资源描述
Citizen Centric Cities The Sustainable Cities Index 2018In many cities, citizens face huge challenges to meet their basic needs of survival, including shelter, access to food, water and warmth. Once these are met, the human need for community, managing society and moving from “A to B” take on far greater importance. Cities are powerful engines that bring people together and allow for resource sharing to meet collective needs. Our study highlights that emerging needs, such as digital connectivity, are being addressed in cities at all levels of sustainability. A critical point is that human needs are fundamentally hierarchical in nature. And if certain needs are not met, for example if housing is too expensive, then dissatisfaction will follow. The SCI and other studies show that even highly developed cities can struggle to meet the basic needs of their citizens. As a result, the level of peoples satisfaction associated with their purpose or well-being are undermined. Viewed from a citizens perspective, a city that is highly ranked as sustainable but with elevated levels of congestion not meeting accessibility needs, is not truly sustainable. This points to a series of core challenges for all cities that influence not only how they seek to improve their performance, but also how they prepare for a digitally-driven transformation. It is important to look at how cities maintain services at current levels of performance as they evolve, specifically if they use innovation to ensure that currently recognized needs and wants are met. Second, how they allocate new resources to meet changing citizen requirements prioritizing initiatives to ensure that the greatest benefits are delivered. Finally, how do cities ensure that they are fit for the future preserving resources so that the needs of tomorrows citizens can be met as well as responding to changes in business models and economic circumstances. In the 2018 edition of the SCI, we continue our exploration of the People, Profit and Planet dimensions of city sustainability, building a greater understanding of the underlying characteristics of cities that enable some to outperform their peers. Our intention is that by initiating further debate on the nature of long-term success, cities will continue to challenge themselves to meet the needs of their people for both today and tomorrow. John Batten, Global Cities Director T he 2018 edition of Arcadis Sustainable Cities Index (SCI) explores city sustainability from the perspective of the citizen. We seek to understand in more depth how different cities enable different citizen groups to meet their particular needs. Foreword 3T he Sustainable Cities Index ranks 100 global cities on three pillars of sustainability: People (social), Planet (environmental) and Profit (economic). The SCI overall findings highlight the following: The importance of the Profit pillar as a driver for long-term sustainability The need for mid-ranking cities to improve their performance across all pillars as a differentiator The growing potential for cities to use the digital evolution of their service provision to promote engagement with citizens and as a key means of improving the citizen experience of city life. London is ranked the worlds most sustainable city in 2018 with particularly high scores in the People and Profit pillars. The results highlight that strengths reflected in Londons status can offset challenges associated with affordability and congestion. Londons Planet ranking is lower, but still in the upper quartile, reflecting air quality and waste management issues seen in other large cities. Stockholm, Edinburgh, Singapore and Vienna complete the top five in the Index. Whereas Stockholm and Vienna score highly against Planet criteria, Edinburgh is aligned more closely to the People agenda. Singapore is highest ranked in the Profit sub-index by a considerable margin. The top 20 sustainable cities are mostly established European metropolises. Additionally, representing Asia are Singapore, Hong Kong and Seoul - both well- established trading cities. New Executive summary 4 York, San Francisco and Seattle are the only U.S. cities in the top 20. Two additional cities, Tokyo and Sydney, are lower ranking high for People, but need to improve in both Profit and Planet. Major cities across Africa and Asia are represented in the bottom 10 of the rankings. Importantly, it is the Profit performance of these cities, particularly related to ease of doing business and output that contributes to their weak relative performance. Growing a robust local economy is a critical aspect of long-term sustainability, particularly given the close association of economic performance with improved quality of life. Although coastal cities including New York and Seattle feature in the top 20, most U.S. cities fall in the bottom half of the ranking. U.S. cities tend to score evenly across the three pillars, highlighting that these cities face broad challenges across all pillars to improve their sustainability. In Latin America, Santiago, So Paulo, Mexico City and Buenos Aires are all tightly clustered at the top of the bottom quartile, typically scoring better in People and Planet than in the Profit pillar. Kuala Lumpur benefits from consistent scores across all pillars and outranks all the cities in China except for Shenzhen as well as a number of U.S. and European cities. Performance across the People pillar is relatively consistent across the top 50 cities. Edinburgh tops the sub-index, and the other cities have scores within +/- 10%. Affordability of city life, access to public transport and income inequality are the big swing variables. A cluster of cities at the bottom of the rankings highlights the challenge of meeting citizen needs in many emerging economies. The affordability, health, education and digital infrastructure indicators all point to deep-seated challenges associated with improving life experiences in emerging cities. A group of smaller European cities led by Stockholm, sit at the top of the Planet sub-index. Determinants of a high ranking include low carbon energy infrastructure and significant green spaces. The expanded 2018 Index also tracks investment in low carbon transport infrastructure, including bike sharing and electric vehicle incentives highlighting the rapid adoption of these solutions in many cities.5 The Profit sub-index highlights the extreme disparities in income. The top of the sub-index is dominated by global financial centers. Singapore, London and Hong Kong head up the list and hold a sizeable lead over New York in 4th place. Sixty cities, ranging from Oslo in 15th place to Lyon in 74th place, have scores within a range of +/-20% highlighting complementary strengths in employment, tourism or ease of doing business. Ten cities, all in developing countries have a lower ranking due to challenges in output, ease of doing business and innovation infrastructure. The research features new work on city archetypes and clusters aimed at explaining the implications of a citizen experience showing a close correlation to the SCI rankings. The four city clusters used are based on an analysis of the citizen experiences of city living combined with the Index data. The city clusters are: Balanced Innovators: Thirty- five cities in the SCI fall into this cluster and have an average ranking of 21st. Particularly strong in People and Profit sub-indices. Post-industrial Opportunists: Thirty-three cities in the SCI fall into this cluster and have an average ranking of 49th. Typical strengths are aligned to the People and Planet sub-indices. Cities in this cluster are mostly U.S. with some in Europe and Australia. Evolutionary Cities: Nineteen cities in the SCI fall into this cluster and have an average ranking of 84th. Cities are particularly weak in the Profit pillar. The cluster includes highly disrupted Western cities such as Athens as well as a number of large, emerging market cities. Fast-growing Megacities: Thirteen cities in the SCI fall into this cluster and have an average ranking of 85th. The Profit pillar is also weaker for this cluster. Cities in this cluster include very large cities from China and India. 6Citizen centric cities O ur latest update of the SCI highlights the rapid impact that digital technologies are having on the citizens experience of the city and on the relationship between city and its people. As the adoption of automated city services expands and as cities become more reliant on citizen- sourced data to support basic functions, this relationship will become even more complex. Building a sustainable partnership The rapid development of urban mobility solutions, whether delivered by mass transit, ridesharing or ultimately by connected and autonomous vehicles (CAV) is perhaps the most extreme example of this rapidly evolving trend. Changes in mobility are already irreversibly shifting the way in which cities operate only 15% of private-hire car journeys are now undertaken by licensed taxi cab in San Francisco the harbinger of much greater change that could occur if Mobility as a Service (MaaS) develops at the pace predicted by forecasters. The citizen centric analysis presented in the SCI highlights the dramatic impact of change affecting most city dwellers experience of their city. There is little evidence of stability and balance in many citizens lives, even in the highly sustainable cities at the top of the rankings. The additional dynamism lent to cities through digital disruption is both a threat and an opportunity for city leaders. On the positive side, emerging opportunities for greater understanding of how cities operate through data as well as means to communicate to citizens through a range of digital platforms should enable cities to be managed more effectively on behalf of all stakeholders. On the negative side, greater awareness of the pace and scale of change may detract from city living and some stakeholders - whether businesses, politicians or an elite may wield disproportionate influence over future investment and management priorities. “The additional dynamism lent to cities through digital disruption is both a threat and an opportunity for city leaders.“ However, the real negative is that new technologies are not, on current trajectories, going anywhere far enough or fast enough to mitigate many of the negative impacts of city living. The cities at the top of the Index have succeeded in achieving a degree of sustainable balance not only due to an historic economic legacy but also due to far-sighted decisions taken to manage the impacts of growth. Londons sewers, New Yorks grid-based planning and Copenhagens green infrastructure are all examples of far-sighted thinking that has helped to mitigate some of the problems of today and of the future. Reflecting on the findings of the SCI and growing evidence of the importance of the citizen perspective, we highlight three aspects of citizen centric cities that will be critical in underpinning long-term city sustainability. Short-term vs. long-term: Compared to the long-term challenges of city sustainability, many aspects of digital disruption are inconsequential “noise”. Cities must keep their focus on long-term resilience, even as they navigate their way through short-term change. Firm foundations: The SCI data consistently highlights that the foundations of city sustainability are an educated and healthy workforce, effective low-carbon infrastructure and ease of doing business. Irrespective of where a city is positioned in the SCI rankings, these attributes should never be put at risk by city planning. Share the journey: City sustainability is a long- term project and cities are increasingly connected. Maintaining a citys long-term competitiveness and resilience will need to be a shared mission. User perspectives, data and digital platforms enable unprecedented levels of collaboration and cities have a key role in leading the way. 7S ustainable cities can be thought of as places that are planned and managed with consideration for social, economic, environmental impact, providing a resilient habitat for existing populations, without compromising the ability of future generations to experience the same. Accordingly, measures of sustainability need to be able to measure current city performance, ability to mitigate future impacts as well as investment in future capability ideally measured from the perspective of the citizen. What enables a city to meet present and future needs? 89 The Sustainable Cities Index is a broad measure of sustainability, encompassing measures of the social, environmental and economic health of cities as shown in Figure 1. Figure 1: The three pillars of sustainability The Sustainable Cities Index ranks 100 global cities on three pillars of sustainability: People, Planet and Profit. The three pillars are closely aligned to the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and track progress against UN SDG commitments covering: Health and well-being Water and sanitation Industry, innovation and infrastructure Inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable cities Climate change impacts Life on land Partnership. The UN SDGs emphasize the cross-cutting nature of sustainability initiatives and the necessity for all cities to take a balanced approach in developing an agenda. In this release of the SCI, we bring an additional focus on how the characteristics of cities contribute to, or hold back, the development of sustainability initiatives. Understanding citizen needs and how cities function is key to identifying how initiatives to improve sustainability performance can be effectively implemented. Metrics used to build the People sub-index indicators measure city performance in terms of: Personal well-being (health, education, crime), Working life (income inequality, working hours, the dependency ratio) Urban living (transport accessibility, digital services and other amenities). Data included in the Planet sub- index ranks cities according to environmental impacts covering: Immediate needs of citizens (water supplies, sanitation and air pollution) Long-term impacts (energy consumption, recycling rates, greenhouse gas emissions) Investment
展开阅读全文