. Another example was how Rotterdam reclaimed energy from heated pavements. He also highlighted a study that found urban heat could offer thermal energy recovery opportunities in the form of Aquifer Thermal Energy Storage systems. These stored winter cold or summer heat and reduced electricity use for cooling and heating buildings. He concluded that it was critical that cities ‘develop intelligent portfolios of real options to address long term uncertainties’.

Dr. Sharon L. Nunes Arguing that climate change would make it harder to achieve liveable cities, Prof. Babovic asked how we could address this issue, and with what sort of infrastructure. He called for flexible solutions and adaptable plans, as we could not predict the future. Demanding a sure-fire solution to an uncertain future was like choosing stocks in an uncertain market. Long-term uncertainty meant we had to explore various scenarios, including high-end scenarios, costs, technical feasibility and social acceptability, with an eye on identifying tipping points and measures. ‘No-regret’ options should be implemented early, and institutional arrangements made to guarantee long-term implementation and strategy review. Much like investing in options rather than stocks, he argued ‘we should not be fixed in a certain pre-specified plan, but invest in options to carry out actions in the future’.

Prof. Babovic argued that a systemic approach to addressing the water-energy-temperature nexus involved conducting a vulnerability analysis, and developing a flexible, options-based strategy to reduce vulnerabilities. A paradigm shift, from optimality to robustness, was critical. This meant focusing on robust measures that were cost-effective,

148

Vice-President, Big Green Innovations, IBM Systems and Technology Group

smarter cities Dr. Nunes explained that creating a ‘smart city’ involved instrumenting a city to collect data on its processes, interconnecting all sensors, and creating analyses that could help improve decisionmaking capabilities. It was vital to integrate built and natural environments, and to understand business processes and other complex interactions.

More people were moving to cities, which consumed more natural resources and were becoming engines of global growth. Dr. Nunes predicted cities would be more critical than nations in determining the world’s future. As such, cities had to understand the different roles they could

play. How cities responded to climate change, developed programmes and adapted to world events, would determine their economic viability. Smart cities would be much better equipped to deal with future problems. Dr. Nunes said environmental factors were key to smart technology. For example, water was critical to urban businesses and daily operations, while a major manifestation of climate change involved the water cycle, as some cities dealt with floods even as others faced droughts.

Dr. Nunes said the city was a microcosm of major global challenges and opportunities. Complex links between manmade systems sustained cities. These included government services, transport, healthcare, resource security and public safety. People were also a vital element in any city, and social issues were as important as technological ones. We had to consider how people interacted with technological change in a smart city, as well as the complexity of urban systems. It was vital to collect data from all areas, connect the built environment – including physical, business and IT infrastructure – with natural environments, and exploit the collective intelligence of citizens to create better places to live and work.

Smart cities were needed as rapid urbanisation was creating high stress in many Asian cities, and was driving the construction of hundreds of new cities. The developing world needed new urban infrastructure and the developed world would need to reinvest in its cities. How cities responded and adapted to climate change would determine their economic viability and sustainability. A better city was a more competitive city, which could improve economic growth and quality of life for its people.

Dr. Nunes ended by saying technology had enabled low-cost networking, which let global enterprises operate anywhere in the world. These same technologies could instrument urban infrastructure systems, with interconnected sensors enabling the analysis and modelling of systems dynamics. This would enhance decision-making and urban performance in areas like energy demand management, water management and traffic systems.

Dr. Enki Tan Board Member, Conservation International

changing issues in conservation Dr. Tan noted that, 25 years ago, bodies like Conservation International (CI) focused on conserving disappearing ecosystems and genetic legacy. Issues like water, air and carbon dioxide were left to the hinterland – areas outside cities that took care of such things. However, hinterlands had since stopped being able to naturally deal with these issues, and these were increasingly factors that CI had to deal with. He noted how environmental problems from rural areas could impact distant cities. One example was Singapore’s experience with haze from Indonesia. He also said biodiversity conservation was extremely complex; political, economic, social and scientific issues all factored into it. He then outlined CI’s ‘Six Securities’: climate security, heath security, food security, species contribution, freshwater security and cultural services. These encompassed CI’s original goal of species conservation, but also incorporated issues that had to be addressed through collaboration.

Dr. Tan elaborated on CI’s work in the conservation of forests, which were important heat and carbon dioxide sinks, and in marine conservation. Oceans absorbed 40% of carbon dioxide and produced 50% of oxygen. He felt we had to go beyond conserving small coral reefs patches as marine parks. Instead, he advocated CI-pioneered ‘seascaping’, where various nations worked to create a sustainable environment. Societies had to adopt more sustainable development, and NGOs could help cities be green. Cities could manage climate change through natural resource stewardship, energy efficiency, building-integrated solar photovoltaic (BIPV), land restoration and projects like REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation plus).

149

The key challenges faced by most NGOs were raising awareness, changing mindsets and engaging the public, government and private sector. While CI focused on environmental conservation in rural areas, these efforts would benefit cities in the wider context of resources and the environment. As forests acted as carbon sinks, forest conservation helped mitigate the impact of climate change. He pointed to the REDD+ project in Madagascar as one of CI’s climate security programmes. It aimed to reduce deforestation across 350,000ha of the Makira forest. CI worked with the Wildlife Conservation Society and Madagascar government to train farmers to produce plentiful harvests from the same plot of land, instead of cutting trees to develop new fields every few years. This improved yields, saved forests and protected wildlife unique to the area. Southeast Asian forest fires caused haze that posed health hazards and also released carbon dioxide, which contributed to climate change.

To prevent these fires, CI worked with the Jambi provincial government in Sumatra to develop alternative livelihoods for the local people involved in burning.

Dr. Tan also mentioned CI food security initiatives, including one with Starbucks on environmentally sustainable coffee, as well as seven marine national parks in Raja Ampat, about 20 times the size of Singapore. These helped local people produce higher fishery yields, creating social and economic security, while protecting the environment. CI also had pilot freshwater security projects in China and Cambodia.

Dr. Tan hoped these would grow in scale and stimulate policy change. He concluded that mindset change was needed to involve the private sector and community in environmental initiatives, in order to scale up these projects, including to the consumer level.

discussion Mr. Ira C. Magaziner (moderator) Chairman, Clinton Climate Initiative, William J. Clinton Foundation

Mr. Magaziner observed all the speakers focused on infrastructure transformations, whether water use, city design, or forest and ocean protection. He described today’s cities as very inefficient mechanisms, using far more energy than needed. New York City transported its waste to dumps in Pennsylvania by truck, consuming fuel to create much methane, a powerful greenhouse gas. In developing and even developed countries, outdated water pumps and leaking pipes meant 30% to 70% of water never reached customers. Cars in traffic jams, burnt fossil fuels while not moving. These were a few examples of urban resource waste. To use resources more efficiently and shift from fossil fuels, we had to transform our basic infrastructure.

Mr. Magaziner then narrowed the problem to two issues: low-cost finance and political will.

Low-interest finance historically funded our infrastructure, but new infrastructure was more capital-intense than what it replaced. An integrated waste management facility would cost more up front than another garbage dump, although it would save money in the long run. Persistent high interest rates thus prevented cities from transforming infrastructure, due to financial considerations. Faced with this, mayors and government leaders needed political will to mobilise the necessary resources, and to encourage buy-in and joint efforts from the private sector and community. ‘The good news is... we have the technologies we need to solve this problem. What we don’t have is the right kind of political and financial organisation to do it.’

A Singapore participant felt the idea of walkability could extend vertically in buildings, and to cycling. She also said cultural practices and value systems would have to be considered in implementing walkability, adding the rising numbers of cars in China was partly due to status consciousness. Mr. Sanyal thought that underground links between buildings in Singapore were good examples of walkability. He also agreed that creating a mindset shift was the key challenge.

150

A delegate from Africa then noted that cities on that continent lacked the capacity to respond to climate change, especially in terms of technology and funding.

The accessibility of funds like the Copenhagen Fund had to be addressed. Mr. Magaziner agreed we had to make resources available to deploy technologies in fast-growing cities in developing countries. He reminded the audience of our shared interest in a global response to climate change.

He said ecological issues, like pollution, affected people regardless of their point of origin. ‘If you put a ton of carbon dioxide into the air in Beijing or New York or London, it affects everyone on the planet.’ He called for a global fund that let developing cities access financing and technology to make the infrastructural changes needed. Many current mechanisms delayed change, so this had to be done with minimal bureaucracy. He urged more authority for local people to deploy available technologies most efficiently. He added it was important for cities to measure and monitor their progress, and the impact of implementation.

A delegate from ECO Singapore asked how to encourage better infrastructure design to fight climate change.

Prof. Babovic stressed the role of schools in celebrating technology and inspiring intellectual curiosity in the young.

This was happening, but in pockets. He added that while bureaucracies made rapid change difficult, there was ‘some political will, among some people, at some levels’ to promote good projects. Mr. Sanyal felt it was often a problem of opening minds. Many developing nations faced more systemic problems with corruption and the political economy.

As he put it: ‘the guys who are sitting inside the cars are simply more powerful than the guys who are walking on the sidewalks’. He felt that ignorance, and a tendency to just avoid the issue, was a large part of the problem, as well as a mindset that ‘associated prosperity with sitting in a BMW’.

A New Zealand delegate asked Dr. Nunes and Dr. Tan what made them go into climate change work. Dr. Nunes contrasted the emotional debate, which would speak to the public, and the debate on economic bottom lines, which would appeal to businesses. Efforts in cutting water and energy use would improve operational efficiency and cut business costs. She noted the financial crisis had given IBM

the impetus to cut its water and energy use. IBM had since capitalised on this to expand its business to include these areas. Dr. Tan described how CI used to engage companies via CEOs who had a personal desire to do something. Five years ago, CI reviewed its engagement strategy and decided to widen its audience to include consumers. He said that at Walmart, management teams supported the idea of reducing packaging and also making their buildings and supply chains more resource and energy efficient. Walmart successfully connected its environmental efforts with consumers. He added that concerted action by one company could create sufficient impact to influence competitors to join in the efforts.

A participant from the Philippines felt walkability went beyond having more bike lanes or walkways. It was about rethinking urban development. Compact multi-use developments would make walking an integral part of daily life. She reiterated that mindset change was vital for people to choose walking instead of driving. She pointed out that a key message for companies and city administrators was that low carbon growth and eco-efficiency would contribute to the triple bottom line. Mr. Magaziner added that big transformations had to work their way into the market economy in order to scale up and accelerate. Thus, business propositions had to be created, and this is where governments could initiate opportunities. Prof. Babovic agreed and said large firms had a catalytic role in pushing firms in local and overseas supply chains to act. Maersk, the world’s largest shipping line, was pressured by Ikea to minimise its carbon footprint. Ikea would benefit by advertising its reduced carbon footprint. Dr. Nunes also identified transparency and the publication of business results, citizen involvement, peer pressure, and competition with other companies, as the major drivers for change.

In closing, Mr. Magaziner drew a connection with religion.

He said the idea of giving our children a better world than the one we inherited was common to all religions. Our actions had poisoned the planet, and we were not doing enough to ensure future generations would be able to inhabit the Earth as we had. He urged the audience to go beyond dialogue and to take action quickly.

151

expert panel session 4b

sustainable waste management – turning trash into resource With rapid urbanisation, cities would grow more crowded and the quantity of solid waste would increase. This would weigh down existing infrastructure, which may already be heavily strained or inadequate to begin with, especially for developing countries. There was a need to reinforce and supplement existing systems, and then to plan for longer-term waste management, resource conservation, and environmental sustainability. In this session, experts discussed how cities could implement holistic and effective waste management solutions. Ideas explored included resource recovery, going upstream to reduce material use at the manufacturing stage, recycling waste into new materials, reducing demand for new materials, and reducing the need for more waste disposal facilities.

Left to right: Prof. Jim Swithenbank, Mr. Howard Shaw, Dr. Helge Wendenburg, Dr. Ryutaro Yatsu, Mr. Jeff Cooper and Mr. Toshi Noda 152

Mr. Jeff Cooper

Prof. Jim Swithenbank

Vice-President, International Solid Waste Association

Chairman, Sheffield University Waste Management Centre

global trends in current waste management

from landfills to energy-from-waste

Mr. Jeff Cooper pointed out that urbanisation inevitably led to a rise in waste generation, which was environmentally unsustainable in the long term. However, he said environmental sustainability in cities could be ensured by enhancing waste management practices that drastically reduced green house gas emissions, and by maximising resource recovery from waste.

Mr. Cooper said the goal of maximum greenhouse gas reduction and resource recovery could be achieved by developing the value chain of converting waste into resource.

Specifically, this could be done by: supporting the cradleto-cradle system, replacing cradle-to-grave system, waste reduction, waste recycling and waste recovery. He added that policy and regulatory instruments had to be implemented at every step of the waste management system in order to encourage the industry to adopt the value chain. An example of such an instrument was ‘producer responsibility’, which aimed to enhance product and packaging designs by making them environmentally sound.

Finally, Mr. Cooper touched on waste recovery and recycling, by citing case studies of successful waste treatment technologies that reduced greenhouse gas emissions while producing useful end products. These technologies include anaerobic digestion, composting and landfill gas reclamation.

Prof. Swithenbank started his presentation by emphasising that landfilling could be minimised or even avoided with effective 3R practices and incineration. He noted that, historically, waste materials from cities were simply dumped in huge piles of polluting material. Liquid run-off usually polluted watercourses, while rotting material continued to emit the greenhouse gases methane and carbon dioxide for 50 years. The area of land required also became a problem and most societies now accepted that such waste dumps were unacceptable. Most importantly, we have come to recognise that dumping waste without recovering reusable material was unsustainable. We now knew that waste should be minimised at its source, and that the recovery of reusable or recyclable materials should be optimised. Another realisation was that the recovery of energy-from-waste (EfW) had to be maximised.

Waste comprised a wide variety of materials, such as cans and paper. These were initially separate, but in crude waste collection systems they became mixed together. Subsequent separation or de-mixing required considerable cost and energy, and usually resulted in cross-contaminated products.

We therefore had to separate wastes at source, wherever that was viable. Prof. Swithenbank went on to point out that by separating waste at source, waste to energy plants could recover energy more effectively. He explained that there was a direct correlation between recycling rates and energy recovery rates from waste incineration.

Prof. Swithenbank noted that EfW power generation only had an efficiency rate of 20%. Fortunately, there was an engineering solution to this, as the remaining energy was available as hot water. This could be used for district heating (or building cooling), thus raising the energy conversion efficiency to about 90%. This reduced our use of fossil fuels for heating or cooling purposes. Because most of the waste residue was in the form of biomass, the net carbon dioxide emission was very low. Also, the heat was generated close to consumers, and the transport of waste was minimised.

City authorities were responsible for planning, authorising and enabling funding for the required district heating pipe network.

Therefore the key to an environmentally friendly ‘trash-intoresource’ strategy, rested with local city governments.

153

Dr. Ryutaro Yatsu

Dr. Helge Wendenburg

Director-General, Waste Management and Recycling Department, Ministry of the Environment, Japan

Director-General of Water Management, Waste Management, Soil Conservation, BMU Germany

Japan’s waste management policy

Germany’s strategies for sustainable waste management

Dr. Yatsu began by explaining that Japan’s environmental policy as a whole focused on creating a sustainable society.

Beginning with environmental sanitation in the late 1940s, Japan’s waste management policy was extended in response to the country’s socio-economic development over the decades. The national waste management policy now focused on the 3Rs of waste and resource efficiency (reduce, reuse, recycle), in parallel with environmental pollution controls based on the ‘Polluter Pays Principle’ (PPP) and ‘Extended Producer Responsibility’ (EPR).

Dr. Yatsu noted that improved resource and energy efficiency were the two wheels of sustainability, and a synergetic approach was critical. Sustainable waste management was about ‘internalising externalities’. In addition to market mechanisms, institutional arrangements were extremely important. These included the legislative framework, law enforcement, and capacity building. In particular, he said that laws and regulations were critical to creating a new market for environmental services. These had to spell out the burdens and cost sharing for waste management and recycling. A market for environmental services had to be established with support from government commitments and regulations. Once this was in place, the private sector could make investments with confidence in the economic sustainability of this new market.

In Asia, it was estimated that the volume of waste discharges would drastically increase, as a result of rapid industrialisation and urbanisation. Each country was expected to identify its own priority areas in waste management and recycling. Dr. Yatsu called for greater regional cooperation in this area. He concluded by reaffirming Japan’s commitment to regional 3R cooperation, in collaboration with Singapore and other partners.

154

Dr. Helge Wendenburg gave an overview of German successes in sustainable waste management, and shared their strategies in the area.

These included using waste management as a sector to grow the economy, and decoupling waste generation from economic output.

Sustainable waste management had a long history in Germany.

There had been many discussions over the years with various stakeholders to decide the best way to manage waste. Dr. Wendenburg said it had taken about 40 years of implementing various policies to achieve the status that Germany now enjoyed with regards to waste management. As such, Germany had much experience with various waste management strategies.

Dr. Wendenburg felt that to manage waste successfully, there first had to be a vision, with specific targets. He said waste avoidance was a part of Germany’s vision. This meant promoting efficient production and consumption, as well as recycling and recovering leftover waste. The current goal was to recycle 65% of municipal waste, while the rest should be recovered. He was insistent about not depositing leftover waste in landfills. These ideas had previously been shared with Japan, and both countries had reached an agreement in 2007 to share their know-how with other nations.

Waste management would only become truly sustainable if and when there were no negative impacts on the environment. This included not using landfills to ensure there were no polluted sites for future generations. Other considerations included the complete recovery and use of waste, as well as the treatment of waste without producing dangerous emissions. This was being done at more than 70 incineration plants in Germany, and had resulted in a positive carbon dioxide balance.

Based on Germany’s experience over the last 20 years, Dr. Wendenburg said his main message was that protecting the environment and using resources efficiently had led to economic investments and activity in building and operating waste management facilities. Sustainable employment was created in the waste management sector, where Germany had over 250 000 workers. He stressed that waste recovery and treatment led to secondary resources and energy, infrastructure for the future, and higher technical and organisational standards.

Since 2000, Germany had made a conscious effort to decrease the amount of waste it produced. Germany had managed to decouple waste generation from economic output since 2002, and this was being done in Japan as well. Germany had been able to decrease the waste it produced, and this was evidence of efficient resources use.

To reach recycling goals, there was a need to know the composition of waste produced so as to ease the recycling process, and to sort out the various recyclable and nonrecyclable materials. Non-recyclable materials could be incinerated to produce energy, like electricity and heat. This technology was used in Germany to cool and heat homes.

He felt this was especially useful in Singapore and other tropical countries, to power air-conditioning in homes and commercial buildings.

In 2007, only 38% of waste in Germany was not recycled. This was a significant improvement from 1990, where 87% of waste was not recycled. Most of this waste was disposed in landfills as Germany had few incinerators, and recycling had yet to take root in 1990.

Dr. Wendenburg then commented on the recovery rates for the main categories of waste. The rate of recovery of construction and demolition waste had remained close to 90% every year.

With regards to municipal waste, recovery rates had improved from 50% in 2000 to about 75% in 2007. This had happened after a decision in 2002 to decrease the amount of untreated waste that was deposited in landfills by the middle of 2002. For production and commercial waste, recycling and recovery levels had reached 80%. Germany’s commitment to a sustainable waste management policy was evident in the way that even hazardous waste was also recovered, from 20% in 2000 to about 65% in 2007. Germany had reduced its dependence on landfills through its various policies, and Dr. Wendenburg said Germany was proud of how it led the way in recycling in Europe.

Concluding, Dr. Wendenburg emphasised the importance of segregation of recyclable materials. A high recycling rate could only be achieved by segregating waste at source.

Separating mixed waste was only possible if mixed waste products did not harm each other, for example, mixing paper products with plastic packaging or wood. Recyclables were harmed if biodegradable waste was mixed with dry waste. Therefore most German municipalities collected wastes separately, and biodegradables for composting were separated from other dry wastes.

Mr. Howard Shaw Executive Director, Singapore Environment Council

basic practices for waste management in Singapore Mr. Howard Shaw noted that, with more people living in cities, the problem of waste was growing. This was significant in terms of both climate change and increased resource use.

He then listed, in order of priority, the main approaches taken towards waste management, beginning with waste prevention. This was followed by the 3Rs – reusing, reducing and recycling waste. The next measure was energy recovery through incinerations, with landfills as the last and least favoured method.

Singapore produced more that 7,677 tonnes of waste everyday, or over 2.8 million tonnes a year. Municipal waste recycling had grown in the last five years. Non-recyclable waste was sent to incineration plants like Tuas South Incineration Plant, to reduce waste volumes by about 90%.

There was some energy recovery from incineration, though Mr. Shaw felt there was still much room for improvement.

Incineration ash was transported to Pulau Semakau, an offshore island landfill, where it was deposited in segregated cells. Completed in 1999 at a cost of $610 million, the landfill had a life span of only 30 years. The challenge was to increase this, by focusing on 3R activities. A mangrove swamp at one end of Pulau Semakau was used as a bio-indicator,

155

in case there was any leakage from the landfill into the surrounding environment. The swamp was now extremely healthy, attracting a large quantity of birdlife. Scientists had recognised this as an engineering marvel, and called Pulau Semakau the ‘Garbage of Eden’.

With a growing national population and the Pulau Semakau landfill reaching capacity, Singapore had to find other waste management solutions. The lack of land on mainland Singapore made it impossible to locate landfills there. Meanwhile, it was impractical to keep reclaiming land from the sea, as at Pulau Semakau. There was no one single solution to the waste issue. Mr. Shaw explained that, for Singapore, it would have to be a mix of incineration, a lot more recycling, and an emphasis on waste avoidance in the first place. Waste energy was an area that Singapore could potentially gain more from, being an incineration-based system. Singapore had to make the current incineration process more efficient. He advocated looking into other technologies, like gasification and pyrolysis, to recover more energy from incineration.

Mr. Shaw also spoke of the potential for waste engineering through non-conventional forms of recycling, saying there was a lot of scope for innovation in the area. Non-conventional forms would include adding value to the recycled materials. He gave the example of Asus, which used bioplastics in the manufacture of their laptops. Lotus cars had also experimented with bioplastics to come up with extremely strong but lightweight panels for their automobiles. Finding new ways to deal with waste could therefore add value to the original recycled materials.

Mr. Shaw said nurturing the population from young was extremely important to make recycling more effective.

Reducing waste was the ultimate strategy. In 2007, the Singapore Packaging Agreement was reached. It now had over 140 signatories, comprising mainly businesses in the manufacturing sector. The agreement began with the food industry, as food packaging contributed to significant waste creation. There was constant dialogue among signatories to share their practices on reducing waste with each other. Companies in Singapore also made use of more sustainable packaging forms, such as packaging derived from sustainable plantations.

156

discussion Mr. Toshi Noda (moderator) Director, Regional Office for Asia & Pacific, UN-HABITAT

Posing a question to Mr. Shaw, a Nigerian delegate expressed concern that incineration polluted the environment. He asked to what extent we should encourage incineration over other processes like gasification or pyrolysis. Mr. Shaw replied we had to consider incineration in its context. In Singapore, it aimed to reduce the volume of waste generated. Strict controls had been developed to monitor incineration plant emissions, and an added advantage was that energy could be recovered. He noted there was no one-size-fits-all solution in waste management, and solutions depended on the waste situation in each city.

Prof. Swithenbank felt there was confusion among the public regarding pyrolysis and gasification. He said the two processes were followed by combustion, and were thus staged combustion and not so different from incineration itself. The advantage of gasification and pyrolysis was that it was a more efficient way of recovering energy. 70% of the gas generated could be used to produce electricity more efficiently. This was twice the efficiency of incineration.

However, gasification and pyrolysis technologies were still undergoing research.

A researcher from Centre for Sustainable Asian Cities at the National University of Singapore commented that waste disposal in Singapore was highly convenient because of refuse chutes in public housing. This did not require residents to segregate their waste. She asked how Japan and Germany managed to achieve changes in public behaviour.

Dr. Wendenburg replied that education, private sector support and sound environment policies were key. Since 1992, Germany had put in place packaging waste laws to extend producer responsibility. Producers had to pay for the collection of used packaging. This money went to educating the public, especially in schools. By end 2000, Germany had become a nation that segregated waste. However, he emphasises the importance of educating the public and acknowledged it took time to convince the public of the importance of 3Rs.

This was an ongoing process, even for Germany today. In addition, driven by rising paper prices in 2008–9, the private sector voluntarily placed free paper recycling bins at residential units, with local government support. He added that Germany had taken into account the community’s concern about incineration. It adopted a policy of composting biodegradable waste, to divert waste from landfills and incineration.

Dr. Yatsu said Japan faced a situation similar to Germany. Its municipal governments engaged the community to encourage waste segregation. For example, city mayors regularly met the community to promote segregation, and personally inspected segregation practices. He said municipalities with close-knit communities tended to be more proactive in segregating waste compared with larger cities. Some municipalities went to the extent of dividing waste into up to 24 categories.

An Australian participant asked if there was a limit to the amount of waste that was recoverable, as not all waste could be recovered in a cost-effective manner.

Dr. Wendenburg agreed not all waste could be recycled cost-effectively, but felt one should always encourage efficient use of resources in production as well as consumption. For example, in Germany wood could be used as a renewable energy source but it could also be used to manufacture furniture and buildings. Prof.

Swithenbank explained there was a limit to recycling for certain recyclables like paper and thus there was a need to continue adding raw materials into the manufacturing process to maintain the quality of products. Mr. Cooper said there was no one prescribed limit to the amount of waste that each society should recycle. There was a need to consider local circumstances in order to determine limits. The level of recycling was highly dependent on the composition of waste, availability of treatment processes, and support from the local community.

there was a growing trend of co-mingling in Britain, as this yielded higher returns of recyclables from the public.

He however mentioned problems when glass recyclables were collected co-mingled with the other recyclables.

These included more wear and tear of the conveyor system at material recovery facilities, the safety of workers, and the possible contamination of products such as glass shards mixed with paper.

Dr. Wendenburg said that, for societies that sought to compost biodegradable waste, it was important to segregate such waste from the rest. A coalition of 13 states was now working with the European Union Commission to develop a directive on biodegradable waste recycling, to obtain useable biowaste.

Prof. Swithenbank said countries might like to consider conducting life cycle analysis in deciding the appropriate recyclables collection system. For example, he said there were some unpleasant by-products from recycled paper. In future, landfills might be mined because of the presence of minerals such as copper in the wastes that had not been segregated before. Dr. Yatsu added that a new trend in Japan was to explore these urban mines, or even urban oilfields.

Mr. Toshi Noda pointed out that all the speakers had placed emphasis on the 3R principle in managing waste in a sustainable manner. The energy aspect would also be important in the future for waste management systems as well as institutional arrangements such as regulation. He regretted that there had been little discussion of waste management policies in developing countries.

The last question came from a Singaporean audience member, who asked about the pros and cons of collecting segregated dry-recyclables, compared to collecting them co-mingled. He noted that Germany and Japan collected recyclables that had been sorted at source, while France and UK collected co-mingled dry recyclables. Mr. Cooper said that

157

expert panel session 4c

moving beyond plans to implementation In urban development, a vision is not enough. Many problems and difficulties arose when governments tried to translate plans into reality. This session let participants share experiences and insights into how cities could organise infrastructure projects, and what approaches they could apply during implementation and financing – with help from the Asian Development Bank’s Cities Development Initiative Asia. The session took a closer look at how cities made use of various tools and strategies to overcome common roadblocks faced during project implementation. From the very first step of choosing the correct project, through execution, and the final steps of maintenance and operation, the session fleshed out real life case studies from three different cities at various stages of project implementation. Capacity building, Public Private Partnerships and efforts to reduce carbon footprint were also topics that surfaced in the discussion.

Left to right: Ms. Xu Hui, Mr. Yang Mingqiu, Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh and Ms. Bebet Gozun 158

Dr. Ursula Schaefer-Preuss Vice President for Knowledge Management and Sustainable Development, Asian Development Bank (ADB)

innovative urban development solutions Dr. Ursula Schaefer-Preuss said that, as rapid urbanisation created ever more Asian cities, there was a pressing need to seek innovative solutions for mounting urban problems. For this reason, ADB had formed the City Development Initiative Asia (CDIA), which was meant to help Asian cities achieve sustainable growth. 60% of people lived in Asia, including 46% of all city dwellers. Asian cities would house up to 1.5 billion more residents in the next 20 years, reaching three billion urban Asians by 2030. With this huge increase, Asian cities would simultaneously face many challenges and opportunities.

In terms of opportunities, rapid urbanisation would remain a key engine of dynamic Asian growth. She noted that cityregions were magnets for people, enterprise and culture.

By providing greater jobs, education, housing and transport opportunities, city-regions played an increasingly critical role in economic and social development.

While urbanisation created wealth, poverty also ‘urbanised’, and new environmental problems were created. Three quarters of greenhouse gas emissions were city related.

Meanwhile, most city governments struggled to deliver urgent services, like garbage collection and disposal, drainage and flood control, water supply and sanitation, and urban transport. A city’s role as an economic engine was muted when the demand for such services increased faster than supply responses that were financially and institutionally constrained. A recent McKinsey study in India indicated that 1 to 1.5% of potential GDP growth every year was lost due to poor infrastructure. She felt that addressing these gaps would define Asia’s urban agenda in the coming decade.

Dr. Schaefer-Preuss said the need for innovative solutions had led German Development Cooperation and ADB to set up CDIA in October 2007. It supported effective city management and provided innovative solutions for developing cities to build capacity for infrastructure projects.

Focusing on workable solutions, CDIA brought together local and national governments, civil society, private sectors and financial institutions. It used diversified approaches to help source funding for the necessary technology

and capacity. CDIA also helped ADB realise some of its long-term strategic framework, like Strategy 2020, and emphasised the goal of sustainable and liveable cities.

As part of its goal of a poverty-free Asia Pacific, CDIA supported inclusive and environmentally sustainable growth, as well as regional integration. It was also a platform for cities to engage international development partners.

CDIA aimed to help cities close the gap between new infrastructure projects on one hand, and financing current infrastructure on the other. It was involved in 22 cities over 12 countries, with more planned. This represented about US$4.5 billion in strategic city infrastructure investments. Dr. SchaeferPreuss stressed the intrinsic value of CDIA projects lay in their innovative nature, not volume, as it only scratched the surface of Asia’s infrastructure deficit. In less than a decade CDIA could benefit over 200 million people, and help ADB and other partners mobilise at least US$15 billion in investments. Calling Singapore an exemplary model for many Asian cities, she hoped it would support CDIA as a full member.

Dr. Schaefer-Preuss called urban transport ‘a stepchild of both urban planning and transport planning, falling between the crack because of institutional compartmentalisation’.

Such projects could now be financed via innovative solutions like Public Private Partnerships (PPP) and CDIA’s ability to assemble stakeholders. Almost all CDIA projects focused on transport. Significant PPP and financing opportunities had been found in most cases. The projects tried to integrate transport as part of land use planning, and shift from private to public transport so as to make transport systems more efficient and cut greenhouse gas emissions.

Next, Dr. Schaefer-Preuss turned to energy efficiency, an area of growing concern due to climate change. While public transport and solid waste cogeneration projects were also key, the focus was on energy efficiency in buildings. CDIA had supported a pre-feasibility study to rehabilitate some 40,000 housing units and 520 pre-cast panel apartment blocks, forming 20% of a city’s housing stock. The study had helped cut the energy used for heating and related greenhouse gas emissions. Solid waste pre-feasibility studies had also shown greenhouse gas emission cuts were important expected benefits of the proposed investments. In both cases, the use of PPP was justified as pre-feasibility studies indicated enough potential profitability.

159

CDIA also supported urban regeneration projects, in partnership with the local private sectors. It helped local governments prioritise infrastructure capital expenditure and to leverage their funds with those of other investors. CDIA helped develop a framework to identify and capitalise on specific high priority projects. Dr. Schaefer-Preuss noted that several other cities then wanted to replicate this investment exercise.

CDIA therefore developed a toolkit for this purpose, and five countries had already undertaken the city level training to enable its use.

Ms. Xu Hui Vice Chief / Project Manager, Foreign Capital Utilization Section, Guiyang Development and Reform Commission, Municipal Administration Centre, Jinyang New District, Guiyang, China

Ms. Xu Hui said the gap between project planning and implementation was among the city’s biggest challenges.

Many projects were awaiting implementation, but limited resources prevented this. There was much need to decide which projects should get priority. Brainstorming had been the main method used to do this, but the city began using the PPP toolkit in 2009.

Mr. Yang Mingqiu said the toolkit was a framework developed

by CDIA to decide project priority and programming by considering economic, social, environmental and city strategy issues. The PPP toolkit use consisted of three steps. First, CDIA trained city representatives to understand the toolkit, so they could then train others and get them to employ it. Next, officials were trained in workshops to let them to understand how the tool could help them prioritise projects. Lastly, the toolkit was applied, and the top priority projects could be identified and implemented.

Mr. Yang Mingqiu Senior economist, Shanghai Academy of Social Science

prioritising project implementation in Guiyang

The speakers shared their experience in using the Planning Project Priority (PPP) toolkit to identify projects for Guiyang to implement. Guiyang was the capital of Guizhou province in Southwest China. While blessed with a beautiful landscape, good ecosystem and mineral riches, it was far from the coast and lacked urban infrastructure. Despite rapid industrialisation and infrastructure construction, the city aimed to develop as an eco-friendly society.

160

Guiyang chose to prioritise foreign-oriented investment projects, as these would pave the way for many foreign financial connections. Mr. Yang said it was important to get feedback during the process, and to let those undertaking the project attend meetings, so they could share their views on the projects and gain acknowledgement from peers.

He also stressed the toolkit was a complementary aid, not a total replacement of existing methods. He felt Guiyang could gradually expand its use of the toolkit from the foreign investment projects to other bigger projects.

Mr. Yang said staff members who attended the discussions and used the toolkit had given positive feedback and agreed it was useful. The city government was also now more confident about using the toolkit. Moreover, users had proposed modifications to fit specific situations in different countries.

Modifications were needed to suit specific political, social and economic conditions, to maximise use of the toolkit. Mr. Yang also felt it was key to have communication between the top level of government, government staff, and CDIA. He suggested the toolkit could be used other government departments, like the Physical and Construction Department, and that it could then gradually become a basic tool for city project decision-making.

Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh Secretary for Local Self Government Department, Government of Kerala, India

development of Cochin’s transport infrastructure Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh discussed the city of Cochin’s transport issues, and how the city planned to solve them with new infrastructure and networks. He began by describing Kerala as a small state on India’s southwest coast. Cochin was its most important city, with less than a million out of Kerala’s 45 million people. Kerala was an outlier compared to other Indian states, with very high social development indicators, like 95% literacy and mortality rates comparable to European nations.

However, its GDP per capita was ranked in the middle of Indian states.

Cochin was Kerala’s most important commercial centre.

Rapid urban growth had created many transport problems. A study of the city’s transport network examined the core urban centre, and outlying areas from which people commuted. It found that the railway through Cochin divided the city into two, creating a fragmented east-west road network. Suburban rail services did not exist. Bridges had been built to link the urban core with a series of islands, but this significantly reduced use of the existing ferry service, so the Cochin’s waterway network was not optimised.

Along with poor road integration, more personal vehicles on the streets had created many traffic problems. Vehicle growth had constrained public transport due to the inadequate road network. As most roads only had one lane, they were underequipped for the rise in traffic. Planning and coordination across different transport modes – ferries, buses or private vehicles – was lacking. CDIA had surveyed residents, and found them willing to pay higher prices for better transport.

They felt traffic volumes were too high, road conditions

were sub-par and new roads were not being built to cope with higher traffic. Residents were also unhappy with public transport: the buses were too dirty, the ferries difficult to use, and both were unsafe.

To address these issues, CDIA conducted a further series of studies, project surveys and stakeholders workshops.

Mr. Singh said Cochin aimed to have a transport sector roadmap and a transport investment package by mid-2010.

He emphasised a focus on moving people, not vehicles, and the need for a shared interface across all transport modes.

To achieve more efficient road use, Cochin wanted to move from private to public transport. To signal the desired transport traits, the acronym ‘CAFÉ’ was used – Clean, Affordable, Fast and Efficient transport.

CDIA integrated various ongoing interventions to develop a holistic transport network. 300 new buses had been ordered, and bus priority lanes were being implemented. These measures would make public transport more efficient, and encourage people to switch to buses.

Various modal priorities had been devised to weigh the relative importance of different projects. Projects relating to nonmotorised modes were placed first, public transport projects were second, and road projects were last. Seven projects were then grouped accordingly. Pedestrian precincts and overbridges were the first priority. Second-priority projects comprised bus priority lanes, better ferry services, interchange upgrades, and park-and-pay stations. Road projects were given last priority. Five-way tests were conducted to evaluate project feasibility and impact. For each project, five questions were posed. [1] Will it satisfy the vision and policies? [2] Where is it? [3] When will it happen? [4] What is the cost? [5] Who will implement it?

Due to the multiplicity of agencies that administered Cochin’s transport, Mr. Singh said it would be difficult to manage and integrate the different modes of transport and projects.

A study of institutional coordination was thus conducted.

CDIA recommended Cochin set up a statutory coordination mechanism to oversee and manage the transport system, so it could operate seamlessly. Mr. Singh reported that this was still being developed.

161

Mr. Tsogtsaikhan Chultemsuren Senior Officer, Urban Development Policy Department, City Government of Ulaanbaatar Mayor’s Office, Mongolia

Ms. Baasanjav Bayantuul Senior Officer, Finance and Investment Department, Ministry of Roads, Transportation, Construction and Urban Development, Mongolia

carbon finance as a clean development mechanism in Ulaanbaatar Ms. Baasanjav Bayantuul said almost half of Mongolia’s 2.7 million citizens lived in Ulaanbaatar, the world’s coldest capital. The average winter temperature was -20 degrees Celsius, and went as low as -45 degrees. Heating lasted eight months due to a long cold season. This meant high energy use. Coal power plants powered nearly all of the city’s heating panels. Besides high carbon emissions, these plants produced 34% of urban air pollution. As tariffs were subsidised and not based on consumption, there were no financial incentives to reduce heating.

Some 20% of city-dwellers lived in 47,000 apartments found in 514 buildings made of precast panels. These were all in a poor state; some had dilapidated structures and poor insulation. Due to excessive heat loss from the building, heating was constantly increased. This also contributed to higher greenhouse gas emissions. To explore and prove potential energy efficiency, Ulaanbaatar and an external agency collaborated to retrofit existing panel buildings, using new technologies to achieve cost-efficient rehabilitation. This was also aimed at raising public awareness of environmental protection and saving energy.

The project yielded positive results. With better insulation, 30% more heat energy was saved. Savings of 50% to 60% would have been possible if residents changed their habits.

In addition, improved comfort and healthier living conditions were achieved. Average indoor temperatures were 22 degrees Celsius, and there was no mould formation or condensation.

Besides fixing heating panels and insulating buildings, leaking

162

pipes were removed and building aesthetics were improved.

This increased building lifespans and raised apartment market values for owners. The project also facilitated public participation and consultation.

To exploit this success and extend it citywide, CDIA helped conduct a pre-feasibility study from October 2008 to May 2009. It identified the citywide programme’s goal, proposed implementation principles and approaches, listed project components, suggested institutional and legal frameworks, devised terms of reference for the first investment phase feasibility study, and outlined this phase. The programme aimed to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and to improve the quality of life in Ulaanbaatar by rehabilitating existing panel buildings, to create a sustainable and maintainable system of heat supply. The programme would have four main components.

The first component involved institutional frameworks.

Two frameworks were proposed. The first advocated a consumption-based heat tariff system, at cost recovery levels.

This was because the whole power and heat generation system was ailing, so the cost of using and improving it had to be financed. The second framework proposed adjusting building codes to raise the energy efficiency of building materials and technologies.

The next component was the thermo-technical rehabilitation itself. To cut heat loss and save energy, a package or works to fully insulate buildings was devised. Roofs and basements would be insulated, double or triple blade windows will be installed to cut heat loss, and balconies would be sealed.

Due to the buildings’ age, and to raise efficiency, pipes and radiators would be rehabilitated. Residents were also unable to control or measure indoor heat, so heat control and measuring devices would be installed to make the buildings more liveable. The third component involved mobilising residents and strengthening their condominium associations.

The final component related to capacity building for the executing agencies and key stakeholders.

Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) had been identified as a key financing option for the programme. The government and its partners agreed to conduct CDM-based line studies, to generate CDM revenue to fund the first investment phase.

ADB helped with these studies via its Clean Energy Financing Partnership Facility. The studies measured heating energy use in two clusters of buildings. The results would help design CDM projects, and calculate possible CDM revenue from an upfront payment mechanism.

The programme would invest some US$30 million yearly over 15 years. The government would provide 30% annual counterpart funding; CDM upfront funding and donor loans would cover the rest. Projected direct cost savings from a reduction in energy production could be part of the financing. Private sector partnerships and Public Private Partnerships were also feasible options. Project cost recovery options included betterment charges on monthly utility bills, connection fees for new developments, and the sale of certified emissions cuts on carbon markets.

The programme’s most anticipated outcome would be in the energy sector, where substantial savings in residential heating were expected. Consumption-based and cost-recovering tariffs would contribute to reducing costs. In the environmental sector, carbon dioxide emissions were expected to fall by 660,000 tonnes yearly. Building rehabilitation would renew some 40,000 apartments for under a third the cost of new construction. With a sustainable heating maintenance system, longer building lifespans would boost the housing sector, enable greater comfort and liveability, and higher market value for housing.

metering were now being observed, and consumption-based and cost-recovering tariffs were being implemented to ensure economic sustainability. Finally, the project could benefit the social sector by promoting community development and active participation by residents.

The first investment phase from 2011 to 2014 would cost US$10 million and rehabilitate some 1,000 units. This was meant to test the project’s feasibility and build capacity for a citywide rollout. Subsequent phases would be from 2014 to 2025, in three phases of four to five years each. A total of 2,000 to 4,000 apartments would then be rehabilitated yearly.

Ms Bayantuul concluded by saying, given Ulaanbaatar’s harsh climate, timing was essential. To maximise efficiency, winters should be used for planning, and summers for construction work. She also noted rehabilitation needed greater technical knowledge and skills than constructing a new building and so a balance between the best technical solution and financial affordability had to be realised. Rehabilitation also meant interventions inside apartments had to be kept to a minimum.

Finally, she observed that for implementation to occur smoothly, active participation by residents would be needed for the entire project cycle, from planning and construction to operation and maintenance.

Liberated energy capacity could stimulate city development and reactivate inner city life. Without rehabilitation, panel buildings in the heart of the city could have formed a slum.

The construction sector would benefit from new energyefficient technologies, and management skills capacitybuilding. Legal and institutional framework had received much thought due to the project. Regulations for heating control and

163

discussion Ms. Bebet Gozun (moderator) Former Secretary, Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Philippines, Chair, Clean Air Initiative For Asian Cities, and Advisory Board Member, CDIA

Delegate Brian Robinson said that, based on the emissions savings described, it seemed Ulaanbaatar could generate US$7 million in credits. However, this still implied a US$23 million funding gap, and he asked how this would be filled.

Ms. Bayantuul replied that the German Bank of KfW would provide a loan for first investment phase, and the Mongolian government would fund 30% of the project cost. The main cost recovery method would be a betterment charge, to be applied to the monthly utility bills of the residents in the long term. Mr. Robinson noted that in CDM projects, there was often a funding gap in need of some form of subsidies, and that was a critical issue in making projects work. He said CDM had the same problem with some transport projects and currently only three or four were under CDM. He knew of other techniques that would help in terms of community and public partnerships as well as generating private funds to support the project, which he offered to share with Ms. Bayantuul after the discussion.

CDIA Project Director Dr. Emiel A. Wegelin noted that Ms. Xu and Mr. Yang had explained how they used the PPP toolkit but had not shared the results. He wanted to know the outcome of the planning and prioritising exercise. He added that CDIA team members had views on Public Private Partnership potential as a component of the project packages, but he wanted to hear Mr Singh’s perspective on the issue as well.

Mr. Yang said that while Guiyang was in Western China and was seen as less wealthy than Beijing or Shanghai, this was untrue. Due to the rapid progress and constant infrastructure work, the government faced many projects from different sectors everyday. They decided to use the toolkit to prioritise 100 projects. Previously, officials had wondered how to move from one project to another. The toolkit helped them order the projects based on Guiyang’s strategy of becoming an eco-city.

He felt the PPP toolkit had become a daily assistance tool for

164

Guiyang. Ms. Xu said feedback had been given to the PPP toolkit designer and an expert from Hong Kong at a workshop in April, so they could modify it based on Guiyang’s situation.

The city had a complicated account tax so the toolkit had to be modified to work with their intended approval procedure and political context. As it had only been the first phase of the toolkit, she expected improvements to make it more suitable to the local context. They would put the improved toolkit to use once it was ready. Ms. Gozun added that after using the toolkit at its original level, Guiyang would want to bring it to the next level before choosing priority projects to pursue.

In reply to Dr. Wegelin, Mr. Singh said CDIA and Cochin had identified four project packages, out of which Package 4 consisted largely of projects like rail and road overbridges, and flyovers. Hence they expected to fund these largely via public financing. The other packages included some revenuegenerating elements like ferry services and park-and-pay facilities. He added that the consultancy has worked out fairly high rates of return of about 10% for these projects.

A delegate felt that Public Private Partnership (PPP) was a key part in the three presentations and asked if any exercise had been done to assess the quality and efficiency of the government partner and the private sector partner. He said the government component was often lacking compared to the private sector in terms of coordination and integration of activities, which upset the PPP concept. His second point was that, except Ulaanbaatar, the cities had focused on new investments. He felt Ulaanbaatar had rightly touched on rehabilitating existing assets, as capacity was very low for un-rehabilitated assets. When old assets continued in an integrated system with new assets, the unit cost of operation became very high and inefficient due to the ‘low drag of capacity interrelation. His own work with the Bombay municipal corporation showed that capacity interrelation was often 25 to 30%. He felt this high servicing cost raised the risk of financing in new investment programmes.

Mr. Singh replied the delegate was right to say some PPP capacity-building would be needed, especially in Indian city governments, ‘where capacity is traditionally rather low’.

However, he felt at the state level, more assistance would be able to be provided with regard to PPP. On the capacity interrelation of old and new assets, Mr. Singh said ADB was helping Kerala upgrade infrastructure in four areas including solid waste management, water supply and urban transport.

Rehabilitation of old assets like upgrading old water supply lines or leak protection was occurring as part of this. He agreed with the need to ensure the management and operation of infrastructure was done periodically and not kept to a fixed timeframe like once in ten years. Ms. Gozun said when we looked at investments, it should not be confined to new projects but also the rehabilitation or improvement in efficiencies of existing assets or the totality of a city’s operations would be dragged down. With regard to the first question, she felt the private sector’s capacity was generally much higher than the public sector in developing countries and that was why CDIA has capacity development as a key component of the project itself.

Ms. Bayantuul said in Ulaanbaatar, capacity development was part of the pre-feasibility study at two levels, the first of which occurred at government level. It involved the executing agencies, like the municipal government and other relevant agencies. On the other hand, there was also capacity development of other stakeholders like the condominium associations, which were meant for the maintenance of buildings. She said the pre-feasibility study had also proposed different training and capacity development tools, which would be refined for the feasibility study. With regard to PPP, she felt private investors would not be willing to invest in projects like residential apartment rehabilitation, but she felt there was scope for intervention in part of the distribution line of heat supply.

stakeholder workshops. Ms. Bayantuul said Ulaanbaatar did not use the toolkit as well.

Dr. Wegelin clarified the three interventions presented were each quite different. In Guiyang, it was an exercise to enhance the way they did intersector priority planning. In Cochin, through a prior process, it was already established that the focus would be on the transport sub-sector so the level of prioritisation was on a lower level. He said he was involved in Ulaanbaatar and it was a very unusual situation. They were able to build on the pilot project, making the technological aspect well defined. Hence, the pre-feasibility study focused on three things. The first focus was on implementing a 15-year asset rehabilitation programme. Their aim was to prevent decay and the need to rebuild more expensive housing. The second focus was on project engineering due to financing constraints. They had to devise new ways of funding these investments. The options included CDM credit, betterment charges – which they agreed was the only way to partial cost recovery by stakeholders – and government subsidy, which depended on the national economy. The third focus was on institutional engineering. For example, the mandate of the condominium association was somewhat confused and that had to be tightened. There were areas for policy reform, and the pre-feasibility study gave good entry points into that.

A Nigerian delegate said the Guiyang team had discussed the benefits of the PPP toolkit but speakers from Cochin and Ulaanbaatar had not. He wanted to know the difference between this toolkit and the rest of the prioritisation methods and how others could benefit from its use. Mr. Singh responded that their study in Cochin did not use the toolkit.

Their methodology was to get feedback on the various concepts developed by the consultants through a series of

165

166

expert panel session 5

balancing resource conflicts and competing demands

167

expert panel session 5

challenges that cities face – nexus of energy, water and food security Food, water and energy fuelled our urban growth, but resource scarcity remained a key challenge. Many lacked clean water, and recent food and energy price volatility could signal supply-demand gaps. Growing populations and rapid urbanisation would raise consumption, and competition for resources. By 2050, the global population would reach nine billion, with 70% in cities. To meet demand, food production had to rise 70%. By 2030, global energy demand would increase by 44% from 2006, with a possible 40% gap between global water supply and demand. A systemic view of interdependencies between these resource systems was crucial to resource management and balancing conflicting demands. Session experts explored the nexus between water, energy and food security in cities, especially in emerging Asia. Participants also discussed how reliable access to food, energy and clean water could promote social, economic and environmental stability in cities.

Left to right: Mr. Paul Brown, Dr. Geng Anli, Mr. Paul Reiter, Dr. Michael Quah and Dr. Dennis Wichelns 168

Mr. Paul Brown (moderator)

Mr. Paul Reiter

Executive Vice-President, Global Market Development Group, Camp, Dresser and McKee Inc

Executive Director, International Water Association

opening remarks Mr. Brown noted that the Singapore International Water Week, which ran alongside WCS, looked at challenges in the water sector. It took a holistic and systems approach to managing water, along with land use. Discussions so far had focused on cities. But he felt an urban focus risked ignoring rural hinterlands, where our food originated, and which were as waterdependent as cities. Broadening the discussion, this session looked at systems that linked water, food and energy security.

From his experience in the American west, Mr. Brown observed water conflicts between agriculture and MNI (municipalities and industries). Urban MNI could pay more for water, which could cause significant food supply disruptions.

He also noted that alternative fuels like bio-fuels needed water, which could be diverted from other purposes. He underlined how these three resources – water, food and energy – were linked in complex ways. Mr. Brown observed that most delegates present had expertise in one or two areas, but rarely all three. He hoped the discussion could explore how to build systems for managing all three resources.

Before handing over to the first presenter, Mr. Brown explained the format of this session. Each speaker would be paired with a respondent, who would contribute his or her thoughts after each presentation. After all three discussions, there would be general discussion.

water-energy nexus: stepping into a challenging future Mr. Reiter said the relationship between water and energy provision was complex and poorly understood. There were few professionals and experts in this area, and relevant data was scarce. As Tom Friedman said, we lived on a hot, flat and crowded planet. Mr. Reiter added that it was quickly getting much more crowded. We had to do more with less in each domain: energy, cities, agriculture and water. Optimisation of these four was typically seen in terms of spheres, each relating to its own domain. But increasingly, we had to optimise across domains, and globally. Our main water issue was a water management problem. A 10% reduction in agricultural water use, easily done with efficiency measures, would double urban water supply. He said optimisation at this scale, or Very Large Scale Integration (VLSI), was critical. Explaining that his talk was about the water-energy nexus, i.e. water for energy, and energy for water, Mr. Reiter noted that some people only know about water for energy, and few knew about energy for water, but hardly anyone had considered the nexus between both.

Starting with water for energy, Mr. Reiter said agriculture used much more water than everything else, which was split between power/industry and domestic use. The water needed for energy was almost as much as all other non-agricultural uses. Among refining and transportation fuels, the ratio of water to gas was 2:1, for bio-diesel it was 3.5 and for gasoline derived from ‘dirty’ oil shale was 6.5. Our energy choices were therefore very significant. As traditional fossil fuels grew scarce and we moved to these other kinds of energy sources, water requirements would grow.

Moving on to energy for water, he said energy was used in water extraction, transmission, treatment, distribution and wastewater treatment. Distribution alone used 60% of all energy used for water. We were entering a water- and energyscarce world, which was worried about greenhouse gases. In the US, the water sector accounted for 5.2% of total carbon emissions, or 13% of electricity use – equivalent to 53 million vehicles. End-use water heating accounted for almost 60% of water-related energy use and carbon emissions. Also, as

169

water grew scarce, energy use rose. For example, five times the energy was used for desalination. We had to use membranes and other water technology more efficiently.

The UK utility sector’s energy use doubled from 1990 to 2006, largely due to more wastewater treatments and membrane filtration. He noted that proposed carbon cuts of 80% from 1990 levels meant a 90% cut from 2006 - so energy for water was a big deal.

Mr. Reiter then asked what we could do to mitigate this footprint, which was a common proportion across the world. First, on the production side, we needed more efficient pumps, processes and energy recovery from wastewater treatment. He predicted that once we set binding targets for global greenhouse gas cuts, every wastewater utility in the world could start producing energy. Instead of being net energy consumers, they would be neutral to positive. However, options were more limited for water utilities. Second, there were opportunities for utility intervention on the end use side. The big target here was water heating, a major energy user. There were opportunities involving legislation, and win-win outcomes.

We could cut energy use by building cities with different water engineering, such as more decentralised plants, closed loops and reduced networks.

Returning to water heating, he said that in mid-1980s Seattle, he essentially converted the city from top-loaded to front-loaded washing machines. The result was an 80% fall in water and energy use, a win-win situation. Likewise, there were a whole host of such end-use measures.

If utilities were enfranchised, these were the kinds of measures that could be pursued. For instance, California had achieved a 30% cut in energy use over 30 years, through energy, building and appliance efficiency.

Utilities had to work on all three boxes. The most significant way to cut energy footprints was to use and sell less water. As utilities made their money from selling water, there was an inherent problem with the traditional business model. He argued that utilities had to work with governments to devise new business models.

Compensation should not be for the sale of product, but for the provision of services. This would be a challenge, especially for investor-owned utilities.

170

discussion Mr. Rob Skinner (respondent) Managing Director, Melbourne Water, and Board Member, Water Services Association of Australia

Melbourne Water handled all aspects of the water cycle: water supply, sewerage, drainage and flood plain management.

Mr. Skinner said their key challenge was to make Melbourne resilient to climate change and resource scarcity shocks.

They had faced recent, urgent shocks, like a 35% drop in water flowing into reservoirs, due to a changing climate.

163gigalitres went into reservoirs in 2006, compared with an historical average of 590gigalitres. In response, they built a 150gigalitres/year desalination plant, and invested in more efficient and drought-proof irrigation, to save 460gigalitres yearly. Water saved went to the city, irrigation security and environmental flow improvements.

Mr. Skinner felt diversity was critical to resilience. This had five strategic components: [1] central solutions (desalination plant, storage reservoirs), [2] decentralised and distributed solutions, [3] market-based responses (where markets trade or develop solutions), [4] water conservation, supply and demand management, and [5] working with city planners. Elaborating on the last point, he said higher urban density led to lower water consumption, while up to half the rise in future water needs could be cut by smarter city design. And like Singapore, they treated the city as a water catchment area. They also used measures like bio-retention schemes, rainwater tanks, and local wetlands.

Moderator Paul Brown noted Australia’s water crisis. He asked if push came to shove between water and energy, would water win, being essential. For example, would desalination be used despite being energy intensive? Was lower energy use something water utilities pursued as ‘nice to have’, but over time would we consume much more energy to meet water demands? Mr. Skinner replied that Melbourne used only renewable energy for water needs, even desalination, although it cost more. He added that after a successful education campaign, businesses and residents took ownership of water issues, and per capita water use fell 41%. While those interested in water might

not know much about the energy dimension to water they would become Trojan horses for wider city planning issues.

For example, Mr.Skinner’s son criticised the energy intensive desalination plant, but he replied that the energy his son used on his computer equalled the energy used to supply his daily water needs. So there was an element of educating people about energy use, and promoting the design of more water and energy efficient lifestyles and cities.

Next, Mr. Brown asked if Melbourne Water faced a revenue bind, where they sold less water due to falling water use per capita, while energy use per unit of water supplied was rising, due to the use of renewable energy and technologies like desalination. Mr. Skinner said the answer was no, as they were fortunate that the economic regulator in the State of Victoria said they could raise prices to cover rising costs if customers were willing to pay. 70% of residents surveyed were prepared to pay the extra $7.50/year for renewable energy. However, he noted many places did not enjoy this benefit.

Mr. Reiter responded to the issue by questioning its premise.

Cities everywhere would produce the water needed for growing populations, including via reuse and desalination. This would use more energy. We were now shifting from cheap environmental sources to manufactured water. We could mitigate this on the energy side, as with renewable energy, and we could get people to use water more efficiently. But the big ticket was to re-engineer cities more efficiently, to use much less water and energy. By not spending money to use less, we saved money via lighter distribution systems, using less energy to treat water, and producing energy. The aim was to combine wastewater and water treatment plants to make water, energy and nutrients. This would need smaller networks and some pain. But in the short run, we needed money and technology to mitigate inefficient systems.

Mr. Skinner added that a water-sensitive city that captured water had less impact on waterways. Waterway ecologies were healthier, and environments along them and in communities were greener. Melbourne Water projected that after re-engineering the city to be water-sensitive, city centre temperatures – now 4 degrees higher than outside – would be much lower. The public health benefits could be considerable.

Also, a water-sensitive higher-density city would be aligned with a broadly defined sustainable and liveable city, with more public transport, and better access to jobs and social services.

Mr. Brown asked if Melbourne had looked at the bigger picture of its energy use, where electricity use for water-related purposes may have grown, but overall energy use for the city may have fallen, for example, due to more urban density and public transport use. Mr. Skinner said this involved a different level of monitoring and analysis, and he was unaware of it being done anywhere yet. He added Australians felt emissions trading was important, and had lost a Prime Minister over this issue in recent days.

On the question of people’s willingness to pay, Mr. Reiter highlighted the challenge of developing a value proposition for people when energy, water and wastewater utilities were split into separate corporations, apart from the municipality, and privatised or partially privatised. He said they were able to triple Seattle’s water rates partly because the city, energy and water functions were all under one franchise. This let them offer people more value, even as they raised rates. This would be harder to do as utilities were broken up and privatised as part of liberalisation. Institutional hurdles like these would be harder to solve than engineering issues. He worried that business models did not support rational activity. Unless they were community-based, electricity companies lacked incentives to do anything other than sell as much electricity as possible. Nor would they want water utilities to help people reduce water and electricity use. We had to incentivise firms so they made money from reducing resource use.

A delegate from CH2M Hill asked how much of the problem was due to poor pricing caused by cross-subsidies. Mr. Skinner said for water, price was important but not a dominant issue. What was more important was integrating, planning, and getting institutional arrangements sorted out. For sewerage, price was significant. The ability to pay for energy and nutrient recovery was impaired by pricing. Weather this should be done at the start or the end of the pipe was largely determined by costs, and costs were confused until we set a price on carbon. Mr. Reiter said there was much debate on the role of prices in energy. In California, a leader in this area, high prices created the political space to do the things necessary to reduce demand, so people could benefit.

171

Dr. Dennis Wichelns Principal Economist, International Water Management Institute

food, water and livelihoods in the cities of 2050 Dr. Wichelns said his talk would ask how we could ensure a food-secure and water-secure future, from an urban perspective. We had to be smart and allocate our scare resources with great care. He added that not all cities were equal when talking about the nexus of food, water and energy.

Food and water were linked in obvious and less obvious ways.

Water was needed for crops and livestock in both rain-fed and irrigated parts of the world. But water was not just an agricultural input; it was also key to many livelihoods. Much of humanity made a living in agriculture, either directly as farm labour, or indirectly in processing, transport, etc. Secure access to land and water resources was essential for many poor rural households, and also in urban and peri-urban areas.

Dr. Wichelns then stated that food shortages reflected shortfalls in demand, and not supply as was commonly thought. He explained that economists technically saw ‘demand’ as both the ability and the willingness to pay, and not simply as the desire for something. As Nobel prize winner Amartya Sen had demonstrated, the problem of food shortage was that people could not afford food, especially in the cities of poor countries.

Food prices had now grown 70% from 2004 levels. This was enormous. Even though a brief and extreme food price spike in 2008 had come down a bit, the overall rise since then had been sustained. People therefore had to be able to afford food at these prices, which would endure for some time, probably due to factors including the rise of biofuels as well as supply disruptions in some areas.

172

Beyond secure access to land and water, people were going to need technical support, credit, infrastructure, markets, etc. Urban agriculture would provide food and livelihood opportunities. In both rich and poor cities, small areas could be set aside for households to grow crops. Such areas would need secure water supplies, and this was an opportunity for irrigating with wastewater. Wastewater could be an urban resource. Even as urban populations and resource scarcity grew, wastewater is one resource that actually grew with the city, and it should be tapped.

In the rich world, particularly the Middle East, North America and Australia, wastewater was treated and used carefully. The challenge was in the developing world. In Ghana’s second largest city, 80% to 90% of the vegetables consumed in the city were grown locally, in urban and peri-urban areas. These were unintentionally irrigated with untreated wastewater.

Farmers on small plots of land used water from adjacent streams and ditches, which contained untreated wastewater.

The crops were sold in urban markets, providing fresh vegetables for city dweller and livelihoods for the crop growers.

The vegetables were fresh and nutritious, but they could also be contaminated with pathogens, chemicals, etc. Leafy vegetables were especially susceptible to this. Unfortunately, wastewater treatment was expensive. The challenge was how to maintain benefits, while reducing risks.

Nutrients in excreta were another wastewater resource. Urine contained nitrogen, potassium and phosphorus. The urine we produced in a year was enough to support the cereal we consumed in a year, so we had to recycle these nutrients.

Nitrogen was expensive and phosphorus was limited, so there was real value there. If we could engineer the separation of urine from faeces, we could generate value from it. This was the nexus between energy, food and water security.

Dr. Wichelns concluded that we had to install infrastructure to capture, treat and use wastewater. Next, we needed to educate, inform and promote these things. Finally, resource prices ought to reflect scarcity and opportunity costs. In doing all of these things, we had to focus on livelihoods, to ensure adequate demand for food. There would be sufficient food and water in our cities in 2050 if we made wise decisions.

The challenge was greater in developing countries. Public investments, and implementing the right policies, were crucial to our success.

discussion Ms. Tan Poh Hong (respondent) CEO, Agri-Food & Veterinary Authority of Singapore (AVA)

Ms. Tan said Singapore imported almost 90% of its food, as it lacked an agrarian hinterland. It was also very vulnerable to climate change. Global food situations, especially water issues like drought, produced higher food prices and affected food supplies. For instance, a Chinese drought some months earlier had affected local cabbage prices, as 70% of Singapore’s cabbages were from China. As the world grappled with food security, Singapore realised it could not rely solely on economic growth and purchasing power as a food security strategy. Ms. Tan defined food security as food that was available, accessible and affordable.

AVA was now looking at the issue of food security, including at the ASEAN and APEC levels. Ms. Tan admitted they did not have good answers yet. However, she said emerging solutions in the food-water nexus could hold some answers. Although Singapore did not produce very much food and could not be self-sufficient in food, it was trying to produce more, to act as a buffer during a supply crunch. AVA was intensively studying urban agriculture, including vertical agriculture and farming in multiple layers, to optimise land use. This was conceptually very attractive, and could mean high productivity and low space requirements.

Ms. Tan reported that tropical marine agriculture was another area of interest, and it could help ease over-fishing in the region. Despite being an island, Singapore lacked sea space for fishing due to the close proximity of Malaysia in the north, and the presence of busy sea-lanes in the south. AVA was therefore considering solutions like inland fish farming. She hoped investments in these areas could create innovations that would help meet food needs in other countries and cities. Singapore was working with its ASEAN neighbours to transfer agricultural R&D technology.

Mr. Brown noted that Singapore was known for NEWater, and asked if people were culturally ready for some of the provocative ideas raised so far, including recycling nutrients from human waste and using them in food production. Ms. Tan this was already happening in livestock farms in many places. Saying that much public education was needed, she recounted Singapore’s experience in promoting the acceptance of NEWater. For example, the Prime Minister drank it during the National Day Rally, Singapore’s equivalent to the US State of the Union address.

Mr. Brown asked Dr. Wichelns if he envisaged a reshaping of urban form, as agriculture moved closer to cities. Noting that it might be too expensive to move treated wastewater all the way out to the

countryside, he asked if we could imagine agriculture more closely integrated in urban and peri-urban areas? Dr. Wichelns said there was already quite a bit of informal agriculture in urban and peri-urban parts of the developing world. Ghana had more informal urban and peri-urban agriculture than formal agriculture in the countryside.

As cities expanded into the countryside, agriculture was found in patches within this expanded urban zone. This was also happening in the developed world. As cities like Detroit went into decline, spaces emerged where people could grow crops. Mr. Brown asked if this was enough to make a dent in global food needs. Dr. Wichelns felt it might not happen at that scale, but it was significant in terms of urban residents’ livelihood needs, and many depended on such activities.

In some developing countries, substantial fresh vegetables and niche products were supplied locally to cities, in ways they might not otherwise be able to access.

Mr. Brown noted the need to make space and water available for urban agriculture, and to avoid squeezing it out. He said wastewater recycling in Orange County competed with the use of nutrients embedded in wastewater, which could be used for urban agriculture.

In response, Dr. Wichelns raised a policy conundrum: if we did treat wastewater in developing world cities, how likely were the poor to use it, in terms of cost? Even as we sought to treat wastewater and improve its quality, we had to ensure the poor could still access it.

Mr. Brown asked Ms. Tan how Singapore integrated urban agriculture in the well-planned city-state. She said Singapore did have urban farms, within half an hour of the city centre. These were for key items like fish, eggs and vegetables. The government had set up a S$5 million food fund, for farmers to improve land productivity by, for example, using higher yield or faster growing crops. The Public Utilities Board had also asked AVA to use water more efficiently, and they were studying this. For instance, they was exploring closed loop vertical farming, where water was recycled within the farm.

A delegate from ecobusiness.com noted Singapore had some 30 golf courses and country clubs, and 20% of land was devoted to military use. There were also around 300 community gardens, and about 300 farms of varying size. He asked if this did not suggest there was more room for local food production, not just commercial farming, but also by residents as part of a bigger picture, so people connected with what they ate, and to improve their quality of life. Ms. Tan said AVA was looking at community gardens. Currently, they often involved herbs and flowers, but she said there seemed to be some potential there. She also noted Singapore housing estates had a lot of open spaces. During a food supply crunch, they were studying if these spaces could be put to use, and so were considering possibilities like setting up a seed stockpile.

173

Dr. Michael Quah Cheng-Guan Principal Fellow & Chief Scientist, Energy Studies Institute, Singapore

the food and the energy-water nexus: some challenges Dr. Quah said he would talk about carbohydrates and hydrocarbons, or food and fuel. Especially when discussing land use, we could see these operated in friction or fusion, in the food-versusfuel, or food-before-fuel debates. His presentation would be in three parts. First, he would describe the situation today, or ‘what’s all the fuss about?’ Next he would explore what ‘reality 101’ on the food-fuel nexus meant. Finally, he would issue a call for a middle way.

Dr. Quah said today’s energy situation was simple: we faced diverse market pressures. Our life-sustaining resources were decreasing, yet we continued to consume, and we faced climate change. Wealthy countries would throw money at the problem to develop alternative energy. But he said we had to be wiser than that and improve conventional systems, what one speaker called Very Large Scale Integration. If we looked at the interaction of systems, we might get simpler and cheaper answers.

Another issue was climate change. Here, we faced the intrusion of brackish water into agricultural land, exacerbating the issue.

The problem also had geopolitical dimensions. We might witness migrations when conventional fuel, largely from the Middle East, became too scarce and expensive. Southeast Asia’s growth in energy use would be amazing. As a US trading partner, the region was as large as Canada and Mexico combined, with more people than the European Union. Fossil fuels, especially gas, would be a major part of its energy supply.

Bioenergy would also be important.

Turning to what he called ‘reality 101’ on the food-fuel nexus, Dr. Quah said when fossil fuels ran out and we used renewable energy, we could envisage one of two extremes.

Either we returned to using energy wisely, or we used one-one hundredth of the energy we used now. He also spoke of the ‘diet perspective’ of energy. Only 10% of the US ‘electronic

174

diet’ depended on foreign sources, unlike over 60% of the ‘liquid diet’. All our energy alternatives, like nuclear, wind, solar or geothermal energy, only satisfied our electronic diet. Only biofuels could satisfy our liquid diet. Dr. Quah quipped that, unless we knew how to fly a 747 airliner on electrons, we needed mobility fuels.

On the food-fuel conundrum, Dr. Quah showed a chart comparing the energy needed to sustain a family of four for a day, against the energy in the fuel tank of a sedan car. He also showed charts depicting how much more energy a Sports Utility Vehicle consumed, compared with a typical public housing apartment and a detached house in Singapore. The energy used by the cars was very many times more than that needed by the family or homes. He asked the audience to keep this image in mind if they faced the dilemma of allocating land for food, or land for fuel. He added that this was why public transport was a critical way of solving the mobility problem. Dr. Quah said we were now transitioning from a high-density energy past and present to a less dense energy future, with carbon pricing and so on. He also presented a chart showing the water and land footprint for three types of bio-fuels, which varied from fuel to fuel and country to country.

In calling for a Middle Way approach to our problems, Dr. Quah said conservation and energy efficiency had to be our first priority. As US Energy Secretary Steven Chu said, this was not just low-hanging fruit, it was fruit lying on the ground and we had to pick it up before it went bad. Next, we had to balance our electronic diet – while shifting from fossil fuels to other sources – with our liquid diet, where biofuels would play a part. Third, we had to grasp nuances and go beyond sound bites and hype, to understand the technological and VLSI issues. Also, if land was unavailable, we had to explore water areas for biofuels. Finally, we had to minimise transport. In the long run, he said biofuels should be localised solutions.

Elaborating on the use of biofuels for our liquid diet, he noted how biofuel production consumed vast tracts of arable land and projected a chart showing the large area of land needed to produce one barrel of biofuel. Given this problem, he said we should include algae in our consideration of biofuels, which would be an option when land was unavailable. He added that algae was also useful in cleaning wastewater. Dr. Quah ended by saying technology was an absolutely necessary but totally insufficient condition. Systems of systems were important, in terms of how they interacted, and the laws of unintended consequences.

discussion Dr. Geng Anli (respondent) President, BioEnergy Society of Singapore Dr. Geng introduced the Bioenergy Society of Singapore as being around two years old. It aimed to gather interested people to exchange information and technology. Bioenergy was a very young discipline in Singapore. The government was cautious, as the field was young, challenging and had many problems. Bioenergy’s drivers were global warming, and rising energy demands due to global industrialisation and urbanisation.

First-generation bioenergy came from food crops like soybeans in the US, sugarcane in Brazil and corn in China.

This had threatened the food chain and caused many problems, including rising food prices. Work on secondgeneration bioenergy attempted to address these issues.

Biofuel referred to the energy produced by plant biomass, including food crops and non-food plants. Secondgeneration biofuel referred to non-food feedstock, like agricultural residue or wood waste, to reduce threats to food supply. Another aspect of this threat occurred when people used land and water that could have been used to cultivate food crops, to grow non-food biofuel crops instead. One solution was to use micro-algae and water, rather than land.

Microalgae cultivation could be integrated with wastewater treatment, as wastewater nutrients could be used to grow microalgae. Compared with other forms of renewable energy, the advantage of biofuel was that it could take the form of liquid fuel to meet transport needs.

Biofuel studies were still in a developing stage, as fossil fuels were still sufficient to meet our needs for now. But these studies were needed as one day we would exhaust fossil fuels, and no matter how expensive they were, we would need to turn to such new fuels. Except for biodiesel, which used less expensive technology and could already be implemented, biofuels today were generally expensive and were seen as a future scenario, especially second-generation biofuels.

Lacking oil or biomass, Singapore did not have the resources for biofuels. Given this fact, Dr. Geng still advocated the study of biofuels. While the city-state lacked the necessary space

and resources, she felt it could have the technology. She also noted the presence of neighbouring countries with good resources. Just as Singapore was the world’s third largest petroleum refinery centre, despite lacking oil, she argued it could similarly have biofuels refining and technology capacities in future.

Mr. Brown asked if the speakers acknowledged the threat to food supply that biofuels potentially posed, and the need to develop second-generation biofuels technologies, which did not threaten food supply. He said it seemed like food crops were the biofuel technologies that were useable now. What was to stop some parties from developing this, and diverting food crops to biofuels? Dr. Quah said it boiled down to economics, but ethics had to come into it also. He noted that, in parts of Southeast Asia, land was already being cleared to grow biofuels, also generating haze in the process.

He said another issue not often discussed in relation to biofuels was biodiversity. When land was devoted to a single crop, much biodiversity was lost. This could affect the crop over several plantings, as seen in the heights of palm oil crops, and this required replanting. He argued that regulatory attention was needed here. Second-generation biofuels were starting to show promise. For example, nonfood plants were cultivated in between food crops as part of intercropping. Another way was to use marginal lands.

He also pointed to an example in Detroit, where certain biomasses had helped with the remediation of land polluted by oil and other industrial runoff.

Mr. Brown asked how it could be that the public and also policymakers at the highest levels could be so uninformed about the issues presented in Dr Quah’s charts, like the critical distinction between electronic and liquid diets. Dr. Quah replied with anecdote about how it would take more than a thousand new nuclear plants to power the hydrogen fuel cell cars needed to replace the 200m conventional vehicles on American roads, or even at least 300 plants using very advanced fourth generation technology, which was more than double the 124 plants now in the country. He said this blew President Bush’s dreams of a hydrogen economy out the window. When he explained these numbers to West Point cadets, they did not react well.

175

discussion Mr. Paul Brown (moderator) Executive Vice-President, Global Market Development Group, Camp, Dresser and McKee Inc Mr. Brown raised the issue of VLSI and a ‘system of systems’ approach. Mr. Reiter felt that, conceptually, the issues were not very difficult, and involved the factors of water, energy, nutrients, heat, etc. Why was it so hard then to push these into policy and thinking? He argued that it was because of our myopia, i.e. ‘the idea that it is easier to control what I can control’. It was easier to optimise locally than globally. So this was not a cognitive problem. Dr. Quah agreed that this was a mindset problem. He noted that Singapore used solar photovoltaic systems, and everyone loved them, but when he proposed integrating these with water heating, it was not pursued. Another delegate replied that vested interests or lobbying could at play.

Mr. Reiter agreed that inertia was an issue. He made a case for government to ‘grease the skids’ and then get out of the way. He said that in Seattle, the government realised it was running out of hydropower, but nuclear power would be so expensive that people would find substitutes and demand would fall. Instead of building a nuclear plant, the government focused on selling substitutes and worked on demand-side measures. In hindsight, this was an obvious solution, but it took policies and subsidies to accomplish. The same thing applied to solid waste. Seattle was planning to build an incinerator, when someone suggested developing a recycling sector and making it work instead, which they did. This ended up being cheaper. He said this was not a Tom Friedman view of governments. Mr. Reiter felt that governments could do things, including provide leadership but also economically. If they were good at it, governments could defeat lobbies and vested interests.

Dr. Quah explained that, while solar energy seemed expensive in urban Singapore, it was not so in remote areas, including the ‘bottom billion’ of the global pyramid. It was cheaper to

176

use renewable energy in these areas than laying pipes and extending grids to bring energy there. The US army did this already, with its remote forward positions. He had given a talk to argue this was a way to bring power to people at the bottom. The only problem was that one could not build a ‘normal’ power industry and charge rates, because the power was free once the capital expenditure was paid for. When he explained this to the government, the reply was ‘I can use this to buy votes in rural areas’.

A delegate commented that Masdar City had a zero carbon model, using mostly solar energy. Its energy cost was about five times higher than the subsidised cost. But if demand fell 80%, people would pay the same energy bill. His point was that sometimes we focused on prices, rather than what people cared about. People did not care about prices, so long as they did not end up paying more. He then asked a question in relation to liquid versus electron diets, where the assumption was that the liquid diet had to stay the same. He asked if could we replace the liquid diet, or how much could we reduce it. Such a change could change the dynamic substantially, as with a shift to electric cars.

Dr. Quah agreed a shift to mass transit and electric cars was is possible in a city-state like Singapore. But in the US Mid-West, where there were long driving distances, the technology was inadequate. For now, certain modes of transport could not be done electronically. He also said we were returning to the age of sail. He said the US Military Sealift Command was studying augmented sails for ships and cargo vessels, for non-urgent transport.

Mr. Brown said he could see there were ideas to solve many problems, and those with money and will could achieve much for themselves. But he asked if the poor would be excluded. Could they earn the livelihoods to create adequate food demand? Would they be affected by biofuels and crop substitution? He asked how we could build our future so that all boats would rise. Dr. Wichelns said it was possible, but in the rich world it was difficult to keep the poor in focus. We

therefore relied heavily on development banks, aid agencies and foundations to address these issues. He said another issue was unfolding in the Mekong region. The Mekong River flowed through a number of countries. There was now a surge in hydropower investment there. Besides longstanding dams and the ones China had recently built, there were 50 to 60 dams in the planning stage. Could the poor retain their livelihoods and food in these areas? He asked if we needed all these dams. Much of the power would be exported.

Against this stood the displacement of tens of thousands of people from historic communities, and the risks associated with huge and complex projects. Mr. Brown extended this point and asked where regulation would come from to control developments with transborder implications, when we asked governments to sacrifice their immediate economic interests, in favour of longer term or cross-boundary interests.

Dr. Wichelns said, in theory, this should be the role of government. The problem was that we did not incorporate all the costs into our calculations, including non-financial costs.

Mr. Reiter noted the world was now small enough that it was like one country with rich and poor elements, a country with no government. He did not know what the solution was, but did not think the UN could solve this. It was a strategic issue for the planet.

But it was changing as time went by, and was now investing in a lot of projects. Her point was that if a government was not taking action, we could try to influence change, such as though this conferences. Integration was necessary, and it was happening. Bioenergy was a kind of waste recycling and in Singapore we could use horticultural waste, or think about wastewater. Ms. Tan remarked that we did not usually talk about energy, water and food in the same breath. For her, one takeaway from Dr. Wichelns, especially in terms of nutrients and how not to let them got to waste. Mr. Skinner said he was inspired by the science. Sometimes he thought that if governments knew about these things they could or would do something. Unfortunately there was much countervailing and lobbying. He concluded that he was a believer in the power of the people. We had to make sure the majority of people were educated, for example by getting people in Laos to understand and say ‘80% of our protein comes from fish, and these dams jeopardise that’. Mr. Brown then thanked the Centre for Liveable Cities for organising what he called a breakthrough session on this subject.

Mr Brown ended by asking each speaker to share the most enlightening thing they absorbed from the session. Dr. Quah noted Dr. Wichelns’ presentation and mused we had used human waste in the past, and he wondered if we could do it again. Dr. Wichelns said he was inspired by the fact that we could focus on livelihoods, talk about people, and recognise that what we needed was leadership. The young people in the room, and at the summit, also inspired him.

He concluded that we had strategies and technologies, but what we needed most was leadership. Mr. Reiter spoke of the human nexus. He said he learned a lot from Dr. Wichelns, especially about agriculture, livelihoods and the poor. Dr Geng said that, a few years ago, the Singapore government did not fund bioenergy research, preferring solar energy instead.

177

178

expert panel session 6

enhancing cities’ biodiversity

179

expert panel session 6

urban biodiversity and ecology for sustainable cities More than 50% of the world’s population lived in cities and the figure was expected to grow to 70% by 2050. To improve their liveability, cities would need to be planned for ecological sustainability, to enable residents to enjoy nature and biodiversity, even as urbanisation intensified. This session brought together the people who played a role in shaping cities, including policy makers, planners, administrators, designers and researchers.

Left to right: Mr. Ng Lang, Mr. Herbert Dreiseitl, Prof. Mark J. McDonnell, Prof. Bruce Clarkson, Prof. Leo Tan Wee Hin, Prof. Wang Xiangrong, Ms. Gwendolyn Hallsmith and Dr. Ahmed Djoghlaf 180

Prof. Leo Tan Wee Hin (moderator)

Prof. Bruce Clarkson

Director (Special Projects), Faculty of Science, National University of Singapore, Chairman, Garden City Fund, and President, Singapore National Academy of Science

Director, Centre for Biodiversity and Ecology Research, University of Waikato

opening remarks Prof. Tan stressed the changes brought about by urbanisation. He said that when he was a student, ‘biodiversity’ connoted rural areas. But in the span of a generation, we now used it with reference to cities. He described the urbanisation of biodiversity by referring to the roads between Shanghai and Suzhou, Los Baños and Manila, and Jakarta and Bogor.

All used to be agricultural farms and ponds but had now been transformed into paved ground. Boasting one of Asia’s oldest botanical gardens, Bogor used to have a cooler climate. But its temperature was now 2 to 3 degrees Celsius higher than before.

Maintaining biodiversity in the face of urbanisation would be challenging. More than 70% of the world would live in urban areas by 2050. There would be 30 mega cities by 2030, each with 10 to 15 million residents. How could we sustain economies, food security, health, recreation, and education, while maintaining that ecosystem services that biodiversity provided? What roles did cities and various stakeholders have in preserving biodiversity? Prof. Tan said the Copenhagen talks failed to resolve that countries would act to prevent global temperatures from rising more than 2 to 4 degrees Celsius by the century’s end. There was therefore a pressing need to explore how to preserve biodiversity for a sustainable future.

bringing indigenous biodiversity back into New Zealand cities: the role of research Prof. Clarkson said New Zealand had enormous biodiversity within a small country. 87% of the people were city-dwellers. But instead of Asian-type megacities, they lived in mini cities. As the last major land mass to be occupied by humans, the nation had a unique ecosystem of many indigenous birds and plants, but only three different species of bats for mammals.

There were extreme differences in biodiversity preservation across cities, from less than 1% indigenous biodiversity in Napier, to 8.5% in New Plymouth. None were very high by global standards. Seven cities had virtually no biodiversity in or around the city. Others, like the coastal port of Nelson, had little indigenous biodiversity in the city, but 20km from the city, 30% of the landscape had indigenous vegetation. Such data helped policymakers set targets for recovering biodiversity. Most cities set an indigenous biodiversity target of 10%. Prof. Clarkson also gave the example of Hamilton, where only 71 out of 9,000 ha in town had indigenous biodiversity. But even such small specks were very important, as they could contain endangered species.

Hammond Bush, a small area beside the Waikato River, was home to the Swamp Maire, the only member of the Syzygium genus found in New Zealand, and the long tailed native bat.

Prof. Clarkson stressed we had to understand the interactions between city and peri-urban areas before proceeding with restoration. Hamilton galley was an example of a good opportunity for restoration. 750ha of the city comprised such galley environments, which were streams that feed into the Waikato River. There was much potential for ‘blue-veining’ and ‘green-veining’, to stitch different parts together and restore preexisting ecosystems.

He also advocated restoring indigenous ecosystems, not introducing novel ones. This was done via evidence-gathering techniques, like pollen analysis and macrofossil analysis.

All the right native ingredients had to add up in the right order and in the right place, while managing problem-causing exotics.

A low forest with complete canopy cover could be restored in

181

10 to 15 years, but there was a need to keep returning to make enhancements. With the forest restored, some species would naturally return to the ecosystem.

There was now a long-term intergeneration project to build natural heritage parks, to restore the region’s complete indigenous diversity. Hamilton had planned a 60ha park, of which 15ha would be up by 2010. Scientific techniques, like mulching or paper discs, played a key role here. Prof.

Clarkson hoped native birds would return to cities, but noted the necessary pre-conditions: around 100ha of high quality forest in the city, and 1,000ha in peri-urban areas. Native birds were unused to predators like the domestic cat in cities.

Identifying the main predators was key, as low reproduction rates could not cope with these predation rates. Other important factors included tracking bird movements, habitats, pest control and public participation in research.

He concluded that research from national, regional and local levels was critical, as what worked in one city may not in another. Key sites had to be restored alongside the reconstruction of new ecosystems. Research occurred across three time frames: [1] concurrent with action, [2] in advance, to gather the right data before starting, and [3] afterward, to measure success.

Prof. Wang Xiangrong Director, Research Centre for Urban Eco-Planning and Design, Fudan University, and Regional Vice-chair of East Asia, IUCN Commission on Education and Communication

global change and strategies for sustainable estuary city: Shanghai Prof. Wang Xiangrong observed the Earth was experiencing climate changes, with precipitation and temperatures rising since the 1900s. This had led to environmental issues like flooding, and many species

182

facing extinction. Most of China faced rising temperatures, especially in the last 50 years. Due to climate change, rising sea levels could submerge river deltas. Parts of the Pearl River delta would be joined with rising sea levels. If the sea rose 30cm, about 1,154sqkm could be submerged, while a 100cm rise could affect 6,520sqkm. Submerged areas in the Pearl, Yangtze and Yellow River deltas would lose much income.

If the affected area in the Yangtze River delta covered 898sqkm, 1.3 billion Yuan would be lost.

Prof. Wang felt the drive to cut carbon dioxide emissions, like the 2009 Copenhagen talks, could change urban development. He described a ‘S3 city’ as having a good location for development, and a unique natural ecosystem, rich in biological productivity. The impact of climate change on such areas was direct and severe; research into such cities was very important and urgent. Prof. Wang had chosen to study Shanghai, which created 1/16th of China’s GDP. Shanghai was a strategically located megalopolis with profound international influence. Its urbanisation ratio was about 70%, and it had a T-shaped developing structure. Given its impact and influence on the world, the development of Shanghai as a sustainable city was important not just to the city or Yangtze River delta, but to the world at large, especially other S3 cities.

With urban and economic growth, Shanghai now faced environmental issues, like scarce land resources as available agricultural land decreased. The city’s urban development and land use from 1947 to 2004 could be divided into four periods: stable growth (1947–1964), slow growth (1964–1979), fast growth (1979–1993), and high-speed growth (1993–2004).

Rapid growth had caused higher mean temperatures, as city temperatures grew, while temperatures differences between urban and rural areas also rose. Rising sea levels caused problems on the beaches, like water erosion, flooding and storm tidal impacts on farmland and forest systems.

In terms of greenery, there were 7,1795ha of green land in the city in 2007, 4,168ha of public green land, and a 38.5% green cover ratio. There was 12.5sqm of park areas per hectare of city-centre land, with 1,200 plant species in total.

Two other national nature reserves occupied 15% of land.

Masterplanning for green space had been done, and targets had been set until 2020.

Climate change assessments had studied coastline area protection, highland ecosystem protection, water resource protection, green space planning, no-carbon city planning, management policies and public participation. Prof Wang also advocated the Shanghai Expo’s 5G concept: green landscapes, green resources, green transport, green buildings and green consumption, with regard to green space planning. He concluded that, under pressure from global climate change, Shanghai had chosen an alternative path to sustainability. It promoted environmental protection and ecological construction. Such issues were being studied by the authorities and public, which could help mend the relationship between man and environment.

Prof. Mark J. Mcdonnell Director, Australia Research Centre for Urban Ecology, University of Melbourne

urban biodiversity and conservation for sustainable cities Prof McDonnell lamented there was much resistance to urban ecology. It was poorly understood and lacked funding or support from academia, municipalities and places like Singapore.

He stressed that urban biodiversity was not lost; global biodiversity hotspots coincided with cities. This was because people incorporated diverse water and topography environments that they liked in their cities, creating an amazing juxtaposition between cities and biodiversity.

Over 80% of Australians lived in the five main state capitals.

Melbourne had 4 million residents in 2004. It was a sprawling American-style city, taking over much space from native vegetation to create new urban ecosystems. Tremendous biodiversity still existed in cities, where species like kangaroos, parrots and orchids could be found.

Prof. McDonnell felt people who worked on urban ecology were schizophrenic. They wanted to restore original environments, but he believed cities were here to stay.

Cities were new and unique entities, with ecologically and socially diverse ecosystems that were important to keep.

Humans were a critical part of that. His felt urban ecologist should study these systems, rather than lament the loss of original vegetation.

Urban ecology integrated disciplines like urban forestry, sociology and landscape architecture. Besides studying animals, plants, he said we had to understand nutrient cycles and energy flows, and how human activity affected and facilitated these in cities. Prof. McDonnell then introduced three essential elements of an urban ecology toolkit. The first was natural heritage conservation; there were still things that deserved to be preserved. Harvard Professor E.O. Wilson had spoken of biophilia – the idea that, by their very nature, humans needed plants and animals. A sterile world without plants and animals was not one many humans want to live in. Next, he mentioned ecosystem services, like pollution filtration and the extraction of clean water, while the final tool referred to cultural services.

To find out international urban plant extinction rates, 22 cities in 12 countries on five continents were studied. The results grouped cities into three categories. Type 1 comprised European cities like Vienna, which had lost most of their flora before 1800. In general, only 10% of their flora became extinct every century, but this low rate could be due to the fact that much flora was already extinct before people began to study them. Type 2 cities, like Singapore or New York, suffered less flora loss before 1800, albeit still a significant amount. They had higher extinction rates per century. Auckland, Melbourne and Los Angeles were Type 3 cities, and they did not experience much extinction per century.

Every city faced ‘extinction debt’. Prof. McDonnell explained that deterministic extinction, as defined by David Tilman, referred to the proportion of extant species that were expected to become extinct. Such predictions enabled early action. If extinction debt grew, more species would be

183

lost than expected. He did foresee much extinction debt in Singapore, but predicted Melbourne would lose 40% of existing plant species in the next century.

In Melbourne, people preserved unique little patches of nature.

These were probably not large enough for long-term plant and animal survival, due to external factors like bushfires.

There was 1.6% of remnant vegetation in the inner city, with an average size of 1.4ha, and 16% of vegetation remained outside the city, with an average size of 6.8ha. The proportion of native vegetation was a strong predictor of extinction rates, especially in newer, Type 3 cities. Historic landscape transformation was another strong predictor of species extinction rates, suggesting the extinction debts of many Type 1 and Type 2 cities.

Restoration and conservation were needed to address extinction debt, especially in Type 3 cities. Cities around the world, including Singapore, had to act now and conduct management action to prevent or reduce further destruction of remnant vegetation. He lamented that people in Melbourne were trying to get rid of the few remnant patches for things like bicycle tracks. Prof. McDonnell advocated de-fragmenting our urban landscapes, to create living networks that connected remnant patches. This would let species grow and hopefully reduce extinction debt. He stressed this was less about connectivity than reducing barriers. Structures should be built in a way that did not disrupt animal movements. This meant smarter road placement, creating new habitats, and using horticulture to create habitats that could be suitable for other plants and animals, even if native plants could no longer grow.

Prof. McDonnell remarked he felt like an urban ecology godfather, but he had taken many hits and observed much malignant tension. For example, he spoke of the tension between temporal scales, as ecological time scales worked in tens and hundreds of years, and needed patience.

There was also tension between nature values, as some ecologists felt weed patches were useless. He stressed the need to think of urban areas as living networks; patches and connections were valuable for many reasons, like

184

ecosystems services, maintaining biodiversity, education or human wellbeing. As an example of the tension in cultural values, he recounted how a New Zealand woman told him she ‘really loves the butterflies but hates the caterpillars’.

This pointed to a need for better public education. There was also tension between research and management, as he felt there was never enough time to do research.

To maintain biodiversity, we needed solid ecological, social and physical knowledge of urban ecosystems. Prof McDonnell underlined the need for ecologically sound planning, management and conservation, incorporating science in all that we did. He advocated far-reaching environmental education programmes, so that the public could understand they were a part of a larger urban ecosystem.

Prof. Richard Corlett Professor of Terrestrial Ecology, Department of Biological Sciences, National University of Singapore

how can native biodiversity be enhanced in urban Singapore?

Prof. Corlett said Singapore’s land use had changed drastically in the last 200 years. Primary forests were replaced from the 19th century, first by crops, then secondary vegetation, and then crops again, with rubber plantations covering 40% of the island at one point. At least a third of Singapore’s known non-marine native species in 1819 were now extinct. Around half the studied surviving species were now endangered. As Singapore lacked a hinterland, any species lost in the urban area was non-recoverable. Very few of these were globally extinct. Most surviving species were confined to small nature reserves, particularly primary forests. Primary forests and older secondary forests were dominated by native species, while the new secondary forests that emerged in the last 20 to 30 years were dominated by exotic species. Open areas in urban Singapore were largely dominated by alien species, including animals. Prof. Corlett attributed this high extinction rate to the number of alien species and the country’s small size.

Alien species had ecological costs and benefits. The rain tree, an alien from tropical America, had eight different native species of epiphytes in it, some having up to 12 (epiphytes being non-parasitic plants that grew on other plans). The rain tree was Singapore’s best tree for epiphytes. Native squirrels also liked its pods, while native bees and moths visited its flowers. It was a prime example of an alien that interacted well with natives. In contrast, the African mahogany was an alien species that did not support epiphytes or mammals, for reasons unknown.

Prof. Corlett said Singapore had an international obligation to conserve its native flora and fauna. This goal had support from the government and public, even if it lacked full popular understanding. Given the small area of remaining forests, increasing the diversity and abundance of native species in urban areas would potentially make a large contribution to nature conservation. Native species in urban areas help to make Singapore unique.

Nonetheless, alien species still had a role to play. Many had characteristics not otherwise found locally. For instance, native trees lacked the rain tree’s broad spreading crown.

Three or four coastal trees had crowns, but they were not comparable. Ever-flowering shrubs, like the bougainvillea, and low-maintenance turf grass were also non-native. Nonnatives might also grow more easily in urban environments, and they could provide ecological services like the rain tree. Alien plants could generally be as good as natives in providing shelter, support and nest sites. Native animals ate their nectar, pollen and fruits, albeit not leaves and seeds, as much as native plants. However, alien species risked being invasive, supported by widespread planting.

Prof. Corlett questioned how far we could restore native biodiversity, arguing full restoration was impossible. He said, ‘there are limits to which a tropical rainforest is compatible with a population of 4 million people’. The key lay in reducing contrast between the original 1819 tropical rainforest, and current urban areas. For this, he suggested three practical steps.

First, we should reduce the structural contrast between urban areas and tropical rainforest. Specifically, we should minimise totally open areas. While we might need turf grass for playing fields, he felt we now had more than we needed.

In contrast, multilayered planting schemes with woody plants attracted more native birds and mammals. Indeed, this was already happening. While Singapore was already an urban savannah 20 years ago, with isolated trees and close mown grass, there was now much denser planting, and the tree cover had effectively joined up. The second step was to control invasive alien species. Currently, Singapore only controlled aliens for causing economic or public health problems, not ecological ones.

Finally, we should use more native species in urban planting.

Of 690 native tree species, only a dozen were widely planted.

This neglect of native species was self-reinforcing, as data on horticultural characteristics and planting materials would be scarce. Prof. Corlett added that the environmental contrast in the city-centre was too great to grow native species there, although not all natural habitats in 1819 were shaded and humid. Some natural habitats were subjected to water stress, like coastal vegetation on cliffs and beaches. These included about 150 wood species. The rainforest canopy was also as dry as any urban area in Singapore.

Prof. Corlett said NUS and NParks were working on a project to encourage planting native species in urban areas, called Enhancing the Native Urban Biodiversity of Singapore. For this project, Hortpark had planted about 120 native species of trees, shrubs and herbs in a small demonstration plot. A guidebook would be produced, and commercial and private gardeners were encouraged to use more native species. The plot would be monitored for wild life, and replicated in a more remote area for further studies on whether they can attract native wildlife.

185

Mr. Ng Lang CEO, National Parks Board, Singapore

Singapore – making space for biodiversity ‘Urban sprawl is never a problem in Singapore, for the simple reason that we have no space to sprawl.’

Making this statement, Mr. Ng Lang explained that land scarcity was a top policymaking consideration, and it applied to biodiversity as well. The solutions Singapore sought were not in textbooks, as they normally talked about the conservation of huge landmasses, not cities. He then went on to describe some of Singapore’s biodiversity solutions.

In 1986, when Singapore had 2.7 million people, its green cover was 36%. 20 years on, there were 4.6 million people, but green cover had grown to 47%. Protected nature reserves covered 4.5% of the city-state. By keeping track of biodiversity rich areas and working with city planners, land could be sensitively developed to mitigate biodiversity loss. Singapore’s largest nature reserve was one of only two protected tropical rainforests in a city setting. Meanwhile, a wetland park in the north of the island was a pit stop for thousands of birds on the East Asian - Australasian Flyway, flying from Siberia to Australia every year from September to March. Chek Jawa, an intertidal mudflat rich in biodiversity, was earmarked for reclamation in 2000. After the community petitioned to save it, the government decided to suspend development as long as possible and it was now a most popular weekend getaway for those seeking to escape the city.

Mr. Ng noted that Singapore was known not only for commerce, but also its rich biodiversity. A photo exhibition on biodiversity was held in the premier shopping district to encourage people to visit nature reserves rather

186

than shopping malls all the time. New species were constantly being discovered; a 2007 survey found 35 new species previously not known to exist in Singapore.

Mr. Ng described himself as naively optimistic about his organisation, NParks. He felt “the word ’endangered’ doesn’t have any sense in a city setting. Everything other than humans, rats and crows are endangered… just save what [we] can and celebrate whatever [we] can save.”

First, Mr. Ng described how NPark’s tried to integrate space. In the 1980s, a small piece of land was cut off from the Central Catchment Area due to building work.

Biodiversity there would die off if it remained isolated. A bridge connecting the two sides, Eco Link, would therefore be built for animals to cross over and exchange genetic material. Extending this idea, an island-wide network of park connectors would also be built. The aim was to build 300km by 2015, with half completed by Oct 2010. These connectors were also greenways – cycling tracks that were green, rather than built over habitats. Research into the island-wide park connector network created opportunities to link different areas and enrich biodiversity throughout the island.

Canal walls would also be broken and greened. Mr. Ng said NParks had been working with PUB for the last two years to create recreation space in a densely packed city. As a source of life, water was very good for biodiversity. It was revealing that within a month of canal works, birds and lizards returned. The project was intended to continue for the next 20 years. In Bishan Park, the concrete canal walls would be broken to allow a river to meander through the park. Such projects would be pursued throughout Singapore.

NParks also tried to introduce greenery in buildings. City planners had a scheme to encourage new buildings to do this, and it had yielded results. They would also incentivise rooftop garden development on existing buildings, by subsidising half the cost. NParks aimed to have 9ha of highrise gardens in three years, and to build communal rooftop gardens on multi-storey car parks.

Existing parks and nature reserves would also be enriched.

NParks managed 10% of Singapore’s land in the form of parks and nature reserves. It now sought parks with suitable conditions for giant forestry in a city setting. Yishun Park had a few giant trees, including dipterocarps, which had 700 species in the original forest. 10% were now localised in Yishun Park, and they are growing very well in the urban environment. This raised our understanding what could be planted in a city environment, at a time when many countries were felling trees.

Mr. Ng also described how Singapore’s Urban Redevelopment Authority had built bridges to link two ridgelines. This has become a popular destination, attracting private sector funding, like a million dollars from Sembcorp.

Native orchids were also reintroduced to the urban environment and were propagating well. A Frenchman, whose wife worked at Nestle in Singapore, recently reintroduced oriental pied hornbills, which had been extinct in Singapore for nearly 100 years. As a bird expert, he believed Singapore was so well-groomed that its trees lacked holes for hornbills to inhabit. He designed a hornbill box, which attracted hornbills to live in them.

NParks was working on important taxonomy groups, like dragonflies and butterflies, as they are bioindicators of healthy ecosystems, only appearing if air and water were clean. It was important to better understand the two groups, catalogue existing local species and learn how to create their habitats. An American woman who loved Singapore’s environment wanted to give back to Singapore gathered volunteers and raised S$100,000 to start a butterfly trail in the main shopping district. While sceptics were not sure if it would work, Mr. Ng once more chose to be ‘naively optimistic’. An architect who was well-versed in butterflies was also starting a butterfly garden. He gathered a few staff and donations to build an enclosure to breed native butterflies. It had also become a training site for people interested in creating butterfly habitats.

To have more native plants in Singapore, Prof. Corlett created a showcase where people could learn how to use them in landscaping. More native trees could also be planted; half the trees planted in the last few years were natives. NParks was also going to award the Green Mark for parks, a certification of biodiversity and environmental friendliness. The assessment was based on how parks were run, but they were trying to extend it to park design and development.

Mr. Ng stressed the need for community involvement and public education. He was shocked to get an e-mail asking for a mango tree to be cut down as it attracted bats. Community in Bloom was one of Singapore’s most successful outreach programmes. Under it, NParks worked with the people to start and sustain community gardens.

Close to 400 gardens had been started over the last five years. It was a self-sustaining and self-propagating movement, as community leaders would then go around to help others start their own gardens. A permanent resident from India started a movement to get people to plant trees.

A tree could be planted for S$200, and a few thousand had been planted so far. Mr. Ng also underlined the importance of education and reaching youths. NParks aimed to add nature education to school curricula in a few years.

NParks hoped to create an index to let cities benchmark their biodiversity against others, and to learn from global best practices. An expert panel had devised a draft index two years ago, and this had been tested over 30 cities. Another expert panel would finalise the index in a couple of days, which would then be formally adopted by October.

187

Ms. Gwendolyn Hallsmith Director, Planning and Community Development, Montpelier, Vermont

community engagement and the role of communities in biodiversity conservation in cities Ms. Hallsmith stated that public participation was a requirement, not an option, in governance today. She noted how Bill McKibben said the distinction between 20th and 21st century environmentalism was one atom, i.e. between carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide. Carbon monoxide was a huge 20th century environmental issue, but it was ‘amendable to technocratic centralised solutions’ like catalytic converters in cars or power plant scrubbers.

Carbon dioxide and biodiversity were less amendable. They needed involvement from all sectors, and different issues needed different types of participation. Effective leaders had to know these differences; they also had to acquire new skills for getting the public involved.

Non-government organisations were not typical, hierarchical organisations. They were self-organising systems driven by people passionate about their work. Hierarchy-free governance was sometimes challenging. As leaders and participants, we needed new skills to make them work. She then listed four types of governance and how they shaped public participation.

Unilateral decision-making, or ‘being the benevolent dictator’, was easiest for officials with power. It was typically appropriate only in crisis situations. On a ship heading for an iceberg, passengers did not seek a consensus – a boss simply gave instructions. A step removed from this was managerial decision-making, where highly skilled professionals

188

made decisions based on their expertise, with some public consultation. But experts very much still managed things.

Consultative decision-making was yet another step removed.

Here, the public was consulted to get their inputs but it was still a step away from real participation. Governments either accepted inputs or not. Finally, the collaborative model was what 21st century governance required. The public was empowered to help make decisions. They would be involved in large stakeholder processes, or sit on boards to learn how to make good decisions for the community.

These theoretical governance models had to be applied to biodiversity conservation. Most ecologists were more comfortable in the forest than in getting people involved in decision-making, and scientists liked to think they knew best. But if an urban biodiversity plan was to be created, Ms. Hallsmith felt people should be told how it involved them, and have their opinions heard. She held up Newburgh in New York State as an example of how this worked. It used inclusive community planning to address severe racial tensions. In a racially divided community – one-third African-American, onethird Hispanic and one-third Caucasian – everyone gathered to discuss how to solve the problem. Although a challenge, it actually worked.

Youth engagement was also critical. In Burlington, Vermont, youths were asked for their vision of the city in 100 years.

Some of the best ideas came from teens. Ms. Hallsmith got youths in a South African city to devise an economic development plan. It involved getting, repairing and selling bicycles. The youths were trained in decision-making and business management. Nearly 10 years later, it was still a successful bicycle shop and youth training programme.

She also worked in Bulgaria’s Yantra River basin and Romania’s Arges River basin. These were both previously authoritarian states, unused to public involvement. But the cities were trained for a week in participatory planning, and the government eventually changed the laws on river basin management planning, which helped distribute the waters around the rivers more equitably throughout the watershed and has now demonstrably improved the water quality.

All this pointed to how integrated our communities were.

To improve human and environmental health and biodiversity, we had to consider a whole range of community processes, like how the community governed itself, how social networks worked, degrees of personal empowerment and social responsibility, etc. Without this, problems would worsen despite our efforts. The people had to learn how dynamic systems worked. They had to learn conflict management, innovation, listening skills, group processes, servant leadership, effective collaboration, and more. Vermont was a small US state with only 500,000 citizens. Montpelier, the capital, only had 8,000 residents. She acknowledged community participation techniques were easier in small places. But she had also worked in Calgary, which had a million people. She found her techniques worked if they were broken into smaller parts for the city’s neighbourhoods and communities.

The difference between a normal and a sustainable masterplan was time. A sustainable plan looked 100 years into the future, not five to ten years as a typical masterplan did. She modelled Montpelier’s planning methodology on the Earth Charter, and the idea of sustainability: ‘meeting our needs without denying future generations their ability to meet their needs’.

To engage the public, Ms. Hallsmith said they first created a large stakeholder group and got city council to endorse a commitment to it. A steering committee was made up of councillors, planning commissioners and elected working committee chairs. They also got students involved as the plan had a very important youth component. By chance, they got a big grant from a family foundation at the start of the project, to help implement the plan. So while they were planning, they gave out small planning grants to people who were more doers than planners. People generally fall into those two categories, and it was important to keep both busy. The planners could do long-range work while doers could help make things better now.

The stakeholder process involved regular monthly meetings, and they made the meetings fun. It was not enough to get the people in a room and talk; they had to be involved. They played a game at one meeting, where they taped a map of the city to the floor and got people to stand in the neighbourhoods and meet each other if they did not already know each other.

Ms. Hallsmith and her team did much community outreach to ensure everybody had a voice. At special events, they turned city hall into a time machine. People could go up the elevator and travel 100 years into the past, or go down and give their vision of the future. They also publicised their events widely in the media, and got local celebrities involved. She felt similar techniques could be used for biodiversity planning.

BioBlitz was a big project where scientists from across the US visited Montpelier for 24 hours and got the community involved in identifying all the species they could in that time.

They identified 1,500 species and had a great time doing it, literally all night. She added we had to support the ‘natural affinity really between the people and your community and the natural world’.

Every year in early spring, an All Species Day Parade was fully organised by the Montpelier community. Artists made costumes for the children, who were dressed as frogs, butterflies, bats, bumblebees, deer, bears, etc. It began at the state house steps and it proceeded down the street with a festival at the end. This was a real celebration of the biodiversity in their community and it had a spiritual dimension as the people had a strong connection with nature.

Another event they were planning was a Council of All Beings.

Originally pioneered in Australia, people would go to their state house and speak in a decision-making forum on behalf of the species in their community and the world, giving a voice to the species in the decision-making processes. She hoped this would add more credibility and weight to the voices of nature.

189

Mr. Bob Harvey Mayor, Waitakere City, New Zealand

transformation of Waitakere into an eco-city In 1992, Waitakere City had just been formed from a number of suburbs, but unemployment ran high, graffiti was everywhere, and it needed leadership and cultural change. Mr. Harvey dreamt he could make the city work if only he could turn the community around, create jobs and create pride. He ran for mayor on the idea of an eco-city, the idea that it could be better if people appreciated the environment. Other cities always invited companies to “build your business here”, but he told his people they could build their lives there, and he was elected. In 2006, Waitakere won the UN Livcom award for best city, and in 2008 he won the individual award for his commitment to peace over 20 years, and his city’s 18-year commitment to sustainability.

When he became mayor in 1992, Mr. Harvey gathered all 700 staff to work on the ecocity idea. He told them he would set up three councils, one each for Màori, youths and ethnic groups. He could not believe they had the courage to do this in 1992, and most of them still worked for him.

In a 1994 report on Mayor Harvey, CNN described Waitakere as ‘a collection of suburban neighbourhoods and strip commercial developments, the classic post war community that gobbles rural land and fights its insatiable addiction to the automobile’. However, Mr. Harvey insisted on reducing carloads with a surcharge on single passenger commuters. He also invested in mass transit projects instead of road construction and repair. He refused to build more

190

infrastructures, and let his people choose if they wanted to be jammed up for miles. He felt people did not understand the advantages of rail and car-pooling. People’s egos were also linked to the idea of ‘my car, my drive, my town’. In the CNN report, he said he wanted to halve the number of cars by the end of the century. He added that since doing that interview, Waitakere had been transformed with terrific planning. From a few fish and chips shops and small villages, it was now is a sustainable living environment.

Mr. Harvey created movie studios similar to Hollywood out of sheds that used to store apples and pears. Many movie productions, like The Piano and Narnia, have used it, creating NZ$1.3 billion in earnings for New Zealand, and 2,000 jobs for young people. Built out of nothing, the movie business had made a huge difference. He did it to create jobs, and matched it with some other jobs that came along, like boat building for the movies as sets and props. He thought it important to create industry where there had not been one before. Waitakere was now a movie city. The boat building business also took off and created 1,000 jobs for young people. The craftsmanship of young New Zealanders was of world standards, and he felt this was a new industry that was sustainable, if it was kept clean.

Unique-looking infrastructure and sculptures were also being built in parks. In the first five to six years, the city was refaced with beauty and style. Everyone was invited to take part and do something that mattered. They created the biggest cleanup in New Zealand. He gave the example of a man who went to every single river and stream and pulled out rubbish. He had pulled out 20 shipping containers of rubbish, including shopping trolleys, cars, refrigerators and plastic. There were 5,000 weekly volunteers who cleaned the city, making it come alive. He also saved the ranges with a massive petition to Parliament. It took 40 years to save the pristine wilderness.

Thanks to an Act of Parliament, infrastructure could not be built there.

In another interview that he showed the audience, Mr. Harvey declared: ‘it is economically viable to build sustainable buildings. In fact, there is only one way to build a building. It has got to be eco-friendly and built out of reusable materials.’

The interview looked at a green building he was involved in.

At NZ$36 million, this totally green building cost about 5% more than regular construction. A layer of native plants filtered the rain and turned out purified storm water. Water collected from the roof was used to flush the toilets. The design exploited daylight and natural ventilation. Built of concrete, glass, plywood and cedar, it was also a transport hub. The 700 employees had only 120 parking lots, with most opting use carpools, trains, buses and bicycles. Mr Harvey said this was what eco-cities were about: smart technology and public involvement.

He ended by saying that Waitakere was ethnically diverse.

15% of people were Màori, 15% were Polynesian Pacific Islanders, and 12% were Asian. Yet there was no racial tension – just a beautiful city.

Dr. Ahmad Djoghlaf Executive Secretary, UN Convention on Biological Diversity

sustainable cities for the future In May, the UN issued the third Global Biodiversity Outlook, a report on the state of biodiversity in 2010.

Dr. Djoghlaf reported that result was not good. The rate of extinction today was 1,000 times higher than the natural rate. No country achieved the goal set by 110 Heads of State in 2002, to substantially reduce the rate of biodiversity lose by 2010.

Worse, biodiversity loss was occurring in every country, and at unprecedented rates in some places.

89% of country reports that the UN received identified climate change as a threat to biodiversity. This confirmed another study, submitted to the Copenhagen Summit, of the most scientifically advanced review of the nexus between climate change and biodiversity. That report said 10% of non-terrestrial and marine biodiversity would disappear with each degree Celsius increase in surface temperatures. The Copenhagen meeting aimed to limit temperature rises to 2% by end 2050. Dr. Djoghlaf said ‘it is the first time in the history of humans and the planet that one species amongst the million species has decided to kill 20% of all [other] species’.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change confirmed that by the century’s end, 30% of all non-human species would disappear, due solely to climate change.

The report confirmed the main threat to biodiversity was a lack of public awareness about the importance of ecosystem services and biodiversity. A European Union survey last year showed that 60% of Europeans had not heard of, or understood, biodiversity. Europe was one of the world’s most advanced continents – well-educated, well-informed, and wellconnected. Yet 30% of its people were totally unfamiliar with biodiversity. The same study by Japan’s Environment Ministry found 30% of Japanese had not heard of biodiversity. People were aware of nature but not the value of protecting it. Sheer ignorance or indifference was a big threat to biodiversity, and Dr. Djoghlaf felt it also applied to policymakers.

Youth were also of concern. A 10-nation survey of six to 12-year-olds, including India, Japan, Australia and Germany, found 46% preferred television or videogames, but only 6% liked the outdoors. A study of UK children found 30% could not tell bees from wasps, and some confused them with flies. Dr. Djoghlaf felt that children ‘completely de-linked with nature… cannot protect something that [they] do not know and… cannot value something that [they] do not respect’.

Dr. Djoghlaf identified unprecedented urbanisation as another challenge. London had a million inhabitants in the 1800s, 15 others hit the mark in the 1900s, and now it was 400.

By 2050, 400 cities in India alone would have at least a million

191

people. France’s biodiversity status was studied every four years, and growing urbanisation had been identified as the main cause of loss. 60,000ha of land was lost annually to construction. 1sqm of Swiss land was lost every second to concrete. However, 95% of urban spread was occurring in developing countries, which still had some biodiversity to protect, so the battle could still be won if we made changes.

Change was not just a matter for mayors and ministers, Dr. Djoghlaf said. The challenge was to create partnerships between central and local government heads. With participation from more than 300 mayors, such a plan of action would be submitted to the ministers and would be part of this new vision for 2011. He added it was important to establish a biodiversity preservation goal but it was more important to agree on implementation.

Dr. Djoghlaf thanked NParks and Singapore for spearheading the urban biodiversity index. He also lauded their role in one of the largest education programmes across some 95 schools. This aimed to get youths to ‘cease to be impassive observers of the destruction of their future’. The multifaceted collaboration involved youths, government leaders, CEOs and the National Geographic Society. He said it was in the private sector’s interest, and not charity, to engage in the battle for life on earth. Firms that did not identify emerging threats today would suffer, while many that grasp the opportunities of tomorrow’s market would prosper.

Dr. Djoghlaf sought to ensure biodiversity was integrated as a priority, alongside implementation of the strategic plan.

He said the beauty of this plan was it was not going to sit at conferences like G8 or G20, but would hit the ground. All 193 parties will be asked to turn this commitment and vision into national priorities and action plans, and some would be asked to do it through national integration. Minister Mah Bow Tan and Mr. Ng Lang then presented Dr. Djoghlaf with the user’s manual for the city biodiversity index. This index was a robust monitoring tool to help cities benchmark and evaluate their biodiversity conservation efforts. The index’s three components evaluated native biodiversity, ecosystem services, and governance of biodiversity management in the city.

192

Mr. Herbert Dreiseitl Founder and Partner, Atelier Dreiseitl, Artist and Landscape Architect

the promise of water Mr. Dreiseitl found Singapore interesting as basic solutions were often inadequate and much more was needed.

Referring to the example of cleaning up streams, he said it began with water from roofs, treating water, controlling storm water and erosion, bringing clean water back to urban areas, and then transforming streams and rivers. Another example from a dense urban area was the rebuilding of Berlin’s Potsdamer Platz 15 years ago. Rooftops became biohabitats that used filtration to treat and clean rainwater. There was also a lagoon system to collect water. Both resulted in an urban area where clean water was channelled and celebrated. While technology could help preserve biohabitats, integrating them into cities was key. This could be done when restoring the cities. The Potsdamer Platz project saw bio-habitats suddenly reappear in the city centre, including endangered species on the red list, like special crabs.

Another example was the Pearl District in Portland, US. The public was engaged to create a park on this industrial site. He felt participation could not be done the same way everywhere, as cultures were different and sensitivity was needed to involve people. Here, they held a workshop to get people to celebrate or showcase their ideas for a park. Many ideas were presented, including someone pretending to be a spider on stage, describing what a spider in 20 years would experience.

Instead of rational planning, they used people’s positive energy and emotions. The park now celebrated bio-habitats in an interesting way. Every drop of rainwater from walkways and rooftops was brought to the park for cleaning, and then went into a river.

Mr. Dreiseitl then spoke of ‘pocket ecology’. The old idea was that ecology should be outside cities, as there was too little space inside. He called Singapore a beautiful example of how biodiversity could be restored to the city, even in small spaces. Small pockets of space, like rooftops, could support bio-habitats. One example he was involved in was a green roof garden in Chicago, which the mayor now showcased as an example for green cities. Interestingly, a wide variety of butterflies returned to the city within a year. Looking down from a higher level at buildings, one now saw a green environment full of life, not ugly rooftops.

Mr. Dreiseitl then shared three Singapore projects, which were being planned or built to integrate biodiversity into the urban landscape. The first was the ‘beautiful biosphere’ of Sungei Buloh Wetland Reserve, which had received much recognition from the American Society of Landscape Architects. Despite its small size, it was very important as birds used it as a stopping point on their journey across the globe. To bring people and environments together, Sungei Buloh would have places where people could walk bare foot in the sludge. He hoped they would make full use of their senses to experience it as full of life, not just dirt. Observation stations and ‘shelves’ would let people hide and observe the wildlife in close proximity, without disturbing them. These would dispel the idea people should stay clear of nature, and let people appreciate its beauty instead. He added that the excitement of nature observation in the day would grow as it became dark and certain animals start to appear.

The next project was JTC CleanTech Park. Built next to a university, this technology park had a very interesting site, in an open field next to a secondary forest. Once again, biohabitats and nature were incorporated in a dense urban area. Some areas could be accessed from the urban front with entrances for bicycles and cars, while the other side was a park. They were trying to bring freshwater swamps, which were very rare in Singapore, and big trees, which would slowly start to grow. Careful and intelligent planning was needed to overlap different areas and qualities so people and wildlife could work

together. Mr. Dreiseitl highlighted his underpasses for reptiles, frogs and animals - tunnels under the streets for them to get from one side to the other. In future, there would be more such corridors to link biodiversity. If biodiversity were sealed and encapsulated, it would not exist because nature needed its own transport systems to mix and reproduce. It was important to understand this, as architects and planners usually devised conceptual plans and built right away, but nature needed time.

Biodiversity would only come slowly after getting the right living conditions, and patience was needed.

The last example Mr. Dreiseitl mentioned was flooding in Singapore canals. When it rained, there was no time and space to cope with the extra water, and everything drained into these canals. These canals were normally empty, but when it rained they quickly filled with water, but also pollution.

Instead of a natural curve, where the water was slowly released back into nature, the canals remained flooded.

Hence, the problem arose on how to regulate flow volumes and water quality. Mr. Dreiseitl said they had tried to solve this problem in Bishan Park, which was now under construction.

They took down the canal profiles and brought water back so that water and park were connected. He reiterated his point about overlapping functions and integrating biodiversity in our cities. There was a need to overlap territories, responsibilities, maintenance services and also financing. The result was a park that normally did not have much water, but which could become a floodplain when it rained. The old canals were dangerous as they were small and had high-speed flows, making it slippery and difficult for children to get out. These floodplains would take one to two hours before the water really came up. Half a year later, an enormous variety of wildlife came back, including dragonflies and frogs.

Mr Dreiseitl concluded that educating people to observe and embrace the environment was an important step in integrating biohabitats in cities. It would let people reconnect with nature.

He also advocated school activities so children could be educated to appreciate their environment.

193

discussion Prof. Leo Tan Wee Hin (Moderator)

Dr. Geh Min of the Nature Society of Singapore felt a lot of past planning was engineer or planner-oriented, with horticulturists doing superficial decoration. But after this session, she felt it should be the inverse; we should recognise existing nature instead of destroying it, and then later restoring it. She asked if transport, planning and engineering professionals could be educated to think ecologically.

Prof. McDonnell said cities were built to engineering codes and laws, so they looked alike despite cultural or climatic differences. But it was not necessarily engineers who needed training. He asked why governments did not set environmental standards in the early stages of development permit processes. Universities should also award ecological engineering degrees. Engineers built bridges and cities, but we went to scientists when problems arose. Ecological engineering could combine both, to draw construction into an ecological framework.

Prof. Tan agreed with Mr. Dreiseitl that solid knowledge was critical. He would cross a bridge unless the builder had professional judgment. The problem was not wilfulness, but rather ignorance in the past. Colorado’s 1930s Boulder Dam was hailed as among human technology’s greatest achievements. Nobody knew California and Mexico would suffer 50 years later, as damming Colorado River created water shortages and salt evaporation in fertile soils. Calling for a more liberal university education, he said ecological, mechanical or civil engineering courses might be unnecessary.

Instead of studying biology or geography in silos, an environmental studies programme could let students major in a solid discipline in a four-year programme, and spend two years on law, business, or governance. They should also meet environment ministers or corporate leaders doing environmental work, to get real working knowledge. He felt everybody was right and everybody was wrong about the best approach. We focused on solving existing problems or future problems we could envision. But new problems would surprise us. If students could be mentally prepared, they could handle problems ‘without being headless chickens running around for the first type of solution [they] can think of’.

Prof. Wang felt it was difficult for eco-cities to balance economics with ecology. He proposed an indicator system to evaluate city ecologies. Disagreeing with Prof. McDonnell, Ms. Hallsmith said the idea of ecological engineers ‘still puts the engineers in the driver’s seat’. She felt the people had to be the drivers. Her work showed they wanted ecologically sustainable cities. The people should lead and demand ecological cities, with engineers as their servants, not ‘reengineer the engineers’. Mr. Dreiseitl disagreed, and felt engineering was important. Our cities were a result of our forefathers’ knowledge; people should be happy to build on it. Earlier generations should not be blamed, as there was a learning process. Few knew of biodiversity in the past. He added that high-tech engineering was used in his biodiversity projects.

Dr. Lena Chan from NParks shared her experience in Pulau Tekong coastal protection. Faced with coastal erosion, the ecologists preferred a soft solution, not hard engineering.

Unfortunately planting alone was inadequate, as the waves were too strong. The result was a hybrid solution with engineers talking to ecologists. The engineers used hydrology and modelling to devise a structure, and then planted mangroves between rock bunds. To protect the bunds, mangroves were planted on the water edge. But they would not stand by themselves and would wash away. So they looked at the species diversity, and used several mangrove tree species, the outer layer being hardiest. Four species were used, all with different characteristics. Dr. Chan said this was an experiment – built with nature, and combing engineering and ecological expertise.

Director (Special Projects), Faculty of Science, National University of Singapore, Chairman, Garden City Fund, and President, Singapore National Academy of Science

194

Prof. McDonnell noted the solution was not ‘to put green suits on engineers’. The problem was they literally lacked knowledge to solve ecological engineering problems. Often, solutions were found ‘with haphazard serendipity’. Hence he felt a university programme that developed the science of ecological engineering would be good. Mr. Ng then invited Prof. Irene Lye to talk about a Masters programme she started at the National University of Singapore (NUS). Prof. Lye said they started an integrated multidisciplinary programme called a Masters of Science in Environmental Management nine years ago. They worked with seven faculties, including Arts, Science, Engineering, Law, Medicine, Business, and Design and Environment. Almost each one taught a core course. Mr. Ng sat on their advisory board, and they had Memoranda of Understanding with Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies and Duke University of Earth Sciences. NUS planned to offer a special course at undergraduate level, with Prof. Leo Tan chairing the committee. They welcomed foreign students, but had limited scholarships.

Prof. Lye fully agreed with speakers who called for integrating disciplines. She hoped to see this in building construction.

She observed that awards might go for a green building with all the ‘bells and whistles’, but with little attention to the natural environment that was destroyed to create the building. Trees might have been cut as builders did not care about clearing vegetation, which they felt could be replanted.

But from an ecological viewpoint, every tree was a home to various animals. These were hard to recover one the tree was destroyed. To deserve a green building award, Prof. Lye felt building should show ecological sensitivity to their sites.

Mr. Dreiseitl felt we had to reconsider engineering in many places, including Singapore. The old approach moved water, people or electricity from A to B. But from design or environmental perspectives, some engineering decisions had made our cities ugly. Professions like landscape architecture were undeveloped and basically added decoration. As a landscape architect, he tried to upgrade his profession, but

first knowledge had to be upgraded. This also applied to engineers, who had to combine science and engineering. For example, stabilising riverbanks had been done in the past with concrete. Now they were starting to use soft engineering.

This was complex, and involved knowing which plants to use, which would be good for bio-habitats, which could maintain hydraulic viscosity, etc. There were many complex things to know about living systems, and professionals had to learn these things.

Prof. Clarkson agreed with Prof. Lye that we had to go beyond nominally green buildings. New projects, even so-called green buildings, often represented a loss in biodiversity. Clearance of on-site nature contributed to biodiversity’s ‘death by a thousand cuts’. Offsets and mitigation had to be part of our process. Biodiversity restoration was also important, as massive extinction would occur below a threshold of about 20%. But beyond just green buildings or restoration, we had to bring the elements together. He defended engineers, saying urban ecology was a new discipline, and ecologists were also to blame. Ignoring cities, they had focused too long on wild lands. He called for new approaches to ecology and engineering, with interdisciplinary teams that had the right expertise. He also supported Mr. Ng, saying that he was an optimist who had seen the early signs across the world, where relevant expertise had been brought together to build new disciplines that would solve these problems.

A practitioner in the audience felt how we valued our environment was critical. Operating on different time horizons, businesses and environmentalists valued resources differently.

He asked how we could balance environmental and urban needs. Ms. Hallsmith felt our collective intelligence could determine our ‘caring capacity’ for particular ecosystems.

We could then decide how to mitigate the impact of urban development, and how to enhance natural systems to help people and the environment coexist. She said people had been reluctant to do this as they were beyond their caring capacity on a global scale. It also begged social equity

195

questions: how could so many have so little, while so few controlled a lot of the planet’s resources? We had to look at a mix of questions to extrapolate answers.

Prof. Wang said the ‘balancing point’ was in the balance of ecosystem inputs and outputs. Economic growth should not exceed environmental capacity, while maintaining a 3M balance of metabolism, mobility and maintenance of urban ecosystems. Prof. Clarkson felt the idea of balance would differ from person to person. As an ecologist, he asked that discussions be transparent and explicit, so protections would persist in the long term. He felt that when discussions were not transparent and explicit, nobody set a threshold.

Mr. Ng said he tended not be too philosophical about these things. Instead, he searched for situations where one could have one’s cake and eat it, albeit this was not easy. This required innovative solutions, and platforms where those from different disciplines could find solutions together. The shortage of knowledge in current textbooks would require new ones to be written. Much learning and new knowledge had emerged, and this should continue. Mr. Dreiseitl said what we valued now might be of little value in future, and vice versa. Lacking our rich environment, later generations might blame us and ask why we did not value it more.

196

Prof. McDonnell found it exciting to be on a world stage discussing urban ecology, a hot topic that was taking off in every city and country. Calling for a ‘better city, better life, better cooperation’, Prof. Wang said he was impressed by the achievements of WCS, which he called a very good international exchange platform, set in Singapore’s beautiful landscape.

Ms. Hallsmith clarified she was not bashing engineers, and said they were very important. Nor did she question the need for integrated education, as there was nothing more important.

She felt bureaucratic silos came from university silos, where people ‘learn more and more about less and less, when [they] actually need to learn more and more about more and more’.

She endorsed Minister Mah’s network of cities idea. Her experience working with cities indicated cities learnt best from each other. Academics or consultants did not help, as city leaders were unique. If city leaders were able to do something, it gave hope to their peers to do the same.

Dr. Djoghlaf felt the participants were saying the same things with different words. We needed a paradigm shift to correct our relations with nature. Our generation had an ethical, economic, financial and cultural responsibility to repair this relationship, or the next generation would blame us. He felt we had created a myth that resources were infinite and we could grow indefinitely. But we had reached growth limits and it was urgent to act differently, beginning with our cities.

special thanks Co-organisers

Co-located Events

Strategic Partners

Supporting Organisations

197

Supporting Government Agencies

Platinum Sponsors

Conference Lunch Sponsors

Official Broadcast Partner

198

Official Business Equipment Sponsor

Official International Newspaper

Gold Sponsor

Official Car

Supporting Publication

g

Contact us

www.worldcities.com.sg

For enquiries on World Cities Summit, please contact: World Cities Summit Secretariat MND Building, 5 Maxwell Road Singapore 069110 Email : info@worldcities.com.sg

h