Sustainable Urban Centers: Smart Cities
Layal Al Madi
Master Dissertation
Neubrandenburg University of Applied Sciences
Abstract
Urbanization is unavoidably moving fast and wide all over the world. Each year more and more people move to cities, and each year cities face issues and difficulties managing the global urbanisation. This research will discuss the issues facing urban areas economically, environmentally and socially. Environmental issues have been a major discussion for more than 20 years, and several cities have made changes and plans to solve these problems. Listing a few of the leading cities in sustainability and looking into suggested solutions for the future in this research. 20 years ago, the discussion was about the future, here it is, the future people talked about is now. The economic role of cities makes them more and more significant, they are centers of finance and production. Centralization of services, pushes people to overcrowding the urban centers, which creates a problem in cities. smart growth is a popular topic amongst urban planners and researchers on this issue, smart growth leads the discussion to smart cities.
Researchers debated about smart cities, and there are several examples of smart cities built and planned that this research will include.
Acknowledgments
First and foremost, I offer my sincerest gratitude to my supervisor, Prof. Philip Caston, who has supported me throughout my thesis with his patience and knowledge whilst allowing me the room to work in my own way. I attribute the level of my Masters degree to his encouragement
and effort and without him this thesis, too, would not have been completed or written. One simply could not wish for a better or friendlier supervisor.
The support of my friends in Neubrandenburg will never be forgotten and I’m beyond grateful for all they did for me throughout the year.
Finally, I thank my Family for supporting me throughout all my studies at University. My parents, who inspire me everyday to be and do better. My sister and brother for always being
Table of Contents
Introduction
Cities as engines of growth
Chapter 1 : Issues and Problems in Cities Chapter 2 : Sustainable Urban Centers Chapter 3 : Smart Growth
Chapter 4 : Smart Cities
Chapter 5 : Songdo, South Korea/ Masdar City, AbuDhabi Chapter 6 : Conclusions
Introduction
According to research, more than 50% of the world’s population lives in urban areas, by 2030 this number could grow to 60%. And is expected to reach almost 70% by 2050.
Four billion people live in cities and urban areas, in three decades it could increase to 6 billion. 70% of global energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions from cities.
Megatrends urbanization, demographic change and climate change is changing the shape of the future.
Research suggest that in order to meet rising consumer demand, cities will need to build floor space equivalent to 85% of today’s exciting building stock.
Considering the existential threat that global warming poses to humanity, the current focus on climate change is undoubtedly justified. However, this should not overshadow the fact that sustainable development does not only end with environmental concerns but also covers social and economic domains that are mediated through physical spaces and built form. There are two-way interactions between these domains with each having a reciprocal impact on the other. Based on the institutional and policy context, these interactions can move us towards either a more virtuous circle of development with more equitable growth, empowered communities, livable spaces and reduced (or at least controlled) levels of pollution, or the reverse. (Ramin Keivani, 2010).
Cities as engines of growth and development
Cities and towns are now recognized as pivotal for development. Cities contribute up to 55% of gross national product in low-income countries, 73% in middle-income countries and 85% in high-income countries (UN-Habitat 2006).
The concentration of people and activities at high densities in cities enables resources to be used more efficiently than in rural areas. They also generate a disproportionate amount of revenue for governments.
The economic role of cities has gained even more significance in the current era of economic globalization (The global city: New York, London, Tokyo 2011): they serve as centers for finance
and producer services; they are areas of innovation and they are the powerhouses of manufacturing and consumer markets.
In addition to their economic function, cities are also places of cultural and social interaction. The critical density of people, that allows for agglomeration economies, also provides greater opportunities for reflexivity, information and knowledge sharing, cultural exchanges and more effective provision of services, particularly health and education. All of these are essential elements for social development, advancement of civil society, well-being, cultural consolidation, change and cosmopolitanism. Cities are also centers of political power and administration. The closer proximity to the seat of power, their higher concentration and better articulation of their demands through civil organizations have meant that in the main urban citizens have greater opportunities for influencing policy-making and setting developmental agendas at both local and national levels.
While this flow of displacement to cities continues, and the pressure on urban center increases, it is argued that it will not slow down or change. The more pressure on cities the more difficult it will get on the infrastructures.
This research addresses the problems cities from different parts of the world faces, the steps some of the leading cities in sustainability applied to get to where it is now, and the solutions urban planners and researchers suggest for sustainable urban centers.
Chapter 1:
Issues and problems in cities
On the environmental front, we are faced with several different but related issues with different degrees of influence around the world. First are the global concerns over the release of greenhouse gases (GHG) and their impact on the world climate. Cities are by far the largest contributors to GHG emissions. They consume 75% of the world's resources and produce 80% of CO2 emissions (Financing urban shelter: global report on human settlements, 2005). It is,
therefore, at the city level that greatest efforts must be concentrated to reduce GHG emissions and tackle pressures of climate change. This requires sociotechnical approaches at both macro- and micro-levels encompassing innovative sociotechnical solutions, institutional frameworks and shifting cultural attitudes for reducing energy consumption, encouraging renewable energy production and changing consumption patterns and lifestyles. This is a global problem that requires a global solution. A recent study by Urge-Vorsatz and Novikova indicated that the greatest economic potential (at net negative costs) for mitigating CO2 emissions in buildings lies in developing countries. This is because many of the low-cost opportunities for CO2 abatement
have already been captured in the more developed economies because of progressive policies in place or in the pipeline. (Urge-Vorsatz and Novikova, 2008).
The second issue is the negative impact of climate change on living conditions as witnessed in recent floods, heat waves and hurricanes in Europe, the Caribbean and North America. To this must be added earthquake and tsunami hazards with their massive potential for exacting human and physical costs as witnessed most recently in Indonesia and Haiti with the virtual destruction of entire cities and colossal loss of life. These have necessitated adaptation measures for enabling cities to cope better with destructive forces of an increasingly volatile climate and other natural hazards. (Wilbanks, 2007).
Other concerns relate to general environmental pollution, resource management (particularly water) and loss of agricultural land arising from urbanisation, urban sprawl and industrial activities. The main concerns lie in developing countries primarily because of institutional inability to implement regulations and manage natural resources. For example, in China more than one third of industrial wastewater and two thirds of municipal wastewater is released into rivers without any treatment (Wen, D., 2005).
To different degrees, most developing cities are suffering from one or more environmental side effects of rapid urbanisation and industrial growth. In addition to the example of China, they can be seen in the contamination of water tables in Curitiba in Brazil because of rapid and
unorganized urban sprawl onto protected areas, the loss of agricultural land around Egyptian cities estimated at a total of 1.4 million acres between 1952 and 2002 and severe air pollution in Tehran that is described as ‘collective suicide’ and estimated to kill some 3600 people a month (El-Hefnawi, 2005).
On the economic front many cities are faced with severe challenges for sustainable economic growth. Cities in the Europe for example are struggling with the after effects of large-scale economic restructuring in a rapidly globalizing era that has seen loss of major industries and previous economic identities. Such cities are striving to reinvent themselves by focusing on one or more alternative sectors such as corporate services, knowledge, creative, cultural and tourist-based industries. Many have been successful in turning around their main economic base (e.g. Birmingham, Barcelona).
Similar issues are also evident in cities in developing countries. However, the scale is generally of a different magnitude and is often complicated by severe institutional weaknesses and the lack of material and financial resources. Addressing severe levels of income poverty through
sustained policies for local economic development and income-generating opportunities for low-income households is of direct relevance to both social and environmental development in cities of developing countries. The absence of strategic economic vision, the lack of coordination between different levels of government and compartmentalized sector-based policy-making not only lead to duplication and wastage of resources but can also entail conflicting objectives and ineffective policy interventions. Crucially as many commentators have noted, the primary concern of the poor is to earn a living rather than look after the environment (Drakakis-Smith, 1995).
A related concern is that of municipal finance. This is highly important not only to the municipal investment in capital projects for supporting economic activities but also to the provision of essential city services, e.g. green space, garbage collection, recycling, street lighting and to offer social support activities, e.g. youth training and community development. Important issues include direct and indirect methods of raising municipal revenues and ways of involving private
and community resources through both formal and informal partnerships. Successful experiences include new innovative schemes for better utilizing corporate social responsibility initiatives and participatory budgeting to better target what is actually needed on the ground and to foster community ownership.
On the social front, cities are prone to huge intra-urban social inequalities. this is often manifested in terms of relative income poverty, crime, the social exclusion of particular sectors of society (migrants, youth, the unemployed, and the disabled) and the challenge of engendering more inclusive and responsive governance. In the 2005 Bristol Accord, the European Union placed the development of sustainable communities at the center of its urban policy emphasizing among other things inclusivity, equity, fairness, good governance, safety and accessibility (ODPM, 2006).
All of these concerns also apply in many other cities but they are also faced with the far more severe context of relative and absolute levels of poverty and exclusion. There are almost a billion people living in slums in cities throughout the developing world – one out of every three city dwellers. (State of the world's cities 2006/7).
The rate of growth of the world's urban population estimated at 2.24% is roughly equal to the rate of growth of slums estimated at 2.22%. The same figures for Sub-Saharan Africa are 4.58 and 4.53%. In sum, we are witnessing what Nicholas You (You, N. 2007) described as the urbanisation of poverty where the urban population is just as likely to suffer from malnutrition, disease and hunger as their rural counterparts.
A major concern in many cities that also accentuates economic inefficiency and the
environmental side effects of rapid urbanisation is the often opaque, exclusive and unaccountable style of urban governance and management leading to skewed and elite decision-making.
Relevant factors that may be considered in such analysis include historic and institutional factors and land market processes that have created unequal urban development patterns and hinder the creation of more efficient, equitable and accessible systems.
Nevertheless, such social and societal problems are being addressed in many cities at different levels and by different institutions. Promising initiatives can be identified in the recent shifts in slum upgrading towards more integrated approaches. For example, in Brazil, comprehensive slum upgrading programmes link employment and income generation with physical
redevelopment and the integration of slum neighborhoods into the city fabric.
In many South American cities, lack of access to basic utilities is not only a major impediment to sustainable economic growth and productivity but also a major cause of urban inequity and ill health (Werna et al. 2009).
Brazilian, Mexican and Chinese cities generally have a much higher level of access to water than Indian and African cities. Overall, however, researchers have noted that in low-income cities of developing countries, only 50% of households have water piped to their homes (Arimah, 2005).
Clearly, scaling up to the level indicated is a monumental task in many developing countries because of the lack of material, financial and human resources. This becomes even more daunting when considering that a large portion of the population in developing cities live in
informal and shanty settlements where local authorities may in fact be barred from providing utilities because of the illegal status of the settlements or because of precarious locations and unplanned layouts that make extension of services very difficult even if governments were willing to extend them (Nickson and Franceys, 2003). This is compounded by lax monitoring and the enforcement of legislation itself, leading to a vicious cycle of poverty, socio-spatial exclusion, irregular land use patterns and slum formation in environmentally sensitive areas, and subsequent costly slum-upgrading programmes. The situation with access to electricity,
sanitation and refuse collection is invariably worse than that of water. These have major implications for social and economic development as well as exacerbating environmental pollution because of usage of open ground or unlined pit latrines for sanitation in some cities, or inadequate disposal of household and industrial refuse (Werna et al., 2009).
Consequently, greater attention needs to be paid to specific policy and technical approaches that provide more immediate solutions that have the potential for scaling up to make a tangible impact on the situation of the low-income groups in developing cities.
Urban form and spatial development have major consequences on the sustainable development encompassing not only environmental issues but also social and economic aspects. The concept of compact city development aims to optimize energy use, promote renewable energy sources, provide integrated transport networks with a focus on enhancing public transport and cycle routes, change the culture of energy and resource consumption and increase social inclusion. Ultimately, such action would also enhance economic productivity through better connectivity and resource saving.
An important consideration under this heading is the impact of major urban development and infrastructure projects initiated by both the public and the private sectors with direct
consequences on all aspects of the sustainability paradigm, in particular urban equity. These developments are often foreign direct investment-driven and globally induced aimed at raising city competitiveness but have unforeseen and/or unaccounted externalities. They often entail conflicting claims to land and city resources between local inhabitants and the actual or
perceived requirements of global capital. They can occur both in established or peri-urban and in peripheral city areas.
Nevertheless, they can also enhance the city economy and have the potential for local economic development benefitting the lower income groups and small and medium local enterprises. The key issue is to set in place the appropriate institutional framework and governance mechanisms for policy-making and implementation that would allow for a more balanced and pro-poor approach to urban spatial organization, land use and affordable housing optimizing both global and local developmental benefits.
In addition, rapid and dynamic urban growth in developing cities often leads to new patterns of agglomeration in peri-urban areas with their own unique social and economic challenges, opportunities and developmental priorities. The problem is compounded by the massive growth of gated communities for the middle and higher income groups that often impinge on peripheral land occupied by poor slum dwellers and peri-urban farming communities and create particular problems of social exclusion and lack of fit within the broader urban fabric.
An important consideration for more equitable spatial development in the new locations as well as the more established parts of cities relates to upgrading existing informal settlements,
providing more secure tenure/entitlement and enhancing low-income access to land and infrastructure resources for housing and income generation activities. This can involve innovative sociotechnical approaches that can seek to provide both supportive institutional frameworks and financial and technical support for a range of measures including physical upgrading and redevelopment, innovative and low-cost engineering solutions and green
refurbishment/adaptation encompassing both energy-saving measures and affordable renewable energy technology.
Multi-level governance and institutional development. urban governance and institutional capacity are highlighted as essential requirements for addressing the main challenges for urban sustainability.
Governance refers to the process of delivering government through the inclusion of non-government actors (Jones and Evans, 2006). From a multi-level governance perspective,
important considerations are (1) the competence and coordination between the vertical levels of government and (2) horizontal levels of governance both in terms of transnational and intra-city linkages and patterns of governance between different city government structures as well as power relations and networked interaction between different public, private and community actors in decision making and policy setting at local and metropolitan levels and the way that they feed into higher levels of decision-making (McGuirk, 2000).
The latter is critical for ensuring an inclusive, responsive and accountable governance process that is not only important for social considerations but also can have direct positive effects for improving economic and environmental impacts of urban development.
Any discussion of governance must consider the impact of strategic planning for enabling
flexible responses to uncertain urban futures particularly in the context of economic globalization and climate change. This approach has been adopted in the cities of the developed countries at least since the early 1980s in their efforts to reinvent themselves in the face of severe economic crisis and loss of their more traditional industries. This has led to a proliferation of various medium- and long-term economic and development strategies at both metropolitan and city district levels. Partly based on this experience and recognition of the multi-faceted problems of economic and physical growth in cities, since 1998 the World Bank and later the Cities Alliance have advocated the adoption of city development strategies (CDSs) in developing countries as a way of providing a holistic strategic approach for addressing the main perceived challenges. The stated objectives of a CDS are:
• Enhancing city economies. • Reducing poverty.
• Protecting the environment.
Chapter 2:
Sustainable Urban Centers
Barcelona, Spain
Named European Capital of Innovation in 2014, Spain’s second-biggest city, Barcelona, is involved in over one hundred smart city projects and is a global leader in its extensive use of the Internet of Things. Smart city projects range from smart lighting, the promotion of charging infrastructure for electric vehicles, and Wi-Fi in public transportation systems and public places. Barcelona provides global leadership by hosting the annual Smart City Expo World Congress – supporting the growth of the smart cities industry. The city’s Telecare service looks after its more than 70.000 elderly and disabled citizens by proactively checking on them with the use of sensor technology. Barcelona has smart LED streetlights throughout that are only activated when they detect movement. This leads to energy savings of no less than 30 percent. The sensors in the street lights also collect environmental data while rain and humidity sensors determine the amount of water required to irrigate public parks. Smart garbage bins are only emptied when full
and smart parking systems show vehicles to free parking spots, reducing carbon emissions and traffic congestion. Digital bus stops provide real time overviews of bus times, USB charging ports as well as free Wi-Fi. The city’s Smart Urban Platform aims to solve urban challenges by bringing together data from social networks, the city’s information systems and the open-source Sentilo sensor network. (Ekaterina Novoseltseva, 2017).
SINGAPORE
Singapore is taking the “Smart City” to a new level. Singapore is deploying an undetermined number of sensors and cameras across the island city-state that will allow the government to monitor everything from the cleanliness of public spaces to the density of crowds and the precise movement of every locally registered vehicle. 5.4 million people squeezing onto 446 square miles of island makes Singapore one of the world’s most densely populated cities. And rapid growth over the last few decades has meant that demands placed on the city’s transport network have rocketed. Nowadays, the city invests a lot in road sensors, phased traffic lights, and smart
parking. The city-state’s leadership in transportation is not surprising if we take into account that the system has a long history of using information technology to improve traffic.
Through smart applications, the sensors provide residents with feedback on their behavior, helping them to use less water, electricity, etc. reducing the household costs. The government, in turn, is able to aggregate this data, using analytics and computer simulation to improve the planning, design and maintenance of public housing estates. (Ekaterina Novoseltseva, 2017).
COPENHAGEN
Since the early 20th century, the bicycle has been a symbol of freedom for people in Denmark. Government of Copenhagen planned and balanced very well spaces given to cars, bikes, public transport and pedestrians. Today, around half of the people who live in Copenhagen ride a bicycle to work. It’s not just the culture that encourages this, but an infrastructure plays a critical role here. Traffic lights are timed for bicycle speeds. And in terms of urban design for bikes, Copenhagen’s 240-mile network is impressive.
Considered to be the greenest capital city in the world, Copenhagen is a center for clean technology innovation and is committed to being carbon neutral by 2025.
Also, there are other initiatives that improve the quality of life of the citizens, for example Copenhagen sends less than 2% of its waste to landfills. Half of the waste is recycled and most of the waste is used to generate heat for the city’s district heating network. (Ekaterina
Novoseltseva, 2017).
OSLO
Oslo is ranked as one of the top ten greenest cities of the world by Green Uptown Magazine. It has few of the issues of overcrowding, pollution, and high energy. But government of the city works on these issues and can be proud of it’s public transportation; underground, tram and bus line systems are really efficient and modern.
Oslo is also the e-car capital of the world, with most electric cars per capita, thanks to different incentives. The city uses information technology to curb energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. By 2020, the city is aiming to reduce emissions by 50% by remaking its transportation grid; by 2030, it is aiming to be 95% climate neutral.
Like other smart cities, Oslo has installed sensors to help citizens with parking problem. It has also established a network of smart street lighting, which has reduced energy consumption by nearly two-thirds. Oslo’s smart-city approach is typical for Nordic countries, its emphasis is on sustainable energy now. Government together with private companies are looking at banning private vehicles by the end of the decade. (Ekaterina Novoseltseva, 2017).
SAN FRANCISCO
San Francisco is one of the first cities in North America to adopt smart city technology. Now citizens have a goal there to achieve zero waste by 2020. San Francisco’s current waste diversion rate is 80 percent. Government offers online tools to complement the policies that reduce waste and increase access to recycling and composting. For example project of Recycle Where provides the latest and most convenient recycling, reuse, and disposal options for plastics, batteries, fluorescent lights, televisions, couches, and much more! The project uses open source
software and an open data model to provide localized and accurate results. This is a case where technology is used to help each person contribute to the City’s goal of zero waste by 2020. Another issue government of San Francisco is working on is energy management. San Francisco is currently 41 percent renewably powered and in order to reach San Francisco’s goal to become carbon-free by 2030.
To achieve this goal SF Energy Map was created; a tool that tracks the solar and wind
installations across the city. Any resident or business can go to the website to see solar potential for their own roof.
Cars and trucks in San Francisco account for about 40 % of our carbon emissions, therefore the government promotes smart commuting, electric transportation, and biofuels to help the city meet greenhouse gas reduction goals. As for the charge points, San Francisco currently tracks the usage and functional status of its charging points, providing real-time status of the chargers and generating long-term reports. Technical tools like the ChargePoint network help the city
establish EV charger demand and determine where chargers should be placed in the future. And of course just like in other smart cities, parking plays an important role, therefore San Francisco also implemented smart parking options that allow drivers to find parking spaces easily. (Ekaterina Novoseltseva, 2017)
Home to Europe’s third-largest port, which serves some 10,000 vessels annually—has also implemented smart-city initiatives. Working with Cisco, the Hamburg Port Authority (HPA) has embarked on a multi-year effort to create an intelligent infrastructure designed to modernize and improve harbor operations while enriching the quality of life for area residents. The overarching goal is “making the whole ecosystem more intelligent,” says Sebastian Saxe, the port authority’s CIO.
Initiatives include an intelligent road system that monitors and provides updates on port traffic to ease congestion in the area, along with smart capabilities that facilitate parking by alerting
cargo-truck drivers as spaces become available—in real time. In addition, integrated smart waterway and rail-management systems help mitigate traffic and transit disruptions when incoming ships require bridge closures in the port area. Ultimately, Cisco and the HPA expect the “Internet of Everything” approach to reduce the port’s operational costs by 70 percent over the next few years. (Ekaterina Novoseltseva, 2017)
HELSINKI
The population in Helsinki is projected to rise from 626,000 to nearly two million in 2050. Government of Finland couldn’t ignore this issue and started to support initiatives of startups regarding building a smart city.
They put a goal for themselves to completely overhaul its public transport network and reduce private car use by 2025. One of the projects companies in Helsinki are working on is using a smartphone, you input your location and destination, then dedicated app plans your journey, offering you a range of options with differing methods, journey times and prices. By merging private transport options, like Uber and cycle companies with the city’s bus, tram, train, metro into one unified network, people from Helsinki will have a quick, easy, one-stop shop for all
their transport needs. They could buy it with one click on their phone.
Other projects include an automated waste collection system that reduces garbage truck traffic by 80-90%, smart grids and real-time energy monitoring to reduce energy consumption by 15%, and parking spaces with electric car charging.
Government together with private companies work on food waste problems and implement sensors in refrigerators at homes, using apps to reminds residents about expiration dates and suggests how the foods can be used rather than thrown away.
Another key goal of Helsinki’s Smart City activity is to harness the innovative capabilities of the entire urban community by promoting cooperation between application developers, and the rest of the city’s ICT ecosystem. Helsinki is very strong in the field of open data innovation,
numerous hackathons and organized on a regular basis and open app competitions are held annually. Helsinki’s schools are known for their forward-looking education systems, shifting away from traditional education to an inquiry-based learning approach. (Ekaterina Novoseltseva, 2017).
Chapter 3 Smart Growth
In United States, in line with the spatial strategic planning approach, smart growth is becoming mainstream in many of states. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the smart growth concept covers a range of development and conservation strategies that help
stronger, and more socially diverse (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). The birth of smart growth is difficult to pinpoint, but its roots include not only the growth management revolution of the 1970s and the 1980s in the coastal states (both east and west), but also the new urbanism movement of the 1990s led by architects and the worldwide attention to sustainable development after the publication of “Our Common Future” in 1987 by the World Commission on
Environment and Development (the Brundland Commission). The smart growth movement is a national movement led by a network of environmental groups, historic preservation
organizations, professional organizations, developers, real estate interests as well as local and state government entities. In 1996, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency established the Smart Growth Network (SGN) with the above partners to: raise public awareness of how smart growth can improve quality of life; promote smart growth best practices; develop and share information, innovative policies, tools and ideas; and cultivate strategies to address barriers to and advance opportunities for smart growth. Through a cooperative agreement, SGN is managed by the International City/County Management Association and the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (Smart Growth Network).
In communities across the United States, there is a growing concern that current development patterns, dominated by so-called sprawl, no longer reflect long-term visions regarding cities, existing suburbs, small towns, rural communities, and wilderness areas. Though they continue to support growth in terms of population and economy, communities are questioning the costs of abandoning infrastructure in the city, only to rebuild it further out. In general, smart growth invests time, attention, and resources in restoring community and vitality to city centers and
older suburbs. New smart growth is more town-centered, transit and pedestrian oriented, and has a greater mix of housing, commercial and retail uses. It also preserves open space and many other environmental amenities.
The ten principles adopted by SGN clearly present the vision of smart growth: - Create range of housing opportunities and choices
- Create walkable neighborhoods
- Encourage community and stakeholder collaboration
- Foster distinctive, attractive communities with a strong sense of place - Make development decisions predictable, fair and cost effective - Mixed land uses
- Preserve open space, farmland, natural beauty and critical environmental areas - Provide a variety of transportation choices
- Strengthen and direct development towards existing communities - Take advantage of compact building design
In many respects, these principles and implementation measures seem not so different from those of growth management, new urbanism or sustainable development, or just good planning. Conventional planning tools such as comprehensive planning, subdivision control, zoning, transfer of development rights, incentive bonus, and design review are still widely used in smart growth initiatives. However, as Knaap (2005) explains, based on the case of Maryland, the smart
growth movement contrasts with its antecedents in the following ways: incentives for implementation; integrated transportation and land use policy; insurgency and advocacy; innovative policy instruments; and institutional reform.
Culture and Creativity
Given the change from a post-industrial to a knowledge-based society, utilization of art and culture, intellectual stimulation of creative peoples, and creating attractive living conditions are increasingly seen as important keys to urban regeneration. This trend reflects the transition of urban policies in European countries. Sasaki (2003) defines the creative city as a place “which has creativity in culture and industry, innovative and flexible urban economy system, and acts as a ‘place of creativity’ that contributes to creatively solving global environmental issues or local community issues.” He cites Kanazawa City as a typical example in Japan.
Technology
Fast urbanization trends brought cities to the forefront of the discussion on global economic and environmental challenges. It is nowadays estimated that most of the world’s population growth in the coming decades will take place in cities, and not only in mega-agglomerations: large cities and metropolis, in medium-low income countries, will probably take the lion’s share of this
growth (United Nations, 2008). In places like India, East Asia and Brazil, beyond natural urban population growth, fast rural-urban migrations are already associated with growing traffic flows, social tensions, waste, water shortages, energy safety threats and other environmental tensions and bottlenecks.
Although in rather different fashions, many cities in developed economies face similar pressures. Inadequate infrastructure and old buildings often call for eco-friendlier, energy-efficient retrofit solutions; simultaneously, rising congestion endangers quality of life and long-term growth (Mingardo, van den Berg, and van Haaren, 2008). Innovative, more efficient and sustainable urban solutions will be in strong need throughout the world, and increasingly so (Camagni, Capelo, and Nijkamp, 1998).
During the last years, challenging yet promising solutions have been emerging, namely based on urban applications of pervasive or ubiquitous computing. Under this new paradigm, IT and computing become a utility and “…technologies weave themselves into the fabric of everyday life until they are indistinguishable from it” (Weiser, 1991). The potential of related urban applications led to the concept of u-city, as one that provides both ubiquitous and interconnected infrastructures and services for different city users (Lee et al., 2008). In a u-city, urban sub-systems (e.g. built environment, mobility, health, safety), objects and persons can become connected to each other through a dense network of sensors, intelligent systems and wireless technologies. A proximate, “eco-blended” concept is the one of u-eco city: a city that
making substantive use of ubiquitous information technologies” (Yigitcanlar and Han, 2009). The potential to tackle environmental challenges in cities is evident.
Obviously, no city complies yet with these canons. However, a few, large scale, pioneer u-eco city pilots began to unfold during the last decade. Due to the required full infrastructure
integration (e.g. energy and mobility systems), the pilots for such new environmental solutions have been pursued through the development of entire new cities/districts from scratch (e.g. in Asia). These developments are calling the attention of governments and private corporations (Kirkwood, 2008). On the one hand, local governments target quality of life improvements as well as more efficient public services; moreover, cities and regions hosting such pilots envisage becoming frontrunners in the development and early adoption of state-of-the-art technologies and create qualified jobs. On the other hand, industrial players (often transnational) have an eye on exploring, testing and patenting those technologies to become leading providers of the future killer applications (Carvalho, Mingardo, and van Haaren, 2012).
Cities from scratch
In addition to innovative approaches to upgrading urban slums, brand new environmentally sound cities will emerge ‘from scratch’ in sparsely populated areas of China, India and elsewhere.
These instant cities-by some estimates 500$ billion will be invested in them in the next decade alone—will be designed, located, and built to be more livable and more competitive. That means
densely populated, vertical, highly energy-efficient urban centers, featuring excellent intra-and intercity mass-transportation. Macomber estimates that China may build possibly dozens of such cities, each housing 10 million people, by 2050.
Chapter 4 Smart Cities
The concept of Smart Cities became popular a couple of decades ago by researchers and urban planners. There are many definitions and understandings of the concept of smart cities and what it really represents. Since this concept had been introduced, researchers had defined it in different points of view.
Many definitions of smart cities exist. A range of conceptual variants is often obtained by replacing “smart” with alternative adjectives, for example, “intelligent” or “digital”. There is neither a single template of framing a smart city, nor a one-size-fits-all definition of it (Albino, Berardi and Dangelico 2015).
In the urban planning field, the term “smart city” is often treated as an ideological dimension according to which being smarter entails strategic directions. Governments and public agencies at all levels are embracing the notion of smartness to distinguish their policies and programs for targeting sustainable development, economic growth, better quality of life for their citizens, and creating happiness (Ballas, 2013).
For corporations such as IBM, Cisco Systems, and Siemens AG, the technological component is the key component to their conceptions of smart cities. Their approach has recently been
critiqued by authors such as Adam Greenfield who argues in Against the Smart City (2013) that corporate-designed cities such as Songdo (Korea), Masdar City (UAE), or PlanIT Valley
(Portugal) eschew actual knowledge about how cities function and represent “empty” spaces that disregard the value of complexity, unplanned scenarios, and the mixed uses of urban spaces. There are authors, however, who have shown that technology could be used in cities to empower citizens by adapting those technologies to their needs rather than adapting their lives to
technological exigencies (Albino, Berardi and Dangelico, 2015).
Perhaps a reason that there is no general agreement about the term “smart cities” is that the term has been applied to two different kinds of “domains.” It has, on the one hand, been applied to “hard” domains such as, buildings, energy grids, natural resources, water management, waste management, mobility, and logistics (Neirotti et al, 2014), where ICT can play a decisive role in the functions of the systems. On the other hand, the term has also been applied to “soft domains” such as, education, culture, policy innovations, social inclusion, and government, where the application of ICT are not usually decisive. (Journal of Urban Technology)
Dirks and Keeling (2009) stress the importance of the organic integration of a city’s various systems (transportation, energy, education, health care, buildings, physical infrastructure, food, water, and public safety) in creating a smart city. Researchers who support this integrated view of a smart city often underline that in a dense environment, like that of cities, no system operates in isolation. Kanter and Litow (2009) stress this aspect in their Manifesto for Smarter Cities,
where they affirm that infusing intelligence into each subsystem of a city, one by one, is
insufficient to create a smart city, as this should be treated as an organic whole. However, many researchers, with the intent of clarifying what constitutes a smart city have separated this concept into many features and dimensions, justifying this decision with the complexity of managing the smart city concept in a holistic way. (Albino, Berardi and Dangelico, 2015)
According to Nam and Pardo (2011), the key components of a smart city are the technology, the people (creativity, diversity, and education), and the institutions (governance and policy). Connections exist between these last two components, so that a city is really smart when investments in human and social capital, together with ICT infrastructures, fuel sustainable growth and enhance the quality of life.
A smart city surely provides some sort of interoperable and Internet-based government services that enable ubiquitous connectivity and transform key government processes towards citizens and businesses (Al-Hader et al., 2009). However, smart cities must integrate technologies, systems, services, and capabilities into an organic network that is sufficiently multi-sectorial and flexible for future developments, and moreover, open-access. This means that ICT must be a facilitator for creating a new type of communicative environment, which requires the
comprehensive and balanced development of creative skills, innovation-oriented institutions, broadband networks, and virtual collaborative spaces (Komninos, 2011). Paskaleva (2011) extensively discussed the topics of open innovation, and user engagement, and the risk that a strong corporate-based approach to creating smart cities may pose risks for the independence of governments. Smarter cities start from the human capital side, rather than blindly believing that
ICT can automatically create a smart city (Shapiro, 2006, Holland, 2008). Approaches towards education and leadership in a smart city should offer environments for an entrepreneurship accessible to all citizens. The smart governance instead of being elective, needs ridding of barriers related to language, culture, education, and disabilities. Also problems associated with urban agglomerations can be solved by creativity, human capital, and cooperation among
relevant stakeholders (Baron, 2012). Therefore, the label “smart city” should refer to the capacity of clever people to generate clever solutions to urban problems. (Albino, Berardi and Dangelico 2015).
Public services and decision-making results from stakeholders and smart governance
collaboration. E-governance can be very important to engage citizens in the decision making and implementation process. In smart cities, the spirit of e-governance should be citizen-centric and citizen-driven.
outlines the dimensions of “smart city” as advanced by various scholars of the phenomenon. The most common characteristics of smart cities are:
• A city’s networked infrastructure that enables political efficiency and social and cultural
development.
• an emphasis on business-led urban development and creative activities for the promotion
of urban growth.
• social inclusion of various urban residents and social capital in urban development. • the natural environment as a strategic component for the future.
The University of Vienna developed an assessment metric to rank 70 European medium-sized cities (Giffinger et al., 2007). This metric uses specific indicators for each of the six identified dimensions of a smart city. For example, smart mobility is divided into local accessibility, international accessibility, availability of ICT-infrastructure, and sustainable and safe transport systems.
More recently, Zygiaris (2013) developed a measurement system, identifying six layers of a smart city: the city layer, emphasizing that smart city notions must be grounded into the context of a city; the green city layer, inspired by new urbanization theories of urban environmental sustainability; the interconnection layer, corresponding to the city-wide diffusion of green economies; the instrumentation layer, emphasizing that smart cities require real-time system responses made by smart meters and infrastructure sensors; the open integration layer, highlighting that smart cities applications should be able to communicate, and share data, content, services, and information; the application layer, useful for smart cities to mirror real-time city operations into new levels of intelligently responsive operation; and the innovation layer, emphasizing that smart cities create a fertile innovation environment for new business opportunities.
Chapter 5 Songdo, Souel
Songdo IBD is a master-planned city on 1.500 acres of land reclaimed from the Yellow sea. According to the Harvard Business School case study (Segel, 2005), it has been envisioned by the Korean central government and commissioned in 2001 to an US investor and developer, the Gale International, in a partnership with POSCO, a large industrial chaebol that stepped in after Daewoo collapsed during the Asian financial crisis (Shwayri, 2013). The "ubicomp"3 technologies are designed and implemented by CISCO, a US smart-grid specialised company which in its own words enables the creation of "smart and connected communities"4. Songdo, sometimes referred to also as "New Songdo", as a part of the Incheon Free Economic Zone5 IFEZ (Newman and Matan, 2013), is primarily a business district. Development through FEZs is a rather traditional approach for development of both international business districts and the u-cities (Shwayri, 2013).
However, the first phase of a project of an international business city was envisioned by the president Roh Tae-woo during his first visit to Incheon in 1988 in order to strengthen the
economic cooperation with China, hence the location choice. After delays in implementation, the land reclamation became only after 1994 for a project of a "Korean Silicon Valley", the
sustainability aspect was added years later, in the 2000s, after POSCO and Gale took over the project in 2001 (Segel, 2005). Each land reclamation stage since 1994 met with opposition despite which the process continued until 2001. Then the Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries achieved downsizing of the land reclamation in the whole country and Songdo did not expand any further. Protesting fishermen were given shares in the city so they would not obstruct the proceedings of the project (Shwayri, 2013). Interestingly, it was planned by the developers as a city for foreigners (Shwayri, 2013; Kuecker, 2013) and their convenience has been
repeatedly pointed out6. A non-Korean city for non-Koreans with large avenues, Central Park and English street names where they could benefit from subsidised schooling, healthcare and so on, contrarily to their eventual Korean counterparts (thought to be mostly employees of the international companies), with English used as the lingua franca (Kuecker, 2013). However, due to lack of interest of foreign firms and developers, the area is currently developed by domestic companies with large housing complexes that look similar to the rest of the country and where mostly Koreans live (Shwayri, 2013).
In terms of technology, Songdo IBD aims to become an ubiquitous city par excellence, including into the smart grid not only utilities but also services networks. This would include, among others, household remote control management through internet devices as well as remote healthcare, tutoring and service delivery requests7. This is what Shwayri (2013) calls u-healthcare, u-services etc. Moreover, the ubiquitous nature of Songdo would not mean only built-in computers all over the city but also their networked nature as "all residential, business and government systems will share data" (Halegoua, 2012) created by the ubicomp usage.
Combining the "u-features" with the green aspect of Songdo such as vast green spaces,
walkability and sustainable transport (i. e. water taxis on the seawater canals in the city), LED street lighting, automatic collection of trash and water recyclation lead Shwayri (2013) to forge the term "u-eco-city". According to the official "Cisco Smart+Connected Residential Solution Video" this urbanism solution will help to "achieve social, economic and environmental sustainability" and overall increase the quality of life in terms of convenience, security, luxury and perceived social status (Halegoua, 2012).
Masdar City, Abu Dhabi
The plan was one thing, but after a decade of the idea emerging there is a major shift to the planned zero-carbon footprint city.
Masdar City combines state-of-the-art technologies with the planning principals of traditional Arab settlements to create a desert community that aims to be carbon neutral and zero waste. The 640-hectare project is a key component of the Masdar Initiative, established by the government of Abu Dhabi to advance the development of renewable energy and clean-technology solutions for a life beyond oil. The city will become a centre for the advancement of new ideas for energy production, with the ambition of attracting the highest levels of expertise. Knowledge gained here has already aided the development of Abu Dhabi's 'Estidama' rating system for sustainable building.
A mixed-use, low-rise, high-density development, Masdar City includes the headquarters for the International Renewable Energy Agency and the recently completed Masdar Institute. Strategically located for Abu Dhabi's transport infrastructure, Masdar is link ed to neighboring communities and the international airport by existing road and rail
routes. The city itself will be the first modern community in the world to operate without fossil-fuelled vehicles at street level. With a maximum distance of 200 metres to the nearest rapid transport links and amenities, the city is designed to encourage walking, while its shaded streets and courtyards offer an attractive pedestrian environment, sheltered from climatic extremes. The land surrounding the city will contain wind and photovoltaic farms, research fields and plantations, allowing the community to be entirely energy self-sufficient.
The development is divided into two sectors, bridged by a linear park, and is being constructed in phases, beginning with the larger sector. The masterplan is designed to be highly flexible, to allow it to benefit from emergent technologies and to respond to
lessons learnt during the implementation of the initial phases. Expansion has been anticipated from the outset, allowing for growth while avoiding the sprawl that besets so
many cities. While, Masdar's design represents a specific response to its location and climate, the underlying principles are applicable anywhere the world. In that sense it offers a blueprint for the sustainable city of the future.
but after more than a decade, a writer said, ‘Now the world’s first planned sustainable city – the
marquee project of the United Arab Emirates’ (UAE) plan to diversify the economy from fossil fuels - could well be the world’s first green ghost town.’
As of this year - when Masdar was originally scheduled for completion - managers have given up on the original goal of building the world’s first planned zero-carbon city.
Masdar City is nowhere close to zeroing out its greenhouse gas emissions now, even at a
fraction of its planned footprint. And it will not reach that goal even if the development ever gets fully built, the authorities admitted.
“We are not going to try to shoehorn renewable energy into the city just to justify a definition created within a boundary,” said Chris Wan, the design manager for Masdar City.
“As of today, it’s not a net zero future,” he said. “It’s about 50%.”
Foster + Partners designed a car-free city scape, with Jetson-style driverless electric cars shuttling passengers between buildings incorporating built-in shades and kitted out with smart technologies to resist the scorching desert heat, and keep cooling costs down.
Mubadala, Abu Dhabi’s state-owned investment company, pledged financial support to the estimated $22bn experiment in urban design.
Ten years on, however, only a fraction of the town has been built - less than 5% of the original six square km “green print”, as Wan called it. The completion date has been pushed back to 2030.
The core of Masdar City is in place, anchored by the large square-ish building that is the Middle East headquarters of Siemens. A 45-metre Teflon-coated wind tower helps channel cooling breezes down a shaded street equipped with a grocery store, bank, post office, a canteen, and a couple of coffee shops.
The pioneering autonomous transport system - which was originally supposed to stretch to 100 stations - was scrapped after the first two stops.
Slump in oil prices drives green energy take up in top exporting nations Read more
There is a bike-sharing station – though it’s a good 10 miles away from Abu Dhabi, and there are no bike paths.
And the rationale for Masdar City – demonstrating a model of green living – has been
abandoned. “The original aim was to be net zero, yes, but that was when we were looking at the city in isolation,” Wan said.
“Masdar as a family company is supply[ing] much, much more clean energy than what is being consumed in the city, for sure,” Wan said. “All I am saying is that we are not going to use a city line boundary to try to dictate what is the most cost-effective way to produce clean energy, because the money invested in Masdar City and the money invested in Shams is the same source.”
He went on: “In the bigger picture I am doing more good for the country and for planet Earth because it’s much more efficient.”
Long before the drop in oil prices, the UAE led the oil-producing Gulf countries in moving their economy away from fossil fuels.
The country’s leaders, staring at the prospect that their estimated reserves could run out in 50 years, invested in tourism, tech and renewable energy. Today about 70% of GDP comes from non-oil sectors, according to Mohammed Bin Rashid Al Maktoum, the UAE prime minister.
The country is eager to be seen as a leader in renewable energy and sustainability, convening regular leadership retreats to discuss their future beyond oil.
Chapter 6 Conclusions
Over reaching governments maybe one of the main reasons behind the lesser success of new smart cities, most of which are described as ‘ghost towns’.
It is argued that there is a certain appeal to build cities from scratch to Urban Planners and to governments, because it’s exciting for urban planners to have clean sheets to design on and be creative and free. And appealing to governments because it attracts investments.
Also, many discussed that one of the reasons why governments are invested and attracted to these new projects and over reaching for new exciting goals, is the appeal of the public and the advertisement of these kinds of projects.
In the time of technology and social media, these projects can be very well advertised. It is also advertisement for the government itself. These kinds of projects will play a key role in
governments popularity among the local and global community.
While the future seems very technological and robotic, which is what looks where we’re headed. More connected cities, in all different aspects, but it doesn’t seem the case for the connectivity of the people.
Smart cities as fancy and progressive as they seem, they are not planned to create communities or strengthen the relations of people.
As it focus mainly on quality of life for people, its focus on the quality of life for individuals and singularity. While planning smart cities (which are the future of most of the urban context), we should plan them to bring individuals together, and communities more connected.
One of the reasons of why Urban planners praised and focused on neighborhoods and mixed-use designs is the social aspect of it. People prefer company. High rises and skyscrapers can be problematic in the sense of community.
Resources
• Keivani et al. 2001 Keivani, R., Parsa, A and McGreal, S. 2001. Globalisation,
institutional structures and real estate markets in central European cities. Urban studies, Sassen 2001 Sassen, S. 2001. The global city: New York, London, Tokyo, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• UN-Habitat 2005 2005, UN-Habitat. Financing urban shelter: global report on human
settlements
• Urge-Vorsatz, D. and Novikova, A. 2008. Potentials and costs of carbon dioxide mitigation in the world's buildings. Energy policy, 36: 642–661)
• Wilbanks et al. 2007 Wilbanks, T, et al., 2007. Industry, settlement and society, Chap. 7.
In: IPCC working group II report: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability.
• Wen 2005 Wen, D., 2005. China copes with globalization: a mixed review. San Francisco: International Forum on Globalization
• El-Hefnawi 2005 El-Hefnawi, A.I.K. 4–6 April 2005. ‘Protecting’ agricultural land from
urbanization or ‘Managing’ the conflict between informal urban growth while meeting the demands of the communities (Lessons learnt from the Egyptian policy reforms
• Drakakis-Smith, D. 1995. Third world cities: sustainable urban development. Urban
2009. Corporate social responsibility and urban development in the cities of the south, Palgrave. Basingstoke
• ODPM, 2006. Securing the future: delivering UK sustainable development strategy • UN-Habitat 2006, UN-Habitat. State of the world's cities 2006/7, London: Earthscan • 2007 You, N. 2007. Sustainable for whom? The urban millennium and challenges for
redefining the global development planning agenda. City, 11(2): 214–220.
• Werna, E., Keivani, R and Murphy, D. 2009. Corporate social responsibility and urban
development in the cities of the south, Palgrave. Basingstoke
• Arimah, B. 2005. What drives infrastructure spending in cities of developing countries?.
Urban studies, 42(8): 1345–1368. [Crossref]
• Nickson, A. and Franceys, R. 2003. Tapping the market: the challenge of institutional
reform in the urban water sector, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan
• Werna, E., Keivani, R and Murphy, D. 2009. Corporate social responsibility and urban
development in the cities of the south, Palgrave. Basingstoke
• Thuillier, G. 2005. Gated communities in the metropolitan area of Buenos Aires, Argentina: a challenge for town planning. Housing studies, 20(2): 255–271.
• Jones, P. and Evans, J. 2006. Urban regeneration, governance and the state: exploring notions of distance and proximity. Urban Studies, 43(9): 1491–1501. and, Werna et al. 2009Werna, E., Keivani, R and Murphy, D. 2009. Corporate social responsibility and
urban development in the cities of the south, Palgrave. Basingstoke
• McGuirk, P. 2000. Power and policy networks in urban governance: local government and property-led regeneration in Dublin. Urban studies, 37(4): 651–672.
• Rakodi 2004aRakodi, C. 2004a. Representation and responsiveness – urban politics and the poor in ten cities in the South. Community development journal, 39(3): 252–265. 2004bRakodi, C. 2004b. “Urba politics: exclusion or empowerment?”. In Urban
governance, voice and poverty in the developing world, Edited by: Devas, N. 68–94.
London: Earthscan. Corfee-Morlot et al. 2009Corfee-Morlot, J., Kamal-Chaoui, L., Donovan, M.G., Cochran, I., Robert, A. and Teasdale, P.J. 2009. Cities, climate change
and multilevel governance, OECD Environmental Working Papers N˚ 14, OECD.
• Vito Albino, Umberto Berardi and Rosa Maria Dangelico , 2015. Smart Cities: Definitions, Dimensions, Performance, and Initiatives, Journal of Urban Technology,
2015.
• https://www.richardvanhooijdonk.com/en/blog/6-smartest-smart-cities-world/ • https://apiumhub.com/tech-blog-barcelona/smart-city-projects-leaders-barcelona/ • Alexandra Lichá, 2015. Songdo and Sejong: master-planned cities in South Korea. • Coco Liu, 2018. Oil-rich Abu Dhabi’s Masdar City: green oasis or green ghost town?
https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/business/article/2133409/oil-rich-abu-dhabis-masdar-city-green-oasis-or-green-ghost-town
• Arthur Lau, 2012. Masdar City: A model of urban environmental sustainability.
https://web.stanford.edu/group/journal/cgi-bin/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Lau_SocSci_2012.pdf •
• T. Kidokoro, N. Harata, L. P. Subanu, J. Jessen, A. Motte, E. P. Seltzer. Sustainable City
Regions: Space, Place and Governance.
• Poonam Sharma, Swati Rajput. The Urban Book Series : Sustainable Smart Cities in
India Challenges and Future Perspectives.
• Heike Mayer, Antoine Habersetzer and Rahel Meili. Rural–Urban Linkages and
Sustainable Regional Development: The Role of Entrepreneurs in Linking Peripheries and Centers :
• Medved, Primoz . The essence of neighbourhood community centres (NCCs) in European
sustainable neighbourhoods. • Smart Cities: Regional Perspectives
