How effective are eco-cities as an urban template with a particular focus on Chinese cities
According to the United Nations (2014); as it stood in 2014, 54% of people lived in cities and that figure is estimated to increase to 66% by 2050. This is putting great pressure on cities to evolve and expand significantly. Notably, in the global southern developing regions, including Africa and Asia where 90% of urbanisation is concentrated. Cities are the principal contributors to greenhouse gas emissions in the world; contributing two thirds of global energy use and 70% of global CO2 emissions (Clinton Climate Initiative, n.a.). In more recent years, greater awareness has been made surrounding the effects of greenhouse gases and the severe consequences of climate change on our world. This has stemmed from events such as the publication of the Brundtland report, which alone has moved policies for sustainable development to the forefront of priorities for cities in recent years. For example the Agenda 21 action plan that came out of the Rio De Janeiro 1992 earth summit. This encouraged Sweden to create a policy whereby every local authority was to implement Agenda 21 plans (Mega. V, 2000). With cities such as Masdar, claiming they will be carbon neutral. McGranahan and Satterthwaite (2003) noted that a sustainable city is one that ‘contributes to the long-term persistence of the biosphere and indeed the global environment’.
An urban template that been around for many years but just recently emerged on an international scale is the ‘eco-city’. The internationalisation of this concept came as a response for the need for sustainable development. There are many key drivers of the eco-city phenomenon and why there is a great movement towards adopting these initiatives;
Environmental challenges are probably the most obvious with cities looking to mitigate infrastructure and services to protect their cities. Threats to a city may be local and sometimes unique to the area e.g. deforestation and river pollution. On a wider scale, cities have to respond to the challenges and put in place policies for international threats such as; reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and CO2 and waste problems.
Socio-economic factors are one of the top drivers for eco-city innovation as more and more people are moving into cities.
When designing and developing a new city there becomes an opening for businesses’ and research organisations to invest in large projects. There have been many cases of private sector projects (Arup) and some which have been public-private initiatives. Business developments within eco-cities largely support technological invocation which can contribute to developments emphasising this aspect.
An opportunity, which many cities have taken is the one to re-brand the city. Using the branding of ‘eco-city’ it can demonstrate its ability to be innovative and competitive (Joss. S, 2011). A list of the top sustainable cities is published every year in the USA with many fighting for the top spot; which is currently Seattle. Masdar is claiming it will be the world’s first carbon neutral city. In addition, many cities have used the branding to create attractions both educational and cultural for visitors to come and experience an eco-way of living.
The political leadership when implementing an eco-city project can come from several different avenues, depending largely on the governance system in place. The developments may come from mayor’s, elected city councils or regional governments and some by national governments for example in China, where the national government has encouraged a mass increase in eco-cities being developed.
International co-operation has been quite key in many modern eco-city developments, with architects, engineers and developers crossing rushing to be able to work on such projects. One big example is the $1.5 billion backing China has given to Sseesamirembe; this being ‘one of the largest Chinese investments to date’. In addition, initiatives such as C40 Cities Climate Change Leadership Group has enabled leaders from around the world to discuss and share knowledge.
The concept of ‘eco-city’ is a fairly new phenomenon. Gaining momentum in recent years largely due to the growing awareness of the severity of climate change and the key role cities play in contributing to the cause (Joss. S, 2011). However, the theory has been around since the 1980s when the Richard Register’s Urban Ecology movement came about gaining momentum with the release of his publication ‘Eco-city Berkeley’ (1987). This brought about a chain of international conferences on Eco-Cities and shortly before the second conference; David Engwicht and Australian Community Activist, published ‘Towards an eco-city’ (1992) where he describes a city as ‘an invention for maximising exchange and minimising travel’. Originally, the eco-city movement was categorised as a bottom-up approach tackling urban issues such as; urban sprawl, inner-city deprivation and environmental pollution. More recently, in the 90s and early 00s initiatives started to pop up around the globe, experimenting with making cities more sustainable; including, The United Nations ‘Earth Summit’ in 1992 which resulted in Agenda 21. Curitiba, Brazil is famous as one of the first projects, implementing an advanced and integrated public transport system. In the present day, the eco-city concept has become increasingly globalised, with a growing number of policy initiatives on national and international scales. Such as, the Clinton Climate Initiative (a collaborative project between the Clinton Foundation and the C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group). There has also been an increase in public-private projects, gaining transnational corporate interest behind their design, financing and construction with a platform to boost their profiles.
There are eco-cities popping up all over the world with the number growing exponentially with such cities now located all over the globe. The regions with the largest growth of eco-city developments are Africa and Asia. These developing regions have the fastest growing urban centres and have the potential to massively contribute to greenhouse gas emissions. Therefore, if they can develop strategies and implement solutions early they can be critical in limiting the effects they have on climate change. Simon Joss (2013) backed this claim up and stated; ‘the unprecedented rate of urbanisation and associated environmental pressures suggest a possible surge of eco-city developments in Africa in years to come’.
Cities can take different stances to ultimately become an ‘eco-city’. They can build an entirely new city from scratch, ‘A new development’; urban expansion can take place whereby in-fill projects can be designed, these can include new urban districts built on brownfield sites. Lastly, retrofit developments can be applied to existing urban infrastructure and services. There are variations across different regions in deciding what stance a city wants to take in its development;
To explain, in Europe it has been found that the projects that are fully implemented and those currently being developed are mostly in-fill developments. This means the majority are regeneration of brownfield sites; focusing on the ‘linkage of urban sustainability initiatives with socio-economic urban regeneration programmes’ (). Compared to Asia where eco-city initiatives are made up of mostly retro-fits, which points towards a need to alter existing infrastructure and systems to make them more environmentally friendly. S. Joss (2011) completed a study using a ‘horizon-scanning exercise’. This was to identify the complexity and the differences of eco-city initiatives across the world. The projects were analysed according to three categories mentioned earlier; 1) A new development, 2) Expansion of exist
ing urban area, 3) ‘Retro-fit’ development. Joss found the most popular type, accounting for over half, was the ‘retro-fit’ development; this consists of retrofitting the existing housing stock, transport infrastructure, energy systems and waste management systems. However, expanding urban areas is also very popular, these can be used to help address the problem of the lack of housing stock due to rapid urbanisation, a rising problem in the South. One example of this is the Greenwich Millennium Village, UK which is a mixed-use development comprising of 3,000 homes, a school and ecology park among others. Built on a brownfield site, ‘Europe’s largest former gas works.’ With many of the apartments included in the help to buy scheme (5% deposit).
In developed regions a focus is put on developing eco-cities as part of economic growth e.g. ‘special economic zones’. This is particularly apparent in Europe where this is already happening in established cities e.g. France and Sweden. The OECD’s ‘Green Cities’ programmes declares ‘As key engines of economic growth, job creation and innovation, but also as major contributors to global warming and environmental problems, cities are at the heart of the transition to a green global economy’ (Hammer et al., 2011). The green growth agenda
Many cities have made great efforts towards urban sustainability and adopted the ‘eco-city’ name, but there is currently a challenge of what an eco-city can actually be defined as;
There have been many definitions of the eco-city used in construction and building but very little used to assess the sustainability of a project. There is not yet one internationally recognised definition, however, many have tried to classify what an eco-city initiative is. Ecocity builders was founded by Richard Register and helps to ‘develop and implement policy, design and educational tools and strategies to build thriving urban centres’ (N.A.). They have the broad idea that an eco-city is simply ‘A human settlement that enables it’s residents to live a good quality of life while using minimal natural resources’. Compared to The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) who more complexly differentiated an eco-city due to their ‘superior environmental quality and liveability to be achieved inter alia through compact, mixed-use developments, low-energy transportation, renewable energy generation and a reduced overall ecological footprint’ (UNEP, 2012). Richard Register himself has been known to comment on the fact the term has remained loosely defined. This has caused many issues to do with the blurred requirements to be able to call a city an eco-city. Joss et al. () explains there are calls for more stringent rules to bring about more ‘specific, rigorous and measurable urban sustainability criteria’. This has meant many cities have used the name eco-city in their branding and on a political scale to compete with others but may not meet the standards of a sustainable city. On the contrary, many cities with outstanding profiles of sustainability and impressive innovation haven’t chosen to use the eco-city label.
In contrast, many authors have commented that this flexibility in the rules to become an eco-city can be a good thing. This is because it is encouraging cities to make even the smallest of changes and compete with others increasing urban sustainability.
As eco-cities have attracted investment from private investors and the issue of lowering carbon emissions has become a more central focus, there has been a shift in importance to energy. Most new developments’ have a large focus on shifting energy use from fossil fuels to renewables and reducing energy consumption. As business interests lay more with technological innovation this is where a lot of focus is put when deciding what type of project to design. Many are now arguing that ‘more interest needs to be put on the socio-political and cultural dimensions of the eco-city’. Example of this include ‘how liveable is the city and how urban infrastructure and spaces meets the needs of the population’ (Sofeska. A, 2017). Again, referring back to Simon Joss’ study; he divided up the eco-cities into the implementation focus, using three categories; 1) technological innovation, 2) Integrated Sustainability and planning and 3) Civic empowerment/involvement. He discovered three quarters of the sample put the greatest importance on technological innovation to achieve eco-city status and the least number of cities placed significance on civic empowerment and community involvement. However, it must be commented that is it anticipated that an initiative will combine two or more of these. With great focus being placed on energy technologies is being low-carbon alone ‘enough’ in the absence of a deeper socio-cultural shift and should more emphasis be placed on Carbon Lock-in ?? Challenge
In 2011, there was an estimated 176 eco-cities across the world, fast-forwarding to 2015, China alone claimed to have 284 eco-cities out of 658 major cities across the country (Holden et al., 2015). The rise of eco-cities in China is largely due to the rising of the middle class and therefore rapid urbanisation. This rise in the middle class has caused an increase in the affluence of the population and the expectation of a better life with fewer people prepared to put up with poor air and urban quality caused by a great amount of pollution (Williams. A, 2017). This poor quality of urban life stemmed from China’s rapid economic development…
The huge rise in the number of eco-cities in China can also be explained by the country taking advantage of the vagueness of the eco-city definition. They have used this and the indistinctness of the performance criteria as an opportunity to mask the situation and rebrand many of their existing cities. In 2016, it was widely boasted and advertised that Hangzhou in the Zhejiang province had become a national eco-city. This is despite the fact the ‘main sources of drinking water were shown to be “adequate”, and that is registered 123 days with good air quality with the average being twice the World Health Organisation’s acceptable limits’ (Shanghai Daily, 2016).
In China the emphasis on technological innovation is particularly prevalent. With the country attracting copious amounts of architects, engineers and business’ wanting to design and invest in the projects that are going to gain the most amount of attention both in the media and politically. One development had the Huffington Post () describe it as the “Ecological Silicon Valley” and “Research Institutes for Modern Science along with eco-efficient urban living”. Meant to be located in the (?) this project never took off and building work never started, this is still a fantasy. These projects may be ecologically friendly but due to the scale of it displaced many local people not l
iving up to the social responsibilities these so-called sustainable cities should. In addition, many of these eco-cities are still being built as a means to make profit and while this is still the motive it has been stated they will always be aimed at the elite and middle class. Even directing the developments towards an international market, this the needs, affordability and priorities of the urban poor to the wayside. Parnell (chapter 4??) also commented on the loss of local histories and ecologies to make way for the projects.
Conclusion
Decker et al. (2000) describes how cities act as sinks for materials imported from around the globe. The example of building materials is used, whereby stone, wood etc. is used for the buildings and then ends up in landfill close the urban area. The question is; can modern cities really be completely sustainable? Many authors have noted the only communities that are really sustainable are the traditional ones that ‘designed nature in’. ‘It is appreciated that contemporary urban sustainability challenges can learn much from how earlier urbanisms evolved, survived and eventually collapsed’.
Ultimately, it is very difficult to assess how successful the eco-city urban template has been as many projects are still in the design and implementation stage. Many of these initiatives will not be complete for another 10-15 years and therefore, the long-term significance or problems will not be able to be studied for many years after that. Joss, S et al (2013) describes how there does seem to be calls for the eco-city to be an international policy priority but with a greater focus on ‘the ecological city as an economic city’ (World Bank, 2010).
Wackernagel and Rees (1996) developed the ‘Ecological Footprint’ analysis; it is basically a bioregional tool that can consider the impact of cities on natural resources and ecosystems. This exhibits that although some industrial cities may appear to be sustainable, the ‘appropriate’ carrying capacity not only from their own rural and resource regions but also from ‘distant elsewhere’. This describes how a city imports sustainability. Eco-Cities are key to long-term sustainability, but many have a much larger ecological footprint than the size of the city and are in fact highly unsustainable (Rees and Wackernagel 1996, Rees 2010).