The global urbanization trend is continuous, rapid and unstoppable (United Nations Environment Programme [UNEP] 2019). The speed of the urbanization process leaves us with no alternative and little time: Cities must be a central part of the global paths towards sustainability. Cities have the potential to be the most significant opportunity for global sustainable development. If the efficiency of cities is improved, wealth can be created and poverty reduced while reducing the current pressure on ecosystems (International Resource Panel 2018; UNEP 2019). However, the window of opportunity is small and narrowing. Decisions made today, particularly in those rapidly urbanizing centers, will dictate the direction of those cities for decades to come. Once a river is covered, a highway is built, a low rise suburb is constructed, a path is set for many years to come.


Processes occurring in urban areas are currently affecting the local and global environment. At the same time the urban environment is being affected by global environmental changes, which, coupled with environmental pressures from the cities themselves, make the urban environment unhealthy in many places. Air quality, biodiversity loss, decrease in water quality and quantity, and ocean pollution are regular consequences of environmentally unsustainable urban processes. These impact the health of urban dwellers; one in nine deaths every year is attributed to exposure to air pollution, decrease in biodiversity and natural areas can affect physical and mental health, poor water quality increases the risk of vector-borne diseases and ocean pollution (e.g. microplastics) can affect human health (see chapter 3).


These impacts are not equally distributed across urban dwellers. Air quality disproportionally affects children (asthma, brain development, lung growth) and heat waves affect the elderly. Informal and economically disadvantaged groups are also more exposed and have less capacity to adapt to floods, landslides and other effects of climate change, they also have less access to services from public supply networks (e.g. water), making them more vulnerable to waterborne diseases. These negative health outcomes affect women directly and more so when they face a caring burden, which affects their own livelihood prospects (see chapters 2 and 3).


Complex, interlinked structural barriers deeply rooted in the political economy and governance of cities represent enormous challenges for making change. This report uses the term lock-ins to explain how they commit cities to current environmentally unsustainable patterns and prevent sustainable and just urban transformations. They need to be tackled, because


“environmental policy is necessary but inadequate by itself to address systemic ecological problems, solutions to which require a more holistic approach” (UNEP Environment 2019).


A comprehensive and inclusive approach is necessary in urban planning and governance, both within city management and at different scales (regional, national, subnational, urban, local) to catalyze a just and environmentally sustainable future.


The world is full of inspiring and innovative urban initiatives, however a persistent theme throughout the many meetings, workshops, and discussions we held during the production of the GEO Cities Report that there is not a perfect example or clearly tested roadmap for sustainable transformation that every city could blindly follow and lead to the outcomes that are necessary. In those same discussions, what did emerge was a myriad of small-scale inspiring examples, large sectoral success stories and early sustainable development headways that give reason for hope when looking towards the future. The diversity of examples and experiences should help move city makers to break away from inertia and city planning defaults (IRP 2018), which keeps the ‘lock-ins’ in place, and should encourage them to envision cities as the ones pictured in chapter 4, as well as following experiences emerging from other cities and experimenting themselves (IRP 2018).


The vision of urban settlements presented in the Quito declaration captures chapter 4 of this report:


“We envisage cities and human settlements that are participatory, promote civic engagement, engender a sense of belonging and ownership among all their inhabitants, prioritize safe, inclusive, accessible, green and quality public spaces that are friendly for families, enhance social and intergenerational interactions, cultural expressions and political participation, as appropriate, and foster social cohesion, inclusion and safety in peaceful and pluralistic societies, where the needs of all inhabitants are met, recognizing the specific needs of those in vulnerable situations.” (United Nations 2017)


We must consider this ambition a possibility, since it is of essence to make civilization sustainable.


Moving towards circularity in cities, decarbonization of urban economies, increasing resilience and decreasing inequity are essential elements presented in this report to exemplify pathways towards sustainability. Any potential pathways to these sustainable urban futures are inherently complex because they need to consider context as well as the multiple interlinked dimensions, including the lock-ins. This complexity means multiple actors need to be involved in finding the solutions, generally at different scales, in the implementation of any transformational policy.


After more than two years of reflection several things are clear – there is an urgent and dire need for reconfiguring how cities function in order to address critical environmental problems with just outcomes for people and nature. It is also clear that this is not easy and there is no simple guidebook to be had but we must take inspiration and action from what information is available. We need to take risks and confront massive underlying issues because a better future is possible for our cities and our planet and we cannot be afraid to take action to make these visions a reality in cities, from Baltimore to Montevideo.


126


GEO for Cities


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146