Growth, Prosperity & Jobs for All
within Planetary Boundaries
with a Focus on Youth and Women
Dr. Mark Roseland, Centre for Sustainable Community Development
School of Resource and Environmental Management
Simon Fraser University
Vancouver, Canada
www.sfu.ca/cscd; www.rem.sfu.ca
roseland@sfu.ca
Communitas Coalition for Sustainable Cities & Regions
in the New UN Development Agenda
Communitas Experts Workshop, UN, NYC
5-6 December 2013
Two huge and potentially conflicting challenges
1) Growth, Prosperity and Jobs for All, including
women and youth, vs.
2) Getting/staying within planetary boundaries
How to address each without worsening the
other?
The territorial dimension
This dilemma is further complicated by
increasing urbanization and the changing role
of cities
But first….
what planetary boundaries must we be within?
The Ecological Footprint
Courtesy: Mathis Wackernagel, Global Footprint Network
The Global Ecological Deficit
(comparing supply and demand)
human population (2013):
7.1 billion
average eco- footprint/person:
2.7 gha
biocapacity per person:
1.7 gha
overshoot (EF – biocapacity)
58% overshoot
1.0 gha
The Global Picture
global biocapacity:
12.0 billion hectares
ffads
Economic and
material growth
today is being
financed by the
liquidation of
essential, nonsubstitutable selfproducing natural
capital and at the
expense of global
life support
systems. We are in
violation of Hicksian
sustainability
criterion.
current human eco-footprint:
19.0 billion hectares
We do not share well.
* The wealthiest 20% of humanity take home 70-75% of
income (consumption); the poorest 20% survive on about
2% of income (purchasing power parity). More than 80
percent of the world’s population lives in countries where
income differentials are widening.
* in cities: increasing phenomena of urban poverty and
exclusion
* poverty in cities increasingly linked to the informal
economy, where women and youth are often locked in
* Urban poverty is also increasingly segregated;
inequalities are concentrated mainly in slums, especially
in the developing world (est. 1/3 of population)
Business As Usual
Practitioner Experience
An explosion of “eco-city” frameworks, standards and
indicators
Local authorities using sustainable community
initiatives
Gaps re: funding, power, shared vision and framework,
coordination, mandate
Thinking About Targets
In the Rio+20 outcome document ‘The Future We Want’,
Member States agreed that Sustainable Development Goals
(SDGs) must be:
• Action-oriented
• Concise
• Easy to communicate
• Limited in number
• Aspirational
• Global in nature
• Universally applicable to all countries while taking into
account different national realities, capacities and levels of
development and respecting national policies and priorities.
Review of Targets Proposed by Others
* UN Sustainable Development Solutions
Network
* UN Habitat
* Centre for International Governance
Innovation (CIGI)
• CIGI and Korea Development Institute,
proposed renaming this Goal as:
“Inclusive Growth for Dignified Livelihoods and
Adequate Standards of Living”
Communitas Proposed Targets
Target 1: Bring global, national and city-region
production and consumption within planetary
boundaries
Country-level targets should be established consistent
with living within our ecological means. A 58% reduction
in average ecological footprints implies a 65% reduction
on average in Europe, and 80% in North America by 2030.
The ecological footprints of many developing countries
are currently well below their bio-capacity and would,
therefore, be set at a higher level, allowing for growth in
their use of bio-capacity.
Communitas Proposed Targets
Target 2: Redirect subsidies to fossil fuel and resourcebased industries by 10% per annum towards the
sustainable development of economic sectors relevant
to each country and its territories in order to foster
social and territorial cohesion
From 2016-2030, set a target of a 10% per annum
reduction of government subsidies to fossil fuel and
resource-based industries and use the savings to fund
training, investment and job creation. For instance, for
unemployed fishers – save the fisheries and biodiversity
while helping people find and create work in alternative,
more environmentally benign sectors.
Communitas Proposed Targets
Target 3: Build the Urban Green Economy
Reconcile the potentially conflicting global agendas of
reducing poverty and averting climate catastrophe by
building the green economy. Specific actions required
include:
• prioritizing government investment and spending in
areas that stimulate the greening of economic sectors;
• limiting spending in areas that deplete natural capital;
and
• employing taxes and market-based instruments to shift
consumer preference and promote green investment and
innovation
Communitas Proposed Targets
Target 4: Invest in Green Infrastructure, also at the cityregion scale, for social cohesion and community resilience
Infrastructure has great influence on how sustainable or
unsustainable our cities are. As infrastructure needs to be
built or replaced, governments at all levels have a tremendous
opportunity to invest in green infrastructure as a way of
providing universal access to basic services (transportation,
energy, wastewater and stormwater management, upgrading
slum housing), while at the same time stimulating necessary
economic growth (at least in developing countries), creating
jobs, and alleviating poverty.
Communitas Proposed Targets
Target 5: Invest in capacity building for prosperous
communities, with a focus on youth and women
unemployed or locked into the urban informal
economy
Community capacity building is based on individual
capacity building, especially education and training.
Capacity building should specifically include
education and training for disadvantaged and/or
marginalized populations, including youth and
women unemployed or locked into the urban
informal economy.
Links to Other SDGs
Linked with all, but particularly with:
• Participatory democracy, poverty and inequalities
reduction
• Universal access to affordable and quality public and
social services and utilities, including housing, water &
sanitation, transport and energy
• Linkages with rural development, including food
security and resources provision; and
• the cross-cutting theme of transformational
partnerships and multi-level governance for
sustainable city-region development.
Moving Forward
• This paper supports the case for an urban SDG.
• Green growth is the only way to have growth,
prosperity and jobs for all while getting/staying
within planetary boundaries.
• One key to advancing sustainable development is
to better enable cities and regions to address
global as well as local development challenges
• Integration of economic, social and
environmental objectives is critical.
Example sustainability assessment frameworks
International framework schemes
• Eco2 Cities (World Bank)
• One Planet Communities (BioRegional)
• Climate + Program (Clinton Climate Initiative)
• Community Capital Tool (Simon Fraser University)
Municipal indicator use
• Ho Chi Minh City (Vietnam)
• Menlyn Main, Pretoria (South Africa)
• Tianjin Binhai Eco-City (China)
National & municipal indicator use
• BREEAM Communities
• German urban sustainability frameworks
• Greenest City 2020, Vancouver (Canada)
• Low-Carbon Cities China
• Surat/Gandhinagar Solar Cities (India)
• Victoria Harbour, Melbourne (Australia)
Community Capital Framework
21
One Way to Build Community Capacity
Sustainability
Researchers
/Academics
Local
Govts/Practi
tioners
Communities
What is Pando?
Pando.sc
A free, multi-lingual online community with a professional
focus, where researchers, academics, and public- and
private-sector practitioners focused on local sustainability
challenges can share knowledge, network,
and collaborate.
25
Moving Forward – 2
• Need framework that is grounded in sustainable development
theory and address all aspects of sustainability (at least ecological,
economic, and social); integrates competing interests; includes all
levels of government and stakeholders; measures progress; and
provides a common language to talk about sustainable
development
• indicators used must provide balance between scientific
imperatives and public participation; they should also show what is
possible
• be adaptable within a “universal” framework; recognize uniqueness
of place; acknowledge and address regional vs. local indicators;
allow for public input and engagement
• must enable monitoring performance and outcomes over time;
they should also be scalable in terms of effort and cost