Contribution of Chinese cities to sustainable growth

Just last month, the World Bank published a report on urban development that explores ways to adopt a low-carbon growth path in key cities. “Sustainable Low-Carbon City Development in China” cites the need for urgent action by Beijing to accomplish its lofty policy goal of reducing carbon emissions by 17 per cent by 2015 as set out in its 12th five-year plan (2011-15). A quick look at some statistics reinforces this point:

n Cities contribute about 70 per cent of energy-related greenhouse gases

n The population of China’s cities is set to rise by 350 million over two decades.

n Industry and power generation each account for about 40 per cent of carbon emissions in urban China, while transport, building and waste make up the remaining 20 per cent.

Mitigating these factors will be crucial in transforming China’s towns and cities into more liveable, efficient, competitive and sustainable places.

The report outlines how policymakers and local, regional and national governments will need to approach the matter. 

The key issue is spatial development and land use. Cities must be planned and developed in a way that maximises the use of land and ensures that transport systems, utilities, industry and other key components can be expanded to meet the future needs of the growing urban environment.

Such planning also needs to incorporate responses to climate change-related issues on growth and development. 

Energy supply, the maximisation of renewables and the need for increased energy efficiency in buildings are other key factors.

The urban transport policy needs to focus on providing alternatives to the private motor car, such as by developing fully integrated public transport services and infrastructure to encourage walking and cycling.

Furthermore, water and waste management needs to become much more efficient, both in reducing the quantities of resources used and maximising the recycling of waste.

By taking the report’s findings onboard, China has the potential to help define a new mode of more sustainable urban development and city dwelling for the 21st century.

This is something that policymakers from Bangkok to Zagreb should pay attention to, but a key point is that we should not wait to observe the outcomes of Beijing’s efforts before embarking on our own.

Resources are becoming scarcer and, as the report mentions, cities are difficult to retrofit with enhanced infrastructure once they have already expanded.

A similar focus closer in Thailand could help establish Bangkok as a paradigm for efficient urban development if policies can be enacted to champion pollution reduction, waste management and the development of a world-class transport system. 

These goals may be a long way from today’s reality, but I believe they are both attainable and worth striving for.