AN ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK
FOR
MONITORING CITIES’ SUSTAINABILITY
A RESEARCH PROJECT BY CENTRE FOR SUSTAINABLE ASIAN CITIES
NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS: PROF HENG CHYE KIANG | DR LAI CHOO MALONE‐LEE
SUPPORTED BY MINISTRY OF NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION AUTHORITY, URBAN REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD , NATIONAL PARKS BOARD Acknowledgement
The research team would like to thank the Ministry of National Development Research Fund Committee for their funding support of this research project.
SDE1 #04‐24, National University of Singapore
4 Architecture Drive, Singapore 117566
Website: http://www.sde.nus.edu.sg/csac/
Contact: Dr. Lai Choo Malone‐Lee I Dr Devisari Tunas
Tel: +65‐6516 5046, +65‐6516 1495 I Fax: +65‐6777 3953
Email: sdemalon@nus.edu.sg I sdedt@nus.edu.sg
AN ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK FOR
MONITORING CITIES’ SUSTAINABILITY
INTRODUCTION
Cities today face many challenges of urban sustainability.
Resources such as land, water, energy and food are usually limited;
environmental problems are often exacerbated by the sheer
intensity of economic and social activities; and the quality of urban
community life is constantly threatened by social inequity, spatial
segregation, urban stress and inadequate amenities. At the same
time, cities are expected to be the pivots of economic growth, and
centers for innovation, creativity, cultural development and
technological advancement. For many cities today, a sustainable
and resilient economy remains a fundamental pursuit that is at the
heart of public policy‐making and community aspiration.
In this context, the critical questions are: How can cities continue
to seek and enjoy economic development, while conserving their
resource base, supporting urban life quality and protecting their
environments? How do cities chart their progress toward
sustainable growth? What assessment tools are available to
support the process?
In this multi‐disciplinary research, we seek to address these
questions, by developing, from first principle, a comprehensive
framework to guide the assessment of sustainable development in
cities, with a focus on supporting economic growth and enhancing
community wellbeing.
THE RESEARCH PROJECT
The research project by the Centre for Sustainable Asian Cities of
the National University of Singapore entitled “Benchmark, Best
Practices and Framework for Sustainable Urban Development” is
supported by Singapore’s Ministry of National Development, Urban
Redevelopment Authority, Housing and Development Board and
the National Parks Board.
2
The project seeks to conceptualize and develop an assessment
framework that encompasses the following intents:
1 Advance the knowledge on sustainable urban development
through an integrated program of multi‐disciplinary research;
2 Identify and analyse international best practices for sustainable
development, to distil relevant principles and practical
implementation mechanisms;
3
Develop a comprehensive database of sustainability
performance indicators with a focus on conceptual robustness and
definitional clarity;
4 Propose an organizing framework to anchor the indicator
system in a meaningful way, to support public policy‐making and
facilitate communication with stakeholders;
5 Validate and operationalize the framework for application in
cities at various stages of development.
DATABASE OF SUSTAINABILITY INDICATORS
The initial stage of the project included a comprehensive literature
review of international studies on sustainable urban development,
the current theoretical and conceptual frameworks, and existing
assessment tools. The investigations from this first stage resulted
in the adoption of a theme‐based research approach to
systematically dissect and analyze the complex issues of urban
sustainable development and to facilitate data collection.
The major issues of sustainable development were organized
under thirteen (13) major themes for analysis, and they are:
Governance, Towards Green Economy, Land, Water, Energy, Food,
Biodiversity, Air, Waste, Transport, Culture, People and Climate
Change. As each theme was studied, urban indicators, both
quantitative and qualitative, that are relevant and helpful to assess
how well cities are performing in each of these respective fields,
were identified.
The sources for these indicators ranged from international
databases such as those of the United Nations, World Bank,
Organization for Economic Co‐operation and Development, World
Resources Institute, etc. as well as local databases from cities that
have done extensive work in this field, for example the Boston
Indicators. In total, approximately 1,000 indicators for sustainable
development were finally collated and synthesized.
The indicators were analyzed through the Drivers, Pressures, State,
Impact and Response (DPSIR) framework, which allowed critical
issues straddling the economic, social and environmental realms,
that impinge on cities’ performances, to be distilled. This database
is a comprehensive resource that will soon be made available to
the international community in the form of a guidebook.
HEADLINE INDICATORS
Given the large body of sustainability indicators available, an
important step in the research process was to shortlist a set of
headline indicators to make the assessment readily
implementable. The idea was to discern the most significant
indicators that encapsulate the important and relevant factors that
delineate a city’s progress toward sustainability. For this, the
research adopted a modified Delphi approach, using an expert‐
based consultation process that involved a structured
questionnaire to focus on issues, facilitate prioritization and
ranking, as well as pose open‐ended questions to elicit the
independent views of the domain experts from academic
institutions, industry and government agencies. Over 100 experts
and around 20 government agencies were involved in the
consultation and validation processes. The result is a focused set
of 158 headline indicators within 13 themes and 55 dimensions.
Each indicator is accompanied by its conceptual underpinnings,
defined metrics and explanatory notes for application.
No
THEME
No. of Dimensions
No. of Indicators
1
Governance
5
10
2
Economy
3
8
3
Land
4
9
4
Water
5
12
5
Energy
5
14
6
Food
5
11
7
Biodiversity
3
11
8
Air
2
8
9
Waste
3
7
10
Transport
5
14
11
Culture
4
15
12
Community
6
20
13
Climate Change
5
17
Total number
55
158
DATABASE OF BEST PRACTICES
THE FRAMEWORK FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTH
Concurrent with the building up the database of
sustainability indicators, the research also compiled a
database of best practices in urban sustainability. The aim
was to apply objective research and evaluation to identify
exemplary approaches, programs or practices of
sustainability in cities, under each of the 13 themes.
This research developed an assessment framework to
encompass the essential concepts of sustainable
development as distilled from the literature and best
practices. As a conceptual framework, it is open‐ended
rather than locked into a numerical construct that does not
effectively represent the more dynamic processes of
sustainability performance in the various indicators of
sustainability as defined.
The selection criteria included:
 Exemplary performances in demonstrating how urban
sustainability goals are being achieved;
 Demonstration of leadership in terms of relevant
and/or bold policies, government commitment and
stakeholders’ involvement;
 Elements of innovation, creativity, freshness of
approach, and high impact, either in terms of thinking,
concept or execution.
In total, the research documented over 90 case studies
from more than 40 cities and towns/districts across Asia,
the Americas, Australia, Europe, as well as Africa. The final
database in effect operationalize the indicators’ by
illustrating how cities have advanced various aspects of
sustainability practices in urban planning, policy making
and project implementation. The database is a
comprehensive documentation of important principles of
urban sustainability, which are validated by practice. They
provide useful lessons and inspiration for other cities.
BENCHMARKING CITIES
Using the defined indicators, cities can be benchmarked in
three ways:
1. Self assessment, by looking at local context and
historical trends to examine how far the city has
progressed as compared to previous performance in
specific areas, and its self‐set targets;
2. Benchmarking against established international
standards where available, such as air and water
quality as established by organizations e.g. WHO
and USEPA;
3. Comparative studies with other cities of similar
development levels
The framework must be anchored in an overarching vision
of sustainability, founded on sound and relevant principles.
This research has adopted the sustainable growth
paradigm, set within an integrated urban planning system,
as its broad vision.
The inspiration for the framework is the concept of “green
growth”, which makes reference to an economy that
promotes social well‐being and reduces inequalities over
the long‐term, while not exposing future generations to
significant environmental risks and ecological scarcities.
This concept has gained international attention as a
response to the energy and carbon intensive nature of
contemporary economies. Its intent is to make growth
processes more resource‐efficient, cleaner and resilient
without necessarily slowing them. Growth is a particularly
relevant proposition in the light of current global economic
realities, and is readily defensible when coupled with the
social pillars of sustainable development like poverty
reduction and creating employment opportunities. In this
regard, it would be consistent with the concept of
“inclusive growth” but clearly acknowledging that the
economy must operate within the constraints of its natural
resource availability and environmental integrity.
For city comparison, it is common to consolidate indicators
into a numerical index. However, it is not the intention of
this research to develop an index, for although indices can
be helpful for public communication, city benchmarking
and ranking, they usually involve a process of quantitative
aggregation, normalization, weighting and value
assignment, which tend to obscure contextual information
that is important for meaningful city evaluation.
The Framework for Sustainable Growth©
3
ELEMENTS OF THE FRAMEWORK
The framework consists of four key thrusts, namely, (a)
support economic development (b) conserve and optimize
resources such as land, water, energy and food (c) protect
the built and natural environment d) enhance community
wellbeing and local culture. Each of these thrusts can be
readily evaluated by the relevant indicators in the thirteen
(13) themes of sustainability as derived in this study.
The four thrusts must be supported by good governance,
which frames a city’s transition toward sustainable growth,
and, its responsiveness to climate change. As defined in
this study, good governance will include the dimensions of
institutional capacity building, stakeholder engagement,
robust regulatory framework, strong leadership, sound
economic
management
and
harnessing
market
mechanisms, where appropriate. Climate change is an
important element in the framework and mainstreaming
would ensure that it is well integrated into the overall
policy apparatus of city governments, and adopted into
existing strategies, programs and action plans.
4
This is an implementation‐oriented framework that
recognizes the important role of urban planning in
providing a platform to pursue sustainable growth. Urban
planning can ensure resource optimization by supporting
careful stewardship of resources such as land and water,
with direct policies for conservation and recovery. It can
seek to reduce negative impacts of economic activities on
the environment, such as in reducing air pollution, ensuring
efficient transport systems and better waste management,
with longer term impacts of improving a city’s economic
competitiveness. It can support residents’ social and
economic wellbeing, through optimal land allocation for
housing and community facilities that will enhance social
life and the city’s livability. The framework thus highlights
the physical‐social‐institutional context within which urban
sustainability is operationalized, and also demonstrates
how a strong and integrated urban planning system can
advance it.
HOW CITIES CAN USE THIS FRAMEWORK
This framework is adaptive as it recognizes that each city
must be contextually differentiated according to their
urban regimes, natural endowments, and present state of
development. Cities also tend to follow predetermined
paths of growth and development that are often fashioned
by historical incidents, nationally constrained circumstances
and the economic/political dynamics at the regional or
international levels. Hence, there are no pre‐determined
pathways or prescribed standards for sustainable
development. The only prescription is the capacity to learn
and to change where necessary.
Thus, cities at different stages of development may adopt
or prioritize different aspects of this framework, in any
combination of the indicators suggested for the four pillars
of growth, namely, economy, resources, people and
environment, in order to transit to more sustainable
growth at their own pace.
At the broad level, cities may adopt a holistic view and
selectively include a few relevant indicators from each of
the thirteen themes based on their institutional capacity
and data availability. More narrowly, cities may follow the
traditional urban environmental transition continuum, and
prioritize their attention to the most critical or basic issues
such as air and water quality, waste management,
transport, sanitation, etc., and progressively move to the
more complex sustainability challenges as they gain
resources and institutional capacity.
ADVANCING CITIES’ SUSTAINABILITY
The framework is useful for cities as follows:
Setting Targets for Sustainability
As more cities begin to adopt the suggested indicators, the
framework will be able to present a wide range of
performance possibilities. This will enable cities to make
their respective decision on which targets are most
appropriate based on their development status. Less
developed cities may, for example, prefer to make step‐
wise progress by initially targeting performance goals with
reference to cities within or closer to their development
status (as evidenced by GDP per capita or HDI) and
progressively improve their performance.
Triggering Change
Very often, cities are locked into a particular development
pathway due to a historical situation or institutional
inflexibility. Path dependency would tend to reinforce
existing institutions or practices. With the proposed
framework, knowing where other cities are heading may
trigger off a voluntary self‐assessment process that could
eventually take the sustainability transition forward.
Common Ground for Action
The Framework can be applied by international agencies,
national or local governments, NGOs, civic societies and
academic institutions as the galvanizing force to forge
common goals of sustainability both within and outside
formal institutions, and across government agencies. At the
city level, by understanding urban regimes, the most
effective entry points for change can be determined. The
Framework can provide the substantive guidelines on the
kinds of progress that could take place and point to the
relevant agency or institution that could be most effective
in activating it. Overall, it would be a useful platform for
self‐assessment, comparative analysis, collective learning,
global path‐finding and benchmarking progress.
Principal Investigators:
Prof Heng Chye Kiang and Dr Lai Choo Malone‐lee
Researchers: Abdul Rahim Bin Abdul Hamid, Dr Devisari Tunas, Duong Ngoc Quyen, Irina Orlenko
4
THEMES AND INDICATORS
GOVERNANCE
Good governance is a key contributor to the advancement of sustainable development as it provides the institutional support structure and incentives to achieve sustainable development. It is characterized by participation, accountability, transparency, effectiveness and efficiency in economic management. DIMENSIONS
INDICATORS
INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY
1.
2.
3.
MUTLI STAKEHOLDER PARTNERSHIP AND ENGAGEMENT
4.
5.
INTEGRATING SUSTAINABILITY AND POLICY
6.
7.
Evidence of horizontal coordination in government
a. Is there evidence that agencies are working together in an integrated way to assess/enhance/pursue sustainable development?
b. Is there evidence that key agencies which are involved in formulating policies on sustainable development align these policies with overarching strategies for sustainable development of the city?
Evidence of interaction with local level authority
a. Does the city authority support (in terms of financial, technical, policy interaction, etc.) local community bodies in their sustainable development related activities?
b. Do local community leaders contribute to urban sustainability planning and policy making?
Evidence of strong commitment of high‐level government leadership in formulating, implementing and supporting urban sustainability strategies
a. Evidence of government leadership initiating policies and initiatives related to urban sustainability.
b. Evidence of the government leadership making efforts to implement sustainability policies.
c. Evidence of government leadership explicitly supporting sustainability initiatives and programs.
Public (citizens’) participation in decision making and implementing on urban sustainability
a. Evidence of public participation and engagement in decision‐making during (i) the formulation of major sustainability plans/policies/strategies and (ii) the review of major sustainability plans/policies/strategies
b. Evidence of avenues for the public to register objections to the government’s plans/policies/strategies and due process for receiving and responding to objections from the public.
Representation of major groups in city council, or equivalent bodies, governing sustainable development ‐ Does the city council, or equivalent bodies, governing sustainable development include members from the following major groups: civil society, private sector, NGOs, academic and research institutions, and others?
Evidence of strategies for sustainable development
a. Is there evidence that a city has adopted a holistic and comprehensive framework for sustainable development?
b. Has the city established a long‐term strategic plan for sustainable development involving multiple government agencies?
c. If there is a long‐term strategic plan, have important aspects of land management relating to sustainability been incorporated in the plan?
d. Is the plan accompanied by appropriate funding or strategies for availing funds for implementation?
e. Are there any established procedures, either legal or administrative, or through the land use planning framework, that ensures that environmental concerns and other considerations are looked after before development proceeds?
Programs for environmental statistics and environmental‐economic accounting
a. Is there evidence that the city tracks/monitors and reports on basic statistics on environmental quality as part of a coordinated centralized system for collating and providing environmental information?
b. Is there evidence that such information is made available to the community in the form of data, publications or through a website?
c. Is there evidence of integrating environment and economic accounting in public decision making?
5
THEMES AND INDICATORS
GOVERNANCE
CONTINUED | 6
DIMENSIONS
INDICATORS
LEGAL AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS
8.
ECONOMIC INSTRUMENTS AND FINANCIAL COMMITMENTS
9.
a. Ratification of global agreements related to sustainable development
i. Has the country ratified (accession to, acceptance or approval of) selected key global agreements related to sustainable development? ii. Has the city adopted any of the selected key global agreements related to sustainable development, irrespective of country's position?
b. Implementation of ratified global agreements ‐ Is there existence of national legislation and institutional mechanism (including financial mechanisms) for the implementation of international agreements related to sustainable development?
Environmental taxes and fees: Has the city implemented environmental taxes and fees as an economic disincentive in the following areas? a. Energy taxes (tax based on fuel type, including climate change levy if applied on fuel type, etc.)
b. Transport levy (including motor fuel differentiation, vehicle excise duty differentiation, congestion charges, etc.)
c. Pollution levy (carbon emission tax, fines and charges paid by defaulting industries, landfill tax, fees for waste collection, etc.)
d. Resource levy (water tax, levy for mining or quarrying, mineral tax, etc.)
10. Subsidies and other financial incentives that promote sustainable development Does the city provide financial incentive such as subsidies and rebates to support environmentally friendly practices in following areas?
a. Energy‐related (adopting energy‐efficient technology/products, renewable energy, etc.)
b. Transport‐related (buying green vehicles, promotion of public transport or non‐motorized transport etc.)
c. Resource‐related (practice separation of waste and recycling, using water efficient fixtures, etc.)
THEMES AND INDICATORS
ECONOMY
This study adopts the UNEP’s 2011 definition of Green Growth to frame the concept of sustainable growth. It makes reference to “an economy that results in improved well‐being and reduced inequalities over the long‐term, while not exposing future generations to significant environmental risks and ecological scarcities.” DIMENSIONS
INDICATORS
MACROECONOMIC PERFORMANCE
1.
2.
3.
4.
GDP Vitals
a. GDP growth rate b. GDP per capita c. Economic structure d. Wage share
Openness ‐ FDI intensity: Average of inward and outward Foreign Direct Investment inflows divided by GDP.
Inflation – Annual inflation rate based on Consumer Price Index.
Labor productivity ‐ Annual average value added per employee.
R&D EXPENDITURE
5.
Total R&D expenditures
a. Percentage R&D expenditures (public and private) as share of GDP.
b. Extent of R&D expenditures on environmental technology (qualitative).
c. Number of patents filed per unit of R&D expenditure.
RESOURCE PRODUCTIVITY
6.
7.
8.
Energy productivity ‐ GDP output in dollar ($) terms per unit (ktoe) of energy use
Water productivity ‐ Value added per unit of water consumed for key industries
Land productivity ‐ Value added per hectare of industrial land for key industries
Note:
i.
An additional indicator on material productivity can be included if cities have the relevant data;
ii.
An additional dimension of the performance of the Environmental Goods and Services (EGS) Sector with appropriate
indicators on its size and contribution to the economy, is also relevant to the assessment. Cities may begin to identify this
sector and eventually include it in the assessment framework.
7
THEMES AND INDICATORS
LAND
The European Commission (2001) has defined a sustainable city as “one that enhances the efficiency of land use within the city, protects highly valued un‐built land, biodiversity and green areas from development and restores contaminated and derelict land (brownfield sites).”
DIMENSIONS
INDICATORS
LAND CONSERVATION
1.
2.
3.
REGENERATION AND REDEVELOPMENT OF LAND
4.
8
5.
LAND COMPACTNESS
6.
7.
LAND OPTIMISATION
8.
9.
Amount of developed land ‐ Area of developed land as a percentage of the total land area.
Legally protected area ‐ Area of legally protected land as a percentage of the total land area comprising:
a. Nature land
b. Built‐up land with buildings or structures designated for conservation c. All other land area for which legal protection has been instituted to ensure that such land is not used for development purposes that are not consistent with the purpose of designation.
Land consumption ‐ Area of new development on undeveloped land tracked from a specified base year (sq. km, trend).
Land degradation a. Proportion of land which due to natural processes or human activity is no longer able to properly sustain economic function and/or an original ecological function without treatment at reasonable cost (trend).
b. Are there any effective actions taken by the city to prevent land degradation and contamination? (qualitative)
Redevelopment of land
a. Area of brownfield land restoration tracked from a specified base year (industrial sites) (hectares, trend). b. Area of non‐industrial land redevelopment tracked from a specified base year (trend).
Population and Space Intensity a. Total population over the total area in a city.
b. Number of inhabitants per 1 sq. km of residential land. c. Ratio of total floor area of commercial developments to the area of commercial land (number).
d. Ratio of total floor area of industrial developments to the area of industrial land (number).
Intensification of Housing Development ‐ Number of dwelling units per 1 sq. km of land zoned for:
a. All types of residential development
b. Single‐family housing zones
c. Multi‐family housing zones.
Land efficiency a. Number of employees per 1 sq km of net commercial land.
b. Vacancy rate for office space ‐ Grade A (trend).
Extent of mixed use
a. Area of land zoned under Multiple Use zone in the city tracked from a specified base year (hectares, trend).
b. Ratio of employees to residents in the CBD (number).
THEMES AND INDICATORS
WATER
The sustainable management of water resources requires both a holistic perspective of resource management and an
integrated response to the interplay of water with environmental, economic, social and institutional factors. A
sustainable urban water system “should not have negative environmental effects even over a long time perspective,
while providing the services wanted, protecting human health and the environment at the expense of a minimum of
scarce resources”.
DIMENSIONS
INDICATORS
WATER USE
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Internal renewable freshwater per capita and its use.
Total water used (m3/capita per day, trend).
Sectoral distribution of water used.
Percentage of drinking water tested that meets international standards.
Percentage of water use met by ‘unconventional’ sources.
URBAN WATER SYSTEM
6.
Energy used for water treatment ‐ Energy used per cubic meter of water treated to drinking water quality (kWh/m3).
Unaccounted for water (Percentage of unaccounted water compared to total water produced). 7.
SANITATION, WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND REUSE
8.
Access to improved sources of sanitation ‐ Percentage of a country’s population that has access to an improved source of sanitation (Country level indicator).
9. Wastewater treatment coverage ‐ Percentage of wastewater generated that is treated to secondary treatment level.
10. Percentage of wastewater recycled ‐ Percentage of wastewater recycled (for potable and non‐potable purposes) compared with total amount of wastewater produced.
SURFACE WATER QUALITY 11. Monitoring surface water quality (qualitative) ‐ To what extent is the city is monitoring and reporting its surface water quality of lakes, rivers, ponds, reservoirs etc. based on the following characteristics?
Physical characteristics:
a. pH
b. Conductivity
c. Suspended solids
Chemical characteristics:
a. Dissolved oxygen (DO)
b. Nitrates (N) concentration c. Phosphates (P) concentration Biological characteristics:
a. Faecal coliform b. Biological oxygen demand (BOD)
MARINE POLLUTION
12. Discharge of pollutants into coastal waters (qualitative)
a. Does the city monitor oil discharge from land‐based activities, maritime transportation, offshore exploration etc. and how effective are these measures? b. Does the city monitor the release of nitrates and phosphates to coastal waters from land‐based activities and urban runoff or concentration of nutrients in transitional, coastal and marine waters and how effective is such monitoring?
9
THEMES AND INDICATORS
ENERGY
Sustainable energy issues in this study include primarily issues such as energy use, intensity and efficiency which are
best analyzed at the level of a city or urban area, to complement assessment of energy security at a national scale.
DIMENSIONS
INDICATORS
ENERGY USE AND INTENSITY
1.
2.
3.
ENERGY MIX AND SECURITY
4.
5.
6.
10
ENERGY PRICING
7.
8.
ALTERNATIVE ENERGY 9.
ENERGY EFFICIENCY
12.
Total Primary Energy Supply (TPES)
a. Total primary energy supply, in terms of 1,000 tonnes of oil equivalent (ktoe) (trend).
b. Total energy exports (ktoe) as a percentage of TPES (trend).
Secondary energy use
a. Total final energy consumption in 1,000 tonnes of oil equivalent (ktoe)(trend).
b. Electricity consumption per capita (KwH/capita).
Energy Intensity ‐ Energy used (ktoe) per S$1,000 GDP generated
Energy mix of TPES ‐ Percentage of fuel types used in terms of tonnes of oil equivalent (e.g. coal, oil, nuclear, renewables, natural gas). Energy security
a. Net energy import dependency (ratio of energy import to TPES)
b. Are there any key fuel types imported where a large majority is from a single supplier?
Fuel Mix for electricity generation ‐ Percentage share amongst four key sources (coal, oil, gas, renewables) (trend).
Pricing Policies ‐ Does the city apply energy pricing policies and strategies that encourage energy conservation and efficiency, and how effective are these measures?
Household expenditure on Energy ‐ Percentage of household energy expenditure in relation to total expenditure. Alternative Energy Supply a. Percentage share of alternative in TPES
b. Does the city have recognized limited natural endowments that hamper the shift towards non‐fossil fuel energy sources? 10. Alternative energy sources in electricity generation and generating electricity ‐
Percentage of alternative energy sources in:
a. Electricity generation
b. Generating capacity
11. Support Mechanism for alternative energy ‐ Does the city have any support mechanism for the promotion of alternative energy, and effective are these mechanism? (qualitative)
Sectoral energy consumption ‐ Percentage of energy consumption from various sectors (industrial, commercial, residential and transport).
13. Sectoral energy efficiency ‐ Energy used in ktoe for the following:
a. Industry (in toe per unit of value added) b. Residential (in toe per capita)
c. Commercial & public sector (in toe per m2 floor space)
d. Transport (in toe per 1,000 vehicle – km)
14. Carbon intensity of electricity generation ‐ Tonnes of CO2 equivalent emitted per kwh of electricity generated.
THEMES AND INDICATORS
FOOD
The subject of food sustainability goes beyond food security or food sovereignty to straddle other dimensions including in‐
city production vs imports, food availability, economic access to food, food utilization, education and nutrition awareness. DIMENSIONS
INDICATORS
FOOD PRODUCTION
1.
2.
FOOD AVAILABILITY
3.
4.
5.
ECONOMIC ACCESS TO FOOD
6.
7.
Farming land, space and productivity
a. Hectares of farming land per 1,000 persons or proportion of farming land compared to total land of a city.
b. Farming Space: Amount of farming space per 1,000 person or proportion of farming space compared to total building space available in a city.
c. Farming productivity in terms of yield tonnes per ha of farming land or tonnes per square meter of farming space.
Strategies for food security (qualitative) ‐ Has the city adopted any policies/strategies on efficient agricultural production or food management system for the food security in the city?
Food self‐sufficiency
a. Percentage of total food calories supplied to the local population by domestic production compared to total consumption in calories.
b. Percentage of food produced by domestic production in amount compared to total consumption in amount.
Import of food
a. Percentage of food import from sources beyond national boundary compared to total consumption.
b. Percentage of food import from outside the metropolitan area of a city but within national boundary compared to total consumption.
Diversity of food import sources a. Number of key food items for which more than 50% of supply comes from a single country (cities to decide on the list of key food items).
b. Number of key food items for which more than 50% of supply comes from a single region (cities to decide the key food items). (Unit: number)
c. Has the city considered its “food miles” and their implications on its global carbon footprint, and made reasonable attempts to reduce it? (qualitative)
Household food expenditure ‐ Percentage of monthly household food expenditure in relation to total monthly household expenditure.
Food assistance programs (qualitative) ‐ To what extent is the population requiring food assistance covered by a public direct food provision and nutrition program?
FOOD UTILIZATION 8.
Dietary diversity ‐ Per capita consumption of key food categories per year. (Key food categories can be defined by respective cities, and may include cereals, milk and dairy, fat and sugar, non‐dairy sources of protein, fruits and vegetables).
9. Food safety policy and programs (qualitative) ‐ Do any food safety and/or consumer protection programs or policies exist in the city?
10. Food‐borne diseases ‐ The incidence of major food‐borne diseases in terms of number of recorded cases per 100,000 people in the city (Cities to decide the major food‐borne diseases relevant to them).
EDUCATION AND AWARENESS RELATED TO FOOD
11. Education and awareness related to food (qualitative) ‐ Are there any public awareness building, public information and education campaigns (including school instruction at various levels) regarding nutrition and food safety?
11
THEMES AND INDICATORS
BIODIVERSITY
AND URBAN GREENERY
The proposed assessment framework straddles the ecological, social and economic values of biodiversity and will assess
how a city addresses these multiple values in the process of integrating biodiversity as a city resource as part of the
city’s spatial planning and long term development goals.
DIMENSIONS
INDICATORS
NATURE CONSERVATION
1.
2.
3.
4.
12
5.
PARK AND NATURAL AREA PROVISION
6.
7.
8.
ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
9.
Number of selected native species and their respective populations (trend) a. Trend in the number of native species of three key taxonomic groups surveyed worldwide, i.e. birds, butterflies, plants, and two other taxonomic groups that the city has data on or wants to report. b. Trend in the population size of three key taxonomic groups surveyed worldwide, i.e. birds, butterflies, plants, and two other taxonomic groups that the city has data on or wants to report.
Ecosystem coverage: Amount (ha) of selected key ecosystem types (trend) ‐
Proportion and absolute amount of land pertinent to main ecosystem types in the city.
Connectivity measures or ecological networks to counter fragmentation ‐ Total area of natural areas that are linked as a ratio of the total area of natural areas within the city.
Percentage of total protected areas and respective ecosystem type ‐ The area and percentage of total protected areas by type of ecosystems relative to total city area respective to their ecosystem type.
Budget allocated to nature conservation and urban greenery related administration ‐ Budget for nature conservation and urban greenery‐related administration or its proxy as a percentage of GDP.
Amount (ha) and percentage of greenery on ground level (trend) ‐ Total area and percentage of greenery at ground level compared to the total area of the city, for:
a. Natural areas
b. Parks
Total provision of parks (with or without natural areas) ‐ Area of parks, including those with natural areas, provided per 1,000 people in the city.
Proportion of total city population within 400m radius of a park ‐ Proportion of total city population within 400m radius of a park or its proxy.
Ecosystem services for climate resilience ‐ Does the city actively recognise or engage ecosystem services contributed by biodiversity and urban greenery to climate resilience? (Qualitative)
10. Regulation of quantity of water through permeable surfaces ‐ Proportion of all permeable areas to total terrestrial area.
11. Carbon storage and cooling effect of vegetation through tree canopy coverage ‐
The total tree canopy cover of both planted and naturally occurring vegetation, i.e., total area under tree canopy, as a proportion of the total terrestrial area of the city. THEMES AND INDICATORS
AIR
Air quality in the city is linked to human health and has a direct impact on the standard of living and the quality of urban
life. The consideration is particularly critical with the emphasis on economic growth, particularly in industrial
development.
DIMENSIONS
INDICATORS
AIR QUALITY
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
EMISSION INTENSITIES
6.
7.
8.
Sulphur Dioxide Concentration ‐ Annual mean concentration of Sulphur Dioxide (µgram/m3).
Nitrogen Dioxide Concentration ‐ Annual mean concentration of Nitrogen Dioxide (µgram/m3).
PM 2.5 Concentration ‐ Annual mean concentration of PM 2.5 (µgram/m3).
PM 10 Concentration ‐ Second highest twenty‐four hour mean concentration of PM 10 (µgram/m3).
Ground‐level Ozone Concentration ‐ Fourth highest eight hourly mean concentration of Ozone (µgram/m3).
Emissions of SOx by relevant key industrial sectors ‐ Percentage of Sulphur
Oxide emissions by each key industry sectors.
SOx emissions per value added for top emitters ‐ SOx emissions per value add (US$) for the key industrial emitters.
NOx emissions per transport unit ‐ NOx emissions per transport unit (in tonnes
per vehicular‐km travelled) (trend).
13
THEMES AND INDICATORS
WASTE
Urbanization along with high production and consumption of goods has increased waste generation in cities. Current patterns of resource consumption and subsequent waste disposal need to be supported by appropriate waste management methods and strategies, and it is important to begin to embrace “Cradle‐to‐Cradle” concepts as part of urban sustainability thinking . DIMENSIONS
INDICATORS
WASTE GENERATION
1.
2.
Total waste per capita ‐ Total waste per capita (kg/capita per day).
Domestic waste per capita ‐ Domestic waste generated per capita (kg/capita per day).
a. Household waste
b. Others (e.g. markets, schools, food centers)
WASTE INTENSITY
3.
4.
Total waste per GDP (kg/US$1,000).
Non‐domestic waste per GDP (kg/US$1,000).
a. Commercial
b. Industrial
c. Others
WASTE RECOVERY
5.
Recycling rate ‐ Amount of waste recycled as a percentage of total waste generated.
Waste finally disposed of by incineration, landfills or other means ‐ Percentage of final waste disposed by: a. Incineration
b. Landfill
c. Other means
Adopting a “Cradle‐to‐Cradle Approach” ‐ Has the city adopted a ‘Cradle‐to‐
Cradle Approach’ to waste management? (qualitative)
6.
14
7.
THEMES AND INDICATORS
TRANSPORT
The definition of sustainability in the transportation sector may vary depending on the perspective of different sectors within society, but it must be associated with the use of resources, social equity, accessibility and economic viability. DIMENSIONS
INDICATORS
MODAL SPLIT
1.
2.
3.
VEHICLE USE AND OWNERSHIP
4.
5.
LAND USE AND TRANSPORT INTEGRATION
6.
7.
8.
Modal split of passenger transport in percentages ‐ Share of each mode (passenger cars, buses and coaches, and trains) in total inland passenger land transport measured in passenger‐km percentages. Ratio of private and public motorised transport ‐ Modal split percentages of private and public motorised transport trips.
Modal split for trips less than 5 kms ‐ The modal split (all types) for all passenger trips less than 5 kms.
Vehicle ownership
a. The number of vehicles registered per 1,000 population.
b. Does the city apply policies to control vehicles and usage?
Vehicle kilometres travelled ‐ Average annual kilometres travelled (for all vehicle types).
Proportion of population living within the transit shed ‐ Proportion of the total population living within the transit shed (defined as 400 m radius of transit facilities).
Proportion of population employed within the transit shed ‐ Number of jobs within the transit shed over the total number of jobs in the city. Geographic coverage of a city’s public transport system
a. Length (km) of rail network per developed land area in a city.
b. Length (km) of bus routs per developed land area in a city.
ROAD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT
9. Road vehicle density ‐ Number of vehicles per lane‐kilometre of roadways.
10. Passenger traffic demand ‐ Total passengers multiplied by the average number of kilometres travelled annually (trends). 11. Travel time budget for time taken to travel to work and back ‐ Minutes taken for the trips from home to workplace and back.
ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS
12. Emission standards ‐ Percentage distribution of Euro 1,2,3 & 4 of all motor vehicles.
13. Road safety ‐ Total annual transport‐related fatalities of all accident types.
14. Household expenditure on transport ‐ Percentage of average monthly household expenditure on transport.
15
THEMES AND INDICATORS
CULTURE
Culture is a driver of sustainability, a form of capital, as well as a method or means toward achieving sustainability within society. It is also a goal of sustainability in itself, and local culture needs to be preserved, supported and reproduced.
DIMENSIONS
INDICATORS
CULTURAL INSTITUTIONS AND ENACTMENTS
1.
2.
3.
16
CULTURAL MILIEU
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
CULTURE AND ECONOMY
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
EDUCATION FOR CULTURE
Number of arts and cultural establishments ‐ Number of arts and cultural establishments by non‐profit and commercial establishment per thousand of population.
Cultural events displayed in public a. Total number of events, shows, performances, and exhibitions per year, including : i.
International and local production
ii.
Festivals (all types)
iii.
Licensed events displayed in public b. To what extent are local customs, traditions and ethnic or religious practices embraced and displayed in festivals, events and other public activities? (qualitative)
Mechanisms to support culture ‐ Does the city have institutional mechanisms to support culture? (qualitative) The following questions are asked: a. Is there a ministry or department of culture?
b. Does this organization have a cultural audit or plan?
c. What is the scope of “culture” in this plan?
Attendance to arts and cultural events annually ‐ Percentage of residents that have attended at least one arts or cultural event in the last year.
Number of tickets to performances purchased annually ‐ Number of tickets to performances purchased annually as a percentage of the population.
Heritage sites and buildings legally designated for conservation ‐ Total number of heritage sites and buildings legally designated for conservation.
Accessible space for creative practitioners to display, create, and practice their work ‐ Does the city have accessible (affordable and suitable) space for creative practitioners to display, create, and practice their work? (Qualitative)
Physical spaces in the city that foster creativity and allow for arts and cultural works and events to be performed and displayed informally ‐ Are there physical spaces in the city that foster creativity and allow for arts and cultural works and events to be performed and displayed informally? (Qualitative)
Government funding for arts and cultural programs ‐ Government funding for arts and cultural programs in dollar terms as a percentage of GDP.
Philanthropic donations to arts and cultural programs ‐ Proportion of the total funding for arts and culture from philanthropic donations.
Number of persons employed full time in the cultural sector ‐ Number of persons employed full‐time in the cultural sector per 1,000 employed persons.
a. Arts and culture Sector
b. Media and digital Entertainment Sector
Value added by cultural industries ‐ Value added by cultural industries as a percentage of the GDP.
Plans for long term investments in arts and culture ‐ Does the city have plans for long term investments in arts and culture that includes diverse areas of expenditures such as: infrastructure, public art, programing, education, etc.? (Qualitative)
14. Integration of arts and cultural education into the baseline curriculum of schools ‐ To what extent is arts and cultural education integrated into the baseline curriculum of schools? (Qualitative)
15. Students in degree‐granting arts and cultural programs ‐ Number of students in degree‐granting arts and cultural programs as percentage of total students.
THEMES AND INDICATORS
PEOPLE
Community wellbeing is not a simple aggregation of individual life satisfaction, it includes how widespread this sense of wellbeing, both material and non‐material, applies across all segments of society. It also includes the concepts of social cohesion and the presence of social networks, all of which relates to the ideals of connectedness and solidarity, that might collectively transfer shared prosperity and value systems to future generations.
DIMENSIONS
INDICATORS
POPULATION PROFILE
1.
2.
3.
HEALTHY LIFE AND HEALTHCARE SERVICES
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Population growth rate ‐ The annual rate of change of population size (%) (trend).
Total fertility rate ‐ Average number of children a woman would bear over the course of her lifetime if current age specific rates remained constant throughout her childbearing years (normally between ages 15 and 49).
Dependency ratio ‐ Number of population aged 0‐19 and 65 and above as a ratio of the working age population 20‐64.
Life expectancy at birth ‐ The average number of years that a new‐born could expect to live if he or she were subject to the age‐specific mortality rates of a given period.
Health conditions ‐ Percentage of adult population under key health risks a. Hypertension
b. Diabetes
c. High cholesterol
d. Obesity
e. Daily smoking
Out‐of‐pocket health expenditure ‐ Share of health expenditure to total household expenditure (monthly) (%).
Public expenditure on health ‐ Government expenditure on health as % of GDP.
Availability of healthcare services a. Number of doctors per 1,000 population
b. Number of hospital beds per 1,000 population
EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT AND SERVICES
9.
Educational attainment ‐ Percentage of adults aged 25‐64 who have completed at least (upper) secondary education.
10. Lifelong learning ‐ Percentage of adults aged 25‐64 who are undergoing job‐
related training as part of the total population of the same group.
11. Public expenditure on education ‐ Government expenditure on education as % of GDP.
HOUSING PROVISION
12. Availability of adequate housing
a. Homeownership rate: Share of resident owner‐occupied housing units as a proportion of the total number of resident occupied housing units. b. Extent of population without access to adequate housing (qualitative).
13. Housing expenditure ‐ Share of housing cost to total household expenditure (monthly) (%).
14. Housing standard ‐ Floor area per person (sq m/person).
URBAN LIFE QUALITY
15. Work‐life balance ‐ Percentage of employees working more than 50 hours per week.
16. Income gap ‐ Average income of the top 10% over the average income of the bottom 10% of the population (90‐10 ratio).
17. Long‐term unemployment rate ‐ Percentage of total number of active persons in the labour market that have been unemployed for 12 months. 18. Crime rate ‐ Number of crimes per 100,000 population.
SOCIAL COHESION
19. Sense of community ‐ Percentage of population participating in the following activities in the last 12 months:
a. Volunteering
b. Community events
20. Sense of belonging ‐ To what extent does the city population agree that “I feel a sense of belonging to the City”? 17
THEMES AND INDICATORS
CLIMATE CHANGE
Cities as economic hubs need to be especially resilient to climatic variability, in order to maintain economic stability and provide for their local population. But, economic activity and population consumption patterns are also responsible for the emissions of GHGs that are linked to climate change.
DIMENSIONS
INDICATORS
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
1.
2.
3.
CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS
4.
5.
18
6.
GHG Emissions per unit GDP and per capita (Trend)
a. Metric tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent per dollar GDP (mt CO2
equivalent per dollar GDP).
b. Metric tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent per capita (mt CO2 equivalent per capita). GHG emissions by sectoral distribution (%) ‐ GHG emissions by sector, namely, energy supply, industries, buildings (including households), transport and others (agriculture, forestry, waste and waste water).
Carbon intensity of domestic consumption measured in tonnes per GDP (Trend) Carbon intensity consumption = emissions from final domestic consumption + emissions embodied in imported goods + emissions from domestic production ‐
emissions embodied in exports.
Assessment of current and historic climate conditions ‐ Has the city conducted assessment studies to observe the historical trends of temperature change, precipitation change and sea level change?
Assessing future projections of climate change ‐ Has the city conducted assessment studies to project future change in temperature, precipitation and sea level?
Assessment of climate impacts and risks/ vulnerability ‐ Has the city assessed its vulnerability or risks to climate change, taking into consideration its historic climate changes, future climate change projections and adaptive capacity?
CLIMATE CHANGE GOVERNANCE
7.
Political support and leadership ‐ Is the city mayor/leader(s) actively supporting and leading the city's climate change initiative?
8. Institutional capacity – Is there a dedicated city department unit, council or equivalent body to manage and govern the climate change mitigation and adaptation processes?
9. Multi‐stakeholder partnership and engagement ‐ Does the climate change planning process involve participation from key actors, e.g. academic and scientific organizations, community‐based organizations and private sector?
10. Climate change strategy ‐ Has the city adopted an overarching strategy or policy to guide its climate change initiatives?
MITIGATION STRATEGY
11. Barriers and limitations to mitigation recognized by UNFCCC/IPCC ‐ Does the city have recognized inherent limitations/constraints to known climate change mitigation measures?
12. Emission reduction targets ‐ Has the city clearly set GHG emission reduction targets?
13. Mitigation strategies developed ‐ Has the city developed clear mitigation strategies in response to the GHG emission targets?
14. Prioritization and Implementation of mitigation strategies ‐ Has the city prioritized/ adopted an implementation pathway for the mitigation strategies?
15. Monitoring and reporting ‐ Does the city have recognized inherent limitations/ constraints to frame effective actions towards climate change adaptation?
ADAPTATION STRATEGY
16. Barriers and limitations to adaptation recognized by IPCC ‐ Does the city have recognized inherent limitations/ constraints to frame effective actions towards climate change adaptation?
17. Adaptation strategies developed ‐ Has the city identified and developed key adaptation strategies, based on the vulnerability assessments?
18. Prioritization and implementation of adaptation strategies ‐ Has the city prioritized/ adopted an implementation pathway for the adaptation strategies?
19. Monitoring and reporting ‐ Has the city developed ways to monitor progress of the implementation processes?
SELECTED BEST PRACTICES
The following are 20 out of over 90 selected case studies from cities around the world that have shown exemplary efforts in addressing urban sustainability issues. SEATTLE | USA
COMMUNITY‐DRIVEN SUSTAINABILITY INDICATORS
Sustainable Seattle demonstrates an approach to developing sustainability indicators
through extensive community participation and interaction. It is a good example of an
urban experience that involves organisational innovation, implementation of participatory
processes, and a sustainability outcome that is both relevant and meaningful for the
community concerned.
BILBAO | SPAIN
URBAN REGENERATION AS A PLATFORM FOR GROWTH
Bilbao’s urban transformation included a host of projects that revolved around brownfield
regeneration, cleaning the river, giving new uses to existing constructions, and building the
infrastructure and public works needed in a post‐industrial city. Enlightened leadership and
the willingness of stakeholders at different levels are key to the success of this case.
Please add high dpi image! LONDON | UK
GREEN ENTERPRISE DISTRICT
Green Enterprise District is an urban regeneration project in East London that seeks to grow
clean and green industries while creating low carbon living spaces. The city has taken a
holistic view towards social, environmental and economic sustainability, by promoting
economic structuring based on brownfield generation and focusing on new industries.
MELBOURNE | AUSTRALIA
THE CITY AS A CATCHMENT Melbourne’s comprehensive water resource management, planning and policy framework
is exemplary for its perspectives on sustainability and resilience. The City as Catchment
policy with its plans to improve urban catchment quality offers a viable approach for water
sustainability that straddles resource use, conservation and behavioral change.
MONTREAL | CANADA
OPTIMISING LAND THROUGH UNDERGROUND SPACES
Montreal’s underground city shows how planners can free up above ground spaces and
optimize development potential of valuable land resources. At the same time, it promotes
connectivity and facilitates pedestrian movement, linking developments across the city,
and allowing it to be used and enjoyed by citizens notwithstanding weather conditions.
ROTTERDAM | THE NETHERLANDS
CLIMATE CHANGE AND WATER MANAGEMENT
Rotterdam’s water management shows how a city can adapt to the effects of climate
change. Detailed studies on the needs of different areas and a willingness to experiment
with infrastructure and urban planning/design possibilities are helping make the city more
climate‐ready while enhancing quality of life, and creating economic opportunities.
RIZHAO | CHINA
PROMOTING RENEWABLES Rizhao represents an example of the mainstreaming of renewable energy sources to
reduce dependency on fossil fuels. The city uses a pragmatic mix of legislative tools and
incentives to encourage large‐scale and efficient use of alternative energy, especially solar
energy throughout the city.
FREIBURG | GERMANY
INTEGRATED ENERGY PLANNING The city of Freiburg has implemented an integrated plan combining transport, urban
planning, waste management, energy efficiency and conservation, promotion of renewable
energy to realise the city’s ambitious climate protection and energy targets. The city is also
a model of public‐private cooperation in promoting sustainability practices.
HAVANA | CUBA
URBAN AGRICULTURE AS CITY LIFE
Havana’s urban agriculture has grown from a grassroots movement into a comprehensive,
organised, government‐backed programme that helps urban farmers gain access to land,
tools, technical inputs, and training in order to produce food for the city. Urban agriculture
helps increase food security, improve access to food and reduce food miles.
KAMPALA | UGANDA
INSTITUTIONALISING URBAN AGRICULTURE
The city of Kampala demonstrated how urban agriculture can be institutionalised through
the involvement of NGOs, humanising the laws at grassroots level, providing technical help
to farmers through better information, skills and technologies. All these contributed to a
more self‐sufficient society and better quality of life for farmers and city dwellers alike.
19
SELECTED BEST PRACTICE CASES
| Continued
BERLIN | GERMANY
COMPENSATION MEASURES FOR NATURE CONSERVATION
The nature conservation legislation and policies of Berlin involving innovative
compensatory mechanisms taking into account both ecological and social outcomes. In the
process, Berlin has been able to achieve the objectives of its landscape programme whilst
responding to the nature conservation advocacy by lobby groups.
CHICAGO | USA
GREEN ROOFS Chicago’s nature conservation efforts takes into account the multiple values of nature
areas – ecological, social, economic and educational. The city government has been
successful in popularizing green initiatives and harnessing partnerships with the private
sector and the citizens through its extensive green roofs program.
STOCKHOLM | SWEDEN
AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT
Stockholm’s regional air quality monitoring efforts have helped public and private
stakeholders better understand emission sources, air quality measurements and
meteorological parameters. In the implementation of its model of dispersion and
deposition of air pollutants, the city has harnessed the support of different actors to
coordinate efforts, share costs, and engender a multi‐stakeholder partnership.
TOKYO | JAPAN
TOWARDS A SOUND MATERIAL‐CYCLE SOCIETY
Tokyo has implemented a city‐wide separation‐at‐source practice and enacted laws and
regulations supporting recycling, reuse, and producer responsibility. The city also managed
to engender behavioral changes by emphasizing reliance on education, awareness building
and leveraging a culture that respects norms and social practices.
AMSTERDAM | THE NETHERLANDS
20
WASTE‐TO‐ENERGY Amsterdam has integrated waste management programs that make extensive use of waste
powered district heating/cooling and use of fuel produced from waste. The city also
applied integration of waste management with physical land use planning by strategic co‐
location of waste water and incineration plants.
HONG KONG | CHINA
LAND USE AND PUBLIC TRANSPORT INTEGRATION
The Hong Kong public transport system demonstrates integration between transport and
land‐use planning, with mixed use policies, transport options in close proximity to
residential and work areas, and good connectivity in both at‐grade and above ground
linkages, all of which are coupled with service quality and affordability considerations.
COPENHAGEN | DENMARK
NON‐MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
Copenhagen has established a good model for the development of city‐wide bike system
and pedestrian networks. Extensive efforts are made to integrate cycling and pedestrian
planning as part of the city fabric, contributing both to reduced fuel‐consuming transport
modes and quality of life in the city.
TAIPEI | TAIWAN
COMMUNITY‐LED CULTURE DEVELOPMENT
Taipei has adopted a variety of approaches to promoting and preserving its local culture,
from strengthening arts and cultural institutional capacity to decentralizing creative zones
for greater interaction between producers and users of arts. The bottom‐up approach also
actively engaged the community in cultural planning and heritage preservation.
SINGAPORE PUBLIC HOUSING
Singapore has provided over 80% of its residents with government designed and built
public housing. It achieved an almost 90% homeownership rate with various supporting
financing schemes. The public housing estates are attractively built with extensive social
and community amenities, as well as efficient infrastructure.
NEW YORK CITY | USA
CLIMATE CHANGE IN INTEGRATED PLANNING New York City’s comprehensive city plans included committed efforts in adapting to and
mitigating climate change. Apart from infrastructure investments, it sought to set up
institutionalized mechanisms to assess, plan and implement changes in the social,
economic and environmental dimensions; in the process, PlaNYC also brings together
different levels of government, private companies, and academia in a common cause.
20