Urban environment City Mayors reports urban environmental developments and examines the challenges faced by cities worldwide

Best cities in the world: Melbourne is still on top while war-torn Damascus dropped to the bottom A report by the Economist Intelligence Unit

The London-based Economic Intelligence Unit (EIU) has again named Melbourne as the best city in the world, whereas the US consultancy Mercer is less impressed by Australias second city, ranking it only 17th in its league table of the most livable cities. Both organizations agree, however, that for people who can choose where to live Vienna deserves serious consideration. Mercer ranks the Austrian capital top in the world, while the EIU puts it in second place. Other German-speaking cities, such as Zrich, Mnchen, Dsseldorf and Frankfurt, which are much favoured by Mercer dont feature in the EIUs top ten at all. Not surprisingly, war-torn Damascus was named as worst city to live in. EIU's ten 'best' cities in the world

2013 Rank (2012) City Country

1 (1) Melbourne Australia 2 (2) Vienna Austria 3 (3) Vancouver Canada 4 (4) Toronto Canada

=5 (5) Calgary Canada =5 (5) Adelaide Australia 7 (7) Sidney Finland 8 (8) Helsinki Australia 9 (9) Perth Australia

10 (10) Auckland New Zealand Mercer Consulting's 50 best cities in the world The 2013 EIU report, which describes the concept of livability as simple, is compiled for business people from western countries and used to work out hardship allowances as part of an expatriate's relocation package. The report's authors say that the survey quantifies the challenges that might be presented to an individual's lifestyle in 140 cities worldwide. Seen from such a western perspective, it is therefore not surprising that the survey's top cities are all located in wealthy western countries. While this years EIU top ten is identical to last years ranking, this apparent stability hides longer-term trends that become apparent when taking a five-year view. Only 28 cities of the 140 surveyed have registered changes in the last 12 months, but 86 cities have experienced a change in livability over the past five years. Of these, just 30 have seen an improvement in scores, while 56 have seen livability levels declining. The past five years have seen civil unrest becoming a globally destabilizing factor, with a number of different reasons for discontent. The most significant of these has been the Arab Spring, which has affected a number of countries in the Middle East and North Africa, notably the ongoing protests in Egypt and the civil wars in Syria and Libya. This means that Damascus, Tripoli and Cairo have seen the sharpest declines over the past five years, with the Syrian capital in particular seeing a 20 per cent decline in liveability and moving to the very bottom of the ranking. But austerity and feelings of disenfranchisement have led to rioting and protests in western Europe as well, notably in Greece, but also in the UK and most recently in Spain. In China, which has seen improving liveability levels over the past five years due to investment in infrastructure and higher living

standards, there has been heightened unrest triggered by a range of social problems, most notably anti-Japanese rioting during August and September last year. Yet it has not all been doom and gloom; there have been some positive changes in liveability over the past five years. Bogota in Colombia has seen the sharpest rise in liveability as the threat from terrorism, violence and kidnappings related to guerrilla activity has declined. Equally, while current elections are disputed, a more stable situation has prompted a rise in liveability for Harare, although the Zimbabwean capital remains in the bottom five cities of the ranking.

Cities where livability has improved most

City Country Rank out of 140 Five-year

improvement in % Bogota Colombia 111 +7.9 Harare Zimbabwe 136 +3.2 Dubai UAE 77 +2.9 Algiers Algeria 134 +2.9 Kuwait City Kuwait 81 +2.5 Dhaka Bangladesh 139 +2.5 Taipei Taiwan 61 +2.0 Colombo Sri Lanka 128 +1.8 Bratislava Slovakia 63 +1.7 Phnom Penh Cambodia 126 +1.6

Cities where livability has declined most

City Country Rank out of

140 Five-year decline in

% Damascus Syria 140 -20.4 Tripoli Libya 133 -19.9 Cairo Egypt 122 -5.9 Sofia Bulgaria 87 -4.9 Amman Jordan 103 -4.1 Panama City Panama 97 -3.8 Tunis Tunisia 104 -3.8 Muscat Oman 88 -3.7 Reykjavik Iceland 54 -3.3 Nairobi Kenya 124 -2.9

The best cities in the world for Senvironment and infrastructure

6 December 2012: Vienna has again been named as the best city in the world, with the Austrian capitals perennial Swiss rival, Zurich, in second place. Auckland, Munich and Vancouver complete the top five. Overall, German-speaking cities, including Dsseldorf, Frankfurt and Bern, occupy six places in the top ten of this yearsQuality of Living Survey by Mercer Consulting. Paris is ranked 29th, London 38th and New York City 44th. Singapore, Frankfurt and Munich offer the best infrastructure. Top ranked cities The Americas Europe Asia-Pacific Middle East & Africa Cities with the best infrastructure Research methodology

This years Mercer research separately identifies the cities with the best infrastructure based on electricity supply, water availability, telephone and mail services, public transportation, traffic congestion and the range of international flights from local airports. Singapore is at the top of this index, followed by Frankfurt and Munich in second place. Copenhagen (4) and Dusseldorf (5) fill the next two slots, while Hong Kong and London share sixth place. Port-au-Prince (221) ranks at the bottom of the list. The highest-ranking US cities on the city infrastructure list are Atlanta (13), Dallas (15), Washington, DC (22) and Chicago (28).

The world's best cities for quality of life (New York City is the base city with a score of 100 points)

2012 Rank 2011 Rank City Country 1 1 Vienna Austria 2 2 Zurich Switzerland 3 3 Auckland New Zealand 4 4 Munich Germany 5 5 Vancouver Canada 6 =5 Dsseldorf Germany 7 7 Frankfurt Germany 8 8 Geneva Switzerland 9 =9 Copenhagen Denmark

=10 9 Bern Switzerland =10 11 Sydney Australia 12 12 Amsterdam Netherlands 13 13 Wellington New Zealand 14 14 Ottawa Canada 15 15 Toronto Canada 16 17 Berlin Germany

=17 16 Hamburg Germany =17 18 Melbourne Australia =19 19 Luxembourg Luxembourg =19 20 Stockholm Sweden 21 21 Perth Australia 22 =22 Brussels Belgium 23 =22 Montreal Canada 24 24 Nrnberg Germany 25 25 Singapore Singapore 26 =26 Canberra Australia 27 28 Stuttgart Germany

28 29 Honolulu USA =29 =30 Adelaide Australia =29 =30 Paris France =29 =30 San Francisco USA =32 =33 Calgary Canada =32 35 Helsinki Finland =32 =33 Oslo Norway =35 36 Boston USA =35 =26 Dublin Ireland 37 37 Brisbane Australia 38 38 London UK 39 39 Lyon France 40 40 Barcelona Spain 41 42 Milan Italy 42 =43 Chicago USA 43 =43 Washington DC USA

=44 41 Lisbon Portugal =44 47 New York City USA =44 48 Seattle USA =44 46 Tokyo Japan 48 =49 Kobe Japan

=49 =43 Madrid Spain =49 =49 Pittsburgh USA =49 =49 Yokohama Japan

Research by Mercer Consulting The EIU's list of 'best' cities in the world

The Americas Canadian cities still dominate the top of the index for this region, with Vancouver (5) retaining the top regional spot, followed by Ottawa (14), Toronto (15) and Montreal (23). Calgary ranks 32 on the overall quality of living ranking. Overall, there was almost no movement in rankings among Canadian cities from 2011 to 2012, with Calgary advancing one position, Montreal retreating one position, and the other cities remaining unchanged. Honolulu (28) is the US city with the highest quality of living, followed by San Francisco (29) and Boston (35). Chicago is at 42 and Washington, DC ranks 43. New York the base city ranks 44. In Central and South America, Pointe--Pitre, Guadeloupe ranks the highest for quality of living at 63. San Juan, Puerto Rico follows at 72 and Montevideo, Uruguay at 77. Port-au-Prince, Haiti (219) ranks lowest in the region. A spokesman for Mercer said: Overall, there has been little change in the rankings for North American cities. A number of South and Central American countries have experienced positive change, essentially due to some modest infrastructural and recreational improvement. Nevertheless, political and security issues, along with natural disasters, continue to hamper the quality of living in South and Central American cities. High crime levels also remain a major problem. In terms of city infrastructure, Vancouver (9) tops the ranking for the region with Atlanta and Montreal following at 13. Other Canadian cities that ranked highly were Toronto (16) and Ottawa (25). In the United States, Dallas ranked 15, followed by Washington, DC (22), Chicago (28) and New York (30). Buenos Aires, Argentina (83) has the best city infrastructure in Central and South America, whereas Port-au-Prince is the lowest ranking at 221. Europe Europe has 15 cities among the worlds top 25 cities for quality of living. Vienna retains the highest-

ranking for both the region and globally. The rest of the top 10 for Europe are dominated by German and Swiss cities, with three cities each in the top 10. Zurich (2) is followed by Munich (4), Dsseldorf (6), Frankfurt (7), Geneva (8), Copenhagen (9) and Bern (10). The lowest-ranking Western European cities are Athens (83) and Belfast (64). Apart from London, there are no UK cities in the top 50. Other European cities among the top 25 include Amsterdam (12), Berlin (16), Hamburg (17), Luxembourg (19), Stockholm (19), Brussels (22) Nrnberg (24) and Stuttgart (27). Paris ranks 29 and is followed by Helsinki (32), Oslo (32) and London (38). Dublin dropped nine places from last year to rank 35, mostly due to a combination of serious flooding and an increase in crime rates. Lisbon ranks 44 followed by Madrid (49) and Rome (52). Prague, Czech Republic (69) is the highest-ranking Eastern European city followed by Budapest, Hungary (74); Ljubljana, Slovenia (75); Vilnius, Lithuania (79); and Warsaw, Poland (84). The lowest-ranking European city is Tbilisi, Georgia (213). With six cities in the top 10, European cities also fare well in the city infrastructure ranking. Frankfurt and Munich rank the highest at second place, followed by Copenhagen (4) and Dsseldorf (5). London (6) and Hamburg (9) are followed by Paris which ranks 12. Budapest (67) is the highest-ranking for city infrastructure in Eastern Europe followed by Vilnius (74) and Prague (75), whereas Yerevan (189) and Tbilisi (201) rank lowest. Infrastructure in German and Danish cities is among the best in the world, in part due to their first-class airport facilities, international and local connectivity, and a high standard of public services, said Mr. Parakatil. Londons high ranking in the infrastructure index reflects a combination of high level of public services offered, with its extensive public transportation system including airports, the London Underground buses and railroad services. Asia-Pacific Auckland (3) retains its position as the highest-ranking city for quality of living in the region. Sydney follows at 10, Wellington at 13, Melbourne at 17 and Perth at 21. Singapore remains the highest-ranking Asian city at 25 followed by Japanese cities Tokyo (44), Kobe (48), Yokohama (49) and Osaka (57). Hong Kong (70), Seoul (75), Kuala Lumpur (80), Taipei (85) and Shanghai (95) are other major Asian cities ranked in the top 100. The regions lowest-ranking cities are Dhaka, Bangladesh (203); Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan (204); and Dushanbe, Tajikistan (207). For city infrastructure, Singapore has the highest ranking worldwide followed by Hong Kong (6), Sydney (8), Perth (25), Tokyo (32) and Melbourne (34). Adelaide and Brisbane both ranked 37. Nagoya (41), Auckland (43), Kobe (44), Wellington (48), Seoul (50) and Osaka (51) are the next highest-ranking cities in this region. The regions lowest-ranking city for city infrastructure is Dhaka, Bangladesh (205). According to Mercer, a noticeable gap can be seen among Asia Pacific cities where several cities have improved in the region partly because they have been investing massively in infrastructure and public services. "Competition among municipalities has been continuously increasing in order to attract multinationals, foreigners, expatriates and tourists. Yet a considerable number of Asian cities rank in the bottom quartile, mainly due to high political volatility, poor infrastructure and obsolete public services, a spokesman said. Middle East and Africa Dubai (73) and Abu Dhabi (78) in the United Arab Emirates are the regions cities with the best quality of living. Port Louis in Mauritius (82), Cape Town (89) and Johannesburg (94) follow, and along with Victoria in the Seychelles (96) and Tel Aviv (99), are the regions only other cities in the top 100. This region has 15 cities in the bottom 20, including Lagos, Nigeria (202); Bamako, Mali (209); Khartoum, Sudan (217); and NDjamena, Chad (218). Baghdad, Iraq (221) is the lowest-ranking city both regionally and globally. In the city infrastructure index, most of the regions cities rank below 100. The exceptions are Dubai (34), which ranks the highest in the region for city infrastructure, Tel Aviv (58), Abu Dhabi (72), Port Louis (91), Muscat (94), Cairo (95) and Cape Town (97). Port Louis, Cairo and Cape Town are the only African cities in the top 100. Elsewhere in the region, Doha, Qatar is at 102, Tunis, Tunisia, ranks 103 and Manama,

Bahrain is at 110. In terms of city infrastructure, Baghdad, Iraq (220) is the lowest-ranking city regionally, along with Sanaa, Yemen (219); Brazzaville, Congo (218); Kigali, Rwanda (217); and Abuja, Nigeria (215). The ongoing turmoil in many countries across North Africa and the Middle East has led to serious security issues for locals and expatriates, said a spokesman for Mercer. Many countries continue to experience violence through political demonstrations that have sometimes developed into massive uprisings and led to serious instability within the region. Countries such as Syria and Mali have seen their quality of living levels drop substantially.

The cities with the best infrastructure Rank City Country

1 Singapore Singapore 2 Frankfurt Germany 2 Munich Germany 4 Copenhagen Denmark 5 Dsseldorf Germany

=6 Hong Kong Hong Kong =6 London UK 8 Sydney Australia

=9 Hamburg Germany =9 Vancouver Canada 11 Yokohama Japan 12 Paris France

=13 Atlanta, GA USA =13 Montreal Canada 15 Dallas USA

=16 Toronto Canada =16 Vienna Austria =18 Helsinki Finland =18 Oslo Norway =18 Stockholm Sweden =18 Stuttgart Germany 22 Washington DC USA 23 Amsterdam Netherlands 24 Zurich Switzerland

=25 Bern Switzerland =25 Ottawa Canada =25 Perth Australia 28 Chicago USA 29 Berlin Germany 30 New York City USA 31 Boston USA 32 Tokyo Japan 33 Nurnberg Germany

=34 Dubai UAE =34 Madrid Spain =34 Melbourne Australia =37 Adelaide Australia =37 Brisbane Australia =37 Philadelphia USA 40 Honolulu USA 41 Nagoya Japan 42 Brussels Belgium

43 Auckland New Zealand =44 Birmingham UK =44 Glasgow UK =44 Kobe Japan 47 Geneva Switzerland 48 Miami, FL USA 48 Wellington New Zealand 50 Seoul South Korea

Research by Mercer Consulting

Research methodology Mercer Consulting largely between September and November 2012 and is regularly updated to take account of changing circumstances. In

particular, the assessments are revised in the case of significant political, economic and environmental developments.

Mercer evaluates local living conditions in all the 460 cities it surveys worldwide. Living conditions are analysed according to 39 factors,

grouped in 10 categories:

1) Political and social environment (political stability, crime, law enforcement, etc)

2) Economic environment (currency exchange regulations, banking services, etc)

3) Socio-cultural environment (censorship, limitations on personal freedom, etc)

4) Health and sanitation (medical supplies and services, infectious diseases, sewage, waste disposal, air pollution, etc)

5) Schools and education (standard and availability of international schools, etc)

6) Public services and transportation (electricity, water, public transport, traffic congestion, etc)

7) Recreation (restaurants, theatres, cinemas, sports and leisure, etc)

8) Consumer goods (availability of food/daily consumption items, cars, etc)

9) Housing (housing, household appliances, furniture, maintenance services, etc)

10) Natural environment (climate, record of natural disasters)

The scores attributed to each factor allow for city-to-city comparisons. The result is a quality-of-living index that compares relative differences

between any two locations. For the indices to be used effectively, Mercer has created a grid that allows users to link the resulting index to a

quality-of-living allowance amount by recommending a percentage value in relation to the index.

Japan urged to invite foreign expertise when re-building tsunami communities

4 March 2012: Japan is planning to build six energy efficient so-called future cities in the region devastated by the magnitude 9.0 earthquake and tsunami one year ago. But there are concerns about the scope and sustainability of the projects and whether international entities will be shut out. After the 11 March 2011 tsunami washed away some coastal communities and many of their inhabitants, many feared that some towns would disappear forever. But Japan is now planning to revive some of them

as energy-efficient communities. Some of the ideas are quite ambitious.A trio of devastated towns - Ofunato, Rikuzentakata and Sumida Kesen - would jointly become home to the world's first mega solar power project with locally distributed batteries.

Kamaishi, which was worst hit by the tsunami, plans to make its own electricity for local consumption and to create new industries. Higashi Matsushima is to use cutting edge building technology to create a disaster resistant community. Iwanuma could use debris from the natural disaster to redevelop a natural environment. It will also have a solar-powered smart electrical grid. And the town of Shinichi plans to become an information infrastructure hub while Minamisoma is trying to be an energy circulation themed city, perhaps utilizing wind power. Imported fossil fuels still power much of Japans economy, especially since nearly all of the countrys

nuclear reactors are now offline for a variety of reasons. Authorities are seeking bold ideas for alternative energy. At a seminar in Fukushima, some of those from the affected communities, international urban planners and diplomats received a briefing from the chairman of an academic group evaluating some cutting-edge proposals. Architect and engineer Shuzo Murakami says future city residents would not only control their electrical usage, but also create and store energy in their own homes. But Murakami cautions the new communities cannot be designed in a way that merely pours in money for construction. The new cities, he says, need to be self-sufficient and sustainable so people will want to live in them over the long term. Even before last year's disaster some of the communities were facing big challenges. Younger residents had fled to bigger cities, abandoning jobs in farming and fishing. Survivors and planners fear that the projects could be the latest version of billion-dollar boondoggles. Japan has seen many of those over the decades where politicians and construction companies collude, primarily for the financial benefit of each other. Japan is encouraging foreign companies to participate in the rebuilding. But overseas groups complain they have found little actual enthusiasm for their expertise and products, both with the massive cleanup so far and the planned reconstruction efforts. Some have told journalists that Japanese middlemen have offered assistance only if bribes are paid. A keynote speaker at the Fukushima seminar, Richard Jones, the deputy executive director of the International Energy Agency, says Japan's decision-makers need to focus on the needs of the people rather than the desires of major Japanese companies. Of course in a situation like this, there's always the temptation because, after all, they're spending a lot of public money to focus it on domestic sources," Jones stated. "But I would certainly urge people to try and think about the long term and also about the

needs of the people in the area. And, Jones says, the primary need in the devastated communities is reconstruction as quickly as possible. I don't think they should try and reinvent the wheel when there are plenty of examples out there of other communities and other projects that have been quite successful, he said. Jones, a former U.S. ambassador to four countries, said smart communities in Denmark, England, Germany and Sweden are viable models for Japan to learn from. Advocates says those lessons include how planning and construction must involve the future residents and other stakeholders to ensure that they are both energy efficient and desirable places to live.

US mayors demand stronger regulations on hydrofracking

21 February 2012: In December 2011, Mayor Matt Ryan of Binghamton, New York, signed into law a two-year ban on hydrofracking in his city. Mayor Ryan had concerns about the natural gas drilling technique because of regulation as it now stands. Three hundred kilometers away, Mayor Michael Bloomberg voiced his opinion that hydrofracking poses unacceptable risks to the water supply of New York City. Regulation, of course, is a way of balancing risks and benefits. Hydrofracking seemed questionable on a large scale in the United States just six months ago, but now it appears inevitable, and the focus of the debate has turned to risk management.

Demand and regulation Three months ago, the US Environmental Protection Agency issued strict new carbon emission standards for coal-fired electric generating plants. Unless the regulations are overturned by the courts (and lawsuits are pending), coal production will become more expensive and therefore less-competitive with natural gas. In his January State of the Union address, President Obama highlighted hydrofracking as an example of the promise of a clean energy future for the US, noting that it now accounts for a third of US natural gas production. Today, the supply of natural gas exceeds demand, which means that it costs more to blast a mix of water, sand, and chemicals into shale rock thousands of feet into the ground than the market price of the natural gas that is extracted. The new EPA regulations are expected to result in price increases for natural gas. This signals the inevitability of hydrofracking to many mayors and also, as former Mayor Calvin Tillman of Dish, Texas says, the need for tighter regulations and more transparency in the drilling process.

Risks Dish, Texas has hundreds of hydrofracked wells and was the site of the documentary filmGasland with the memorable scene of a homeowner igniting his natural-gas-infiltrated tap water. The city, under Mayor Tillman, also commissioned several independent studies, which contradicted industry and state of Texas claims that hydrofracking was not a threat to groundwater supplies, air quality, and human health. The independent studies showed higher levels of contamination than the state and gas industry disclosed and helped fuel a national debate over the merits of hydrofracking. Dish is a small city, and it is the small, rural communities that stand to incur most of the risks

because that is where almost all hydrofracking takes place. For example, hydrofracking a single, average-size well can generate 40,000 or more trips by heavy trucks. Though the well operator may be contractually required to repair roads it damaged, proving liability can be difficult. Was the road properly constructed to begin with? Was it already old and deteriorated before drilling began? Well operators have used these arguments and others in Pennsylvania and West Virginia to avoid liability, leaving small municipalities vulnerable to enormous road repair expenses or enormous legal expenses to sue the well operator for breach of contract. Similar scenarios have played out for individual homeowners. Were their drinking water wells contaminated by chemicals used in nearby hydrofracking or by naturally-occurring selenium and arsenic? The burden of proof, including the expense, is on the homeowner.

Risk management President Obama offered 20 recommendations for reducing the risks of hydrofracking to individuals and communities in his State of the Union address. The recommendations include requiring gas producers to disclose the chemicals they use in the hydrofracking process and closer monitoring of each well with data posted on the Internet. The Presidents recommendations apply to hydrofracking on federal lands. It will be up to the states to apply them on state and local property where most hydrofracking occurs, and to include both small and large gas producers. With adequate regulations, hydrofracking could increase natural gas supplies, provide a higher level of energy security, create jobs, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the US. The future of hydrofracking, however, is cloudy. The hydrofracking industry is highly speculative, with costs currently exceeding returns by three to one; long-term costs are more difficult to assess since the gas reserves that are easiest and cheapest to extract will be depleted first; the natural gas distribution system must be bolstered with new pipelines and shipment facilities before full benefits can be achieved; lawsuits are in progress, and therefore regulatory mechanisms are uncertain; and public acceptance in not a sure thing. The future of American cities on or near shale deposits likely will intersect with the future of hydrofracking. Mayors are in a pivotal role. As mayor Luke Ravenstahl of Pittsburgh says, city leaders should take a leadership position when it comes to making decisions on energy and energy efficiency.

Al Gore says Green energy needs patient investment -

20 October 2011: The second Low Carbon Investment Conference at the end of September 2011 in Edinburgh focused strongly on offshore wind energy specifically unlocking investment and cutting the costs of production. This is seen by the Scottish Government as essential to its aim of re-industrialization through renewable energy. Cutting the costs of offshore wind relative to other sources is imperative if Scotland is to make progress quickly enough to become a manufacturing and exporting country in this growing subset of renewable energy infrastructure and production. Edinburgh Chamber of Commerce, which organized the event in association with the Scottish Government and corporate sponsors secured former US Vice President Al Gore for a keynote address. Gore has made climate change and making the transition to a low carbon economy his principal interest in the last ten years and he brought to the event a sense of urgency backed by some very up to the minute images and analysis.

Gores message to the energy sector was to get urgent in the transition because the divergence between climate and the weather we are all experiencing now has narrowed to the extent that the two things can now be spoken of as if they are the same. The basic physics of climate change has been known for a long time. In the last two years there have been clear signals of hydrological cycle changes. Flood events are now much larger and more intense than previously. Water vapour above the oceans has increased by 4 per cent in the last thirty years. Gore told delegates that in the US the cost of solar PV installations has fallen and new installations doubled between 2009 and 2010. If the cost is brought

down the growth in clean energy can be very powerful. The short-term approach of financial investors is a serious problem we have to address. Thirty years ago the average period of equity investments was seven years. Today its seven months. Even pension funds are less patient now. We must have incentives for patient money. The drive to reduce costs to make the emerging wave and tidal technologies and off-shore wind competitive is at the top of business and political agendas. With its rejection of nuclear the SNP administration in Scotland has committed to renewable more than most governments and it aspires to major research and development and manufacturing roles in the emerging clean energy world. Alex Salmond, re-elected as First Minister since the last Low Carbon Investment conference in Edinburgh

was upbeat in his keynote address. I am increasingly confident we can move to commercial delivery in wave and tidal in the next few years. Highlighting synergies across the energy sector as an asset for his small country he said our oil and gas technology and knowledge could help reduce offshore wind costs by 10-20 per cent. And he claimed Scotland is now the only country to provide support throughout the process. Scottish Enterprise Chief Executive Lena Wilson explained more: Scotland is the only country providing

to companies support all the way from research and development to manufacturing. Collaboration and partnership has been a theme in the year since the first low carbon energy conference here. Scottish Enterprise (a Government economic development agency) is very focused on the supply chain for offshore wind. Our competitors are moving fast and we need to deliver quickly on collaborative investments and initiatives. Cities are major players in the clean energy transition, which is likely to rely on enhancement in energy efficiency at the points of use if it is to happen. No city is more aspirational than Munich in this regard. It aims to create the conditions in which the total energy use within the city boundaries in 2025 will be from renewable. Deputy Mayor Hep Montzader told the business leaders and others that it was useless to create a green city without a good municipal society. If we want to tackle energy re-organization the cities must play a decisive role. In Munich we set out in 1995 on a path towards becoming a sustainable municipality. We have had to bring our population with us and at first we had to integrate all the players in to an alliance to act on climate protection. Since 1995 we (Social Democrats and Greens) have been re-elected three times. We give money to support private householder investments in improving their homes. Cities can set examples and provide citizens with standards. We have said to locally based companies that if they have CO2 reduction ideas which they will implement we will subsidies them to provide exemplar projects for other businesses and inhabitants in Munich. Innovation, good public relations and good collaboration are a good way forward, said Montzader. Munich is able to use the leverage of ownership of its city energy utility. The City Council chose to retain control of it in the 1990s when several cities in Germany sold them off. Monica von Schmalensee is the Chief Executive of White Architects, which have been responsible for several low carbon buildings in Scandinavia. She told the delegates in Edinburgh that Western Harbour in Malmo and Hammarby Sjostad in Stockholm are driven by a green agenda and low carbon use targets. Local governments set high standards but what then happened was that industry competed with each other to do even better. The market in Sweden is now going towards both good quality environments and low carbon emissions and lower costs and in the cities. Bringing people together at a very early stage and using technical innovation of good quality is key to delivering low carbon solutions, said Ms von Schmalensee.

Torontos Rouge Park to become Canadas first urban national park

6 July 2011: With the election of the federal Conservatives the outlook on the urban agenda in Canada was mixed. But the recent Throne speech provided some optimism for Canadian urbanism outlining the creation of Canadas first urban national park in the Greater Toronto Area, although there were no funds promised in the budget. Rouge Park, designated a provincial park by the Province of Ontario in 1995, is slated to take its place along the other 42 National Parks and National Park Reserves in Canada. Although there are more than 12 government organizations and one non-profit owning and managing the land, including the Toronto Region Conservation Authority, the cities of Markham and Toronto, and the Province, it is expected to be taken over by Parks Canada within two years once a national park plan is in place. The Throne speech read, In this, the 100th anniversary year of our national parks system, our government will create significant new protected areas. It will work with provincial, regional, municipal, aboriginal and community stakeholders toward establishing an urban national park in the Rouge Valley of eastern Toronto. As the federal Conservatives increase their focus on the Greater Toronto Area, some may either see this as a celebration of their recent success in the region or a means of gaining further support. Despite the lack of funding Markham Deputy Mayor Jack Heath is confident the project will move forward. I would have liked to see funding in the federal budget, as it gives more than anything else the intention of the federal government. But it doesnt stymie us or set us back. Toronto City Councilor Glenn De Baeremaeker also weighed in on the announcement. It truly is, by a historic fluke, almost an untouched wilderness area, a small wilderness area on the edge of the city of Toronto. It has taken a couple of decades, but to see this in writing, in a government document, in a throne speech telling the nation what they are going to do is fabulous. Councilor De Baeremaeker had been fighting for the designation for 25 years. Alan Wells, chair of the Rouge Park Alliance said, Parks Canada brings resources that we dont have, like park wardens to stop poachers and to keep the trails safe. The trails need a lot of maintenance, so its bigger than the City of Toronto can manage.

Located within the boundaries of Toronto, Pickering, Markham and Stouffville, Rouge Park will be Canadas first national park to be located within a municipality. Covering an area thirteen times the size of New Yorks Central Park, it is also considered the largest nature park located within a metropolitan core in North America. The Rouges urban surroundings will give it a unique feel from all other National Parks in Canada. The Rouge will be the fifth smallest of all National Parks and National Park Reserves. It will also be accessible by public transit as Toronto Transit Commission buses and GO Transit, the provincial bus and rail commuter transit system, currently serve the park. Unfortunately its urban surroundings also pose a significant threat especially through residential development in Toronto and Markham. As Torontos biggest wetland, Rouge Park has the most bio-diverse ecosystem in the region, home to 762

plant species, including six nationally rare species and 92 regionally rare species. It is also home to over 300 bird, fish, mammal and reptile species, many of which are locally, regionally and nationally rare. It has six major waterways running through it which run through four municipalities, including the Rouge River, Torontos most healthy river. According to the Rouge Park Alliance, The Rouge Park is Canadas premier urban wilderness park protecting two National Historic Sites, and the only working farms in Toronto. From the 19th century to the 1950s the Rouge served as an urban retreat, home to many resorts and cottages, and it currently has three golf courses in the vicinity, and 16 kilometers of trails and campgrounds running through it. The hope is that with the National Park designation it will become North America's premier urban wilderness. The park also has a strong agricultural heritage, having many farmers as tenants. The parks main objective is the preservation of near-urban agriculture although the alliance recently made a confidential decision to end leases for over 700 acres of farmland. Mr. Wells has said in the past he would like to see the Federal Government add 5,000 acres in farmland to the park which was expropriated for the failed Pickering Airport project. As discussions on the National Park designation heated up in late 2010, farmers, whose lands were expropriated 40 years ago for the creation of the Pickering Airport, expressed concern over the proposal. Human history in the Rouge, which was once covered by a glacier, goes back over 10,000 years to Paleolithic nomadic hunters, Iroquoian women farmers and early European explorers, and with the National Park designation the natural environment and human activity will be a part of the area for many years to come.

Wealthy American cities can afford to be greener

3 July 2011: San Francisco won the title of greenest major city in North America, with Vancouver, New York City, Seattle and Denver completing the top five cities in the 2011 US & Canada Green City Index. The study of US and Canadian cities provides some important key findings. Notably, cities that performed best in the rankings are the ones that have comprehensive sustainability plans that encompass every aspect of creating a greener future including transportation, land use, energy use, carbon dioxide emissions, and water. There is a correlation between how cities perform in the US and Canada Green City Index and their income (as measured by GDP per capita). Wealthier cities can afford better projects environmental or otherwise. They are also more able to deploy well-financed departments with relevant expertise to introduce and monitor appropriate environmental policies. In the US, for example, municipal governments are able to set their own environmental priorities and budgets, and consequently wealthier cities are able to devote more resources to environmental topics. A lot of environmental performance in the US is based on the individual actions of cities rather than a centrally regulated and monitored system, says Andreas Georgoulias, a lecturer in the Department of Architecture at the Harvard Uni- versity Graduate School of Design. A stronger local economy, therefore, enables cities to embark on projects and make environmental investments with higher costs and longer time horizons.

The greenest cities in North America Rank Cities Points

1 San Francisco 83.8 2 Vancouver 81.3 3 New York City 79.2 4 Seattle 79.1 5 Denver 73.5 6 Boston 72.6 7 Los Angeles 72.5 8 Washington DC 71.4 9 Toronto 68.4

10 Minneapolis 67.7 11 Chicago 66.9 12 Ottawa 66.8 13 Philadelphia 66.7 14 Calgary 64.8 15 Sacramento 63.7 16 Houston 62.6 17 Dallas 62.3 18 Orlando 61.1 19 Montreal 59.8 20 Charlotte 59.0 21 Atlanta 57.8 22 Miami 57.3 23 Pittsburgh 56.6 24 Phoenix 55.4 25 Cleveland 39.7 26 St Louis 35.1 27 Detroit 28.4

Source: EIU / Siemens

However, the link between income and overall Index scores is weaker in the US and Canada than it is in either Europe or Asia. Relatively low-income Vancouver, for example, ranks second overall, suggesting

that other factors have a significant influence on the results. What might these factors be? There are a couple of possibilities. First, there are differences in environmental priorities between US and Canadian cities. Canadians are more aligned with Europeans when it comes to carbon emissions and energy use. They are more willing than Americans to invest in emissions reductions and energy efficiency. On the other hand US cities prioritize different environmental areas like water and air quality. A second important factor is that, in the US, environmental ambition is often wrapped up with other public policy goals such as economic development and poverty alleviation, especially in lower-income cities. As Mark Hughes, senior fellow at the PennDesign and TC Chan Center of the University of Pennsylvania, explains, urban planners and policymakers see environmental sustainability as part of a more cohesive attempt to address a range of problems. He presents the example of Philadelphia, which despite its high poverty rate does better than some more affluent cities in the Index in areas such as land use and environmental governance. In Philadelphia, he says, sustainability is about poverty reduction not carbon reduction. Across the US, he argues, there are high- and low-income constituencies for sustainability. In other words, this connection between sustainability and development means that lower- income cities will address environmental issues as part of a larger strategy to tackle poverty. In the US, cities on both coasts, such as San Francisco, New York, Seattle and Boston, rank at the top. Part of this is economic: these are also some of the wealthiest cities. The strength of the east coast cities, however, tells an important story about how local governments have successfully integrated environmental programs into broader development strategies to simultaneously revitalize their economies and make urban areas more livable. Dr Hughes recalls that west coast cities used to have significantly better environ- mental records than those in the North-East. Cities like San Francisco, Seattle and Portland, influenced by the US conservationist movement, which was born in the American west, were more concerned about the impact that urban growth had on the surrounding environment. The Sierra Club, one of the largest environmental organizations in the US, was founded in San Francisco in the 19th century, and the roots of Portlands comprehensive land use policy can be traced to the start of the last century. In the past decade, however, eastern and north- eastern cities have begun to address sustain- ability problems more vigorously. The catalyst has not been merely concern for the environment. Confronted with the long-term decline in the manufacturing economy, cities have introduced sustainability efforts in an attempt to increase their competitive advantage, thereby attracting jobs and stimulating economic growth. In particular, older cities have tried to revitalize urban infrastructure dating back well over a century, such as narrow streets, compact lots, and vertical commercial and residential buildings. Once viewed as unpleasant constraints on development, these are now regarded as the building blocks of a more sustainable urban environment decreasing the cost of energy and transportation for businesses and citizens residing in the city. The Index results illustrate how effective these integrated approaches can be: cities from both coasts have converged a remarkable feat of catch-up for the easterners. There remain some differences in emphasis. New York and Boston, for example, now do particularly well on land use, which is a weaker area for west coast cities. West coast cities in contrast are trailblazers in recycling. Overall, though, the results are very similar. This is more than just history it suggests a way ahead for some of those cities ranked low in the Index. Cleveland, St. Louis and Detroit share things in common beyond geographic proximity. These cities have seen their traditional sources of economic growth decline in recent decades, and have been confronted with formidable challenges, including population loss and shrinking city budgets. As with the high performers in the Index, environmental issues are just one part of a mix of sometimes difficult hurdles. The experience of their peers suggests, however, that the solution will likely need to be a holistic one that includes a consideration of sustainability as an integral element from the beginning, rather than as something to be considered once the economy is back on track.

Environmental problems in US and Canadian cities are well-documented: greenhouse gas emissions are high by any standard and urban sprawl remains a challenge. However, US and Canadian cities excel in several areas. Water infrastructure, recycling levels and environmental governance mechanisms are comparable to the best cities the Green City Indexes have evaluated around the world. For example, the average leakage rate, 13%, is lower than in any other continent and 26% of waste is recycled, compared with 28% for the 15 richest cities in Europe. Americans and Canadians are also innovating in the area of urban sustainability, as the exemplar projects show. For Americans in particular, though, with their long tradition of private sector and non-governmental organization (NGO) activity, this innovation is not always through government institutions. For example, the Clinton Foundation an American NGO recently joined forces with C40 Cities, an organization of large global cities committed to combating climate change. Similarly, Dr Georgoulias of Harvard points to the Leadership in Energy and Canadian cities have a reputation for being more environmentally conscious than US cities, but a first glance at the Index tells a different story. Vancouver, which is one of five Canadian cities in the Index, placed second overall, but the other four are clustered around the middle of the ranking. If wealth is taken into account, however, all of the Canadian cities punch well above their weight. Despite an average per capita GDP $7,000 lower than the average of the 22 US cities in the Index, Canadian cities rank nine to ten places higher than they would be expected to given their lower income. One factor in Canadian cities strong performance could be their robust environmental policies. Canadian cities have higher policy scores on average at 78 points out of 100 overall, compared with 70 for American cities, which demonstrates the commitment they have made to improving environmental performance. Another factor could be cultural differences in attitudes towards willingness to accept environ- mental regulations, but here it is important to avoid over-simplification. Canadians certainly have a long history of environmental activism Greenpeace was born in Vancouver in 1970 but the modern environmental movement in the US, especially in the west, also grew up in the 1960s and both countries have conservation movements reaching back over a century.

Access to drinking water remains urban Africas number one priority *

17 June 2011: Access to running water remains in a state of crisis for a huge number of people across Africa. With growing urbanisation across the continent, African cities will need the political determination to ensure sustainable water resources based on social need rather than commercial concerns.

The water issue is a major problem for people in sub-Saharan Africa. Indeed, the water situation in sub-Saharan Africa remains characterised by the difficult access to this resource, the poor supply management of watering places and the high costs of water network connections. For instance, in Benin one household in three doesnt have access to drinking water, and the problem is much more acute in rural areas. Households having access to drinking water are considered as households who have drinking water at home or within 200 metres from home: running water from the companys distribution network, fountain water, water from the village pump, water tank and water from protected wells. Various consultations led with the populations have indeed confirmed that the water issue is a major problem for them. The concerns, as raised by the populations, focus on the difficult access to water and the poor management of the watering places, the difficulties to call for the financial participation of the population for the creation and the management of watering places and the borehole characteristics which are too often inappropriate: even if this water is neither used for drinking nor for cooking, it is nevertheless inappropriate. The water crisis The water crisis in cities is increasingly the subject of special attention in all international conferences on water. The alarm was raised in Dublin and Rio de Janeiro in 1992 and continued to resound in other meetings such as Beijing and Istanbul in 1996, in Cape Town in 1997 and at the Second Global Forum on Water held in the Hague in 2000. In most of these meetings, the water crisis in African cities has been one of the main concerns. Globally, Africa is urbanising at a rate of about 5 per cent, the fastest rate in the world. The urban population in Africa could rise from 138 million in 1990 to 500 million in 2020, and African cities with over 1 million inhabitants will then have to accommodate nearly 200 million people. Regarding water, a survey conducted in 1990 in 29 sub-Saharan countries showed that eight of these countries suffered from a shortage or a scarcity of water. According to estimates, in 2025, that number should increase to 20 out of 29. For instance, Lagos, the commercial centre of Nigeria, the African country with the largest population, has nearly 14 million inhabitants, that is to say half the population of Kenya and more that most African countries. It is the most populated city in Africa Lagos is the sixth-largest city in the world and could become the third-largest in two decades. This would require greater access to water supply and to other

infrastructures as well as essential services for millions of additional inhabitants. Moreover, as in many other African countries, Lagos is about to face a real water crisis. Methods of supply Access to clean water in Africa does not correspond to that of Europe. In fact, a small proportion of the population has access to drinking water and the water service is not restricted to the conventional networks, as there are

still other drinking-water sources available such as communal water points (springs), wells and boreholes. Water from the natural environment (oceans, lakes, rivers, creeks, groundwater, rains) is a collective good. It belongs altogether to no one and to everyone. Considered as a natural resource, water has multiple utilisations: agriculture (70 per cent), industry (20 per cent) and domestic consumption (10 per cent). Water management is complex. It is a cross-cutting resource because it affects altogether health, urban development, agriculture, industry and leisure. It also has multiple stakeholders and has to be approached on a territorial basis too. Management of water services is rather complicated. It requires high technical ability, permanent adaptation to changing conditions and important funds, because of the high cost of infrastructure and equipments, together with permanent maintenance needs. Although water management has often been transferred to local authorities in Africa, resources themselves were not transferred. Water companies are still in charge of water management in African cities, but without adequate consultation with local authorities. In the case of Cotonou - Benins largest city with a population of some 760,000 people - access to drinking water seems secured, but some neighbourhoods still remain without water supply. Almost everybody has access to drinking water. Nevertheless, only 44 per cent of people have running water at home and 55 per cent of them will buy running water from nearby homes. The water from the Socit national des eaux du Bnin (SONEB) and elsewhere - which comes from fountains, district pumps, tanks or protected wells - is considered as running water at home. Proper fountains or fitted-out watering places almost do not exist anymore in the city of Cotonou. But households, which have no connections at home stock up buckets of water bought in a nearby house. Cotonou populations often face water cuts, which sometimes last all day. The company in charge of water distribution explains that this problem is due to the maintenance of the network and to power cuts. But the investigations showed that 20 years ago the German firm GIGGS had forbidden the urbanisation of the area around the pumping stations because it might damage the groundwater. But the advice given by the firm was not followed and the area was largely urbanised, causing damage to the groundwater and thus to the water supply company. This led the distribution company to increase the price of drinking water. Leaders of the company usually explain that these adjustments are due to the international financial crisis and to the high maintenance costs. In accordance with article 93 of the law 97-029, dated 15 January 1999 and concerning the organisation of cities in the Republic of Benin, the town is responsible for the supply and the distribution of drinking water. But this has never been respected whereas it might have encouraged competition and enabled populations to have a say. Challenges For a good water management policy in African cities, several challenges have to be met, such as: the implementation of laws and regulations giving water management to local communities the knowledge of water sources the development of a framework for the management of surface water resources the necessity of financial means and human resources to monitor and operate the equipments informing and educating people for a rational use of watering places. Recommendations To improve peoples access to drinking water, African cities need support in the following areas: the control, the development and the water supply based on the principle of demand the management and the rational exploitation of water resources

the training and re-training of communities as well as the establishment of a process concerning equipments renewal the strengthening of the drinking water supply systems the establishment of a high council for water the setting-up of a water fund for a real management of the resource the establishment of monitoring and evaluation mechanisms.

Research Committee

Information Department -MQM