#SB46 All Aboard! (Blog post about 4 years of non-ambitious #climateaction 2013-2016 in #Rdg #RdgUK)

This showcase is an attempt to prove the importance of working on climate preparedness Within the local council framework, not outside it (in any partnership)!

Reading Climate Change Strategy Consultation (the fourth I believe): https://consult.reading.gov.uk/css/reading-climate-change-partnership-strategy-review

(In 2013 the Reading Climate Change Partnership (RCCP) launched its climate change strategy: ‘Reading Means Business on Climate Change’. Produced in partnership with a range of key stakeholders, the strategy outlines Reading’s response to climate change.)

As you may know Climate Change Centre Reading (CCCRdg) is still waiting for a response to our submitted response per 14/12/12 on the first consultation from 2012/13. Now is also the last chance for Reading to apply for the European Green Capital Award, online! before the next govt catastrophe.

CCCRdg has only one thing to state over the “Reading Climate Action” from the last four years. How come this community scam “Reading Climate Change Partnership” is not within the Reading Borough Council framework!? Who are these climate officials and what committee/department to contact regarding climate change also about the ratified Paris Agreement in the RBC? Where is Reading’s expertise on COP22 and Habitat3? Four years later,, it is a fraud. Should there be an investigation due to failure to take bold inclusive accessible climate action, is this failure for community engagement because of lack of competence for climate collective action, is it illegal? Is this a waste of more time and resources? (We are on the edge of the abyss and the local government can’t ignore it) This is something we feel strongly about.

Also wonder whom from the RBC Climate Change Department will be representing at the COP23? (Exactly, there is non such)

How is the climate strategy linked to SDG11? Where can one find a local net-emissions city-area overview? What is RCCP’s plan to restore our changing climate? Does Reading has an #DRR evacuation plan in place #UCEEP? Does the partnership’s strategy so-called ‘Reading Means Business on Climate Change’ include fire corridors, prevention and restoration of land loss? A panic plan when our Kennet and Thames rivers dries up? Reading’s residents have long been cheated by this non-ambitious “follow target board management”. We feel sorry for all the years that has past, now there is NO more time to waste, the CLIMATE EMERGENCY is here, it has arrived. Wake up! For heaven’s sake, there is already a Global Action Plan in place. National, regions and local governments all have own responsibility to deliver these existing health and safeguarding plans in local legislation to its residents right now A.S.A.P.

Everyday a climate emergency occurs somewhere on the planet, this only the beginning…

Where is the transparency of this committee? Whois on-board the Reading Climate Change Partnership and their roles. Where are the notes from all previous meetings, the RCCP Board Meeting Minutes, in a link?

RCCP pretend they are doing good knowing human greed –> technological growth and business development/extraction of natural resource and population growth are the main causes behind climate change, still no mention of how to act in a non-greedy manner in the climate strategy, silence, we can neither find references to healthy business regulations, compact living or family planning. You all know how political climate change is. It affects everything everywhere and everyone (in that order?). An external Reading climate strategy means nothing, unless you have a genuine, honest and long term committed leadership. Who do we trust today with the future, your local lead councillor or an independent #IoT Reading leadership? Who has the comprehensive correct knowledge to implement the right climate change policies in your own local society? Will you, a citizen of your community, tolerate a slow and weak external climate strategy being thrown in your face? Don’t accept, challenge any targets in the climate strategy for better Within your local council, until zero emission target has been achieved. If you want more info on this, search in social media, follow hashtag #SB46, google it and READ more.

If the committee’s approach to divestment was a bit caring they would act together with Fossil Free UK and target carbon financing all over Berkshire authorities and beyond, READ here; https://campaigns.gofossilfree.org/petitions/campaign-to-divest-berkshire-public-bodies-and-instutions “It’s time to launder your money! Take it out of dirty institutions that invest in filthy fossil fuels.”

Neighbouring Boroughs like Cardiff, Poole, Oxford, Milton Keynes, Bristol and Southampton City Councils; if these six south unitary authorities can achieve proper action plans, what is Reading Council’s sorrow excuse? 100% Renewable energy asap, even supermarket TESCO is on-board!

Reading Borough Council need a Climate Change Committee.

I do hope you understand the do-or-die-time momentum for glocal climate change efforts

Sincerely

RE: CALL FOR PAPERS – DRR AND INTERNATIONAL LAW SYMPOSIUM REJECTED

Dear All,

Please find below a link to Climate Change Centre Reading´s (CCCRdg) abstract – http://media1.tvb-climatechallenge.org.uk/2017/03/CLIMATE-CHANGE-CENTER-READING-PAPER_DRR-AND-INTERNATIONAL-LAW-SYMPOSIUM.pdf

CCCRdg know “#drr and sustainable urban opportunities”, it is within our expertise area, we find it is important, it is our duty and responsibility to publish our paper abstract to the public. To establish a local private sector law case, providing collaborative commitment to “DISASTER RISK REDUCTION PLAN IN RDG COUNCIL LEGISLATION”

#switch2sendai #MEXICOGP2017 #Localisation #CitiinCiti #CititoCiti

Also an emergency adaptation DRR – Disaster Risk Reduction and restoration plan for every city needs to be implemented in local legislation #UCEEP – All cities need to draft Urban Climatic Emergency Evacuation Plan (#UCEEP) by 2020.

Walker INSTITUTE and University of Reading DRR AND INTERNATIONAL LAW SYMPOSIUM cannot excel cities impact on DRR law without connecting it to the agreed outcome of the Habitat III:s conference on urban settlements, the agreed New Urban Agenda in relation to the Paris Agreement and the Sustainable Development Goal 11 and Goal 13.

 

Dear Climate Change Centre Reading,

Regarding Climate Change Centre Reading’s (CCCRdg) paper abstract on the upcoming symposium on Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) and international law:

“Regrettable your paper; “Aiming for cities ambitious task to take on and implement the Sendai framework on DRR in the New Urban Agenda”

(Making a link to the following theme; (2) how DRR related law and policy will/should develop within specific fields of city law), (participation of governmental, intergovernmental, private, NGO/civil society, academic, and media sectors)

has been rejected.”

Best wishes

The preparatory committee DISASTER RISK REDUCTION AND INTERNATIONAL LAW SYMPOSIUM
29 June-1 July 2017, University of Reading, UK

 

BACKGROUND

SYMPOSIUM OVERVIEW Please join us at the University of Reading between 29 June and 1 July 2017 for the Disaster Risk Reduction and International Law Symposium organised by the Reading School of Law and the multidisciplinary Walker Institute, co-sponsored by the American Society of International Law (Disaster Law Interest Group). Framed around the principles and objectives underpinning the Sendai Framework on DRR 2015-30, and cognisant of the relevance of other global initiatives including the Sustainable Development Goals 2015 and UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, this will be a unique opportunity to discuss, debate, inform and progress the development of law, policy and practice governing DRR and disasters at the national, regional and international levels.

CALL FOR PAPERS Papers are invited which examine one or more of the following research questions, and should be framed around key principles and objectives of the Sendai Framework on DRR:

(1) What ‘soft’ and ‘hard’ law DRR related norms currently exist within international law, whether more generally or within specific legal regimes?

(2) How will/should DRR related law and policy develop within specific fields of law?

(3) What are the current and potential law, policy and/or practice implications of findings in (1) and/or (2), especially in relation to improving the coherence of DRR law at national/regional/ global levels, and associated implementation and enforcement mechanisms? Adopted approaches should include: (a) regional or country-specific case studies; (b) theoretical/ conceptual frameworks; and/or (c) examples of state/non‑state actor practice.

Reading, UK 19/03/17

School of Law

University of Reading, UK

#PeoplesMarchRD for jobs, justice and the climate

Sister March for jobs, justice and the climate **Save the Date 30 April, Sunday**


We warmly welcome you to participate in the Reading People’s March for jobs, justice and the climate on Saturday 30th April.

Climate change. WE #RESIST. WE #BUILD. WE #RISE.

We are a group of extraordinary and ordinary people who believe that now is the time to #ActOnClimate Change. We want to encourage leaders throughout the world at #COP23 arranged by Fiji in Bonn to go beyond binding decisions on Climate Change.

What will happen at the event?

We will march on Sunday 30th to show support for the People’s Climate Movement and for the international summit in Bonn 6-17 November 2017. We want to encourage ambitious action on CLIMATE CHANGE to avert a global crisis. We want Reading to be part of a giant global movement for change. We want a more just, more equitable and healthier world for us all.

We will walk through Reading town centre with a stop outside the Civic Centre. The walk starts at 12pm at Redlands Road (The Museum of English Rural Life) and the route includes six stop offs, one at the Civic Centre, before finishing up outside Reading Town Hall.

The INVITATION and the ROUTE: http://media1.tvb-climatechallenge.org.uk/2017/04/RPM_2017_Invitation.pdf
“Walk with us on Sunday 30th from 12pm. Assemble 11.30 at Redlands Road to March for climate, jobs, and justice. You can also join in at any of the points A-F along the route.” Rules to abide with hosting a joint People’s Climate March http://media1.tvb-climatechallenge.org.uk/2017/04/Host-Guidelines.pdf

From the Town Hall we walk towards Forbury Gardens for a well-deserved honourable www.incredible-edible-todmorden.co.uk -picnic on the grass. There will be a climate stall will with information as part of the climate rally.

By marching we will attract media attention hours before Trump’s 100th day in office, giving the event special importance. WE NEED local and global leaders to know that WE INSIST they should take ambitious action on CLIMATE CHANGE to avert a global crisis.

In #Togethernessship, we are more powerful than anyone possibly imagine. Whatever happens in the US, WE CAN, and WE WILL, build the future from here, resilient, fairer and more humane. As well, an emergency adaptation #DRR – Disaster, Risk, Reduction and restoration plan for every city essential to be implemented in local legislation #UCEEP

#WHYIMARCH

People’s Climate Sister Marches – Host Guidelines
http://media1.tvb-climatechallenge.org.uk/2017/04/Host-Guidelines.pdf
#ECO4CLIM_Rdg – climate@readingpeoplesmarch.org

Sunday April 30 – Reading

● No to dirty energy!
● Yes to renewables!
● Climate jobs now!

● Justice for people!

***
■ Many more details to come over the coming weeks and months.

Organisations supporting the demonstration include:
Climate Change Centre Reading
Ecopreneurs for the Climate in Reading
Greenpeace Reading
Global Justice Reading
Transition Town Reading
Friends of the Earth Reading
Cycle Campaign Reading
Green Party Reading

Continue reading “#PeoplesMarchRD for jobs, justice and the climate”

Get involved and become a sponsor for Ecopreneurs for the Climate in Reading

@ECO4CLIM_Rdg Join the Ecopreneurs for the Climate in Reading “Glocal Week of Green Business for #Climate, #Innovation + #Jobs OCT 24-30”


This is going live in the U.K. in October 28th!

Whether you are a student or an Ecopreneur, whether you are a free-lancer or work in an SME, or even in a large company, as long as you believe change is possible; our contribution makes a true difference for the people and the planet. This is your movement – Inclusive, diverse, fun and transformative. Your generous contribution to this campaign will, in a few years, develop 50 labs across the world / empower more than 500 ecopreneurs / generate 3,000 green jobs and directly avoid hundreds of tons of CO2 emissions into the atmosphere.

How can you join?

The 2016 edition “ECO4CLIM_Rdg” will take place on October 24-30, 2016. It will comprise of multi-stakeholder eco-innovation workshops and the Climate Champion Awards. **Save the Date28 Oct** ECO4CLIM_Rdg’s coordinators, climate-champion ecopreneurs and global partners participate in prestigious international forums the likes of CLIMATE CHANCE WORLD SUMMIT in France, the Women Leaders and the Global Transformation Summit, the #COP22 Climate Summit in Morocco, or SwitchMed Connect 2016 in Barcelona. Now is the time, participate, add your city or join our ecosystem of partners:

Looking to unlock Reading’s green potential. We will, in three weeks, seek to locate and highlight eight local climate innovations (Eco-preneurs)! Do not hesitate to put forward to us yours or any local low-carbon Innovation that can reduce Reading’s Greenhouse gas emissions footprint!

!Green entrepreneurs for the #Climate, the Global Week of Green Business and the Climate Movement – October 24-30, 2016 #ECO4CLIM16 Climate organiser for #ECO4CLIM_Rdg Please let us know if you like to be trans-boundary involved. We are looking for – Space partner, – Media partners, – Sponsors and – Enablers for Reading Climate Champion Awards 2016 – Email eco4clim @ cccrdg .org .uk

We warmly welcome you to participate in the ECO4CLIM_Rdg Event – Climate, Innovation +Jobs “Glocal Week of Green Business and the #ClimateMovement” Friday 28th October.

eco4clim16

 

Feel free to pledge-as-you-feel to get UK’s first Climate LAB started 🙂

https://www.crowdfunder.co.uk/join-the-ecopreneurs-for-the-climate-in-reading

 

International Guidelines on Urban and Territorial Planning – UN Habitat

Green belt not refeered to nor mentioned in the New Urban Agenda! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_belt

The need for planning cannot be over-emphasized. Urbanization is progressing rapidly and by 2050, seven out of ten people will be living in cities. Inappropriate policies, plans and designs have led to inadequate spatial distribution of people and activities, resulting in proliferation of slums, congestion, poor access to basic services, environmental degradation, and social inequity and segregation.

The International Guidelines on Urban and Territorial Planning serve both as a source of inspiration and a compass for decision makers and urban professionals when reviewing urban and territorial planning systems. The Guidelines provide national governments, local authorities, civil society organizations and planning professionals with a global reference framework that promotes more compact, socially inclusive, better integrated and connected cities and territories that foster sustainable urban development and are resilient to climate change.

 

Download the IGUPT  Guidelines here: http://unhabitat.org/books/international-guidelines-on-urban-and-territorial-planning

COMMENTS ON DRAFT #NEWURBANAGENDA 28 JULY 2016

Referring to the result of the Surabaya conference, Climate Change Centre Reading a local stakeholder from UK acting as a climate change advocacy on sustainable urban opportunities (not development). Please consider our thoughts to the Informal Intergovernmental Meetings (HABITAT III)

7th – 9th September, New York, USA on the New Urban Agenda;
https://www.habitat3.org/the-new-urban-agenda

From another strong Habitat III meeting, before and after the PrepCom3 conference should completely merge foundational basic elements one#Agenda2030 consensus especially with #Goal11 in sustainable cities.

There has been growing consensus about the devastating impacts that climate change will have on urban areas. Concurrently, urban planning has a role to play in mitigating against climate change, which  are expressed in a number of governmental reports, national planning policies and evolving international legislations; including the draft urban agenda of 2016.  Urban areas are recognized as key sources of greenhouse gas emissions; however, they can also assist in initiating actions to both reduce emissions and confront the anticipated effects (Krellenberg et al., 2010). Hence the proposed policies being purported in the New Urban Agenda are critical.

Overall, the document is comprehensive and it took a majority of the issues affecting urban centres into consideration. However, it is a high level document that will have to be tailored when being implemented to suit particular context and country settings. The following are the comments I have based on the review that was done.

This document is a follow-up on a review that was done for the Draft dated July 18, 2016. I see where some of my previous comments were included in the present draft.

  1. Policy Proposal 60 (formerly 54): The notion of “decent job” is being promulgated a lot in development documents, however, what constitutes decent job is not known or understood by the poor and marginalized. This needs to be addressed as finding and accepting jobs by the poor, especially in countries in the global south is often not met with such scrutiny.
  2. Policy Proposal 63 (formerly 57): “environmentally sound planning”, A definition of this concept will have to be developed based on context to be used by respective urban managers, within specific urban centres.
  3. Policy Proposal 74 (formerly 67): “Sustainable and resilient buildings” there is need for inclusion of required guidelines in local government policies that has to be met before planning and building permission is granted by the relevant agencies.
  4. Policy Proposal 75 (formerly 68): The lack of good governance in some countries encourage and perpetuate the development of slums and informal settlements, however, there needs to be effective policies to address the creation of these and where existing to regulate them. This could also be included and addresses in the Building Urban Governance Structures section of the Agenda.
  1. Policy Proposal 85 (formerly 77): “Approaches to urbanization”, This would have to consider the policies that are existing and how they can be strengthened, again based on context. What is the aim? to temper or encourage urbanization?
  2. Policy Proposal 115 (formerly 106): “Sustainable water management systems” Any urban water management system must make allowances for reducing precipitation and increased temperatures, complete with the solutions to address how short fall from these these will be accounted for.
  3. Policy Proposal 140 (formerly 131): “collaborating with insurance and reinsurance institutions” Is this leaning towards climate insurance? If yes, how will it be implemented in urban centres in most countries in the Global south and how will it be financed and what role will developed countries play in this regard?

Additionally, I would like to see throughout, policies that will stem the population growth within urban centres where applicable, in least developed countries and if not to ensure that all the required infrastructure and services are provided.

 

Ms. Donna Miller, Reading University

 

 

COMMENTS ON DRAFT #NEWURBANAGENDA 18 JULY 2016

Referring to the result of the Surabaya conference, Climate Change Centre Reading a local stakeholder from UK acting as a climate change advocacy on sustainable urban opportunities (not development), please consider our thoughts on the New Urban Agenda;

From another strong Habitat III meeting, before and after the PrepCom3 conference should completely merge foundational basic elements one #Agenda2030 consensus especially with #Goal11 in sustainable cities.

There has been growing consensus about the devastating impacts that climate change will have on urban areas. Concurrently, urban planning has a role to play in mitigating against climate change, which  are expressed in a number of governmental reports, national planning policies and evolving international legislations; including the new draft urban agenda of 2016.  Urban areas are recognized as key sources of greenhouse gas emissions; however, they can also assist in initiating actions to both reduce emissions and confront the anticipated effects (Krellenberg et al., 2010). Hence the proposed policies being purported in the New Urban Agenda are critical.

Overall, the document is comprehensive and it took a majority of the issues affecting urban centres into consideration. However, it is a high level document that will have to be tailored when being implemented to suit particular context and country settings. The following are the comments I have based on the review that was done.

  1. Throughout I found a greater emphasis on national governments, however, most urban centres worldwide are governed by local governments or municipalities, hence emphasis should also be placed on the role these organizations will play in implementing policies and plans and educating the population on urban climatic issues and impacts.
  2. Policy proposal 22: Under this section there will be a need to target communities, specifically through educational programmes etc.
  3. Policy proposal 28: “regardless of migration status”, Is the urban agenda independent of other policies on migration? Especially in England/Europe where there is now a migration problem and how will this will be addressed? This has to be discussed and refined further.
  4. Policy Proposal 51: “we commit to recognize the working poor in the informal economy” The informal economy has long been a part of cities. These economies play a critical role in cities, but can negatively hinder effective governance; throughout cities worldwide the need to practice good governance often trumps this aspect. However, in achieving this and to ensure inclusivity, the six priorities of inclusive cities (urban population growth, infrastructure provision, legal reform, access to support services, privatisation of services and citizens involvement in decision making) should be followed.
  5. Policy Proposal 54: The notion of “decent job” is being promulgated a lot in development documents, however, what constitutes decent job is not known or understood by the poor and marginalized. This needs to be addressed as finding and accepting jobs by the poor, especially in countries in the global south is often not met with such scrutiny.
  6. Policy Proposal 57: “environmentally sound planning”, A definition of this concept will have to be developed based on context to be used by respective urban managers, within specific urban centres.
  7. Policy Proposal 60: “Containing urban sprawl” with a thrust to reduce the use of fossil fuel and the emission of Carbon dioxide, It is pertinent to give consideration to increasing densities vertically instead of horizontally and leaving more green paces to assist with both the mitigation and adaptation to climate change impacts.
  8. Policy Proposal 66: Commitment to develop renewable and affordable energy sources should be taken a bit further and include options to let the remaining fossil fuel stay in the ground (in oil producing countries).
  9. Policy Proposal 67: “Sustainable and resilient buildings” there is need for inclusion of required guidelines in local government policies that has to be met before planning and building permission is granted by the relevant agencies.
  10. Policy Proposal 68: The lack of good governance in some countries encourage and perpetuate the development of slums and informal settlements, however, there needs to be effective policies to address the creation of these and where existing to regulate them.
  11. Policy Proposal 77: “Approaches to urbanization”, This would have to consider the policies that are existing and how they can be strengthened, again based on context. What is the aim? to temper or encourage urbanization?
  12. Policy Proposal 79: Proper checks and balances has to be implemented to ensure that all the relevant guidelines and procedures are adhered to.
  13. Policy Proposal 85: I particularly like this policy statement and it is to be incorporated in all aspects of the management of all cities as inclusivity and promoting rights to the city is key to guaranteeing that all the other aspects work.
  14. Policy Proposal 88: This policy statement will also be critical in contributing to the reduction of fossil fuel use and the emissions of carbon dioxide. Whether this will be enough to push us towards the target decided on in the Paris climate Agreement is left to be seen, however it is a start.
  15. Policy Proposal 89: This needs to be broken down further to include actual evacuation plans for urban centres/cities and an aspect to educate the residents about these plans.
  16. Policy Proposal 91: I would suggest creating a Geographic Information System that will be able to accommodate and incorporate all the aspect to readily undertake an analysis.
  17. Policy Proposal 94: “Shifting from predominantly private ownership to rental and other tenure options” “to prevent segregation” Is this purporting that government will be renting through subsidies etc? Needs to be clarified as this would be contradictory as renting through the private sector will not address segregation it will further promote it.
  18. Policy Proposal 97: This needs to be further broken down to include the mandatory inclusion of climate change mitigation and adaptation measures to reduce the effects from the expected impacts.
  19. Policy Proposal 103: “Support better coordination between transport and urban… Is this referring to the designated transport authority and/or ministry etc.? Needs to be clarified
  20. Policy Proposal 106: “Sustainable water management systems” Any urban water management system must make allowances for reducing precipitation and increased temperatures, complete with the solutions to address how short fall from these these will be accounted for.
  21. Policy Proposal 108: The addition of waste to energy should be factored in as well.
  22. Policy Proposal 111: Life and lifestyles in urban centres are often eclectic therefore preservation of heritage should be at all levels and should include cuisine as well.
  23. Policy Proposal 127: This could be done through public/private partnerships
  24. Policy Proposal 130: Mention is made about the Green Climaet Fund, however, there might be need to access other financial avenues.
  25. Policy Proposal 131: “collaborating with insurance and reinsurance institutions”Is this leaning towards climate insurance? If yes, how will it be implemented in urban centres in most countries in the Global south and how will it be financed and what role will developed countries lay in this regard?
  26. Policy Proposal 149: “It should avoid duplication” There should be a mandatory policy which speaks to integration and coordination in this regard, as for too long urban centre management has suffered from duplication, which is also a deterrent to effective management.
  27. Policy Proposal 153: This is setting out a timeline for review and reporting on progress, however, in policy proposal 147, there is mention of this being voluntary? This needs to be revisited and a mandatory review and reporting set that should be agreed by everyone concerned.

 

Ms. D Miller, Reading University

#Goal11 City Levels Green, Amber or even Red

#Goal11. Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable

Today, more than half of the world’s population lives in urban areas. It is thus incumbent upon states and societies to foster policies that help make cities and human settlements more inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable, as SDG number eleven states. In this cross-national comparison we look at two aspects that can be ascribed to this complex and multidimensional goal.

11_1

Click on the picture to enlarge

The first indicator refers to air pollution and potential health stresses caused by high particulate matter concentrations. Figure 11.1 shows the respective proportion of the population whose exposure to “PM2.5” is above the WHO threshold of 15 micrograms per cubic meter. In 17 OECD member states, including several small countries such as Estonia, Iceland, Luxembourg, and Slovenia, but also some large countries such as the United Kingdom and the United States, the population is on average not exposed to particulate matter concentrations exceeding this threshold. However, in the other half of the OECD nations, the picture looks different. In the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Belgium, for instance, more than 50 percent of the population is on average exposed to particulate matter levels above the threshold. These three countries lag farthest behind. And also countries such as Germany (25 percent of the population), Switzerland (28 percent), the Netherlands (32 percent), Austria (32 percent), and Italy (35 percent) still have some catching up to do.

11_2

Click on the picture to enlarge

The second indicator used here and portrayed in figure 11.2 refers to potential overcrowding as measured by the average number of rooms in a dwelling per person. The indicator thus Today, more than half of the world’s population lives in urban areas. It is thus incumbent upon states and societies to foster policies that help make cities and human settlements more inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable, as SDG number eleven states. In this cross-national comparison we look at two aspects that can be ascribed to this complex and multidimensional goal. The first indicator refers to air pollution and potential health stresses caused by high particulate matter concentrations. Figure 11.1 shows the respective proportion of the population whose exposure to “PM2.5” is above the WHO threshold of 15 micrograms per cubic meter. In 17 OECD member states, including several small countries such as Estonia, Iceland, Luxembourg, and Slovenia, but also some large countries such Goal 11. Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable 11.1 Particulate matter provides some information on housing conditions in terms of space. The top five countries in this respect are Canada, New Zealand, the United States, Australia, and Belgium, where the respective room per person ratio is between 2.3 and 2.5. The midfi eld comprises a number of countries with on average 1.6 to 1.8 rooms per person. Countries such as Japan, Germany, France, Sweden, Austria, Portugal, and Switzerland belong to this group. At the bottom of the league table, however, we find several countries where a person has – on average – only one room at his or her disposal: Mexico (1.0), Turkey, Slovakia, Poland, and Hungary (all 1.1).

Further indicators which could be relevant to this goal include, but are not limited to, widespread access to public transport or the number of people killed in road accidents. These domains are particularly relevant outside the OECD nations since 90 percent of global road deaths, for instance, occur in low- and middle-income countries.

 

Source: SDG Index and Dashboards – Global Report

#H3PrepCom3

togetherness

Cities are, by their very nature, dynamic places that grow, evolve and develop at a fast pace, particularly in the developing world. In that sense urban development itself needs little assistance: urban areas will grow and develop out of their own momentum. The challenge is to ensure that this development is *sustainable* and *inclusive*.

As we all know, sustainability means meeting the needs of the present without undermining the opportunity for future generations to meet their own needs. Inclusiveness means meeting the needs and aspirations of all urban dwellers; the poor as well as the rich, migrants and marginalized as well as established residents. This is the challenge that needs careful thought, planning and collaborative effort.

The many comments and submissions in this discussion have proposed a range of ideas and suggestions for how to make urban development more sustainable and inclusive. Balancing these various options and approaches requires that we acknowledge the many trade-offs that development brings. As city leaders, residents and entrepreneurs struggle to respond to the dynamic growth of cities, it is easy to fall into the trap of meeting the needs of the present at the cost of the future (e.g. by making short-term choices in infrastructure development) or by neglecting the needs of the poor and marginalized while trying to meet the demands of those with stronger voices (especially elites). Sustainable and inclusive development means that we should resist these pressures as much as possible and take a more inclusive, longer-term view of urban development. This is the challenge that the New Urban Agenda will need to meet.

Our thanks for the many contributions you have made to help us create such a sustainable and inclusive agenda. We look forward to seeing what comes out of the intergovernmental process, and the negotiations that will take place in Surabaya in two weeks’ time.

The New Urban Agenda that is agreed at Habitat-III will only be the start of the journey. We look forward to continuing that journey with all of you, and the many others committed to sustainable urbanization.

With best wishes,
Joseph D’Cruz, Urbanization Task Team Lead, United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)