cities – Page 2 – Cabot Institute for the Environment blog

A modal share for net zero

Posted on June 5, 2020March 31, 2023 by janet.crompton

Bristol needs to get more people cycling and walking in the next decade to meet its net-zero carbon emissions target

Bristol has committed to an ambitious goal of being carbon neutral by 2030. This will require an 88% reduction in emissions from the transport sector in the next decade. While other sectors, such as energy and waste, have decarbonised significantly in recent years, emissions from transport have been stubborn to change. Transport, therefore, represents one of the greatest challenges for Bristol meeting its 2030 ambitions.

The challenge of reaching this target has been compounded by uncertainty around what a carbon neutral transport sector would look like. We know intuitively that car journeys need to be replaced by public transport, walking, and cycling. However, a lack of certainty about the scale and nature of the shift required makes it difficult to establish a roadmap for transitioning to a sustainable transport system. In 2019, the Sustainable Transport Network (STN), a group of transport organisations in Bristol, proposed targets for modal share — i.e. the share of journeys by car, bus and active travel — to reach the net zero target. But these targets lacked a solid evidence base. Our report, released today and available on the Cabot Institute website addresses this evidence gap.

We produced this report as part of our MSc programme in Environmental Policy and Management with support from STN members. Building on previous research by the Centre for Sustainable Energy, we modeled the modal share needed to reach net zero by 2030, assuming that 100% of buses and nearly all cars are Ultra Low Emission Vehicles (ULEV) by then. It was a challenging task due to the absence of the exact data needed to do this with confidence, but we drew on multiple data sources to generate our estimates.

We found that journeys made by car currently dominate travel, with an estimated 51% of all journeys each year. Walking and cycling account for roughly 30% of journeys, and the remainder by public transport (where the majority is by bus). Our modelling shows that substantial changes are required over the next decade. To achieve the emissions reductions needed to reach the net zero target, we’ll likely need to increase the share of journeys by walking and cycling to 55%, increase the share of bus and train journeys to 25% and decrease the share of car journeys to 20%.

How can we get there?

The greatest required increase is in the number of people cycling and walking in Bristol. The Sustrans 2019 Bike Life report demonstrates that a majority of Bristol residents support movements to create safer and more spacious streets.This will require the introduction of low-traffic neighbourhoods, extensive pedestrianisation, and bicycle lanes that are wide and free from cars. TravelWest reports that 40% of commuting journeys are under 2km, a distance that could be walked or cycled in less than half an hour with the necessary, safe and connected infrastructure.

The modal share targets we have proposed are ambitious, but evidence from other cities around the world suggests that they are also achievable. Drawing on this evidence, and our research into current plans and initiatives in Bristol, we recommend the following:

Expand efforts to encourage uptake of electric cars, such as subsidies and electric car sharing schemes.
Accelerate implementation of initiatives that discourage journeys by car and increase the safety and appeal of alternatives, such as the Clean Air Zone, the pedestrianisation of the Old City, and piloting low traffic neighbourhoods.
Ensure successful implementation of the Bus Deal. Extensive bus prioritisation measures are essential to deliver the frequent, reliable, and fast relative to driving. Development of more park and ride facilities aiding this further.

It is possible to achieve net zero in the transport sector in Bristol, but it will require aiming for more ambitious targets than previously proposed. Our research suggests that greater coordination between authorities and organisations is also needed to ensure that ambitious strategies are effectively and quickly implemented – particularly in the domain of active transport. While more research is clearly needed — including more comprehensive local data on transport behaviour to monitor progress — the evidence available suggests we need to act quickly and decisively to decarbonise our transport system.

Download the full report.
———————————
This blog is written by postgraduate students from the Environmental Policy and Management MSc at the University of Bristol, including Eveline Hall, Miriam Castillo Orozco, Anna Collingridge, Clare Watson and Alex Swan.

Rebuilding Bristol as a city of care

Posted on May 21, 2020March 31, 2023 by janet.crompton

I was asked to speak at an event organised by the Mayor of Bristol, Marvin Rees and the City Office team that brought together academics and other interested in rebuilding Bristol. I was asked to respond to the following question and thought people might be interested in reading the full text here:

‘Bristol, along with cities all over the globe, is facing an unprecedented health, economic and social crisis. This brings both a challenge and an opportunity to rebuild our city. If we do it well, Bristol will be more inclusive, more sustainable and more resilient in the face of future shocks. If we do it without thinking, falling into old assumptions (i.e. badly), the opposite is true. How should we rebuild our city?’

In 5 minutes I can only hope to raise some issues and matters of concern. There are many present here today who will know a lot more than me about aspects of social justice – especially around race, disability and class and I hope they will join in afterwards with comments and concerns. This is intended to be a provocation for ongoing conversations that bring diverse knowledges and expertise together so that we can begin to rebuild our city to be more inclusive, sustainable and resilient.

We knew before this pandemic struck that many communities and organisations were facing an ongoing crisis – a crisis in which inequalities are growing, where austerity and a desire for growth at all costs had pushed cities around the world into a situation where social, economic and environmental justice were comprised.

The pandemic has helped to make visible where people and communities are falling through the cracks in our cities and illustrated more widely that a return to business as usual is not an attractive option for those of us interested in social, economic and environmental justice. It is not an option for those families living in crowded accommodation who don’t have enough food on a daily basis, it’s not an option for those living with disabilities or ill health who rely on inadequate, time rationed segments of care delivered by care workers who are undervalued and underpaid. It’s not an option either if we want to take our responsibilities to the planet seriously.

So what have we seen during this crisis that helps us to understand our challenges as a city and the assets that we have to draw on in rebuilding them.

We have seen the incredible efforts of the community and voluntary sector in the city who have built on established and designed new alliances to tackle their communities’ needs. These initiatives have gone way beyond reactively responding to the everyday, urgent needs of their communities. For instance, Knowle West Alliance, developed over the last two years, brings together large and small community organisations- they have set up a community food bank, coordinated volunteers, communicated through digital and postal service with all community members, used the amazing Bristol Can Do platform to recruit volunteers and assign them to a brand new befriending service and committed to reflecting and learning as part of this discussion. The Support Hub for older people, set up in 2 weeks in order to bring together organisations in the city concerned with the needs of older people, were determined to draw on their collective expertise to provide a range of support for older people including practical and emotional support but also virtual activities. These examples, and many others, demonstrate how through working collaboratively across sectors and alongside our communities we can go way beyond provision of ‘crisis’ support. They have shown the value and strength of the civil society sector in the city in working alongside communities at the margins building on their ongoing, long term work and trusted relationships with the communities that they serve.

We have finally appreciated and valued the key workers who support systems of care in the city – the care workers, teachers, food delivery workers and community development workers. Raising questions around how we might change our systems of value in the city.

Our neighbourhoods and streets have fostered intergenerational and cross cultural discussion and we have made new friends – we have come together in Whats App groups and through socially distant street gatherings to share our concerns, to provide care where this has been needed and, importantly, to laugh and cry together. A question we might want to explore here relates to how we might develop ‘community’ across our neighbourhoods providing the support we all need across generational and cultural difference, in and between hyperlocal areas?

Our green spaces have provided the space for those without gardens to enjoy fresh air and exercise, whilst socially distancing. Roads, free of cars, have provided new found space for children and families to play and cleaner air, particularly in those areas of the city where poor air quality is a particular concern. Lizzi has already suggested the need to capitalize on this in bringing forward environmental change in our city and globally.

I would argue that in Bristol’s response to COVID 19 we have seen that our city is a place resplendent with learning, creativity, innovation and care.

I want to pick up particularly on this last word which I think is highly relevant. I want to suggest that if we want to tackle issues of social, economic and environmental justice we need to retain a focus on the role of care in the city. I draw on the feminist scholar Jean Tronto’s definition of care as ‘everything that we do to maintain, continue and repair ‘our’ world so that we can live in it as well as possible. Feminist approaches to care foreground our interdependencies, and encourage us to take notice of peoples’ lived experiences, their existing knowledges and expertise and the stories they tell about them. They encourage us to do what Jane Jacob’s the great American City planner suggested – to take notice of the complexity of our city, to look closely ‘at the most ordinary scenes and events and attempt to see what they mean and whether any threads of principle emerge.’ (Jacobs, 161, p.23). I think we have seen a lot of these ordinary scenes during this pandemic but that we need to work quickly to recognise the threads of principles and new values that might emerge.

My suggestion is that we need to work care-fully together to build on the wide range of vital and lively existing learning, innovation and creativity in our cities. However, a word of caution. We must not make assumptions that there is consensus on what these principles or values might be and we need to recognize that ‘rebuilding Bristol’, especially if we want to challenge concerns around social, economic and environmental justice, will not be easy. We will need to continually ask ‘who is not involved?’ We will need to ensure that we work with others who are ‘not like us’ or with whom we disagree. We will need to design new processes and methods for this and we will have to be open to building new relational capacities in the process, with each other but also with the environment surrounding us.

I want to finish by saying this is a moment that we need to grasp head on drawing on the many assets that we have in the city, many of which have been made more visible through this crisis. We have achieved so much in the city during this pandemic which will support us to work differently to challenge questions of social, economic and environmental justice in the city.

**Watch Helen discuss this subject area in more detail in our Annual Lecture 2019 below**

———————–

This blog is written by Cabot Institute member Helen Manchester, Associate Professor in Digital Inequalities & Urban Futures at the School of Education, University of Bristol and a Bristol City Fellow. This blog was reposted with kind permission from the School of Education blog. View the original blog.

Helen Manchester

Marvin Rees interview on the Sustainable Development Goals

Posted on September 27, 2018April 3, 2023 by janet.crompton

This week is UN Global Goals week, an annual week of action where the United Nations and partners from around the world come together to drive action, raise awareness and hold leaders to account in order to accelerate progress to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), also known as the Global Goals.

Dr Sean Fox, Senior Lecturer in Global Development at the University of Bristol’s Cabot Institute for the Environment, recently interviewed me about why I support the Sustainable Development Goals. You can read the transcript below.

SF: You’ve been a vocal supporter of the Sustainable Development Goals, when some mayors don’t talk about them. Why do you think they’re important?

MR: I think it’s important to talk about them because we often fall victim to the stereotype of thinking the SDGs are for the global south, when actually the SDG themes clearly cross over. For example, take Water. It’s a northern hemisphere issue as well. The challenges may not be as extreme as in sub-Saharan Africa or Asian countries, but it is increasingly an issue for us with Climate change and migration.

But then the other thing is really making sure this is not just about national governments. In fact if you leave it to national governments we’ll fail, because they don’t cooperate they contest. They have hard borders. They don’t talk about interdependence like we do at the city level. We share a population in Bristol with so much of the rest of the world and we need to work as though that is true, because our population here cares about the population there. The SDGs are real and raw in the Northern and Southern hemisphere as well as within families.

SF: How can the SDGs be beneficial for Bristol?

MR: We are trying to build a global network of cities through the Global Parliament of Mayors and that involves coming up with a common language. The SDGs can be that language. There’s a proposition that national governments are failing in everything from climate change to migration, inequality and health, and it’s a failure of national policy. But it’s also a failure of a global governance structure that is overly dependent on nations. We urgently need global governance to move into its next iteration, with international networks of cities working and sitting alongside national leaders as equal partners in shaping international and national policy. We’re trying to change the architecture.

However, if we want these international networks of cities to work, we have to be able to talk to each other. One of the things that bonds mayors at a mayoral gathering is their challenges: Rapid urbanisation, health and wellbeing, adequate housing, air quality, quality education, water supplies. All mayors face the same challenges. Mayors connect at these gatherings because we’re trying to do something. I think the SDGs offer language, images and targets around which a global network of cities could rally. We need to attach ourselves to them, and interpret the SDGs as they are relevant to our local area so we can deliver them locally and globally, even if our national governments are failing.

SF: National government also share common objectives. What is the difference between being a city leader rather than a national leader?

MR: One is the proximity of leadership to life. National leadership is much more abstracted from life. I met the mayor of Minneapolis and she told me they had the largest Somali community outside of Somalia. Then I was in a taxi with a Somali taxi driver, and I was talking about this and said ‘I was in Minneapolis, there’s a big Somali community there’. He said ‘I go to Minneapolis regularly, my family are there!’ So a Bristolian lives here, but he also lives in Minneapolis because his family are there.

Now we don’t govern like that, but he lives like that. We’re a city with a global population, so there’s a vested interest in cities looking out for each other’s interests because they share populations, families, and remittances flows. There must be someone in Somaliland that wants Bristol to do well and there must be someone in Bristol that wants Somaliland to do well because that’s thier cousin, that’s their gran. I want Jamaica to do well, I want Kingston to do well.

Additionally, cities are better placed to recognise their interdependence. Nations may recognise their interdependences but they’re always drawn to borders, competing GDPs and trade deficits. It seems to be a much more a zero sum game.

SF: Why should UK mayors bother with Global Goals and networks? Why not just focus on Bristol?

MR: Often politicians offer to purchase your vote with promises. I don’t like that. It needs to be what are we going to do. We should be a city that wants to change the world, all cities should! We should want to deliver on the SDGs not just for Bristol but for the world, even if you don’t have family elsewhere, because we’ve got to save the planet. I think it’s pretty clear. We need to be delivering against the SDGs as part of our global responsibility in an interdependent world.

———————–
This blog has been reproduced with kind permission from Marvin Rees and Bristol Mayor’s Office. You can view the original interview here.

Marvin Rees is the Mayor of Bristol. He leads the city council and its full range of services – from social care to waste collections. He also performs a broader role representing the interests of Bristol’s citizens on a national and international level.

Marvin Rees

Dr Sean Fox

Dr Sean Fox is a member of the University of Bristol’s Cabot Institute for the Environment and a Senior Lecturer in Global Development.

This is the second blog in our #GlobalGoals series as part of Global Goals Week 2018. Read the other blogs in the series:

Global Goals, Local Action: Bristol and the SDGs

Global Goals, Local Action: Bristol and the SDGs

Posted on September 25, 2018April 3, 2023 by janet.crompton

This week is the #GlobalGoalsWeek which is a campaign to improve awareness about the UN Sustainable Development Goals (Global Goals or SDGs). The 17 Global Goals cover everything from Ending Poverty, to Climate Action and they have been called the closest thing the world has to a strategy. This week we’ll be publishing some of the SDG activity that’s been happening in Bristol. To follow what’s going on check out #BristolSDGs or #GlobalGoalsWeek we’re planning blog posts from amongst others the Mayor of Bristol, Bristol City Council’s SDG ambassador and other members of the Bristol SDG Alliance.
————————————
As the Global Goals week commences we consider how the work towards localising the SDGs in Bristol has developed in the last 9 months and look to share some lessons on the process of localisation.

In 2015 the 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were ratified by 193 of the UN member nations. These goals set ambitious targets to address worldwide issues of sustainable development, such as social inequality, responsible and inclusive economic development and environmental protection. They were created for everyone, everywhere and have been described as ‘the closest thing the world has to a strategy’.

Who will be responsible for ensuring we achieve these goals and how will they be achieved?
In the realm of international agreements, national governments have traditionally been responsible for local implementation. But a combination of profound global demographic shifts and a sense that national governments are increasingly incapable of tackling complex global challenges due to domestic political wrangling has given rise to a global movement to place cities at the heart of efforts to tackle both local and global challenges. This movement, which is coalescing around a constellation of city-to-city networks (such as ICLEI, C40 and the Global Parliament of Mayors), is now grappling with the challenge of ‘localising the SDGs’. How can we usefully translate this global agenda into local practice in a way that meaningfully transforms lives?

This is the question we are working to answer through a University of Bristol funded project on Localising the SDGs for Bristol, in partnership with the Bristol Green Capital Partnership (BGCP), and Bristol City Council.

To date the project has involved engagement locally and internationally. Our previous blog post came after the Global Ambition, Local Action conference, held in Los Angeles which Allan Macleod, the Cabot Institute SDG Research and Engagement Associate, attended. Just over a month later he was also part of the hundred of delegates who gathered in Bristol for the Data for Development Festival. During three days of plenaries, breakouts and workshops the role and use of data and technology in achieving and monitoring the SDGs was discussed. Additionally, Mayor Marvin Rees showed his local support and commitment to the SDGs by announcing an SDG Ambassador in his Cabinet (Councillor Anna Keen).

The strong leadership and commitment to the SDGs from Bristol’s mayor has been complimented by many stakeholders across the city. Bristol boasts an SDG Alliance consisting of members from organisations across Bristol including some of the city’s anchor institutions with both universities, the City Council and the Bristol Green Capital Partnership represented as members of the Alliance. The network has been growing and now consists of well over 50 stakeholders from diverse backgrounds looking to mobilise SDG activity in Bristol. Through a series of interviews with key city stakeholders and alliance members, a Bristol Method+ report was released during the UN High Level Political Forum in July 2018. This report detailed the initiatives and actions that have occurred locally towards making the SDGs more mainstream in the city.

Another way the SDGs have been made locally relevant is through the One City Plan. Our research seeks to identify and support mechanisms for embedding the SDGs in local planning and governance processes by engaging with a wide range of stakeholders in the city.

Bristol City Council, a pivotal stakeholder is currently working to bring partners together for a new One City Plan. This Plan seeks to use the collective power of Bristol’s key organisations to achieve a bigger impact by supporting partners, organisations and citizens to help solve key persistent city challenges and improve the lives of Bristolians across the city. The core themes behind this plan align with the SDGs and it provides a great opportunity for Bristol to lead nationally and internationally on the SDGs. As a result, the Goals were integrated into the plan and mapped onto Bristol’s local priorities. By building on the work in ‘Hacking the SDGs for US Cities’, 75 of the 169 SDGs targets were found to be directly relevant to Bristol. These targets are being blended together with locally-developed priorities to form the One City Plan goals to result in ‘Bristol’s SDGs’.

Our work with Bristol city council has shown three important features of localisation. Firstly, the SDGs largely overlap with the remit of most city councils. As a result of this, the most cost effective, and beneficial method of localisation is a translation of local priorities onto the goals and the integration of the goals into the local priorities of the city. Lastly, the SDGs provide an opportunity for city leaders to engage in discussions around the same topic. They provide a global language for city leaders to share learning and best practices across contexts and borders. This is especially important as cities are increasingly aiming to take a more prominent role in international leadership.

During our project, it has become clear that Bristol has developed a solid foundation for SDG localisation and has begun to be a global leader in implementing the SDGs. However, it is a particularly exciting time to be working collaboratively on implementing the SDGs in Bristol as the city will be hosting the Global Parliament of Mayors Annual Summit (GPM) in October. The GPM will provide Bristol with an additional opportunity to showcase its leadership and demonstrate its credentials as an important international city that is working to improve the lives of all its citizens, while also working to tackle the challenges that we face as a global community.

What experiences do you have of the SDGs abroad or in Bristol? Do you have an ideas or lessons that can be applied to Bristol? If you have any further questions or comments, feel free to get in touch at allan.macleod@bristol.ac.uk.

——————————————-

This blog is written by Allan Macleod, SDG research and engagement associate working across Bristol Green Capital Partnership, Bristol City Council and the University of Bristol Cabot Institute for the Environment.

Allan Macleod

Cities’ contributions to the global SDGs: A Bristol view

Posted on August 7, 2018April 4, 2023 by janet.crompton

Earlier this month, people from around the globe gathered in New York for the annual review of the world’s progress towards achieving the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), an event known as the ‘High Level Political Forum’ (HLPF). These globally-agreed goals were developed in 2015, providing a vision for what the world should look like in 2030. Covering all three dimensions of sustainability through 17 Goals, 169 targets and 244 indicators, the SDGs have been called ‘the closest thing the world has to a strategy’.

This year the HLPF focused on 6 of these Goals, including sustainable cities and communities, SDG 11. The inclusion of cities as a specific goal is a success, and it is the first time that a subnational unit has been included in a UN statistical reporting framework.

But cities have an important role to play in meeting all of the Goals, beyond just SDG11. Urbanisation is increasingly seen as a key cross cutting element in almost every aspect of sustainable development. Forecasts suggest that by 2050 almost 70% of the world’s people will live in cities. The concentration of people living and working in urban areas creates acute sustainable development challenges in cities. And what happens within individual cities can have far-reaching environmental impacts on resource use, pollution and carbon emissions in far-away places. Because local sustainable development challenges have national and even international implications, cities have the power and the opportunity to make progress towards the global SDGs, by tackling city-level challenges through innovative technical and organisational solutions.

Indeed, the 2017 HLPF declaration highlighted “the need to take appropriate action towards localizing and communicating the [SDGs] at all levels, from the national to the community and grassroots level […] Efforts should be made to reach out to all stakeholders, including subnational and local authorities.” (para 28)

So, to achieve the ambitious SDGs by 2030, cities must be fully engaged with all the goals, and can work with each other to share learnings, as well as interact at national and global policy levels. For example, New York City presented the first-ever official city-level review of progress towards the SDGs at the HLPF 2018 linked with their OneNYC approach – and invited other cities to work with them.

Despite Bristol’s many successes, we continue to face important challenges. Prominent among these is intense inequality across economic, social and environmental domains: such as income inequality, poor air quality and persistent gaps in health and education outcomes across the city. The SDGs offer a framework for taking on these challenges in an integrated way to achieve sustainable and inclusive prosperity that leaves no-one and nowhere – including nature – behind.

For the last few years, Bristol has been grappling with how it can best engage with the SDGs through an alliance of stakeholders from across the city. This work and their views have informed our ‘Driving the SDGs agenda at a city level in Bristol’ report, released during this year’s HLPF, where UK Stakeholders for Sustainable Development and partners launched an initial review of UK progress ‘Measuring Up’.

This tells the story of the Bristol SDG Alliance, formed in 2016 to advocate for the practical use of the SDGs in Bristol – to ‘localise’ the Goals to the city – and shares key learnings.

Hosted by Bristol Green Capital Partnership, in part because the SDG agenda integrates the environmental, social and economic dimensions of sustainability, the Alliance has submitted evidence to a parliamentary inquiry, commissioned an SDGs & Bristol report, and facilitated an innovative academic role to link SDG research and engagement in Bristol.

In this role, I have been able to work collaboratively with Bristol City Council on behalf of the Alliance to integrate the SDGs into the emerging One City Plan. In addition, many businesses and other organisations in the city appreciate the relevance of the SDGs to their work, such as Airbus and Triodos Bank, among others.

As we move forward, we will be grappling with some of the challenges facing other cities working to localise the SDGs. For example, how best to monitor progress.

This is a challenge even at the national level, with the UK’s national statistics office still working hard to assess and collect the data to report on the SDGs nearly 3 years after they were agreed – see the national reporting platform. Such monitoring challenges are more acute at a city level, with extra complexities and fewer resources available to address them.

For the SDGs to be achieved by 2030, challenges such as these will need to be overcome by cities. The theme for 2019’s SDG review is ‘inclusiveness and equality’, where the UK will also undertake its first official national review. Bristol is well-placed to contribute in 2019. Collectively the city may wish to follow New York’s initiative and report alongside the UK on our city’s progress next year.

———————————————-
This blog is written by Allan Macleod, SDG research and engagement associate working across Bristol Green Capital Partnership, Bristol City Council and the University of Bristol. It has been reposted with kind permission from the Bristol Green Capital blog. View the original blog.

Allan Macleod

Grey Britain: Misery, urbanism & neuroaesthetics

Posted on July 10, 2018April 4, 2023 by janet.crompton

View of London from the Sky Garden (source: skygarden.london).

“We have created a Star Wars civilization, with Stone Age emotions. We thrash about and are a danger to ourselves and the rest of life.” – E.O. Wilson, The Social Conquest of the Earth (2012).

In a previous article I have discussed the use of simple patterns to interpret the complexity of nature and the human interface with it. Here, I will illustrate this concept on a larger canvas, discussing this interface, between nature and social systems, more thoroughly. This final article, in the series on inter-disciplinary work I have written for the University of Bristol Cabot Institute for the Environment, is partially motivated by my personal interest in the cycle of urbanism, the associated architecture and concepts. It is also motivated by a project I followed closely during a past flirtation with living and working in London and the comparable changes I see happening around me in Bristol, where I currently live and work.

Billboard #1 from London is Changing project (source: londonischanging.org).

‘London is Changing’ was an arts project undertaken by Dr. Rebecca Ross at Central St. Martins in 2015. It highlighted the effects of economic policy in the capital by displaying the stories of individuals relocating in, out and within the capital, out of choice and necessity, on billboards around the city. On one level, this project introduced me to the plight of individuals whose movements are determined by expropriation, economic policy or various other processes largely beyond their control. On another level, it gave me an insight into the emotional response this change in environment can invoke in those undertaking such change.

Indeed, as modern society has ridden the wave of an economy of concentrated wealth creation the transient notion of moving somewhere new for education or employment has become a perceived norm. Yet, there is a polarising undercurrent to this wave, in which generations of individuals face the prospect of never being able to afford to permanently root themselves to the environment, where the terms ‘gentrification’ and ‘displacement’ have come to define the nature of settlement and where our demand, and in some cases, expectation, of a ‘home’ is placing an unsustainable strain on ourselves, materials, space and the environment at large. Be it due to social, economic or environmental causes, these trends are effectively driving people further from their familiar habitat and immediate social connections, which leads to social destabilisation – a key contributing factor of societal vulnerability.

Billboard #2 from London is Changing project (source: londonischanging.org).

The inter-environmental patterns of displacement and resettlement are as intriguing as they are worrying. Similarly, a concept related to this physical displacement, the notion of intra-environmental displacement is one which can set the foundations of an unstable social system. This is to say, an emotional displacement characterised by a detachment created through rapid physical change of the surrounding environment, one that can enhance the disconnection between people and their environment and, in some cases; other people. Notionally linked to gentrification, urban renewal or regeneration is part of the cycle of urbanisation and whilst it does not immediately or physically displace a person from the environment, it’s effects are becoming more documented and this is to a largely negative fanfare.

Drawing on the personal experience of having worked and socialised with residents of the recently regenerated Heygate, Aylesbury, the (old) south Kilburn Estates in London and coupling this with my academic work and interest, I have given great consideration to the phenomena of intra-environmental connection and disconnection. Indeed, the initial results of my own research with flooding and social systems is conspecific with the kind of systematic social change discussed in this article, differing only in temporal scale, whereby enhanced social interaction has the potential to negate the detrimental effects of uninvited change, be it rapid onset as is the case with a flood inundation or prolonged onset via environmental redevelopment, to the structure of the social system. Observing the changes currently taking place in Bristol, at Temple Quarter and along the southern bank of the Avon, I feel urgency in the need to communicate the detrimental potential of poor foresight, as well as the positive potential of implementing new approaches, in urban development and renewal of any kind.

The Biophilic Hypothesis, P2P Urbanism & Neuroasthetics

Biophilia is a term that was first introduced by psychoanalyst Erich Fromm in 1973’s ‘The anatomy of human destructiveness’ to describe a “passionate love of life and all that is alive”. One only needs to pause for a moment to consider this term in relation to current global affairs to concur with the author in his estimation that it is distinctly lacking from the zeitgeist of our time.

Biologist and foremost proponent of sociobiology, E.O. Wilson later utilised the term to describe “the urge to affiliate with other forms of life”. Wilson has suggested that this urge, to affiliate and connect with one another, other species and the natural environment at large is a biological necessity in the continuation of our species. Furthermore, Wilson has also suggested that a true or complete biophilic environment would be one that provides an appropriate habitat and home whilst also naturally connecting the human to the environment via the promotion of natural social and environmental connections. The biophilic principle has acted as the inspiration and catalyst for a divergence in thinking related to modern urban theory.

The structure of life I have described in buildings is deeply and inextricably connected with the human person and with the innermost nature of human feeling

– Christopher Alexander, Nature of Order (1963).

Nikos Salingaros and Christopher Alexander, leading design theorists, polymaths and ardent critics of modern architectural design, have suggested in their works that a historic shift in urban architectural design accompanying post-world war II urbanisation, based on a supposed ideal concept of order over function or form, has become a pseudo-standard leading to a widespread loss of environmental identity at the human scale within the built environment initially through sprawl and latterly grand-scale, monoculture.

This loss of identity occurs through a number of routes, aesthetically via design or use of distally sourced materials, unclear structural purpose via desired use of the structure superseding local need or location via dramatic replacement of a visually recognisable building of historic or social importance. Salingaros and Alexander have suggested that this loss of identity lends itself to a loss of societal orientation and has partially or fully led to the proliferation of all things from social polarisation to the increasing rates of mental ill health in urbanised areas.

Drawing influence from Wilson’s concept of concilience, Salingaros has proposed many alternative solutions for the reconciliation of urban development at the human scale, solutions which are based on rigour with a view to addressing future human needs and ambitions. One of the most ambitious and rigorous of these solutions is P2P Urbanism.

P2P Urbanism is a process of open-source urban intervention carried out cooperatively across a spectrum of people and agencies with vested interest in the evolution of their urban environment, not just architects and city planners. It is primarily based on the application of analogous techniques of file sharing and open-source software with design patterns generated by Christopher Alexander. The idea underpinning P2P being that it is a reflection of the human elements available for input and so, theoretically, will reflect the very needs and ambitions of those engaging with the process. Thus, with greater engagement, across a broad spectrum of human groups and agencies, P2P can potentially address the need for reconnection of the urban environment at a human scale whilst offering progressive alternatives to urban sprawl and monoculture through Alexander’s designs; a potentially true reflection of us in the environment within which we reside. With Bristol’s burgeoning IT-centric industry, the potential a concept like P2P has to illicit a desirable trend of urbanisation, one which fosters a reconnection between people and place, is great.

Jinu Kitchely states, in her 2015 article on Fractals in Architecture, that “architecture as an art form enjoys the privilege of spatiality in addressing human perception and sense.” A complete biophilic environment would be one which fully addresses human perception and sense, “architects who have responded to this instinctive need, by going beyond structural constraints and catered to the emotional needs of the user, have historically achieved much more than the creation of mere shelters.” An obvious source of inspiration for the biophilic environment is nature, with many architects and designers “probing vehemently into the nature of natural forms and organisms to identify and understand the great concepts of the master designer.”

A key concept of the biophilic principle, as applied to architectural design, is the incorporation of nature’s morphology iteratively in the urban re-shaping process. I have previously spoken about how complexity arises from fractal systems, the basic quality of fractal geometry being that it is iteratively-defined – it must be described in terms of steps involving the result of previous steps. Over infinity, fractal generation is recursive and so, in theory is infinitely complex. Benoit Mandelbrot stated in his seminal book ‘The Fractal Geometry of Nature’ that the physical manifestation of this theory, of objects substituting themselves for copies of themselves, can be seen all around us and is the basic process that underpins all living things. Christopher Alexander’s analogue for this is that of a bone’s form which, evenly distributes structural stress across its surface, emerges as a result of a biological program telling cells to add bone mass where stress is likely to be greatest and so is an example of physical and structural feedback shaping the object.

Analysis from Richard Taylor’s research suggests that eye patterns traced from observations of Jackson Pollock’s paintings (left) elicit a significant physiological response in the posterior of the human brain that reduces stress through pattern recognition (right) (source: blogs.uoregon.edu).

Professor of Physics, Psychology and Art at the University of Oregon, Richard Taylor has created an interdisciplinary team that investigates the physiological response of humans when they observe these fractal patterns. Termed fractal expressionism, using work produced by Pollock and Escher, Taylor’s team has found that the format in which people examine these patterns can elicit a positive physiological response, one which reduces stress as the fractal structure of the human visual cortex resonates with the fractal image identified. From the discovery of fire by early humans to the evolution of contemporary artistic concepts, neural and physiological sense and response to natural, iterative patterns of the world around us has been influential in directing the evolution of the human brain and its emotive response system. From this understanding, it seems logical to assume that the structures we build in the environment around us possess the potential to have an impact on this system too.

Connection & disconnection

Images of the Heygate Estate, Elephant and Castle, London taken in 2014 pre-demolition, post-expropriation. (source: top middle by Tom O’Shea. Bottom: LDNGRAFITTI.co.uk

Now, as this colloquy reaches a coda it feels important to illustrate some examples of successes and failures in respect of that which is written above. The images directly above, taken of the Heygate Estate in London once all residents had been removed from the large estate complex; some forcibly others under enforced willingness – as their lifelong homes were subject to a compulsory re-purchase at 40% of their actual value. The images depict discontent and anger, indeed more damning than the enormous displacement of a strong community under duress, is that the majority of flats and houses built on the land of the Heygate have been sold to overseas investors for a price vastly above what the old flats were purchased for. It is clear that this style of urbanisation is one which fosters a disconnection between people and place.

The iconic Trellick Tower, Westbourne Park, London. Considered an eyesore in its early days and symbol of failure for the utopian architectural ideals of the ‘streets in the sky’ movement of the 60’s. The brutalist structure is now credited as a glowing success of how distinct architectural style can connect a community (source: architectsjournal.co.uk).

Just one and a half miles away from the Heygate is Trellick tower. Ernö Goldfinger’s brutalist 70’s masterpiece, designed as a positive response to the ‘architecture of doom’ employed by the Nazi’s during WWII. The tower employed biophilic facets of utilitarian materials and purpose to create an iconic aesthetic that emphasised robust and reliable living spaces for residents with community as a centrepiece. In the years since its completion, the tower has had a fair share of criticism but has since emerged as an iconic element of the London skyline, an aesthetic centre-point of the city’s urban fabric and one which is now seen as a triumph of biophilic ideals. Much like Corbusier’s Chandigarh and Bofil’s La Murilla Roja, Trellick made the needs of the human scale a priority, with form and function evolving from there. Chandigarh is consistently seen as the standard of how biophilic ideals can be applied to planned cities, Corbusier’s design for the city was based on the human body, and Bofil’s La Murilla, a community housing project in Alicante, looked to connect the residents with the cliffs into which it was built and the sea below, whilst providing a stimulating and iconic aesthetic to foster the sense of a unique community.

Images of La Murilla Roja (top) and The Palace of Assembly, Chandigarh (bottom) (source: Wikipedia).

These iconic buildings and cities contain unique community characteristics, and this is because they incorporate a consideration for just that. As British cities expand to cope with demand and greenfield sites are increasingly developed to provide affordable housing, the concepts discussed above, and examples highlighted throughout, must be considered with a view to sustainable progress. Trellick tower, Chandigarh and the like provide an iconic representation of a time and a place in our relationship with the built and natural environments, they can provide inspiration for what is possible.

Concepts like Salingaros’ P2P urbanism offer an inclusive approach for the future development of cities, currently or due to be, undergoing great change; like Bristol. Ultimately, systematic social vulnerability is a complex convolvulus of interactions on a vast spectrum of scales, addressing it should be a priority and opening the avenues of investigation outlined above is one way to begin.

Sir Denys Lasdun, said of the architect’s job as being “Not to give a client not what he wants but what he never dreamed that he wanted; and when he gets it, he recognises it as something he wanted all the time.” By considering how to connect us with our urban environments more, through the conduit of nature and the biophilic, the author believes that the process of urbanisation can afford us with a sense of place far beyond our dreams and more importantly, one which we should have had all the time. Failing this, follow the advice of the billboard below and enjoy the gifts of nature before they are consumed by the belligerent grey beast of indifferent urbanisation.

Billboard #3 from London is Changing project (source: londonischanging.org).

——————————————————–

This blog was written by Cabot Institute member, Thomas O’Shea, a Ph.D. Researcher at the School of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol. His interests span Complex Systems, Hydrodynamics, Risk and Resilience and Machine Learning. Please direct any desired correspondence regarding the above to his university email at: t.oshea@bristol.ac.uk.

Thomas O’Shea

Read Thomas’ other blogs in this series:

Dadaism in Disaster Risk Reduction: Reflections against method

Sweet love for planet Earth: An ode to bias and fallacy

What makes cities more environmentally sustainable: A comparative study of York and Bristol

Posted on July 5, 2018April 4, 2023 by janet.crompton

Over the summer of 2017 I conducted 25 interviews with policymakers and key stakeholders – 17 in York and 8 in Bristol. The interviews involved wide ranging discussions on the three pillars of sustainability – environment, social and economic – in the city of the interviewee.

Some background to the study and why I chose Bristol to compare with York – coming from the Leeds/Bradford conurbation, York seems like such a pleasant place to me: incredible preservation of its heritage, affluent, with very few of the economic and social problems experienced in some other parts of Yorkshire. However, having lived in York for a couple of years, I’ve realised when you scratch the surface a little, it’s not perfect. There are quite interesting dynamics in the city that prevent it from achieving its potential, particularly environmentally…

Enter Bristol as a comparison city!

Having won the European Green Capital 2015, Bristol was an obvious choice. Although initially my concern was there are stark differences between York and Bristol in terms of size, culture etc., it soon became apparent that these differences only highlighted the dynamics within each city that I was trying to uncover.

My research found that York’s two largest challenges in trying to be a more environmentally sustainable city are its political flux – due to finely balanced politics based on geographic location within the city – and heritage. Because of the flux, there is a lack of long-term vision for the city in addition to large political risks to parties that seek to enact less salient environmentally sustainable policies. When the flux is combined with the city’s conservatism – due to a culture of preservation – York can lack ambition.

Furthermore, York lacks economic sustainability, which is due to several reasons: the relatively recent loss of many of its large anchor employers, such as Rowntree’s, Terry’s and the Carriage-works; a focus on the low value-added tourist industry; high-office costs; high-living costs for employees; and a difficulty in accessing government infrastructure funding due to being on the edge of two Local Enterprise Partnerships. Additionally, whilst York has many small to medium sized enterprises – who reinvest a higher portion of their income into the local economy than large companies – it lacks the alternative business models, such as those found in Bristol, that can bring wider benefits. Therefore, due to economic unsustainability and a lack of alternative business models, the city’s business focus is on job growth as opposed to wider societal and environmental benefits, such as was found in the business focus of Bristol. Many of the positives that York possesses are due to the natural advantages that result from its built environment. The lack of ambition and vision, however, is preventing York from achieving its full potential. Being a city rich in heritage does not mean that it cannot also have a strong environmental sustainability focus, as discussed by Paul McCabe, Strategic Manager – Sustainability and Transformation, City of York Council:

“Other cities around Europe have shown that the two things are not incompatible: old architecture, green architecture, big public spaces, bold things can work together and compliment older areas.”

Bristol is an example of what a city can achieve in terms of environmental sustainability in a country with a very centralized state whose policies at a national level may be perceived by some as regressive. Additionally, while Bristol does have social problems, many of these may be inherent in large British cities. Bristol’s pursuit of green capital can be seen as a means to identify itself on a wider stage for pride and to attract inward investment – In this context I am using the term ‘capital’ to express the assets that a city has available to itself. In this sense green capital is not only a physical asset of entities such as green spaces for instance, but an asset embedded in urban cultures that has wider consequences – Why Bristol is pursuing green capital may be due to seeing the makings of this within its own culture: Bristol has a notably vibrant culture that is hard to define and account for, but appears to be bringing many social, environmental and economic benefits to the city. This vibrant culture was commented upon by James Cleeton, Sustrans England Director South, “what Bristol does well, is what its people do: there’s still that culture, that socio-cultural drive behind a desire for a really sustainable and green city”. Furthermore, the pursuit of green capital may only be possible in the city due to a long-term vision that emerges from political stability, the importance of which is contrasted with York’s changing administrations and relative lack of political stability. Although Bristol stands to benefit economically from green capital, this pursuit of green capital is perhaps only enabled because Bristol is already economically successful.

Therefore, I found what makes cities more environmentally sustainable revolved around the interaction between four themes: culture, economics, politics and social. These four themes all, in varying forms, influence environmental sustainability in a very individual nature within each city. Perhaps the most important influence, however, was found to be the status and nature of the capital that each city possessed – be that the heritage capital that holds York back, or the green capital that pushes Bristol forward, in this regard.

To read the full study, please see two versions: a shortened version and the full version.

——————————
This blog was reposted with kind permission from Bristol Green Capital Partnership. View the original blog.

This blog was written by Graham Gill from University of York. Graham can be contacted by email.

Graham Gill

How engaging citizens can help to shape green cities

Posted on July 3, 2018April 4, 2023 by janet.crompton

In order for European territories to be more environmentally and socially sustainable the involvement of citizens is key. Experiences throughout Europe show us that developing strategies to improve the engagement, collaboration and communication with local stakeholders – across diverse realms and thematic domains – is essential to ensure an effective outcome. During European Green Week, a workshop organised by DG Environment, was conducted to showcase some inspirational experiences in terms of sustainable urban development, health and waste management from different European cities.

Speakers included Mauro Gil Fournier (Estudio SIC), Professor Rich Pancost (Director of University of Bristol Cabot Institute for the Environment), Silvia Moroni (AMAT), Paola Robalo (Centro Ciência Viva do Alviela), Sietse Gronheid (Wasted Social Enterprise) and Igor Kos (City of Maribor).

Rich Pancost speaking at EU Green Week. Image credit BristolBrussels.

[Rich Pancost contributed on a variety of issues, largely arising from Cabot Institute and Bristol City engagement, but spoke primarily about the Green and Black Conversation and Ambassadors programme. He emphasised the importance of engaging with marginalised groups, the fact that they have much to teach ‘established’ organisations, and the fact that inclusion requires far more than good will but hard work and appropriate financial investment.]
There was much feedback from the workshop as to how citizens could help to shape green cities which included:

We need to consider different levels of citizens’ involvement: consultation, participation, co-creation. For this reason we always have to consider who is involved and who is excluded from every process.
People are involved in topics they care about, so in order to get out of our elitism we need to address issues that really matter to most people, especially those people that are often not actively engaged. This is what was experienced by the Green and Black Ambassadors during the Bristol Green Capital year, where a community radio station with a focus on the local African-Caribbean community (Ujima Radio) framed environmental discussions and training around the perspectives of local community members.
Topics such as air quality, circular waste management or water pollution are hard topics to get people involved in, whilst topics such as food or green spaces are often more recognised by people because the feel ‘closer’. For this reason Milan, which is taking part in the Air Quality Partnership of the EU Urban Agenda, is working on developing an Action Plan that will actively address citizens’ involvement through a concrete toolkit.
For people to be engaged we need to involve them throughout the process and not just at the end to show the results. This is what has been experienced in Portugal by the Science Centre in Alcanena that is involving the local community in monitoring water quality, polluted by the local industry, in order to understand the roots of the problems and develop together possible solutions.
In order to get people involved in long term change we need to deliver short and medium term results that they can appreciate. This is what is being done in Maribor, that is developing a long term circular economy strategy and is creating festivals, schools events and fairs to get people involved and experience some of the changes taking place in the waste, such as for the biological waste turned into compost for community gardens.
Participatory processes that really get people committed, beyond a consultation, require people with professional skills of moderation and community engagement, which should therefore also be economically remunerated in order to ensure long term commitment. This is what is experienced by in Amsterdam, where through the Wasted project circular waste cycles are an opportunity to create complementary currencies in partnership with local enterprises. The same is true for engaging with marginalised groups who have to sacrifice precious time to contribute; we cannot extract free labour from anyone but especially groups that are already marginalised by structural inequities.
For environmental and societal transition to take place we need to ensure that it also affects economic and financial models in an inclusive and participatory way, otherwise large parts of our society will keep being left out. This is what has been done in Madrid through the MARES project that develops social economy cooperatives around sustainable mobility and energy production.
Skills around social media and communication tools need to be addressed in order to reach out to people, yet they might be more effective tools for consultation rather than co-creation.

——————————–
This blog was written by Daniela Patti (Eutropian) and edited by Amanda Woodman-Hardy (@Enviro_Mand) and Professor Rich Pancost (@rpancost) from Cabot Institute for the Environment.

From meatless meat to trustless trust – can Blockchain change the way that we work together to create knowledge in smart cities?

Posted on April 25, 2018April 4, 2023 by janet.crompton

Smart Cities apply technology, connectivity and data to the urban experience, but they could easily become Fake Cities. Their factories still produce things – but they are staffed by robots. Their cars still take you where you want to go – but they are driven by autonomous systems. You can hold their digital products in your hands – but only via a smart phone.

In the worst case, Smart Cities trade down authentic human experiences for something artificial, virtual and ersatz. But can the Smart City ever trade-up and improve on the original?Take food as an example. Scientists are perfecting cultured cells to grow synthetic meat in laboratories. Far from producing an unpalatable substitute, the result is said to be nutritious and tasty. As the world’s population grows rapidly, meatless meat is seen as a carbon and resource efficient alternative that could represent “the future of food”.

In their recent report partners in the UnLoCK consortium considered whether Blockchain and Distributed Ledger Technologies could similarly transform another basic human need – by creating “trustless trust.”

But might this be needed?

The argument goes that Smart Cities join-up multiple systems, more than have ever been connected before. The scale and complexity of the resulting ecosystem means that not all participants can expect to have pre-existing relationships with each other. In this context, it is difficult to know who or what to trust.

The blockchain is seen as a way for Information to be securely shared between peers. The important point is that rather than investing trust in one privileged partner, such as a bank, the focus moves to collectively creating a trusted system; one where peers collectively own and update the Distributed Ledger as a single version of the truth.

The UnLoCK consortium partners identify numerous areas where they would like to experiment with the application of this technology, from understanding the environmental provenance of goods and services within supply chains associated with new local approaches to house building, to systems that afford ‘smart citizens’ greater ownership and control of their personal data.

The consortium partners are planning further discussions to explore how to move from theory towards a working prototype. For more details of the UnLoCK consortium contact, Lisa Kehoe Lisa.kehoe@bristol.ac.uk and Stephen Hilton stephen.hilton@bristol.ac.uk

————————————–

This blog was written by Stephen Hilton, Director of Bristol Futures Global, and a University of Bristol Cabot Institute Fellow.

This blog was reposted with kind permission from PolicyBristol. View the original blog post.

Informal power in the city: where does change come from?

Posted on February 14, 2018April 5, 2023 by janet.crompton

An event in December shared the findings of a new collaboration between the University of Bristol and Bristol Pound into the use of informality and how informal approaches at a city level can extend influence, support innovation and ultimately inform policy.

“So, what is informal power? An academic term is ‘informal governance’ and it’s the unseen and undocumented activity that contributes to city and policy change. It might be a conversation in the street, meeting a colleague or friend for coffee, or a networking event where ideas are discussed and developed. To an extent therefore it’s about who you know and who you feel comfortable discussing a new project or approach with, drawing on shared values and aims.

Over the course of this year, Sarah Ayres and myself at the University of Bristol have been working with Ciaran Mundy and colleagues at Bristol Pound to see how our academic understanding could be translated into the way that a city-wide social enterprise could play a part in city leadership, how its values might be shared and ultimately might influence policy. Bristol Pound is a great example of an alternative form of city leadership and it has been really interesting to explore with the staff, directors and city partners how informality works for them. We have found that there are many people in the networks of informality that exist in the city, but that they are not always conscious of how their informal interactions can influence the more formal decisions. As one of our participants said:

‘Informality helps to inform the making of strategy and policy – and informality helps to actually get it done once you’ve got that context in place’

These informal networks can bring together a range of people who might not normally come into contact – but they might also, consciously or unconsciously, perpetuate old power structures. Our aim, through this research, is to recognise how these networks operate – and then to challenge the things that might lead to some people feeling excluded. Happily, many people are keen to challenge the status quo, to seek out new voices and ensure that other views are represented – and informal approaches can be very effective in making new connections and bringing in other perspectives.

Informality is particularly useful where there are new ideas to be tried out, explored and developed and where a formal meeting might limit creativity, reduce the number of people involved and constrain what is discussed. It can be a more flexible and enjoyable way to work, but we also recognise that at some point these informal discussions need to be brought into formal decision making if city change is to happen.

There are many people in the city who feel strongly about making Bristol ‘the best it can be’ – drawing on long-held ‘collegiate’ approaches to city leadership which stretch far beyond the council, incorporating both key city organisations and strong grassroots innovative thinking. If the city of Bristol has always been good at making space for informal approaches and a wider ‘diffused’ city leadership, in resource-strapped times this confidence in alternative approaches can only be helpful – but the reduction in council resources still has an impact. Whilst the council has allowed (or not interfered with) the many activities and collaborations flourishing independently across the city, it has also provided some ‘webbing’ to bring groups and individuals together and facilitate collaboration. There are opportunities in this new void, for other organisations like Bristol£ and the Bristol Green Capital Partnership, to facilitate these informal dialogues across the city, steering a course for more ‘sustainable city with a high quality of life for all’.

————————

This blog was written by Cabot Institute member Caroline Bird, a Research Fellow in the School for Policy Studies at the University of Bristol. She’s also involved in city initiatives such as the Bristol Energy Network and her research connects across academic and city sectors to share knowledge for urban sustainability. This blog was reproduced from the Bristol Green Capital Partnership blog.