PROMOTING COOPERATION FOR SUSTAINABLE URBAN DEVELOPMENT

TADASHI MATSUMOTO, PhD OECD High-level Dialogue on Sustainable Cities and Transport June 20, 2013, Berlin

Key message:

Integrated, metropolitan-wide policy approach for urban sustainability

1. Experience in OECD cities: compact city policies

2. Urban green growth in dynamic Asia

3. OECD work on metropolitan indicators

Outline

COMPACT CITY POLICIES

OECD (2012), Compact City Policies: A Comparative Assessment, OECD Green Growth Studies, OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264167865-en Also visit our website: www.oecd.org/gov/regional-policy/compact-city.htm

The concept of compact City

… not at a city scale (in an administrative term), but at the metropolitan scale.

… not only for small- and medium-sized cities, but it is relevant to cities of all sizes, even to mega-cities!

Dense and proximate development patterns

•Urban land is intensively utilised

•Urban agglomerations are contiguous or close together

•Distinct border between urban and rural land use

•Public spaces are secured

Urban areas linked by public transport systems

•Effective use of urban land

•Public transport systems facilitate mobility in urban areas

Accessibility to local services and jobs

•Land use is mixed

•Most residents have access to local services either on foot or using public transport

Compact city policies’ contribution to

urban sustainability

Compact city characteristics

Environmental benefits

Social benefits Economic benefits

Less automobile dependency

– Fewer CO2 emissions

– Less pollution from automobiles

– Lower transport costs

– Higher mobility for people without access to a car

– Improved human health due to more cycling and walking

– Development of green jobs/ technologies

Shorter intra-urban distances

– Fewer CO2 emissions

– Less pollution from automobiles

Higher mobility of low-income households, due to lower travel costs

Higher productivity due to shorter travel time for workers

More efficient public service delivery

- Public service level for social welfare maintained by improved efficiency

Lower infrastructure investments and cost of maintenance

Source: OECD (2012), Compact City Policies: A Comparative Assessment

Compact city policies can generate synergistic impacts:

1. Set explicit compact city goals

2. Encourage dense and contiguous development at urban fringes

3. Retrofit existing built-up areas

4. Enhance diversity and quality of life in urban centres

5. Minimise adverse negative effects

Policy complementarity:

Identified policy strategies

Policy complementarity:

Densification + affordability (Vancouver)

Policy complementarity:

Storm water + heat island + perceived density (Portland)

OECD GREEN CITIES PROGRAMME:

URBAN GREEN GROWTH

IN DYNAMIC ASIA

• Conceptual framework (2011)

• Case studies (2011-12) City-level National-level

Paris (2011) Korea (2011)

Chicago (2011-12) China (2012)

Kitakyushu (2012)

Stockholm (2012)

• Synthesis report: Green Growth in Cities (2013)

• Next step: extending the scope to cities in developing countries

OECD’s Green Cities Programme (2010 – )

• Income growth raises demand for:

– personal living space

– personal mobility

– energy consuming appliances (air conditioning, etc.)

• How to de-couple income growth and GHG emissions?

• How to accelerate necessary actions at an earlier stage of income growth and minimize the environmental consequences?

Economic growth, consumer

behaviour and greening of cities

Dynamic growth in Asia:

Urbanising fast, but still a long way to go ...

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

Leve

l of U

rban

izat

ion

(%)

Level of Urbanization by Region (%)

Source: ADB (2012), Key indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2012, 3rd Edition.

Source: Firman, T., et al. (2011)

Global and local environmental risks:

Vulnerability to climate change

Global and local environmental risks:

Human health threatened by poor air quality

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

Ah

waz

Ula

anb

aata

rSa

nan

daj

Lud

hia

na

Ke

rma

nsh

ah

Yaso

uj

Kan

pu

rD

elh

iLu

ckn

ow

Uro

miy

eh

Qo

mIn

do

reK

ho

ram

abad

Ag

raA

l Ain

Lan

zho

uK

olk

ata

Van

Xin

ing

Uru

mq

iFa

rid

abad

Gre

ater

Cai

roM

exi

cali

Jab

alp

ur

Mu

mb

aiD

han

bad

Ilam

Alla

hab

adB

ush

ehr

Ker

man

Jin

anB

eij

ing

Pat

na

Sara

jevo

Ab

u D

ha

bi

Me

eru

tX

i'an

Jaip

ur

Qaz

vin

Me

dan

Ch

en

gd

uH

efe

iSh

enya

ng

Taiy

uan

Var

anas

iC

ho

ngq

ing

Wu

han

Esfa

han

Shiji

azh

uan

gK

on

ya

Kar

sH

am

ed

an

Ara

kH

arb

inTi

anjin

Na

njin

gD

eniz

li

PM

10Le

vel (

mic

rogr

ams/

cub

ic m

ete

r)

Asia and the Pacific (34/57)Non-Asia and the Pacific

Source: ADB

Cities with PM10 above 100 ug/m3 (2008-2009)

EU

standard

Cities under current investigation

Phnom Penh

Danang

Hai Phong

Surabaya

Bangkok

Jakarta

Manila

Johor Bahru

Kuala Lumpur

KEY INDICATORS TO MONITOR POLICY PERFORMANCE

Shifting towards Functional regions

Urban areas vs. administrative cities

Population density on urban land

0 1 000 2 000 3 000 4 000 5 000 6 000 7 000

Brussels

Stockholm

Copenhagen

Vienna

Prague

Lyon

Hamburg

Marseilles

Frankfurt

Munich

Katowice

Cologne

Warsaw

Amsterdam

Berlin

Stuttgart

Manchester

Birmingham

Lisbon

London

Milan

Rome

Paris

Turin

Madrid

Barcelona

Naples

Athens

Density in urban land based on LandScan (pop/ km²) Density in total land based on LandScan (pop/ km²)

Density in 28 metropolitan areas in Europe

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1996 2006

Me

dia

n c

om

mu

te d

ista

nce

(km

)

Toronto CMA

Calgary CMA

Montreal CMA

Edmonton CMA

Vancouver CMA

Victoria CMA

Canada

Median commute distance

for selected metropolitan areas in Canada, 1996-2006

Accessibility to public transport

• Methodology

– Distance (5 or 10 minute walk from stations) based on road network

– Average frequency (>=5 or < 5 times per hour) is combined with distance

• Result

– 51% of city’s population are living in the area accessible by public transport (3 % of very high, 7% high,

34% medium, 6% low accessibility)

Very high

High

Medium

Low Null

Note: This analysis is based on administrative border of Daejeon, Daejeon is chosen considering data availabiity and relevance to the on-going project: Compact City Study; Korea Source: OECD’s elaboration based on Korea Transport Database(2011)

OECD Metropolitan Database: a tool for policy-making

Interactive maps and data on metro areas http://measuringurban.oecd.org/