envelope
注册免费订阅每周通讯 Sign up for email updates

中国与世界,环境危机大家谈 WHERE CHINA AND THE WORLD DISCUSS THE ENVIRONMENT

查看评论 view comments

中文

Preparing for an urban future

Maryann Bird

January 26, 2007

Will humanity’s historic move from countryside to city mean opportunity or apocalypse? Maryann Bird examines the Worldwatch Institute’s latest State of the World report, which opts for optimism.

In 2005, Shanghai constructed more building space than exists in all the office buildings of New York City.

“If the last century was the century of urbanisation, the twenty-first will be the century of cities. It is in the cities that decisive battles for the quality of life will be fought, and their outcomes will have a defining effect on the planet’s environment and on human relations.”

So writes Jaime Lerner, a former governor of southern Brazil’s Paraná state and former mayor of Curitiba, Paraná’s capital, in his forward to the Worldwatch Institute’s just-released annual report, State of the World 2007: Our Urban Future. An internationally recognised architect and urban planner, Lerner knows of what he speaks. During his years in office in rapidly developing Brazil, he implemented numerous social, ecological and urban reforms, including an integrated transportation system in Curitiba that has caught the attention of mayors and urban planners in the Americas, China and elsewhere.

The significance of this new, global urban supremacy -- for both people and planet – is profound, and the statistics are stark: About 35% of the population of Africa and Asia is now urban -- a figure that is expected to stand at 50% by 2030. From 1970 to 2000, just 4% of the $1.5 trillion in development assistance worldwide was for urban aid. And while cities cover a mere 0.4% of the earth’s surface, they generate the bulk of the planet’s carbon emissions.

Sometime in 2008, a threshold will be crossed: the point at which more people – roughly 3.2 billion human beings -- will be living in the world’s urban areas than in its rural ones. Between now and 2030, the population of the earth is projected to grow by 1.1 billion, according to the Worldwatch report. If global development priorities are not reassessed to account for massive urban poverty, well over half of these newcomers may end up living in under-serviced slums: urban settlements in developing countries without such necessities as clean and convenient water and sanitation facilities, health care and durable housing.

“The combined impact of a growing population and an unprecedented wave of migration from the countryside means that over 50 million people – equivalent to the population of France – are now added to the world’s cities and suburbs each year,” says Worldwatch’s president, Christopher Flavin, in his preface to Our Urban Future.

 “More than at any other time in history,” writes Flavin, “the future of humanity, our economy, and the planet that supports us will be determined in the world’s cities.”

As cities become more populated, more and more of the world’s energy-hungry buildings are taking form there. Worldwide, buildings account for more than 40% of total energy use. Much of that energy – particularly in urban areas -- is heavily reliant on fossil fuels, the primary engine of global climate change. And, of course, as China booms economically, the country is increasingly a key factor in the planet’s urban future. Already home to 16 of the world’s most polluted cities, China sees millions of its people move to cities each year.

“In 2005,” the Worldwatch report says, “Shanghai constructed more building space than exists in all the office buildings of New York City. Every month, China adds urban infrastructure equal to that found in Houston, Texas, simply to keep up with the masses of people migrating from rural areas to cities.”

Unlike many people, who fear that an increasingly urbanised future will mean more problems than solutions for the planet, Flavin (like Lerner and others who contributed to the new Worldwatch report) views cities not as “hopeless and apocalyptic places” but as “exciting laboratories of change”. Such optimism, he insists, “is central to the future of cities – and the world itself.”

photo by Java Cafe

Like it or not, the global future will be urban. So, what can be done to improve that future, to fight poverty and environmental injustice in cities? The 250-page report addresses a wide range of practical topics, including urban farming, green transportation, energy efficiency, natural-disaster risks, public health and sanitation, and local economics. While acknowledging that “there is no magic bullet for creating sustainable, equitable and peaceful cities,” Our Urban Future points to five “necessary if not sufficient conditions for such transformations.”

Spelled out by Janice E. Perlman, a consultant on urban poverty and environmental justice issues, and Molly O’Meara Sheehan, State of the World 2007’s project director, they are:

-- Transparent governance. This includes confronting corruption by fostering competition, which in turn would reduce bureaucratic leeway and increase accountability. The report cited La Paz, Bolivia, where bribery in construction permits was reduced by simplifying and advertising the rules, contracting-out the permitting to architects, and reducing the city’s role to oversight carried out by fewer (and better paid) municipal employees.

-- Decent work or a basic income. For the urban poor, jobs – which afford dignity – are a key factor. Job creation, as well as skills-training work in growing market sectors, is needed. So, too, is access to financial tools such as savings and credit, including the many forms of microfinance. Large companies can play an important role, as in Mexico, where the cement company CEMEX developed a scheme by which low-income families can buy materials to build and improve their housing. Local governments can hire the urban poor to help address environmental problems, such as in a Rio de Janeiro community reforestation project to protect the city’s vulnerable shantytowns from flooding. Contracted local workers also have carried out rebuilding after flooding in Dar-es-Salaam, Tanzania, and Kampala, Uganda. “Conditional cash transfer programmes” – by which low-income families receive cash as an incentive for desirable actions, such as sending children to school or having them immunised against contagious diseases – also have a role to play.

-- Innovations in conservation. Cities without full infrastructure, including much of China, can “leapfrog” over outmoded, wasteful systems dating back to the Industrial Revolution and start with twenty-first century technology. The built environment can be revolutionised by taking advantage of high- and low-tech resource-conservation strategies: installing water-conserving toilets, separating drinking and grey-water systems, using passive solar energy or biogas for heating. Some projects in China will use biogas from wastewater for cooking, passive solar energy for heating and cooling and compressed earth for building materials. Indeed, the eastern coastal city of Rizhao, in Shandong province – home to nearly 3 million people – is a model municipality. Local leaders see the city’s enhanced environment – thanks to the wide use of solar power -- as a key to long-term improvements in its social, economic and cultural spheres.

-- Intelligent land use and integrated community development. Old planning tools can be used for progressive change. For example, zoning, building and land-use regulations can be adapted “to foster mixed-use communities, with homes close to workplaces, commerce and recreation”. Development in areas with infrastructure in place can help to limit urban sprawl. Special-interest areas can be set up, protecting environmentally important areas and connecting nature corridors. In Brazil, São Paulo has led the way in creating a more inclusive city. One key step was taxing developers to create a fund for such public-interest investments as public transportation, housing and environmental upgrading. Dakar, Senegal, first tested a “sites and services” approach, by which small plots of land are laid out with connection to basic services and made available -- for small sums or loans -- to new migrants. (Retrofitting a squatter community is far more expensive.)

-- Social cohesion and cultural diversity. Cities can be strengthened by cultural diversity, which makes human economics (like natural ecosystems) more resilient. In urban areas -- torn by violent crime that further isolates the poor -- the sale of guns and drugs needs to be controlled, along with the corruption that allows such activities to continue. Among initiatives considered promising are: community policing in low-income neighbourhoods; arts, culture and sports programmes for at-risk young people, and weapons amnesties.

Perlman, who founded the Mega-Cities Project in 1987 to address issues of urban poverty, notes that poor urban neighbourhoods are afflicted by “the worst of two worlds” -- the environmental health hazards of both underdevelopment and industrialisation. “Yet their residents tread lightly on the planet … The gap between rich and poor in cities from Nairobi to New York means that those with the fewest resources suffer most from pollution generated by the wealthiest.”

Indeed, the report says, “[t]he logical sequence linking global sustainability to urban poverty is synthesised in what have become known as the Perlman Principles.” In short:

-- There can be no global environmental sustainability without urban environmental sustainability.

-- There can be no urban environmental solution without alleviating urban poverty.

-- There can be no solutions to poverty or environmental degradation without building on bottom-up, community-based innovations.

-- There can be no impact at the macro level without sharing what works among local leaders and scaling these programs up into public policy where circumstances permit.

-- There can be no urban transformation without changing the old incentive system, the “rules of the game” and the players at the table.

-- There can be no sustainable city in the twenty-first century without social justice and political participation as well as economic vitality and ecological regeneration.

Approaches that work should be shared globally and, given the magnitude and urgency of the challenges ahead, it is important to start now, the Worldwatch report maintains. “Imagine the ideal, but do what is possible today,” urges Brazil’s Jaime Lerner. Mobility, sustainability and identity need to be addressed, he writes. Transport systems need to be combined and integrated. Urban infrastructure needs to have multiple functions, to be utilised 24 hours a day, for maximum saving and minimal waste. Riverbanks, parks and historic districts need to be nurtured to maintain quality of life and self-esteem for everyone living in an urban environment.

 “A city is a collective dream,” Lerner asserts. “To build this dream is vital. … Cities are the refuge of solidarity. They can be the safeguards of the inhumane consequences of the globalisation process. They can defend us from extraterritoriality and the lack of identity.

“On the other hand, the fiercest wars are happening in cities, in their marginalised peripheries, in the clash between wealthy enclaves and deprived ghettoes. The heaviest environmental burdens are being generated there, too, due to our lack of empathy for present and future generations.

“And this is exactly why it is in our cities that we can make the most progress toward a more peaceful and balanced planet, so we can look at an urban world with optimism instead of fear.”


Maryann Bird is a London-based freelance journalist with a special interest in environmental and human-rights issues. A writer and editor, she was previously a staff member at Time magazine (Europe), The Independent, the International Herald Tribune and The New York Times.



参与讨论       COMMENTS

Original Posting Language Key
- 原始发表语言 original posting language
上次 Posts: 4
上次 Last post: 07 Feb 16:29
subscribe to discussion
参与讨论
RSS
RSS
如何区别: 城市或特大的城市?

在于规划宏观的发展计划中, 一些国家类似中国则有选择的余地: 注重于现有的大城市, 或者是偏向区域性的小市镇的发展以致使国家全面的发展获得平衡。然而, 这份报告如何论证这问题呢?难道规划和管理聚集性的城市比较容易,或者是政府应该对这些区域实施类似英国绿带政策的规划模式来控制发展?

A distinction: city or megalopolis?

On a macro-level of planning, countries like China have a choice: concentrate on making the most of their largest cities, or deliberately encourage development of smaller regional cities to distribute growth. How does this report address this question? Are huge urban agglomerations easier to plan for and manage, or should they be deliberately prevented--as the green belt restricts London's growth?

城市的贫困和环境问题急需解决

城乡巨大的贫困差别一直以来是中国城市化快速发展的主要因素。但一旦城市人口和就业机会到了一定的饱和状态,城市的贫困和环境问题就会显现。中国确实需要来缩小城乡差别来对城市化减速。

我很赞成这一文章中的观点:我们需要创造就业机会来减少城市贫困,从而来提高人口素质,来保护我们的环境。

为了更好地解决这些问题,大量创造同环保有关的就业大有潜力。

政府和企业应该对此作出贡献,作出好的全局性的规划和作出相应的初期投资,在城市中创造大量的有利环境的职业,问题就能解决。

Immediate solution for poverty and environmental problems in city is needed

The immense gap of poverty between countryside and city has been the main cause of urbanization in China. By the time the population and job opportunity in city has been saturated, poverty and environmental issues will be visualized. China should reduce the gap of poverty between countryside and city as to slow down urbanization indeed. I strongly agreed to the point of view in this article: we are required to create job opportunity in city in order to reduce poverty, thus, will improve the quality of society so as to protect our environment. To resolve these issues more effectively, there is a potential to create more job opportunities which related to environmental protection. Contribution of government and enterprise to protect the environment is essential, they should take action in overall planning and attempt to work out relevant investment at the beginning stage, create job opportunity which will benefit the environment, hence, this will be able to solve the problem.

中小城市还是大都市?

一号提问者提出了一个很有趣的质疑。在世界观察报道中,我找不到对一个城市大小的明确偏爱。文件中指出或许全球都市化的一个最明显的方面就是大都市的数量增加,凝聚了至少一亿人。然而,它补充,这些大都市只聚集了城市总人口的9%;超过一半的城市居民居住在少于500000居住人口的中小城市里。不考虑地域广义性,世界观察说,“每个城市都有自己的历史和人口来引导城市向自己的方向发展”。持续性对任何城市的成功都至关重要,然而追求城市持续发展的一个重要方面就是对特殊城市特殊需要的真正了解。有了正确知识作为引导,政府和援助者可以更敏锐地定位上百上亿美元的用处用以完成,举例说,联合国用于改善10亿贫民窟居民生活的千年计划。或许我们中国,印度,巴西,尼日利亚和其他国家的朋友想就城市大小问题作更多的评论。

City or megalopolis?

Questioner No. 1 poses an interesting query. In the Worldwatch report, I find no expressed preference for one size of city over another. The document notes that perhaps the most visible aspect of global urbanisation has been the rise of "megacities", agglomerations that are home to at least 10 million people. But, it adds, these cities account for only about 9% of the total urban population; over half of the world's city dwellers live in municipalities with fewer than 500,000 inhabitants.
Beyond regional generalisations, Worldwatch says, "each city has a history and a population that will lead the city in its own direction." Sustainability is critical to any urban area's success, though, and a true understanding of the specific needs of individual cities is a key factor in the quest for that sustainability. Armed with accurate knowledge, governments and aid donors can more sensibly target the hundreds of billions of dollars needed to achieve (for example) the UN Millennium Project goal of improving the lives of 100 million slum dwellers.
Perhaps our friends in China, India, Brazil, Nigeria and elsewhere would like to comment further on this question of city size? -- Maryann Bird

城市的承载能力

中国最终要花费极大部分的国家收入来维持东部沿海大城市的可居住状况,以来避免发生造成社会崩溃的类似“黑死病”的灾难。

你不可能让上千万的人居住在条件差的环境下而不发生生态自然淘汰的事情。

同时,中国还得花大量的钱从越来越贫瘠和受污染严重的内地获得水和食物。nanheyangrouchuan

Carrying capacity of cities

China is going to end up spending the majority of its revenue on maintaining a livable presence in and around the big east coast cities to prevent a "black plague" type of social collapse. You can't have tens of millions of mostly poor people living in cramped conditions without nature getting rid of the weaker members of each megacity population.

At the same time, China will have to spend considerable amounts of money getting water and food from an increasingly barren and polluted interior to its population or be forced to pay suppliers' prices for food and technology to produce clean water.

nanheyangrouchuan


发表评论 Post a comment
标题 Title :


(Maximum characters: 1200 | 不超过 1200字)


发表的评论在预先被管理员浏览后翻译成中文或英文。
Comments are translated into either Chinese or English after being moderated.

我们建议你在评论后署名, 以便其他浏览者能更好地与你交流。你没有必要使用真名,但你的署名将会协助我们维护网站的信息交流畅通。
We suggest you add your name to your comments so that other readers can respond to you more easily. You don’t have to use your real name, but providing a name will help make communication clearer for other forum participants.