Global Platform for Sustainable Cities (GPSC) URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) FIRST EDITION GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) © 2018 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street NW Washington DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000 Internet: www.worldbank.org This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org. Please cite the work as follows: Global Platform for Sustainable Cities, World Bank. 2018. “Urban Sustainability Framework.” 1st ed. Washington, DC: World Bank. Cover photo: © Duncan Taralrud-Bay 2013. Used with the permission of Duncan Taralrud-Bay. Further permission required for reuse. Cover design: Casey Chen ii GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) CONTENTS FOREWORD VIII ACKNOWLEDGMENTS XI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 ABBREVIATIONS 8 PART I: UNDERSTANDING AND ACHIEVING URBAN SUSTAINABILITY 11 1. WHAT IS A SUSTAINABLE CITY? 11 2. A FOUR-STAGE APPROACH TO ACHIEVING URBAN SUSTAINABILITY 12 Stage 1: Diagnosis 14 Stage 2: Defining a Vision and Identifying Priorities 30 Stage 3: Financing the Plan 34 Stage 4: Monitoring and Evaluation 47 Cross-Cutting Processes: Citizen Consultation and Stakeholder Engagement 49 3. SUMMARY OF USF’S ASSISTANCE TO CITIES 52 REFERENCES 53 PART II: GPSC MEASURING FRAMEWORK 57 PURPOSE OF THE MEASURING FRAMEWORK 57 OVERVIEW OF THE MEASURING FRAMEWORK 58 Key Focus Areas 59 Components of the Key Focus Areas 60 Indicator References and Useful Sources 62 Further Information 63 iv CONTENTS ENABLING DIMENSIONS 65 Enabling Dimension 1: Governance and Integrated Urban Planning 65 Enabling Dimension 2: Fiscal Sustainability 73 OUTCOME DIMENSIONS 79 Outcome Dimension 1: Urban Economies 79 Outcome Dimension 2: Natural Environment and Resources 86 Outcome Dimension 3: Climate Action and Resilience 90 Outcome Dimension 4: Inclusivity and Quality of Life 94 REFERENCES 101 ANNEX A EXAMPLES OF OTHER FRAMEWORK INITIATIVES 104 ANNEX B MOVING UP THE URBAN SUSTAINABILITY PATHWAY 110 ANNEX C MALAYSIAN URBAN-RURAL NATIONAL INDICATORS NETWORK FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 118 ANNEX D IMPLEMENTING THE VISION IN NEW YORK: ONENYC 121 ANNEX E MEASURING FISCAL SUSTAINABILITY WITH CREDIT RATINGS 130 ANNEX F MOVING FROM DIAGNOSIS TO PRIORITY ACTIONS IN ADDIS ABABA 137 v URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) BOXES Box 1. Boston CityScore Box 2. Geographic Tools for Urban Data Collection and Indicators Box 3. World Bank City Planning Labs in Indonesia Box 4. Trends in Decoupling Economic Growth from Resource Use and Environmental Impacts Box 5. Emerging and Sustainable Cities Initiative: Indicators and “Traffic Lights” Box 6. Urban Growth Scenario Analysis for Planning Box 7. Mexico City Urban Growth Scenario Box 8. OneNYC Plan Box 9. Valuing Creditworthiness in Cities in Columbia, India, Peru, and Kenya Box 10. Importance of Climate-Smart Capital Investment Planning Box 11. Structuring and Credit Enhancements: The Tamil Nadu Water and Sanitation Pooled Fund in India Box 12. Green Bonds Box 13. Small-scale PPP Bus Terminal and Commercial Complex in Dehradun, India Box 14. Leveraging Land to Finance Infrastructure: Four Lessons from International Experience Box 15. Asian Development Bank GrEEEn City Consultation Process Box 16. Rating Criteria for an International Local or Regional Government FIGURES Figure 1. The Four Stages of the USF Process Figure 2. Decoupling in Berlin, Copenhagen, London, and New York Figure 3. ESCI Water Benchmarks Figure 4. ESCI Traffic Light Topic Classification Figure 5. SWOT Analysis Conducted by the Asian Development Bank for Hue, Vietnam Figure 6. Scenario Results vi Figure 7. GrEEEn City Action Plan Formulation Process Figure 8. GrEEEn City Stakeholder Consultation in Hue, Vietnam Figure 9. Relation Between the Four Outcome Dimensions and Two Enabling Dimensions Figure 10. Dimensions and Key Focus Areas of the Measuring Framework Figure 11. Relationship between a Dimension and the Components of Each Key Focus Area Figure 12. Phases of an ESCI City Figure 13. GrEEEn Cities Operational Framework Figure 14. UN-Habitat Wheel of Urban Prosperity Figure 15. NUS Framework for Sustainable Growth Figure 16. Five Pillars and Three Lenses of the PwC Approach Figure 17. The Urban Maturity Curve Figure 18. Key Measures in Singapore Figure 19. Bishan New Town Plan and Land Use Figure 20. Housing and Development Board’s Integrated Planning Approach Figure 21. Financing of Housing in New Towns through a Creative Financial System Figure 22. MURNInets Framework Figure 23. MURNInets Dimensions, Themes, and Indicators Figure 24. Core Challenges and Opportunities Addressed in OneNYC Figure 25. Vision 1: Growth Figure 26. Vision 2: Equity Figure 27. Vision 3: Sustainability Figure 28. Vision 4: Resiliency Figure 29. Addis Ababa Urban Expansion and Fragmented Growth along Roads TABLES Table ES.1. Enabling Dimensions and Associated Goals Table ES.2. Outcome Dimensions and Associated Goals Table 1. Selection Criteria for GPSC Indicators Table 2. Global City Indicators Program: Categories and Themes Table 3. The ABCs of Rating Scales by Standard & Poor’s Financial Services (S&P) vii URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) FOREWORD With the population of cities expected to increase sustainability. Supported by GEF, and led by the by 2.5 billion between now and 2050, cities face World Bank in close collaboration with many a multitude of challenges. Urban sprawl and existing initiatives, the GPSC assists cities in tapping transportation congestion are expected to worsen, into cutting-edge knowledge and expertise on and the effects of climate change will increase cities’ topics ranging from urban planning to low-carbon vulnerability to natural hazards and increase the risk strategy, transit-orientated development, and of climate-induced displacement. Such consequences sustainable financing. Together with various partners affect people’s welfare and bring unprecedented in the urban realm, the GPSC is creating a suite of challenges to the planet’s environmental knowledge products and tools that will help cities sustainability. drive their development agenda. But urban growth and climate change also create A key pillar of the platform is to link knowledge an imperative and offer opportunities to create to finance so that cities become major hubs for sustainable cities that meet these challenges. The achieving global environmental benefits. The goal is Global Environment Facility (GEF), the World to enable cities to leverage financing to advance their Bank and other multilateral development banks, the sustainability and resilience agendas, and in particular United Nations, and many other organizations are to work toward the United Nations Sustainable investing in solutions to harness the opportunities Development Goal 11—making cities inclusive, safe, associated with global urbanization. They seek to resilient, and sustainable. By connecting cities with decarbonize the urbanization process, promote international financial institutions (IFIs), the resource-efficient growth, build compact cities, and GPSC helps match projects with financing enhance urban resilience. This transformation of opportunities and promotes the sustainable cities will drive economic development, create jobs, implementation of projects. provide a higher quality of life, and have a positive impact on the global commons. Since the adoption of the New Urban Agenda in Quito, Ecuador, in October 2016, many IFIs have Towards this end, the Global Platform for come together to coordinate an approach that Sustainable Cities (GPSC) was launched in March supports city leaders in developing long-term visions 2016. It was designed to meet the need that and plans, and in utilizing the financing options many of us saw for an enabling environment—a that can translate those plans into a reality. Today platform—that allows cities to exchange ideas, the GPSC is strengthening the IFI network and share experiences, use analytical tools, and, most promote investment in sustainable urban importantly, steer investment toward long-term infrastructure. viii We are pleased to introduce the Urban Sustainability Framework (USF) as a guide for cities seeking to enhance their sustainability. It supports cities as they progress along the sustainability pathway, from creating a vision all the way to identifying financial resources to implement their plans. Its Measuring Framework lays out key enabling and outcome dimensions of urban sustainability: governance and integrated planning, fiscal sustainability, economic competitiveness, environment and resource efficiency, low carbon and resilience, and social inclusiveness. This evidence-based and integrated approach strives to help cities assess and understand where they are in their development, and to support them on the journey toward long-term urban sustainability. Naoko Ishii Ede Ijjasz-Vasquez CEO and Chairperson Senior Director To the cities, organizations, and experts who Global Environment Facility Global Practice for Social, have contributed to the development of the Urban, Rural and Resilience framework and helped prepare this publication, World Bank Group we would like to take this opportunity to express our appreciation. We are confident that through this collaboration, a shared vision and common approach to urban sustainable development can be forged. We invite cities to use the framework to meet the challenges they face today and in the coming decades, and we enthusiastically look forward to the collaborative efforts to adopt an integrated approach to urban sustainability. ix URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) x ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Urban Sustainability Framework (USF) was created by the Global Platform for Sustainable Cities (GPSC), which is managed by the World Bank. The document was prepared by a team led by Xueman Wang, coordinator of the GPSC, with contributions from Serge Salat (Urban Morphology and Complex Systems Institute in France), David Painter (senior financial expert), and the engineering and design firm Arup. Lincoln Lewis, a GPSC team member, served as production editor. The USF team is sincerely grateful to the World Bank peer review panel, which was chaired by Sameh Wahba and consisted of Laura Bailey, Judy Baker, Carter Brandon, Stephane Hallegatte, Ellen Hamilton, Shagun Mehrotra, Megha Mukim, Joshua Gallo, Gerald Ollivier, and Andrew Roberts. The team also appreciates the contribution of Anne Himmelfarb, who edited the report, and Casey Chen, who designed it. The USF is the product of a broader partnership between the Global Environment Facility (GEF), GPSC, the World Bank, participating countries and cities, project-implementing agencies, and resource team organizations. The document specifically benefited from comments received from the Asian Development Bank, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group, GEF, Local Government for Sustainability (ICLEI), United Nations Industrial Development Organization, World Resources Institute, and individual experts, including Catalina Turcu of University College London and Takeshi Takama of su-re.co. Work on the USF at the World Bank was carried out under the guidance of Sameh Wahba, Director of the Global Practice for Social, Urban, Rural, and Resilience (GSURR) and Ede Ijjasz- Vasquez, Senior Director of GSURR. xi URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) The world’s growing cities are at the leading edge of the global sustainability agenda. How cities choose to respond to challenges can greatly influence the prosperity and quality of life of their residents. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Urbanization’s Opportunities and Challenges in the Global Agenda The world is urbanizing at an unprecedented rate, It is often asserted that the battle for sustainable and more than half the world’s population live in development will be won or lost in cities. Indeed, cities. Predictions indicate that by 2050, two-thirds the world’s growing cities are at the leading edge of of the world’s 9.8 billion people will live in urban the global sustainability agenda. How cities choose areas (UN 2015b). The corresponding increase in to respond to challenges can greatly influence the global urban land cover during the first three decades prosperity and quality of life of their residents. of the 21st century is expected to be greater than City governance and planning initiative failures can the cumulative urban expansion before the year 2000 exacerbate urban problems—such as socioeconomic (IPCC 2014). inequality, slums and informal settlements, urban sprawl, and the degradation of natural ecosystems— While urbanization presents many opportunities, while also exposing the city to the localized effects rapidly expanding cities face a multitude of perils of global climate change. City governments must that come in tandem. Economic disruptions, social therefore make informed decisions about their strife, and environmental disasters are increasingly infrastructure investments based on up-to-date data occurring within their enlarging boundaries. Such sources. occurrences exert huge stresses on often limited infrastructure and public services; according to It is crucial that cities take advantage of estimates by the Organization for Economic Co- opportunities to enhance sustainability. As they operation and Development (OECD), governments grapple with population growth, advancing rates worldwide will have to spend approximately $71 of urbanization, and the impacts of climate trillion in total by 2030 to provide adequate overall change, it is clear that in the future, cities will global infrastructure for electricity, road and rail need to adopt innovative approaches to support transport, telecommunications, and water.1 This is increasing demands by their residents. Cities can 3.5 percent of the world’s annual gross domestic be and must become places of innovation and product (GDP) from 2007 to 2030 (OECD 2015). drivers of economic growth, where wealth and The perils that rapidly expanding cities face, along jobs are created and resources are used efficiently. with subsequent steep funding needs, translate into The choices that are made about how cities are significant difficulties for many city governments, built, inhabited, and maintained will have long- which often have disproportionately small budgets. term global effects. 1 All dollar amounts are U.S. dollars. Image: Buddha’s Birthday: Cheonggye Stream by Emily Orpin, CC BY-NC 2.0, www.flickr.com/photos/ejorpin/8748812861. 1 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) The efficient and effective planning and take center stage. The Global Platform for management of cities enable economies of scale, Sustainable Cities (GPSC) was launched in 2016 while also potentially offsetting the negative to advance efforts towards this goal. It aims impacts of global climate change on natural to support, strengthen, and contribute to the ecosystems. worldwide initiatives mentioned above by helping cities translate transnational declarations into city- The world is beginning to realize that cities are level actions, with a focus on integrated planning dynamic places where positive change can happen and fiscal responsibility. Bringing together rapidly at an unprecedented rate. The international participating cities and a wide range of other community has harnessed the momentum with entities working on urban sustainability issues, several key events, such as the September 2015 the GPSC creates a shared platform for global launch of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable knowledge and an evidence-based, integrated Development (UN 2015a). The groundbreaking plan approach to achieving worthwhile outcomes. is the first international agreement to acknowledge sustainable urban development as the fundamental The Urban Sustainability Framework precondition for the prosperity of cities. The The Urban Sustainability Framework has been agreement comprises 17 Sustainable Development developed by the GPSC to Goals (SDGs) and 169 actionable targets that aim • Help build a common understanding of to be achieved by 2030. Particularly relevant is the sustainability within an urban context; 11th SDG—sustainable cities and communities— • Provide practical guidance to cities on how which seeks to “make cities and human settlements to pursue urban sustainability through inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable” by integrated approaches; recognizing urbanization and urban growth as a • Serve as a policy tool to support cities in transformative force for sustainable development collecting and integrating data, and using (UN 2015a). those data sets to define a vision, set targets, monitor progress, and forecast trends—all Following the launch of the SDGs, the year 2015 while being able to compare themselves with also saw the adoption of the Paris Agreement peer cities; by 195 member states of the United Nations • Establish a common framework to measure Framework Convention on Climate Change urban sustainability so that cities can diagnose (UNFCCC) as a universal legally binding agreement and benchmark their current performance, on climate (UN 2011). In 2016, at the third United monitor the impacts of their policy and Nations Conference on Housing and Sustainable planning interventions, and share data and Urban Development (Habitat III), held in Quito, knowledge with other cities in the GPSC Ecuador, the New Urban Agenda was adopted (UN network and beyond. 2017). This document, which centrally embeds the SDGs within in its discussion, sets out how cities Functionally, the intention of the USF has been should be planned and managed to best promote to help cities of all scales and at every possible sustainable urbanization. geographic location. GPSC’s membership covers a very diverse group of cities, including megacities Transforming the Future of Cities with populations of more than 15 million people, Now that cities have emerged on the global relatively small cities with populations of 200,000, agenda, sustainable urbanization initiatives must high-middle-income cities with an average per 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY capita income of more than $15,000, and low- Part I: Understanding and Achieving Urban income cities with per capita income of less than Sustainability lays out a process for, and $2,000. Given this diverse membership, the USF practical guidance on, a four-stage approach is not intended to be prescriptive in its approach, that includes (1) diagnosis of the city’s current but rather provides general guidance that can be situation; (2) definition of a vision for change modified and tailored to the unique circumstances and establishment of priorities; (3) an approach of each city. to financing of the plan that achieves and demonstrates fiscal sustainability; and (4) Building on the knowledge and experience of monitoring and evaluation. previous initiatives, the framework offers an action- and policy-oriented tool for sustainable integrated Part II: The GPSC Measuring Framework planning It includes guidelines, good practices, builds a common understanding of sustainability and milestones to enable each participating city to within the urban context through two “enabling” understand its sustainability context, develop a vision and four “outcome” dimensions. The enabling for future sustainability performance, prepare a plan dimensions are (1) governance and integrated to achieve that vision, and implement the sustainability urban planning, and (2) fiscal sustainability. The plan through financing and regulatory support. The outcome dimensions are (1) urban economies, (2) framework uses a four-stage approach—consisting natural environment and resources, (3) climate of diagnosis, vision development, target setting, and action and resilience, and (4) inclusivity and monitoring—and includes a road map with indicators quality of life. at each stage. This approach ensures that in addition to providing guidance on the policies cities should Understanding and Achieving Urban adopt, the USF shows cities with scarce resources and Sustainability: Part I’s Four-Stage Approach to limited capabilities how best to accomplish reforms Integrated Planning and make investments. Sustainable cities combine greater productivity and innovation capacity with lower costs and reduced The USF seeks to be an inspiring guide for cities environmental impact. They provide secure and embarking on a journey toward sustainability, healthy urban environments where both people and more broadly to advance the integration, and nature can thrive. They offer amenities such as implementation, and coherence of the global affordable housing and vibrant street life while also sustainability agenda. City governments are the providing safe and high-quality public spaces. They primary audience for USF guidance, while other also provide inclusive access to health care, education, agencies, institutions, and practitioners may also and jobs at walking distance or reachable by short find the framework useful. The USF document will and convenient transit rides seamlessly integrated be periodically revisited and enhanced by way of with pedestrian and bicycle paths. The potential of lessons learned during its use. Knowledge products clean energy and smart technologies are harnessed on specific topics will be issued over time to to increase well-being, reduce environmental impact, complement the principles outlined in the USF. and protect ecosystems. A sustainable city preserves its environmental and physical assets for future The Urban Sustainability Framework is structured in generations while enhancing its competitiveness. two parts, along with annexes that explore the good It also has a local government with the fiscal and practices of specific cities and organizations and the administrative capacity to carry out its urban functions positive results of their initiatives: with active participation from citizens. 3 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) To achieve these admirable outcomes, cities face The USF’s four-stage approach offers cities a road new coordination challenges. Among them are map for improving their sustainability status. The jurisdictional fragmentation due to metropolitan framework recognizes that different cities may be at agglomerations that far exceed municipal limits, different development stages but that all can make and the sectoral silos created by the departmental progress toward sustainability. It sets cities on a organization of city governments. Both breed trajectory to deliver inclusive growth while reducing contests due to intergovernmental allocation of the impacts of environmental disasters and climate mandates and mismatched resources. change. Although each city’s action plan will differ in policy priorities, the USF’s four stages of integrated Many cities around the world are in urgent need of planning and cross-cutting processes are broadly effective planning and financing strategies to meet applicable, as follows: today’s critical urban challenges. Integrated urban planning offers a unique opportunity for cities to realign Stage 1: Diagnosis. This stage answers the their growth trajectories to follow a more sustainable, question: “Where are we now?” The diagnosis resilient, and inclusive path. In particular, cities need is a process of dynamic, continuous self-analysis. to coordinate land management with infrastructure, It identifies key capabilities and critical natural resources, and hazard risk. Cities need policies sustainability gaps. It enables cities to respond to manage the intensity of land use and to ensure its to emerging trends, events, challenges, and integration with infrastructure development—especially opportunities. To facilitate this stage of planning, transport (World Bank 2013). the USF encourages cities to integrate their data into planning and policy-making initiatives. The Urban Sustainability Framework provides tools and methods that cities of different sizes Stage 2: Vision and Priorities for Action. and levels of development can use to improve This stage poses the questions “Where do we their sustainability over time. In lower- or middle- want to go?” and “How do we get there?” The income countries, many cities struggle to provide vision is oriented toward the future and attempts basic infrastructure to their residents while also to foresee how the city could be more sustainable establishing conditions in which businesses and 10 to 20 years from now. This stage invites cities economies will thrive. However, these cities can to formulate aspirational goals that give shape to make progress toward sustainable urbanization. what the city wants to become. The vision should They should be encouraged by the achievements correspond to the city’s needs, historical and of cities that struggled in the 1960s—like Seoul cultural context, and current position on the or Singapore—which demonstrated that in one sustainability pathway. Priorities for action at generation a high level of per capita income could this stage are key transformational interventions. be achieved by utilizing integrated, resource-efficient, To realize the vision, cities should have an and sustainable planning methods. effective action plan that outlines measurable targets and milestones, activities and initiatives for With the USF, the GPSC aspires to help cities implementation, the responsibilities of each actor, develop their sustainability vision and action plan. and city budget commitments. The USF is a tool to support strategic planning and identify priorities. It helps decision makers come to Stage 3: Financing the Plan. This stage answers adequate and evidence-based decisions that integrate the question: “How do we finance urban investment multiple sustainability dimensions. necessary for achieving the chosen priorities?” Financing the priorities for action is critical: the process of 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY identifying financing options should take place in GPSC’s Measuring Framework: Part II’s parallel with the development of a city’s vision Enabling and Outcome Dimensions and priorities. T he GPSC aims to help cities leverage opportunities arising from urbanization through Stage 4: Monitoring Framework. This an integrated approach to urban planning and stage answers the question: “Are we doing the right financing. It has interpreted the critical outcomes thing, and is our plan working?” Holistic monitoring and themes enshrined in the SDGs, the New and evaluation allows government officials Urban Agenda, and the Paris Agreement through and development managers to learn from past the lens of the GPSC priority areas—that is, the experiences, improve service delivery, and plan integrated approach to urban planning, action, and allocate resources, while also demonstrating and financing. the results of the initiatives as part of their own accountability. The GPSC promotes a strong At the heart of the USF is its Measuring Framework, focus on measurable results through the use of which aims to enhance the understanding of the USF indicators. urban sustainability and promote evidence-based integrated urban planning through six dimensions Cross-Cutting Processes. This consideration of sustainability. These include two enabling answers the question: “How are we doing?” The dimensions (table ES.1) and four outcome cross-cutting processes of citizen consultation dimensions (table ES.2). and stakeholder engagement are involved at each stage. The GPSC encourages cities to implement Table ES.1. Enabling Dimensions and Associated Goals the USF through an inclusive and participatory ENABLING DIMENSIONS GOALS process. A robust consultation procedure must be part of formulating the vision and action plan 1. Governance & integrated Achieve integrated, well-planned urban development to ensure that citizens are committed to the goals urban planning and involved in the implementation. Monitoring should ensure transparency, and its results should 2. Fiscal sustainability Ensure accountable governance and fiscal sustainability be made public so that citizens can evaluate the actions undertaken. Table ES.2. Outcome Dimensions and Associated Goals A sustainability plan is all the more effective OUTCOME DIMENSIONS GOALS when policies for several goals are bundled. Bundling of policy instruments and a high level 1. Urban economies Attain sustainable economic growth, prosperity, and competitiveness across of coordination across institutions can increase all parts of the city the likelihood of achieving sustainability goals. According to initiatives such as the UN-Habitat 2. Natural environment Protect and conserve ecosystems and & resources natural resources into perpetuity City Prosperity Initiative,2 the most prosperous sustainable cities are the ones that perform equally Work toward mitigating greenhouse well in all dimensions of sustainability and that 3. Climate action & resilience gas emissions while fostering the overall resilience of cities have successfully integrated planning, governance, and finance (UN-Habitat and International City Work toward creating inclusive cities Leaders 2015). 4. Inclusivity & quality of life and improving cities’ livability, focusing on reducing poverty levels and inequality throughout cities 2 Refer to annex A for further information on UN-Habitat’s City Prosperity Index. 5 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) For organizational purposes, the Measuring Framework to their challenges. It encourages city leaders to identifies separate dimensions of urban sustainability look at their city and assess its sustainability status; and aligns subsidiary key focus areas with indicators. to create a vision for its future, supported by an However, sustainability is a complex, multidimensional action plan with clear priorities and a monitoring concept that cannot be effectively addressed without process; and to look at how integrated planning and acknowledging the relationship between different city financing can be coordinated to support sustainable functions and systems. The six dimensions and goals urbanization. City leaders can use the USF to tailor are interrelated. Policies and actions that impact one the analysis of their city’s strengths, weaknesses, goal are likely to have additional impacts on other threats, and opportunities; to shape their vision for goals. For this reason, it is essential that an integrated the future; and to identify their priorities. approach to urban sustainability is adopted by cities. Such an approach recognizes the interrelationships Rapid urbanization confronts city governments between dimensions and seeks to maximize synergies with unprecedented governance, planning, and between city systems and functions to reduce fiscal challenges across the spectrum of urban inadvertent negative impacts on other aspects of a city. sustainability. How decision makers prepare for rapid urbanization is crucial, not only to the future Recommended Action by Cities of their cities, but also to global economic progress Cities are where development challenges and solutions and sustainability. City leaders must urgently develop meet. The USF provides a framework to help city a vision for their city’s future in consideration leaders make informed decisions for sustainable of their city’s unique path for economic growth, development in their cities and address key challenges. environmental protection, climate impact and resilience, and inclusiveness. This vision must The GPSC encourages cities to use the USF as an be built upon integrated planning that utilizes a action-oriented tool for finding sustainable solutions multidimensional framework, such as the USF. 6 REFERENCES IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 2014. “Human Settlements, Infrastructure and Spatial Planning.” In Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Working Group III contribution to the IPCC 5th Assessment Report. Geneva: IPCC. http://www.urbanmorphologyinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/IPCC- report-Chapter-12.pdf. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). 2015. “Fostering Investment in Infrastructure.” Paris: OECD. https://www.oecd.org/daf/inv/investment-policy/Fostering-Investment-in- Infrastructure.pdf. UN (United Nations). 2011. Cities and Climate Change: Global Report on Human Settlements 2011. Nairobi: United Nations Human Settlements Programme. https://unhabitat.org/books/cities-and-climate-change-global-report-on-human- settlements-2011/. ———. 2015a. “Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.” United Nations General Assembly. http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/70/1&Lang=E. ———. 2015b. World Urbanization Prospects: The 2014 Revision. New York: United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. https://esa.un.org/unpd/wup/Publications/Files/WUP2014-Report.pdf. ———. 2017. “New Urban Agenda.” Habitat III Secretariat. http://habitat3.org/wp-content/uploads/NUA-English.pdf. UN-Habitat and International City Leaders. 2015. “The City Prosperity Initiative: 2015 Global City Report.” https://unhabitat.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02-old/CPI_2015%20Global%20 City%20Report.compressed.pdf. World Bank. 2013. Planning, Connecting, and Financing Cities—Now: Priorities for City Leaders. Washington, DC: World Bank. doi:10.1596/978-0- 8213-9839-5. 7 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) ABBREVIATIONS ADB Asian Development Bank CIP capital investment plan CPI City Prosperity Index CPL City Planning Labs CRI City Resilience Indicators CSAC Centre for Sustainable Asian Cities EBRD European Bank for Reconstruction and Development ESCI Emerging and Sustainable Cities Initiative FAR floor area ratio FDI foreign direct investment FIES Food Insecurity Experience Scale GDP gross domestic product GEF Global Environment Facility GHG greenhouse gas GIS geographic information system GPSC Global Platform for Sustainable Cities GSURR Global Practice for Social, Urban, Rural, and Resilience GVA gross value added IDB Inter-American Development Bank IFC International Finance Corporation LRG local or regional government MRT mass rapid transit MSE micro and small enterprise MURNInets Malaysian Urban-Rural National Indicators Network on Sustainable Development NUS National University of Singapore OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development PPP public-private partnership PSR pressure-state-response PwC PricewaterhouseCoopers SDG Sustainable Development Goal S&P Standard & Poor’s Financial Services SWOT strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats TNUDF Tamil Nadu Urban Development Fund TNUIFSL Tamil Nadu Urban Infrastructure Financed Service Limited ULB urban local body UN United Nations UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change USF Urban Sustainability Framework WCCD World Council on City Data WHO World Health Organization WSPF Water and Sanitation Pooled Fund 8 9 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) The Urban Sustainability Framework has been developed to help cities understand their current sustainability status, define a vision with priorities, establish financing for implementation, and monitor their progress along the way—all while being able to benchmark themselves with peer cities.   GPSC held a Sustainable Cities photo competition in October 2017. With this winning photo submitted by Yannick Folly from Benin, one can practically sense the chaos of the city – exhaust fumes from trucks, cars and motorbikes billowing alongside pedestrians going about their business in the street. Photos such as this communicate an urgent need for cities to provide infrastructure to create a more livable environment. We are also reminded that cities are foremost made of people. Source: © Yannick Folly. Reproduced with permission from Yannick Folly; further permission required for reuse. 10 PART I: UNDERSTANDING AND ACHIEVING URBAN SUSTAINABILITY The guidance contained in part I of the Urban 1. What is a Sustainable City? Sustainability Framework (USF) is targeted to help A city is enabled to achieve sustainability by using two city governments and their partners address the important methods, which the USF calls enabling following fundamental questions: dimensions: (1) good governance and integrated • Where are we now? urban planning processes; and (2) sound management • Where do we want to go—that is, of city finances to ensure financial sustainability.3 what are our priorities? • How do we get there? Sustainable cities demonstrate the following four • How do we finance the investment needed key outcomes, which the USF calls outcome to achieve the priorities? dimensions: (1) robust economic growth, • How are we doing? prosperity, and competitiveness across all parts of the city; (2) protection and conservation of The answers to these questions are explained within ecosystems and natural resources into perpetuity; the following three sections of part I: (3) mitigation of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions 1. What Is a Sustainable City? This section while fostering overall city resilience; and (4) lays out the six dimensions of a sustainable inclusiveness and livability, mainly through the city and defines sustainability at various levels reduction of city poverty levels and inequality. of urban development 2. A Four-Stage Approach to Achieving A sustainable city is a compact, relatively densely Urban Sustainability. This section lays populated mixed-use urban form that creates out the key principles of integrated planning efficiency gains. It combines greater productivity and describes the four stages for achieving and innovation capacity with lower costs and urban sustainability reduced environmental impact. It provides secure 3. Summary of USF’s Assistance to Cities. and healthy urban environments where both This section includes GPSC’s recommendations people and nature can thrive, and offers residents for action by cities. affordable housing, vibrant street life, and safe and high-quality public spaces. A sustainable city provides inclusive access to health care, education, and jobs at walking distance or reachable by short and convenient transit rides seamlessly integrated 3 The four outcome and two enabling dimensions are further elaborated in part II. Image: Panoramic bird’s eye view of Bishan Park and housing estate from Ang Mo Kio by Jimmy Tan, CC BY 2.0, www.flickr.com/photos/jimmytst/10454662843. 11 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) with pedestrian and bicycle paths. It harnesses the 2. A Four-Stage Approach to Achieving Urban potential of clean energy and smart technologies to Sustainability increase well-being, reduce environmental impact, Many cities are in urgent need of effective and protect ecosystems. A sustainable city preserves planning and financing strategies to meet today’s its environmental and physical assets for future critical urban challenges. The USF’s four-stage generations while enhancing its competitiveness. approach offers cities a road map for improving It also has a local government with the fiscal their sustainability status. It contributes to and administrative capacity to carry out its urban setting cities at different development stages functions with active participation from citizens. on a trajectory that delivers inclusive growth while reducing pressure on the environment and Across the world, cities are placing themselves mitigating climate change impacts. on a path toward sustainability and implementing innovative ideas to efficiently manage urbanization. Every city is unique. Thus, what matters to Cities such as Copenhagen, New York, Singapore, the long-term sustainability of one city will be Seoul, Curitiba, Cape Town, and hundreds of different from what matters to the next city; this others have led the way in sustainable urban variation reflects different contexts, challenges, development and are creating a vision of and political priorities. However, a common sustainable cities of tomorrow. Annex B provides process, summarized in figure 1, can be applied examples of how cities such as Seoul and within all cities to help guide decision making Singapore have progressed on their sustainability and to establish and implement a cost-effective pathway, from struggling to meet the basic urban sustainability agenda. This process is designed services standard in the 1970s to achieving to be flexible enough to respond to short- sustainability that attracts investment and provides term needs while taking a long-term view of a high living standard for citizens today. development. Figure 1. The Four Stages of the USF Process 12 PART I The USF process is intended to help cities develop thus leverage the most value from work already a common understanding and vision, build undertaken. The guidance includes callout boxes to commitment across a diverse range of stakeholders, highlight more detailed information, such as tips or streamline effort, and inform monitoring and references to other resources. Case studies are also evaluation of the impact of interventions in highlighted throughout. moving the city toward desired outcomes. The USF does not provide a prescriptive, step-by- Financing is a key policy pillar that should be step methodology but instead sets out a flexible undertaken in parallel to developing the vision. process through which cities can advance urban Financing entails finding sources for the capital sustainability in a way that meets their own needs outlays needed to achieve the vision and to provide and priorities. It includes considerations for how infrastructure and services as the city grows. A cities can identify interventions to enhance existing vision that does not fully consider its financing processes, strategies, plans, and initiatives and implications cannot be realized. 13 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) Stage 1: Diagnosis The building blocks of the USF’s diagnosis stage • Drive improvement in performance by can be thought of as a pyramid. The foundational setting a baseline from which to assess change; information for the diagnosis process is the city’s • Shed light on the impact of actions, so data. Building upon the data are the indicators. At decision makers can expand, modify, or the top of the pyramid are the city’s polices, which redirect resources and effort to more rely on both the data and indicators for stature. effectively achieve desired outcomes; • Identify strengths and weaknesses as well The diagnosis process is first facilitated by the as assets (such as hard infrastructure or USF’s identification of the key focus areas that are intangible resources) that can be leveraged to globally relevant to the urban sustainability agenda. support interventions; Each area provides a starting point for cities • Identify interconnections, co-benefits, synergies, seeking to determine the scope of their diagnosis or trade-offs between city systems that can assessments. Each category starts by listing a help guide efficient use of resources; and question, which provides guidance on what the • Explore gaps in awareness and opportunities diagnosis stage should aim to determine. Cities may for action. wish to augment these key questions with more details specific to their own context. However, in most cities, understanding current conditions can be challenging. Therefore, the During the diagnosis process, establishing an USF has divided the first stage into manageable understanding of current conditions can serve steps that start with building the database, then several purposes for city decision makers. elaborates on the selection of indicators, and finally Specifically, it can: explains the data analysis process. • Build a shared vision to support decision making; 14 PART I Stage 1.1. Building a Database City leaders are beginning to understand that trends. Geospatial data deal with the distribution data, and the infrastructure to analyze them, will of indicators across the city space (for example, become as important to the well-being of their densities of people and jobs, concentration of citizens as the power grid and the transportation firms, numbers of jobs accessible by transit in a system. More and better data could, for example, given time from different city locations, housing help governments ensure that services in poor and infrastructure at risk). They usually are neighborhoods are as good as those in wealthy shared in the form of maps, but the underlying ones. data are in numeric and spatial geographic information system (GIS) formats. Qualitative Collecting and Managing Data data tend to be judgement-based and are usually Data form an essential part of evidence-based descriptive rather than numeric. These types planning, with indicators serving as an interface of data can be gathered through methods such between policies and data to show policy makers as face-to-face personal interviews, surveys, how and where they should target their efforts. focus groups, expert panels, document revision, Thus, collecting data for the diagnosis assessment observation, and case studies. is a first step in a process that should lead to integrated data management along all stages of An important part of collecting data is the the USF, from assessment to monitoring. That consideration of how to manage data processes, is why data are described here not in isolation such as quality assurance, security, backup, but as a comprehensive integrated system that procurement, and completeness auditing. requires long-term management. Cities rely on a complex web of institutions and networks, which Key questions cities should consider when function as systems within systems. Integrated establishing a data governance management plan urban data processes promote coordination include the following: between government bodies and key stakeholders • How will the city manage quality assurance of to support effective knowledge sharing and robust data? There may be instances when more decision making. Promoting integrated, inclusive than one data set could fulfill a reporting data processes helps to ensure that data sets are requirement, or the team may encounter data coordinated (reducing the risk of conflicting sets with conflicting results. information and reducing duplicate effort), up- • How will the city manage issues such as data security to-date (reducing the risk of basing decisions and privacy? The indicator framework on old information), and accurate (reducing the represents a comprehensive view of a city’s risk of inaccurate data that lead to misinformed performance across a range of topics, and decisions). requires a large volume of data, some of which may be sensitive for a city. It is important to select a data collection method • How will the city ensure data are auditable and appropriate to the type of data required for backed up for future reference? The city’s indicators. Quantitative data deal with quantities, monitoring program should extend over a values, or numbers and are usually expressed in meaningful period of time to reveal changes in the city’s performance (creating a numeric form. They can be measured at a single trajectory), and it should measure future point in time or in a time series that reveals progress against and enhance city’s ability to build sound strategies and plans for a strong future. 15 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) Box 1. Boston CityScore CityScore is an online tool that uses a number The platform has been successful because it to indicate Boston’s overall performance as a integrates the data tracked by the city. Municipal city. The platform combines scores from 21 government computer systems may not be different metrics tracked by the city, ranging organized in a way that allows easy access to from the prevalence of serious crimes compared the data, which is needed for a platform such as to historical data, to the timeliness of pothole CityScore, or the data may be stored in separate repairs, to the number of active library users. A databases. To make a platform such as this value greater than 1 means that the performance perform, it is crucial that different municipal is better than Boston’s target; anything less than departments work together, but the coordination 1 indicates the city’s performance is below the and data collection effort for the task is often target. Scores for the past day, week, month, and underestimated. quarter are published on the city’s website so that anyone can see the up-to-date performance The success of this platform demonstrates the information. growing trend among municipal governments in the United States toward what is sometimes The creation of CityScore was inspired by the called data-driven governance. As part of this idea that a city, like a baseball player, should approach, cities seek to leverage data to increase have a batting average (Bidgood 2015). It was efficiency while also keeping residents informed launched in January 2015, and the numeric of its performance. To achieve these goals, cities scores immediately brought attention to leading the trend, such as Boston, Los Angeles, city services that were not performing up to New York, and Houston, have begun using the expectations, and helped them receive more ever-increasing amounts of data they collect to attention and resources. improve their planning, deliver better services, and engage citizens. The approach requires performing An early example was emergency medical data analytics on information from vastly different services, which had increasing response times. functions of a city (Bidgood 2015). When the mayor sought the reason for this, he learned that both the city’s population and the The story of CityScore demonstrates that cities number of visitors had been increasing over can use the data they collect and manage to time, meaning that the number of emergency improve performance results. Its success thus far calls had increased as well. However, the funding is likely to inspire other cities to do the same. to support additional ambulance services had not been correspondingly raised. Based on this Source: City of Boston, “CityScore,” new understanding of the city’s needs, the mayor https://www.boston.gov/cityscore. was able to quickly dedicate additional financial resources to improve emergency response times. 16 PART I • What procedures will the city need to put in place to Utilizing Technology for Data Collection and manage the process for data procurement? To Geospatial Analysis complete the reporting for indicators, it may be necessary to purchase data from Traditional sources of urban data include the latest private companies or institutions. population census, public service company records, • How will the city manage the reporting assignment, reports of other international bodies, and academic review, and approval process? Review and research. New technologies such as the remote approval of data reporting may require sign- sensing and development of GIS analytical tools off or approval from several key stakeholders have considerably enriched the potential of data for to ensure consistency. understanding cities. Considering these issues in advance will help the city Geospatial analysis is the collection, display, and deliver a robust, transparent, credible, and accountable manipulation of imagery (such as aerial or satellite assessment to inform decision making. photographs and images) and data (such as historical data records) explicitly in terms of geographic Cities need to play an active role as brokers of urban coordinates, or implicitly in terms of a street data. This entails more than sharing reams of their address, postal code, or other locational identifiers. own administrative information, as several cities round Geospatial analysis enables the creation of maps, the world already do. Municipal governments ought to graphs, statistics, and other products that can illustrate become the guardians of the local information system, complex relationships in a more easily accessible designing a framework that encourages others to share visual format and support future scenarios. Applying data and supply services to citizens. For example, they geospatial tools to complex urban data allows for might act as a portal for information from utilities and a more granular understanding of many of the online companies, while simultaneously protecting indicators.4 By disaggregating their values at fine intra- privacy and making certain that the algorithms used urban scales as well as broader regional scales, analysis don’t discriminate against specific groups of individuals. can explore the relationships between urban systems and networks. Box 2 lists some of the geographic Some cities are beginning to assume this role. A prime tools used for collecting urban data, while box 3 example is Boston’s data sharing partnership with suggests the contribution of new technologies and Waze to reduce traffic congestion. In exchange for analytic tools to strengthening city planning capacity in some data from the service, the city quickly informs Indonesia. Waze of any planned road closures. Boston also uses CityScore to manage its urban data (box 1). Chicago, However, implementing robust geospatial tools and meanwhile, has launched OpenGrid, a website mechanisms can be a complex process and costly for a that allows users to view public urban data using city, especially in the developing world. When investing in online maps. any of the tools described here, the city must also invest in the human resources necessary to obtain that tool’s full benefit. Thus, prioritization of tools and methodologies must take into account their acquisition and operating costs, training requirements, and implementation complexity. Setting out a clear strategy for what data is a priority to collect, and then having a coordinated plan as to how to effectively analyze, is very important. Box 2. Geographic Tools for Urban Data Collection and Indicators Geospatial tools are increasingly being used to and patterns; carry out spatial planning as well as transport • Mapping of infrastructure and key public and economic planning. They also help cities assets; understand with much greater precision the • Predictive modeling; interrelationships of urban systems that affect • Multi-hazard probabilistic risk assessment; their sustainable agenda. Examples of geospatial • Land use mapping based on high- tools and capabilities available to cities include: resolution imagery; • Remote sensing analysis of the urban • Future built form mapping through high- ecosystem and ecosystem services; resolution imagery; and • Mapping of urban characteristics • Multicriteria suitability analysis. 4 The tools discussed here are those with the broadest applicability to urban sustainabilityII. 17 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) Box 3. World Bank’s City Planning Labs in Indonesia Indonesia will have 68 percent of its population different government entities control different living in cities by the year 2025 (World Bank data sets (World Bank 2016a). To implement 2016a). The country’s rate of urbanization an integrated planning approach, aligning the is one of the fastest in the world; from 2000 stakeholders and creating a data strategy for to 2010, the extent of Indonesia’s urban area implementation are key. grew by more than 1,100 km2—an increase exceeded only by China (World Bank 2016b). The CPL program initially set up labs in two Anticipating a high rate of urban growth in the Indonesian cities: Denpasar, Bali, and Semarang, future, Indonesia is seeking to better position its Central Java. At the city level, the program aims cities by utilizing evidence-based data analysis to to develop a spatial information strategy for inform spatial planning decisions. each participating city that sets up processes and procedures allowing government stakeholders However, may Indonesian municipalities are to interact, such as through a GIS platform unfamiliar with systematic data collection for collecting and sharing data. It also seeks and sharing, and have limited infrastructure to build the technical skills of staff to manage to process, manage, and host data. To assist the technologies. The program plans to create Indonesia in strengthening its data capacity so a Municipal Spatial Data Infrastructure model it is able to leverage urbanization’s benefits, to help scale up the method and technology the City Planning Labs (CPL) program was to a wide range of Indonesian cities (Singh, established by the World Bank and funded by the Raghupathy, and Volosin 2016). Indonesia Sustainable Urbanization Trust Fund (World Bank 2016b). The initiative provides One sample project initiated by Semarang’s CPL technical assistance, shares different international team conducted data analytics to inform the city’s development experiences, and makes available medium-term plan. The analysis considered factors financing solutions for the implementation of such as the city’s water supply network, health development projects (Singh, Raghupathy, and centers, schools, green spaces, and poverty rates, as Volosin 2016). well as the implications of land area reduction due to subsidence. The results have allowed planners to Indonesia’s government understands what see more clearly how the city’s infrastructure gaps is needed to enact the integrated planning relate to issues such as poverty and the physical approach that the CPL program is facilitating. challenges of land subsidence (World Bank 2016a). “Good city planning will require good statistical Although the analysis was done for Semarang, the and geospatial data which at present are kept method used will offer wider benefits when it is in various government agencies,” says Arifin shared with Indonesia’s many coastal cities. Rudiyanto, who deals with regional development at Indonesia’s National Planning Agency. Doni For Indonesia’s cities experiencing the effects Widiantono, who is the director general of of rapid urban expansion, the scale-up of the planning for the Ministry of Agrarian and Spatial CPL program will enable them to address the Planning, admitted, “We are rich in data but poor challenges that urbanization presents and to take in information”—a reference to the fact that advantage of the opportunities it offers. 18 PART I Stage 1.2. Measuring What Matters: Selecting Indicators for City Priorities The aphorism “You cannot manage what you • Relevant laws, regulations, internal and cannot measure” is particularly true for and external policy drivers, and agreements with relevant to cities. In order to decide where you want strategic significance to the city government to go, you first need to know where you are, and and city stakeholders; selection of the right indicators is an important • Key city values, policies, strategies, step in the process. For instance, sustainability operational management systems, goals, and indicators are important tools for diagnosing urban targets (such as building on existing city problems and pressures, and thus for identifying plans, policies, etc.); areas that require intervention. Since data are • Critical factors for enabling success (such as a fundamental component of evidence-based those relevant to policy makers, investors, planning, the chosen indicators are effectively the financial institutions, etc.); interface between the data at hand and the policies • The core functions of the city government envisioned (ADB 2001). Therefore, indicators are and the manner in which they could an important component of the GPSC program. contribute to advancing the sustainability agenda within the city (such as the city The GPSC’s Measuring Framework (described government’s ability to control or influence a in part II) provides a comprehensive list of key given topic). indicators across six sustainability dimensions. Cities can select those indicators that are most relevant and measurable within the city’s specific Stage 1.3. Understanding Implications: context. They can thus tailor the diagnosis Assessing Trends, Benchmarking, SWOT assessment across the key focus areas and ensure it Analysis, and Scenario Analysis is relevant to different stakeholders.5 It is worthwhile to consider that data and indicators by themselves are not meaningful. Once a city has While each city will determine what is important to collected data and created a database as explained in its own decision making, the following issues are stage 1.1, and has selected indicators as explained in broadly applicable to all:6 stage 1.2, the next consideration is the implication • Reasonably estimated sustainability impacts, of the indicators. To understand the implications, risks, or opportunities identified through the data need to be compared to and analyzed with sound investigation by people with historical data from the same city (the baseline) and recognized expertise, or by expert bodies data from other relevant cities (the benchmarks). By with recognized credentials in the field; measuring indicators of current performance and • Main sustainability interests and topics, comparing with the baseline and benchmarks, city and indicators identified by stakeholders governments are better positioned to understand (such as vulnerable groups within local their current business-as-usual trajectory and to communities, civil society); make evidence-based decisions about interventions • Main topics and future challenges for that will improve that trajectory. cities reported by peer cities and/or partner organizations; 5 It is important to note that indicators may differ for different stakeholders (such as city policy makers, credit raters, investors, and community interests). Cities should tailor assessments to provide the most meaningful outputs to targeted stakeholder groups. 6 The list is adapted from GRI (2013). 19 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) Assessing Trends Baselines establish the year 0 performance of certain development patterns; where patterns the city against its selected indicators. Through are harmful or unsustainable, reversing them ongoing monitoring, cities can begin to identify will require significant regulatory and economic trends and evaluate the impact of policies and change. For example, continuous and accelerated investment decisions over time (see box 4, which consumption of land per added inhabitant indicates includes an explanation of Copenhagen’s long-term not only sprawl patterns but also possible local evaluation). Past trends have a strong predictive government finance issues if the city relies on land effect, as cities often find themselves locked in sales for its financing. Box 4. Trends in Decoupling Economic Growth from Resource Use and Environmental Impacts Decoupling economic growth from resource use the Finger Plan, which has largely concentrated and environmental impacts entail significantly growth along transit-served corridors separated reducing the material and energy needed to by substantial green areas. More than half the produce one unit of gross value added (GVA). metropolitan population lives within 1 km of a GVA is the measure of the value of goods and railway station, and around a quarter within 500 services produced in an area, industry, or sector m. These rates compare favorably to denser cities of an economy and equates to output minus such as London and New York. Mass transit intermediate consumption. Such a figure can ridership and cycling mobility are high, particularly be appreciated only over one or two decades. the latter, where Copenhagen is a global leader. Achieving this decoupling requires combined actions on city form, economic sectoral Copenhagen has been successful in its structure, technologies, and human behavior. pursuit of green growth; the Municipality of Green cities across Europe are demonstrating Copenhagen has halved its carbon emissions that continued economic and population growth since 1993, which now stands at 3.5 metric can occur without a commensurate increase tons of CO2 per capita, moving the city closer in a city’s environmental footprint. Figure 2 to its goal of becoming carbon neutral by shows that over the past 20 years Berlin and 2025. Replacing coal with biomass for heating Copenhagen have achieved rapid decreases and power generation and increasing the use in energy use and per capita CO2 emissions, of wind energy have contributed substantially while London and New York have impressive to reducing emissions. The city’s progress growth in the use of more sustainable modes of has been furthered by the increased use of transport, such as cycling and public transport. nonmotorized transport; the average number of kilometers traveled by residents with Urban form in Copenhagen, for example, has bicycles grew by 43 percent from 1993 until been strongly influenced by its core spatial strategy, approximately 2010 (LSE Cities 2012b). 20 PART I Figure 2. Decoupling in Berlin, Copenhagen, London, and New York Berlin (All variables are indexed: 1993 = 100) Copenhagen (All variables are indexed: 1993 = 100) London (All variables are indexed: 1997 = 100) New York (All variables are indexed: 1993 = 100) Source: LSE Cities 2012a. © LSE Cities. Reproduced with permission from LSE Cities; further permission required for reuse. 21 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) Benchmarking Benchmarking against other cities provides a successful in comparable cities. This knowledge means to rapidly assess performance. It is therefore allows cities to develop plans to improve or particularly well-suited to assessing performance adapt specific best practices, usually with the at the diagnosis stage, when a city may just be aim of increasing some aspect of performance. starting to measure itself using urban sustainability Benchmarking should not be seen as a one-off indicators. The process of benchmarking involves event, but rather an ongoing process through which comparing the performance of one city to best cities continually seek to improve their practices. practice displayed by other cities. Benchmarking helps cities identify good practices used elsewhere Evaluating the performance of their peers can that can be adopted to enhance their own help cities set their own goals since it provides a sustainability.7 real-life reference point for comparison. In using benchmarks to inform their goals, cities should Examples of benchmarking techniques include keep in mind two important considerations: • Expert input through focus groups (e.g., preselected groups of individuals with diverse 1. Regional variations. There are huge technical backgrounds and interest in the variations in how different regions define city’s sustainability program) or panels sustainability. When selecting best-practice (e.g., groups of local, national, or cities to benchmark against, cities should international specialists in urban sustainability always be mindful of the regional context.8 planning and implementation); 2. Level of ambition. Cities should take their • Comparison with cities in the same capacitiy for change into account. Not every region, of the same size, or at the same city can or wants to attain world-leading level of development; or against cities that performance. Realities such as resource the city aspires to emulate; trade-offs (funding, time, staff, etc.), • Comparison with established international potentially competing agendas, and standards (where available), such as air and politically motivated goals have effects on water quality, developed by global or national the level of ambition that is feasible for a entities (e.g., the World Health Organization city. It is also important to remember, or the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency); however, that as a city enhances its • Review of industry guidance documents and performance, new opportunities arise that relevant standards; and may advance additional goals. Success, even • Use of proprietary benchmarking approaches. if limited, opens doors to new opportunities. Best-practice benchmarking helps cities identify An explanation of IDB’s method of coding how goals may be reached and, more importantly, indicator benchmark ranges is included in box 5. what policies and technologies have proved 7 Cities can conduct benchmarking self-assessments or work with third-party entities such as universities, nongovernmental organizations, or private sector consultants. Regardless of who conducts the study, a city must interpret the data to understand if they represent good practice, bad practice, or something in between. 8 For instance, what constitutes a high public transport usage target might not be the same for regions in different continents. In US and Canadian cities, 90 percent of people drive to work, compared to 37 percent in European cities. This is due to the inherent differences in the land use and urban forms of European and American cities. 22 PART I Box 5. Emerging and Sustainable Cities Initiative: Indicators and “Traffic Lights” The Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) the expected parameters; (2) yellow when the Emerging and Sustainable Cities Initiative indicator has deficits; and (3) red when the (ESCI) relies on a useful methodology for indicator is in a critical state. This process, known Phase 1 – Analysis and Diagnosis: Identification of Problems coding indicators. After the indicator form as traffic-lighting, uses a traffic light color for has been completed, the values are assessed each indicator to visually represent how near the in relation to comparative values such as found value is to the expected range for achieving benchmarks. These comparative benchmarks sustainability in the region. or values are grouped into three ranges, which are assigned a color according to the following The indicators for the water topic, with their formula: (1) green when the indicator is within respective benchmarks, are shown in figure 3. Figure Table 4.1 3. ESCI Example Water of indicators and benchmarks in the Water topic Benchmarks Phase 1 – Analysis and Diagnosis Theoretical benchmark Unit of # Topic # Subtopics # Indicator Description measurement Green Yellow Red 1 Water 1 Water 1 Percentage of Percentage of households with Percentage 90– 75–90% < 75% coverage households home connections to the city’s 100% with home water network connections to the city’s water network 2 Efficiency in 2 Annual water Annual consumption of water L/person/ day 120– 80–120 < 80 or the use of consumption per capita of people whose 200 or 200– >250 water per capita homes have a water connection 250 to the city’s network 3 Efficiency 3 Continuity of Annual average of daily number h/day > 20 h/ 12–20 < 12 h/ in the water water service of hours of continuous water day h/day day supply service supply per household 4 Water quality Percentage of water samples in Percentage 97% 90– < 90% a year that comply with national 97% potable water quality standards 5 Non-revenue Percentage of water that is lost Percentage 0–30% 30–45% > 45% water from treated water entering the distribution system and that is accounted for and billed by the water provider. This includes actual water losses (e.g., leaking pipes) and billing losses (e.g., broken water meters, absence of water meters, and illegal connections). 4 Availability 6 Remaining Number of years remaining Years > 10 5–10 <5 of water number of with a positive water balance, resources years of a considering the supply of positive water available water (taking into balance account hydrological cycles) and the demand for water (projected uses, including population, industrial sector, ecological flows, etc.) 4.17 In addition to providing an overall view of the different sectors from a long-term per- spective, the baseline studies generate specific information relevant to the collection 23 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) of data for the indicators. During the prioritization phase, the baseline studies are the most important input for the disaster risk and climate change filter. GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) Methodological Guide Emerging and Sustainable Cities Initiative Each ESCI topic consists of several subtopics and Finally, for the prioritization process carried out indicators. Hence, the final evaluation of the color in the next phase, scores are assigned to each assigned to the topic comes from analyzing the topic: topics labeled green receive a score of final traffic lights for all the indicators included. 1 (low priority), topics labeled yellow receive a The main result of this phase is the classification score of 3 (medium priority), and topics labeled of all the topics with a definitive color, as shown in red receive a score of 5 (high priority). figure 4. Figure 4. ESCI Figure 4.1Traffic Light Topic Traffic-light Classification exercise Phase 1 – Analysis and Diagnosis Diagnosis Environment Urban development Fiscal area and governance Water Urban growth management Participatory planning Energy Poverty Transparency Renewable energy Public transport Audit Air quality Clean, safe and multimodal Modern public management Noise pollution transport Fiscal and administrative GHG Diversified and competitive autonomy Solid waste economic base Maximization of tax base Sewage Employment Fundraising Vulnerability to natural Connectivity Management by results disasters Education Quality of public spending Preparation for natural Citizen security Debt management disasters Health Contingent liabilities Management plans for climate change risk and adaptation 4.18 A fundamental task for the success of the three baseline studies is to define their area of study (geographical scope). Apart from political–jurisdictional divisions, the study area must include, as a minimum, the sum of the current urban footprint plus the area of po- tential urban growth. A “multilevel” delimitation is recommended that covers the set of municipalities that form the existing urban footprint, as well as a level of urban expan- sion that comprises the municipalities that the continuous growth trend will affect. Source: IDB 2014. Graphics © IDB. Reproduced with permission from IDB; further permission required for reuse. 24 4.19 The first study analyzes the GHG emissions in the city. This study is composed of an in- ventory of GHG emissions and options for their mitigation. Although the LAC region has PART I SWOT Analysis A SWOT analysis is a study undertaken by an scales, including a high-level approach (e.g., a high- organization (such as a city government) to identify level desktop-based review with a small core team) its strengths, weaknesses, available opportunities, or a detailed approach (which expands the breadth, and possible threats. The analysis is based on a detail, and robustness of inputs and may include quadrant matrix, in which strengths and weaknesses workshopping the known data collected from cities (internal factors) are presented above the x-axis, and determining the priorities). and opportunities and threats (external factors) are presented below. Typically, strengths and Once the SWOT identification is complete, the opportunities (positive factors) are listed on the city can begin to analyze the results and diagnose left of the y-axis, while weaknesses and threats implications. Some of a city’s strengths—for (negative factors) are listed on the right. A sample example, a robust stakeholder engagement SWOT analysis is shown in figure 5. process that can help guide city action as well as build support for new plans and efforts—can It is important to realize that the four quadrants of immediately support the city’s sustainability agenda. the SWOT analysis are not mutually exclusive; for Others, such as the siloing of city government instance, a weakness can also indicate an area of departments, can obstruct effective action because opportunity. As shown in figure 5, for example, the they prevent topics from being approached in focus area of “unemployment” may be thought of collaborative and holistic ways. as a weakness to the city’s sustainability agenda, but it also presents opportunities, such as “vocational Similarly, there are some weaknesses that limit a training and jobs in tourism, health care, and city from taking advantage of opportunities, like a handicrafts.” poor communications and public relations strategy. Others are more critical. If a city is highly exposed The framework provides a flexible tool that can to climate hazards but is unable to enforce building be applied quickly, making it particularly powerful codes, the situation poses a threat to the lives and for fast, initial diagnosis; it can also be used for livelihoods of its citizens. It could also become a rigorous evaluation and more robust assessment.9 threat to the city’s attractiveness to investors and The analysis can employ different methodological businesses if not dealt with quickly. 9 It is important to realize that a SWOT analysis returns what is put into it; a rapid, cursory assessment will produce results that offer less confidence in guiding significant investment or action than a more detailed, rigorous assessment. 25 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) Preparing a GrEEEn City action Plan 29 figure 3.3: strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (sWOT) Analysis for Hue, Viet nam Figure 5. SWOT Analysis Conducted by the Asian Development Bank for Hue, Vietnam strengths Weaknesses • Geographical location • Economic growth • Slow urbanization • ‘‘Laid-back’’ attitude inhibits (hub function) in province (10%) • Lack of raw natural and thrive for development/ • Diversity (land, water) • Well-developed financial resources innovation • Naturally preserved areas infrastructure (education, • Lack of infrastructure and • Unemployment • Natural scenery water supply, medical) outdated technologies • Complexity of government maintained, low pollution • Tolerance (drainage, waste treatment, system and management • Ecological assets • Political commitment transportation) • Limited number of investors • Strong historical and • International airport • Encroachment into vis-à-vis potential cultural heritage • Transport connectivity heritage site • Water bodies not well • Human capital (also rail) • Low climate resilience maintained, with negative • Education center • Security system • Low capacity in impacts on citizens • International cooperation • Developed industries environmental protection • Lighting and signage and partnerships (tourism, textiles, • Lack of planning and system insufficient • Medical provision construction materials, preservation of open • Dependence on external and facilities [sea]food processing, spaces/natural environment tourist operators • Established brand “Hue” high tech, beverage) • Low community awareness • Connectivity between for environment tourist destinations • Rate of deforestation Opportunities Threats • Support from central • (New) tourism niches • Effects of climate change • Geographical separation government and external (spiritual, etc.) (sea-level rise, etc.) of coastline donors/investors • Health center development • Disaster-prone • Integration leading to • Tourism center • Building on the brand geographical features intensified (inter-)national (and development • Heritage preservation • High construction/ competition in other locations) strategy development • Growth of (facilities in) • Vocational training and jobs • Degradation of heritage Da Nang in tourism, health care, sites and shortening • Balance between economic and handicrafts of tourist season due growth and heritage to climate change preservation Source: SWOT ADB 2013. = strengths, © ADB. weaknesses, License: opportunities, CC BY 3.0 IGO, and threats. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/igo/. Source: ADB. 2013. Technical Assistance for Green Cities – A Sustainable Urban Future in Southeast Asia (TA 8314-REG). GCAP Visioning and SWOT Analysis Workshop, 22 November, Hue, Viet Nam. Barriers to such participation arising from formal arrangements or traditional practices may need to be overcome or navigated to reach equal participation of women, and to involve vulnerable and disadvantaged groups, in particular people living in poverty and other low-income groups or their representatives, as well as ethnic minorities and indigenous peoples. To reach consensus, each stakeholder must have the opportunity and needs to be encouraged to individually express themselves and participate fully in the discussion. Different viewpoints and aspirations need to be explored until every issue is placed on the table and an acceptable solution can be reached. There is always a risk that the vision will be only that of key government staff solely due to their position and influence. 26 PART I Scenario Analysis Scenario analysis is a process of ascertaining and drivers. More specifically, the analysis explores analyzing possible future events by considering the implications of the drivers’ increasing or possible outcomes under certain conditions decreasing influence on the key indicators. (sometimes called “alternative worlds”). Scenario analysis often incorporates robust When cities set challenging goals concerning trends, modeling to project possible future outcomes they may need to bundle a comprehensive set of in order to inform decisions today. The analysis policies in an integrated manner. Scenario analysis can serve as a powerful tool for identifying may be very useful in understanding how to modify potential future trajectories. 10 Box 6 offers established unsustainable trends. details on scenario analysis in general. Box 7 describes a scenario analysis carried out in Scenario analysis is frequently used to explore Mexico City to understand the impacts of one central question structured around key growth to 2050. Box 6. Urban Growth Scenario Analysis for Planning Comparing various long-term growth scenarios cover patterns (including urban footprint) under a can provide city planners with a powerful business-as-usual scenario—that is, if current and approach to identifying and enacting a pathway recent patterns and dynamics continue unchanged. to sustainability. An intelligent growth scenario represents future development patterns assuming a policy and Too often, growth occurs in a city without a investment emphasis favoring more efficient use comprehensive understanding of the associated of existing resources and installed infrastructure. challenges, opportunities, and impacts this growth creates. Infrastructure investments, Both scenarios often identify similar elements, housing policies, land use patterns, and and include the following: environmental issues are frequently treated • The network of natural areas to be independently and in a reactive manner, even protected and preserved by the city though they are interdependent and interact in (sometimes referred to as “green complex ways with many other social, economic, infrastructure”); and environmental factors. Growth scenario • Areas that ought to be the focus of modeling and analysis can help cities understand renewed efforts of development, such the comprehensive impacts of different growth as areas already served by infrastructure and policy scenarios across a range of key and public facilities and having the capacity indicators, such as land consumption, air quality, to serve more people, thus avoiding infrastructure costs, mobility, health, equity, the high capital and environmental costs energy consumption, carbon emissions, and of unnecessary infrastructure expansion quality of life. (for example, empty or underutilized lands that could support development with Two types of scenario are particularly useful for minimal infrastructure costs); and implementing sustainability frameworks: a trend • Areas where existing development may be scenario and an intelligent growth scenario. A at risk due to climate change and other trend scenario represents potential future land natural or human-made hazards. 10 See Wilkinson and Kupers (2013). 27 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) Box 7. Mexico City Urban Growth Scenario • RapidFire was developed by Mexico City has experienced significant Calthorpe Analytics to frame long- economic growth in recent decades, with a term metropolitan growth. growing middle class fueling a diversified • It is a spreadsheet-based tool that knowledge-based economy. However, the uses a broad range of projections, city faces significant environmental, social, from demographic, to travel, to fuel fiscal, and governance challenges as it seeks to and energy emission factors. grow and prosper in the coming decades. To • Output metrics are calculated that better understand these challenges, Calthorpe demonstrate the relative effects of Analytics has partnered with the Mexican different land use scenarios and policy nongovernmental organization Centro Mario options. Inputs can be customized Molina to adapt its RapidFire model to the city. and estimate economic, environmental, and social Scenarios have been developed to test the consequences. impacts of growth until 2050. The “trend” scenario depicted growth based on land development and investment trends of past decades; two alternative scenarios—a cubic feet by 2050. In addition, the vision “moderate” scenario and a “vision” scenario— scenario provides for a 13 percent reduction explored the impacts of aligning housing in the use of private automobiles in terms of and employment growth with the expansion distance driven and a 23 percent reduction in of public transit infrastructure and better average commute time. Household costs for coordination of jobs and services with housing transportation and basic services are reduced sites across the region. The scenarios also tested by 10 percent, and GHG emissions are the impacts of adopting more automotive- reduced by more than 9 percent per year. oriented urban models as opposed to more walkable urban designs and street patterns. These models provide a useful tool for The results are shown in figure 6. strategic planning of the city and for promoting dialogue among national and local As the figure shows, outcomes across the governments, the private sector, and civil scenarios vary substantially. The compact society. “vision” scenario reduces new land use by 80 percent, annual energy costs by $90 million, Source: This box draws on Centro Mario and annual water consumption by 11.8 million Molina and Calthorpe Analytics (2015). 28 PART I Figure 6. Scenario Results LAND INFRASTRUCTURE ENERGY WATER TRAVELED KM TRAVEL TIME COSTS PER CO2 GHG CONSUMPTION COSTS USE USE HOUSEHOLD EMISSIONS Additional periurban land Road, public lighting, water Electricity and gas for Indoor and outdoor usage for Private vehicle kilometers Private vehicle and Associated with fuel, auto, Transport, buildings and sewer network residential and commercial residential and commercial traveled public transport energy and water and energy associated with construction, O&M buildings buildings person hours traveled consumption water management (cumulative 2050) (cumulative 2050) (cumulative 2050) (cumulative 2050) (annualized) (annualized) (annualized) (annualized) 640 km2 $ 511,100 million pesos 4,160 Quad. Btu 52,450 mill. m 3 42,000 mill. 2 hours average daily trip $ 108,500 million pesos 26 mill. Ton CO2 vehicle km traveled in household expenditure per year (similar in size to Puebla) TREND 255 km2 $ 175,700 million pesos 4,140 Quad. Btu 52,200 mill. m 3 38,600 mill. 1 hour 3/4 $ 101,900 million pesos 24 mill. Ton CO2 MODERATE (similar in size vehicle km traveled average daily trip in household expenditure per year to Toluca) - 65% reduction in periurban land consumption -$ 335,300 million pesos -$ 867 million pesos per year -$ 53 million pesos per year -8% reduction in vehicle km traveled per year - 15 % reduction in daily person hours traveled -6% reduction in household expenditure per year -6% emissions 20 km additional BRT per year 140 km2 $ 107,800 million pesos 4,120 Quad. Btu 45,900 mill. m 3 36,700 mill. 1 1/2 hours $ 98,000 million pesos 23 mill. Ton CO 2 (similar in size vehicle km traveled average daily trip in household expenditure per year to Queretaro) VISION - 78% reduction in periurban land consumption -$ 403,200 million pesos -$ 1,799 million pesos per year -$ 88 million pesos per year - 13 % reduction in vehicle km traveled per year - 23 % reduction in daily person hours traveled -9.5% reduction in household expenditure per year -9% emissions 40 km additional BRT per year Source: Centro Mario Molina and Calthorpe Analytics 2015. © Centro Mario Molina 2014. Reproduced with permission from Centro Mario Molina; further permission required for reuse. 29 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) Stage 2: Defining a Vision and Identifying Priorities Once city decision makers understand how their city In setting out guidance to help cities define a vision performs, they have completed the first step to effectively and identify priorities, stage 2 is a crucial step in guide their city’s future. The analytical capacities and intervening in the city’s business-as-usual trajectory. tools identified in the previous section help produce the It enables the city to aspire to, and achieve, a information a city needs for the second stage of the USF different, improved future. approach—defining a vision and identifying priorities. These indicators may also be useful for monitoring and Stage 2.1. Developing a Vision evaluating progress over time. Sustainable cities have a clear vision of what they want to become and follow that vision with a plan. Defining a vision and setting priorities for urban They develop interventions and strategies in a sustainability can help a city do the following: systematic and coherent manner. For many cities, • Build a shared vision of the desired future “visioning” is a way of laying out a long-term future. and foster a collective sense of purpose, an inclusive identity, and a unified agenda; Cities may wish to refer to the six dimensions of • Support decision making and empower urban sustainability included in part II to help focus people by providing a clear focus for their vision. effort, and drive appropriate, efficient, and effective use of resources; Vision statements are concise records of the • Avoid distraction or deviation from goals city’s aspirations for its future. While vision by defining what is, and is not, prioritized statements are unique to each city, most within the scope of the city’s objectives; and statements share certain common characteristics. • Communicate what matters to the city to build understanding, support, and commitment across diverse stakeholder groups. 30 PART I As outlined in Ambler (2013), vision statements o Global relates to economic orientation, should be: knowledge exchange, and open-minded • Future-focused, to make clear the city’s outlook and attitude; and direction and provide a specific picture of o Connected means physically connected— what the city will look like in the future (e.g., through walking, cycling, and high-quality 5, 10, or 20 years from now); and relevant public transport—but also “virtually” to and grounded in the city’s current reality connected by world-class and context; telecommunications, socially connected • Challenging and inspiring, to uplift, by communities’ sense of belonging and engage, and invite people to commit to a social well-being, and connected to other cause that stretches to a high standard spheres of government and to those with (setting a vision for what is beyond possible an interest in the city. today but is aspired to for the future); • Directional and clear, to enable effective • Malaysia’s Urban-Rural National Indicators guidance for decision making and Network for Sustainable Development independent action; specific enough to be (MURNInets) is a program developed by actionable, but flexible enough to allow for a the Federal Department of Town and variety of successful implementation Country Planning, Peninsular Malaysia, to approaches; assess Malaysian cities’ performance and level • Purpose-driven, to provide a larger sense of of sustainability. Further information is purpose, as well as values-based and found in annex C. connected to the city’s core values and ideals; • By creating the Melaka State Structure Plan • Understood and shared by members of 2035, this state in Malaysia aims to develop a the community, and broad enough to thriving, green, inclusive, and resilient state include diverse local perspectives; and with a unique identity. It provides a planning • Easy to communicate. framework that aims at driving and controlling physical development at state For example: level, as articulated in Section 8 of the Malaysian Town and Country Planning • Through Vision 2030, the City of Stockholm Act 1976 (Act 172). It is structured along six has clarified its long-term ambition and dimensions: aspiration to become a world-class city by o Promoting economic growth; 2030, one that is versatile and offers a range o Assisting sustainable development; of experiences, that promotes innovation and o Physically reconstructing the living growth, and that is safe, accessible, and environment; inclusive for all citizens. o Improving relationships; • Sustainable Sydney 2030 expresses the o Managing traffic; and community’s vision for and the city’s o Developing socioeconomic welfare. commitment to a green, global, connected city: o Green implies a modest environmental impact, as well as trees, parks, gardens, and linked open spaces; 31 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) Stage 2.2. Identifying Priorities Building on the findings from stage 1’s diagnosis • Do city government priorities align with local and analyses, city decision makers can identify community and stakeholder priorities? where to focus their efforts. The city’s strengths • Are priorities pragmatic and can they be and weaknesses, its current and projected future feasibly implemented, monitored, and performance, and the vision for the city’s future evaluated? should all be considered. Once the city has completed this prioritization, it may More specifically, this analysis will help city decision wish to develop short-, medium-, and long-term goals makers identify what interventions to prioritize and objectives specific to the priority focus areas. in order to and current-day performance for their long-term vision for the city. Stage 2.3. Developing an Intervention Plan The following are key questions for city Once a city has established a vision for its future government decision makers to consider when and identified the priority focus areas that will identifying priority areas for action: drive efforts to achieve this vision, it can begin to • Which focus areas capture the city’s current develop a plan to make this vision a reality. policy priorities, based on existing plans and programs? Each city has its own needs for an intervention • What are the city’s main weaknesses and plan, depending on factors such as the city’s challenges, as identified by the stage 1 vision, priorities, capacities, and position along diagnosis analyses and stakeholder the spectrum of urban sustainability. Common consultations? Does the city government characteristics of effective, successful intervention want to prioritize all identified areas of plans include the following: weakness, or only some of them? • Clear commitment to the plan by the city’s • What are the city’s main strengths and/or leadership; opportunities identified by the stage 1 • A clear vision with associated priorities, diagnosis analyses and stakeholder goals/objectives, and interventions to achieve consultations? Does the city government this vision; want to build further on these strengths? • Discrete targets that clearly link to the city’s • What are the main relationships between key interventions and goals/objectives, with time focus areas within the city, and how can the horizons for reaching these targets; city use these relationships to best effect? Are • Clearly defined roles and responsibilities for there opportunities to promote positive co- implementing interventions; benefits and/or minimize trade-offs? • Adequate resources to complete interventions; • What city plans and processes are under • Identification of actors in addition to city way or planned in the near future that can be leaders, for example stakeholders or other leveraged to accommodate, or benefit from, partners. further interventions? • Identification of the plan’s intended • What scale of ambition or degree of outcomes and impact; change does the city government strive • A methodology to measure and monitor the for—incremental change, a more substantial impact of interventions; shift, or transformational change—and over • Mechanisms to adapt or modify interventions what time period? as required to meet the city’s targets; and 32 PART I • A process to review and update the city’s plan must also consider the feasibility of implementing to ensure that it remains fit for purpose. a change, in terms of political will, technical feasibility, cost, time line, scale, etc. Cities should also consider their capacity to take action and whether collaborating with other actors Opportunities and interventions may comprise to undertake interventions may be necessary or changes to a physical (or hard) asset, such as a desirable. C40 Cities and Arup (2015), along with new development, technological solution, or University College London, describe the following other built structure. They can also comprise a typologies of governance adopted by cities, soft intervention, such as a process or policy that recognizing that cities may employ more than one builds knowledge or empowers skills and leadership model of governance depending on their levels of (e.g., training, capacity building, behavior change, power across different city assets or functions: improved coordination between departments). • Commanding cities typically use regulation and enforcement to deliver action. The role To identify who has direct control or influence over of private and other actors is often small; an intervention, it is helpful to ask the following • Implementing cities commonly take action questions (C40 Cities and Arup 2015): through the delivery of projects and • Who owns or manages the opportunity and/ programs, often without the input of private or intervention? sector and other actors; • Who sets policies and enforces regulation • Providing cities are characterized by a high relevant to the opportunity and/or intervention? level of control over service delivery, and are • Who controls budgets and/or financing able to take action through this influence; available for the opportunity and/or intervention? • Legislating cities achieve progress on • Who sets the vision for the opportunity and/ interventions by setting policy and legislation or intervention? that requires others to act; • Collaborating cities usually act in Opportunities and interventions should promote a partnership with other actors to leverage their holistic, interconnected approach to city functions respective powers; and and consider the city as a system of systems, and • Facilitating cities have limited power to they should aim to bridge silos through an inclusive take action directly, and instead focus on process that acknowledges codependencies and creating an attractive environment for others interdependencies. This integrated approach can to act. help new ideas emerge and bring together new opportunities for cross-sectoral innovation. It When identifying and developing opportunities can maximize synergies, foster efficient use of and interventions to pursue, cities should consider resources, and build longevity by ensuring that how closely the effort aligns with the priority areas stakeholders and co-owners are engaged and and the degree to which the effort will move the invested the effort. An example of this approach, city toward their goals and vision (e.g., what are the New York City’s OneNYC plan, is given in box 8; outcomes that this intervention will deliver?). Cities more provided in annex D. 33 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) Box 8. OneNYC Plan New York’s OneNYC plan was developed with in the fight against climate change. cross-sectoral interagency collaboration, public • Vision 4. A resilient city. Ensure engagement, and consultation with renowned neighborhoods, the economy, and public experts in their respective fields. OneNYC’s services are prepared to withstand and emerge initiatives are ambitious but realistic and will prepare stronger from the impacts of climate change New York City for the challenges it faces today and and other threats of the 21st century. in the years to come. The plan includes four visions: Importantly, these visions are divided into • Vision 1. A growing, thriving city. a total of 27 goals and targets and a series Continue to be the most dynamic urban of key indicators that will be reported on an economy in the world, where families, annual basis. In total, there are approximately businesses, and neighborhoods thrive. 55 quantitative indicators designed to help the • Vision 2. A fair and equitable city. city monitor and evaluate the effectiveness Develop an inclusive and equitable economy of its programs, policies, and initiatives. In that provides well-paying jobs and addition, specific initiatives are defined for each opportunities for all New Yorkers to live in corresponding target, with clear information on dignity and security. funding status and sources. • Vision 3. A sustainable city. Be the most sustainable city in the world and a world leader Source: City of New York 2017. Stage 3: Financing the Plan 34 PART I Having identified priorities for investments, city To finance investments in infrastructure, city leaders then confront the problem of financing leaders have three main tasks: those investments. How do city leaders bridge the gap between readily available resources and 1. Value and develop the city’s fiscal investment needs? What sources should they tap? sustainability. Fiscal sustainability can A city’s sustainability vision and intervention plan be achieved by securing cash flows through will not materialize unless financing supports user fees and taxes—and, where necessary, them. A best-practice principle is to develop a by raising revenue by leveraging assets. It is city’s intervention plan as a business plan that also possible to tap capital markets, either by can be implemented on the ground. Thus the issuing bonds or by borrowing from USF places stage 3 (financing) parallel to stage specialized financial institutions and 2 (defining a vision and identifying priorities). intermediaries. Experience shows that cities This arrangement highlights the need to secure can increase their fiscal sustainability and sufficient financial resources to successfully that subnational debt financing can work, implement the vision and the intervention plan. assuming that clear regulations are in place Cities may have to revise priorities when taking to (1) guide the issuance of debt; (2) manage into account financial constraints, and may have risks from borrowing; and (3) clearly set to select actions with the highest return on forth the conditions under which subnational investments that broadly enhance sustainability governments can issue debt (including the dimensions. purpose, type, and amount of debt that can be issued). Smaller cities may need to In general, financing sustainability interventions pool their credit requirements or enhance faces three interrelated challenges: (1) cities their credit quality to attract lenders. Thus, do not have the capital they need to invest in governments of smaller cities can use bond projects; (2) there are insufficient recurrent banks, loan pools, and guarantees to reduce revenues for city governments and urban service lenders’ risks. providers; and (3) cities and urban service providers lack access to market-based financing 2. Coordinate public and private finance for urban infrastructure. using clear and consistent rules. There are at least two situations in which private To address these challenges, city governments and financing may be a city’s preferred course: their urban service providers need to take actions when the government sees public-private that promote their long-term financial sustainability. partnerships (PPPs) as a way to improve This section provides an overview of the options efficiency in service provision, and when a and processes for financing a city’s action plan. The service can be provided on a profit-making goal is to help cities basis by a private entity. With enough • Understand and assess their current fiscal assurance that commitments are firm, sustainability status so that they can build on PPPs can shift the fiscal burden of areas of strength and address areas of infrastructure improvement projects off the weakness; and public budget (though it is important to • Better structure urban infrastructure account for any contingent liabilities financing so that funds for the infrastructure that local government may face as a result). needed to improve sustainability are accessible. Nevertheless, PPPs are no magic bullet: they 35 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) require commitments to sustainable cost- Stage 3.1. Assessing Financial Sustainability: covering tariffs or equivalent tax revenues. Valuing Creditworthiness They cannot stand in for good financial It is beneficial for cities to be able to assess their management or good project evaluation. own financial capability and demonstrate their To successfully implement PPPs, the GPSC degree of creditworthiness. Creditworthiness refers encourages cities to use the enabling to the capacity of a city government to meet its dimensions of the USF to assess their public financial obligations, including repayment of its sector capacity, their legal framework, debts. This is also the basic definition of fiscal the level of integration of their planning, sustainability. Creditworthiness is an aspirational the prioritization of their investments, and their degree of risk. Cities are encouraged to goal, like other kinds of sustainability goals. What ensure transparent and competitive is important is for a city government to strive to procurement, build strong monitoring improve its financial performance, so that it can systems, and allow flexibility for adapting to ultimately demonstrate its creditworthiness (see box unpredictable events. 9 for some examples of cities’ effort to improve creditworthiness). Useful tools for measuring fiscal 3. Leverage existing assets to develop sustainability, including national scale credit ratings new ones, linking both to land use (or shadow credit ratings), are described in detail in planning. Leveraging assets can involve annex E. land and property taxes, land sales and leases, charges for impact and for development Continuing improvement of financial performance (developer extractions), betterment levies helps the city government gain access to (land value capture taxes), and tax increment subnational credit markets and so finance its financing. Of special interest is land value sustainability intervention plan. Too often, even capture that monetizes increases in land value where subnational credit markets exist, it is hard to resulting from infrastructure improvements. find useful and reliable information on the finances Land value capture can be based on of city governments in developing countries—one integrated planning of transit provision and reason being a lack of transparency in municipal land use, which is part of an enabling government operations. Cities in developed dimension—governance and integrated countries make information on their finances urban planning—of the USF. This enabling available in the form of public financial statements dimension is essential for making land and credit ratings. Credit ratings are a standardized value capture instruments work. The applicable government institutions should measure of creditworthiness, and come in various clearly define property rights, objectively forms: public or private/shadow; national or value land using standard methods, and international scale; institutional or transactional. support and oversee land management, land Once a city receives a credit rating, it is better sales, and tax collection. positioned to access subnational credit markets to finance its intervention plans. 36 PART I Box 9. Valuing Creditworthiness in Cities in Columbia, India, Peru, and Kenya Colombia. Colombia has promoted fiscal Peru. In 2010, the Municipality of Lima transparency by publishing traffic-light-style obtained a loan to finance urban infrastructure. ratings of local payment capacity, with red, green, In an initial step, with the aid of donor- and yellow signals reflecting a combination supported technical assistance, the city had of liquidity and solvency indicators. In ratings applied for a credit rating from an international of municipalities’ subnational debt, a red light rating agency. The credit rating helped to identifies a municipality whose ratio of interest to facilitate a $70 million commercial bank operational savings exceeds 40 percent and whose loan from BBVA Banco Continental to the ratio of debt stock to current revenues exceeds 80 municipality. This loan took Lima a considerable percent. Red-light municipalities cannot borrow. way toward securing long-term financing—its Green-light municipalities can. Yellow-light maturity was double that of the city’s previous municipalities can borrow only after obtaining the debts, making debt service payments more approval of the central government. affordable and freeing municipal revenues to cover critical operating expenses. The loan was India. In 1995, the Ahmedabad Municipal partially backed by a $32 million guarantee from Corporation took the groundbreaking step of the International Finance Corporation that requesting a credit rating from one of India’s enhanced the city’s credit quality. leading credit rating agencies for a domestic municipal bond. Ahmedabad’s first credit Kenya. In Kenya, the Water and Sanitation rating was A+, indicating adequate security Program, together with the Water Services for investors. After re-examining the financial Regulatory Board, recently completed an structure of its project with attention to credit effort to establish utility shadow credit ratings enhancement, Ahmedabad returned to the rating for 43 urban water supply providers. In the agency the following year and received a rating process, they found that 13 would likely be of AA, indicating a higher degree of security for rated A or BBB creditworthy and 16 would its structured bond. When Ahmedabad issued likely be rated BB; these high credit ratings 1 billion Indian rupees ($25 million) worth of may open the door to private commercial domestic bonds without a state or national finance on the local bond market for these government guarantee in January of 1998, the local water suppliers. public portion of the issue was oversubscribed by more than 15 percent. Source: Adapted from World Bank 2013. 37 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) Stage 3.2. Prioritizing Investment and Structuring Financing Identifying and Prioritizing Investment: The CIP is the basis for the annual capital budget, Capital Investment Plans which is developed using project-level data on capital City governments must fulfill essential prerequisites in investment costs as well as operating revenue and order to access the market-based long-term financing expenditures over a 10-year to 15-year time horizon. needed to implement their sustainability intervention Formal approval of the CIP by the city government plans. To access long-term financing for urban makes the city’s investment plans transparent to the infrastructure, a city needs (1) a capital investment plan financial community. (CIP); and (2) a plan for structuring the financing for infrastructure projects in the CIP. A CIP preparation process can be specifically designed to select projects that meet the investment priorities A city’s CIP translates the 10-year to 30-year of the sustainability intervention plan. Information on investment priorities of the sustainability climate-smart CIPs can be found in box 10. intervention plan into a defined set of well-prepared projects that, if implemented, will help the city A city is faced every budget cycle with competing, and achieve its sustainability targets and goals.11 A city sometimes even conflicting, proposals for allocating can use its CIP to: scarce financial resources. The GHG emissions from • Implement sustainability intervention plans; just one power plant can set back a city’s plan to meet • Extend the service life of infrastructure assets; and carbon reduction targets for decades. A city only • Maintain creditworthiness. achieves resilience when all capital investments prove Box 10. Importance of Climate-Smart Capital Investment Planning Cities face a gap between infrastructure needs Climate-smart capital investment planning can have and available finance (World Bank 2010; World direct fiscal benefits through the selection of cost- Economic Forum 2014). The creation of well- effective projects more likely to withstand hazards. designed CIPs can increase creditworthiness, Just as meaningful, however, are the indirect and thereby expand the capacity of cities to fill benefits of this major step toward creditworthiness, the infrastructure investment gap (Marlowe, such as using fiscally prudent techniques for Rivenbark, and Vogt 2009). Capital investments selecting investments, and creating a pipeline of are climate-smart and resilient when they serve low-carbon, resilient projects for financing. the social, economic, and environmental purposes for which they were intended, while also reducing Source: Adapted from Whittington 2016. Original GHG emissions, helping communities adapt text © Jan Whittington 2016. Adapted and to climate change, and promoting resilience to reproduced with permission from Jan Whittington; any number of disturbances a city could face. further permission required for reuse. 11 The discussion here is adapted from Whittington (2016). 38 PART I robust to the catastrophic threats it faces. A climate- To attract the financing needed to implement its smart CIP guides cities away from the problematic sustainability intervention plan, a city must move pattern of choosing projects that are less expensive in beyond a general wish list of investment priorities. the short-term but pose hazards to life and livelihoods Each investment must be carefully defined and or entail unnecessarily high operating costs in the long prepared. There are two types of investments that term. Sustainable cities break out of this pattern with a city can make to improve sustainability: capacity- urban plans that help them invest in cleaner, more building investments (soft infrastructure), and affordable, and more safely located public facilities investments in physical assets (hard infrastructure) (e.g., water systems, transport systems, and hospitals). (IDB 2014, 105). By designing facilities to be climate-smart and resilient, cities can achieve these fundamental goals while Capacity-building investments enable a city government improving the local economy, the long-term value and its urban service providers to improve their of their assets, and the health and well-being of their management. The investments may entail improvement citizens. of urban planning, disaster response, and/or financial management with a focus on increasing sustainable Adopting a sustainability-focused process for capital performance of these functions. investment planning integrates the goals for growth Investments in physical assets reduce any foreseeable and resilience that are identified in urban or regional risks to the city’s sustainability. Such investments may spatial plans with decisions made each year about which include hard infrastructure for upgrading informal capital investments to make. A city with citywide or low-income neighborhoods, improving transportation, regional plans that identify areas of human settlement delivering water and sanitation services, expanding at risk from hazards as well as areas that are rich in energy distribution, or making solid waste collection environmental assets—that is, areas that perform and disposal more environmentally sound. Hard valuable ecosystem services, provide sources of revenue infrastructure investments need to be carefully from tourism, or are targeted for preservation for their structured financially, institutionally, and legally in order unique qualities—can use the climate-smart CIP to to mobilize the necessary long-term capital financing select the investments that reduce the vulnerability of needed for project implementation. both human and environmental assets. For them, the process can provide assurance that investment decisions Both types of investments are likely to be among a made on a regular basis are in alignment with their city’s investment priorities and require capital resources. comprehensive plans. But before they are implemented, cities must carry out pre-investment studies. These are an indispensable To use its CIP to reduce GHG emissions and select requirement for accessing long-term financing; their resilient investments, a city should perform analyses evaluation of the project’s characteristics—technical, on a project-by-project basis in a sustainability-focused financial, fiscal, legal, institutional, operational, process of decision making. This approach can have environmental, and social—helps determine whether direct fiscal benefits through the selection of projects executing the project is feasible. Such studies also that are more cost-effective to operate and maintain and help reduce the risks of the project and foresee more likely to withstand hazards. obstacles that could occur during the implementation. Specifically, for the provision of public services, such exercises help to determine the methods and means of cost recovery (charges and subsidies).12 12 There is now a growing effort to assess the sustainability of physical infrastructure using rating systems. This could be an important part of a pre-investment analysis that supports development of a climate-smart CIP (IDB 2014, 105). 39 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) Funding for hard infrastructure pre-investment studies Regardless of the financing mechanism chosen, and project structuring advisory services is most likely the financial community’s perception of the city’s to come from public sources such as higher levels of risk of default will probably need to be reduced government, local development institutions, and/or in order to induce market-based financing of external donors. However, the long-term financing for urban infrastructure. Credit enhancements are infrastructure must come from public, private, and mixed tools designed to reduce the financial default (PPP) resources through a variety of mechanisms; public risk associated with a specific infrastructure resources alone are too scarce and are needed to leverage financing operation such as a bond, loan, or market-based capital in order to achieve the scale of PPP. The application of credit enhancements investment that cities require (IDB 2014, table 7.1). to a bond, loan, or PPP is an essential part of the structuring of the financing agreement. The Structuring and Accessing Financing reason for incorporating credit enhancements A city’s plan for financing identifies the expected into a financing transaction is to give the sources of financing for each of the projects in its CIP. financial community greater confidence that In many cases, the plan for financing is an integral part it will be fully repaid on an agreed schedule. of a city’s CIP, but if not, it is important to formally In turn, the financial community’s greater identify the expected sources of long-term financing confidence should result in a lower interest rate, for approved investments planned for the next three to a longer repayment term, or both (assuming five years in the CIP and in the current annual capital financial markets are competitive). In countries budget. The variety of long-term financing options where the financial community lacks experience available to a city will vary, but (leaving aside capital in financing urban infrastructure, credit grants from higher levels of government or other enhancements have proven to be essential to donors) the most common sources generally include mobilizing market-based financing. For example, long-term debt (bonds or loans), PPP mechanisms, credit enhancements were key to the successful and land value capture mechanisms. These financing financing of water infrastructure for 13 small options are discussed in detail as part of stage 3.3. cities in India (box 11). Box 11. Structuring and Credit Enhancements: The Tamil Nadu Water and Sanitation Pooled Fund in India In 1996, the Tamil Nadu Urban Development flows to development projects. By 2004, the Fund (TNUDF) was set up as a public-private majority of the portfolio consisted of sewerage partnership, with the aim of providing sustainable and water supply projects. financing for infrastructure investment. The government of Tamil Nadu owns 72 percent The TNUDF approach tended to be used for of the capital, and 28 percent is held by three municipalities with large and predictable revenue Indian private financial institutions that have a streams. However, a majority of the urban local majority stake in the asset management company bodies (ULBs) in Tamil Nadu with large neglected that manages the fund, the Tamil Nadu Urban infrastructure needs are small and medium-size Infrastructure Financial Services Limited municipalities. Bond issuance fees and credit rating (TNUIFSL). This arrangement gave credibility to charges involved in accessing capital markets often the fund and enabled it to attract private capital generate transaction costs that are too high for 40 PART I the smaller ULBs. In order to ensure the inclusion nontax receipts, and state devolutions. In of weaker ULBs and relatively small but essential order to avoid maturity mismatches in projects, in 2002 the government of Tamil Nadu revenue and repayment profiles, each ULB and TNUDF instituted a special purpose vehicle had to transfer a tenth of its annual debt called the Water and Sanitation Pooled Fund service to a separate fixed deposit account, (WSPF). This fully owned government trust was with precedence over other commitments. set up to finance essential services like water The cumulative deposits were then and sanitation for small and medium-size towns transferred to the WSPF account to service by raising resources on a pooled basis through bondholders. a market-driven approach. TNUIFSL was also • A debt service reserve fund, named the entrusted with managing this fund. Bond Service Reserve Fund, was set up by the government of Tamil Nadu with liquid investments of 69 million rupees Pooling the water and sanitation requirements of ($1.42 million), equal to one full year of 13 municipalities and towns, WSPF mobilized debt service. The reserve fund is sufficient capital market finance through an unsecured to ensure that the fund can continue to pay structured debt obligation for 304.1 million Indian its creditors (that is, the purchasers of its rupees ($6.2 million) in December 2002. The bond bonds or its lenders) even when one or had an annual coupon payment of 9.2 percent and more of the fund’s municipal borrowers fail a tenor of 15 years, with a put and call option at to make repayments to the fund for interest the end of a 10-year period. Several key structural on, or principal of, their loans. This elements helped reduce financing costs: additional security for the fund’s investors • Pooling a number of projects reduced the makes it possible for the fund to issue its transaction and rating costs for the bond bonds on capital markets, or to borrow issue and made it more attractive to investors; from institutional lenders, at rates and on • The bond’s repayment was supported by a terms that in turn allow it to make loans to portfolio of loans on-lent to the municipalities; municipal borrowers at attractive interest • The bond was issued in Indian rupees, rates and other terms. preventing foreign currency risk; and • A partial credit guarantee was issued by • The credit rating of the project pool was the U.S. Agency for International improved by structuring the debt to provide Development (USAID) for 50 percent of a series of credit enhancements, which the principal amount; the balance was allowed the creation of an investment- covered by the government of Tamil Nadu grade product (AA rating from two agencies) in the form of a government order and reduced significantly the debt’s coupon. stipulating that it would replenish the shortfall to the Bond Service Reserve Fund, To strengthen the market’s confidence in the bond, deducting its respective share of State three different levels of credit enhancements were Finance Commission funds accruing to the used: municipalities involved. • The first level was a no-lien escrow account set up by the 13 ULBs on all their revenues, Source: OECD 2010. including property and other tax collections, 41 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) Most credit enhancements carry some cost. It is A wide range of institutional structures (from totally important for the city to weigh the financial gains public ownership and operation, to private management produced by a credit enhancement against the cost contracts, to concessions, to totally private ownership of using the enhancement.13 More than one credit and provision) has been identified by the Inter- enhancement can be used if cost-effective, and American Development Bank (IDB 2014, table 7.2). enhancements can be layered one onto another in ways that increase the financial community’s confidence that Deciding on the appropriate structure is an important it will be paid according to agreement. policy decision to be taken by a city government. Before Finally, financial structuring has to adopt the modality deciding on a structure for the project, it is important best suited to the financial characteristics of the to get detailed analyses and recommendations from a project and the financing mechanism, and should qualified independent public finance advisory firm that use applicable tools to mitigate possible risks, such as has experience enabling public clients to mobilize long- political risk or risks created by the legal framework, term local currency financing for infrastructure. fiscal context, macroeconomic variables, and institutional capacity. In the end, the financial structure Once an urban infrastructure project’s institutional must be adapted to the project’s needs and to the local structure is decided, the next step is to access the conditions facing the city seeking financing.14 needed financing. This entails using an appropriate combination of the three broad types of financing Stage 3.3. Instruments for Structuring Urban that have proven successful for developing urban Infrastructure Projects infrastructure: Financial structuring is one of the critical elements 1. Long-term local currency public debt financing; that allow a city and urban service providers to access 2. PPP in local currency; and funds for the infrastructure needed to improve 3. Land value capture financing linked to one of sustainability (IDB 2014). In many countries, it is the other two. currently not enough for cities to demonstrate that they are objectively creditworthy. The financial community’s Long-Term Debt Financing perceptions of risk may diverge from that of a credit In many respects, long-term debt financing is the least rating agency for a variety of legitimate or mistaken complex form of financing a city can use to develop reasons. It is therefore necessary to structure urban urban infrastructure. Since cities do not normally have infrastructure financing in a way that reduces default foreign/hard currency revenue flows, they should risk and enables access to long-term financing at a cost avoid taking any foreign exchange risk and always that is feasible for the city or urban service provider. borrow in local currency (Painter and Gallo 2012). If the institutional structure of the project calls for the capital investment to be a public responsibility, Structuring appropriate institutional arrangements then the city government or public urban service for building, operating, and maintaining urban provider will need to issue local currency bonds (or infrastructure is an important first step. The institutional similar securities) to investors, or take long-term local arrangements will largely determine the type of currency loans from lenders. financing best used to develop infrastructure projects. 13 Cities that have had the best experience in mobilizing long-term market-based financing always retained an independent public finance advisory firm to research, analyze, and recommend a cost-effective combination of credit enhancements for the financing structure. The types of credit enhancements used in a structured financing also depend on the type of financing instrument: bond, loan, or PPP. 14 See IDB (2014, 108), which explores the experience of Latin American and Caribbean cities in financing urban infrastructure. 42 PART I In most countries, bond investors are institutions such versus-return policies of these domestic institutional as pension funds, insurance companies, and private investors will determine how the bonds themselves investment funds that need to acquire long-term should be financially structured to obtain the least- assets (e.g., bonds) to match their long-term liabilities cost financing for the project. Recently, there has been (e.g., pension payments). Since most institutional growing interest among investors in using their capital investors also seek to avoid foreign exchange risk, to specifically support environmentally sustainable a city should expect investors in their bonds to be projects funded by “green bonds,”15 (box 12). domestic institutional investors. The investment risk- Box 12. Green Bonds A popular sustainability-focused financial But private commercial lenders are also active instrument issued by commercial entities, a in the green bond market. Bank of America has green bond is a debt security issued to raise issued two green bonds—one for $500 million in capital specifically in support of climate-related November 2013 and another for $600 million in or environmental projects. Those projects May 2015—to finance renewable energy projects typically include renewable energies, energy in solar, wind, geothermal, and energy efficiency. efficiency, sustainable waste management, clean transportation, biodiversity, sustainable land use, or Green bonds are a convenient and conventional climate change mitigation and adaption. The green way for sustainability-focused investors to channel bond market has grown exponentially in recent their resources into investments that aim to produce years, from $4 billion in 2010 to over $37 billion in specific environmental impacts. To promote 2014, according to the World Bank. transparency for shareholders and investors around the investment process, a consortium of the world’s The World Bank and its private sector lending largest investment banks developed a set of green arm, the International Finance Corporation bond principles in 2014. The principles were drafted (IFC), are active issuers in the market. As of June with input from investors and environmental 2015, the World Bank had issued $8.5 billion groups to boost disclosure and integrity in the through more than 100 green bond transactions development of the green bond market. in 18 currencies that have supported roughly 70 climate mitigation and adaptation projects in the Source: Adapted from Mendoza 2015. Original developing world. The IFC, meanwhile, has issued article © Naki B. Mendoza 2015. Adapted more than 37 green bonds to date that have raised and reproduced with permission from Naki B. approximately $3.8 billion in nine currencies. Mendoza; further permission required for reuse. 15 Here again it is important for a city to get detailed analysis and structuring recommendations from a qualified independent public finance advisory firm that has experience enabling public clients to mobilize long-term local currency financing for infrastructure. 43 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) Lenders for urban infrastructure include banks and demand and need, and offer opportunities for local nonbank financial intermediaries. However, most investors and financiers that may not be available commercial banks tend to lend for shorter terms from larger projects.18 Box 13 offers an example of than institutional investors because their assets a small-scale PPP project in Dehradun, India.19 (loans) need to match their shorter-term liability structure (deposits). Nonbanks (such as urban development funds and bond banks) are often Box 13. Small-Scale PPP Bus Terminal and created precisely to offer longer loans for urban Commercial Complex in Dehradun, India infrastructure. Lenders also prefer to avoid foreign exchange risk, meaning that cities will be seeking Located 236 km from New Delhi, Dehradun loans from domestic banks and nonbanks whose is the capital of the north Indian state of investment policies will determine the structure and Uttarakhand and is a popular tourist and terms of the loans.16 educational hub. The private sector was asked to design, finance, build, operate, A specialized form of long-term debt financing maintain, and transfer a bus terminal and known as “pooled financing” offers financing to commercial-entertainment complex, with a a pool of cities with relatively small infrastructure concession period of 20 years. Revenue to the projects. For a number of countries, pooled concessionaire is from usage fees charged to the financing has proven especially successful in scheduled 750 buses per day, lease rental from lowering the cost of financing for infrastructure the commercial-entertainment complex, and projects that are not large enough to interest fees from other value-added services. The high- institutional investors or most commercial banks.17 risk, low-revenue usage fees of the bus terminal were supplemented by significant commercial Public-Private Partnerships revenues. No expense was borne by the city to PPPs bring private sector expertise to the develop this relatively small facility as a PPP development and operation of an urban project. infrastructure project. While large PPP projects that bring private capital investment typically require Source: Adapted from Delmon 2017. Original complex legal agreements that cities must negotiate, text © Jeffrey Delmon 2017. Adapted and monitor, and enforce, small-scale PPPs offer a reproduced with permission from Jeffrey number of benefits, especially where projects Delmon; further permission required for reuse. are developed by municipalities: they are close to Original source UNDP (n.d.). those who need services most, respond to local 16 A qualified independent public finance advisory firm can help cities get the best terms for their loans. 17 In pooled financing, a nonbank financial intermediary selects a number of cities with relatively small infrastructure projects to participate in the pool. The financial intermediary (often called a bond bank or a municipal development fund) establishes carefully structured loan agreements with the participating cities that total to an amount large enough to interest domestic institutional investors. With assistance from a qualified public finance advisory firm, the public intermediary executes a bond issue that is backed by the underlying pool of loan agreements with the participating cities but is also structured with sufficient credit enhancements to attain a strong investment-grade bond rating that minimizes interest costs. The financial intermediary passes the capital raised from investors to the participating cities for their projects with only a small increment on the interest rate to cover operating costs. 18 In fact, small-scale PPPs make up a significant share of total PPPs. The Private Participation in Infrastructure (PPI) Database shows that in 2013, approximately 40 percent of projects globally were valued at less than $50 million, and approximately 25 percent of projects were valued at less than $25 million, even though the PPI Database focuses on sectors more accustomed to larger projects (Delmon 2017). 19 See GPSC (2017) for further information regarding small-scale PPP projects. 44 PART I Land Value Capture An alternative way to generate municipal revenue Land value capture mechanisms based on taxes and for investment project financing is through fees generate an increased own-source revenue flow land value capture.20 Land value capture refers that can be used to repay long-term debt financing to the partial or total monetizing of the land provided by the financial community. Land value increase generated by actions external to value capture mechanisms based on regulatory the land owner, such as public investments in betterment charges produce a series of one-time infrastructure or administrative changes in rules payments from property developers that may or and regulations on land use. Whether in the form may not eventually aggregate into enough capital of taxes (tax increment financing), fees (impact to fully amortize the city’s related infrastructure fees or contributions for improvements), or investment, and in any case the city will have to regulations (transferable development rights or land obtain financing for construction of infrastructure readjustment), land value capture mechanisms have in the first place (debt or PPP). Finally, land a long history. value capture mechanisms based on public land acquisition or land readjustment may be useful for One of the main advantages of land value capture reducing public expenditure on certain types of mechanisms is the virtuous development cycle that infrastructure PPP projects, but they are unlikely is generated through their use, in which value is to generate enough resources to recover the full created through public interventions (physical and/ capital cost of most projects. However, auction or regulatory), totally or partially monetized to sales of public land can generate substantial capital capture the additional value, and reused to execute for infrastructure. new local development projects. The potential of these instruments to generate resources is often Lessons from international experience show that overlooked,21 but their use is increasingly gaining strong governance is a prerequisite for successfully interest and acceptance. Apart from being a source implementing land value capture instruments, as of investment resources, these mechanisms can explained in box 14. conveniently contribute to the construction of more socially and spatially equitable cities. 20 This entire section is derived from IDB (2014), which explores the experience of cities in Latin America and the Caribbean. 21 One of the main reasons why these instruments are not more widely used relates to the technical complexity of their implementation. A city may need expert assistance to understand and apply these mechanisms in practice. 45 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) Box 14. Leveraging Land to Finance Infrastructure: Four Lessons from International Experience 1. Strong institutions are needed to make land- success of this system is attributable partly to based financing instruments work. Institutions major efforts at updating and maintaining a are essential to clearly define property rights; to comprehensive cadastral database—but also to objectively value land using standard methods; and growing citizen participation and oversight. to support and oversee land management, land sales, and tax collection. 4. Development and impact fees, and tax increment financing, are seen mostly in 2. Land sales are most successful when coupled developed countries—because their success with other financing sources, such as a system requires strong institutions that many of property taxes. Although useful as an initial developing counties do not yet have. These source of revenue for infrastructure investments, instruments need a strong regulatory authority land sales are not a reliable source of long-term to enforce fee collection and to ensure that financing; for that, a tax revenue system is needed. fees are used only for their defined purpose. Clearly defined property rights are essential. 3. Betterment levies and special assessment Other prerequisites for success include updated taxes bring revenue to municipalities based information on property values and a clearly on the increase in land value from public defined methodology for estimating a project’s improvements. In practice, the main challenge impact on land and property values. For tax in using betterment levies is determining how increment financing, a well-developed property tax to calculate the increases in property value due regime is also required. Unless a strong property to improvements. Such determinations require tax system is in place, imposing development institutions for valuation and for the collection and and impact fees and establishing tax increment publication of price data. A simplified solution has financing may be unrealistically ambitions. worked well in Bogotá: levies are not estimated for each parcel but linked to a citywide fee. The Source: World Bank 2013. 46 PART I Stage 4: Monitoring and Evaluation After all the work to develop, finance, and implement Stage 4.1. Selecting Key Performance Indicators a plan, how can city decision makers evaluate if their for Monitoring Progress plan is working? A key performance indicator is a quantifiable measure used to evaluate the progress of an organization (such Setting targets for urban sustainability goals and using as a city government, business, or other entity) in these targets to monitor and evaluate progress can achieving a performance objective. Measuring against help a city to answer these questions: key performance indicators at regular intervals helps • Is our plan helping us reach our desired outcomes? city governments understand the impact of their • Are we doing the right thing to achieve our policies and plans and provides evidence on which to desired outcomes? base future policy and investment decisions. • What impact do our actions/interventions have on helping us reach our goals, and is City governments can also use key performance there something more or something else we indicators as a mechanism to communicate could be doing? performance with stakeholders and demonstrate transparency in government. This communication Monitoring and evaluation can also help decision of indicators may in turn help community members, makers identify appropriate interventions to efficiently investors, or other stakeholders make more informed direct effort where performance may fall short, or decisions about plans, policies, and investment redirect effort to areas of greater need if trajectories strategies the city has put forward for consideration, as far exceed minimum targets. well as inform decisions at the ballot box. 47 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) Cities can refer to the indicators they used during the Stage 4.2. Implementing Monitoring and initial diagnosis stage, and adopt and/or develop these Evaluation for tracking performance, as follows: Monitoring and evaluation are vital to assess the • They can use the same indicators to effectiveness and impact of interventions and enable a clear evaluation of “before” actions. They create an evidence base of the city’s and “after” performances and to demonstrate trajectory that can inform decision makers about performance change related to the city’s the need to adapt their plan and/or interventions to efforts; reach their targets. • They can select indicators that capture the city’s strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, When developing a monitoring and evaluation and challenges; program, cities should consider the following issues: • They can address gaps identified in programs • Roles and responsibilities of actors; or policies; and • Challenges or issues around data collection; • They can focus on vulnerable groups, • The frequency of data collection required locations, assets, etc. to provide the information needed as well as the appropriate level of detail for the data; Cities should also identify how they intend to use the • Alignment of monitoring and evaluation information that will be generated by monitoring and processes with other existing efforts to both evaluation, and in particular consider the following: employ resources efficiently and take • The type of indicators to include—qualitative advantage of existing, familiar processes; (perception based), quantitative (numerically • Lag time (i.e., the time between an benchmarked), or a combination of both; intervention and the resultant impact) and • The degree of control or influence the city sensitivity (i.e., the scale of impact required government may be able to exert to impact before an impact can be determined); and the performance of the indicator; • The frequency with which findings will be • The ability to determine the relationship reported and whether reports will be publicly (correlation or causality) between actions and available. performance; and • The needs of stakeholders, such as policy makers, vulnerable groups, insurers, funders, etc. Cities can draw from the USF indicators included in part II to select those that are most relevant to their priorities and context. In this way, cities can create a bespoke set of key performance indicators to measure and monitor performance. 48 PART I Cross-Cutting Processes: Citizen Consultation and Stakeholder Engagement Stakeholder engagement must be a formal and The form and content of stakeholder engagement fundamental component of every stage in the process efforts should also mirror the diversity of the to enhance urban sustainability. Engaging with city’s population, as well as the complexity of stakeholders increases the knowledge and expertise sustainability topics. Participation should cover the available for decision makers to draw on, potentially full range of affected groups, with special attention helping new ideas and innovations to surface. given to representation of disadvantaged or Empowering stakeholders to provide a meaningful marginalized groups. contribution builds a shared sense of commitment and endorsement that can support decision makers Key stakeholders include representatives from civil as they undertake ambitious plans and interventions. society groups, governments (at city, state/regional, Sharing data, indicators, and benchmarks with citizens and national level), academia, industry, city advocacy is important to promote transparency, increase public and support networks, and other individuals and awareness, and foster further community participation. groups that are interested in or have knowledge that can contribute to sustainability efforts. An example of Consultation on a city’s vision, urban policy, and an inclusive stakeholder process is given in box 15. action plan is critical to improve policy design and outcomes. It should be the foundation of urban design and management. Public engagement should be undertaken at the start of planning, urban design, and urban management initiatives to provide ideas and feedback pertaining to the environment and public interest. This collaborative process will help to instill a sense of civic pride and build social capital within communities. Research indicates a correlation between citizen engagement and environmental performance. For example, approximately three-quarters of the technological changes that would help London meet its long-term carbon reduction targets are based upon decisions by citizens or companies, not governments (Economist Intelligence Unit 2009). Stakeholder engagement programs should include formal, scheduled efforts to discuss sustainability issues, along with efforts based on specific needs as they arise. These efforts are especially important when the city relies on stakeholders to undertake collective action beyond the direct control of the city government. 49 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) Box 15. Asian Development Bank GrEEEn City Consultation Process The Asian Development Bank (ADB) has coordination with key stakeholders. In this role, developed a consultation process based on a the city government faces two main challenges: (1) visioning exercise that builds consensus on a getting its staff out of their technical silos; and (2) shared GrEEEn City vision among various ensuring the participation of private sector and stakeholders. The preparation and implementation civil society stakeholders. The plan formulation of the plan are led by a city government in process is shown in figure 7. Figure 7. GrEEEn City Action Plan Formulation Process Identify Built, Natural, Human Resource, and Cultural Assets Visioning and SWOT Analysis Formulate Unique Selling Point Define Opportunities “Business-as-Usual” Assessment Gap Analysis and Infrastructure Needs Urban Profiling Assessment Capacity Needs Assessment Prioritize Investments Develop Initiatives with Actions Action Planning Identify Urban Management Partnerships Establish Key Performance Indicators Endorsement of Institutionalize within GrEEEn City Action Plan Government Planning Framework Source: Sandhu et al. 2016. © ADB. License: CC BY 3.0 IGO, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/igo/. 50 PART I A people-first GrEEEn Solutions Cities approach and consultation for livable representation, ownership, and equity among all the participation of a diverse range of participants. Figure 8 shows results of stakeholder stakeholders, especially the disadvantaged, help consultations in Hue, Vietnam, based on the ADB to build inclusiveness. This approach ensures approach. Figure 8. GrEEEn City Stakeholder Consultation in Hue, Vietnam figure 3.2: Greeen City Vision for Hue, Viet nam What do you want your city to be in 10 years? “A city with excellent physical conditions is not enough if the people who live there are not happy.” Many green Many green parks parks Preservation Preservation ofof Tourism center Cooperating Cooperating with with ADB ADB For citizens and cultural heritage cultural heritage in the region guests alike A well A wellcentral central Less Less governed noise noise Preserving Preserving Ecological Ecological tourism tourism governedurban urban More More In balance with In balance with theancient the ancient Good urban trees trees Nice Nice spirituality development development spirituality characteristic characteristic planning and scenery scenery of ofthe thecity city Model management Further development destination Furtherdevelopment Addressing Good Good weaknesses Good living oftourism of tourismand services andservices standard/ standard/ quality quality of life conditions of life Suitable proactively master plan Good Good social social fresh nice attractive not too large welfare system welfare system beautiful expanding Meaningful Meaningful role role for for children, children, Economic, Economic, social, social, Highly High competitive competitive friendly environmental and environmental modern Synchronized infrastructure Synchronized infrastructure elders, the elderly,andand disabled people infrastructure infrastructure with disabilities sustainability sustainability human e cient Intelligent Good Good Stable competitive clean green sustainable transport system logistics logistics incomes Creating system system Good public enough jobs Increase of transport system Better roads Better roads income Economy in harmony More green Creating axes Creating axes of More with environment environment businesses greenroads ofgreen roads green Urban Urban natural natural environment environment E cient E cient jobs resistant to storms and floods landuse land use Good Good Improved Improved Better disaster Better waste Better waste Good operation and Good operation and disaster disaster Adaption to Adaptation to Good Good water water management management management business business forecasting management of of climate change environment management environment management system system hydropower system hydropower system ADB = Asian Development Bank. ADB ADB. Source:Source: © ADB. 2015.2015. GrEEEnCC License: Enabling BY Cities: 3.0 Hue IGO,City Action Plan. Manila. GrEEEn https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/igo/. a. The spelling of “GrEEEn” reflects the project’s “3E lens” that focuses on environment, economy, Constraints and Barriers to Achieving Consensus and equity (Sandhu, et al. 2016). More details on the project are included in annex B. The visioning exercise differs from a simple stakeholder meeting because building consensus on a shared GrEEEn City vision among the various stakeholders is a reiterative process to ensure representation, ownership, and equity. Therefore, real participation of a diverse range of stakeholders, especially the disadvantaged, is needed to build inclusiveness through a people-first approach. Some authors also argue that contrary to long-held assumptions about the relationship between democratization and social equality, this expansion of URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) 51 political equality has been accompanied by a corresponding decline in social and economic equality (Lee, McQuarrie, and Walker 2015). However, in emerging countries, where public GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) 3. Summary of USF’s Assistance to Cities The USF provides cities with tools to facilitate an evidence-based decision-making process that integrates multiple sustainability dimensions, thus enabling urban interventions in various sectors and different levels of government. Although each action plan will differ in its policy priorities, the USF’s four-stage approach is broadly applicable. The GPSC recommends that cities develop or enhance a sustainability plan through the four-stage process: • Stage 1: Diagnosis. Conduct a systematic diagnosis process to inform the later USF stages. • Stage 2: Vision and Priorities for Action. Define a vision with clear priorities and measurable targets to support the formulation of long-term goals that are both ambitious and achievable. • Stage 3: Financing the Plan. In parallel to stage 2, develop and implement action plans that systematically improve financial management, encourage fiscal sustainability, and ultimately allow cities to maintain investment-grade creditworthiness. • Stage 4: Monitoring and Evaluation. Systematically monitor and evaluate progress. • Cross-Cutting Processes. Carry out stakeholder consultations throughout each stage to ensure transparency, and make public the results so that citizens can evaluate the actions undertaken. 52 PART I REFERENCES ADB (Asian Development Bank). 2001. Urban Indicators for Managing Cities. Edited by Matthew S. Westfall and Victoria A. de Villa. Manila: Asian Development Bank. https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/30020/urban-indicators- managing-cities.pdf. ———. 2013. “Technical Assistance for Green Cities: A Sustainable Urban Future in Southeast Asia (TA 8314-REG).” GCAP Visioning and SWOT Analysis Workshop, Hue, Vietnam, November 22. ———. 2015. Hue GrEEEn City Action Plan. Manila: Asian Development Bank. https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/179170/hue-greeen-city-ap.pdf. Ambler, G. 2013. “10 Characteristics of an Effective Vision.” http://www.georgeambler.com/10-characteristics-of-an-effective-vision/. Bidgood, Jess. 2015. “Tracking Boston’s Progress with Just One Number.” New York Times, October 8. https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/09/us/getting-the-big-picture-in-boston- number-by-number.html?_r=1. C40 Cities and Arup. 2015. “Climate Action in Megacities 3.0.” http://www.cam3.c40.org/images/C40ClimateActionInMegacities3.pdf. Centro Mario Molina and Calthorpe Analytics. 2015. “Urban Planning Modeling Scenarios: Mexico City Metropolitan Area.” http://calthorpeanalytics.com/img/RF_MexicoCity.pdf. City of New York. 2017. “OneNYC 2017 Progress Report.” http://onenyc.cityofnewyork.us/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/OneNYC_2017_ Progress_Report.pdf. Delmon, Jeffery. 2017. Public Private Partnerships in Infrastructure: An Essential Guide for Policy Makers. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Economist Intelligence Unit. 2009. European Green City Index: Assessing the Environmental Impact of Europe’s Major Cities. München: Siemens AG. https://www.siemens.com/press/pool/de/events/corporate/2009-12-Cop15/ European_Green_City_Index.pdf. GPSC (Global Platform of Sustainable Cities), World Bank. 2017. “Small-Scale Municipal PPP.” GPSC Compendium, World Bank. https://www.thegpsc.org/knowledge-products/municipal-finance-and-ppp/gpsc- compendium-small-scale-municipal-ppp. 53 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) GRI. 2013. “Principles for Defining Report Content: Materiality.” Global Reporting Initiative, Amsterdam. https://g4.globalreporting.org/how-you-should-report/reporting-principles/ principles-for-defining-report-content/materiality/Pages/default.aspx. IDB (Inter-American Development Bank). 2014. “Methodological Guide: Emerging and Sustainable Cities Initiative.” 2nd ed. http://www.iadb.org/en/topics/emerging-and-sustainable-cities/implementing-the- emerging-and-sustainable-cities-program-approach,7641.html. LSE Cities. 2012a. “European Cities De-couple Economic Growth from Environmental Impact.” https://lsecities.net/media/objects/articles/european-cities-de-couple-economic- growth-from-environmental-impact/en-gb/. ———. 2012b. “Patterns of Change Berlin/Copenhagen/London/New York: Electric City.” Urban Age Conference Newspaper. https://files.lsecities.net/files/2012/12/the-electric-city-newspaper-data.pdf. Marlowe, Justin, William Rivenbark, and John Vogt. 2009. Capital Budgeting and Finance: A Guide for Local Governments. Washington, DC: International City/County Management Association. Mendoza, Naki B. 2015. “The Next Wave of Development Finance Innovation,” Devex. October 21. https://www.devex.com/news/the-next-wave-of-development-finance-innovation-87139. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). 2010. “Innovative Financing Mechanisms for the Water Sector.” OECD Studies on Water. OECD Publishing, Paris. http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/environment/innovative-financing-mechanisms-for- the-water-sector_9789264083660-en. Painter, David, and Joshua Gallo. 2012. “The Importance of Sub-National Authorities Avoiding Foreign Exchange Risk When Borrowing Long-Term.” SNTABriefs, note 2, July. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/978931468279291095/text/ NonAsciiFileName0.txt. Sandhu, Sonia Chand, Ramola Naik Singru, John Bachmann, Sankaran Vaideeswaran, and Pierre Arnoux. 2016. GrEEEn Solutions for Livable Cities. Mandaluyong City, Philippines: Asian Development Bank. https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/181442/greeen-solutions- livable-cities.pdf. Singh, Gayatri, Seetha Raghupathy, and Peter Volosin. 2016. “Kota Semarang: Urban Growth and Access to Public Infrastructure.” Advance edition. World Bank. 54 PART I UNDP. n.d. “UNDP Training Module: Financing, Fare Fixation, & Cost Benefit Analyses.” http://wricitieshub.org/sites/default/files/Presentation-Financing-Fare-Fixation- Cost-Benefit%20Analysis.pdf. Whittington, Jan. 2016. “Climate-Smart Capital Investment Planning: A Guide to the Excel Model.” Presentation at the Municipal Finance and Creditworthiness Academy, Washington, DC, December 6. Wilkinson, A., and R. Kupers. 2013. “Living in the Future.” Harvard Business Review. May. https://hbr.org/2013/05/living-in-the-futures. World Bank. 2010. “Cities and Climate Change: An Urgent Agenda.” Urban Development Series no. 10. December. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTUWM/ Resources/340232-1205330656272/CitiesandClimateChange.pdf. ———. 2013. Planning, Connecting, and Financing Cities—Now: Priorities for City Leaders. 2013. Washington, DC: World Bank. doi:10.1596/978-0-8213-9839-5. ———. 2016a. “How Sharing Data and Collaboration Can Improve Indonesia’s Urban Planning.” September 22. http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2016/09/22/how-gathering-data- in-one-place-can-improve-indonesia-cities. ———. 2016b. “New Facility Will Help Indonesian Cities Boost Infrastructure Investment and Sustainable Economic Growth: World Bank.” Press release. June 14. http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2016/06/14/new-facility- will-help-indonesian-cities-boost-infrastructure-investment. World Economic Forum. 2014. “Global Agenda Council on Infrastructure, 2012-2014.” http://www3.weforum.org/docs/GAC/2013/WEF_GAC_Infrastructure_ MidtermReport.pdf. 55 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) Information silos must be bridged so that data can be integrated and shared, and interdependencies within dynamic urban systems better understood. GPSC held a Sustainable Cities photo competition in October 2017. Juan Pablo Angulo Salazar from Colombia submitted this winning photo of Bassin de la Villete in Paris. When viewing the photo, you can clearly feel a sense of aspiration. Speaking to this aspiration, quite a few participants sent photos of cities that are generally considered as environmentally friendly with high livability. Many of the photographers who submitted entries are nationals of developing countries from around the world. In this photo, we can see ideas of what many cities are striving to become. Source: © Juan Pablo Angulo Salazar 2017. Reproduced with permission from Juan Pablo Angulo Salazar; further permission required for reuse. 56 PART II: GPSC MEASURING FRAMEWORK Purpose of the Measuring Framework Planning a city requires an understanding of how past trends, and future trends. A trend provides different factors shape the ways people live, work, information on the evolution of the value for play, and influence sustainability. This understanding, an indicator over the past 5 to 10 years, which is in turn, requires relevant and accurate data on past, useful for understanding the dynamics of the current, and projected city performance. With this city over time and the evolution of the city’s knowledge, it is possible to better anticipate future performance. Future trends under different demands and to craft policies and plans that enhance policy scenarios may be used to understand the the overall sustainability of cities. impact of different policies on a city’s performance and for making more informed The rising complexity of urban challenges that development decisions. span multiple domains means that one can no longer approach urban challenges by looking at 2. Benchmark regionally and globally. urban systems individually, nor fully understand a Reporting against the indicators will help cities problem by employing only the data of individual learn from one another by sharing best sectors. Information silos must be bridged so practices and allowing mutual comparison that data can be integrated and shared, and across a wide range of performance measures. interdependencies within dynamic urban systems better understood. 3. Prioritize city actions. As cities develop action plans, the framework can support prioritization Part II of the Urban Sustainability Framework (USF) of actions by considering various policy options presents a multidimensional framework designed to and applying priority filters (environmental, help cities understand and measure urban sustainability economic, and social impacts, along with through the four-stage process explained in part I. budget cost estimates). Specifically, it will help cities do the following: 4. Vision, plan strategically, and monitor 1. Assess performance and track progress. action plans. The framework may be used to The framework can be used to track and monitor facilitate more robust target setting, with strategic the progress of a city’s performance. Cities objectives for each priority area, along with should evaluate each indicator’s current status, time-related targets and measures for cities’ operations. Image: Central Park by Victor, CC BY-NC-ND 2.0, www.flickr.com/photos/vic_206/23930568219. 57 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) 5. Improve transparency and citizen the data can be standardized so that data sets engagement. Utilizing open data for various can be integrated with and compared to indicators can increase transparency and one another data. The USF set of core transform how citizens participate in indicators offers cities an opportunity to governance. Local governments’ publication synchronize various data formats so that data of data on indicators can increase accountability sets can be compared and integrated. This and improve the quality of government effort will support open data initiatives. services. To bring about these improvements, data programs must require disclosure, be Overview of the Measuring Framework promoted to increase visibility, have space for The Measuring Framework comprises six public reaction, and ensure data source interconnected dimensions that articulate: accountability. 1. The enabling environment that the GPSC program of activities aims to establish within 6. Support open data and applications. A cities in order to deliver outcomes (i.e., the growing number of cities, as well as enabling dimensions); and international organizations such as UN-Habitat 2. The outcomes that cities can achieve by and the World Council on City Data (WCCD), addressing urban sustainability (i.e., the are now making urban data freely available to outcome dimensions). the public. These initiatives are fairly recent, The relationships between the two enabling however, so the landscape of open urban data dimensions and four outcome dimensions is not well known. A key benefit of having are summarized in figure 9, which shows the a large number of data sets openly and readily enabling dimensions contributing to the outcome available is the ability to fuse data. However, dimensions in order to create an integrated this potential benefit depends on whether approach. Figure 9. Relation between the Four Outcome Dimensions and Two Enabling Dimensions ENABLiNG DiMENSiONS GOvERNANCE & iNTEGRATED URBAN PLANNiNG FiSCAL SUSTAiNABiLiTY OUTCOME DiMENSiONS CLiMATE ACTiON URBAN ECONOMiES & RESiLiENCE iNCLUSiviTY NATURAL ENviRONMENT & QUALiTY OF LiFE & RESOURCES 58 PART II Key Focus Areas Underlying the dimensions is a series of key focus measuring, and enhancing their sustainability areas that articulate the city characteristics that performance within the Sustainable Development particularly impact urban sustainability. These are Goals (SDGs) and the New Urban Agenda. The key important for cities to consider when diagnosing, focus areas are summarized in figure 10. Figure 10. Dimensions and Key Focus Areas of the Measuring Framework ENABLiNG DiMENSiONS Key focus areas: 1. Vision & long-term strategic planning 2. Stakeholder participation 3. Data management 4. Trend analysis 5. Land use & zoning 6. Urban growth patterns 7. Informal settlements 8. Transport & moblility intrgrated with land use 9. Cultural heritage OUTCOME DiMENSiONS Key focus areas: Key focus areas: Key focus areas: 1. Economic performance 2. Economic structure 1. Ecosystems & biodiversity 1. Housing 3. Business climate innovation 2. Air quality 2. Education & entrepreneurship 3. Water resources 3. Poverty reduction, hunger 4. Labour force management reduction, and food security 5. Livelihood opportunities 4. Solid waste management 4. Drink water & sanitation 6. Income equality and shared 5. Consumption & 5. Basic physical infrastructure prosperity production patterns 6. Health & well being 7. Global appeal 7. Safety 8. Connectivity and global links 8. Social cohesion 59 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) For organizational purposes, the Measuring Figure 11. Relationship between a Dimension and the Framework identifies separate dimensions for Components of Each Key Focus Area urban sustainability and aligns indicators with those specific dimensions and key focus areas. However, sustainability is a complex, multidimensional concept that cannot be effectively addressed without acknowledging the relationship between different city functions and systems. The six dimensions and goals are interrelated. Policies and actions that impact on one goal are likely to have additional impacts on other goals. For this reason, it is essential that cities adopt an integrated approach to urban sustainability. Such an approach should recognize the interrelationships between dimensions and maximize synergies between city systems and functions to reduce inadvertent negative impacts of one city system on another. Cities may wish to use the key focus areas to help Strategic goals are indicated to help cities identify where to prioritize investment and action understand what their policies, plans, and decisions (see the discussion of stage 2 in part I). However, for should ultimately be aiming to achieve within each every city, the relative importance of each focus area, dimension. Similarly, subgoals are indicated to and the way each focus area can be addressed, will be assist the selection of key focus areas as well as different. Each city will need to chart its own course specific key indicators. toward the goals of the six dimensions by prioritizing focus areas according to its particular context and The rationale of each key focus area lays out the circumstances. In annex F read through a lens of the reasons or logical basis for applying that set of six dimensions about how Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, questions and indicators to the assessment process. moved from diagnosis to creating priority actions for The rationale often includes typical implications for sustainable development. cities to consider. Components of the Key Focus Areas Key questions set out in very broad terms what the The selection of the dimensions and key focus diagnosis and measurement process should seek to areas is informed by different types of goals. Within answer for each focus area. The key questions are each dimension are several key focus areas, which deliberately very high level in nature. It is expected comprise rationale, key question(s), and indicators. that cities will augment the key questions with more The relationship between these different components detailed assessment questions specifically tailored to is shown in figure 11. their unique context. 60 PART II Finally, the indicators that have been identified core indicators within the Measuring Framework. By within each of the focus areas provide a means for using the 14 core indicators associated with SDG 11, cities to begin to measure current performance in GPSC cities can help establish comprehensive multi- relation to the focus area. The list of indicators is not city data sets for each SDG 11 indicator and in turn intended to be prescriptive or exhaustive. Cities may (1) help track international progress toward SDG 11, select the indicators that they consider most relevant (2) allow peer cities to compare their performance, and measurable, and they may add further indicators and (3) enhance knowledge sharing. as appropriate. The GPSC encourages all cities to contribute toward international efforts to realize UN- It is important to note that most indicators are Habitat’s SDG 11, which focuses upon sustainable cross-cutting and will directly or indirectly indicate cities and communities. For this reason, the 14 performance across multiple focus areas. Selection indicators associated with SDG 11 are described as criteria for the indicators are shown in table 1. Table 1. Selection Criteria for GPSC Indicators CRITERION REQUIREMENTS • Be simple, easy to interpret, and able to show trends over time; • Be responsive to changes in the environment and related human activities; Policy • Provide a basis for international comparison; relevance and utility for users • Be either national in scope or applicable to regional issues of national significance; and • Have a threshold or relevance value against which to compare it, so that users can access the significance of the associated values. Support for • Be aligned with indicators to track progress toward the Sustainable Development Goals, international particularly SDG 11 (sustainable cities and communities); and sustainability • Be aligned with themes and indicators identified with other relevant international commitments efforts and communications. • Be aligned with indicators to track progress toward the Sustainable Development Goals, Analytical particularly SDG 11 (sustainable cities and communities); and soundness • Be aligned with themes and indicators identified with other relevant international commitments and communications. • Be readily available or made available at a reasonable cost-benefit ratio; Data • Be adequately documented and of known quality; and measurability • Be updated at regular intervals in accordance with reliable procedures. Beneficial • Should allow the city to assess the success of a policy in terms of the measurable benefits for the and people- population, with special considerations for vulnerable, underrepresented, and/or less-advantaged centered in approach groups. Source: Adapted from OECD 2003. 61 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) Indicator References and Useful Sources The USF utilizes existing indicators and proposes The following are the main initiatives or frameworks new indicators that generally cover cross-cutting whose indicators are cross-referenced in the USF: issues between sustainability dimensions. Some • CPI: UN-Habitat City Prosperity Initiative, of the indicators included within the USF are also https://unhabitat.org/urban-initiatives/ used in several other initiatives that provide detailed initiatives-programmes/city-prosperity-initiative/. methodologies for their calculations. Where applicable, • CRI: Rockefeller Foundation and Arup, users may refer to the available indicator sources for “City Resilience Framework,” April 2014 further definitions and calculation procedures. Some (updated December 2015); Inside the CRI: of these initiatives propose benchmarks organized by Reference Guide, March 2016. “low,” “medium,” and “high” terminology (European • EBRD: Green Cities Programme Bank for Reconstruction and Development [EBRD]) Methodology, based on work prepared by or by a “traffic light” (green/yellow/red) color coding the Organisation for Economic Co-operation system (see box 5 for information on the method of and Development (OECD) and ICLEI-Local the Inter-American Development Bank [IDB]). Governments for Sustainability for the EBRD. • GEF-6: Global Environment Facility (GEF) A specific mention should be made of resilience Sustainable Cities IAP: Tracking Tool for Child indicators. Resilience is an important component Projects. of urban sustainability that spans all of the USF • IDB: Inter-American Development Bank, dimensions. “Annex I: ESCI Indicators,” in “Methodological Guide: Emerging and Sustainable Cities Urban resilience describes the ability of cities, under Initiative,” 2nd ed., July 2014, https://drive. the impact of shocks and stress, to continue to google.com/a/iclei.org/file/ function so that the people who live and work there— d/0B93Bl6qR3zQ_OXgyN3lwMURqNE0/view. especially the poor and the vulnerable—survive and • ISO 37120:2014: “Sustainable development of prosper. The notion of resilience has helped to bridge communities—Indicators for city service and the gap between traditional risk reduction policies quality of life” (ISO 2014). and those of adaptation to climate change. It goes • SDGs: “Annex IV,” in Report of the beyond traditional management, based on specific risk Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable assessments, and accepts the possibility that various Development Goal Indicators (E/ disruptive events, including massive migrations, may CN.3/2016/2/Rev.1), March 2016, https:// occur but are not necessarily predictable. Resilience sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/ focuses on improving a city’s performance against documents/11803Official-List-of-Proposed- multiple hazards, rather than preventing or mitigating SDG-Indicators.pdf. asset loss due to specific events. • WDI: World Bank, World Development Indicators 2017 (Washington, DC: World Bank, Thus, the USF does not limit resilience to the climate 2017), https://data.worldbank.org/products/wdi.22 dimension, and it includes resilience indicators within all the dimensions. A specific City Resilience Indicators (CRI) Framework has been developed by the Rockefeller Foundation and Arup (2016) and is cross-referenced for some of the USF indicators. 22 The World Development Indicators database is the World Bank’s premier compilation of cross-country comparable data on development. It contains more than 1,400 time series indicators for 217 economies and more than 40 country groups, with data for many indicators going back more than 50 years. These indicators can be used to compare cities’ sustainability performances to national performances, and many of them can be disaggregated at city level. 62 PART II Further Information The dimensions, focus areas, and indicators that form the GPSC Measuring Framework have been identified through review of the following: • SDGs (UNSD 2017), with particular reference to SDG 11 (UN-Habitat 2016b); • The commitments and themes expressed within the New Urban Agenda (UN-Habitat 2016a); and • The commitments within the Paris Agreement on Climate Change (UN 2016) and the subsequent interpretation of these commitments for cities (C40 Cities and Arup 2017). The identification and selection of the indicators have been informed by the following references: • ISO 37120: “Sustainable development of communities—Indicators for city service and quality of life” (ISO 2014); • Indicators for the Global Environment Facility Integrated Approach Pilots; and • Indicators for Inter-American Development Bank’s Methodological Guide of the Emerging and Sustainable Cities Initiative (IDB 2014). 63 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) Central to the sustainability transformation is an integrated planning approach coupled with a long-term vision of sustainable growth. GPSC held a Sustainable Cities photo competition in October 2017. This winning photo was taken by Oyelowo Eyitayo in Nigeria and shows a line of solar panels in the middle of a road. The photo is very telling – the town may be struggling for basic services, but it’s already trying to utilize renewable energy for street lighting. From this photo, we can clearly see the town’s aspiration, despite the challenges it is facing. Just like this, urban sustainability can start with a small step. And in time, many small steps become enough to push an initiative into the stratosphere – because transformational change doesn’t happen overnight. Source: © Oyelowo Eyitayo. Reproduced with permission from Oyelowo Eyitayo; further permission required for reuse. 64 ENABLING DIMENSION 1: Governance and Integrated Urban Planning Goal To achieve integrated, well-planned urban development that responds appropriately to shifting opportunities and challenges Context Complex urban challenges do not follow spatial should ensure that the plan as a whole has a greater or administrative boundaries, nor can they be impact than the sum of its individual parts, if addressed by isolated sectors or actors alone. implemented in isolation. Central to the sustainability transformation is an integrated planning approach coupled with a long- Urban efficiency improves not only because cities term vision of sustainable growth that extends adopt new sectoral policies and approaches, but also, beyond a political term. Although the concept more critically, because they can adapt governance of integrated urban development is not new, a practices and organizations to bundle policies tendency to “think in silos” is still prevalent in many in a more integrated way.24 Many cities already municipal administrations. Many city governments, demonstrate successful approaches to integrated even those from relatively developed countries, urban development. They have an overall strategy still find it challenging to break down silos and to foster cross-sectoral and multilevel coordination. foster collaboration between various agencies. They also have dedicated environmental When individual sector strategies fail to take departments, structured communication, data codependencies or interdependencies with other sharing, and joint target setting by departments with sectors into account, the result is not only conflicts different responsibilities. of interests but also an inability to address cross- sectoral challenges.23 Fast-growing cities can transform and become more inclusive and people-friendly by utilizing granular, Cities need to take a more holistic approach to contextual, and integrated planning approaches sustainability challenges and avoid addressing each based on data and indicators. Good planning issue in single departments. The GPSC promotes an shapes urban forms that offer a variety of land use integrated approach that breaks down sector silos patterns in vibrant neighborhoods and intensities and encourages cooperation across various sectors of development articulated with transit accessibility. and disciplines. The integrated approach means that Such approaches must include attention to details all policies, projects, and proposals will be considered such as local area development plans, streetscape in relation to one another. In this regard, synergies improvements, public space provision, urban design, between the elements of the integrated urban plan good connectivity, and place making. Planning needs 23 For instance, a city’s performance in one category, such as transport, is linked to the successes or failures of others, such as air quality. 24 Integrated planning allows cities to integrate a multiplicity of initiatives that reinforce each other. It considers physical, economic, social, and other aspects of the city as a whole and integrates social and cultural infrastructure early in the planning and design of the physical environment. Cities function best when their urban form, pattern, and design sympathetically consider their inhabitants’ culture, needs, and aspirations. Image: Copenhagen Skyline by Alex Berger, CC BY-NC 2.0, www.flickr.com/photos/virtualwayfarer/14988122882. 65 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) to be implemented to allow greater dynamism and flexibility, so that it can better respond to short-term needs while taking a long-term view of urban development (Ellis and Roberts 2016). The USF identifies integrated urban planning as an enabling dimension. It encompasses key focus areas that are critical to, and cut across, all four of the outcome dimensions: urban economies, natural environment and resources, global climate and resilience, and inclusivity and quality of life. The following are the key focus areas and indicators that fall within the integrated urban planning dimension: 1.1 Vision and long-term strategic planning; 1.2 Stakeholder participation; 1.3 Data management; 1.4 Trend analyses; 1.5 Land use and zoning; 1.6 Urban growth patterns; 1.7 Informal settlements; 1.8 Transport and mobility integrated with land use; and 1.9 Cultural heritage. Assessment and Measurement 1.1 Vision and Long-term Strategic Planning Subgoal To guide long-term strategic planning through the articulation of a clear vision for the future Rationale Central to the sustainability transformation is an integrated strategic planning approach coupled with a long-term vision of sustainable growth that extends beyond a political term. Strategic planning is the process by which the city determines what it intends to be in the future and how it will get there. The city determines the necessary priorities and strategies to achieve its vision. Included are measurable goals that are realistic and attainable, but also challenging—with an emphasis on long-term goals and strategies, rather than short- term (such as annual) objectives. Strategic planning assumes that certain aspects of the future can be created or influenced by the city. Strategic planning is ongoing; it is the process of self-examination, the confrontation of choices, and the establishment of priorities. Key question(s) Has the city identified key issues, challenges, and choices to be addressed as part of the strategic planning effort? Has the city encouraged its agencies and citizens to develop a shared vision? Has the city developed a clear long-term vision for the future, and are there processes in place to ensure this informs planning and decision making? Does the strategic plan include clear and measurable accomplishments with intermediate goals, milestones, and procedures for monitoring progress? Indicators • Existence of vision and long-term planning and strategy (GSPC); • Number of planners per capita25 (GPSC); and • Existence of an implementation process with measurable goals and indicators for monitoring progress (GPSC). 25 This indicator may be used as a proxy of planning capacity. 66 ENABLING DIMENSION 1 1.2 Stakeholder Participation Subgoal To ensure that city planning and decision making benefit fully from the perspectives and views of all stakeholders, and that good relations with stakeholders, including civil society, are maintained Rationale A transparent, integrated, and inclusive process to include a wide range of stakeholders will help align different perspectives and goals to a common end, and will leverage knowledge. Engagement with all relevant stakeholders will ensure that a city’s long-term vision, decision making, and planning is informed by multiple perspectives on the city’s needs, opportunities, and assets. Active participation by stakeholders in city decision making also helps strengthen relationships and widens the sense of ownership of city strategies and plans. It can improve the quality, acceptance, and effectiveness of projects and proposals. Key question(s) Has the city undertaken a detailed analysis of key stakeholders for its projects? Does it understand stakeholder needs, priorities, and interests? Does the city government seek participation from key stakeholders? Is the city developing effective communication to keep stakeholders well informed, motivated, and keen to participate? Indicators • CORE: Presence of a structure that allows civil society to directly participate in urban planning and management and that operates regularly and democratically (SDG 11); and • Number of stakeholders involved in decision-making activities, and mechanisms to encourage community engagement (CRI). 1.3 Data Management Subgoal To fully integrate data collection, management, and sharing across city departments and partner agencies Rationale Keeping track of progress increases transparency and is one of the first steps to incentivizing progress. Recording and presenting the municipality’s progress electronically makes the entry and diffusion of this information more efficient. An effective and transparent data governance process is critical for establishing and monitoring indicators and for evidence-based planning. Given the interrelations between city systems, an integrated approach to data collection, management, and sharing is critical. Platforms that bring together data from across city departments and partner agencies can serve as powerful tools to support an integrated approach to urban planning and management. Key question(s) How are data collected, collated, and shared within the city? Are data georeferenced in a common platform (including socioeconomic data)? What is the level at which data are disaggregated?26 Indicators • Years since census with city-level data (GPSC); and • Existence of a geographic information system (GIS) platform and level of data sharing and integration between city agencies (GPSC). 26 Are there plans to increase the level of disaggregation to achieve a more fine-grained understanding of the city and its past and future evolutions? 67 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) 1.4 Trend Analyses Subgoal To ensure that city planning and decision-making processes are informed by accurate and robust data, with trend analyses Rationale Access to comprehensive, accurate data is crucial to inform planning and decision making within a city. Effective strategic long-term planning requires analysis of data based on regular monitoring and trend analyses so that the city can develop appropriate responses to emerging opportunities and challenges. Sharing spatial data disaggregated at fine resolution on common platforms between different urban agencies is key to including sectoral plans within more integrated planning efforts and to monitoring plan implementation. Creating open data platforms is also key to engaging stakeholders and citizens. Key question(s) Does the city have access to comprehensive, up-to-date data sets and trend analyses on which to base its strategic planning activities? Are these data sets (in particular socioeconomic data) spatially georeferenced, and do the different urban agencies use a common data standard? Indicators • Population and projected growth in the next 10 to 20 years (GEF); • Population density27 with time series and future trends (population/built-up area) (IDB, EBRD); • Job density28 with time series and future trends (number of jobs/built-up area) (GPSC); and • Demographic structure: dependency ratio and expected trend (WDI). 1.5 Land Use and Zoning Subgoal To ensure appropriate development of the city by creating and implementing integrated land use and zoning plans Rationale Long-term-horizon concept plans define the city’s spatial structure with broad land allocation, factoring in long-term population needs, economic growth projections, and so forth. Medium-term master plans (usually having a 10- to 15-year time horizon and reviewed every five years) define detailed and granular land use intensity as well as accompanying layers such as urban design, conservation guidelines, and so forth. Land use and zoning plans provide a consistent and coherent plan for development of the city over the short to long term. They should align with the city’s vision for the future as expressed in its infrastructure, economic strategies, and trend projections. These should be developed in an integrated manner in collaboration with all city departments, partner agencies, and other key stakeholders. They should include inbuilt flexibility in zoning codes and planning incentives to allow some variation in planning and design parameters.29 Key question(s) Is development across all parts of the city controlled and managed in line with up- to-date land use plans and aligned with national strategies? How is coordination between different urban agencies organized for producing/updating land use plans? Does the city have strong enough governance and institutional capacity to develop plans and monitor their implementation? How is land supply planned in tandem with market demand and cycles? What are the instruments to ensure both compliance and institutionalized methods allowing the flexibility of planning parameters—are changes based on the merits of a proposed development or motivated by land value capture opportunities? 27 For large cities and for planning purposes, these data (when available) should be disaggregated at district scale and/or at finer statistical scales such as TAZs (Transport Analysis Zones). 28 This indicator is also a measure of economic concentration fostering economies of agglomeration. When data are available, they should be disaggregated at district scale and/or at finer statistical scales such as TAZs. 29 This flexibility is critical to ensure that cities can achieve sustainable patterns of development that meet their future needs while also allowing for adaption to unexpected changes and market responsiveness. 68 ENABLING DIMENSION 1 Indicators • CORE: Average share of the built-up area of a city that is open space for public use by all, by sex, age, and disability status (for instance are buildings constructed to be accessible for the elderly) (SDG 11); • CORE: Proportion of national population living in cities that implement urban and regional development plans integrating population projections and resource needs, by size of city (SDG 11); • Years since land use plan was reviewed and updated (not having a land use plan scores 0 automatically) (GPSC); • Density, integrated land use: Transit-oriented development promoted (EBRD); and • Use of existing built-up areas: Mixed-use development promoted through zoning regulations/incentives (EBRD). 1.6 Urban Growth Patterns Subgoal To control expansion of the city and achieve compact growth while providing enough land per capita for adequate housing, public services, and basic physical and social infrastructure Rationale Controlling expansion of the city into undeveloped areas is important to preserve natural habitats and agricultural resources. Cities that are more compact30 and dense provide connections through greater proximity. Compact cities reduce car dependency, energy consumption, and carbon emissions; they also require less infrastructure, are more effectively served by public transport networks, provide more opportunity for social interaction, and generate many economic benefits by concentrating businesses in close proximity to each other. Compact growth increases access to a high number of diverse job opportunities, in particular for the urban poor. Enough land per capita should be provided for housing, for physical infrastructure (roads, public spaces, wastewater, sewage, etc.), and for social infrastructure (public services, education, health care, etc.). Key question(s) Does the city have effective policies and plans in place to limit urban sprawl? Does the city encourage increasing densities along transit corridors with land use regulations such as floor area ratio (FAR)?31 Does the city have plans to provide enough land per capita for public services, adequate housing, and basic physical and social infrastructure? Indicators • CORE: Ratio of land consumption rate to population growth rate (SDG 11); • Annual growth rate of built-up areas32 as a percentage of total area (IDB, EBRD); • Built-up land area (m2) per person and its evolution over the last two decades (GPSC); and • Percentage of urban development that occurs on existing urban land rather than on greenfield land33 (EBRD). 30 Compactness is an important geometric property of urban shapes and is different from density. An urban shape can be compact and dense or compact and not dense. Density measures intensity of land use; compactness measures key shape properties of the urban footprint. A compact city is one closely and firmly packed, with component parts closely fitted together, and not dispersed and fragmented. In purely geometric terms, if two cities have the same built-up area, then residents in the more compact city will have to travel a shorter distance, on average, to the city center or to any location in their city. 31 FAR is the ratio of a building’s total floor area to the area of the piece of land upon which it is built. The term can also refer to limits imposed on such a ratio. As a formula: FAR = (total amount of usable floor area that a building has / land zoning area). Allowable FAR has a major impact on the value of the land. Raising allowable FAR can usually equate to higher land value. Flexible FARs can be used as a land value capture instrument.25 This indicator may be used as a proxy of planning capacity. 32 This indicator measures average annual growth rate of the areal urban built-up areas (excluding green space and vacant land) within (and outside) the city’s official limits. The data should be collected from the building permits database, once a year, or analyzed with remote sensing tools. 69 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) 1.7 Informal Settlements Subgoal To prevent, rehabilitate, and upgrade informal settlements and slums to improve their access to basic infrastructure and social services while reducing vulnerability Rationale Communities living within informal settlements are often without access to safe water and sanitation, basic infrastructure, and public services. This leads to poor health and education outcomes, reduced livelihood opportunities, and environmental degradation. Insecure land tenure discourages investment in informal settlements and prevents rehabilitation. Key question(s) Are informal settlements present within, or adjacent to, the city, and does the city have effective policies in place to prevent and rehabilitate informal settlements? Indicators • CORE: Proportion of urban population living in slums, informal settlements, or inadequate housing (SDG 11, CRI); • Proportion of total adult population with secure tenure rights to land and legally recognized documentation who perceive their rights to land as secure, by sex and by type of tenure (SDGs, CRI, modified ISO 37120); • Percentage of substandard housing (IDB); and • Informal settlements as percentage of city area (GEF, CPI). 1.8 Transport and Mobility Integrated with Land Use Subgoal To maximize use of sustainable mobility options and integrate transport planning with l and use planning Rationale Accessibility within cities is partly determined by the distance between where people live and where people work. People generally move between those two points using private or public motorized transport.34 Policies that encourage high-density, mixed-use, balanced, transit-oriented development—with jobs close to homes and walkable streets—are vital to reduce private car use and increase the financial viability of public transport. Land value increases created by improved accessibility can be captured by local governments to further finance provision of public transport infrastructure. Efficient mobility integrates labor and consumer markets and is a driver of economic development. Transport policy relates to regional integration, to economic performance and competitiveness, to access to jobs, to affordability and an inclusive society, to quality of life, and to public health. As utilizing transportation can represent a significant challenge for households in poverty (Venter 2011), inclusion of transportation cost considerations in planning decision processes can make neighborhoods more assessable and affordable for residents to live in.35 Cities can also reduce carbon emissions and improve health and well-being by promoting walking, cycling, and use of public transport and low-carbon or zero-carbon vehicles. Key question(s) Has there been within the last two years an origin/destination survey covering the urban or metropolitan area? Is there a published transport master plan based on the results of the survey and other supporting studies? Has the city implemented a transport management system, including various indicators for measuring and monitoring the transportation system? Is transportation planning integrated with land use planning, economic planning, and pro-poor policies? Has the city set coordination mechanisms, policies, and incentives to encourage integration of transit with higher density, urban design quality, and provision of local jobs? Are land value capture financing instruments integrated in transit infrastructure financing schemes? 33 This indicator measures the ratio of urban development that occurs on brownfield sites to the urban development that occurs on urban fringe greenfield sites. The data should be collected from the building permits database once a year. 34 The essential characteristics of transport infrastructure include the connectivity of street networks and the proportion of urban area covered by streets, as well as the quality of road and rail networks and other public transport infrastructure (Rode et al. 2014) 35 Planning for location efficiency considers both transportation and location in calculating costs for households and provides affordable transportation options aligned with affordable housing.. 70 ENABLING DIMENSION 1 Indicators • CORE: Proportion of population that has convenient access to public transport, by sex, age, and disability status (SDG 11); • Balanced transportation demand: Jobs-to-housing ratio36 (IDB); • Number of jobs accessible in 20, 30, and 45 minutes from different city locations37 (GPSC); • Proportion of the population living within 20 minutes of everyday services (grocery stores, clinics, etc.)38 (EBRD); • Share of population having access to public transport within 15 minutes by foot39 (EBRD); • Average commuting time and distance from residence to work40 (IDB, EBRD); • Road congestion: Average travel speed on primary thoroughfares during peak hours (km/h) (IDB, EBRD); • Traffic demand is managed (congestion charges, smart technologies) (EBRD); • Motorization rate: Number of vehicles per capita41 (IDB, EBRD); • Transport modal share in commuting42 (car, motorcycle, taxi, bus, metro, tram, bicycle, pedestrian) (IDB, EBRD); • Length and surface coverage of roads per square kilometer, split between wealthy and deprived areas43 (GPSC); • Kilometers of road dedicated exclusively to public transit per 100,000 population44 (IDB, EBRD); • Kilometers of bicycle path per 100,000 population45 (IDB, EBRD); • Total walkway kilometers of dedicated pedestrian paths per 100,000 inhabitants (IDB); • Transportation affordability index: (number of trips times average cost per trip) / (per capita income of the bottom quintile of the population) (IDB); • Transportation fatalities per 1,000 population (IDB, CPI); and • Resilience of transport systems, interruption of public transport systems in case of disaster46 (EBRD). 36 The employment-to-housing ratio measures employment opportunities for the labor force living in a given geographic area. It is usually measured in terms of the proportion of jobs per household. Geospatial tools allow planners to map the ratio at a fine-grained spatial resolution and to identify areas that would help to incentivize the creation of local jobs. 37 This indicator links transportation efficiency, climate change mitigation (by reducing the commuting flows in areas where a high number of jobs is accessible at short distances), economic efficiency (by increasing agglomeration), and social inclusiveness (by allowing cities to identify and prioritize areas with combined poverty and job access deprivation). It has been utilized in the strategic plan OneNYC (see annex D) to prioritize additional public transportation in New York, where access to jobs within 45 minutes varies widely—from 70,000 to more than 2 million depending on location. The World Bank has developed geospatial tools to perform these calculations at fine-grained spatial resolution; see Li et al. (2016). 38 This indicator measures the proportion of the population living within 20 minutes by any mode of transport to everyday services. The data should be collected through surveys once a year. 39 This indicator can be calculated on average, and for planning purposes cities would benefit from using geospatial data tools to disaggregate it at fine spatial resolutions. The indicator can also be calculated by surveys. 40 This indicator measures average time and distance traveled by all commuters to work. It provides information on the level of integration of transportation and land use. The data should be collected through surveys once a year. 41 This indicator measures the number of private vehicles (cars, motorcycles) per capita. It can be calculated by dividing the total number of vehicles (obtained from the vehicle registration database) by the total population. The data can be collected biannually. See European Environment Agency, “Size of the Vehicle Fleet,” http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and- maps/indicators/size-of-the-vehicle-fleet/size- of-the- vehicle-fleet-2. 42 This indicator measures the number of commuters working in the city who use each of the listed modes of transport divided by the number of commuting trips to work. Surveys are a common data collection method. The data can be collected biannually. Supplementary metric: Percentage of commuters using a travel mode other than a personal vehicle (as a percentage of total commuters) (ISO 37120). 43 This indicator links transportation connectivity and social equality. Geospatial tools allow simultaneous mapping of deprivation and critical infrastructure provision such as transportation (see for example the Johannesburg Spatial Development Framework described in City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality [2016]). 44 This indicator measures the total centerline kilometers dedicated exclusively to busway and railway, divided by 100,000 of city population. The data should be collected once a year. 45 This indicator measures the total centerline kilometers dedicated to bicycle paths, divided by 100,000 of city population. The data should be collected once a year. 46 This indicator offers a qualitative assessment of the ability of public transport systems to run efficiently during a natural disaster (such as a flood, earthquake, or storm). 71 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) 1.9 Cultural Heritage Subgoal To protect and conserve cultural and historical heritage Rationale Protecting and conserving a city’s cultural and historical heritage (encompassing tangible heritage such as monuments, historical urban fabric, and archaeological sites as well as intangible heritage such as oral traditions, performing arts, and rituals) helps to reinforce local identity and culture. This result benefits the city by enhancing social cohesion and encouraging a sense of pride in the city. It also strengthens the appeal of the city to businesses and tourists. Key question(s) Are there effective policies and plans in place to protect and conserve cultural and historical heritage? Are there protected heritage neighborhoods with effective regulatory frameworks? Does the city improve heritage awareness through knowledge and educational activities? Indicators • CORE: Total expenditure (public and private) per capita on the preservation, protection, and conservation of all cultural and natural heritage, by type of heritage (cultural, natural, mixed, and World Heritage Centre designation); level of government (national, regional, and local/municipal); type of expenditure (operating expenditure/ investment); and type of private funding (donations, private nonprofit sector, and sponsorship); and • Number of World Heritage sites within 100 km (GPSC). 72 ENABLING DIMENSION 2 ENABLING DIMENSIONS 2: Fiscal Sustainability Goal To ensure transparent, accountable, and effective management of the city and its finances Context City governments need adequate financial reserves Fiscal sustainability requires an enduring commitment in order to function—e.g., to pay staff or to deliver to sound financial management by the city and a services and planning activities. Sound financial supportive fiscal enabling environment. It entails management ensures that financial resources are prudent management of the operating budget robust, collected efficiently, and used strategically, (revenue and expenditure), the capital budget while the city operates within its budget. Careful (investment in infrastructure), liquidity (cash flow), structuring of city budgets will help to ensure and debt. It also entails a fiscal framework that assigns that funds are available for regular investment in adequate revenue sources; allows adjustment of tax, infrastructure and emergency planning and response. tariff, and fee rates when necessary; and provides This in turn helps to promote long-term financial formula-based revenue transfers that are predictable stability of the city government and also enables the and timely. City governments should also engage in government to adapt to changing circumstances and continual strategic forecasting of future revenues and respond to emergencies. liabilities, environmental factors, and socioeconomic trends in order to adapt financial and spatial planning The feasibility of sustainability policies and spatial accordingly. For fast-growing cities, it is critically planning instruments is highly dependent on a city’s important to access long-term financial markets to financial and governance capability. Cities are best help fund the numerous investments required in able to combine sustainability and shared prosperity urban infrastructure. This step is not possible for cities through effective urban governance, transformational lacking fiscal sustainability and effective governance. leadership, citizen engagement, multi-stakeholder The USF identifies fiscal sustainability as an enabling planning, and deployment of appropriate and dimension. This dimension encompasses key focus effective policies, laws, and regulations. Meanwhile, areas that are critical to, and cut across, all four of the openness and transparency about how city finances outcome dimensions. are managed, and how city decisions are made, can help strengthen trust in the city’s leadership. The following are the key focus areas under this dimension: A city’s fiscal sustainability is the ability of its 2.1 Accountability and transparency; government to sustain an adequate level of 2.2 Creditworthiness; ongoing administrative and urban services using 2.3 Revenue and financial autonomy; its total recurrent revenues, while also investing in 2.4 Expenditure management; and infrastructure improvements to meet the foreseeable 2.5 Management of debt and other obligations. growth in demand for city services. Unsustainable levels of debt or other liabilities harmful to the fiscal position of cities can cause a vicious cycle of growing debt, which diverts funds away from productive investments and so reduces the potential for economic growth. 73 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) Measurement and Assessment 2.1 Accountability and Transparency Subgoal To build and maintain trust in the city government and ensure accountable management and appropriate use of public resources Rationale Transparency and accountability in the use of public resources are essential to ensure the trust of civil society in the city government. Cities, and the public officials who run them, must be able to demonstrate that their budgets, projects, and policies are responsive to citizens’ needs. Accountability can be enhanced when the city leadership is directly elected by the people of the city and demonstrates that it is acting in the interests of the r esidents. Transparent and accountable auditing and scrutiny of public services can deter corruption and the misuse of city funds. Effective efforts to eliminate Corruption will help to reduce wasteful use of resources. Key question(s) Are there effective systems in place to ensure accountability of city government in its management and use of public resources? What are the actions undertaken for developing an accountability/transparency framework that acknowledges the importance of (1) information (through an open data approach), (2) enforcement (focusing on the community and the need to meet customer satisfaction and legal compliance obligations), and (3) participation (based on a partnership approach with an engaged community)? Indicators • Existence of electronic systems for tracking the municipality’s management (yes/no) (GSPC); and • Percentage of municipal government accounts audited (GSPC). 2.2 Creditworthiness Subgoal To demonstrate fiscal sustainability and creditworthiness by achieving a national scale investment-grade credit rating Rationale Already under pressure, infrastructure and basic services such as transport, solid waste management, education, and sanitation will need to be expanded significantly in order to serve developing cities’ growing populations. The investment required is immense: developing countries need an additional $1.3 trillion of investment in public infrastructure each year just to keep pace with current demand (World Bank 2018). However, the traditional sources of financing utilized by central governments and international aid organizations won’t be nearly enough to meet this demand. To secure the required funding, cities will need to access private sources of long-term financing through local capital markets and commercial partnerships—and to do this they will need to demonstrate that they are financially sustainable. Cities can measure and benchmark their financial sustainability through national scale credit ratings that show the domestic financial community that they are creditworthy. Credit ratings represent a standardized independent assessment of a city’s financial situation and specifically its ability to fulfill its financial commitments, including the repayment of debt. By allowing cities to access loans and issue municipal bonds, they make it possible for cities to finance infrastructure through capital investments and other means. 74 ENABLING DIMENSION 2 Key question(s) Is the city engaging, or planning to engage, with private sector investors? Has the national government developed an enabling legal and regulatory, institutional, and policy framework or responsible subnational borrowing? Are there national scale credit ratings of cities in this country? If yes, does the city have a credit rating, and if so, does it have a national scale investment-grade credit rating and what is that rating? If not, does the city envision obtaining a rating in the near future? Indicators • A credit rating or shadow credit rating on the national credit rating scale of the country (GPSC). 2.3 Revenue and Financial Autonomy Subgoal To maximize autonomy over city finances Rationale A city’s viability, independence, and control over its own resources are all affected by the balance between a city’s own source of income and higher-level government transfers. If a city depends on funding from regional or national government for revenues to deliver its services to the public, then it may have less ability to conduct financial planning and less control over its own budget. Key question(s) To what extent does the city have access to and transparent control over diverse revenue streams? Which revenue sources are managed directly by the city, and do these generate sufficient revenue to cover the city’s operating expenditures? How are municipal taxes collected, and what percentage of taxes due is actually collected? Are there revenue sources (own sources or transfers) that are dedicated to specific expenditures in either the operating or capital budget? Is the city financially autonomous or heavily dependent on other levels of government for its overall financing or for financing some sectors of its development? Indicators • Own-source revenue as a percentage of total revenue47 (ISO 37120, IDB, CRI); • Utility cost recovery (percentage) (IDB); and • Taxes collected as a percentage of taxes billed (IDB). 47 This metric explores how much control the city government has over its revenue. It examines whether it operates with a degree of economic independence or depends on central government allocation. Own-source concerns local government revenues originating from local fees, charges, and taxes. This amount is expressed as a percentage of total revenues that include all revenues provided by other levels of government, including formula-driven payments or repatriation of income tax and grants from higher levels of government. 75 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) 2.4 Expenditure Management Subgoal To ensure effective management of the city budgets Rationale To ensure financial sustainability, cities must plan for both operating and capital investment expenditures, and they must achieve a consistent positive operating margin (surplus of operating revenues over operating expenditures). To ensure transparency and accountability, they must execute operate and capital expenditure budgets in accordance with plans. A system of indicators and goals to accompany the budget helps to ensure that money is spent in a way that produces desired results. More specifically, it helps to (1) promote transparency and accountability in the budgeting process; and (2) allocate resources more effectively. Key question(s) Does the city have operating and capital investment plans that guide the preparation and execution of annual operating and capital budgets? Does the city have an operating margin surplus of operating revenues (own source and transfers) over operating expenditures? Has the city experienced any cash shortages during the last several fiscal years, and if so, how were they managed? How is budget execution tracked? Are there measurable indicators and goals? Indicators • Operating margin (operating revenues from all sources minus operating expenditures in all categories) (GPSC); and • Performance indicators and goals for tracking budget execution (IDB). 76 ENABLING DIMENSION 2 2.5 Management of Debt and Other Obligations Subgoal To adequately manage debt and other obligations Rationale A city’s financial obligations (liabilities) have a major impact on its financial sustainability. If obligations become greater than the revenue and reserves available to pay them, the city is financially unsustainable. To be sure of having access to the capital required for maintaining and expanding essential infrastructure, cities must carefully manage their financial obligations. Lenders and investors will look carefully at the city’s current debt (long or short term, fixed or variable interest rate, to be paid in local currency or foreign currency); the debt service burden; the needs for future debt financing; and other liabilities and contingent liabilities and how they are funded. In some cases, a serious risk to the fiscal management of a city comes from contingent liabilities—that is, liabilities that do not necessarily appear in the municipal government’s budget or balance sheet because they are not due to be paid in the short term. These become a risk if they materialize without sufficient reserves to pay them when they are due. Adequate management of debt and other obligations require keeping current and future mandatory payments within the limits of revenues and reserves available to make those payments. It is also essential that cities use long-term debt only to finance well-planned capital investments (such as infrastructure), and that they repay all short-term debt in the same fiscal year in which it was incurred. Cities also need to be careful not to incur debt in a currency different from the one in which they obtain revenues. Otherwise they will face foreign exchange risk that they are not able or authorized to manage. Key question(s) What are the city’s present debt service ratios? Do these ratios indicate that current debt is sustainable? Would additional debt be sustainable?Is all debt denominated in local currency? Is all short-term debt repaid within the fiscal year it is incurred, or is any of it rolled over to the next fiscal year? Does the growth rate of either short-term or long-term debt exceed the growth rate of revenues available for debt service, and if yes, what measures are being taken to reduce the debt? Are the city finances at risk due to contingent liabilities? Indicators • Debt service ratios (percentage) (IDB): o Ratio of annual debt service payments to total annual operating revenue; o Ratio of annual debt service payments to annual own-source revenues48 (ISO 37120, CRI); and o Ratio of annual debt service payments to the operating margin when debt service is excluded from total operating expenditures. • Ratio of foreign currency debt to local currency debt (GPSC); • Debt growth (percentage) (IDB); • Average annual rate of growth of the debt in the last three years: o Growth rate of short-term debt; o Growth rate of long-term debt; and o Growth rate of revenues available for debt service. • Total contingent liabilities that the city could be required to pay in the next five years as a percentage of the city’s own revenue in the same period (IDB). 48 The debt service ratio is the total long-term debt servicing costs (including lease payments, temporary financing, and other debt charges) divided by total own-source revenue and expressed as a percentage (ISO 37120). 77 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) Urbanization and economic growth go hand in hand. Higher levels of development are correlated with a greater concentration of production and population in cities. 78 OUTCOME DIMENSION 1: Urban Economies Goal To attain sustainable economic growth, prosperity, and competitiveness Context In cities that enjoy sustainable economic growth Urban economic development is also and competitiveness, firms and industries create often sequenced over time, with cities first employment, raise productivity, attract investments, experiencing structural transformation of their and increase the incomes of their citizens over time. local economies, resulting in efficiency gains, and later experiencing improvements in productivity. Worldwide, improving economic development in Long-term job growth in cities is usually driven cities is a pathway to eliminating extreme poverty by tradable sectors (World Bank 2015). These and to promoting shared prosperity. SDG 8 aims sectors drive growth in incomes and provide at promoting sustained, inclusive, and sustainable spillovers for other sectors and hence are economic growth, as well as full and productive critical in determining a city’s overall economic employment and decent work for all. development pathway. Urbanization and economic growth go hand in hand, The key focus areas for assessment and and higher levels of development are correlated with measurement within this dimension are: a greater concentration of production and population 1.1 Economic performance; in cities. However, urbanization does not automatically 1.2 Economic structure; breed economic success. Even for cities enjoying 1.3 Business climate, innovation, and positive economic trajectories, there are pitfalls along entrepreneurship; the way. Cities may need to continuously reassess their 1.4 Labor force; approach to growth in order to maintain momentum. 1.5 Livelihood opportunities; Sustainable urban economic development results 1.6 Income equality and shared prosperity; in efficiencies, and also allows better access to 1.7 Global appeal; and opportunities, amenities, and services. 1.8 Connectivity and global links. Image: Frites and Fiets Cycling Trip by George Weeks at the Academy of Urbanism, CC BY-NC-ND 2.0, www.flickr.com/photos/academyofurbanism/37685715116. 79 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) Assessment and Measurement 1.1 Economic Performance Subgoal To achieve economic growth and prosperity while reducing environmental impacts in absolute terms Rationale Cities are engines of local, regional, and national economic development. Agglomeration effects (the productive efficiencies that result from colocation of firms) are integral to urban economic development. Agglomeration effects tend to be spatially bound. With its economies of scale and shared infrastructure, the city is the natural scale of job pooling where knowledge can be transferred between businesses. In particular, companies providing high-value-added services need face-to-face interactions and knowledge exchange. Urban economic development is intricately linked to—and often a prerequisite for—service delivery, investments in infrastructure, and poverty reduction in cities. Cities that are more competitive have the ability to set aside additional resources to meet the needs of their citizens and the challenges of the future. Yet in order to grow, the economy may require natural resources and emit waste that pollutes land, water, and air and contributes to impacts on the global climate. Thus, cities in developing countries may need to tackle trade-offs between growth and environmental efficiency. Sustainable urban economic growth should be linked to increasing the efficiency of resource use, reducing carbon emissions in absolute terms, and encouraging low-carbon and climate-smart investments. Key question(s) Does the city demonstrate competitiveness—gross domestic product (GDP) growth per capita, job growth, and growth of incomes? Is the city economically dense enough to promote agglomeration economies? Is the economic growth environmentally sustainable? Indicators • GDP per capita, including growth rate (SDGs, WDI, GEF, IDB, CPI); • GDP energy intensity (primary energy use/unit of GDP)49 (SDGs, WDI); • GDP carbon intensity (annual CO2 emissions per unit of GDP)50 (WDI, IDB, EBRD); • GDP per domestic material consumption51 (SDGs, EBRD); • GDP density (GDP/km2 of urban built-up area)52 (GPSC); • Annual growth rate of real GDP per employed person (SDGs); • GDP per person employed53 (WDI); and • Percentage employment change from the last year54 (CRI). 49 This indicator links the cross-cutting issues of economic productivity, energy efficiency, and climate change. Time series of GDP on one side and energy consumption on the other side can be used to assess if the city realizes relative decoupling (decrease over time of the energy intensity of its economy) or absolute decoupling (absolute increase of GDP accompanied by absolute decrease of energy consumption). 50 This indicator—kilograms of CO2 emissions per 2011 purchasing power parity dollars of GDP—links the cross-cutting issues of economic productivity and climate change. Time series of GDP on one side and CO2 emissions on the other side can be used to assess if the city realizes relative decoupling (decrease over time of the carbon intensity of its economy) or absolute decoupling (absolute increase of GDP accompanied by absolute decrease of carbon emissions). 51 This indicator measures material resource productivity. 52 This indicator measures both urban land productivity in relation to infrastructure costs and agglomeration of the economy. It thus assesses impacts on urban productivity in two ways: (1) through productivity of land; and (2) through productivity of labor (which is increased by agglomeration, as suggested by international research). See Salat, Bourdic, and Kamiya (2017). 53 This indicator is a measure of productive employment. 54 This metric examines whether overall employment opportunities have increased, decreased, or remained level in the past year. A thriving economy should be evident through positive and steady employment change. 80 OUTCOME DIMENSION 1 1.2 Economic Structure Subgoal To establish a diverse, competitive, and resilient economic structure Rationale Urbanization economies are a result of matchmaking across labor, infrastructure, and knowledge pools in cities. A diversity of sectors, people, and ideas provides a rich foundation for fostering innovation, which in turn drives productivity growth over time. A diverse economic base also provides economic stability by minimizing a city’s reliance on a small number of industries and by increasing access to a larger basket of markets. Thus, diversity is also related to resilience, in that it helps city economies withstand downturns or disruptions within particular sectors, in turn reducing risks for businesses, investors, and workers. Trends in the sectoral composition of the economy show if the city evolves toward higher segments of the value chain and specializes in sectors where it has a competitive advantage. Key question(s) Is the city’s economy driven by a diverse range of sectors, or does it rely on a small number of sectors? Does the city specialize in sectors where it has a competitive advantage? What are the factors (local and global) behind growth and/or demise of main economic sectors in the city? Is the education level of the labor force high enough to support moving up value chains in global markets? Indicators • Manufacturing employment as a proportion of total employment (SDGs); • Sectoral breakdown (GDP, employment) and evolution during the last two decades with disaggregation by gender55 (WDI); • Location quotients of top-three city economic subsectors (share of subsector in city GDP compared to national share)56 (GPSC); and • Herfindahl index and evolution over time57 (GPSC). 55 This indicator allows assessing two cross-cutting issues: the economy’s sectoral composition and women’s participation in the highest- value sectors. 56 A location quotient (LQ) is an analytical statistic that measures a region’s industrial specialization relative to a larger geographic unit (usually the nation). An LQ is computed as an industry’s share of a regional total for some economic statistic (earnings, GDP by metropolitan area, employment, etc.) divided by the industry’s share of the national total for the same statistic. For example, an LQ of 1.0 in mining means that the region and the nation are equally specialized in mining, while an LQ of 1.8 means that the region has a higher concentration in mining than the nation. 57 The Herfindahl index measures the size distribution of firms within an industry. It is an indicator of the level of competition in a market. It is defined as the sum of the squares of the market shares of the companies of the sector (sometimes limited to the 50 largest companies), with the market shares expressed in fractions. It can therefore range from 0 to 1. An increase in the Herfindahl index generally indicates a decrease in competition. A weak index indicates an atomized market among many competing firms, while an index of 1 indicates a single monopoly producer. More precisely: • An H below 0.01 indicates a highly competitive industry; • An H below 0.15 indicates an unconcentrated industry; • An H between 0.15 and 0.25 indicates moderate concentration; and • An H above 0.25 indicates high concentration. 81 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) 1.3 Business Climate, Innovation, and Entrepreneurship Subgoal To create a dynamic business environment to support private sector development and innovation Rationale Cities must retain a competitive advantage to attract and retain business investment. Cultivating and promoting the city as an attractive place for businesses helps to retain capital; it also creates momentum as businesses locate near each other to benefit from economies of scale and reduced transaction costs. An environment that supports local business development and innovation provides greater livelihood opportunities for its population and is less reliant on external economic influence. Such an environment helps to retain economic profit within the city, boosting the local economy and city revenues. Economic growth is driven by learning, innovation, and the accumulation of ideas, skills, and knowledge capital. By supporting local business development and innovation, cities can reduce dependency on external economic influences and create greater economic opportunities for their population. Business climate has been traditionally associated with economic competitiveness of countries, regions, and cities. Bureaucratic barriers deter entrepreneurship and private investment, and thus have major negative consequences for economic performance. Business climate is shaped both by regulations and norms (often established at a national level), and by the way regulations and norms are implemented (which is most often a local issue). Key question(s) Does the regulatory environment (e.g., bureaucratic norms and procedures related to starting and operating a business) encourage economic growth and development in the city? Does the business support provided by the national or local authorities address the real needs of the businesses and help them improve productivity? To what extent are there mechanisms in place to promote procurement practices that support local businesses and businesses owned by women and minority groups? To what extent are there mechanisms to provide emergency support to local small and medium-size businesses following a disaster? Indicators • Research and development expenditure as a proportion of local GDP (GPSC); • Foreign direct investment (FDI) in capital divided by GDP58 (IDB); • Number of businesses per 100,000 16- to 64-year-olds (ISO 37120, CRI); • Days to obtain a business license, and change of this number over time (IDB, WDI, CPI); • Number of days the city government takes to grant a construction license (IDB); • Strategic business infrastructure: Existence of a logistics platform (yes/ no)59 (IDB); • Ease of access to finance (what share of business struggles to access finance, what are the interest rates, what financial tools are offered by banks and by other institutions) (GPSC); • Quality and accessibility of support for businesses (GPSC); and • Number of mechanisms in place to support local small and medium-size businesses following a disaster (CRI). 58 Supplementary metric: average FDI-attributable jobs over the last three years per 100,000 16- to 64-year-olds (CRI). This is calculated by taking the mean average of annual FDI job figures over the past three years. The city also needs to know the size of its population aged 16 to 64 years old (working population), then divide FDI jobs by this figure and multiply by 100,000. 59 A “yes” answer means that the city provides specialized facilities exclusively to logistics operators in diverse activities. 82 OUTCOME DIMENSION 1 1.4 Labor Force Subgoal To invest in local skills and attract talent in line with the current and future jobs marketplace Rationale By aligning the skills of the city’s workforce to current and emerging job opportunities, cities can support existing employers and attract new businesses, thus generating the economic dynamism to create new jobs and increase livelihood opportunities for their populations in the long term. A long-term comprehensive strategy is required to help match the skills of the workforce to the current and emerging employment market place in the city. Key question(s) Has the labor force participation rate increased or decreased over the last decade, and why? To what extent are there effective mechanisms in place for matching skills to the current and emerging employment marketplace? Indicators • Labor force participation rate, and changes over time60 by gender (WDI); • Vulnerable employment by gender (WDI); • Informal employment61 as percentage of total employment by gender (adapted from 2016 SDGs, IDB); • Level of education of labor force (GPSC)62; and • Percentage of foreign born residents (OECD). 1.5 Livelihood Opportunities Subgoal To facilitate livelihood opportunities for city residents Rationale In a sustainable city, individuals are able to access diverse livelihood and employment opportunities to accrue personal savings that will support their development in ordinary times and their survival in times of crisis. Job creation in cities is at the forefront of the economic development challenge globally. Many developing countries are experiencing a demographic and spatial transition, with millions of new entrants to the labor market. Creating job opportunities in urban areas—quickly—is essential if countries are to take advantage of their “demographic dividend” and thus avoid the social disaster created by unemployment and inequality. Cities need jobs and opportunities for their citizens, and they need the means to generate tax revenues to fund projects that meet the growing demand for basic services. Key question(s) Are there diverse, accessible, and appropriate livelihood and employment opportunities? Do employment opportunities match the level of education of the labor force in type and quantity, or is there a mismatch? To what extent are there labor policies and standards in place that effectively deter discrimination and promote fair employment conditions? Indicators • Average hourly earnings of female and male employees, by occupation, age, and disability status (SDGs); • Unemployment rate (percentage), and change in rate over time (IDB, CPI, CRI); and • Youth unemployment rate (CPI). 60 Globally, informal and vulnerable employment accounts for 1.5 billion people, or over 46 percent of total employment. In both southern Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa, over 70 percent of workers are in vulnerable employment. 61 This is the percentage of the economically active population engaged in informal employment as defined by the International Labour Organization. 62 This indicator links social inclusiveness (match of jobs and skills) to the ability of the city to move up the value chain in its economic structure and to evolve toward a service (and ultimately a knowledge) economy. 83 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) 1.6 Income Equality and Shared Prosperity Subgoal To reduce income inequality within the city (across geography and demographic groups) and across the urban system Rationale At the city scale, incomes converge through economic development: as cities develop, an influx of migrants (often from smaller cities or rural regions) leads to an increase in intracity inequality, but subsequently inequality levels tend to decline as cities gradually include migrants in the labor force. Income disparity is not only a problem for the poor; it can blunt economic growth, increase crime, and weaken social cohesion across cities. As hubs of both economic opportunity and economic disparity, cities have a vital role to play in tackling inequality and should consider income disparities across space, across communities, and across demographic groups (i.e., ethnic groups, women, young adults, immigrants, and disadvantaged populations). Key question(s) What is the pattern of income disparity across the city and between different demographic, gender, and ethnic groups? Is income disparity geographically concentrated in specific urban areas? How does the per capita provision of physical infrastructure (streets, public space, water and sewage systems, transit stops, etc.) and social infrastructure (public services, education, health, etc.) differ for wealthy and poor urban areas? Indicators • Income Gini coefficient63 (SDGs, WDI, IDB, CPI); • Share of consumption or income, highest 10 percent of population (WDI); • Share of consumption or income, lowest 10 percent of population (WDI); • Annualized growth in mean consumption or income per capita, bottom 40 percent (WDI); • Average income ratio between urban population and neighboring rural population, and changes over time (GPSC)64; and • Ratio of access to services between 90th and 50th percentiles (GPSC). 63 The Gini index measures the extent to which the distribution of income or consumption expenditure among individuals or households within an economy deviates from a perfectly equal distribution. A Gini index of zero indicates perfect equality, while an index of 100 implies perfect inequality. 64 This indicator reflects migrations from rural area to urban areas. 84 OUTCOME DIMENSION 1 1.7 Global Appeal Subgoal To position the city as an appealing place to live, work, visit, or do business Rationale Cities that are able to develop an appealing differentiator (or “brand”) are better able to compete with other cities to attract business, skilled workers, and tourists, and thus better able to increase and diversify their potential tax base. The appeal of a city may be based on its cultural or historic heritage, ease of doing business, quality of place, lifestyle, or diversity. Key question(s) How attractive is the city as a place to live, work, study, visit, or do business compared to other cities regionally, nationally, and internationally? Has the city put in place a strong and financed policy for enhancing cultural interaction? Indicators • Number of visitors from abroad and domestically (GSPC); • Number of international students (GPSC); • Number of foreign residents (GPSC); and • Foreign direct investment as a percentage of total investment (OECD). 1.8 Connectivity and Global Links Subgoal To provide adequate transport and digital connectivity to support economic growth and attract investment Rationale Cities are efficient at providing access to people, goods, services, and information: the better and more efficient this access, the greater the social and economic benefits of urban living. A sustainable city deploys the connective infrastructure—transit infrastructure, airport connectivity, logistics, and information and communications technology—required to sustain both the population and the economy and to provide better quality of life and equitable access to jobs, education, and health. Broadband quality and airport and logistics connectivity support a city’s access to global flows of information, high-level services, and goods. Key question(s) Is there good connectivity for people and goods between the city and regional and international destinations? To what extent does the city have strong, integrated economic relationships with other cities and regions? Is the city a key node, or is it close to a key node, in global or regional transportation networks (ports, high-speed rail, air)? What is the city’s distance from major concentrations of economic density and its location in regional economic corridors? Are communication technology networks effective and reliable across the city? Indicators • Proportion of population covered by a mobile network, by technology (SDGs); • Broadband Internet subscriptions per 100 inhabitants (SDGs, WDI, CPI); • Number of national and international routes from nearest airport (GPSC); • Value of city exports as a percentage of city GDP (WDI, CRI); • Value of city imports as a percentage of city GDP (WDI); • International inbound and outbound tourists (WDI); and • Market accessibility due to infrastructure, Rural Access Index, Urban Accessibility/ Mobility Index (World Bank). 85 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) OUTCOME DIMENSION 2: Natural Environment and Resources Goal To protect and conserve ecosystems and natural resources Context The natural environment provides many social But a city’s growth and economic development can and economic benefits and is an essential occur without destroying or degrading the environment; component of urban sustainability. The instead, the city’s natural assets can be preserved environment provides food, water, and other for future generations. Well-planned cities decouple essential commodities. Healthy ecosystems economic growth from environmental pressure by regulate the climate and attenuate the effects increasing their resource efficiency. Cities provide of extreme weather events, while improving unique opportunities for patterns of highly efficient residents’ quality of life and well-being. consumption and production of energy, water, and materials as well as for circular economies and low- However, urbanization and overconsumption of carbon living. High-density development can reduce resources are placing great pressure on natural urban sprawl and relieve the environmental pressures environments. Expansion of urban areas results of a burgeoning planetary population. In this way, cities in loss of natural habitats and decimation of can provide new pathways to sustainable use of natural biodiversity. Further environmental degradation resources and protection of ecosystems and biodiversity. can occur if city sanitation, waste disposal, and environmental enforcement systems fail to keep The following are the key focus areas for assessment pace with the rate and pattern of urban growth. and measurement within this dimension: Meanwhile, increased motorized vehicular and 2.1 Ecosystems and biodiversity; industrial activities can cause significant declines 2.2 Air quality; in air quality, with resulting impacts on human 2.3 Water resources management; health and increased levels of greenhouse gas 2.4 Solid waste management; and (GHG) emissions. 2.5 Consumption and production patterns. 86 OUTCOME DIMENSION 2 Assessment and Measurement 2.1 Ecosystems and Biodiversity Subgoal To protect, conserve, restore, and promote ecosystems, natural habitats, and biodiversity within and beyond the city boundaries Rationale Healthy and biodiverse ecosystems are vital to the effective functioning of city systems (e.g., they provide water, attenuate floodwater, filter particles from air, promote pollination, help control climate, support nutrient cycles). They also provide health, recreational, cultural, and spiritual benefits to city residents. Avoiding soil contamination is of particular concern for healthy agriculture and protection of human health. Key question(s) What are the land cover changes that may be a threat to urban ecosystems and biodiversity? Are ecosystems and biodiversity within the city protected by regulations and effectively implemented actions? Indicators • Hectares of permanent green space per 100,000 city residents (IDB); • Share of population within a 15-minute walk of open green space65 (EBRD); • Enforcement and monitoring of biodiversity regulations (GEF); • Existence and active implementation of a land use plan that includes zoning with environmental protection and preservation zones (IDB); • Abundance of bird species66 (annual percentage change, all species) (EBRD); • Number of contaminated sites (contaminated sites/1,000 inhabitants or km2) (EBRD); and • Concentration of mercury in soil (mg/kg) (EBRD). 65 This indicator of accessibility is used in cities’ strategic plans (see for example PlaNYC, described in annex D). 66 This indicator measures the percentage of change in bird population in one year. The data for the whole city can be estimated from a sample of an inventory of bird population in a given area. The data should be compiled once a year. See European Environment Agency, “Abundance and Distribution of Selected Species,” http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and- maps/indicators/abundance -and- distribution-of- selected- species/abundance-and- distribution-of-selected-2. 87 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) 2.2 Air Quality Subgoal To maintain adequate air quality levels across the city such that no communities are routinely exposed to unhealthy levels of air pollution Rationale Poor air quality in cities is commonplace as a result of motorized vehicles and industrial emissions. It has widespread impacts on human health, increasing the occurrence of strokes, heart disease, lung cancer, and respiratory diseases, including asthma. Poor air quality also reduces city attractiveness, quality of life, and economic productivity. More generally, pollution has a huge economic cost. Key question(s) Does air quality across all parts of the city routinely meet standards that protect human health? What are the measures taken both for reducing source emissions and for protecting public health? Indicators • CORE: Annual mean levels of fine particulate matter (e.g., PM2.5 and PM10) in cities (population weighted) (SDG 11, EBRD, CPI); • Average annual concentration of NOx (EBRD); and • Average daily concentration of SO2 (EBRD). Note: These indicators should comprise averages and spatially disaggregated data, when available. 2.3 Water Resources Management Subgoal To manage water resources in a coordinated manner, without harming the quality and sustainability of surface water and goundwater bodies within and beyond the city boundaries Rationale A reliable, safe water supply is fundamental to a city’s viability, yet often the reservoirs and aquifers on which the city relies are located far beyond its geographic and administrative boundaries. It is essential for cities to implement a catchment-wide approach to planning and managing water resources, whereby cities collaborate with all relevant stakeholders within the catchment area to manage demands, establish safe yields, and maintain quality. Key question(s) Are city water supplies able to meet demand to provide safe water for all in the long term? What actions are taken to improve water supply systems and to change water consumption patterns? Indicators • Level of water stress: Annual freshwater withdrawals, percentage of internal resources (SDGs, WDI, EBRD67); • Annual freshwater withdrawals, percentage by sector (agriculture, industry, domestic) (WDI); • Annual water consumption per capita68 (L/person/day) (GEF, IDB, EBRD); • Water productivity, GDP/water use (WDI, EBRD); • Nonrevenue water: Percentage of water lost in the water distribution system69 (IDB, EBRD); and • Percentage of residential and commercial wastewater that is treated according to applicable national standards (SDGs, IDB, EBRD, CPI). 88 OUTCOME DIMENSION 2 2.4 Solid Waste Management Subgoal To minimize waste generation and to minimize environmental impacts of waste by ensuring appropriate collection, treatment, and disposal of the city’s solid waste. Rationale Reducing, reusing, and recycling waste reduces pressure on the planet’s finite resources. Uncontrolled dumping of waste and disposal in landfill sites without effective pollution controls results in degradation of land, water, and air. Comprehensive collection and appropriate treatment and/or disposal of a city’s solid waste helps prevent environmental degradation. Key question(s) Are solid waste management practices across all parts of the city effective at reducing waste generation, reclaiming value from solid waste, and minimizing environmental impacts of waste collection, treatment, and disposal? Indicators • Total solid waste generation per capita70 (kg / year / capita) (EBRD); • Share of the population with weekly municipal solid waste collection71 (percentage) (IDB, EBRD); • Proportion of municipal solid waste that is sorted and recycled72 (IDB, EBRD); and • Remaining life of current landfill(s).73 (IDB, EBRD) 2.5 Consumption and Production Patterns Subgoal To achieve sustainable management and efficient use of natural resources Rationale The world’s population is growing, and the demand for food, materials, and goods is increasing at an unprecedented rate. Yet there is a finite supply of many natural resources on which we rely. Cities are uniquely well placed to reduce demand on these finite resources through more efficient use, substitution of renewable resources, and implementation of circular economy principles. Sustainable consumption and production aims at “doing more and better with less.” It increases net welfare gains from economic activities while reducing resource use, degradation, and pollution along the whole life cycle of the resource. Key question(s) Is the city implementing strategies to maximize efficient use of natural resources? Is the city implementing cooperation among actors operating in the supply chain, from producer to final consumer? Is the city engaging consumers through awareness raising and education about sustainable consumption and lifestyles? Indicators • CORE: Proportion of financial support that is allocated to the construction and retrofitting of sustainable, resilient, and resource-efficient buildings utilizing local materials (adapted SD G11); and • Material footprint per capita and per GDP unit (SDGs). 67 EBRD Water Exploitation Index (%): The Water Exploitation Index Plus (WEI+) is the total water used as a percentage of the renewable freshwater resources in a given territory and time scale. See European Environment Agency, “Use of Freshwater Resources,” http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and- maps/indicators/use-of- freshwater-resources- 2/assessment-1. 68 This indicator measures the annual per capita water consumption of residents connected to the city’s network. Data can be obtained from the public agency providing the water. The data must be measured several times a year to account for the variability of water consumption levels with the seasons. 69 This is calculated as percentage of water lost from the amount of treated water entering the distribution system that is accounted for by the water provider. This includes actual water losses (e.g., leaking pipes) and billing losses (e.g., broken water meters, absence of water meters, and illegal connections). 70 For useful benchmarks, see European Environment Agency, “Waste—Municipal Solid Waste Generation and Management,” http:// www.eea.europa.eu/soer- 2015/countries-comparison/waste. 71 The data can be collected annually through surveys. 72 Formally and informally recycled materials are those that (following local government permits and regulations) are diverted from the waste stream, partially recovered, and sent for processing into new products. 73 This indicator measures the remaining useful life of the site of the sanitary or controlled landfill, based on the city’s municipal solid waste generation projections (in years). The data can be collected twice a year. 89 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) OUTCOME DIMENSION 3: Climate Action and Resilience Goal To minimize the city’s impact on climate change and foster resilience Context Global climate has much to do with the concepts sustainable and low-carbon pathways. In mature or and considerations identified within the natural established cities, options will focus on the potential for environment and resources dimension described above. refurbishing existing systems and infrastructures. Key However, the Urban Sustainability Framework identifies mitigation strategies include collocating high residential climate action and resilience as a standalone dimension densities with high employment densities, diversifying in recognition of the importance and urgency of land use mixes, increasing accessibility to and investing international efforts to curb the impacts of climate in public transit, and other supportive demand- change—and the vital role that cities must play in management measures. These strategies can reduce “holding the increase in the global average temperature emissions in the short term and long term (IPCC 2014). to well below 2° C above pre-industrial levels, and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 At the same time, cities need to adapt to a changing °C above pre-industrial levels” (UN 2016). climate. Adaptation measures range from large-scale infrastructure changes to initiatives to bring about Cities are major contributors to climate change. behavioral shifts within the local population. But Despite covering less than 2 percent of the earth’s adaptation to predicted risks is not sufficient by itself. surface, cities consume 78 percent of the world’s Cities are recognizing that they must build resilience energy and produce more than 60 percent of all to a wide range of shocks and stresses that are not carbon dioxide and significant amounts of other necessarily predictable. They must position themselves greenhouse gases, mainly through energy generation, to survive and thrive in an increasingly uncertain vehicles, industry, and biomass use. Analysis shows future—one where climate change combines with that cities must reduce per capita emissions by an urbanization, demographic change, and globalization average of 42 percent to limit global temperature to create new and unpredictable risks. rise to 1.5 degrees and that every city must diverge considerably from current business-as-usual pathways The following are the key focus areas under this dimension: to deliver a climate-safe future (UN-Habitat 2016b). 3.1 Greenhouse gas inventory; 3.2 Energy efficiency; For rapidly developing cities, options for mitigating 3.3 Clean energy; climate change include shaping their urbanization 3.4 Climate change adaptation; and and infrastructure development toward more 3.5 Disaster risk reduction. 90 OUTCOME DIMENSION 3 Assessment and Measurement 3.1 Greenhouse Gas Inventory Subgoal To identify the sectors, sources, and activities within the city that are responsible for greenhouse gas emissions so that the city’s emissions can be managed and reduced Rationale Cities need a good understanding of the sources and scale of their GHG emissions in order to develop strategies to reduce emissions and monitor progress toward emission reduction targets. Key question(s) Does the city use a GHG inventory to identify sources of emissions and prioritize policies to reduce emissions?74 Indicators • Existence of a GHG emissions measurement system with a monitoring system (IDB); • Annual CO2 equivalent emissions per capita75 (tCO2/capita) (SDGs, IDB, EBRD, WDI, CPI); • GHG emissions, total and percentage change (WDI); • Methane emissions, total and percentage change (WDI); and • CO2 emissions by sector (electricity and heat production; manufacturing industries and construction; residential buildings and commercial and public services; transport; other sectors) (WDI). 3.2 Energy Efficiency Subgoal To maximize energy efficiency in order to reduce the city’s greenhouse gas emissions Rationale Reducing energy use through efficiency measures can deliver significant reductions in GHG emissions, with the added benefit of delivering significant monetary savings as well. SDG 7 aims, by 2030, to substantially increase the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix and to double the global rate of improvement in energy efficiency. Besides sectoral measures, integrated urban planning is a powerful instrument for increasing energy efficiency. Key planning policy levers include (1) increasing urban density in low-density cities; (2) aligning transit accessibility and land use intensity to reduce transportation energy; (3) improving city public transit; (4) changing building practices; and (5) changing sources of energy. Key question(s) Is the city implementing effective strategies to improve energy efficiency? How are energy efficiency policies reflected in regulatory frameworks and financial incentives? Indicators • Total final energy consumption, in GJ per capita per year and average annual growth (WDI, IDB); and • Resilience of the electricity network to climatic extremes: Average share of population undergoing prolonged power outage in case of climatic extremes over the past five years (percentage) (EBRD). 74 The first step in considering city GHG emissions is to define a GHG baseline of the annual GHG emissions produced in a given geographical area. This requires defining the scope of the emissions being measured and the boundaries of the city unit. The scope of emissions included in the city GHG standard produced by the UN Environment Programme, UN-Habitat, and the World Bank “includes all emissions produced within a city, major emissions from consumption within a city, and major upstream emissions that are attributable to city residents. The question about the relevant boundaries of a city has to do with the unit to measure—strict city boundaries or the metropolitan area. A metropolitan or functional limit of the city may be the best scale to use, especially for larger cities” (World Bank 2010). 75 This indicator measures CO2 emissions of the city, divided by city population. It controls for the size of city population. Estimates of CO2 emissions must first be made within each sector (transport, electricity, etc.) and averaged. 91 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) 3.3 Clean Energy Subgoal To reduce greenhouse gas emissions by switching to low-carbon and zero-carbon energy sources Rationale The impact of energy consumption on GHG emissions depends not only on the amount consumed, but also on the mode of energy production and the consequent GHG emitted by those sources. The majority of GHG emissions from cities can be attributed to energy derived from fossil fuels, electricity within buildings, and fuels used by vehicles. Switching to low-carbon or zero-carbon sources of electricity and power can therefore deliver significant reductions in GHG emissions. Key question(s) What are the city targets, policies, incentives, and milestones for increasing the share of renewable energies? Indicators • Percentage of total energy derived from renewable sources, as share of city’s total final energy consumption (adapted from SDGs, EBRD, CPI); and • Proportion of population with primary reliance on clean fuels and technology (SDGs). 3.4 Climate Change Adaptation Subgoal To reduce the risks to the city (and in particular to the poor and vulnerable groups) posed by the consequences of future changes in climate Rationale In the future, climate change will have more and more significant impacts on cities. It will increase the frequency and severity of some natural hazards, especially extreme weather events, and introduce new incremental impacts that are less immediate. The consequences of climate change will be felt on health, livelihoods, and material assets, and will more heavily affect the poorest people, the inhabitants of informal settlements, and vulnerable groups such as women, children, the elderly, and the disabled. SDG 1 aims, by 2030, to build the resilience of the poor and those in vulnerable situations and to reduce their exposure and vulnerability to climate-related extreme events and other economic, social, and environmental shocks and disasters. Key question(s) Is the city preparing for and seeking to limit the magnitude and severity of existing and future climate impacts? Has the city developed a comprehensive climate change adaptation plan? Is the city treating vulnerability to climate impacts as a separate concern, or mainstreaming resilience into existing efforts, in particular those concerned with the urban poor and the most vulnerable? Does the city incorporate climate considerations into existing plans, policies, and projects? How does the city finance adaptation to climate change? Indicators • Years since the city’s climate change strategic plan was updated (CRI). 92 OUTCOME DIMENSION 3 3.5 Disaster Risk Reduction Subgoal To reduce the risk of disaster caused by natural hazards Rationale A combination of climate change, urbanization, and globalization means cities are more at risk than ever before from natural and man-made disasters (e.g., floods, droughts, cyclones, epidemics, terrorist attacks). Cities can implement prevention and mitigation measures to reduce risk and develop strategies to help them recover in the event that a disaster should occur. Key question(s) Has the city undertaken comprehensive disaster risk reduction strategies? Is disaster risk management integrated in city planning (land use, transportation, and water, in particular)? To what extent is there an adequately trained, resourced, and coordinated official emergency response to the immediate aftermath of disasters and major incidents? Are citizens aware of and engaged in contingency plans in case of natural disasters? Indicators • CORE: Number of deaths, missing persons, and persons affected by disaster per 100,000 people (SDG 11); • CORE: Direct disaster economic loss in relation to global GDP, including disaster damage to critical infrastructure and disruption of basic services (SDG 11, EBRD); • CORE: Local disaster risk reduction strategies adopted and implemented in line with the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 (yes/no) (adapted from SDG 11); • Awareness of and preparedness for natural disasters76 (EBRD); • Population affected by droughts, floods, and extreme temperatures (WDI); • Critical infrastructure at risk due to inadequate construction or placement in areas of nonmitigable risk77 (IDB, EBRD); • Existence of adequate contingency plans for natural disasters with early warning systems (yes/no) (IDB); and • Existence of risk maps (at an adequate scale for the main hazards threatening the city) (IDB). 76 This is a qualitative assessment of citizens’ awareness of the threats of natural disasters and their means to minimize damages (e.g., insurance, knowledge of shelters, measures to take at the building level, etc.). 77 This requires identification of urban areas exposed to a disaster (e.g., located in a low-lying area, exposed to a landslide) together with information about the quality of housing in such areas. The data should be collected biannually based on a selected climatic/geological event (e.g., 10-year flood, if flood is the most common type of disaster the city experiences). 93 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) OUTCOME DIMENSION 4: Inclusivity and Quality of Life Goal To reduce inequalities and provide a decent quality of life for all Context Urbanization has the potential to improve city dwellers’ People are the soul of a city, and ensuring that they quality of life and provide a pathway out of poverty. lead fulfilling lives (and are able to contribute to others But all too often, rising inequality and exclusion occur in return) is crucial to any sustainable city. Creating within cities instead. In order to realize the full social people-centered, livable cities means making them and economic benefits of urbanization, cities must inclusive, equitable, tolerant, and access oriented; they value all people and their needs equally, and guarantee should have good-quality public open spaces and be equal rights for and participation by all. They must affordable, healthy, walkable, and pleasant for different provide equal and affordable access to basic necessities, groups of people. To foster urban sustainability, cities including food, water, housing, sanitation, and energy. must provide amenities required for improved living Cities must also ensure that no group is excluded from standards, such as social services, education, health, the benefits of economic growth, regardless of race, recreation, safety, and security. These will enable the religion, ethnicity, or socioeconomic status. population to maximize individual potential and to lead healthy and fulfilling lives. In particular, cities should strive to achieve gender equality and empower women and girls. SDG 5 aims at The following are the key focus areas under this dimension: ending all forms of discrimination against all women 4.1 Housing; and girls everywhere; at eliminating all forms of 4.2 Education; violence against all women and girls in the public and 4.3 Poverty reduction, hunger reduction, and private spheres, including trafficking and sexual and food security; other types of exploitation; and at ensuring that women 4.4 Drinking water and sanitation; are able to fully and effectively participate in political, 4.5 Basic physical infrastructure; economic, and public life, and that they have equal 4.6 Health and well-being; opportunities for leadership at all levels of decision 4.7 Safety; and making in these realms. 4.8 Social cohesion. 94 OUTCOME DIMENSION 4 Assessment and Measurement 4.1 Housing Subgoal To provide adequate and affordable housing for all Rationale SDG 11 aims, by 2030, at ensuring access for all to adequate, safe, and affordable housing and basic services, and at the upgrading of slums. Safe, adequate housing provides the shelter and security that are essential for the health and well-being of the city’s inhabitants. Inadequate housing can lead to long-term social, economic, and environmental challenges for individuals, communities, and the city as a whole. Key question(s) Is there an adequate supply of safe and affordable housing to meet demand? Does this housing meet the requirements of residents (in terms of space and quality)? Is housing policy targeted at providing dwellings close to transit facilities in order to increase job opportunities for all and reduce transportation costs for the poorest? Is housing policy integrated in planning for mixed-use, well-connected communities offering local jobs, or is it undertaken in silos? Does housing policy favor social and ethnic mixing through regulatory frameworks and incentives? Indicators • Quantitative housing shortage (number of housing units/number of households) (IDB); • Housing affordability index: Percentage of household income spent on housing (mortgage or rent) by the poorest 20 percent of the population (CRI); • Average housing floor space per person (GPSC); and • Housing deprivation78 (CRI). 4.2 Education Subgoal To provide quality education for all Rationale Education is essential for human development. Education increases the range and quality of livelihood opportunities, helping to reduce poverty and eradicate hunger. An educated workforce is better able to meet the skills demanded by businesses, and in turn helps local economies to grow and prosper. Equal access to education can help to eliminate gender and ethnic inequalities and empower marginalized and vulnerable groups. SDG 4 aims, by 2030, at eliminating gender disparities in education and ensuring equal access to all levels of education and vocational training for the vulnerable, including persons with disabilities, indigenous peoples, and children in vulnerable situations. Key question(s) Are educational attainment levels across the population equal regardless of gender, ethnicity, or wealth? Indicators • Parity indexes (female/male, rural/urban, bottom/top wealth quintile, and others such as disability status, indigenous peoples, and conflict-affected, as data become available) for all education indicators that can be disaggregated (SDGs); • Adult literacy rate79 (percentage) by gender, ethnicity, and wealth (IDB, WDI, CPI); • Expected years of schooling by gender, ethnicity, and wealth (adapted from SDGs, CPI); • Net primary enrollment rate (percentage) (SDGs, WDI); • Student/teacher ratio (IDB); and • University seats per 100,000 people (IDB). 78 Housing deprivation is defined by the City Resilience Index as the percentage of population living in a dwelling considered overcrowded, and exhibiting at least one of the following housing deprivation measures: (1) a leaking roof; or damp walls, floors, or foundations; or rot in window frames or floor; (2) no bath, shower, or indoor flushing toilet; or (3) too dark. 95 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) 4.3 Poverty Reduction, Hunger Reduction, and Food Security Subgoal To reduce poverty and hunger with the goal of ultimately eliminating them; and to ensure security of food supply and adequate nutrition for all Rationale SDG 1 aims at ending poverty in all its forms everywhere. It aims, by 2030, at eradicating extreme poverty, currently measured as living on less than $1.25 a day, for all people everywhere, and at reducing by at least half the proportion of men, women, and children living in poverty in all its dimensions according to national definitions.Food is an everyday essential requirement for human life. Since most of the urban poor do not produce food, they cannot cope with food price and supply volatility in the same way as rural populations. Unless they can raise their incomes, during supply shortages or times of higher prices they find themselves increasingly vulnerable to the prospect of malnutrition.80 Food shortages can lead to chronic malnutrition and force individuals to spend significant time and resources to obtain the food necessary to survive. This can affect the ability of the individual or community to meet other basic needs, especially among low-income and disadvantaged groups. Failure of food supplies can result in famine, epidemics, and social unrest as citizens compete for scarce resources. Key question(s) Have all men and women, including the poor and the vulnerable, equal rights to economic resources, ownership and control over land and other forms of property, and access to basic services, inheritance, natural resources, appropriate new technology, and financial services, including microfinance? Are there particular groups, communities, or areas within the city where people are unable to afford, or unable to access, sufficient nutritious food? Is food security for the urban poor a city priority? Are there specific policies and actions to ensure urban food security?81 To what extent are there mechanisms in place to ensure continuity of essential food supplies in an emergency and during times of stress (e.g., if imports from a major source of supply are disrupted/stopped)? Indicators • Poverty head count ratio at $1.90 a day (2011 purchasing power parity) (percentage of population) (SDGs, WDI, IDB, CPI); • Proportion of resources allocated by the government directly to poverty reduction programs (SDGs); • Percentage of malnourished children under five as a percentage of all citizens under five (SDGs); and • Prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity in the population, based on the Food Insecurity Experience Scale (FIES) (SDGs). 79 Unless defined otherwise by the country, the indicator measures the percentage of people in the city 15 years and older who can, with understanding, read and write a short, simple statement about their everyday life. The World Bank indicates that “literacy” also encompasses “numeracy,” i.e., the ability to make simple arithmetic calculations. 80 Over 150 million people living in cities and towns, almost all in developing countries, are struggling to maintain a diet sufficient for good health. FAO 2015. 81 Examples include increasing the supply from farmers in peri-urban areas, improving distribution networks from farms to urban markets, and allocating lands for urban farming. 96 OUTCOME DIMENSION 4 4.4 Drinking Water and Sanitation Subgoal To ensure access to safe drinking water and adequate sanitation for all Rationale In order to reduce poverty, it is essential to increase access to drinking water and sanitation.82 Indeed, this access is an essential requirement for human life. Inadequate or unsafe water supply systems and poor sanitation can result in health epidemics and environmental degradation. Time spent obtaining water from a safe source can impact on an individual’s ability to work or gain an education. Key question(s) Is a safe, reliable, accessible, continuous, sufficient, and affordable potable water supply and sanitation system provided to households across the city?83 Are there safety procedures in place to ensure stringent quality standards are met at all times? Are there contingency plans for the city that identify how potable water will be distributed in case of a major event or extreme disruption? Indicators • Proportion of population using safely managed drinking water services84 (SDGs, CPI); • Percentage of water samples in a year that comply with national potable water quality standards (IDB, EBRD); • Percentage of population that can be supplied water by alternative methods for 72 hours during disruption (CRI); and • Improved sanitation facilities (percentage of population with access) (SDGs, ISO 37120). 4.5 Basic Physical Infrastructure Subgoal To ensure universal access to basic infrastructure, including affordable energy, solid waste collection service, and public transport Rationale SDG 7 aims, by 2030, to ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable, and modern energy for all. Unaffordable or inadequate access to energy (electricity or fuels), solid waste collection services, and public transport can adversely affect health, educational attainment, and livelihood opportunities. Access to adequate, affordable energy, in the form of electricity and/or fuels (gas, oil, wood, peat, etc.), is essential for basic household functions. While the level of energy used by city residents depends on a variety of social and environmental factors, all residents need access to a minimum level of energy supply to meet basic requirements, such as cooking, space heating, and hot water for adequate hygiene. Key question(s) Do all households within the city have access to affordable and reliable energy, solid waste collection, and public transport? To what extent are there mechanisms in place for effective alternative (backup) energy supplies for households? 82 Globally, 884 million people lack access to safe drinking water, and 2.6 billion people—40 percent of the world’s population—lack access to basic sanitation. (UNW-DPAC 2012). 83 According to the World Health Organization (WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation 2012), between 50 and 100 liters of water per person per day are needed to ensure that most basic needs are met and health issues are avoided. 84 Supplementary metrics: Percentage of population that has access to safe and reliable water (WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation 2012); percentage of city population with sustainable access to an improved water supply (ISO 37120). 97 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) Indicators • CORE: Proportion of urban solid waste regularly collected and with adequate final discharge out of total urban solid waste generated, by cities (SDG 11); • Proportion of population living in households with access to basic services (SDGs); • Percentage of households with a home connection to the sewer system (IDB); • Electricity provision: Percentage of households with authorized connection to electrical energy85 (ISO 37120, IDB, EBRD, CRI); • Average percentage of household income spent onfuel and electricity by the poorest 20 percent of the population86 (CRI); and • Energy infrastructure resilience: Number of days that city fuel supplies could maintain essential household functions (through alternative sources)87 (CRI). 4.6 Health and Well-Being Subgoal To achieve a high standard of health and well-being among the city’s population Rationale Public health services help to ensure that city-scale health risks are monitored, epidemics are avoided, and wider health issues are managed. A healthy population is able to enjoy a good quality of life and make a full contribution to the economy. Access to adequate health care and public health services is essential to reduce the occurrence of infectious diseases. Effective welfare services are also important for ensuring people have access to adequate care, accommodation, and nutrition care to support health. Good access to green spaces and recreational facilities, along with walkable streets, also encourages healthy lifestyles. Key question(s) Are there particular groups, communities, or areas within the city where the health of the population is generally lower than the national average? To what extent are public health awareness and education programs implemented across the city and extended to disadvantaged or vulnerable groups? How is intersectoral coordination organized to achieve a healthy city?88 Indicators • Number of people covered by health insurance or a public health system per 1,000 population (SDGs); • Life expectancy at birth by gender (WDI, IDB, CPI, CRI); • Maternal mortality ratio89 (SDGs); • Under-five mortality rate (SDGs, CPI); • Number of new HIV infections per 1,000 uninfected population, by sex, age, and key populations (SDGs); • Number of physicians (MD/DO degree) working within the city per 100,000 population (ISO 37120, IDB, CPI, CRI); and • Hospital beds per 100,000 residents90 (ISO 37120, IDB, CRI). 85 Metric guidance: Percentage of households with a safe, legal electricity connection. 86 This metric examines energy poverty. It focuses on the poorest 20 percent of the population in order to assess the extent to which the overall population struggles to access electricity. 87 This examines the contingency planning of the city fuel providers and local government. It specifically examines whether they have backup arrangements in place to continue supply in the event of disruption. 88 Is there a steering committee or coordination council that includes representatives from health, urban planning, housing, sanitation, environment, and transport agencies in order to develop integrated strategies for making the city healthier? 89 Metric guidance: Maternal mortality rate per 100,000 live births (CRI). 90 This indicator serves as a general measure of inpatient service availability. Hospital beds include inpatient beds available in public, private, general, and specialized hospitals and rehabilitation centers. In most cases, beds for both acute and chronic care are included. Because the level of inpatient services required for individual countries depends on several factors —such as demographic issues and the burden of disease—there is no global target for the number of hospital beds per country. 98 OUTCOME DIMENSION 4 4.7 Safety Subgoal To ensure the safety and security of all Rationale SDG 16 aims to promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development and to provide access to justice for all. High crime rates can lead to long-term social and economic decline by destabilizing communities. They degrade the city’s competitive advantage in attracting and retaining residents, talent, and investment. Effective systems to deter crime help to increase a sense of safety among city residents and reduce the costs associated with fighting crime. Key question(s) Is the city a safe place to live and do business? What are the policies to prevent and decrease crime prevalence? Indicators • CORE: Proportion of persons who were victims of physical or sexual harassment, by sex, age, disability status, and place of occurrence, in the previous 12 months91 (SDG 11); • Proportion of population that feels safe walking alone around the area where they live92 (SDGs, IDB, CRI); • Proportion of women and girls aged 15 years and older subjected to sexual violence by persons other than an intimate partner in the previous 12 months, by age and place of occurrence (SDGs); and • Homicides per 100,000 population (SDGs, ISO 37120, CPI, CRI). 91 This indicator may be used to measure the high prevalence in several regions of gender-based violence and violence against children. 92 This indicator can be based on a sample survey but should include at least 100 households from each district or borough within the city. 99 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) 4.8 Social Cohesion Subgoal To foster social cohesion and a peaceful and pluralistic society Rationale Communities that are active, appropriately supported by the city government, and well- connected with one another contribute to the bottom-up creation of a city with a strong identity and culture. Conversely, inequalities associated with income, livelihood opportunities, environmental degradation, and access to basic social and physical infrastructure can severely hinder social cohesion across city populations. An inclusive society overrides differences of race, gender, class, generation, and geography and ensures inclusion and equality of opportunity. Development policies, planning and design of urban spaces and infrastructure, and provision of basic services can all help or impede social cohesion. Engaging multiple stakeholders in city decision making helps align different perspectives, leverage knowledge, and ensure that no group or community is marginalized. Key question(s) Are there relatively high levels of social cohesion across the city, or is there evidence of civil unrest within or between the city populations? Is the city developing inclusive policies such as equal access to clean and safe places for living, work, and recreation, as well as equal access to basic services,93 equal access to transportation, respect for diversity, and inclusive decision making? What are the specific actions targeted at marginalized groups? To what extent do local communities and community organizations provide an additional avenue of immediate support for citizens? To what extent is there a cohesive sense of citywide identity and culture in which all citizens feel a sense of belonging? Indicators • Women as a percentage of total people elected to city-level office (ISO 37120, CRI); • Ethnic minorities as a percentage of total people elected to city-level office (ISO 37120 Adapted, CRI); and • Voter participation in last municipal election (as a percentage of eligible voters) (ISO 37120, CRI). 93 These include education, health care, clean water, and sanitation. 100 OUTCOME DIMENSION 4 REFERENCES C40 Cities and Arup. 2017. “Deadline 2020: How Cities Will Get the Job Done.” http://www.c40.org/other/deadline_2020. City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality. 2016. “Spatial Development Framework 2040.” http://www.sapra.org.za/docs/Johannesburg%20Spatial%20Development%20 Framework%202040.pdf. Ellis, Peter, and Mark Roberts. 2016. “Leveraging Urbanization in South Asia: Managing Spatial Transformation for Prosperity and Livability.” South Asia Development Matters. Washington, DC: World Bank. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/ handle/10986/22549/9781464806629.pdf. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 2015. “The State of Food Insecurity in the World 2015.” http://www.fao.org/3/a-i4646e.pdf. Global Environmental Facility. n.d. “GEF-6 Sustainable Cities IAP: Tracking Tool for Child Projects.” IDB (Inter-American Development Bank). 2014. “Annex I: ESCI Indicators.” In “Methodological Guide: Emerging and Sustainable Cities Initiative.” 2nd ed. http://www.iadb.org/en/topics/emerging-and-sustainable-cities/implementing-the- emerging-and-sustainable-cities-program-approach,7641.html. IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 2014. “Human Settlements, Infrastructure and Spatial Planning.” In Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Working Group III contribution to the IPCC 5th Assessment Report. Geneva: IPCC. http://www.urbanmorphologyinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/IPCC- report-Chapter-12.pdf. ISO (International Organization for Standardization). 2014. “ISO 37120: 2014. Sustainable Development of Communities—Indicators for City Services and Quality of Life.” ISO, Geneva. https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:37120:ed-1:v1:en. Li, Qu, Gerald Ollivier, Holly Krambeck, and Tatiana Peralta. 2016. “Using Travel Time–Based Analysis to Evaluate the Potential Impact of Transit- Oriented Development on Job Accessibility.” World Bank, Washington, DC. 101 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). 2003. “OECD Environmental Indicators: Development, Measurement and Use.” https://www.oecd.org/env/indicators-modelling-outlooks/24993546.pdf. Rockefeller Foundation and Arup. 2014; updated 2015. “City Resilience Framework.” https://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/report/city-resilience-framework/. ———. 2016. Inside the CRI: Reference Guide. March. http://www.cityresilienceindex.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/160516-Inside-the- CRI-Reference-Guide.pdf. Rode, P., G. Floater, N. Thomopoulos, J. Docherty, P. Schwinger, A. Mahendra, and W. Fang. 2014. “Accessibility in Cities: Transport and Urban Form.” NCE Cities Paper 03. London: LSE Cities, London School of Economics and Political Science. Salat, S., L. Bourdic, and M. Kamiya. 2017. Economic Foundations for Sustainable Urbanization: A Study on Three-Pronged Approach: Planned City Extensions, Legal Framework, and Municipal Finance. Nairobi: UN-Habitat; Paris: Urban Morphology & Complex Systems Institute. UN (United Nations). 2016. Paris Agreement. United Nations Treaty Collection. http://unfccc.int/paris_agreement/items/9485.php. UN-Habitat. 2016a. “New Urban Agenda.” A/CONF.226/4. United Nations Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development. http://habitat3.org/the-new-urban-agenda. ———. 2016b. “SDG Goal 11 Monitoring Framework: A Guide to Assist National and Local Governments to Monitor and Report on SDG Goal 11 Indicators.” United Nations Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development. March. https://unhabitat.org/sdg-goal-11-monitoring-framework. UNSD (United Nations Statistics Division). 2017. “Report of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable Development Goal Indicators.” E/CN.3/2017/2. Annex III. https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/indicators/Official%20Revised%20List%20of%20 global%20SDG%20indicators.pdf. 102 OUTCOME DIMENSION 4 UNW-DPAC (UN–Water Decade Programme on Advocacy and Communication). 2012. “UNW-DPAC: Biennial Report 2010–2011.” United Nations Office to Support the International Decade for Action “Water for Life” 2005–2015. http://www.un.org/waterforlifedecade/pdf/unwdpac_biennial_report_2010_2011.pdf. Venter, Christo. 2011. “Transport Expenditure and Affordability: The Cost of Being Mobile.” Development Southern Africa 28, no. 1 (March): 121–40. WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation. 2012. “Progress on Drinking Water and Sanitation: 2012 Update.” United Nations Children’s Fund and World Health Organization. https://www.unicef.org/media/files/JMPreport2012.pdf. World Bank. 2010. “Cities and Climate Change: An Urgent Agenda.” Urban Development Series no. 10. December. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTUWM/Resources/340232-1205330656272/ CitiesandClimateChange.pdf. ———. 2017. World Development Indicators 2017. Washington, DC: World Bank. https://data.worldbank.org/products/wdi. ———. 2018. “City Creditworthiness Initiative: A Partnership to Deliver Municipal Finance.” World Bank. http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/urbandevelopment/brief/city-creditworthiness- initiative. World Bank Group. 2015. Competitive Cities for Jobs and Growth: What, Who, and How. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/23227. Zenghelis, Dimitri, and Nicholas Stern. 2015. “Climate Change and Cities: A Prime Source of Problems, yet Key to a Solution.” The Guardian, November 19. http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/nov/17/cities-climate-change-problems- solution. 103 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) ANNEX A Vision: Process, General Examples of Other Framework Initiatives Stages and Phases This annex summarizes the overall approach for some of the most widely used and broadly applicable of IDB. Through a multi-sectoral vision, it aims at urban sustainability frameworks, including those Initiative (ESCI) started as an institutional proposal supporting the emerging cities of Latin America and developed by the Inter-American Development Bank the Caribbean in their efforts to improve citizens’ 2 (IDB), Asian Development Bank (ADB), European quality of life, enhance sustainability for future Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), generations, and increase economic competitiveness UN-Habitat, Global2.1 City InIndicators general, the Facility, World ESCI methodology as a means comprises of six generating phases, which decent employment. are grouped into two The Council on City Data, ICLEI, stages.National University The first stage, ESCI the developed which includes a methodology first four phases, consists of aof rapid rapid application evalua- of Singapore (NUS), and PricewaterhouseCoopers and diagnosis to help cities prepare their tion of the urban reality and ends with the preparation of an Action Plan for the city’s action (PwC). plans. It works by identifying strategic interventions sustainability, containing specific proposals for intervening that contribute areas identified in the sustainability to achieving as targets critical; this Inter-American Development stage takes Bank’s approximately Emerging oneshort, in the year. The second and medium, stage of the long methodology, term. ESCI’s and Sustainable Cities Initiative methodology is organized in a two-stage, five-phase In 2010, the Emerging and Sustainable Cities process, as shown in figure 12. Figure 2.1 The phases for a city Figure 12. Phases of an ESCI City EMERGING and Phases of a city in the SUSTAINABLE CITIES Initiative ANALYSIS ACTION PLAN PRE-INVESTMENT MONITORING INVESTMENT PREPARATION & DIAGNOSIS PRIORITIZATION Phases 1 2 3 4 5 ! Financing Design and Action Plan First mission Applying lters: Formulating Initiate data studies in implementation Execution Action Plans for collection prioritized of a monitoring City overview Public opinion identi ed sectors: system Projects ready Economic cost strategies Form work Feasibility for bidding teams Complete Climate change and nancing Initial study Economic Indicators for Specialists Activities indicators prioritized areas Engineering Identify Environmental Tra c light Critical areas Create detailed stakeholders Citizen exercise for the city’s Action Plan Prepare vertical perception Contracting of sustainability Validate cooperation technical inputs Baseline studies Topics of interest Action Plan agreement Set of actions Monitoring New public Set of indicators List of High level List of System services and Deliverables prioritized Action Plan with basic stakeholders with tra c light infrastructures areas and descriptions and initial view analysis, com- of strengths and parisons with sectors problem areas other cities and baseline studies CORE OF THE METHODOLOGY PRE-INVESTMENT + MONITORING Development of the Action Plan - 1 year Action Plan Execution - 3 years Source: IDB 2014. © IDB. Reproduced with permission from IDB; further permission required for reuse. 13 104 ANNEX A xxviii Executive Summary To test the GCOF, seven cities in Malaysia, Myanmar, Thailand, and Viet Nam have drawn up GrEEEn City Action Plans (GCAPs) with varying technical scopes and levels of institutional engagement. Asian Development Bank’s GrEEEn GCAPs consist of The Solutions a shared development UN-Habitat’s vision, andInitiative City Prosperity prioritized and time- for Livable Cities based investment programs and initiatives with short-, medium-, and long-term actions for In order to measure current and future progress improving environmental Developed by ADB, the GrEEEn Cities quality and achieving competitive, inclusive, and resilient growth of cities on the prosperity path, UN-Habitat has in cities. Operational Framework aims at contributing to the introduced a new tool, the City Prosperity Index achievement of the United Nations SDGs, which (CPI), together with a conceptual matrix, the Wheel Focus of the Book of Urban Prosperity. Both are meant to assist decision offer a triple-bottom-line approach to human well- being through social inclusiveness, environmental protection, and economic competitiveness. The makers in designing clear policy interventions. The framework is an integratingBy way of background, platform. Through the first partCPI the book of not provides an only provides overview indexes andof the emergence of measurements green growth approaches urban profiling and synthesis, it enables a deeper in urban development in recent years (Chapter 1) and introduces relevant to cities, it also enables city authorities, as the GCOF (Chapter analytical understanding of the economy, the 2). The second part of the book presents the building well as local and national stakeholders, blocks for grEEEn to identify environment, and equitysolutions by deepening understanding (the “3 Es”—hence the of visioning and action planning for integrated urban opportunities and potential areas of intervention that spelling of “GrEEEn”).development With the goal (Chapter 3); unbundling the 3Es of economy, environment, and equity as of achieving will foster greater prosperity. multiple benefits across applied in concrete the “3 Es,” projects (Chapter 4); elaborating on Urban Management Partnerships the framework (UMPs) (Chapter analyzes how a single intervention can generate 5); and discussing a key enablers in the various stages of project planning and implementation (Chapter 6). The The CPI final Wheel part ofbook of this Urban Prosperity at the keyconceptualizes looks takeaway lessons series of direct and indirect benefits that impact the forand improving quality ofThe prosperity along life for all citizens (Chapter 7). six dimensions that are summarized livability in a city (Sandhu Singru 2014). framework is shown in figure 13. in figure 14. Greeen Cities Operational Framework Figure 13. GrEEEn Cities Operational Framework ELEMENTS ENABLERS OUTPUT GREEEN CITY Policies “ E” Pillars for Integrated Development ACTION PLANS Strategies Investment Program Economy Environment Equity Sector Plans Financing Mechanisms Status Quo of the City Regulations Competitiveness Natural Resource Inclusiveness E ciency Service Delivery E ciency Accessibility Finance Low-Carbon Livable City Infrastructure, Asset Technology A ordability Management, Operation, Resilience Governance URBAN and Maintenance Climate Resilience MANAGEMENT Financial Innovation Disaster Risk Institutions PARTNERSHIPS Public–Private Partnership Management Civil Society Peer-to-Peer Revenue Generation Learning Entrepreneurship Private Sector Decision Support and Job Creation Systems Skills Training Urban Profiling and Action Planning – Analysis and Synthesis Consensus Building, Visioning, and Stakeholder Ownership 3Es = economy, environment, and equity. Source: Sandhu and Singru 2014. © ADB. Reproduced under the document’s Source: S. Sandhu and R. Naik Singru. 2014. Enabling GrEEEn Cities: An Operational Framework for Integrated Urban Development terms for in Southeast Asia. SERD Workinguse. noncommercial Paper Series. No. 9. Manila: Asian Development Bank. 105 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) Conceptualizing Urban Prosperity Figure 1.1.1 Figure 14. UN-Habitat Wheel The Wheel Urban Prosperity of Prosperity of Urban URBAN PROSPERITY spo ns ke tio int ac er policy era int Productivity cti s on interactions ke po s UR ITY policy BAN PER interactions PRO PROS Envi SPERI ronm enta ture URBAN l sus struc taina Infra TY bility Government institutions policy Laws and interactions urban planning s poke tion s terac inter ion policy ke in actio s interactions clu spo ns Qu l in ali cia ty so of nd life policy ya interactions uit Eq UR Y IT BA ER N SP PR O OS PR s poke interaction s PE RIT AN URB Y Source: UN-Habitat 2012. © UN-Habitat. Reproduced with combined power functions at work in the city. For instance, pace and momentum of the ‘wheel’; (iii) ensuring the UN-Habitat; permission frombuilding further a school and a covered permission market required next to a poor area is fordevelopment balanced reuse. of the five ‘spokes’ and associated likely to have multiplier effects across the five dimensions of synergies; and (iv) in a two-way relationship, absorbing shared prosperity. and amortising any ‘shocks’ transmitted by the ‘spokes’. Global City Indicators Program This goes to show that far from some new ‘model’ or The ‘hub’ brings together The Global City Indicators Program was launched by ‘utopia’ or branding/marketing technique, UN-Habitat’s local governments may have little control over them). the power functions The two categories arePOLICy ‘wheel of prosperity’ symbolises the well-balanced (e.g., laws, regulations the World Bank with funding from the government development of the five dimensions, the current condition and institutions, urban structured around 18 themes, UN-Habitat suggest of Japan. Cities can use a database that comes with of which is graphically represented in the City Prosperity as shown in table 2. planning, civil society, that the project for the Index (CPI – see below). The ‘outer rim’ absorbs the trade associations, special city of the 21st century the program to formulate effective policies for growth cumulative forces transmitted through the ‘spokes’ – the agencies, etc.) associated is one of achieving and sustainable economic development. In order to five dimensions of prosperity. At the centre is the ‘hub’ – Table 2. Global City Indicators with the five ‘spokes’. Program: balanced prosperity, the local urban power functions, with four interrelated Categories and In this role the ‘hub’ Themes implying making the help cities assess and monitor their performance, roles: (i) ensuring the prevalence of public over any represents human agency ‘wheel’ well rounded CITY SERVICES with synergetic spokes QUALITY OF LIFE the program has developed a set of standardized, other kind of interest); (ii) controlling the direction, in all its embodiments. and a dynamic hub. • Education • Civic engagement consistent, and comparable indicators over time and 15 • Energy • Economy • Finance • Environment across cities. The program is organized into two • Fire & emergency response • Shelter • Governance • Social equity broad categories: municipal services (which include • Health care • Technology & innovation • Recreation services typically provided by municipal governments • Safety • Solid waste and other entities) and quality of life (which includes • Transportation • Water contributors essential to overall quality of life even if • Wastewater Source: Bhada and Hoornweg 2009. 106 DATABASE OF BEST PRACTICES THE FRAMEWORK FOR SUSTAINABLE GROWTH Concurrent with the building up the database of ANNEX A This research developed an assessment framework to sustainability indicators, the research also compiled a encompass the essential concepts of sustainable database of best practices in urban sustainability. The aim development as distilled from the literature and best was to apply objective research and evaluation to identify practices. As a conceptual framework, it is open‐ended exemplary approaches, programs or practices of rather than locked into a numerical construct that does not sustainability in cities, under each of the 13 themes. effectively represent the more dynamic processes of sustainability performance in the various indicators of The selection criteria included: sustainability as defined.  Exemplary performances in demonstrating how urban sustainability goals are being achieved; The framework must be anchored in an overarching vision  Demonstration of leadership in terms of relevant of sustainability, founded on sound and relevant principles. and/or bold policies, government commitment and This research has adopted the sustainable growth stakeholders’ involvement; paradigm, set within an integrated urban planning system,  Elements of innovation, creativity, freshness of as its broad vision. approach, and high impact, either in terms of thinking, concept oron World Council City Data Open Data Portal execution. National University The inspiration for the of Singapore’s framework Framework is the concept of “green To support cities seeking to improve services and Sustainable for growth”, which Growth makes reference to an economy that total, In of quality the life, research the World documented Council on overCity 90 Datacase studies In its database promotes sustainability of well social indicators, ‐being and reduces NUS’s inequalities over from more than 40 cities and towns/districts across Asia, the long ‐ term, while not exposing future generations to (WCCD) maintains a data portal of open city data and the Americas, Australia, Europe, as well as Africa. The final Centre for Sustainable Asian Cities (CSAC) organizes significant environmental risks and ecological scarcities. provides a database comprehensive platform for in effect operationalize thestandardized indicators’ by the This key issues of sustainable development under 13 concept has gained international attention as a urban metrics. how illustrating The cities Open Data Portal Cityadvanced have allows various aspects of major themes: response to the governance, energy andeconomy, land, water, carbon intensive nature of to explore, track, citiessustainability monitor, practices in urban and compare planning, member policy making energy, food, biodiversity, contemporary economies. air, waste,istransport, Its intent to make growth and project implementation. The cities on up to 100 indicators of service performance database is a culture, people, processes moreand climate resource change. ‐efficient, For each cleaner and resilient comprehensive documentation of important principles of without necessarily slowing them. Growth is a particularly and quality of life. The WCCD is also implementing urban sustainability, which are validated by practice. They studied theme, CSAC has identified quantitative 3 relevant proposition in the light of current global economic ISO 37120, the new provide useful international lessons standard, and inspiration for otherand has cities. andrealities, qualitative urban indicators to assess how well and is readily defensible when coupled with the developed the first ISO 37120 certification system. cities are performing in this area. social pillars of sustainable CSAC has development likealso poverty Certified cities are included BENCHMARKING CITIES in WCCD’s Global Cities reductionan developed assessment and framework creating employment encompassing opportunities. In this Registry for a one-year period, after which they must ™ essential the regard, would be of it concepts sustainable consistent with development the concept of Using the defined indicators, cities can be benchmarked in “inclusive be recertified. three ways: 94 (figure 15). growth” but clearly acknowledging that the economy must operate within the constraints of its natural 1. Self assessment, by looking at local context and resource availability and environmental integrity. ICLEI’s Cities for historical Climate trends Protection to examine how far Campaign the city has Figure 15. NUS Framework for Sustainable Growth In 1993, ICLEI led the progressed as establishment compared to previousof the Cities for in performance specific areas, Climate Protection and its self Campaign, ‐set targets; which aims to facilitate 2. Benchmarking against established international emissions reduction by local governments using a five- standards where available, such as air and water stage process. Theas quality five stages are established by (1) measurement; organizations e.g. (2) WHO commitment; and(3) planning; (4) implementing; and (5) USEPA; monitoring. developed ICLEI has studies 3. Comparative with software ofthat tools other cities similar support thedevelopment levels methods. Presently the campaign engages over 1,000 local government stakeholders who are For city comparison, it is common to consolidate indicators integrating climate change into a numerical initiatives index. However, is nottheir it with planning the intention of processes (Sustainable this research Cities to develop an International 2012). index, for although indices can be helpful for public communication, city benchmarking and ranking, they usually involve a process of quantitative aggregation, normalization, weighting and value assignment, which tend to obscure contextual information that is important for meaningful city evaluation. The Framework for Sustainable Growth© Source: Centre for Sustainable Asian Cities, NUS 2014. © Centre for Sustainable Asian Cities, NUS. Reproduced with permission from Centre for Sustainable Asian Cities, NUS; further permission required for reuse. 94 WCCD, “Created by Cities, for Cities,” http://www.dataforcities.org/wccd/. 107 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) PwC’s Pillars and Lenses PwC ranks cities according to 39 different that create a strong foundation for growth, one indicators that are seen to represent the distinct for compromisers, which focuses on areas needing stages of urban development. The indicators improvement, and one for differentiators, which are grouped into five pillars and (as described in focuses on amenities that distinguish a city. The annex B) examined according to three lenses (PwC PwC pillars and lenses are shown in figure 16. 2015): one for civic basics, which focuses on areas Figure 16. Five Pillars and Three Lenses of the PwC Approach Assessing the cities: 5 pillars & 3 lenses Research 5 key pillars across Livable, Sustainable, Competitive elements… Culture and Connectivity Health & Environmental Economics society welfare Sustainability We have identified a range of indicators and metrics that we believe capture the core elements of a livable, sustainable and competitive city. Three stages of progression… 3 lenses Civic Basics Compromisers Differentiators These factors look at the Factors which make a city The factors which ‘set the ‘bottom-line’ – the more (less) attractive for pace’ and attract people to fundamentals for a city to living, working and doing live, work and invest in a be considered ‘livable’. business. city. E.g. broadband quality and E.g. Traffic congestion /air E.g. Airport connectivity/ public transport. pollution solutions. FDI Source: PwC Singapore 2016. © 2016 PwC. Reproduced with permission from PwC; further permission required for reuse. 108 ANNEX A REFERENCES ADB. 2015. “Enabling GrEEEn Cities: Hue GrEEEn City Action Plan.” ADB, Manila. Bhada, Perinaz, and Dan Hoornweg. 2009. “The Global City Indicators Program: A More Credible Voice for Cities.” Directions in Urban Development. World Bank, Washington, DC. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/10244. Centre for Sustainable Asian Cities, NUS. 2014. “An Assessment Framework for Monitoring Cities’ Sustainability.” National University of Singapore, School of Design and Environment, Centre for Sustainable Asian Cities, Singapore. http://www.sde.nus.edu.sg/csac/booklet%20small.pdf. IDB (Inter-American Development Bank). 2014. “Methodological Guide: Emerging and Sustainable Cities Initiative.” 2nd ed. http://www.iadb.org/en/topics/emerging-and-sustainable-cities/implementing-the- emerging-and-sustainable-cities-program-approach,7641.html. PwC. 2015. “Building Better Cities: Competitive, Sustainable and Livable Metropolises in APEC (and How to Become One).” https://www.pwc.com/sg/en/publications/assets/apec-build-better-cities.pdf. PwC Singapore. 2016. “‘Building Better Cities’: Competitive, Sustainable and Livable Metropolises in APEC Countries.” Presentation at the Global Platform for Sustainable Cities (GPSC) Working Group on Indicators for Sustainable Cities & Geospatial Tools, Singapore, March 8. Sandhu, Sonia Chand, and Ramola Naik Singru. 2014. “Enabling GrEEEn Cities: An Operational Framework for Integrated Urban Development in Southeast Asia.” SERD Working Paper 9. Asian Development Bank, Manila. https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/149685/southeast-asia-wp-9.pdf. Sustainable Cities International. 2012. “Indicators for Sustainability: How Cities are Monitoring and Evaluating Their Success.” http://sustainablecities.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/indicators-for-sustainability-intl- case-studies-final.pdf. UN-Habitat. 2012. “State of the World’s Cities Report 2012/2013: Prosperity of Cities.” UN-Habitat, Nairobi. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/745habitat.pdf. 109 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) ANNEX B Moving Up the Urban Sustainability Pathway A city’s sustainability focus likely reflects both its World Bank research has shown that when cities improve place along the urban development pathway and their economic competitiveness, this is initially because its level of ambition for the future. To help cities of structural transformation, and later because of determine what their sustainability focus should efficiency gains and productivity (World Bank Group include, PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC 2015) 2015). At lower income levels, the typical city is a market proposes three possible lenses through which they town that faces the challenge of transformation from can examine themselves: a service center to a production center through rapid • Basics. At a first level, a city must provide industrialization. At middle-income levels (between basic services to its citizens and create $2,500 and $20,000 per capita), cities are typically sufficient infrastructure for its growth— production centers striving to increase productivity and especially health care, housing, air quality, and take advantage of market opportunities rather than to public transport. dramatically transform their industrial mix. At higher • Differentiators. A city must also identify its income levels, cities generally become centers for the differentiating factors or positive attributes, financial and creative industries, with the challenge of such as a lauded tertiary education system, transforming themselves again by shifting economic public spaces and parks, international activity to higher-value-added sectors. connectivity infrastructure such as airports, and openness to trade. Struggling cities should be encouraged by the • Compromisers. The success of a city can also achievements of cities such as Seoul or Singapore, be altered by compromisers and negative which went from extreme poverty in the 1960s to high attributes that indicate challenges or risks. levels of livability, inclusiveness, and per capita income These negative attributes include high crime today through integrated, resource-efficient, and rates, corruption, intolerance and exclusion, sustainable planning. Some of the most thriving global or difficulties in doing business, to name a few. cities of today, including Seoul and Singapore, have traversed all the steps of the sustainability pathway Cities can improve only if they have a true picture over the last 50 years. of their overall performance. These lenses can help city decision makers select indicators—like those provided in the USF—that serve as meaningful markers for monitoring sustainability performance over time, and that show the city its place along the “urban maturity curve” (figure 17). 110 ANNEX B Figure 17. The Urban Maturity Curve Not all cities are created equal Understanding the Urban Maturity Curve: Where are you? Proactive: Knowing where you are now… Advance planning, a provides a better understanding of the pathway for more attractive city to live, work and do tomorrow’s growth business Culture Reactive: Struggling to meet Eco Living demand, Most Technology Leisure unattractive to live, of Asia Mass Transit Green Space work & do Elderly Care business Transport Connectivity Commercial Environment Water Education Property Waste Entertainment Management & Research Water Basic Power Market Hospitals Disaster Risk Schools Stalls Buildings Management SMART Survival Basic Advanced Quality of Life Minimal infrastructure Infrastructure, utilities Business growth and Focused on advanced to meet human needs to allow new business & competitiveness, plus human needs, quality of initial social services effective social life & sustainability infrastructure Increased tax revenues Dhaka, Port Moresby, Nairobi, Jakarta, Madrid, Beijing, London, New York, Lagos, Port au Prince Mumbai, Rio de Janeiro KL, Berlin Singapore, Toronto Source: PwC Singapore 2016. © 2016 PwC. Reproduced with permission from PwC; further permission required for reuse. 111 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) Seoul’s Development Pathway Through the 1950s, the Republic of Korea was so period, the disappearance of shantytowns was mainly poor that people had trouble securing even one meal due to market action in residential redevelopment a day.95 After the Korean War, Korea was one of the projects. world’s poorest countries, with per capita income of only $64. In the 1960s, economically the country Throughout Korea’s urbanization process, urban lagged behind the Democratic Republic of Congo planning and land management institutions were and Mozambique. By the 1980s, it had surpassed adopted to respond to challenges in each urbanization Argentina, and by 2010 Korea’s GDP per capita had stage, an approach that proved effective. Investments risen to approximately $30,200. Korea today has a in connective infrastructure contributed to the higher GDP per capita than Spain and New Zealand successful urbanization process by improving the and is less than 10 percent behind the European economic efficiency of the national urban system as Union, on which it is gaining quickly (Cox 2011). well as that of individual cities. Seoul, Korea’s capital, is now a wealthy metropolitan area in a prosperous country. Singapore’s Transformation: Integrated Planning as an Enabling Factor on the Road to By using coordinated planning and connecting Economic Prosperity policies, Korea successfully managed its journey Another striking example of a city that has climbed from an incipient to an advanced level of quite high on the sustainable development ladder is urbanization. To address economic development and Singapore. Singapore’s transformation illustrates how urbanization, the government implemented the Five- a city can move through all the stages of the pathway Year National Economic Development Plans and for growth, going from mere survival to meeting the National Territory Comprehensive Plans. Under basics in two decades, and then during the next two these plans, Korea began a journey of economic decades becoming one of the most prosperous progress, with average economic growth of 22.6 urban economies. percent in the late 1960s. Singapore 50 years ago was a dilapidated city with Korea made progress through the implementation a high percentage of poverty. Over 1.3 million of five major public policies: urban planning and out of 1.9 million people were living in slums, and land management; housing development; improved Singapore had a GDP per capita of $516 (Liu 2017). connectivity; the elimination of substandard housing; It faced a massive squatting problem, along with very and the development of housing for low-income limited resources, limited land, little infrastructure, groups. Before the complete introduction of an few economic activities and a largely unskilled urban planning system, land development programs workforce, and a financial investment shortage. were set up and the use of land was regulated. The However, the city succeeded in turning its problems transport system was developed in the following into opportunities. order: first the railway system, then the expressway network in the period of intermediate urbanization, Singapore’s economic strategy comprised three and finally the motorway network and high-speed rail components: (1) the government’s strategic in the advanced period. In the intermediate period, role, (2) mobilization of its human capital, and the relocation policies implemented to eliminate slums (3) continuous development of infrastructure. were not successful. At the beginning of the advanced Early key measures were designed to rise above 95 This discussion of Korea draws on World Bank (2013). 112 ANNEX B the development challenges and tackle the and the island’s connectivity was improved with most pressing issues in an integrated way. First, seaports and airports. Particular attention was paid commerce was developed along Shenton Way, to the environment through pollution control, industry was developed in Jurong, and housing clean buildings, and the establishment of a garden and squatter clearance was prioritized with the city committee and a walkways committee. The establishment of the Housing Development Board. land shortage was alleviated with land reclamation. Then, infrastructure was provided to improve the Thus, in two generations, from approximately 1960 functioning of the city (water, electricity, sewage, to 2010, Singapore provided the key infrastructure etc.), the flow of traffic was enhanced (with roads, needed for the city to develop into a prosperous buses, MRT [mass rapid transit], etc.), persistent island nation (figure 18). flooding was mitigated with a drainage system, Figure 13: Key Measures in Singapore Figure 18. Key Measures in Singapore Commerce Industry Housing External Links Flowing Traffic Drinking Water Source: Liu 2017. Reproduced under the Urban Redevelopment Authority’s terms for noncommercial use. Modifications by Liu Thai Ker. Original Source：Urban Redevelopment Authority, Singapore Modified: Liu Thai Ker 113 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) In the following stage of its development, from length of MRT lines more than doubled in 25 years, 1985 until the present, Singapore focused on and average daily ridership has quadrupled in 20 years, business growth and competitiveness, effective social reaching 2.76 million passenger trips in 2014. In spite infrastructure, and advanced human needs and quality of a huge increase in wealth and income, the excellent of life. The development targeted both local and MRT coverage (aiming now at putting 90 percent global dimensions of sustainability. At the global scale, of the population less than a 10-minute walk from a huge investments gave Singapore some of the best mass transit station) and urban planning have kept car global connectivity infrastructure, including one of the ownership low, at 109 cars per 1,000 people in 2014. largest-capacity international seaports, one of the best This is only a slight increase over the car usage rate of global airports, and an international cruise terminal. 80 cars per 1,000 people 30 years before (Liu 2017). In 2014, the annual number of twenty-foot equivalent unit containers (TEUs) handled by its seaport was 21 Singapore has achieved a high level of absolute times greater than it had been 30 years earlier, reaching decoupling of economic growth and environmental 33.9 million. The number of passenger arrivals was six pressure, cutting its CO2 emissions per capita by two- times greater, reaching 26.67 million (Liu 2017). thirds in 25 years, to 4.32 metric tons in 2011, even as GDP per capita increased seven to eight times over At the domestic scale, the city developed its economy, the same period (Liu 2017). with modern business centers and industrial estates; its connectivity and accessibility with efficient A key success factor has been integrated planning. public transportation systems; its human capital and The city-state has been planned as a polycentric global appeal with education and art venues; and its urban region with cascading planning scales: five inclusiveness with public housing for 82 percent of regions, with 25 new towns, neighborhoods, and the population. As a result, GDP per capita reached precincts. The planning of new towns is based on a $56,284 in 2014, 8.3 times greater than it had been decentralization model and on bringing amenities near 30 years before. Homeownership tripled in 44 years homes, as exemplified in the example of the Bishan (from 29.4 percent in 1970 to 90 percent in 2014). The New Town plan and land use table shown in figure 19. Land Figure 19. Bishan New Town Plan (left) Table Use Use and Land – Towards (Right) High Self-Sufficiency Bishan New Town Landuse Area (Ha) Percentage (%) Residential 473.5 45 Commercial 83.5 7.9 Educational 72.1 6.9 Institution 21.6 2.1 Parks & Gardens 74.1 7.0 Sports & 15.8 1.5 Recreation Bishan Reserve Sites 3.0 0.3 17% of NT Area Transportation 140.1 13.3 Institutions 84.2 Industry 8.0 Utilities & Others Schools 84.2 8.0 Total Commercial1,052.0 100 Original Source：Urban Redevelopment Authority, SingaporeSource：Liu Thai Ker Source: (left): Liu 2017. Original source from the Urban Redevelopment Modified: Liu Thai Ker Authority. Modifications by Liu Thai Ker. Source (right): Liu 2017. © Liu Thai Ker. Reproduced with permission from Liu Thai Ker; further permission required for reuse. 114 ANNEX B Bishan New Town has achieved a high level of self- As demonstrated in figure 20, the Housing sufficiency as a complete 10 km2 community offering and Development Board has managed a jobs, commercial development, education, green large percentage of Singapore’s building spaces, and amenities: a combined 17 percent of the stock with an integrated approach new town’s land area is devoted to institutional land encompassing a range of supporting uses use (shown in red in figure 19), to schools (in yellow), besides housing, including commercial and to commercial use (in blue). The high-density space, industrial facilities, and supporting town has been designed to be visually nonoppressive infrastructure. It has sought to create and functionally comprehensive, offering all amenities accessible, livable, people-centered within a walking distance. This planning approach has communities in harmony with the led to lower infrastructure costs. environment and ecology. Figure 20. Housing and Development Board’s Integrated Planning Approach Source：Liu Thai Ker Contributions of HDB Sound Policies Urban, Construction, Social, Lifestyle, Economic Resettlement Upgrade New Land Construction Industry Commercial Housing the Industrial Nation Infrastructure Jobs Economic Property Market Growth Basic Building Block Of Singapore Plan Source: Liu 2017. © Liu Thai Ker. Reproduced with permission from Liu Thai Ker; further permission required for reuse. 115 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) Figure 21. Financing of Housing Financing in New of Housing inTowns through New Towns a Creative through FinancialFinancial a Creative System System Grant Shops Profit Factories Housing Development Loan Capital New Repayment Expenditure HDB Flats Mortgage Government HDB Sale of Flats Repayment Loan Residents Mortgage Financing Loan Monthly Central Loan Provident Repayment Fund Employment Savings Source: Liu 2017. Original source from the Housing and Development Board. Original Source：Housing & Development Board, Singapore Modifications by LiuLiu Modified: ThaiKer. Thai Ker Note: HDB stands for Housing and Development Board. In the new towns, affordable housing has been Sustainable development has been practiced in Singapore provided to the majority of the population from early in its history. The city’s resource constraints through a creative financial system that leverages have driven it to take a balanced development approach profits from employment, shops, factories, and the rather than follow the “grow first, clean up later model,” sale of flats. This approach takes full advantage of in which economic growth comes at the expense of the new towns’ mixed-use development, as shown the environment or citizens’ quality of life (World Cities in figure 21. Summit Mayors Forum 2013, 6). Singapore’s urbanization journey has been of Cities of the future are likely to be resource-scarce, interest to officials from other countries. They have high population densities, and be located mainly in have sought to understand how this transformation emerging regions like Africa, Asia, and Latin America. was done and (more pertinently) what could be Thus, cities like Singapore may offer a more useful replicated in their own cities. Established livability model of sustainable development than low-density indexes, like the European Union index or the livable cities (CLC and DRC 2016, 44). Singapore’s Mercer Index, tend to give the highest rankings experience in city development and governance—and to cities with the lowest population density. But its successful absolute decoupling of growth and Singapore has been ranked as one of the most environmental pressure—could be useful, especially livable cities in Asia and is of high density. It in the development of high-density cities, which are presents a model of integrated and balanced urban necessary to relieve the pressure future urbanization will development (CLC and ULI 2013). place on resources and the environment. 116 ANNEX B REFERENCES CLC and DRC (Centre for Liveable Cities Singapore and Development Research Center of the State Council of the People’s Republic of China). 2016. Challenges and Reforms in Urban Governance: Insights from the Development Experience of China and Singapore. Singapore and Beijing: Centre for Liveable Cities Singapore and Development Research Center of the State Council of the People’s Republic of China. https://www.clc.gov.sg/publications/books-challenges-and-reforms-in-urban-governance.htm. CLC and ULI (Centre for Liveable Cities Singapore and Urban Land Institute). 2013. “10 Principles for Liveable High-Density Cities.” www.nss.org.sg/documents/10PrinciplesforLiveableHighDensityCitiesLessonsfromSingapore.pdf. Cox, W. 2011. “The Evolving Urban Form: Seoul.” New Geography. February 17. http://www.newgeography.com/content/002060-the-evolving-urban-form-seoul. Liu, Thai Ker. 2017. “Value, Science, Art of Planning. The Singapore Perspective.” Presentation at the World Bank workshop “Towards Sustainable Development: Strengthening Urban Planning and Resilience,” Hanoi, Vietnam, January 10. PwC. 2015. “Building Better Cities: Competitive, Sustainable and Livable Metropolises in APEC (and How to Become One).” https://www.pwc.com/sg/en/publications/assets/apec-build-better-cities.pdf. PwC Singapore. 2016. “‘Building Better Cities’: Competitive, Sustainable and Livable Metropolises in APEC Countries.” Presentation at the Global Platform for Sustainable Cities (GPSC) Working Group on Indicators for Sustainable Cities & Geospatial Tools, Singapore, March 8. World Bank. 2013. Planning, Connecting, and Financing Cities—Now: Priorities for City Leaders. Washington, DC: World Bank. doi:org/10.1596/978-0-8213-9839-5. World Bank Group. 2015. Competitive Cities for Jobs and Growth: What, Who, and How. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/23227. World Cities Summit Mayors Forum. 2013. “World Cities Summit Mayors Forum Conference Report.” http://www.worldcitiessummit.com.sg/sites/default/files/WCS_MF_2013_Bilbao_Report.pdf. 117 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) ANNEX C Malaysian Urban-Rural National Indicators Network for Sustainable Development The Malaysian Urban-Rural National Indicators cities’ performance and level of sustainability. Network for Sustainable Development It was implemented in 2002 and has served as a (MURNInets) is a program developed by the foundation for measuring city development in Federal Department of Town and Country Malaysia. The MURNInets framework is shown in Planning, Peninsular Malaysia, to assess Malaysian figure 22. Figure 22. MURNInets Framework Vision 2020, New Economic Model, Five Year Malaysia Plan/National Physical Plan (NPP) National Urban Policy (NUP)/ Sectoral Policies 1 DIMENSION 6 Competitive 2 DIMENSION Economy DIMENSION Effective Sustainable Environmental 34 Indicators – Governance secondary data from data Quality provider agency MSSDI 5 3 2 Indicators DIMENSION DIMENSION – primary data from survey Efficient 4 Sustainable Infrastructure DIMENSION Communities - Happiness Index Study & Transport Optimum Use of - Residents' Satisfaction Level on Local Authority Land & Natural Services Resources Government Transformation Programme – GTP / ETP (NKRA, NKEA, MKRA) 6 Source: and Development/Division, DIMENSIONS Research 21 THEMES / 36 PLANMalaysia, INDICATORS Ministry of 8 Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government 2017. © Research and Development Division, PLANMalaysia, Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government. Reproduced with permission from Research and Development Division, PLANMalaysia, Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government; further permission required for reuse. 118 ANNEX C MURNInets pilot projects were launched in six The National Physical Planning Council— Malaysian cities—namely Georgetown, Johor Bahru, the highest authority on physical planning in Kuantan, Kuching, Pasir Mas, and Batu Pahat. In Malaysia, chaired by the prime minister—is 2011, after almost 10 years of implementation, regularly updated on the status of MURNInets MURNInets was reviewed and a process was implementation as a check on the efforts taken by introduced that included six dimensions, 21 themes, all local authorities in Malaysia toward attaining and 36 indicators. These are summarized in figure 23. sustainable development. Figure 23. MURNInets Dimensions, Themes, and Indicators SUMMARY LIST OF DIMENSIONS, THEMES AND INDICATORS MURNInets Efficient and Optimum Use of Balanced Regional Enhancement of Spatial, Effective Governance S1 Competitive S2 Land and S3 Development S4 Environmental and Social S5 Through Communication Economic Natural (Infrastructure and Quality, Safety and and Provision of Public Development Resources Transportation) Physical Diversity and Infrastructure Services and Facilities) D1 Competitive D2 Sustainable D3 Sustainable D4 Optimum Use of D5 Efficient D6 Effective Economy Environmental Communities Land & Natural Transportation & Governance Quality Resources Infrastructure Themes No Theme No Themes No Themes No Themes No Themes No Economic Environmental Residential 1 Changes in 1 Utility 2 Delivery 1 2 2 Growth Quality land use Efficiency System Recreation and 1 Community Solid Waste 2 Municipal 3 Management Poverty 2 Risk 1 Facilities Strengthening 2 development Management Institutions Quality of Life Transportation 1 5 Heritage 2 Private 1 Environmental Preservation, Enforcement & 2 2 Sewerage 1 Investment management Security 1 Agriculture & Monitoring Tourism Management Demography 1 Total 4 Total 5 Total 9 Total 6 Total 6 Total 6 Overall Total Indicators = 36 Source: Research and Development Division, PLANMalaysia, Ministry of 9 Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government 2017. © Research and Development Division, PLANMalaysia, Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government. Reproduced with permission from Research and Development Division, PLANMalaysia, Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government; further permission required for reuse. 119 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) REFERENCES Research and Development Division, PLANMalaysia, Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government. 2017. “Sustainable Cities through the Malaysian Urban Rural National Indicators Network for Sustainable Development (MURNInets).” May. http://scdmalaysia.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/MURNInets.pdf. 120 ANNEX D ANNEX D Implementing the Vision in New York: OneNYC The Vision of One New York: The Plan for a Strong and Just City In 2007, New York mayor Michael R. Bloomberg developed a reconstruction strategy, and developed released the first PlaNYC, which aimed to respond recommendations to adapt the city to projected responsibly to the growing needs of the city’s impacts of climate change, including sea-level rise population and infrastructure. Titled “A Greener, and extreme weather events (City of New York Greater New York,” it included the city’s initial 2015). sustainability strategy, and it has become the model for other major global cities. PlaNYC identified The PlaNYC reports have focused on pressing measures to improve the city’s aging infrastructure, issues of growth, sustainability, and resilience. support parks, improve the quality of life and All of these objectives remain at the core of the health of New Yorkers, and commit for the first current plan, called OneNYC, which was published time to reducing greenhouse gas emissions (City of in 2015. But there are three significant differences New York 2015). in the approach taken with this plan, as illustrated in figure 24, it focuses on inequality, has a regional In 2013, after Hurricane Sandy, the city unveiled perspective, and seeks the direct involvement PlaNYC: A Stronger and More Resilient City, of New Yorkers in defining the plan’s goals and which documented lessons learned from Sandy, initiatives (City of New York 2015). 121 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) New York City Today and Tomorrow GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) Addressing Core Challenges and Opportunities It is time to build on our strengths and address these challenges and opportunities. We are all at risk when so many New Yorkers struggle to find living-wage jobs, good schools for their children, affordable housing, and neighborhoods and communities they can proudly call their home for years to come. We run the risk of becoming two New Yorks: one for the affluent and one for those who are left out of the city’s success and lack access to good schools or good wages for hard work. What we do now to confront these challenges will define the future of New York City and what kind of city we leave to our children. Figure 24. Core Challenges and Opportunities Addressed in OneNYC Core Challenges and Opportunities PlaNYC 2007 & 2011 OneNYC 2015 Growing Infrastructure Growing Importance of Population Needs Inequality the Region Urban Evolving Environmental New York City Economy Conditions & Voices Climate Change New Vision for OneNYC Source: City of New York 2015. © City of New York. Reproduced with OneNYC builds upon the four core challengesfrom permission City addressed of New York; further permission required for reuse. in past PlaNYC reports, and now includes growing inequality, the importance of the region, and New York City voices. nyc.gov/onenyc One New York: The Plan for a Strong and Just City 26 122 ANNEX D New York’s vision for its fifth century is therefore • Take 800,000 New Yorkers out of poverty or organized around the principles of growth, near-poverty by 2025, raise the minimum wage, equity, sustainability, and resilience. At the vision and launch initiatives for education and job stage itself, the principles are associated with growth; ambitious and measurable goals that will then • Reduce premature mortality by 25 percent, and be implemented with sustained investments and ensure access for all to physical and mental monitored actions. health services and household risk control; • Expand Family Justice Centers to help victims “Vision 1: Our Growing, Thriving City” of family violence; and With vision 1, New York aims at continuing to be • Promote the citywide integration of the most dynamic urban economy in the world, and a government services, information, and thriving place for families and businesses. This vision community data. seeks to • Implement an ambitious program for “Vision 3: Our Sustainable City” affordable housing; Vision 3 aims at making New York City the world’s • Support a first-class business sector of the most sustainable city and a world leader in the fight 21st century; against climate change. This vision seeks to • Foster employment growth; • Minimize New York’s environmental footprint; • Build an inclusive workforce with training • Reduce greenhouse gas emissions: The city for high-growth industries and programs is pursuing its goal of reducing greenhouse gas providing skills to the most difficult to employ; emissions by 80 percent by 2050 (“80 x • Support the burgeoning economy of 50”)—the largest city in the world to take on innovation and develop high-speed wireless this commitment—and expands its initial focus networks and transportation infrastructure; and on buildings to include energy supply, transport, • As a regional hub, work closely with neighbors and solid waste as part of a comprehensive on transportation, housing, and employment action plan to achieve the goal; issues. • Have the cleanest air and water of any big city; • Commit to achieving the goal of zero waste in “Vision 2: Our Just and Equitable City” landfills by 2030 (keeping organic matter out of With vision 2, New York City aims at having an the landfill will also reduce greenhouse gas inclusive economy that offers jobs and opportunities emissions); so that all can live in dignity and security. This vision • Make major investments to remediate seeks to contaminated lands; and • Ensure that underserved New Yorkers have more access to parks. 123 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) “Vision 4: Our Resilient City” Vision 1 has six goals, each of which is monitored in Vision 4 aims at ensuring New York’s neighborhoods, detail using a series of indicators: economy, and public services are ready to resist and • Goal 1. Expansion of the Industry aims at emerge stronger from the impacts of climate change ensuring that New York City will have the space and other 21st-century threats. This vision seeks to: and the assets to become a world economic • Ensure the ability to respond to adverse events leader and develop high-quality jobs in various such as Hurricane Sandy; sectors. • Provide basic services and services to all • Goal 2. Workforce Development aims at residents, and become stronger as a developing a workforce with the skills to community—with the goal of eliminating by participate in the 21st-century economy. 2050 long-term displacement of homes and • Goal 3. Housing Supply and Affordability jobs after shock events; aims at ensuring that New Yorkers have access • Improve public and private buildings to be to affordable, high-quality housing coupled with more energy efficient and resilient to the robust infrastructure and community-based services. impacts of climate change; • Goal 4. Culture aims at ensuring that New • Adapt infrastructure such as transportation, Yorkers have easy access to cultural resources telecommunications, water, and energy to and activities. withstand severe weather events; • Goal 5. Transportation aims at ensuring a • Strengthen coastal defenses against floods and reliable, safe, sustainable, and accessible sea-level rise; and transportation system that meets the needs • Strengthen homes, businesses, community of all New Yorkers and supports the city’s organizations, and public services to reduce growing economy. the impacts of disruptive events and promote • Goal 6. Broadband aims at ensuring for every faster recovery. resident and every business access to affordable, reliable, and high-speed broadband service Implementing and Monitoring the Plan with anywhere by 2025. Goals and Indicators The plan delivery is monitored through a comprehensive framework of indicators organized according to a cascading structure: visions/ goals/indicators. As shown in figures 25–28, the monitoring system gives previous data, latest data, and target for each indicator, and uses a traffic light system to show whether performance is improving or stable (green), is declining by less than 10 percent (yellow), or is declining by more than 10 percent or above tolerance (red). The vision level indicators and goals for each of the four visions are presented in figure 25. 124 ANNEX D Figure 25. Vision 1: Growth Goal Indicator Previous Data Latest Data Target Vision-level indicator Population 8,516,502 8,537,673 9 million (2015)1 (2016) (2040) Median household income $52,996 $55,752 Increase (2014) (2015) Gross City Product (GCP) $653.2 billion $662.5 billion Outperform national (2014)6 (2015) economy (percentage growth rate of gross 3.4% GCP growth 1.4% GCP growth national product) compared to 2.4% compared to annually GNP growth 2.5% GNP growth Total number of jobs 4.296 million 4.396 million 4.896 million (2016) (2017) (2040) Number of jobs accessible to the average New 1.5 million Data Not 1.8 million Yorker within 45 minutes by transit (2015) Available (2040) Share of New Yorkers that can access at least 88% Data Not 90% 200,000 jobs within 45 minutes by transit (2015) Available (2040) VISION 1: G ROW TH Number of new and preserved affordable 21,044 21,970 120,000 housing units financed under Housing New York (2015) (2016) (2024) (cumulative) 40,204 62,506 (cumulative) (cumulative) Number of new affordable and market rate 57,386 15,011 240,000 residential units (cumulative 10 year total, by (2015) (2016) (2015-2024) permit)4 80,287 95,298 (cumulative) (cumulative) New City Source: York of City will have New York 2017. ©the York. assets of New and Cityspace to with Reproduced be a global economic leader and grow permission from City of jobs quality across New York; a diverse further range permission of required sectors for reuse. Industry Expansion & Total number of jobs 4.296 million 4.396 million 4.896 million Cultivation (2016) (2017) (2040) Share of (total private sector) jobs in innovation 14.7% 14.8% 20% industries (2014) (2015) (2040) Median household income $52,996 $55,752 Increase (2014) (2015) Gross City Product (GCP) $653.2 billion $662.5 billion Outperform national (2014)6 (2015) economy (percentage growth rate of gross 3.4% GCP growth 1.4% GCP growth national product) compared to 2.4% compared to annually GNP growth 2.5% GNP growth Performance Improving or Stable 125 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) Performance Declining ( < or = 10%) Performance Declining ( > or = 10 or Zero Tolerance*) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) Vision 2 has five goals, each of which is monitored in • Goal 3. Access to Health Care aims at giving detail by a series of indicators: access to physical and mental health services to • Goal 1. Early Childhood aims at ensuring all New Yorkers. that every child in New York will be nurtured • Goal 4. Criminal Justice Reform aims at and protected and will thrive. keeping New York the safest among the • Goal 2. Healthy Neighborhoods, Active largest US cities with the lowest incarceration Living aims at ensuring that New Yorkers of all rate, and a fair and efficient criminal justice ages will live, work, learn, and play in system. neighborhoods that promote an active and • Goal 5. Vision Zero targets zero road healthy lifestyle. accidents in the streets of New York. Figure 26. Vision 2: Equity Goal Indicator Previous Data Latest Data Target Vision-level indicator Number of New Yorkers lifted out of poverty or ~101,000 based on ~281,000 800,000 people lifted near poverty based on simulating wage changes prior wage increases based on prior out of poverty or near to 2013 data and tracking certain anti-poverty through 2015 wage increases poverty by 2025 initiatives through 2017 Premature mortality rate1 186.00 deaths per 184.5 deaths per 142.6 deaths per 100,000 100,000 100,000 (2014) (2015) (25% decrease) (2040) Premature mortality rate disparity - 1.48 x 1.51 x 1.27 x Black vs. White (2014) (2015) (2040) Median household income $52,996 $55,752 Increase (2014) (2015) Every child Source: City in New of New York© York 2017. City will City of beYork. New nurtured, willwith be protected, and will thrive Reproduced permission from City of New York; further permission required for reuse. Early Childhood Infant mortality rate1 4.2 infant deaths per 4.3 infant deaths 3.7 infant deaths per 1,000 live births per 1,000 live 1,000 live births (2014) births (20% decrease) (2015) (2040) Infant mortality rate disparity - 2.9 x 3.0 x 1.5 x Black vs. White (2014) (2015) (2040) VISION 2: EQUIT Y Number of 4-year-olds enrolled in full day Pre-K 68,647 70,430 Increase (2016) (2016) New Yorkers of all ages will live, work, learn, and play in neighborhoods that promote an active and healthy lifestyle Healthy Average number of servings of fruits and 2.3 mean servings 2.3 mean 3.0 mean servings Neighborhoods, vegetables that adult New Yorkers eat per day (2014) servings (25% increase) Active Living (2015) (2035) Percentage of adult New Yorkers that meet 69% Data Not 80% physical activity recommendations (2014) Available (2035) 126 Percentage of NYC public high school students 18.7% 21% 30% who report meeting recommended levels of (2013) (2015) (2035) aerobic physical activity ANNEX D Vision 3 has six objectives, each of which is • Target 4. Brownfields targets cleaning up monitored in detail by a series of indicators: contaminated lands (to deal with disproportionately • Goal 1. 80 x 50 targets reducing New York’s high exposures in low-income communities) greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent by and converting land to safe use. 2050 compared to 2005. • Goal 5. Water Management comprises • Goal 2: Zero Waste targets sending zero waste mitigating flooding in neighborhoods and to landfills by 2030. providing high-quality water services. • Goal 3. Air Quality targets having the best air • Goal 6. Green Spaces seeks to ensure that all quality among all cities in the United States by New Yorkers will benefit from open spaces that 2030. are useful, accessible, and beautiful. Figure 27. Vision 3: Sustainability Goal Indicator Previous Data Latest Data Target Vision-level indicator Greenhouse gas emissions reductions relative to 12% 14% 80% reduction by 2050 20051 (2014) (2015) relative to 2005 Volume of DSNY-collected refuse (excluding 3,176,900 tons 3,196,200 tons 90% reduction by 2030 material collected for reuse/recycling) relative to (11.5% reduction) (10.9% reduction) from 2005 baseline 2005 baseline of ~3.6M tons2 (2015) (2016) (358,860 tons) Reduce risk of stormwater flooding in most 0.44% 0.65% Maintain < 1% affected communites as measured by backlog of (2015) (2016) catch basin repairs Source:New The New City’s York City of greenhouse York 2017. © City of Newgas emissions York. Reproduced will withbe 80 percent lower by permission from 2050 than in 2005City of New York; further permission required for reuse. 80 x 50 Greenhouse gas emissions reductions relative to 12% 14% 80% reduction by 2050 20051 (2014) (2015) relative to 2005 New York City will send zero waste to landfills by 2030 V I S I O N 3 : S U S TA I N A B I L I T Y Zero Waste Volume of DSNY-collected refuse (excluding 3,176,900 tons 3,196,200 tons 90% reduction by 2030 material collected for reuse/recycling) relative to (11.5% reduction) (10.9% reduction) from 2005 baseline of 2005 baseline of ~3.6M tons2 (2015) (2016) 3,588,600 tons Curbside and containerized diversion rate 16.0% 16.9% Increase (2015) (2016) Citywide diversion rate (including all streams of 52% Data Not Increase waste: residential, commercial, construction and (2013) Available demolition, and fill) New York City will have the best air quality among all U.S. cities by 2030 Air Quality Air-quality ranking among major U.S. cities3 4th 5th 1st (2012-2014) (2013-2015) (2030) Disparity in SO2 across city neighborhoods 3.20 ppb, 1.6 ppb, 2.25 ppb range in winter range in winter (2030) average across CDs average across (2014) CDs (2015) 127 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) Disparity in PM2.5 levels across city 6.50 µg/m 3 5.1 µg/m 3 5.32 µg/m 3 neighborhoods range annual average range, annual (2030) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) Vision 4 has four objectives, each of which is • Goal 3. Infrastructure ensures that infrastructure monitored in detail by a series of indicators: systems in the region will adapt to maintain • Goal 1. Neighborhoods aims at ensuring ongoing services. neighborhood safety by building community, • Goal 4. Coastal Defense will strengthen New social, and economic resilience. York’s coastal defenses against floods and rising • Goal 2. Buildings aims at improving buildings sea levels. against climate change. Figure 28. Vision 4: Resiliency Goal Indicator Previous Data Latest Data Target Vision-level indicators Eliminate disaster-related long-term Data Not Available Data Not Eliminate displacement of New Yorkers from homes by 2050 Available (2050) Reduce the Social Vulnerability Index for 4 Data Not Reduce neighborhoods across the city (2010) Available Reduce average annual economic losses resulting Data Not Available Data Not Reduce from climate related events Available Every of neighborhood city Source: City willof New York 2017. © City beNewsafer by York. strengthening Reproduced with community, social, and permission from City economic resiliency of New York; further permission required for reuse. Neighborhoods Capacity of accessible emergency shelters 10,000 10,000 120,000 (2016) (2017) (2018) Rate of volunteerism among New Yorkers1 17.6% 17.4% 25.0% (2014) (2015) (2020) The city’s buildings will be upgraded against changing climate impacts VISION 4: RESILIENCY Buildings Number of flood insurance policies in across the Data Not Available 55,682 Increase city2 (2017) Square footage of buildings upgraded against 264,000 7,692,721 Increase flood risk (2016) (2017) Number of elevated homes in the Build-it-Back 202 957 Increase program (cumulative) (2016) (2017) Infrastructure systems across the region will adapt to maintain continued services Infrastructure System Average Interruption Frequency Index 89.8 85.9 Decrease (SAIFI), the number of outages per 1,000 (2015) (2016) customers3,4 Customer Average Interruption Duration Index 3.66 2.89 Decrease (CAIDI), the average duration of an outage in (2015) (2016) hours3,4 128 Percentage of hospital and long-term care beds 84% 84% 100% benefitting from facility retrofits for resiliency (2016) (2017) (2020) ANNEX D REFERENCES City of New York. 2015. “One New York: The Plan for a Strong and Just City.” http://www.nyc.gov/html/onenyc/downloads/pdf/publications/OneNYC.pdf. ———. 2017. “OneNYC 2017 Progress Report.” http://onenyc.cityofnewyork.us/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/OneNYC_2017_Progress_ Report.pdf. 129 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) ANNEX E Measuring Fiscal Sustainability with Credit Ratings Fiscal sustainability refers to a city’s ability to Fiscal sustainability is also referred to as sustain an adequate level of ongoing administrative creditworthiness. Creditworthiness means the and urban services using its total recurrent ability and willingness of a potential borrower to revenues, while also investing in infrastructure repay its debt in full and on schedule, but it can improvements to meet the foreseeable growth in be generalized to mean the borrower’s ability and demand for city services. For fiscal sustainability, willingness to meet all of its financial obligations. as for other components of sustainability, the first In order for a city to finance the infrastructure it steps in the process of defining and improving on needs for implementing its action plan, it must current performance are understanding, measuring, offer the financial community a creditworthy and tracking. The most useful tool for measuring investment opportunity. Creditworthiness can be a city’s fiscal sustainability is a credit rating. It objectively measured by credit ratings that are based provides a forward-looking, standardized, external on standardized analysis performed by credit rating assessment of financial conditions that can be agencies. Credit ratings are therefore a good way consistently tracked over time and benchmarked for cities to measure their financial sustainability against similar cities. and benchmark their performance. Making use of market-based financing mechanisms Creditworthiness is a relative term. A city can depends on convincing the financial community be “more creditworthy” or “less creditworthy” that it can earn an acceptable profit by participating compared to other organizations. That is why credit in a city’s infrastructure-financing transaction. This ratings are presented as a scale: from AAA (the persuasion is possible only if the city is shown to lowest risk of financial default) through C (default be fiscally sustainable in the long term. Therefore, is imminent or inevitable) to D (in default). A city for a city to mobilize long-term financing for with a credit rating of BBB- or better is said to be infrastructure from market-based sources, it must “investment grade,” while one with a lower rating is achieve and demonstrate its fiscal sustainability. said to be a “speculative” investment (table 3). 130 ANNEX E Standard & Poor’s credit rating symbols provide a simple, THE ABCs OF efficient way to communicate creditworthiness and credit quality. RATING SCALES Our global rating scale provides a benchmark for evaluating the relative credit risk of issuers and issues worldwide. Table 3. The General ABCs of summary ofRating Scales reflected the opinions by& by Standard Poor’s our Financial Services (S&P) ratings Investment AAA Extremely strong capacity to meet financial commitments. Grade Highest rating AA Very strong capacity to meet financial commitments A Strong capacity to meet financial commitments, but somewhat susceptible to adverse economic conditions and changes in circumstances BBB Adequate capacity to meet financial commitments, but more subject to adverse economic conditions BBB- Considered lowest investment-grade by market participants Speculative BB+ Considered highest speculative-grade by market participants Grade BB Less vulnerable in the near-term but faces major ongoing uncertainties to adverse business, financial and economic conditions B More vulnerable to adverse business, financial and economic conditions but currently has the capacity to meet financial commitments CCC Currently vulnerable and dependent on favorable business, financial and economic conditions to meet financial commitments CC Highly vulnerable; default has not yet occurred, but is expected to be a virtual certainty C Currently highly vulnerable to non-payment, and ultimate recovery is expected to be lower than that of higher rated obligations D Payment default on a financial commitment or breach of an imputed promise; also used when a bankruptcy petition has been filed or similar action taken Ratings from ‘AA’ to ‘CCC’ may be modified by the addition of a plus (+) or minus (-) sign to show relative standing within the major rating categories. Source: S&P LLC 2014. © S&P LLC. Reproduced with permission from S&P LLC; further permission required for reuse. RATINGS DEFINITIONS Note: Standard & Poor’s Financial Services LLC (S&P) does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, For a complete timeliness, list of Standard & Poor’s or availability Ratings of any information, Definitions, including issuer credit ratings as including ratings, and is not responsible for any errors or omissions well as a related article on Understanding Standard & Poor’s Ratings(negligent Definitions, please go to or otherwise), regardless of the cause, or for the results obtained from the www.UnderstandingRatings.com use of ratings. S&P gives no express or implied warranties, including, but not limited to, any warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose or use. S&P shall not be liable for any direct, indirect, incidental, exemplary, compensatory, punitive, special, or consequential damages, costs, expenses, legal fees, or losses (including lost income or profits and opportunity costs) in GUIDE TO CREDIT RATING ESSENTIALS 9 connection with any use of ratings. S&P’s ratings are statements of opinions and are not statements of fact or recommendations to purchase, hold, or sell securities. They do not address the market value of securities or the suitability of securities for investment purposes, and should not be relied on as investment advice. 131 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) But what kinds of organizations is a city’s • The characteristics of the city’s finances, creditworthiness being compared to? That depends including trends in total revenues (their on whether the credit ratings are on a national or volatility, diversity, and predictability), total international rating scale.96 City governments or urban expenditure, the balance (surplus or deficit) service providers that borrow funds in their domestic between recurrent operating revenues and local currency markets can be rated on their national recurrent operating expenditures, reserves, and rating scale, where the comparator with the lowest liquidity; and risk of default is the AAA national government.97 City • The management and administration of the governments and urban service providers that achieve city, including institutionalized financial national scale ratings of BBB- or better are considered policies and procedures; management of investment-grade risks for local currency investors the budget; accounting and financial reporting; and lenders. Each credit rating agency has its own independent external audits; effects of politics, methodology for assessing the risk that a city or urban labor issues, or citizen initiatives; and the degree service provider will default on its debt. However, the of revenue and expenditure flexibility. essential factors analyzed by these methodologies are virtually the same and include the following: Obtaining a national scale investment-grade credit • The institutional framework surrounding the rating should be an aspiration of all city governments city, including centralized/decentralized and urban service providers that are pursuing governance, degree of fiscal autonomy, formal sustainability.98 However, it is not necessary for a responsibilities of the city, legally mandated city to be publicly rated immediately. A city can start annual expenditures, and the characteristics of with a “private” or “shadow” credit rating that is any funding provided from the national provided only to the city administration as a means government; of identifying where the city stands on the rating • The economic outlook for the city, including scale so that improvement measures can be carried trends in the economic base, the local revenue out before a fully public rating is conducted and base, employment conditions, local income released. Creditworthiness is not limited to local and wealth, demographics, and the per capita governments—it extends to their utility companies. tax/fee burden compared to other similar cities In Kenya, the Water Services Regulatory Board and the national average; calculated and published utility shadow credit ratings • The city’s debts and other liabilities, including for 43 water service providers in 2011 and found only current debt (long or short term, fixed or 13 providers to have investment-grade ratings. variable interest rate, to be paid in local currency or foreign currency), the debt service burden, A national scale investment-grade credit rating the needs for future debt financing, other is a good way for a city to demonstrate its fiscal liabilities, and contingent liabilities and how they sustainability and creditworthiness to the domestic are funded; financial community. However, achieving and 96 Multilateral development banks, sovereign governments, and large corporations are rated on the international rating scale when they want to borrow hard currency funds (U.S. dollars, euros, yen) in the international markets. Here the comparators are the global AAA organizations that demonstrate the lowest risk of default (for example, the World Bank, the government of Switzerland, and Microsoft). 97 Note that national governments that do not issue their own unique currency (e.g., national governments in the euro area or the CFA zone) are not always considered AAA and may even be rated as speculative in the rating scale associated with their currency (e.g., Greece). 98 Such a credit rating could be anything from AAA to BBB- on a national scale—for example, a city’s credit rating could be an AA(mx) in Mexico or an A+(za) in South Africa. 132 ANNEX E maintaining an investment-grade rating requires an 1. Increasing own source revenue. Many cities enduring commitment to sound financial management have found that through successful reforms and by the city or urban service provider and a supportive improvements in various stages of the revenue and enabling fiscal environment. It entails prudent collection process (registration, assessment, billing, management of the operating budget (revenue collection, and monitoring), they can increase their and expenditure), the capital budget (investment own-source revenue, often quite substantially. The in infrastructure), liquidity (cash flow), and debt. It best course of action is to increase the revenue also entails a fiscal framework that assigns adequate yielded under existing tax, tariff, and fee rates before revenue sources; allows adjustment of tax, tariff, and proposing an increase in rates. Improvement of fee rates when necessary; and provides formula-based revenue collection practices is an essential step in revenue transfers that are predictable and timely. justifying any proposed increase in rates.100 In addition to providing the means for a city or urban After improving own-source revenue collection as service provider to demonstrate its creditworthiness much as possible and raising tax, tariff, and fee rates to financial institutions, credit ratings offer other on existing revenue sources as far as possible, a city advantages. The rating report that accompanies the may still need to seek additional sources of revenue letter grade spells out the financial strengths and in order to achieve fiscal sustainability. Introducing a weaknesses of the authority in some detail, and can new tax, user charge, or fee at the local level is usually be used to guide a city’s efforts to improve its financial a difficult and politically unpopular measure. It is not management. When ratings are made public, they are easy to do and may require convincing city residents a simple and transparent means of communicating a of its necessity and persuading higher levels of city’s financial condition to key stakeholders and the government to approve its use. community at large. They can also be used by national governments to monitor the financial health of a city In addition to the foregoing steps, a city may be able with complete objectivity.99 to marginally increase revenues by actively managing its cash balances so that they provide interest income, There are several things that a city can do to achieve but prudent cash management requires investing in and demonstrate fiscal sustainability and thereby ways that maintain liquidity (so that funds are available improve its credit rating (World Bank 2018): when required) and security (so that funds are not lost 1. Increase the city’ own-source revenue; in bad investments). 2. Put the city’s intergovernmental transfer revenues on a sound basis; and 3. Maintain an operating margin surplus of recurrent revenues over expenditures. 99 It is also important to note that credit ratings can be based on either (1) the risk of default by a city or urban service provider on any of its financial obligations, referred to as an “institutional” or “general obligation” credit rating, or (2) the risk of default on a specific financial obligation of the organization, such as a bond, loan, or PPP agreement, which is referred to as a “bond rating” (although it can apply to any specific financial obligation). While a city’s bond rating has its foundation in the city’s general obligation rating, the specific bond, loan, or PPP being rated can be structured in a way that reduces the risk of default. As a result, it is even possible for a city with a general obligation credit rating slightly below BBB- to offer the financial community an attractive long-term investment grade “structured obligation.” This broadens the universe of cities that can access long-term financing through private and mixed mechanisms, but only to the extent that the cities can afford to pay for all of the structural “credit enhancements” that are built into the financing. 100 If a city has the ability to raise tax, tariff, and/or fee rates, and revenue collection at current rates has been improved as much as possible, then it should try to set rates at levels that can generate sufficient revenue to cover the cost of mandated services. 133 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) 2. Putting intergovernmental transfer revenues on • Prepare conservative estimates of recurrent a sound basis. A city needs to be able to accurately revenues for at least three years ahead; forecast the amount and timing of its revenue from • Prepare expenditure estimates for at least year to year. If a city faces unpredictable, unstable, three years ahead that anticipate likely increases and/or delayed transfers from higher levels of in expenditures for each budget line item; government, then accurate revenue forecasting is • Compare future-year recurrent revenue unreliable, and it will need to work with the higher estimates with corresponding expenditure levels of government to improve the predictability estimates to identify potential problems in and timeliness of transfers, especially those linked to maintaining the “budget limit; and the city government’s mandated services.101 • Prepare and adopt annual expenditure budgets that comply with the “budget limit” policy. Even when the sources of funding for A city should assess all options for increasing intergovernmental transfers are stable, the transfers its operating margin to determine which ones will not be predictable unless an agreed formula for are legally, technically, and politically feasible. the allocation of transfers is consistently applied. Possible options include increasing recurrent If transfers are based on what a higher level of operating revenue (own-source and transfers); government can “afford at the moment,” then reducing personnel expenditures; reducing the agreement needs to be reached on a “minimum” cost of goods and services used; and/or allocation to be provided every year. If bureaucracy at reducing energy and fuel expenditures.102 a higher level of government typically delays transfers (intentionally or unintentionally), then the transfer To further reduce expenditures, the city government mechanism and process will need to be simplified and needs to think strategically and consider the medium made more transparent. and long term as well as its immediate situation. Repairing old equipment and facilities can become 3. Maintaining an operating margin surplus. more and more expensive over time. At some point, it A city’s operating margin is its operating revenue is more cost-effective to replace equipment or facilities (all revenue not specifically designated to fund the than to continue to repair them. capital budget) minus its operating expenditures (all expenditures not included in the capital budget). To Whatever methods are chosen, maintaining an maintain an operating margin surplus, a city needs to operating margin surplus provides the essential keep operating expenditures below the level of annual foundation for a city’s financial sustainability. recurrent operating revenues. Recurrent operating Problems in maintaining a positive operating margin revenues are those that a city government can always will jeopardize a city’s fiscal sustainability, and the expect to collect every year; that is to say, they are very underlying problems need to be addressed as soon as predictable revenues (either own-source or transfers). possible. In order to keep operating expenditures below the level of annual recurrent operating revenues, a city will Box 16 presents criteria used by a rating agency for need to assigning ratings to local and regional governments. • Establish a written policy that limits budgeted expenditures to less than the level of the recurrent revenue estimate for the year; 101 If the national government’s own source of revenue for funding transfers is unpredictable, then it will be necessary to seek a more stable source of funding. While every country is different, it should be possible to identify several national government revenue sources that do not fluctuate very much from year to year. A relatively small but consistent percentage of large and stable streams of national government revenue should be automatically set aside to fund intergovernmental transfers every year. 102 It may be possible for a city to reduce expenditures through cost-saving measures such as outsourcing, introducing better technology, improving security over equipment and materials, using less overtime, standardization of vehicles and computers, etc. 134 ANNEX E Box 16. Rating Criteria for an International Local or Regional Government The international credit rating agency Fitch the analysis of the LRG once the institutional considers a number of factors for rating entities or framework has been assessed. debt instruments in different jurisdictions outside of the United States, though not all factors are Intrinsic credit profile. This is the result of the applicable in every case. Overall, a local or regional outcome of the rating factors before any further government (LRG) that performs consistently criteria (e.g., ratings floor or sovereign ratings and shows its ability to absorb shocks will receive cap) are applied. a higher rating than one that does not. The rating process takes into account the influence that Debt securities. The nature of the specific debt the different factors exert on one another. For security and its relationship to the issuer’s general example, “the socio-economic profile influences credit quality will influence the security’s rating. the tax base and expenditure pressures. The fiscal Given that “in most instances, the debt security results affect the LRG’s need to borrow or retire represents a senior and unsecured claim on the debt. Management has an impact on revenue, sub-national,” the security’s rating is “typically the expenditure and risk appetite.” The main rating same as the relevant Issuer Default Rating.” criteria that Fitch considers are listed below. Ratings above the sovereign. In determining Institutional framework. The assessment of the an LRG rating, the sovereign rating is typically institutional framework looks at constitutional considered a cap. This approach reflects “the and statutory regulation, oversight by higher high degree of control and potential intervention levels of government, equalization funding, and by the central government.” An exception to transparency, among other factors. this approach is made for LRGs “that enjoy a high degree of autonomy on taxation, freedom Additional factors. Other relevant factors, such to access financial resources, and institutional as the LRG’s economy, debt and other long- recognition.” term liabilities, finances and fiscal performance, and management/administration, help sharpen Source: Fitch Research 2015. 135 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) REFERENCES Fitch Research. 2015. “International Local and Regional Governments Rating Criteria.” May 18. https://www.fitchratings.com/site/re/719656. S&P LLC. 2014. “Guide to Credit Rating Essentials: What Are Credit Ratings and How Do They Work?” https://www.spratings.com/documents/20184/760102/SPRS_Understanding-Ratings_ GRE.pdf/298e606f-ce5b-4ece-9076-66810cd9b6aa. World Bank. 2018. “City Creditworthiness Self-Assessment and Planning Toolkit.” http://www.citycred.org/. 136 ANNEX F ANNEX F Moving from Diagnosis to Priority Actions in Addis Ababa Addis Ababa is the largest city in Ethiopia and Enabling Dimensions one of Africa’s fastest-growing cities. It plays an 1. Governance and Integrated Urban Planning important role for the development of the country Diagnosis and for the economic prosperity of the region. Addis The overall organization of the city government Ababa’s efforts to promote greater sustainability is complex, comprising agencies, authorities, and must be closely aligned with its vision of being a enterprises of the city and the federal government safe and livable city, and with Ethiopia’s national with a range of roles and responsibilities in the goals of becoming a middle-income country by 2025 construction and management of infrastructure. and Africa’s diplomatic capital. Over the next few This arrangement creates an important need for decades, Addis Ababa’s unprecedented urban growth coordination. The draft development plan is quite could create the scale and agglomeration economies comprehensive and technically sound. As in most sufficient to enable the city to achieve its long-term cities, the challenge will be effective implementation goals; but if this growth is not well managed, it could of the plan and prioritization of project interventions also exacerbate existing risk factors and stresses (World Bank 2015). related to natural hazards, access to basic services, and congestion. Addis Ababa is urbanizing at an exponential rate and is expected to become a megacity of nearly 10 The following diagnoses and recommended priority million people by 2037. This will put a strain on actions for Addis Ababa are organized along the the city’s ability to reach its goal of being a livable USF’s six dimensions and include some of its and safe city. Addis Ababa is sprawling; urban most important indicators. They demonstrate how growth exceeds population growth. The result is struggling cities can build on diagnosis to prioritize that an estimated 46 percent of the land is vacant actions that will increase sustainability, as Addis or underutilized. However, the city center has an Ababa is doing through its Integrated Development extremely high density (up to 30,000 inhabitants Plan, currently in draft form. The content of this per km2), concentrating about 30 percent of the annex is adapted from World Bank (2015) and population on 8 percent of the land, usually with UN-Habitat (2017). poor living conditions. 137 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) Land Underused or Vacant 46% 15 Land Allocated roads Housing Addis Ababa’s expansion along its five radialTotal without assessing the impacts on transportation; to Streets Stock (figure 29) has posed many challenges for the city, Comprised this approach misses the opportunity 17to integrate of Low Quality 20% including increased transportation costs, congestion, public transport modes in terms of coverage, routes, Housing and provision of public infrastructure services. In fares, schedules, and equipment. Low street coverage 70-80% and lack of road network and related infrastructure addition, there is a lack of coordination between About Addis Ababa 16 investment in transport and urban development. have led to increased inefficiency in mobility, with Decisions on housing location and land use planning implications for productivity, quality of life, and are made based on the availability of land resources social inclusion. Figure 29. Addis Ababa Urban Expansion (left) and Fragmented Growth along Roads (right) Addis Ababa Urban Expansion Urban Land Expansion Rate 3.2% per year 18 Maximum Density 30,000 people/km2 19 Source: World Bank 2015. Addis Ababa Urbanization Along Road Corridors 15 18 19 Ethiopia Urbanization Review, 2015 16 30 The 2007 Population and Housing Census, 2010 17 Growth and Transformation Plan II, 2015 31 138 ANNEX F Priority Actions for Addis Ababa Priority Actions for Addis Ababa • Address exponential urban growth by • Improve the revenue-generating capacity of rapidly focusing on the implementation of the the city. new Integrated Development Plan. • Improve tax collection. • Create an implementation “business plan” that • Explore other forms of resource mobilization, articulates the phasing of works, costs and including attracting more domestic and foreign financing sources, and roles and responsibilities. investment by improving the business • Develop a strong communication plan environment. that engages the participation of a wide range of stakeholders, including nonstate Outcome Dimensions organizations. 1. Urban Economies • Improve transparency and accountability Diagnosis mechanisms by creating a website for the Addis Ababa is home to 25 percent of the urban dissemination of public information, tracking population in Ethiopia and is one of the fastest- and providing updates on the progress of growing cities in Africa. It is the engine of growth the plan. for Ethiopia and a major pillar of the country’s • Use a transit-based development approach vision of becoming a middle-income, carbon- for intensification: as part of the neutral, and resilient economy by 2025. Addis implementation of the Integrated Ababa’s economy grows every year by approximately Development Plan, the municipal government 14 percent. The city currently contributes should select targeted sites for intensive approximately 50 percent of the national GDP; this public investment, private sector engagement, large share highlights Addis Ababa’s strategic role and institutional coordination. Investments within the overall economic development of the in transport, especially public transport, should country. be supported by interagency technical teams to ensure the quality of local development. Despite the efforts of the federal government and • Shape metropolitan growth with transit the city administration to diversify the economic corridors: efforts must be made to ensure that base of the capital, the service sector remains fringe growth is orderly and that there are dominant and the pace of manufacturing growth has viable and affordable transportation options. remained slow (with some improvement over the • Ensure a balanced concentration between past five years). Although the city government has downtown and outlying areas. made a significant effort to enhance local economic development through micro and small enterprise 2. Fiscal Sustainability (MSE) development, it has yet to demonstrate Diagnosis the potential of MSEs in producing broad-based Addis Ababa’s ability to generate income needs inclusive sustainable economic growth. As a result, to be better aligned with urban economic activity. the urban economy does not offer a sufficiently wide The city faces the challenge of increasing range of employment opportunities for different municipal revenues to finance public spending. skill levels. Current public spending in the city is far too much dependent on state revenues and subsidies, Addis Ababa was ranked 121st from among with the share of municipal revenues declining 125 cities surveyed in the “Global Cities 2016” over time. 139 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) competitiveness report, better only than Dhaka, 2. Natural Environment and Resources Khartoum, Lagos, and Luanda (A. T. Kearney 2016). Diagnosis In the Doing Business 2016 report, Ethiopia ranks Air and water pollution currently exceed acceptable 146th among 189 economies surveyed for ease standards, with negative consequences for of doing business (World Bank 2016). Starting a ecosystems and for the health of city residents. business, obtaining credit, trading across borders,Neighborhoods accommodating the more vulnerable and registering property were found to be critical communities have the least access to green areas and impediments to doing business in Ethiopia. These fewest benefits of an adequate ecosystem. factors have adversely affected inward foreign direct Addis Ababa is already suffering from water scarcity, investment flows into Ethiopia and specifically into and this is expected to become even more significant Addis Ababa. due to rapid urbanization, increased individual water demand as incomes rise, and the impacts of climate Thus, despite its strong economic growth, Addis change. Currently, Addis Ababa has two sources of Ababa faces significant challenges. For example, water—surface water and groundwater—and failure levels of unemployment and poverty in Addis of either would result in a crisis. To ensure that more Ababa remain high, estimated at 23.5 percent and potable water is made available to the population and 22 percent respectively. More than one in four address the estimated 36.5 percent leakage of water households report an unemployed adult, compared supply in the system, Addis Ababa must improve to one in 10 households in other urban areas in maintenance and respond more quickly to reported Ethiopia; and the informal sector employs about 30 breakages. The per capita distribution is estimated to percent of the economically active labor force in be around 40 liters/day, well below the city’s goal of the city. 110 liters/day. Priority Actions for Addis Ababa Priority Actions for Addis Ababa • Build on recent gains by improving the • Reduce the transaction cost associated with efficiency, effectiveness, and responsiveness of environmental degradation by expediting the municipal institutions in service delivery. implementation of existing laws and • Ease the cost of doing business by regulations on pollution control and energy undertaking deep reforms to facilitate access efficiency. to land, credit, and investable capital, and by • Introduce best practices for solid waste such as eliminating bureaucratic red tape and waste separation, compost production, and corruption. recycling and reuse. • Develop MSE linkages with medium and • Tackle water pollution by regulating and large enterprises. Government support is controlling discharges from both houses and needed to enhance skills and finance factories. for MSEs, and MSEs also need national and • Address water scarcity by focusing on international market linkages, technology improved efficiency and protection of the transfers, and subcontracting arrangements. existing supply system, management of demand, and identification of additional water sources. 140 ANNEX F 3. Climate Action and Resilience 4. Inclusivity and Quality of Life Diagnosis Diagnosis The climate of Addis Ababa is forecasted to have an The Gini coefficient (which measures income increase in precipitation variability and temperature. inequality) rose in Addis Ababa between 1996 and This will likely exacerbate a wide range of hazards 2005, from 0.353 to 0.455. After 2005, the Gini in the city, including flooding and landslides as well coefficient started to decline, and in 2015 it stood at as droughts and fires (which have been the most 0.342. common hazards in rural and urban areas). The geographic location and topographic features of Addis Ababa’s 80 percent level of literacy is higher Addis Ababa, compounded by the existing state of than that of other parts of the country. In addition the drainage system, road network, and sewerage to impressive achievement in school enrollment system, expose the city to street and riverine at all levels, the city has also shown significant flooding as well as landslides. There are limited improvement in educational infrastructure, which awareness-raising activities and no early warning has in turn improved access to education. system in place, meaning that communities are highly vulnerable. However, the provision of housing and infrastructure, which underpins urban economic Priority Actions for Addis Ababa productivity and social inclusiveness, is By improving coordination between municipal significantly lagging, despite the major investments services, Addis Ababa’s government could being made by the city. Of total housing stock, implement a set of initiatives that would transform 70–80 percent is of low quality. It is estimated the resilience of the city and bring many economic, that only 44 percent of the population have social, and environmental benefits: access to clean water, and only 25–30 percent of • Implement existing plans and regulations; households have wastewater collection, either • Establish clear and competent leadership through piped sewer lines or vacuum trucks. in risk management, including the creation of Treatment capacity is currently exceeded, and a risk management unit under the authority of excess waste is deposited in water bodies. The the mayor to strengthen, promote, and city’s electricity access rate is close to 100 percent, integrate risk management initiatives in but energy service disruptions—outages and municipal organizations; interruptions—are very frequent and a stress to • Strengthen citizen engagement in disaster risk the city. The projected rapid growth in population management by leveraging informal initiatives and intensity of urbanization will require an and strengthening formal ones—this will also increase in generation capacity and an efficient serve to make existing engagements more transmission and distribution system. efficient; and • Establish a functioning neighborhood-level Existing poverty alleviation programs are fragmented early warning system for residential areas and ineffectively targeted, with very low coverage. along rivers and in densely populated zones The national food poverty head count index is 33.6 for flood safety. percent on average (34.7 percent in rural areas and 27.9 percent in urban areas). Currently, the most 141 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES (GPSC) vulnerable groups in Addis Ababa cannot benefit vulnerable groups (with special attention from many of the social services available because to existing social service programs and access they cannot access or afford them. Analysis is to housing) to develop an integrated strategy needed to better understand vulnerable groups in to meet their needs. the population and to develop an integrated strategy • Put in place a safety net and targeted that will provide them with appropriate support complementary livelihood actions to consistent with the overall government agenda. support extremely poor and vulnerable groups and households. Priority Actions for Addis Ababa • Develop an inclusive housing strategy, including a review of household affordability and the on- and off-budget subsidies associated with the city’s condominium program; incorporate a wider range of options beyond ownership of condominium housing units (i.e., rental housing, housing upgrading, housing cooperatives, etc.) and expand affordable housing finance. • Increase coverage and reliability of basic services, including wastewater collection and treatment and energy distribution. • Undertake an in-depth study of the most 142 ANNEX F REFERENCES A. T. Kearney. 2016. “Global Cities 2016: Which Global Cities Are Performing Best Today, Which Have the Best Long- Term Potential, and What Makes a ‘Smart City’?” https://www.atkearney.com/documents/10192/8178456/Global+Cities+2016.pdf/8139cd44- c760-4a93-ad7d-11c5d347451a. UN-Habitat. 2017. The State of Addis Ababa 2017: The Addis Ababa We Want. Nairobi: UN-Habitat. https://unhabitat.org/books/the-state-of-addis-ababa-2017-the-addis-ababa-we-want/. World Bank. 2015. “Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: Enhancing Urban Resilience.” City Strength Resilient Cities Program. World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2016. Doing Business 2016: Measuring Regulatory Quality and Efficiency. Washington, DC: World Bank. http://www.doingbusiness.org/~/media/WBG/DoingBusiness/Documents/Annual-Reports/ English/DB16-Full-Report.pdf. 143 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF) 145 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK (USF)