Informed Cities Forum 2011 Project Findings Lorenzo Bono

Urban Ecosystem Europe

Lorenzo Bono

Urban Ecosystem Europe

Urban Ecosystem Europe is a core set of environmental sustainability indicatorswhich provides an integrated assessment of European cities’ urban environment.

53 cities applied UEE

19 Big(> 500,000)

20 Medium(150,000-500,000)

14 Small(<150,000)

53 cities applied UEEStockholm 847.073 Praha 1.249.026Helsinki 588.941 Poznań 554.200Kobenhavn 528.208 Bydgoszcz 356.637Vantaa 197.636 Timisoara 311.428Aalborg 192.000 Valjevo 96.761Odense 190.245 Vranje 87.288Turku 178.000 Liepaja 83.415Helsingborg 123.000 Sfintu Gheorghe 62.300Kuopio 96.800 Knurow 38.706Vaxjo 83.005 Chrudim 22.950

Amsterdam 747.290 Barcelona 1.621.537Rotterdam 592.939 Torino 907.563Glasgow 584.240 Napoli 959.574Nantes 580.502 Zaragoza 700.808Bremen 547.685 Genova 609.822Sheffield 547.000 Bologna 380.181Dresden 511.138 Firenze 371.282Dublin 506.211 Vitoria Gasteiz 240.580Nürnberg 503.673 Granada 234.325Antwerpen 482.456 Porto 221.800Bristol 433.100 Parma 184.467Leicester 304.700 Oeiras 172.000Münster 282.718 Ravenna 155.548Augsburg 267.221 Ferrara 135.369Plymouth 252.800 Bolzano 104.029Bordeaux 230.000 Granollers 60.012

Faro 58.675

Nor

ther

n E

urop

e

Eas

tern

Eur

ope

Wes

tern

Eur

ope

Sout

hern

Eur

ope

Data availability

Data availability

Air PM10 daily exceedances traffic stations 90,0%daily exceedances background stations 62,0%annual mean traffic stations 90,0%annual mean background stations 64,0%

NO2 annual mean traffic stations 90,0%annual mean background stations 74,0%

O3 exceedances 85,0%

Water wastewater connected inhabitants 94,0%treatment 78,0%network 78,0%

potable water per capitaconsumption 92,0%distribution network leakages 88,0%

Waste production production (municipal and household) 96,0%separated collection municipal and household 88,0%

municipal 76,0%household 45,0%

Data availability

Urban Design green areas parks and garden 88,0%urban green areas 96,0%natural areas 86,0%

trees trees along roads 67,0%cycling paths and lanes 88,0%

cycling network 64,0%pedestrian paths length 54,0%

areas 45,0%

Mobility modal split modal split (general) 83,0%all trips city by car 68,0%

public transport passengers (general) 77,0%urban passengers 64,0%total network km travelled 51,0%

GPP paper recycled paper purchased 62,0%food organic food purchased 32,0%local authority green fleet 68,0%

ISO and EMAS certificated departments 52,0%

Data availability

Noise exposed population den 60,0%night 55,0%

Energy CO2 CO2 or CO2 equivalent emissions 80,0%consumption households elecrtricity consumption 60,0%district heating connected inhabitants 53,0%renewables solar thermal installed in PB 38,0%

solar photovoltaic installed in PB 47,0%

Key indicators

4-5 INDICATORS showed

Link to the web platform……

Benchmarking cities: air quality

• Indicatori usati da: green capital award, urban audit, green city index (economist), citeair (index)

• Monitoring station network: esempio di due italiane, se possibile con mappa

• PM10: le diverse possibilità (1° scelta: media annua vs superamenti; 2°scelta: centralina peggiore, media centraline traffico, media centraline background, media tutte centraline)

• PM10 grafici e classifiche a confronto (possiamo segnare in rossouna città e vedere come cambiano le posizioni in classifica….)

Image from: EGC – catalogue of best practice


• single parameters/index• exceedances/annual mean• traffic/background stations


http://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/air/airbase/map-stations

Amsterdam Kobenhavn

Air quality monitoring network


Monitoring stations

• Traffic and background

• Traffic

• Background

Air quality assessment

Amsterdam


Monitoring stations

• Traffic and background

• Traffic

• Background • Stations’ average

• Worst station

Type of value

• Concentration

• Limit exceedances

Air quality assessment

Pool of pollutants

• PM10

• NO2

• O3

• Others


PARAMETERS – European Green Capital Award

Analysis of the European Green Capital Award 2010 & 2011 application round

Traffic/background

PM10/NO2/O3

Mean/exceedances

Average/worst station (maximum value)


INDEX – Citeair air quality index

http://www.airqualitynow.eu/comparing_year_average.php

Detected values weightened

Worst station considered

Index based on “distance to target” (EU legislation)

PM10 exceedances_trafficPM10 annual mean_trafficNO2 annual mean_trafficO3 exceedances_trafficSO2Benzene

PM10 exceedances_backgroundPM10 annual mean_backgroundNO2 annual mean_backgroundO3 exceedances_backgroundSO2Benzene

annu

al a

ir qu

ality

inde

x

traffi

c in

dex

back

grou

nd

inde

x


INDEX – European Green City Index

European Green City Index - Siemens

PM10 annual daily mean of emissions scored EU targetNO2 annual daily mean of emissions scored EU targetO3 annual daily mean of emissions scored EU targetSO2 annual daily mean of emissions scored EU target

policiesai

r qua

lity

Euro

pean

Gre

en C

ity In

dex

Benchmarking cities: UEE air quality

PM10 excedances - traffic stations mean (n of days)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Torin

o

Nap

oli

Poznań

Bar

celo

na

Bydg

oszc

z

Fire

nze

Bol

ogna

Parm

a

Ferr

ara

Liep

aja

Gra

nada

Dre

sden

Rav

enna

Pra

ha

Sto

ckho

lm

Ant

wer

pen

Bor

deau

x

Mun

ster

Por

to

Am

ster

dam

Aal

borg

Faro

Augs

burg

Zara

goza

Hel

sink

i

Nur

embe

rg

Bre

men

Gra

nolle

rs

Nan

tes

Gen

ova

Bol

zano

Kuop

io

Ply

mou

th

Gla

sgow

Kob

enha

vn

Leic

este

rH

elsi

ngbo

rg

Turk

u

Van

taa

Vaxj

o

Bris

tol

Vito

ria G

aste

iz

Chr

udim

Dub

lin

Ode

nse

PM10 exceedances – traffic stations’ average (n of days)

PM10 annual mean - traffic stations mean (µg/m3)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Torin

o

Nap

oli

Bar

celo

na

Bydg

oszc

zFi

renz

ePa

rma

Gra

nada

Bol

ogna

Ferr

ara

Poznań

Aal

borg

Liep

aja

Pra

ha

Ant

wer

pen

Rav

enna

Dre

sden

Gra

nolle

rs

Ply

mou

thC

hrud

imK

oben

havn

Mun

ster

A

mst

erda

m

Rot

terd

amAu

gsbu

rg

Nan

tes

Bor

deau

x

Bre

men

Faro

Ode

nse

Por

toZa

rago

za

Gen

ova

Nur

embe

rgS

tock

holm

Hel

sink

iLe

ices

ter

Bol

zano

Gla

sgow

Bris

tol

Dub

linV

itoria

Gas

teiz

Hel

sing

borg

Kuop

ioTu

rku

Van

taa

Vaxj

o


PM10 annual mean – traffic stations’ average (µg/m3)

PM10 annual mean - worst traffic station (µg/m3)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Torin

oB

arce

lona

Nap

oli

Prah

aB

ydgo

szcz

Fire

nze

Bord

eaux

Gra

nada

Gen

ova

Parm

aPoznań

Bol

ogna

Chr

udim

Ferr

ara

Rot

terd

amA

albo

rgA

ntw

erpe

nLi

epaj

aB

rem

enA

ugsb

urg

Dre

sden

Gla

sgow

Rav

enna

Am

ster

dam

Gra

nolle

rsK

oben

havn

Ply

mou

thSt

ockh

olm

Mun

ster

Le

ices

ter

Nan

tes

Por

toFa

roH

elsi

nki

Nur

embe

rgO

dens

eZa

rago

zaO

eira

sB

olza

noSh

effie

ldB

risto

lD

ublin

Vito

ria G

aste

izS

fintu

Ghe

orgh

eH

elsi

ngbo

rgK

uopi

oTu

rku

Van

taa

Vax

jo


PM10 annual mean – worst traffic station (µg/m3)

PM10 annual mean - traffic stations mean (µg/m3)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Torin

o

Nap

oli

Bar

celo

na

Bydg

oszc

zFi

renz

ePa

rma

Gra

nada

Bol

ogna

Ferr

ara

Poznań

Aal

borg

Liep

aja

Pra

ha

Ant

wer

pen

Rav

enna

Dre

sden

Gra

nolle

rs

Ply

mou

thC

hrud

imK

oben

havn

Mun

ster

A

mst

erda

m

Rot

terd

amAu

gsbu

rg

Nan

tes

Bor

deau

x

Bre

men

Faro

Ode

nse

Por

toZa

rago

za

Gen

ova

Nur

embe

rgS

tock

holm

Hel

sink

iLe

ices

ter

Bol

zano

Gla

sgow

Bris

tol

Dub

linV

itoria

Gas

teiz

Hel

sing

borg

Kuop

ioTu

rku

Van

taa

Vaxj

o


PM10 annual mean – traffic stations’ average (µg/m3)

Benchmarking cities: cycling network

• Differenza tra paths and lanes e tutto il resto (anche come valoreassoluto o percentuale….)

• Differenti classifiche su 3 indicatori diversi: piste/abitante; piste/superficie; piste/strade



• Paths and lane and the cycling network• Paths and lanes: rate to inhabitants• Paths and lanes: rate to municipal area

Paths and lanes, rate to total cycling network

0,00%

10,00%

20,00%

30,00%

40,00%

50,00%

60,00%

70,00%

80,00%

90,00%

100,00%

Bord

eaux

Faro

Fire

nze

Gen

ova

Knur

owN

ante

sN

urem

berg

Ode

nse

Poznań

Sfin

tu G

heor

ghe

Turk

uV

axjo

Kob

enha

vnD

ublin

Gla

sgow

Ply

mou

thB

rem

enV

itoria

Gas

teiz

Bol

zano

Kuo

pio

Bol

ogna

Ant

wer

pen

Parm

aB

risto

lZa

rago

zaR

aven

naA

albo

rgH

elsi

nki

Van

taa

Por

toTo

rino

Oei

ras

Am

ster

dam

Ferr

ara

Gra

nada

Dre

sden

Mun

ster

H

elsi

ngbo

rgLe

ices

ter

Prah

aB

ydgo

szcz

Bar

celo

naG

rano

llers

Stoc

khol

mLi

epaj

a


Paths and lanes, rate to total cycling network (%)

Cycling paths and lanes, rate to inhabitants (m/inh)

0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

Ode

nse

Van

taa

Turk

uK

uopi

oV

axjo

Aal

borg

Bre

men

Ant

wer

pen

Mun

ster

H

elsi

nki

Stoc

khol

mA

mst

erda

mK

oben

havn

Rav

enna

Nur

embe

rgN

ante

sD

resd

enBo

rdea

uxH

elsi

ngbo

rgB

olza

noPa

rma

Dub

linG

lasg

owV

itoria

Gas

teiz

Ferr

ara

Faro

Bol

ogna

Bris

tol

Zara

goza

Ply

mou

thPoznań

Knur

owTo

rino

Fire

nze

Byd

gosz

czS

fintu

Ghe

orgh

eLe

ices

ter

Gra

nada

Bar

celo

naPr

aha

Por

toG

rano

llers

Oei

ras

Gen

ova

Liep

aja

Nap

oli

Val

jevo


Cycling paths and lanes, rate to inhabitants (m/inh)

Cycling paths and lanes, rate to municipal area (m/km2)

0

500

1.000

1.500

2.000

2.500

3.000

3.500

Ant

wer

pen

Stoc

khol

mK

oben

havn

Bord

eaux

Hel

sink

iB

rem

enA

mst

erda

mV

anta

aO

dens

eD

ublin

Nur

embe

rgB

arce

lona

Turk

uG

lasg

owTo

rino

Mun

ster

B

olza

noD

resd

enB

risto

lB

olog

naN

ante

sP

lym

outh

Fire

nze

Leic

este

rPa

rma

Poznań

Vito

ria G

aste

izG

rana

daA

albo

rgB

ydgo

szcz

Hel

sing

borg

Knur

owP

orto

Prah

aZa

rago

zaR

aven

naK

uopi

oG

rano

llers

Ferr

ara

Sfin

tu G

heor

ghe

Vax

joFa

roO

eira

sG

enov

aLi

epaj

aN

apol

iV

alje

vo


Cycling paths and lanes, rate to municipal area (m/km2)

Cycling paths and lanes, rate to total street network (m/km)

0,00

50,00

100,00

150,00

200,00

250,00

300,00

350,00

400,00

450,00

500,00

Hel

sink

i

Ode

nse

Vax

jo

Ant

wer

pen

Van

taa

Bol

zano

Kuo

pio

Mun

ster

Dre

sden

Dub

lin

Bol

ogna

Vito

ria G

aste

iz

Bar

celo

na

Hel

sing

borg

Bris

tol

Parm

a

Knur

ow

Sfin

tu G

heor

ghe

Rav

enna

Ply

mou

th

Byd

gosz

cz

Fire

nze

Leic

este

r

Gra

nada

Ferr

ara

Prah

a

Aal

borg

Faro

Oei

ras

Gen

ova


Cycling paths and lanes, rate to total street network (m/km)


Benchmarking cities: green urban areas

• Parks and garden and green urban areas• Parks and garden: rate to inhabitants• Parks and garden: rate to municipal area


Parks and gardens, rate to total green urban areas

0,00%

10,00%

20,00%

30,00%

40,00%

50,00%

60,00%

70,00%

80,00%

90,00%

100,00%

Gra

nolle

rsH

elsi

ngbo

rgLi

epaj

aS

fintu

Ghe

orgh

eTu

rku

Gen

ova

Bol

zano

Ode

nse

Van

taa

Bris

tol

Fire

nze

Bre

men

Zara

goza

Ant

wer

pen

Ply

mou

thFe

rrar

aG

lasg

owLe

ices

ter

Nur

embe

rgD

ublin

Byd

gosz

czA

mst

erda

mN

ante

sTo

rino

Chr

udim

Por

toPa

rma

Vito

ria G

aste

izPr

aha

Bord

eaux

Knur

owB

arce

lona

Gra

nada

Mun

ster

H

elsi

nki

Bol

ogna

Poznań

Nap

oli

Vra

nje

Faro

Oei

ras

Vax

joD

resd

enV

alje

voK

uopi

oR

aven

naA

albo

rgA

ugsb

urg

Kob

enha

vnR

otte

rdam

Shef

field


Parks and gardens, rate to total green urban areas (%)

Parks and Gardens, rate to inhabitants (m2/inh)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Van

taa

Hel

sing

borg

Ode

nse

Aal

borg

Bre

men

Bris

tol

Ply

mou

thD

ublin

Prah

aV

itoria

Gas

teiz

Vax

joTu

rku

Sfin

tu G

heor

ghe

Ant

wer

pen

Gla

sgow

Ferr

ara

Hel

sink

i

Gen

ova

Am

ster

dam

Nan

tes

Por

toM

unst

er

Fire

nze

Nur

embe

rg

Liep

aja

Parm

a

Bol

ogna

Bol

zano

Bord

eaux

Poznań

Torin

o

Gra

nada

Kuo

pio

Leic

este

r

Byd

gosz

czD

resd

en

Gra

nolle

rsB

arce

lona

Zara

goza

Oei

ras

Chr

udim

Faro

Knur

owN

apol

i

Rav

enna

Val

jevo


Parks and gardens, rate to inhabitants (m2/inh)

Parks and gardens, rate to total municipal area (%)

0,00%

1,00%

2,00%

3,00%

4,00%

5,00%

6,00%

7,00%

8,00%

Bris

tol

Dub

lin

Bar

celo

naV

anta

aP

lym

outh

Por

toB

rem

en

Torin

oG

lasg

owPr

aha

Bord

eaux

Am

ster

dam

Hel

sink

iFi

renz

e

Ode

nse

Ant

wer

pen

Gen

ova

Leic

este

r

Nur

embe

rgB

olog

naG

rano

llers

Hel

sing

borg

Gra

nada

Poznań

Bol

zano

Vito

ria G

aste

izO

eira

sS

fintu

Ghe

orgh

eB

ydgo

szcz

Nan

tes

Liep

aja

Mun

ster

D

resd

enTu

rku

Nap

oli

Parm

aFe

rrar

a

Zara

goza

Knur

owC

hrud

im

Vax

joFa

roK

uopi

oR

aven

naV

alje

vo


Parks and gardens, rate to municipal area (%)

For any further information, please contact us:

[email protected]

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION

Date post:	07-Nov-2014
Category:	Technology
Upload:	iclei-sustainability-management-urban-governance
View:	394 times
Download:	1 times

Informed Cities Forum 2011 Project Findings Lorenzo Bono

Technology