Online archive - find the most current content at nordregio.org

City-challenges in poorer countries

It is surely no coincidence that as the world has become more urbanised climate change has emerged as the most important global development challenge. In 2007, for the first time in history, fully half of the world's population now lives in cities. By 2030, two thirds will live in urban areas. Some 95% of this projected growth will take place in developing countries.

Urban areas, covering only some 3% of the earth's surface, produce 80% of the world's CO2 emissions while attracting 75% of its energy use. Direct sources of greenhouse gas emissions include the transport of people and goods, the building of infrastructure and industrial production. Among the numerous indirect sources are cooking, lighting, heating and the air conditioning systems in our buildings.

Although cities in the poorer countries historically contribute less to global environmental problems than their more affluent counterparts, this situation is rapidly changing, especially in Latin America and Asia. Here rapid economic growth is increasingly leading to westernized consumption patterns and levels. Those most affected by these trends are the world's urban poor with natural disasters fast becoming their most immediate threat.

The circumpolar North, with its many built settlements and towns, but also major cities where a large part of the population lives, is another "site" exposed to this "new" vulnerability. The security of these settlements is being challenged by the rapidly melting ice, glaciers and permafrost. Coastal settlements are particularly at risk because of erosion in the short term and rising sea levels in the longer term. The building stock, roads, airports and railway lines constructed on melting permafrost also faces the now constant risk of serious degradation.

Urban sustainability

At the same time certain other apects of urbanisation provide an opportunity to relieve the pressure on these delicate ecosystems. This has been termed the urban sustainability multiplier: high urban living density shrinks per capita ecological foot-prints by reducing energy and material needs.
Examples of interventions that combine significant benefits for cities in terms of generated revenues with greenhouse gas emissions abatement include:

- high rise buildings' demand for energy is much less than that of suburban family homes. In compact cities infrastructure costs are lower as is land consumption, transport and commuting time, as well as costs and emissions. In dense cities the percentage share of car ownership is much less than in suburbs.

- office buildings and private homes are responsible for 38% of CO2 emissions in the USA mainly due to the use of air conditioning. It is then necessary to reduce energy needs for heating, lighting and cooling of these buildings, but also to increase efficiency in the use of building materials and of the building cycle itself. Technology for passive zero energy and zero carbon buildings, based on improved insulation materials, already exists. Such buildings cost only 5% more than conventional models.

- by promoting increased usage of mass transport systems, pedestrian zones, non-motorized transportation and the use of more fuel-efficient vehicles and environmentally-friendly fuels, the total volume of CO2 emissions from mobile sources can also be reduced.

- switching from coal to natural gas in power plants, promoting the use of clean energy sources to replace fossil energy and the co-generation of heat and electricity also represent important opportunities. Carbon free energy sources like windmills, solar panels, geothermal energy, combined heat and power-plants thus carry great potential.

Adaptation to climate change

The determinants of adaptive capacity include the availability of financial resources, technology, specialised institutions and human resources, access to information and the existence of legal, social and organisational arrangements. These assets are scarce in developing countries and smaller cities where, with a proven vulnerability to climate change, investments will likely require:

• a "hardening" of the infrastructure systems, including storm drainage, water supply and treatment plants, and
• protection or relocation of solid waste management facilities, energy generation and distribution systems

In addition to efforts undertaken at the global and national levels, local authorities will have to lead in finding their solutions to these global climate challenges. The international development community has barely acknowledged the environment and poverty crises in cities: only a few comprehensive examples of climate mitigation and adaption as such currently exist. What is missing then, in addition to financial resources, is a global overview and a platform for discussions and the exchange of good practices, as well as normative support for local authorities.

UN-HABITAT

As a remedy to this, the UN Programme for Human Settlements (UN-HABITAT) is currently developing a 'global cities and climate change' network. Arctic cities will also be eligible to participate. The objective here is to provide opportunities for local governments and their associations to actively collaborate in global, regional and national networks to better pursue the goals of sustainable urbanization, using climate change as the entry point.

Policy dialogue promotion between national and local governments will be particularly important here in order to create the necessary synergies and links. New tools and knowledge management strategies building on wider co-operation with the UN-family, the World Bank, the regional development banks as well as relevant NGOs and universities and the private sector (insurance companies, associations of builders, building materials manufacturers and contractors) will be made available.

International development cooperation has thus far hardly recognized the urban environment and poverty crises. Anti - urban development paradigms still 'rule the roost' intellectually. It is therefore positive that both Norway (MFA) and Sweden (SIDA) are currently considering whether or not to fund the new UN-HABITAT network. This initiative, although still in its infancy, represents a unique opportunity to promote – in an equal manner - the infamous three e's of the global sustainable development triptych: equity, ecology and economy.

(The author expresses his personal views.)

By Erik Berg, Senior Adviser at the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs