water, power, people, information

!!

Sustainable Cities

Paul Currie - 18015972

Mark Swilling & Edgar Pieterse

15 July 2013

!!!

I hereby confirm that this assignment is the product of my own work and research and has been written by me, and further that all sources used herein have been acknowledged. 


Word Counts Part A: 4685 Part B: 2582

Table of Contents

Part 1: Crisis, Cities, Flow & Infrastructure 1

Introduction 1

Decoupling 1

Cities & Transition 3

Material Flows 4

Infrastructure & Urbanization 6

Positioning the Sustainable City 8

Concluding Remarks 9

Part B: Social Infrastructure 10

Introduction 10

Attitudes Toward Infrastructure 10

Curitiba 11

Porto Alegre 13

Conclusion 14

References 15

" i

Part 1: Crisis, Cities, Flow & Infrastructure

Introduction Cities have traditionally stood as the central beacon of human progress. They are snapshots of a world of diversity, innovation and creativity, providing a platform for the expression of new fashions, cultures, technologies and beliefs. They are also snapshots of inequality as participants succeed or fail in such changing environments. Agricultural surpluses allowed workers to pursue enterprises beyond feeding themselves, opening many opportunities for discovery and innovation; these would gain value in the growing marketplace of the city. The arts have long been central in understanding the human soul in a changing world and cities represent the largest of these artworks. Modernization gave cities a chance to quantitatively display their success with the largest populations, the tallest buildings, the busiest roads, the brightest lights, and the most welcoming business climate.

Now, the socio-environmental consequences of all these successes will also be felt in the city. Overpopulation, pollution, ecosystem degradation, scarce resources, inequality, climate change and a loss of connection to the natural world have become triggers for the sustainability movement. Already it has become a race to the cleanest air, the most green space, the least cars and the sleekest combination of energy saving, water efficient, bicycle-riding technologies. However, it is uncertain how effective this ‘greening’ movement will be, especially with regards to the motivations behind it. In addition, the service infrastructures which allow the city to function are typically sturdy, out-of-sight systems which are embedded in the physical build of the city and are embedded in the everyday behavior of its citizens. Changes to such systems is slow, particularly when requiring citizens to rethink their behavior, and the results uncertain due to the city’s nature as a complex system. As an open system, requiring resource inputs and waste sinks which are outside of the city, it is questionable whether a city can truly become sustainable in its own right.

This paper addresses the crises using the concept of decoupling: this suggests disconnecting resource use from the outcome of economic growth and in this way, economic growth from environmental impact. With decoupling focussing on consumption of resources, it is beneficial to understand how resources move through urban space. For this, the paper explores the types of flows passing through cities, how the infrastructure enables or prevents provision of these flows to citizens and how urbanization emerges from their interactions. It argues that for there to exist a ‘sustainable city,’ infrastructure systems and society’s interactions with them will need to be reconfigured.

Decoupling The economy is built upon raw materials which are put through production for human needs, consumption by humans and then discarded as waste (Annecke & Swilling 2012). The flow of materials though this system is expressed as a metabolic rate or tonnes of processed material per GDP. In a society which connects economic growth with development or success (Korhonen 2008), perhaps incorrectly, it becomes necessary to disconnect environmental

" 1

damage from economic growth, to allow for growth without detrimental effects to the environment. While there exist many impending socio-environmental crises relevant to the city context, climate change and depletion of resources are the most readily understood as they are quantifiable and can fit into our economic system (Korhonen 2008). As our economy is reliant on resources, it becomes necessary to disconnect or decouple resource use (referring to primary sources) from economic growth as well. Decoupling suggests that one uses less and achieves the same or better output. These processes are therefore related non-linearly as demonstrated in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Stylized demonstration of decoupling on the left and the observed relative decoupling on the right.(Robinson et al 2013, UNEP 2011)

Relative resource decoupling (Figure 1) has already taken place due to an efficiency of resource use; material use has increased by a factor of eight since 1990, while GDP has jumped by a factor of 23 (Annecke & Swilling 2012). This will only be enhanced as efficiency and productivity measures become more widespread. Efficiency of use does not correlate to sustainability however, as the resources are still being consumed, albeit at a slower rate (Korhonen 2008). With the reality of population growth and the fact that material use has increased 36% since 1980 (Annecke & Swilling 2012), efficiency or ‘dematerialization’ is a stalling mechanism; limited resources mean that alternatives must be sought through a process of ‘transmaterialization;’ if they are renewable then decoupling will be further enhanced (Hodson et al 2012).

Other ways to encourage decoupling include recycling and reuse of materials. GDP and metabolic flow do not account for such reuse, but doing so would reduced the input of new resources in the first place. Hawken’s notion of a service-economy could be helpful to this end as well, by promoting the consumption of a service like transport instead of a product like the automobile; this would require the car company to make higher quality, longer lasting goods, which it maintains with reused and recycled materials, thoroughly reducing its need for new inputs (Hawken 1999).

Pressures to decouple are coming from higher governance such as global agendas to mitigate climate change and from bottom-up pressures like the growing costs of resources.

• In terms of climate change, reduction in carbon emissions has been deemed a necessity by the International Panel for Climate Change (IPCC), which have demonstrated that if average temperatures increase beyond 2 degrees celsius, the world will experience huge ecological and social problems as sea-levels rise, rain pattens change and relocation becomes necessary (Annecke & Swilling 2012). In may 2013, the carbon content of the atmosphere surpassed the 400 parts per million threshold, a mark not reached since about 2.5 million years ago (Mohan 2013). The 2 degree increase is now a reality and it now remains to curb the rise from going further (Mohan 2013, Annecke & Swilling 2012). In order to curb this increase the IPCC has set a goal of no more than 2.2 tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2) released per capita per year. To achieve this, current use of resources would have to freeze immediately; this suggests a metabolic rate of about 60 billion tonnes of material used globally per year or just over 6 tonnes per capita per year;

" 2

this would require adoption of strong sufficiency measures in developed countries whose consumption is between 15 and 30 tonnes per capita per year, while allowing developing countries to ‘catch-up’ from their average of 2 tonnes per capita per year (Annecke & Swilling 2012).

• Large material flows through cities are only possible due to their low cost. This is changing, and while economists may argue that the price is rising due to low interest rates (which keep raw materials in the earth), investments in commodities, huge demand in china, and political insecurity in certain areas (Annecke & Swilling 2012), some argue convincingly that it is due simply to resource depletion. Evidence of oil peak is compelling, and despite being overshadowed by the multi-crisis of 2008, it has or will very shortly arrive, and it signifies the beginning of ‘peak everything’ which will surely affect our economic system (Heinberg 2009).

Motivations behind decoupling vary and it should be noted that decoupling is related to economic imperatives to ensure long term growth, while sustainability suggests using less energy and material while “pursuing conventional development targets” of human wellbeing and equality of access to such energies and materials (Annecke & Swilling 2012). While economic growth and sustainability are not irreconcilable, external pressures (governmental or grassroots) are required to ensure a wellbeing and equality agenda, not simply status-quo growth as supported by conventional ecological modernization (Korhonen 2008).

In the larger context of socio-industrial transitions which have crises as their turning points, Annecke and Swilling expect that a mix of two scenarios (envisioned by Charles Gore) will occur. Either an immediate efficiency agenda will form part of an ecological modernization plan which will heavily reduce material use and carbon output, or delayed action will result in detrimental crises which will cause radical transformation led by grass-root movements and those already practiced in sustainable innovations, which will necessitate localization, resource efficiency and ecological restoration (Annecke & Swilling 2012). Following current trends and evidence that crises are already present (Heinberg 2009, Annecke & Swilling 2012), it seems unlikely that efficiency measures will allow for a calm transition, but rather delay an inevitable and chaotic rush to recreate urban space.

A last note on decoupling suggests that we question the assumed need for growth; economic growth is not proven to ensure service provision to the poor, reduce inequality or provide any qualitative indicators of value to the human existence, so why not decouple human well-being from economic growth?

Cities & Transition The first urbanization wave saw an increase in the number of urban dwellers from 15 million in 1750 to 423 million in 1950. It also generated the vision of a modern city as city planners rolled out and rebuilt infrastructure systems to handle this growth (Annecke & Swilling 2012). Their reductionist approaches fit humans into a grid whose primary purpose was efficient movement of people, goods and services through the city. Many of these planners (like Baron Haussman in Paris or Robert Moses in New York City) swept aside informal communities who were viewed as hinder-some to the clockwork city (Annecke & Swilling 2012). The current literature on urban space has shifted away from this reductionist understanding of cities, as static, malleable landscapes, towards cities as complex systems: as ecosystems, networks, social-ecological systems which adapt to changing pressures from a multiplicity of interactions (Du Plessis 2008). Some literature is calling for the absorption of informal systems into official planning (Annecke & Swilling 2012, Brown 2008), to allow natural adaptation, instead of top town ordering. In understanding cities, it is important to highlight a number of current trends relevant to environmental concerns. • The starting point for most environmental discussions is population growth and this has become more relevant to

cities; in fact, “urbanization is the second dominant demographic trend of our time after population growth itself. In 1900, 150 million people lived in cities. By 2000, it was 2.8 billion people, a 19-fold increase. As of 2008, more than half of us are living in cities - making us, for the first time, an urban species”(Brown 2008, 192). It is suggested that we

" 3

are in the second urbanization wave, which will see 3 million more people on earth before population growth starts to level out in 2050. Of these 3 million, all are expected to be in urban environments and most are expected to be in African and Asian cities, putting pressure on undeveloped infrastructures (Hodson et al 2012, Annecke & Swilling 2012). This will not be solely due to rural/urban migration or limited to the few mega-cities, but mainly due to natural growth and establishment of satellite cities, most of them with populations of less than one million (Annecke & Swilling 2012, WWF).

• It is important to note that 80% of GDP comes from cities; 60% of which comes from the 600 most productive cities; this will encourage a shift in power from developed to developing cities where industries have relocated (Hodson et al 2012). This puts pressure on developing cities to form sustainable systems to handle the effects of this additional production, as they cannot relocate them elsewhere.

• As centers of production, they are also centers of innovation. This innovation attracts investment which increases the income levels of the citizenry, which in turn increases consumptive behavior. Add this to an increasing population, a decrease in household size (which indicates an increase in household number), and an increase in urbanization and consumption levels are guaranteed to rise (Hodson et al 2012).

• Differential access to infrastructure has resulted in the spread of slums, which are not expected to disappear; they are focussed in Asian and African cities where the majority of new urbanites is expected. How city planners engage with slums and their informal systems is important for establishing a cohesive, equitable vision of a sustainable city (Brown 2008).

It is important to note that it is increasing consumption (measured by GDP), not increasing urbanization that drives total energy and material requirements for a city. Rising GDP per capita correlates to urbanization so cities have become the central space to confront socio-environmental concerns and envision sustainable transitions.

Material Flows

Figure 2: Interactions of a city with its bioregion (Roberts et al 2009)

Urban flows are “an integrative concept for identifying areas of potential intervention for decoupling at city level” (Hodson et al 2012, 796). The notion fits into the concept of a city as containing multiple socio-metabolic systems (infrastructures) which facilitate the flow of stocks and services through it. The conventionally described flows include water, sewage (both transferred through the water and sanitation networks), electricity (generated from finite and infinite resources), people

" 4

and goods (conveyed through transit systems), solid waste (made up of multiple materials) and information (voice, imagery and ideas existing on unique virtual platform) (Annecke & Swilling 2012). These flows have their origin in natural systems and the outputs of cities are returned to their local bioregions. The stability of a city is based on the percentage of resources sourced in this region. In addition, the ‘environmental quality’ of this region influences the value of stocks within the city, determining land and property values, technological investment, residents choice of location, and their quality of life (Roberts et al 2009).

Why food systems are not included as a socio-metabolic flow is curious as they are the basis of city development and success; the surplus of food produced by few individuals enables others to explore different work, careers, dreams. It is a flow typically operated by players other than government, and enjoys the flexibility that comes with this (Annecke & Swilling 2012). It would benefit from integration into the planning of networked infrastructure.

Material Flow Analysis (MFA) measures metabolic rate of a materials which flow through a system. It has typically been utilized on global and national systems, but recently has been used to effectively describe the functioning of cities. As cities are open systems, resource sources and waste sinks are viewed as external and can therefore be measured accurately based on inputs, consumption and outputs (Annecke & Swilling 2012). Figure 3 shows an MFA of water flow through a sustainable water system in New Delhi. Attention should be directed to the arrows indicating ‘converters,’ ‘demands’ and ‘re-converters.’ These respectively indicate technologies which transform the raw material into a state useful or safe for human consumption, technologies which utilize this product, and technologies which enable reuse of the product through the system. These points are where technological fixes can be applied to great effect. Again, this effect is enhanced if it is coupled with behavioral or attitude change towards infrastructure and service provision.

MFA shows how flows become intertwined; for example the flow of nutrients permeates the water, sanitation, transport, food and solid waste systems, which indicates that holistic interconnections of these systems would be beneficial (Doshi et al 2007, Annecke & Swilling 2012). MFA also offers the ability to evaluate interactions between urban and environmental systems (via local inputs and outputs) in what Hodson et al call “recoupling of urban systems with the natural systems that support them”(2012, 792). However, in reconnecting urban growth (economic or qualitative) with natural resources, the use of replenish-able or infinite resources becomes a complete necessity to achieve decoupling (Hodson et al 2012).

Unfortunately neither metabolic rate nor GDP account for recycled goods and are therefore questionable as indicators of growth (Annecke & Swilling 2012). However, for the purposes of flow analysis, an increase in recycled materials does mean a reduction in new materials sourced, which indirectly benefits resources decoupling.

The danger of only focussing on material flows is that it quantifies everything and overlooks many qualitative indicators. While it is extremely valuable in achieving resource decoupling goals and helpful in reinterpreting local interactions with the bioregion, it ignores the socio-ecological factors which provide the motivation for such flows in the first place. Assessment of these factors or ‘externalities’ is crucial for achieving environmental impact decoupling; after all, “technology and technological functions coevolve with social functions and social interests”(Hodson et al 2012, 794). To understand these factors, an exploration of infrastructure and its development is helpful.

" 5

Figure 3: Sankey diagram for the flow of water through a sustainable water system in New Delhi (Robinson et al 2013)

Infrastructure & Urbanization Access to material and energy flows is determined by the level of built infrastructure; First wave urbanization established the vision of infrastructure as a binder of cities and regions in the name of public interest, yet this is not the reality (Graham & Marvin 2001). Most cities have examples of infrastructures which not only bypass certain groups, particularly the poor, but actively prevent cohesion. Graham and Marvin present realities of urban infrastructure which determine the form of urbanization that emerges (2001):

• Infrastructures are socio-technical processes with which people engage without full understanding of their workings (Graham & Marvin 2001). Indeed these services are so embedded in the everyday activities of citizens that they are typically only noticed when they malfunction (Guy et al 2001). The unique abilities of using phones, driving cars, taking airplane flights, flushing toilets, plugging into power are so normalized that they do not seem important (Graham 2010). When they “work best, they are noticed least of all” (Perry in Graham & Marvin 2001, 163), yet these invisible systems become quite visible when they break down. In the framework of stocks and flows, ‘patterns’ is the third aspect which

" 6

represents behaviors of use. Adapting these pattens are at the forefront of a transition towards a sustainable city; current ‘out-of-sight’ attitudes to infrastructure mean that it tends to be managed reactively. However, by making infrastructure part of daily dialogue, active re-imagining of services becomes possible.

• They “dramatically, but highly unevenly warp and refashion the spaces and times of all interactions” and sustain “socio-technical geometries of power”(Graham & Marvin 2001, 11). Depending on how the systems are designed, certain players can extend their influence beyond the ‘space of place,’ while others find barriers. Social bias is innate in infrastructure; however, this shouldn’t be attributed to the technology, but to those who design it.

• They represent large amounts of capital and time; not only does infrastructure convey stocks and flows, but it is a stock in itself, and contains much of the capital and resources consumed by the city (Roberts et al 2009). It is also responsible for 31% of environmental impacts, of the 60% due to urban activity (Annecke & Swilling 2012).

• They develop urban culture and visions; to use complexity language, urbanization is an emergent property of the interactions between flows and the connections created between infrastructures (Hodson et al 2012, du). Such visions are defined by the philosophy of the time and have huge impacts on how cities form.

Annecke and Swilling provide a simple trajectory on urbanization trends (2012):

• Inclusive urbanization emerged as infrastructures were built to deal with the first wave of urbanization. It championed ‘universal access’ to services which was guaranteed by the state, typically through public monopolies. These infrastructures ensured equitable cohesion but were quite unsustainable.

• Splintered urbanization favored the ‘commodification’ of services after service failures of the 1970s. Private monopolies were split which led to competition and the innovation which comes with that. Informational systems developed which connected cities in other regions and nations through a ‘space of flows’ while ironically disconnecting the local communities (Graham & Marvin 2001). Commodification led to social fragmentation as certain services became unaffordable. While monopolies lack the creative abilities necessary for a sustainable transition, it is curious whether a monopoly is necessary a negative thing if it’s primary objective is public service and not capital gain.

• Slum urbanism follows what Asef Bayat calls ‘quiet encroachment’(Annecke & Swilling 2012). As products of splintered urbanism, slum dwellers who cannot afford commoditized services develop their own complex informal systems for managing flows, either through separate means or through illegal access to established systems. These systems are not incorporated into city plans which makes them hard to analyze and change: “what we are trying to analyze is a ‘mess’ which cannot be cleaned up by explaining the mess as an absence of a pre-ordained order”(Annecke & Swilling 2012, 125). In an African context of 62% urban dwellers living in slums with informal networks (Annecke & Swilling 2012), many of the flows are unmeasurable. Annecke and Swilling argue that slum dwellers are integral parts of socio-material flows and their ability to obtain services, meager as they may be, it why slums are able to spread and thrive (2012).

• Green urbanism has championed the eco-modernist vision of ‘minimizing damage’ by accepting limits and not simply seeking to relocate the problems elsewhere. The sustainability measures that show up in the form of quick-fix technologies and efficiency measures are only sustainable with a commitment to sufficiency (Annecke & Swilling 2012). The greening movement has given light to the specific aspect of cities which are unsustainable, but it still remains a splintered approach in which large developments are built, proclaiming environmental sustainability and self-sufficiency, while entirely separating themselves from positive social connections in the city.

• Livable urbanism is a next step envisioned by Annecke and Swilling, to return from a ‘space of flows’ to a ‘space of place’ via “regionalized bio-economic diversification” which relies on local value chains and minimal global supply, to reconnect the city through more rethinking of urban supply systems and less socially exclusionary technological fixes and mega-projects. This all with a vision for a reduction in consumption, equity of access to services and a focus on regenerative technologies.

" 7

In a green infrastructure report, the WWF prescribes three (rather vague, though nonetheless important) prerequisites for cities to approach sustainability: adopting aggressive energy reduction goals and thorough planning, developing strong financing strategies, and making use of innovative technology (2008).

• The WWF notes that energy intensity of cities decreases as they mature, due mostly to service industry replacing manufacturing industry (2008). While this is true, the manufacturing industry has not disappeared, but simply relocated to another city, most likely in a developing country, which will incur the environmental burden (Hawken 1999). This is an externality not calculated in material flow. Instead of relocating emissions, non-polluting alternative energies are required (Hodson et al 2012). As current resources become more expensive, such alternatives become competitive and offer new industries for development (WWF 2008). In addition, planning a city with a favor on high density developments allows infrastructure to service more people more cheaply, while reducing overall energy requirements and emissions.

• New infrastructure may conduct flows more efficiently, but it is also expensive to install, and the need for such investment will hopefully be realized before the required materials are too costly. It is expected that refurbishment and upgrading infrastructure will cumulatively cost about $41 trillion by 2030 (Doshi et al 2007). These capital costs are going to be incurred at some point; it might as well be sooner (Doshi et al 2007). In order to finance this, private sector partnerships with firm but light government oversight is advocated.

• Making use of new technologies is a requirement, particularly those focused on the source, demand and re-conversion sections of material flow. Less inputs and sustained use of these inputs is a requirement for long term sufficiency.

Positioning the Sustainable City Described as social-ecological system (Du Plessis 2008), one of the primary features of a city is the capacity for abstract thought and expression of symbolic ideas in the form of technologies and innovation; these are only mobilized with an increased awareness in the citizenry for infrastructural systems.

In bringing about transitions, a shared vision is needed; this may of course be changed, as an adaptive complex city system would require. Such a vision enables discussion of priorities, includes external knowledge and gives a direction for transition, which would be implemented by an intermediary (Hodson et al 2012). Such an intermediary would mediate different priorities, specifically in addressing production or consumption behaviors. Light handed government which opens discussions (Doshi et al 2007) is necessary encouraging private sector to make long term investments; in addition, empowering local governments to explore context-specific solutions allows cities to engage better with their bioregion (Doshi et al 2007, Roberts et al 2009).

Cities have a codependent relationship with the regional system or bio-region within which it falls. This region has its own labour market and food and water supplies and, as illustrated earlier, determines the stability and value of the city. In addition, technology and behaviors towards it have co-evolved and require solutions targeted to both.

Within this, national urban systems exist which support national industry with set national policies which are often constrictive to the flourishing of differential cities. Most urban environmental impacts are due to global or national supply chains (Roberts et al 2009) and the extension of the urban infrastructure has relocated many of these impacts outside of developed cities to developing cities (Hawken 1999); in this way, developed cities enjoy the benefits of the product without the consequences of producing it. These consequences are felt in compounding ways by the newly located industrial cities who produce more than they would need for their own consumption, if they are able to consume these products at all.

A space of flows relies on global transport systems which connect the world to resources and commodities, allowing cities to develop an addictive dependence on this network. Global environmental crises result from this network, not to

" 8

mention the imminent economic difficulties as oil prices rise (Heinberg 2009). ICT systems (to which cities are also addicted) allow global information exchange which takes citizens away from the space of place (Graham & Marvin 2001); here, they exist on virtual platforms which connect friends, colleagues, interests and innovations and distract them from concerns in their locality (with notable exceptions like the arab springs utilizing internet coordination - Annecke & Swilling 2012). Concerns and solutions become a global responsibility. With globalization as the culprit for much of the trouble, would it not make sense to dismantle these platforms? While this would certainly be effective, it is clear that such dependence cannot be undone. However, a celebration of differential solutions and unique city developments could mean advocating for reduced reliance on transport of redundant resources, while increasing transfer of knowledge and innovation which enable self-reliance. This may be in the form of Annecke and Swilling’s concept of Livable Urbanism which is driven by learning and the formation of a proud identity as a ‘sustainable city,’ in which promotes local value chains which encourage culturally functional communities which are attractive to investors (2012).

Concluding Remarks In summary, the interventions promoted in this paper include:

• Decoupling resource use from economic growth • Decoupling environmental impact from economic growth • Developing a joint social vision as a ‘sustainable city,’ with a wellness and equity agenda beyond growth • An attitude change towards infrastructure in order to re-imagine service provision • A holistic implementation of efficiency, alternative and replenishing technologies with public input and education • A holistic view of infrastructure upgrading which intertwines multiple systems • A reduction in reliance on global supply while increasing use of information networks for innovation sharing • Developing localized solutions for cohesive service provision • Inclusion of informal systems into city planning • Dismantling of exclusionary infrastructures • Enabling local government empowerment for changing infrastructures from within

Approaching the sustainable city is possible with the understanding that infrastructure is often what shapes social cohesion. In order for an equitable sustainable vision to be achieved, social cohesion is required, so it falls to city planners, service providers and the citizenry to support shifts in infrastructure towards shared space, virtual or physical, which denies exclusion and promotes innovation.

“The human urban environment concept is a process of asking questions and exploring possibilities, not a fixed menu of problems and solutions. Local and global, physical and socio-economic, past and future, are all tangled up, in a rich picture of change and opportunity”(Roberts et al 2009, 36)


" 9

Part B: Social Infrastructure

Introduction A city is a complex, evolving system emergent of a multiplicity of interactions within it. The framework of stocks, flows and patterns is useful for quantifying the movement and use of energy and materials which animate the everyday lives of city dwellers. Much of these flows or movements go unnoticed by the populace whose behavior has been developed concurrently with the service provision infrastructures. While transitions towards a sustainable city will be guided by government and supported by the public sector, it will fall to the city dwellers to adapt their attitudes towards and consumptive behaviors of services. With the new addition of three million urbanites by 2050 expected in under-developed cities of Asia and Africa, informal systems become predominant.

The interventions developed in Part A which promote a transition towards a sustainable city include:

• Decoupling resource use from economic growth • Decoupling environmental impact from economic growth • Developing a joint social vision as a ‘sustainable city,’ with a wellness and equity agenda beyond growth • An attitude change towards infrastructure in order to re-imagine service provision • A holistic implementation of efficiency, alternative and replenishing technologies with public input and education • A holistic view of infrastructure upgrading which intertwines multiple systems • A reduction in reliance on global supply while increasing use of information networks for innovation sharing • Developing localized solutions for cohesive service provision • Inclusion of informal systems into city planning • Dismantling of exclusionary infrastructures • Enabling local government empowerment for changing infrastructures from within

Much of this relates to how the citizenry interact with their infrastructure services. Therefore, this part will focus specifically on the social interventions which enable effective restructuring of infrastructural service provision. An assertion in Annecke and Swilling’s book is that solutions are occurring somewhere (2012); innovations are being developed in one city or another, and all that remains is for this to be shared. These solutions are often context specific, but many share a central theme, that of public participation and human infrastructure. Here, the paper will explore approaches to solid waste infrastructural systems in two brazilian cities: Curitiba and Porto Alegre.

Attitudes Toward Infrastructure Resources move through complex and normalized infrastructures which are well established to expect a continuous supply of resources (Hodson et al 2012). Changing this expectation requires that it become visible, and that there is a shift in availability of the service or a disincentive to use it. Lester Brown radiates a hope and a vision of a city designed for people (date). Here, pedestrians and bicycles replace cars as the dominant form, vacant lots are transformed into food gardens, water is recycled, waste is handled openly as having value to other systems, and not shunned as

" 10

offensive, and green space is aplenty. This city also generates renewed sociability amongst its residents; remarking on Paris’ bicycle program, “Patrick Allin, a 38-year-old Parisian and and enthusiastic user of the bikes, says they are great for conversation: ‘We are no longer all alone in our cars - we are sharing. It’s really changed the atmosphere here’”(Brown), a sentiment which I completely share in my enclosed capsule of a car, while driving the streets of Cape Town. Brown cites the innate need for humans to connect with nature as suggested in the biophilia hypothesis or by tested eco-psychology theories, in which medical patients with rooms proximate to gardens recovered faster than those separated from nature (date). As all life-support systems originate in nature, a city’s infrastructure should become an extension of these systems, and humans may hopefully develop a need to connect with them. Appreciations of infrastructure are apparent in many art installations, such as the Pompidue Center in Paris (Image 1), which externalized all it’s support systems, or the Tate Modern in London, a retired natural gas power plant repurposed as an art gallery (a novel reuse of a city stock), or ‘chelseafication’ found in many cities (London, San Francisco, New York, Cape Town to name a few), in which older, often abandoned, industrial warehouses are repurposed and retrofitted as residential, commercial or artistic sites. This attitude is the first step to acknowledging that citizens are a part of their services, what Simon Graham may term cyborgs (2010), reliant on and living by the technology which was originally meant to make life simpler or easier. In this sense city dwellers are infrastructure in and of themselves, and have only to reconfigure themselves.

Image 1: The Pompidue Center in Paris, a modern art museum with external infrastructure.

Curitiba The environmental successes of Curitiba, capital of Brazil’s Parana province, have served as the basis for many countries’ urban environmental visions, particularly in the system of mobility. Its public transit system and central planning has effectively connected the different groups of the city (Rabinovitch 1992). Its protection of green space, connected

" 11

with land and transit policies (Rabinovitch 1992) has connected the bioregion to the city. As one of the fastest growing cities in Brazil with a growth rate of 5.34 percent per annum in the 1970s, the city found itself generating a large amount of non-organic waste which was quickly filling landfills; as a response, the city established Brazil’s first large-scale recycling program in 1984 (Ricardo 2013). It is this solid waste recycling system which these case studies will explore.

Initiated by the city mayer, Jaime Lerner, the recycling program built a vision roughly translated as ‘garbage that is not garbage.’(Rabinovitch 1992). It Encourages home separation for garbage into organics and non-organics. Recyclables are collected every week by private companies for sorting at a municipal facility; the facility employs homeless people and recovering alcoholics, who sort the recyclables into the varying materials which are sold on to factories. This represents the infrastructural system, which is remarkably free of technology. It relies more on human capital, which is more intuitive than machines and allows for empowerment of those on the social periphery.

In order for this system to gain traction, publicity and educational programs were developed to build community buy-in. A strong focus was given to children, through cartoons, visits from actors in environmental costumes (a family called Leaves became the mascot for this program) (Ricardo 2013), and from exercises at schools. Children were asked to bring old, used or waste items from home which still retained some value, and traded them for usable items (not necessarily new) like toys (Rabinovitch 1992). This immersive education of children was “very effective in disseminating ecological concepts to their families and making sure that their parents participated in domestic garbage separation”(Ricardo 2013, 179). The success of these campaigns has led to similar efforts in other or Curitiba’s urban environmental initiatives.

The next stage of the recycling program developed from the difficulty in servicing the dense squatter settlements (favelas), which are typically located in vulnerable areas. The build up of garbage in these areas began affecting water systems, generating flooded areas and spreading disease (Rabinovitch 1992). This stage was called the ‘garbage purchase program,’ which incentivized neighborhoods on the periphery to collect their recyclables in government provided bags; 8 to 10 kilograms of waste was exchangeable for a bus ticket. This afforded those on the periphery access to the central city, with no cost to the city (as bus operators are paid for milage driven, not passengers transported)(Ricardo 2013).

This later evolved into the ‘green exchange program,’ still active with over 80 distribution points, in which the bags of waste could be traded for regionally sourced, healthy food. This was made possible by a drop in demand and price correlated to an outbreak of cholera in Brazil around 1991 (Ricardo 2013). It ensured that food did not go to waste, and that local farmers were able to make some money off their surplus crop. The cost of the food was less than it would cost to pay a municipal collector (Rabinovitch 1992). “Every 4 kilograms of recyclable materials can be traded for one kilogram of locally cultivated seasonal produce, improving access to healthy food for the poor whilst tidying up the city”(Ricardo 2013, 180).

The success of these programs is visible in its uptake by the marginalized groups. In 2010, the municipality’s trucks collected about 21,800 tonnes of garbage while informal collectors gathered 190,000 tonnes. The revenue from these recyclables is funneled back into maintenance of recycling centers and a research and citizen promotion center (Rabinovitch 1992, Ricardo 2013).

The governance of curitiba effectively developed a system of solid waste disposal which acted as a platform to address larger equity and health concerns. Instead of overlooking informal systems, they were championed and empowered, requiring minimal capital input while reaping large socio-ecological benefits. These informal economies are fantastic examples of bypassing resource and impact decoupling and attempting decoupling of wellbeing with economic growth. Through the system, the poor were granted access to transportation and healthy food, while ensuring that work was

" 12

done to benefit the city and bioregion as a whole. “An urban growth pattern should be established in conjunction with a conscious decision to promote an integration of different elements of urban development”(Rabinovitch 1992, 72).

Porto Alegre I was fortunate enough to visit Porto Alegre, capital of Brazil’s Rio Grande do Sol, and one of its favelas called Vila Bom Jesus, while attending the World Social Forum in 2005. It was my first true awakening to environmental movements (as I volunteered with Greenpeace Brasil) and the realities of slum life. While the Greenpeace work, centered on building awareness at the forum around nuclear waste, genetically modified organisms, recycling and energy use, was incredible, this single visit to the favela changed my perspective on people and their abilities. Here were people so similar to myself, living in difficult situations, yet making something out of it. While this is an odd comment for a South African (from a divided, poverty stricken country), it took an international, external experience for me to actually see what was also surrounding me in my own country.

Vila Bom Jesus, like many favelas across Brazil is home to Catadores (or waste collectors), who spend the days wandering the neighborhoods collecting waste. This group had actually found it easier to take the waste back to the favela and sort it there before delivering the sorted product to the municipality or recycling factory in exchange for cash. The profits from this enterprise, support the whole community and pay for the services which do make it to the favela, such as electricity and water.

The notion that these people lived comfortably in the close proximity to garbage was striking, yet this was a projection of my own attitudes to waste, not theirs. These bags of discarded items, wrappers and containers were their livelihoods and their support system. These flows were valuable to them, even when they had no value to other citizens.

Image 2: Scenes from Vila Bom Jesus, a Porto Alegran favela with trash sorting warehouses.

What I did not know then is that Porto Alegre has a governance systems which relies heavily on citizen participation. This is possible due to an increase in municipal autonomy from the national government (in line with the last intervention from Part A) in 1988, which allowed improving financial status; this allowed for the development of participatory budgeting (Cities Alliance 2007). The system is based on neighborhood assemblies for discussion of and writing out of the budget; first stages include presentations by government to the assemblies, after which neighborhoods prioritize infrastructure investments. The next round elects district representatives and alternates to participate in the ‘municipal budget council’ meetings which oversee plans of each city agency (City Alliance 2007)

This participation has shown that government assumed desires of the populace are not always accurate (City Alliance 2007). It has also “increased government transparency while discouraging negotiations based on vested interests”(City

" 13

Alliance 2007, 113). Expanding on the system, public assemblies were formed for discussion of specific sectors including urban planning, transport management, health and social welfare, education and culture, and economic development (City Alliance 2007). Finally, city-wide conferences were held to build a collective vision of the city (in 1993), to debate a reformulation of the urban development plan (in 1995), and to connect social and strategic policies (in 2000).

The city’s environmental program is run on public management programs and large-scale environmental education; an example of this is the city’s environmental atlas, published in 1998, which aims to build citizen capacity for personal environmental management, premised around the need for making informed decisions (City Alliance 2007). This is important as the city is nestled in a flourishing ecosystem of Lake Guaiba, which is home to about 28% of flora native to Rio Grande do Sol, and diverse fauna. It is therefore vital to make sure that flows leaving the city are not detrimental to this region.

The results of this public participation system is that “Porto Alegre has the highest standard of living and the highest life expectancy of any Brazilian city. Virtually all its people have water piped to their homes and most have good-quality sanitation and drainage. The garbage collection system reaches virtually all households and has included a separate collection of recyclables since 1990”(City Alliance 2007).

Returning to the recycling system, Brazil has very few national waste recycling laws, yet it’s recycling programs are sturdy and comparable to those of Germany or Japan (Fox 2010). This lack of restricting laws may be the reason such an organic process has been able to evolve. Brazil has recycled more than 90% of aluminium cans, about 95% of its tin cans and about 50% of its glass and plastic bottles. Michael Fox describes the informal economy for these materials, supported heavily in 2006 by the then president Luiz ‘Lula’ da Silva. A catador makes an average of 400 reais or $225 per month on the sale of these materials. This is now below Brazil’s 2010 minimum wage of 510 (Fox 2010). In the specter of high unemployment, this situation is not ideal, but promotion of such economies provides at least some solution. This market is being further incentivized by government mandates for companies which produce packaging to buy back at least 25% of that produced (Fox 2010).

Conclusion The development of and reliance on human infrastructure and informal systems, as well as an insistence on public participation (and public governance in Porto Alegre) has furthered the positive urban environmental development of both Curitiba and Porto Alegre. With a strongly defined vision for what their city should be, the public and government set out to build environmental protection systems which were designed primarily for societal benefit.

The re-imagining of a low cost, efficient waste systems operated by marginalized communities on the periphery of cities enables some opportunity for these people while servicing the needs of the city. In this way, garbage, typically perceived as valueless in developed countries, was re-envisioned as holding innate value and was tradable on a formal market for food, transport or cash. This system was also possible due to loose national regulations and increased municipal initiative to design context specific solutions to waste management.

While technological fixes are the dominant attitude to solving environmental problems in green urbanism, these cities have bypassed this form of urbanism and approached Annecke and Swilling’s concept of livable urbanism. The measures explored by the municipalities have demonstrated that human infrastructure is just as, if not more effective a system and much more empowering.

!

" 14

References

Birkeland, J. 2002. Positive Development. London: Earthscan. Chapter 1.

Blewit, J. 2008. Understanding sustainable Development. London: Earthscan. Chapter 2.

Brown, L. 2008. Plan B 3.0. London: WW Norton & Company. Chapter 10

Cities Alliance. 2007. Livable Cities: The Benefits of Urban Environmental Planning. Cities Alliance. [online: retrieved June 28th 2013]. www.citiesalliance.org

Du Plessis, C. 2008. Understanding Cities as Social-Ecological Systems. World Sustainable Building Conference - SB’08. Melbourne, Australia, 21-25 September.

Doshi, V, Schulam, G, Gabaldo, D. 2007. Lights! Water! Motion! Strategy and Business, 47: 39-53.

Fox, M. 2010. Cash For Trash: Brazil’s Unemployed Catadores Keep Recycling Rates Hight while Earning Much-Needed Cash. Earth Island Journal. [online: retrieved June 28 2013] www.earthisland.org.

Graham, S ed. 2010. Disrupted Cities: When infrastructure Fails. Presentation of ideas to be discussed in the book. New York & London: Routledge.

Graham, S & Marvin, S. 2001. Splintering Urbanism: Networked infrastructures, technological mobilities and the urban condition. London: Routledge. Chapter 1.

Guy, S, Marvin, S & Moss, T (eds). 2001. Urban Infrastructure in Transition: Networks, Buildings, Plan. London: Earthscan. Chapter 2.

Hawken, P. 2007. Blessed Unrest: How the Largest Social Movement in History Is Restoring Grace, Justice, and Beauty to the World. London: Penguin Books. Chapter 2

Hawken, P. et al. 1999. Natural Capitalism: The Next Industrial Revolution. London: Earthscan. Chapter 1.

Heinberg, R. 2009. Temporary Recession or the End of Growth? The Oil Drum. [Online: retrieved 14 July 2010]. August 9. www.oildrum.com

Hodson, M, Marvin, S, Robinson, B & Swilling, M. 2012. Reshaping Urban Infrastructure: Material Flow Analysis and Transitions Analysis in an Urban Context. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 16(6):789-800.

Korhonen, J. 2008. Reconsidering the Economics Logic of Ecological Modernization. Environment and Planning A, 40:1331-1346.

Mohan, G. 2013. Carbon dioxide levels in atmosphere pass 400 milestone, again. LA Times. [online: accessed 4 July 2013]. 20 May. www.articles.latimes.com

" 15

http://www.citiesalliance.orghttp://www.earthisland.orghttp://www.oildrum.comhttp://www.articles.latimes.com

Rabinovitch, J. 1992. Curitiba: towards sustainable urban development. Environment and Urbanization. 4(2): 62-73.

Ricardo, O. 2013. Incentivized Recycling in Curitiba. In Robinson, B, Swilling, M, Hodson & M, Marvin, S. 2013. City-level Decoupling: Urban Resource Flows and the Governance of Infrastructure Transition. Report of Cities Working Group of the International Resource Panel, United Nations Environment Program.

Roberts, P, Ravetz, J & George, C. 2009. Environment and the City. London: Routledge. Chapter 2.

Robinson, B, Swilling, M, Hodson & M, Marvin, S. 2013. City-level Decoupling: Urban Resource Flows and the Governance of Infrastructure Transition. Report of Cities Working Group of the International Resource Panel, United Nations Environment Program.

Swilling M. & Annecke, E. 2012. Just Transitions: Explorations of Sustainability in an Unfair World. Cape Town: UCT Press. Chapter 2, 3 & 4.

United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). 2011. Decoupling natural resource use and environmental impacts from economic growth. UNEP. [online: accessed July 5th 2013]. www.unep.org

World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF). ND. Reinventing the City: Three Prerequisites for Greening Urban Infrastructures. WWF International. [Online: retrieved 22 June 2013] www.panda.org

" 16

http://www.panda.org