From the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Global survey: Climate change now a mainstream part of city planning
CAMBRIDGE, MA — An increasing number of cities around the world now include preparations for climate change in their basic urban planning — but only a small portion of them have been able to make such plans part of their economic development priorities, according to a unique global survey of cities released today.
The Urban Climate Change Governance Survey (UCGS), based on responses from 350 cities worldwide, underscores the extent to which city leaders recognize climate change as a major challenge — even as they are trying to figure out how their responses can create jobs, growth, and cost savings in areas ranging from cities’ transportation networks to their distribution of businesses.
“Climate change isn’t an isolated issue,” says Alexander Aylett, a postdoc in MIT’s Department of Urban Studies and Planning (DUSP), and the lead author of today’s report. “It has large implications for all other aspects of urban life. What we are seeing is cities starting to build it into the DNA of how they approach urban planning.”
According to the findings, 75 percent of cities worldwide now tackle climate-change issues as a mainstream part of their planning, and 73 percent of cities are attempting both climate mitigation and climate adaptation — that is, they are trying both to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and to adapt to long-term changes that are already in motion. But only 21 percent of cities report tangible connections between the response to climate change and achieving other local development goals.
Aylett calls it a “cliché” that environmental and economic progress cannot coexist, citing a number of cities where jobs and growth have derived from climate-change efforts. Portland, Ore., he observes, developed incentives, training, and regulations to help sustainable construction firms grow, while a pilot program called Clean Energy Works Portland employed 400 workers to reduce home energy use, reducing carbon emissions by 1,400 metric tons annually.
Urban planners in Alberta, as Aylett notes, have studied the cost savings associated with limiting metropolitan sprawl and concluded that denser development could save $11 billion in capital costs over the next 60 years, and $130 million in annual maintenance. But most cities, he suggests, have simply not yet identified ways to link climate planning and economic development in the first place.
“It isn’t so much that it’s hard to reconcile economic and environmental priorities,” Aylett says. “It’s that we’re not trying.”
Regional differences remain
The new report is a companion to a survey conducted in 2012. This year’s results revealed continuing regional disparities in urban climate planning. Compared with the global average of 75 percent, U.S. cities lag in planning for both mitigation and adaptation, with just 58 percent of cities addressing both. This echoes the 2012 survey, which revealed that a smaller portion of U.S. cities were doing basic climate-change planning, compared with those in other regions — 59 percent in the U.S., for instance, compared with 95 percent in Latin America.
Globally, 63 percent of cities say they have between one and five employees dedicated to climate-change planning; North American cities are most likely to have just one staff member focused on the topic. As the report’s executive summary notes, “A lack of funding to hire sufficient staff to work on climate change is a significant challenge for 67 percent of cities.”
On a different note, about 85 percent of cities have conducted an inventory of local greenhouse-gas emissions, and 15 percent, as part of that effort, have tried to track the emissions that stem from goods and services consumed within that city. As Aylett points out, “Beginning to address these upstream emissions is crucial if cities are really going to help bring down global emissions.”
The results also reveal that local industries and businesses are relatively disengaged with urban responses to climate change: About 25 percent of cities say that local businesses have been crucial to creating and implementing their climate mitigation plans, whereas 48 percent of cities report that local civil-society groups, such as nonprofits or other organizations, have been involved in climate planning.
The survey is a collaboration between DUSP and ICLEI, the world’s largest association of cities. Today’s report is being released in conjunction with an ICLEI-backed conference on urban planning, being held in Bonn, Germany. To conduct the survey, questionnaires were sent to officials in more than 700 cities worldwide, with 48 percent of them responding to a set of 69 queries.
Written by Peter Dizikes, MIT News Office
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
bernie-SEI is tied into the Belmont Challenge and the Future Earth Alliance and it is all about herding people into the planned urban communities of the future. It is a global phenomena because it’s a global desire to plan economies, control human behavior via political governance and majority ‘consensus’, and redistribution.
OECD is calling this the Great Transition and it is very tied to the K-12 education reforms going on in the US now under the name of the Common Core. I downloaded the OECD Toolkit for US schools this week, published about a month ago for that very future function, in case a certain WUWT contributor wants to swoop in and try to contradict the reality once again. I even have the draft consent letter laying out how to mislead parents.
Robin (May 30, 2014 at 4:20 am) – You are quite right, of course, but “progressive” is incorrect in this context. Try regressive, or repressive, or suppressive perhaps, instead.
“To conduct the survey, questionnaires were sent to officials in more than 700 cities worldwide”
Half threw it away. The other half gave it to a junior employee to fill out. The junior employee couldn’t find anyone to push it off on, so completed it. These are the “facts” the report is based on.
Robin:
I just went back and found a more recent report by Gary Haq cataloging the efforts to create “the Good Life” in a small suburb of York, England.
http://www.sei-international.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/sei-report-york-jrf-building-community-sustainability-full.pdf
They do not say it, but a quick read shows that the project was a failure – almost an abject failure and could be used as a case study of the failure of social engineering.
That said, I disagree with your judgment on Don Schon’s notion of Action Research. I see Action Research as essentially ideologically neutral – though I grant that it is frequently used as some kind of legitimation mechanism by progressives to justify many rather silly ideas. I was a student of the late Chris Argyris, the lead author of their joint seminal book on Theory in Practice, and a proponent of Action Research. What is remarkably absent from reports like the above mentioned PRACTICAL ACTION TO BUILD COMMUNITY RESILIENCE THE GOOD LIFE INITIATIVE IN NEW EARSWICK is the mind blowing absence of the reflective and critical thinking championed by Chris Argyris. I highly recommend Chris’s Teaching Smart People How to Learn. The folks at SEI could certainly benefit from reading it.
Bernie- my exposure to Chris Argyris’ work is not as a student, but as a reader of how others are using his work and what Action Research means to them. I cite in particular Shoshana Zuboff and her vision of the Support Economy and distributed capitalism that goes with this urban planning vision and especially Peter Senge. In fact I believe it was Senge’s The Fifth Discipline Handbook that first called my attention to his considering Schon and Argyris to be the godfathers of this type of vision. I have to deal with what people perceive to be the vision and failures are never a deterrence to this planning vision.
http://www.invisibleserfscollar.com/aspiring-to-create-new-habits-of-mind-and-mental-models-suitable-for-a-new-culture-society-and-economy/ is where I dealt with what Donald Schon’s visions meant for both education and planning generally. His Generative Metaphor vision is hugely important. I would love for you to tell me where you think it is inconsistent with where Chris would have desired for all this to go.
This is no small matter since the recent NAS publication of Livable Cities of the Future: Proceedings of a Symposium Honoring the Legacy of George Bugliarello makes it clear that this total planning is kicking into high gear. As if I did not already know that from tracking the Democracy Collaborative, Metropolitanism, and TOD-Transit Oriented Development. That Bugliarelly symposium alarmingly touts his vision of Cities as a Biosoma. Planned at the Biological (Human), Social (Economies and where people live), and at the machine level (the technology that allows the planning. Tied to Big Data and that Big Blue vision above).
I have not read Argyris’ books although he is regularly cited in the footnotes or Acknowledgments page of books I have read, but I have read several of Schon’s and too many of Senge’s.
Planing ahead is a great idea. I think that all cities should have Global Warming departments,Volcanic Eruption departments, Solar Flare and Meteor Strike planing. They could share office space with those preparing for the next Avian flu pandemic. How would you like to have those titles on your business card? Now how to increase taxes to pay for all of this. But let’s not worry about that, I’m sure it will all work out; look a Detroit.
Robin: I see from your blog that you are very aware of Chris Argyris. I think we have a different take on his work, though I agree that many, like Senge, have applied in ways that I am pretty sure Chris would disagree with. I am also very critical of our current education system and the pernicious effects of both teacher unions and so called education experts. I will drop by your site.
Surely this is a typo:
Clean Energy Works Portland employed 400 workers to reduce home energy use, reducing carbon emissions by 1,400 metric tons annually.
So that’s 3.5 tonnes per worker?
After Wisconsin killed its work on high-speed, intercity rail, a friend was furious about it. They said that we needed high speed rail because of all the people who would flee to the north when global warming made the south unlivable!
Progressives are into control and an appearance of doing something. It’s self selection for progressives to end up in municipal government and aspire to the age old cause of fixing the weather.
When you take money from one part of the economy in order to pump it into another part of the economy, of course the part of the economy that is receiving money is going to grow.
But liberals always ignore the losses that occur in the areas where money is being taken.
Greg says:
May 30, 2014 at 12:58 am
——
You seem to be assuming that global warming is going to continue for the next 100 years.
BTW, at present rates, the sea levels are advancing at less than 7 inches per year. Do you have any evidence to support your belief that the rate is going to increase that dramatically?
Even the IPCC admits that the models are worthless at anything less than planetary scales. So how exactly are cities supposed to plan for climatic changes in their areas, if nobody knows what those changes will be?
http://www.morpc.org/pdf/sustainingscioto.pdf
The above is a link to how the Scioto river valley in central Ohio is undergoing climate change (or so the planners think) and how they are using a computer model to determine how much water will be available for drinking, etc. It is ludicrous as we all know the models are good for nothing.
Suppose you were given the job to manage your city’s acclimation to climate change 30 years ago. What possible changes would you have made to better acclimate your cities ability to deal with the climate of today, in 1984?
Since the current climate is indistinguishable from that of 1984, for all practical purposes, any changes you made would have been counterproductive; a waste of time, effort and money, not to mention WRONG!
The best possible thing you could have down over the last 3 decades to help your city adapt to climate change is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!
Consequently, I am immediately making myself available to any city to fulfill their need of climate change adviser. I promise to do the best possible job for your city (meaning absolutely nothing). My salary will be negotiable, but a significantly large travel package must be provided so that I may visit other cities and learn the innovative ways they are doing absolutely nothing for their cities.
Robin:
I still recommend that you look at Chris’ Teaching Smart People How to Learn. It is available free here: http://www.ncsu.edu/park_scholarships/pdf/chris_argyris_learning.pdf
The major difference that I see is that Chris focuses on how individuals can interact to increase the effectiveness with which they solve problems. That is it. All the language about mental models, etc, is purely explicative. Chris would have asked a lot of questions about anyone who was proposing grand schemes and even more about people who were imposing grand schemes. In terms of the current topic, Climate Change, I think Steve McIntyre epitomizes the kind of thinking and behavior Chris advocated. He would have seen the claim of 97% as highly problematic. He would have pointed out the serious deficiencies in how advocates of AGW argue their case and behave towards those who disagree.
I don’t doubt that some have used Chris’ insights and empirical observations to advocate for the creation of “new” people and organizations, but these folks, IMO, do not understand his real argument. The presumption and assumption of expertise were essentially anathema to Chris, if that claim of expertise were used somehow to legitimate a reduction in openness, candor, accurate information, critical thinking and a freedom to chose.
concluded that denser development could save $11 billion in capital costs over the next 60 years
================
This was tried in Vancouver. FAIL. Denser development saves the city money, but it drives up land prices, forcing people to move away from the denser development, defeating the plan.
So while the planners can plan all they want, in the end economics will defeat them. Just ask the old Soviet Union and their centrally planned economy. Take a look at Detroit:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_of_Detroit
“A significant percentage of housing parcels in the city are vacant, with abandoned lots making up more than half of total residential lots in many large portions of the city.[41] With at least 70,000 abandoned buildings, 31,000 empty houses, and 90,000 vacant lots, Detroit has become notorious for its urban blight.[39][42]”
“The average price of homes sold in Detroit in 2012 was $7,500; as of January 2013 47 houses in Detroit were listed for $500 or less, with five properties listed for $1.[40] Despite the extremely low price of Detroit properties, most of the properties have been on the market for more than a year as buyers balk at the boarded up, abandoned houses of Detroit.[40] The Detroit News reported that more than half of Detroit property owners did not pay taxes in 2012, at a loss to the city of $131 million (equal to 12% of the city’s general fund budget).[45]”
BTW, at present rates, the sea levels are advancing at less than 7 inches per year.
=============
nope, they are advancing at less than 7 inches per 100 years.
all the people who would flee to the north when global warming made the south unlivable!
===============
so why is it the south-western states have the highest growth rate?
Gary Pearse says:
May 30, 2014 at 3:52 am
Okay, recycling is good
————————————
Where did you get that? In the majority of cases, recycling is like any other green schemes. A costly waste of our resources and time. Why do you think your recycled goods are worth absolutely nothing at the curb? They don’t magically go from garbage to a useful product, it takes energy and earths resources to create something out of junk. No one cares about that part, because it is part of the new “feel good” reality where reality is secondary to the real results.
Re: Wayne Delbeke’s APEGBC comments:
I, too, am a member (retired geologist) of APEGBC and complained directly in writing several times to the association re: the imposition in January 2014 of its factually flawed position paper on climate change, which was introduced without a vote of the general membership. One of the drivers behind the policy is John Clague, an academic geologist (SFU) and climate alarmist who looks like a shoo-in to become APEGBC’s next president. Oh dear! Clague is also a buddy of Andrew Weaver, the “brains” behind the University of Victoria’s ESCM climate model, one of the worst temperature predictors on record (see WUWT October 24, 2013 for a post on the “epic fail” of that Canadian model). Weaver is now in provincial politics as a Greenie. Oh dear!
I have also submitted a letter of complaint on the matter to APEGBC’s “Innovation” magazine, hopefully to be included in its next issue. Unless …..
Time to call it what it is…Mass Delusion, Mass Hysteria. Many examples can be found in history.
“During the summer of 1835, a series of six newspaper reports appearing in the New York Sun caused a worldwide sensation. Created by journalist Richard A. Locke, the paper claimed that astronomer Sir John Herschel had perfected the world’s strongest telescope in a South African observatory, and had discovered various life forms on the Moon: a two-legged beaver, a horned bear, miniature zebras, and colorful birds among them. His most astonishing observation was that he could see human-like forms on the Moon flying about with bat-like wings. The creatures were given the scientific name of “Vespertilio-homo” meaning bat-man. These beings were described with angelic innocence, peacefully coexisting with its fellow creatures in an environment apparently absent of carnivores. The delusion began on Friday, August 21, with an ambiguous story about new astronomical discoveries. Great excitement prevailed in New York City and spread around the world; most newspapers had been hoodwinked, including the New York Times. Locke published the articles in a pamphlet and sold sixty thousand copies within a month. The New York-based Journal of Commerce newspaper eventually unmasked the hoax (summarized from Griggs 1852; Bulgatz 1993).”
A hundred years later Orson Welles scarred the heck out of people with his radio drama. In the 1690’s we had the Salem witch trials. Governor Phips ordered that all suspects be released ending the madness, but not before 20 lost theirs lives through torture and execution, plus two dogs. Where is the leader today who will call a halt? We are waiting.
ferdberple says:
May 30, 2014 at 7:21 am
An update on Detroit:
“Removing blighted residential properties and small commercial structures that have plagued Detroit neighborhoods for decades would cost $850 million, with perhaps $1 billion more needed to tackle the bankrupt city’s larger commercial and industrial property, a task force said Tuesday.”
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/task-force-850-million-cost-blight-removal-23882867
As this will be government supervised expect costs to triple.
What a joke. What a lie…
Regulations do not contribute to economic progress. This does not mean that regulation is unnecessary, but we’re using a repacking “broken window” fallacy by trying to say since companies must spend more money on construction, or hire additional green-compliance auditors, that it’s an economic stimulus.