URBAN POPULATIONS

Brownfield sites: abandoned, derelict and underused buildings and land with potential for redevelopment
Suburb: residential area within/just outside boundaries of a city
*Urbanization: process by which an increasing % of a country’s population comes to live in urban areas.
- Contributed by natural increase, RUM, higher death rates in rural
Urban growth: absolute increase in number of people living in urban areas, physical expansion
Suburbanization: the outward growth of towns and cities to engulf surrounding villages and rural areas. This may result from
the out‑migration of populaton from the inner urban area to the suburbs or from inward rural–urban movement.
Urban Sprawl: the unplanned and uncontrolled physical expansion of an urban area into the surrounding countryside.
Counter-Urbanization: the movement of population away from inner urban areas to a new town, a new estate, a commuter
town or a village on the edge or just beyond the city limits.
Re-Urbanization: The development of activities to increase residential population densities within the existing built‑up area of a
city. This may include the redevelopment of vacant land, the refurbishment of housing and the development of new business
enterprises.
Gentrification: the process of renewal and rebuilding accompanying the influx of middle-class or affluent people into
deteriorating areas that often displaces poorer residents (residents)
*Ecological Footprint: the amount of land and water a population requires to produce the resources it consumes and to absorb
its waste under prevailing technology.

Trends of urban growth:

HICs: level higher (more in cities) //
LIC and lower MICs like India : lower level // rate faster ( lower level of employee assistance and job availability > leads to rural to urban
migration > high natural increase)
Increasing urbanization: increase in physical size and pop > link to leading to URBAN SPRAWL (centrifugal)

***PROCESS OF URBAN GROWTH > ESSAYS

MOVEMENT OF RESIDENTIAL
CENTRIFUGAL (outward)
1. URBAN SPRAWL (more in LEDCs, NIC)
- Green belts (usually MEDCs) to control development, only natural area: England 14 green belts cover 15% of land

2. SUBURBANIZATION (within daily commuting range) > suburbs

> Decentralization of people, employment, services from inner and CBD
> Developed on greenfield sites (new land) usually in Europe, Australia
- Out of town shopping centres: Bullring in Birmingham, Trafford centre in Manchester, The Mall at Cribbs Causeway
> Facilitating factors: transport and ICT (can do teleworking)

3. COUNTER URBANIZATION (beyond daily commuting range) > rural

Decongests CBD but also decrease economic growth and employment
> CAUSES
1. Growth of public transport systems and increased ownership of private cars ACESSIBILITY EXAMPLES
> Rising affluence, increase mobility with cars and can travel longer distances
2. Improved telecommunications
> Teleworking such that workers can work from home, greater freedom of location
3. Decline of inner city
> Economic decline as industries move to other areas > unemployment, factory closures, abandoned buildings
> Poor physical conditions: inadequate public amenities, unsightly environment (graffiti, derelict buildings)
4. Migration of jobs to suburban and rural locations: RETAIL AND MANUFATURING EXAMPLES
> Able to access, so move out cause cheaper land and space more
5. Changing residential preferences
> CBD: over congestion, crime, pollution, noise
> Suburban: cleaner, quieter, more space, may be self sustainable
6. Self sustainable new towns that prevent overcrowding and reduce congestion
> IMPACTS: LINK TO MOVEMENT OF RETAIL ETC.
- CBD decline
- Pollution and loss of land in rural areas
> SOLUTIONS (urban renewal, gentrification)
Advice : IF you get a URBAN RENEWAL ESSAY: 2 case studies: objectives, reasons (inner city decline due to decentralization,
deindustrialization),strategies + evaluation (effectiveness: investments, pop)[ think London inner city docklands area –

CENTRIPETAL (inward)
Rural to Urban (more in LEDCs, NIC) should substitute for LIC and MIC
> Movement of people away from countryside to towns and cities esp in LEDCs and NICs, leading to rapid rate of urbanization
> CAUSES: push pull factors in notes on population change // EFFECTS: O1 - China’s rate of urbanization: 60%
1. RE-URBANISATION and URBAN RENEWAL
2. GENTRIFICATION (subset of urban renewal) > reimaging, improve vitality, vibrancy, image
> Reinvestment of capital into inner city areas
> Redevelop brownfield sites
> Involves residential upgrades: improvement of older properties in inner city
Pull factors of inner city gentrification:
1. Easy access to CBD, short journey and transport costs saved
2. Distinctive architecture compared to suburban estates (prestige, look good)

URBAN RENEWAL, GENTRIFICATION > REURBANISATION

BIRMINGHAM (re-imaging)
1. Bull Ring indoor shopping mall
WHY?
> Inner city areas have become less
popular as places to live an as
locations for economic activities
HOW?
> Flagship development, vibrant,
trendy
EFFECTIVE
1. Encourage creative industries
> 1000 creative businesses (software design,
publishing) > 17,000 employed
> Grants up to 500 EU$ for existing firms to set
up new firms
- Custard Factory in Digbeth: 500 artists and
creative enterprises
2. Better quality of life
> Densely populated blocks with poor sewage
demolished, replaced luxury flats
> Authorities improve leisure activities in city:
parks, bars, restaurants opened
> Remodeling of underground crossings: people
to cross roads at ground level reduced fear of
crime
WEAKNESS
1. Older businesses unable to compete
> Largest indoor shopping complex in UK with
modern infrastructure, extensive shops: drew
customers away from other retail outlets in the
city, reconfigured where the central shopping
area is
2. Operating costs: white elephant, 8million to
build
3. Rise in costs of land
> Rents rose at 5% per annum since it opened
> Displacement of poor people
(Social polarization)

Top mall
- 2004: top three shopping centres in
Britain, was the busiest in UK in with
36.5 million visitors > BUT
overcrowding and displace lower
income groups
EL RAVEL, BARCELONA
(Gentrification, re-imaging)
1. Accommodation for newcomers,
tourists
> New hotel facilities, Barcelo Raval
Hotel, 4 star luxury hotel 2008
- Strategically located in the most
fashionable area, metro station
- 37 meters, towers above the
surrounding skyline + elliptical design
> Museum of Contemporary Art for
Barcelona: built on land previously
occupied by tenement buildings
> Centre of Contemporary Culture for
Barcelona
For more refer to text book or guide
LIVERPOOL, ALBERT DOCK
(Gentrification, re-development)
3. Creation of jobs
> More than 8000 jobs BUT middle income
migrants take service jobs from locals
EFFECTIVE
1. Accessibility
> Close to major tourist attractions
2. Rebranding from filthy to trendy (S$)
> No more association with the low-status, high-
density housing, vibrant night life
3. Increase tourism leads to new jobs ($)
> Inner city filled with derelict tenant blocks to
the 5th top tourist attraction for overnight stays
in UK
EFFECTIVE
WEAKNESS
1. Persistence of: (S)
Drug Dealing, crimes, prostitution
2. Resident’s needs have not been considered
or met
> Focuses on the temporary tourist populations
> Risk losing distinct ‘neighborhood character”
3. Threaten culture (S)
> Opening of Hotel coincided with National day
of Catalonia Fiesta: traditional street
performances canceled, celebrations disrupt,
traditions disregarded
WEAKNESS
> Quality housing with river view
> Galleries and ‘Little Woods’ chain
store
1. Influx of population 1. Lack of housing (S)
> 4000 -> 10000 population, 6mil tourists, quality > Housing that was developed, it catered for
housing and lodging double-income professional couples and, as
such, did little to solve the city’s housing crisis
2. Threaten culture (S)
> Public participation and community
involvement in planning and decision-making
processes limited
> Loss of cultural traits
GENTRIFICATION > REURBANISATION
EAST LONDON
> Build Olympic Village:
converted to affordable
housing after games
> Build new amenities for
Olympic Sports: attract people
to live in area
> £17 billion on transport
improvement (extend East
London Rail Lines) > increase
accessibility
EFFECTIVE WEAKNESS
1. Affordable housing 1. Disparity between rich and poor
> 40% of 2800 new homes will be affordable > Unaffordable to poorest: 32% cannot afford 1 room
2. Amenities and services property
> Properties for poorer people demolished: 450
> Aquatics centre uses 50m pools as facilities for
Housing Association flats torn down
community
2. Does not address community’s needs
3. Creation of jobs
> 90% not involved in planning process > top-down
> 10,000 new jobs
> 75% think planning authorities didn’t successfully
> 2000 jobs for unemployed local residents
address local community’s needs
4. Income generated
3. Jobs not long term
> Olympics brought £9 billion
> Low paying jobs, not permanent > limited
> Estimated Olympics generate £10 billion in extra transference of skills
income for UK economy > 25 business closed down

GLOBAL MEGA CITIES – good ICT, good transport infra, cultural and entertainment development (SG)
MEGA CITIES – cities with more than 10 million population, become multi-nuclei centres after swallow up nearby towns (Dhaka, Lagos, LEDC)
- 2015: 27 of world’s largest cities are in Asia in 2030 …………………
- Shanghai and Mumbai: 20 million
- Jakarta and surrounding area: 37 million
> Rate of growth of cities: LEDC - 4-5% per year, MEDC - 1-2% per year …………………

POSITIVE NEGATIVE
> Dynamic and vibrant centres of econ activity and social > Establishment of shanty towns (LEDCs)
interactions > Social: segregation, disparities
> Hubs in global network of econ activity (e.g. trade and finance) > Infrastructure deficits (inadequate water supply, sanitation)
> Generate wealth efficiently urban areas in MEDC generate over > Environmental impact
80% of national econ output - China rapid growth, contains 16 of the 20 most polluted cities in
> Economies of scale the world
Growth of Primate Cities
The size of its population is more than two times that of the second largest city
1. Bangkok: 12% of Thailand’s population, 80% of their urban population, 60% of GDP
2. London: 9 times the size of Birmingham
3. Paris: 8 times the size of Marseilles

Natural Change
1. Conurbation (huge metropolitan area)
a. Corridor of urbanisation extending from Boston to Washington (“Boswash”)
2. Urban Consolidation → control urban sprawl
a. Increase density of residential buildings → infilling gaps in urban area
b. Advantage: utilities and transport more economic to provide
3. Development of urban village (ethnic enclaves)
a. Sydney: Chinatown, Cabramatta (Vietnamese), Aurburn (Turks)
b. Determined by price of housing, location of markets or an historical focal point → wealthy residents not happy, restrict other
residents → gated communities
URBAN LANDUSE AND CHANGE
ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS AND LAND USE
INFORMAL SECTOR
> Not taxed, monitored by government or included in any GNI
> Provides unskilled and semi-skilled migrants with causal, temporary, but immediate work
- Angola: takes 13 procedures, 124 days for application // USA: 5 days
- Dhaka: Half a million children in informal sector. Vulnerable to street crimes violence, drugs and sexual abuse, toxic fumes and waste
products
POSITIVE NEGATIVE
> Tertiary refuge sector: provides unskilled migrants with work > Associated with crimes, threaten security, turns away potential
> Informal and formal are interdependent: goods in informal sold in visitors and investors
formal > Exposed to exploitation, health hazards, deprived of rights in laws

FORMAL SECTOR
Permanent, set hours of work, levels of pay, provision of pensions and social security rights

ZONING[ A rough diagram – even a bad one is ok- diagram is worth marks]
1. Bid rent theory: a graph that shows different amount of rent that a range of urban land uses
can afford to pay OFFICES

> Distance decay: land values highest in CBD and decline w increasing distance LIGHT
INDUSTRIES

> City most accessible, prestige, economies of scale, threshold population high
> Depends on type of location each use needs and amount willing to pay
> Reasons for why certain things located where they are AGRI

RURAL

2. Peak land value intersection model PLVI: most valuable site within CBD
> As distance from this decreases, land prices decrease. However, there are secondary peaks (major radial route, ring roads)

SPATIAL PATTERN: URBAN MORPHOLOGY: MODELS (refer textbook )

1. Burgess’s concentric zone model
2. Hoyt’s sector model

CBD CHARACTERISTICS
1. Commercial and economic core: core moneymaker > Major retail outlets: highest turnover, requires largest threshold pop
2. Highest rent values > Supply of accessible sites v limited, so high competition push price up + high accessibility (centrality of location)
3. Intensive land use > Buildings expand upwards and underground since high land price
4. Most accessible with greatest volume and conc of traffic > Fringed by various transport terminals and off street parking
5. Ever changing > Processes of sub urbanization, urban renewal

DECLINE
Factors:

ZONE OF TRANSITION (area of the inner city) > ever changing based on expansion and shrinkage of CBD
> Mixed land use: slums, car parks, and cafes
> Zone of assimilation or discard depends on CBD slight shifting in location within built up area (can happen simultaneously at diff parts)
> Zone of Assimilation: residential area invaded by advancing front of CBD, parts of transition zone close to higher status of CBD
undergoing expansion tend to be absorbed into this zone of transition
> Area of Discard: area suffer from progressive withdrawal of central businesses (remember sub and counter urbanization?)
due to economic downturn  inner city decline, indicators of deprivation (unemployment, healthcare, crime rate,
depopulation etc.

MOVEMENT OF MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES CAUSES

> Initial attraction to cities due to
1. Dense population: large market and variety of labour readily available, both skilled and unskilled
2. Cities are major centres of innovation, ideas and fashion

> Factors influencing type of location needed now

1. Land required
> Light industries[such as electronics]: less land, can afford to be closer to CBD to have best of both suburb and city market
> Heavy industries[ such as iron and steel,car manufacturing]: need space for manufacturing, assembling
2. Availability of labour
3. Availability of transport system: some industries locate on radial routes e.g. Samsung electronics at Suwon, Korea

> Causes of movement out to new locations away from city

PUSH PULL
1. Cheaper land/ cannot afford in CBD
> CBD: shortage of space and bid rent theory, where CBD occupied by retail and offices since they deem it to most attractive place to start
business, and pay most = high prices
- UK: Over past 3 decades, land prices in CBD increasing rapidly even up to 500% in certain places
2. Movement of population out 2. More land in outskirts
> Suburbanization and counter urbanization > Plus cheap prices contribute to expansion
> Shift to cope with loss of consumer base within city center > CBD no longer ideal place it once was during industrial revolution when
> Tap on the existing and growing population living in the suburbs manufacturing was main industry
- Liverpool: population decrease due to these two movements - Busan, Korea: Hyundai car works is an industry, which requires a lot of
since 1930s; many left for new towns Runcorn and Skelmersdale land in the manufacturing and assembling process
3. Deterioration of old industrial towns 3. Increasing accessibility to suburban sites
> MEDCs: many were built in early 1900s, infrastructure degraded > Cause of increase in car ownership in recent years, due to increasing
> Narrow roads in these towns also congestion affluence. Can travel longer dist and more frequent so industries no need
> Other manufacturing also move out so abandoned buildings left locate in CBD to get customers or access to labour
cause place to be area of disinvestment - UK: growth of car ownership from 12 mil cars in 1970, to 22 mil in 1990
> Developed and located nearer to ring road intersections, main roads,
and motorways so easier and more attractive for people to visit or access

MOVEMENT OF RETAIL CAUSES

1. Retail warehouse and superstores
> Along main roads on edge of urban area where there is space and cheaper land
2. Out of town shopping malls
> Located on urban greenfield sites with good accessibility and space for parking and expansion // also may be closer to suburban residential

PUSH
1. Cheaper land/ cannot afford in CBD (refer above)
2. Movement of population out
> Suburbanization and counter urbanization
- Liverpool’s population has been decreasing due to these two
movements since the 1930s; many have left for the new towns of
Runcorn and Skelmersdale.
> Shift to cope with loss of consumer base within city center
> Tap on the existing and growing population living in the suburbs
> Target affluent market, who are the ones able to afford and be self
sufficient enough to live in the outskirts of town
3. Congestion
PULL
2. More land in outskirts
> Plus cheap prices contribute to expansion
> Availability of space beneficial in provision for parking lots,
compared to CBD lack of parking, or high parking rates
- Trafford Centre in the Manchester: successful out of town retail
center, which is also largest retail center in the UK, has over 10,000
car parking spaces and up to parking spaces for 300 coaches, it
sufficiently provides and meets the needs of its visitors, of which 90%
arrive by car.
3. Increasing accessibility to suburban sites (refer above)
- The Mall at Cribbs Causeway, Bristol located near motorways and
main roads: 10 mil spent on major upgrade to nearby junction, a dual
carriageway link road to connect the junction with other roads.
- This provides rapid access from different places to the mall: over 4.5
million people live within 1 hour drive.

Use New York – Mumbai from textbook

Other e.g.
- Merry Hill (Dudley) + Meadowhall

MOVEMENT OF OFFICES (not v impt)

PUSH PULL
1. Traffic congestion in city > loss of man hours 1. More accessible for suburban workers
2. Expensive high land value and rents 2. Cheaper cause less competition and more space
3. Difficulty and cost of expansion 3. More space for cheap prices
> Movement back into brownfield sites
1. New office developments built in inner cities as part of urban regen
IMPACTS OF MOVEMENTS
POSITIVE
CBD:
1. Various attempts to revitalize the city center
> Full-scale developments, the creation of traffic free zones, new
covered shopping malls, and specialist shopping centres within the
inner city and CBD
- The Mall: sparked fight-back in Bristol’s city center. Cabot circus,
opened in 2008, is a vast new covered shopping centre, slightly
larger than the Mall, including many features: 13-screen cinema
complex.
- Success: played important role in Bristol’s rise to being the 9th
largest shopping destination in 2013.
NEGATIVE
CBD:
1. CBD decline due to establishment of many new developments
outside
2. Out of town shopping centres, coupled with changing residential
preferences and demographics within the CBD, led to closure of
many shops within CBD.
- The Mall: drew trade away from Bristol’s CBD – opening of a john
Lewis anchor store there has led to the closure of the existing John
Lewis store in Bristol’s city center
DEST:
1. Movement of retail --out compete with small scale shops
- Local shops in Cribbs causeway decreased by 25% in 1990
2. Congestion and pollution
FACTORS AFFECTING LOCATION OF RESIDENTIAL
MEDCs:
1. WEALTH (employment, income)
A. Rich: can afford cleaner and further away from pollution, closer to city center (though note apartment blocks) for prestige, accessibility and
schools
Gated communities: area of wealthy private housing with secure perimeter and controlled entrances
- Bethnal Green, East London: working class accommodation
- Gated communities: in SoHo and Greenwich in London and New York; Mayfair and Park Lane in London, TriBeCa in New York
B. Poor: undesirable areas, rely on strong social interactions and associations with others in their community to agglomerate tgt (sense of
belonging, security)
- Slums: Dharavi slum in Mumbai, Kibera slum in Kenya, slums in Delhi: 60% unemployed, 48% living below poverty line
2. ETHNICITY/RELIGION
> Reasons: discrimination, wish to live tgt, relative security, poverty, first area of receiving due to migrant networks
> Difference in culture > ghettos: residential district of one ethnic/cultural group
- South Hall, London: 10 gudawaras (Sikh temples) were built [one won an architectural award], 2 hindu temples, around ¾ Indians
- Ghettos in USA: Harlem, Bronx: 35% blacks and 55% Hispanics, 72% of residents in Harlem New York are blacks
3. DISTRIBUTION OF FAMILY STATUS
> Family life cycle: different events and stages of life (e.g. college, retirement)

LEDCs:
1. WEALTH, ETHNICITY
> Proximity to amenities, employment and security
2. OVER TIME:
> Bridgeheaders (first generation migrants): more willing to take up poorer conditions
> Consolidators (bring in family after get richer): move into larger squatter settlement
> Status seekers

ZONES OF DEPRIVATION
Deprivation: when an individual’s wellbeing falls below level generally regarded as reasonable minimum (relies on:
employment, housing, health, education , crime rates, environmental quality etc)

MEDCs:
1. Inner city areas
> Overcrowded apartments that were supposed to be built for families
> Poor housing, economic and social deprivation, reception area for new migrants
2. Ghettos
> Ethnic minorities
> Stick together to retain cultural identity, language, kinship and sense of belonging and security. Provision of services and goods catered for
their needs.
3. Council estates [ UK – cheaper government housing]
> Form of public housing at reasonable rents to working class

Inner city housing

in west London

LEDCs:
1. Slums (legal) (both DCs and LEDCs)
> Very close to city center, can walk to jobs and generally close to inner city
2. Squatters/shanty towns (illegal)
LEDCs: shantytowns (model does not apply to LEDCs, so they exist of zones of deprivation)
> Because government unable to provide proper housing, high RUM, no funds or interest, lead to informal housing
> Have no legal rights, lose homes to government action since land is neither owned nor rented
> Little to no social amenities, fire and health hazards and sources of epidemics since a lot of people in small space
URBAN STRESS > LINK TO POVERTY CYCLE (affecting: crime, education, health, housing, poverty)

SOCIO ECONOMIC
ISSUE CAUSE IMPACT
URBAN > Rapid urban growth: Rural to urban, natural increase 1. Loss of farmland
SPRAWL - China: expanding cities take over 200k ha of farmland annually
> Many farmers lose livelihood since forced to move out
> Increase distance for food to transport lead to environmental
impacts such as pollution, and rising cost of food
2. Depletion of green spaces
> Reduced diversity, loss of green spaces
Solution: Taxing green field sites and promote incentives for
redeveloping brownfield, develop green belts to protect spaces
TRAFFIC 1. Expansion of urban areas 1. Unproductivity
CONGESTION > City expands, increase commuting distance and journeys > Loss of man hours, people stuck in traffic
take within city 2. Emission of greenhouse gases as vehicles keep running while
2. Econ growth stuck in jams
> Rapid increase in car ownership due to rising affluence: - On average, Bangkok’s traffic moved 57 percent slower than a
UK or Jakarta, increase five fold since 1970 clear road situation
> Growth in commercial and industrial activities leading to
an increase in demand for service vehicles - Delhi, India: 15km/h during peak hours, eroding companies'
3. Inadequate transport networks productivity by way of lost man hours: 40 per cent productivity
> Provision of public transport not kept up with pop is being lost to time wasted on the road
growth
> Congested roads with incompatible mix of motorized Solutions:
and unmortised vehicles 1. SG: ERP, MRT, public transport, new towns decentralize
- Dhaka, Bangladesh: pavement dwellers and road side 2. Curitiba: public transport
hawkers
POOR 1. Failure of govt to provide 1. Poor SOL, deprivation
QUALITY > Other priorities, lack of funds > Lack basic amenities (electricity, water)
HOUSING 2. Large population to provide for > No affordable housing so resort to slums, squatters which
> LEDCs 1/3 3. Housing out of reach for poor, usually for middle class have poor living conditions, pollution, more crime and less
can’t afford workers accessibility

Solutions:
(Refer to sustainable cities housing strategies below)

BROWN AGENDA
> Lack of safe water supply
> Inadequate solid waste management
> Uncontrolled emissions
ENVIRONMENTAL
ISSUE CAUSE IMPACTS
AIR POLLUTION 1. Transport 1. Health implications
> Motor vehicles produce gases like nitrous oxide, carbon monoxide, and > Leaded fuel: low concentrations of
sulphur dioxide: warm climates: Gases heated and photochemical smog lead in blood → higher risks of heart
produced attacks and strokes in adults, impair
> Inadequate public transportation + high private car ownership child’s mental development
- Tiananmen Square in Beijing: highest traffic density, western suburbs have - Mother’s exposure to airborne lead
heavy manufacturing → pollutant (sulphur dioxide, ozone and solid particulate during pregnancy → baby have lead
materials are worst in city centre near it [ refer to notes on Beijing] poisoning
2. Industries - Bhopal, India accident
- Beijing:
- Industrial sources account for 97% sulphur dioxide emissions Watch you tube
- Coal combustion in the power, steel, cement and brick industries: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJ
g19W8x_Ls
58% of PM2.5 (some shit very dangerous for humans)
- 4.7 smoggy days/month in 2013, pollution reaching 40x safe level 800 killed over 200,000 injured due to
> Burning of biomass, wood and coal for heating a poisonous gas leak from an MNC
- India, Delhi: street sweepers burn 8k tons of rubbish to keep warm- more from factory
textbook - guide
WASTE 1. Failure to build waste disposal systems 1. Land pollution
OVERBURDEN > Poor planning, lack of law enforcement, lack govt revenue and political will - ⅓ and ½ solid wastes generated -
> Most LEDCs: ½ of - Curitiba, Sweden- Malmo – these cities have made efforts uncollected and left to accumulate on
solid waste
uncollected
wasteland
- Jakarta: 40% of solid waste is
uncontrolled (on roadside and
waterway) → cogs drainage channels →
flood in rainy season
2. Health implications
 > Spread of diseases → high infant
mortality rates
- India: Leaching of toxic material from
decomposing garbage → contaminate
water sources
WATER 1. Houses not connected to sewage system 1. Health implications
POLLUTION > Waste enter directly/dumped into streams, canals - Ganges river near Varanasi: faecal
- Bangkok: houses built over canals discharges their wastes directly into water coliform bacteria levels at least 3000
under house times higher than safety levels by WHO
- Yamuna, Delhi: dumps 58% of waste, 70% of inhabitants drink filtered water 2. Water scarcity
from river, 200million tons of sewage/day - Dhaka: 70% of household not
connected to waste system → human
waste into Balu river → river purified by
adding chlorine ammonia sulphate →
millions without safe drinking water
LAND 1. Concretised land 1. Infrastructure destroyed/damaged
SUBSIDENCE + > Ground infiltration greatly reduced, coupled with poor drainage > Water pipes break, railway lines
FLOODING > Groundwater not being refilled by infiltration, land subsidence occurs buckle, foundation of buildings
threatened
- Mexico city: over abstraction of
groundwater, city subsidence more than
9 metres

DEPRIVATION
1. Spatial distribution
> Disparity gap is seen in social segregation: zones of deprivation
2. Measures of deprivation
> Environmental:
- Quality of housing, incidence of crime, vandalism and graffiti
- Pollution level:
- MIC country as per HDI ranking : Jakarta: traffic congestion in urban cities, lack of public transport system and rise in affluence, Jakarta
accounts for around 40 percent of all autosales in the country, 2014-16: 480k new cars, 60% of Jakarta's population has respiratory
problems
- LEDC but now more appropriate to say MIC as per HDI as per 2017 : Yamuna in New Delhi, India 200 million tons of sewage dumped daily
Government reported that cars were responsible for 70% of the PM10-sized particulates in the air.
Air pollution causes 2.8million people to lose work days, 3 million absences in school

> Social:
- Quality of housing:
- MIC INDIA : Dharavi slum more than 1million live there, located at the heart of Mumbai, near commercial center and airport, 100 000
makeshift homes, lack proper infrastructure, water and electricity is only available in short periods during the day, water is rationed
- MEDC or HIC : council estates Beecontree, London 17% of people live here, basic necessities, largest social housing estate in London
- Low standard of living, crime, level of health, access to healthcare, standard of education, depopulation

Becontree

> Economic:
- Access to employment, unemployment, underemployment, level of income (gini-coefficient)
- Poverty:
- Now Lower MIC but previously LEDC : Stung Meanchey in Phnom Penh[ Cambodia] , 100 acre garbage dump, toxic gases fuming,
scavenger families live at the slum next to it, trash dumped there is source of food and income, recyclables like aluminium and plastic are
resold for 50cents, rubbish trucks kill or dismember people, heavy metal waste, medical waste
 Families live here

Delhi’s ghazipur waste hill as tall as qutub minar-

google link http://bit.ly/33mWPs6

Physical indicators: quality of housing, pollution levels, crime rate, and vandalism

3.
URBAN POVERTY (increasing due to economic problems, population growth)
> Slums:
> Many LEDC cities, large communities live on and around garbage tips, making a living by recycling
- Phnom Pneh, Cambodia: Dump hill is largest garbage tip and thousands of poor live there. Many are chronically sick, and others suffer from
poisoning from toxic fumes of burning plastic
- 34% live on less than $1/day, with 14 hours of work and 35 cents daily
> MEDC: council housing (initially for middle class, in suburbs/inner city)(as become older, rich people move out and housing allocated to the
poor > negative association “sick estates”), ghettos and slums (inner city)

URBAN CRIMES (know why)

> Individual crimes: one off acts of violence, usually economically motivated
> Organized crimes: human trafficking, drugs and arms smuggling
> Open, armed conflict: terrorists, rebel groups (ISIS= Think Syria)
CAUSES
Inequality > discontent, unemployment, limited police presence, more opportunities in large cities
MICROCLIMATE
Define: weather conditions of small, specific area within a larger area > wind, temp, cloud cover and precipitation
Urban areas characteristics: higher avg temp, precipitation, lower humidity and wind velocity, thicker cloud cover
1. CLOUD COVER + PRECIPITATION higher
> More pollutants (cars, industries): provide condensation nuclei to form clouds
> Higher temperatures due to concretised surfaces trap more heat, generate convection currents causing warm parcel of air to rise with water
vapor, cool and reach dew point, condense into clouds
> Convectional rain: is torrential (heavy rain, short duration), from cumulonimbus clouds
2. WIND higher speed but also more variation, more frequent periods of calm
> Buildings create friction, act as windbreaks
> BUT skyscrapers may create “canyons” through which wind are channeled (Venturi effect), strong enough to sway buildings: higher speed
3. TEMP higher
> Urban heat island phenomenon!!
> Concrete of buildings and roads store heat in the day, release them at night so higher nighttime temp. At the same time, heat
radiated at night is trapped again and released in the day.
> Albedo values (reflective quality) of urban surfaces are lower cause surface not flat (all the skyscrapers vs. flat grass and treetops)
so higher net radiation value
> Irregular geometric shapes of city affect radiation patterns. Incoming insolation caught in maze-like reflection allowing more heat
to be absorbed by surfaces it radiates off
> Human activities: burning fossil fuels, central heating, car fumes, industries  smog (nitrogen oxide, carbon
dioxide)
> Pollution blanket, high cloud covers: absorbs and reradiate infrared radiation downward
> No water bodies, greenery: evaporation and transpiration has cooling effect, less plants to reduce carbon emissions (they are
carbon stores, provide shade)
> Urban heat wave
IMPACTS
> Heat stress and illness: working days lost, productivity down
> Disease: increase likelihood of vector borne diseases, which prefer humid and warm climates

SUSTAINABLE CITIES (MUST touch on ALL social, econ, environ) ** EF= Ecological Footprint
Urban ecological footprint: amount of biologically productive land and water that a human population needs to produce resources it
consumes, and to absorb its waste under prevailing tech
> Expressed in units of global ha, unit to measure our demands on the earth (EF) and ability of earth to supply demands (bio capacity)
> Determined by: rate of pop growth, levels of development and consumption, nature of available tech
> Trend: MUCH higher in MEDCs (US 6ha/person, sustainable is less than 1.9ha)
- London’s EF is 125x the SA of the city itself
HOWEVER, cities concentrate populations such that it reduces land pressure and proximity of infra/services, so urban areas hold promise for
sustainable development > EFFECTIVE URBAN PLANNING

THE CITY AS A SYSTEM (inputs and outputs) { diagram as given book of sustainable city}
> Inputs: population, goods, and services, food, raw material urban decay, growth, movements,
industrialisation Outputs: wealth, services, and waste (inorganic and organic waste)
1. LINEAR/open SYSTEM (unsustainable)
> Resources flow through urban area with little concern about origin or destination
2. CIRCULAR/closed SYSTEM (sustainable, small EF)
> Minimizes inputs by recycling outputs since there will be reduced demand for new input resources(+) and less land(+) needed to absorb
waste, BUT high costs for transportation of waste for recycling and bins
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (linked to urban stress)
> Meets needs of the present without compromising ability of future gens to meet own needs
> Increase social equity, encourage participation, improve living spaces, and maintain surroundings and health and conserve natural
resources fast
> Sustainable city management: process of managing city’s inputs and outputs such that QOL for current and future urban dwellers can be
maintained
> Compact cities!! Minimize infractstructure needed, reduce distance travelled (emissions decrease), and reduce urban sprawl (but congestion)
Economic sustainability Social sustainability Environmental sustainability
> Should have access to employment > Reasonable Quality Of Life meeting basic > Promote public transport (SG)
social,
(Chengdu or Curtiba ) cultural and healthcare needs, housing to be > Preserve green spaces (SG): maintenance of
> If they get ill or permanently disabled, safe and affordable (SG, Curitiba, Caracas) green spaces, greenbelts reduce urban sprawl
should get entitled to economic security > Provide opportunities to maximize potential > Improved waste management (Curitiba,
> Economic competitive, sustain itself (edu) Sweden)
without
causing irreversible damage > Political freedom > Easing congestion
Urban ecological footprint
CASE STUDIES:
SOCIAL: TRANSPORT STRATEGIES (time saved, accessibility)
INFO EVALUATION
EFFECTIVE EVALUATE
CURITIBA, BRAZIL 1. Efficient and fast 1. Very successful LEDC
1. Public transport and road planning > Allowed people to travel quickly > An exceptional strategy!
(Urban stress: congestion, pollution) regardless of traffic conditions on - Over 60% of residents use buses to get
WHY? surrounding roads, buses don’t need to work each day, even though Curitiba
> Reduce congestion: congested city centres are harmful to compete with cars etc. has the 2nd highest rate of car ownership
to productivity and the environment - Waiting time for buses less than a in Brazil
- Congestion costs 11 billion minute during peak hours - Reduction of 40 million car trips per
HOW? year
- Central street divided into three sections: central section Sustainable and effective in getting
is a two-way road reserved for buses, with bus stops every people to use Public Transport
500m
LEICESTER, UK
1. Walking and cycling strategies (Urban stress: congestion, pollution)
- 75% of pollution is caused by 25% of vehicles
HOW?
- Schools: Walking Bus Scheme, “walk-to-school” week
- 100km of signed cycle routes provide a network off and alongside the main road network
+ Bottom up approach: cultivate lifestyle from young but remember - Funding needed

SOCIAL: HOUSING STRATEGIES (improve SOL)

PUBLIC HOUSING
SINGAPORE positive
- 1950s: 1.3 million in squatter huts, diseases
HOW?
- 1960s: HDB established. Five year building
programme built over 50k units
CARACAS, VENEZUELA negative
> Aimed to rehouse over 180 thousand people
living in slums, known as Ranchos
- 97 high 15-storey apartment buildings to
house 180,000 from ranchos + green spaces
EVALUATION
EFFECTIVE WEAKNESS
1. Affordable for the low income 1. Future unaffordable
> No longer need to share unsanitary spaces > Inflation, young cannot afford
- 80% of locals living in it now > REBUTTAL: Government subsidies as
2. Social sustainability CPF[ central provident fund] housing grants of
> Provided electricity and water up to $80k so this rate makes it affordable
- New towns [ at edge of city ]: schools, 2. Not replicable in all contexts
clinics, hospitals, and community centres. - Expensive, lack political will, may only work
Town council to ensure the maintenance of due to Singapore’s small size and compact
infrastructure area
4. Environmental sustainability
- UN-HABITAT scroll of honor award for 3. ((CARACAS))
providing one of Asia’s greenest cleanest
housing programmes
- Punggol eco-town: installing energy
efficient lighting in common areas,
centralized recyclables chutes, water
efficient fittings and rainwater harvesting
> Long term: can be extended to all other
HDB flats in the future
1. Inaccessible and no facilities nearby: continue to live in poverty and poor living conditions
2. Hastily built: construction errors and low maintenance: unsafe conditions
3. Congestion: houses clustered in one area, attracted more people
4. Crime: taken over by squatters causing drugs and gun violence to be rampant. Caracas
known as one of Brazil’s most dangerous cities, most homicides.

NEW TOWNS EVALUATION

EFFECTIVE WEAKNESS
SINGAPORE positive
> Decongestion from CBD, self sufficient in
other neighborhoods New towns: Tampines
RIO DE JANERIO +ve
> Due to the expanding middle class, and high
population density
- Barra de Tijuca was established
1. Accessible: Downtown line by 2017
2. Education: 23 educational institutes
3. Lifestyle and recreation: Tampines hub
1. Decentralization
- Barra has attracted over 300 thousand
residents
- Many affluent and middle class attracted
by high quality of life: large malls,
condominiums, nearby mountains and
beaches
1. Self sustainable
- Reached a threshold population to support
the hypermarkets, schools and offices
established
1. Land prices
1. Challenging to relocate the lower income
population
> Largest demand for informal jobs is in the
CBD: without private transport, lower income
residents unable to travel to and fro.
- Approximately 3 hours to travel from Rio to
Barra, and no public transport is available
[ refer to case study notes]
SLUM UPGRADING
JAKARTA, INDONESIA- positive
- Densely populated, unserviced, low-income
urban homes to 60% of 4.8 million inhabitants
> Lack of facilities
- Kampong improvement programme in 1969,
up to 2000 new approach
Kampong means village
SITE AND SERVICE
LUSAKA, ZAMBIA
- Encourages groups of 25 to come together
with 8ha of land
ENVIRONMENTAL STRATEGIES
PUBLIC TRANSPORT (link social)
SINGAPORE positive
> Control car ownership and emissions, PT
more environmentally friendly
- World health organization: air pollution
biggest environmental health risk, heart
disease and stroke
ERP system charges according to time
of day and where traffic is headed when
the car passes the gantry. Is it going to
CBD area or not ?
EVALUATION
EFFECTIVE
1. Providing services and improvements at
lost costs
- Improved more than 500 kampongs and
provided basic services to 4 million people,
for just $60 per capita without disrupting
cultural fabric
- 93km of drains, 56000m of water pipes
2. Much cheaper than apartments
- Ratio price is 140:1
EVALUATION
EFFECTIVE
1. Providing services
- When ditches are dug, the government
will lay water and drainage pipes
- Extra funds saved by government is
used for electricity, roads, and simple
facilities
2. Cheaper alternative
- Low priced building materials will be given
provided shell of the house is built
EVALUATION
EFFECTIVE
1. Increases accessibility
> More convenient option
> Can travel to different parts w/o car,
resolves issue of accessibility to different
places
- MRT doubled to 270km by 2020 and new
lines
- 8/10 households within 10 minute walk to
MRT station
2. Reduce EF and air pollution
- MRT carbon footprint 13.8g per person,
per km, buses 73 and cars 118
MRT= Mass Rapid Transport = metro
WEAKNESS
1. KENYA Kibera slum- negative
> Split into 4 zones, zone A,B,C,D, to
redevelop and upgrade houses, affordable
+ The new houses (upgraded zone A) are
affordable for their size
- HOWEVER people who currently reside in
Kibera slum are still unable to afford them
- People outside slum exploit cheap and large
houses with built in facilities: rent out small
rooms to those who live in the slums
http://bit.ly/2Z1qwM8= good ppt to give you an
idea = very good
WEAKNESS
1. DANDORA, NAIROBI, KENYA
> Housing for 100000 people by 1987
- HOWEVER majority of those receiving aid
were not the poorest of Nairobi’s urban
dwellers (only benefitted middle class)
- Due to building standards, cost of building
has increased: inaccessible to the poor
- Poorer dwellers turned to squatter
settlements as a result
WEAKNESS
1. Rising car ownership
> Still want cars due to prestige
- 500k private vehicles in SG
> BUT:
- Electrical car sharing: authorities appointed
Blue SG to run a fleet of 1000 cars by 2020
under national electrical vehicle (NEV) car
sharing programme
> More environmentally friendly than petrol
2. Public transport unreliability
- MRT major breakdown 14 times 2015, plus
expensive to maintain
GREEN SPACES
UK negative
HOW?
- 27,000 urban public parks
SINGAPORE positive
> Natural landscapes are vital to preserving
regional ecosystems and biodiversity
> Reduction of greenhouse gases
> Green spaces absorb and retain less heat
than concrete
- WHO: People who use public open spaces
are 3 times more likely to achieve
recommended levels of physical activity
EVALUATION
EFFECTIVE WEAKNESS
1. Suffered from steady decline in quality
> Public parks assessment: that falling local authority budgets led to closure of facilities such
as cafés and toilets, a reduction in policing and management (much of which used to be
carried out by park keepers) and the creation of banal, low-maintenance landscapes.
1. Singapore's clean and green image has 1. Lack of space and land
been a critical marketing tool in attracting - Singapore: land is expensive and
international investment and tourists competitive
- 4 nature reserves, 350 parks, rooftop > REBUTTAL : make it functional as water
greenery reduce surface runoff, make use of catchment and recreational areas
space double functionality Make it into a tourism attraction, Gardens by
the bay and botanic gardens
2. Protect biodiversity
- macritchie reservoir area:
Helped preserve the pangolin, jade tree
snail

WASTE MANAGEMENT + EVALUATION

RECYCLING
CURITIBA +
Green Swap Program
> Previously: slums (favelas) no proper waste
disposal system, roads inaccessible to garbage
lorries, trash were thrown into green spaces
and rivers
> Recycling encouraged in slums by allowing
for exchange of recycled of certain weight for
vegetables and fruits
EFFECTIVE
1. Effective manner of handling waste as
waste is recycled properly instead of being
disposed of
- Drastic improvement in environmental
quality and decrease in vermin and litter
- 20% of waste is recycled, adding 25% to
the life span of landfills.
2. Provides job opportunities for poor
WEAKNESS
1. Large amount of waste still landfilled
- In the outskirts of Curitiba, 30% of waste go
to landfills
> Causes environmental issues: carbon
monoxide and release of harmful gases due
to the burning of waste
- Bags of different waste measured by weight
and given to authorities, locals are paid in food
items like fruits and vegetables
SWEDEN +
> Circular system minimizes inputs by recycling
outputs
- 50% of household waste burnt to produce
energy at incineration plants, a cheap fuel
SINGAPORE –negative
- Offshore landfill
- 150k jobs
3. Promotes health in poor communities in
slums
1. Very successful, little output
- Only 4% of waste is landfilled and the rest
is recycled and incinerated, compared to
only 38 per cent of household waste
recycled in 1975
1. Prevents land pollution: incinerate trash
to save space, also does not use land in
country, prevent land pollution
1. Import trash
- Sweden does not produce enough burnable
waste for energy needs: importing 800,000
tons of trash a year from other European
countries including neighboring Norway
1. Long term unsustainability: Pulau
semakau [ Pulau means island] will
be filled by 2035
- Household recycling rate remained at 20%
between 2005 to 2015 despite more than 15
years of the National Recycling Programme

AIR POLLUTION EVALUATION

EFFECTIVE WEAKNESS
BEI JING, CHINA negative 1. Relocation of industries: electroplating 1. Limited efforts, other factors
> Rapid industrialisation: 70% of energy used move from from central area, all coal > Industrialisation and population growth
from burning coal, many residents exposed to burning power stations in large and medium increase demand
sulphur dioxide > smog deter investors (s$) sized cities
2. Gas cooking encouraged in households
- HOWEVER only 15% changed from coal to
gas + factories stopped on important days
to clear the skies
LOS ANGELES, USA positive
> Used to rely heavily on motor vehicles > public transport + location traps pollutants (shaped like a basin)
> Harsh regulations were implemented, carpooling was encouraged
1. Reduced air pollutants
- 20% of passenger vehicles must be pollution free, 38000 low emission vehicles made
- Particles in the air reduced by 47%, NO2 reduced by 33%

POWER= Good example to show how Los Angles air was improved by people in POWER both people and government /administration
WATER POLLUTION
TIANJIN ECO-CITY positive
> Prior to the development of the Eco-city, the
site comprised of mainly polluted water-
bodies, including a 2.6 sq km large wastewater
pond.
https://www.tianjinecocity.gov.sg/gal.htm
https://www.gov.sg/factually/content/three-
interesting-facts-about-the-sino-singapore-
tianjin-eco-city
EVALUATION
EFFECTIVE WEAKNESS
1. Treatment of water with technology 1. Expensive, not in all contexts
> Utilized new technology to filter and clean
the lead-polluted water 2. YAMUNA, NEW DELHI- polluted water
> Worked with PUB[ Public Utility
Board of Singapore] to establish
water- filtrating technology and a
wastewater
treatment plant

This city was a chinese – Singapore

collaborative effort

Toxic foam pollutes

Yamuna river
DETAILED CASE STUDY
GRAZ, AUSTRIA
1. Background (industrial centre > pollution)
a. Coprofit programme developed by Environment Department of the City of Graz, Austria in 1991
b. Aim: educating local businesses, improve production processes, reduce waste and resource consumption > increase profitability
2. Implementation
a. Voluntary, with incentives: Ecoprofit logo for marketing, access to research and support from local unis > improve process, cut
costs
b. Workshops educate managers in closed loop production techniques > companies required to appoint multi-disciplinary task
force: increase efficiency, minimise waste, maximise recycling
c. Ecoprofit logo awarded when 30% solid waste, 50% hazardous waste and air emission is reduced, renewable only when
improvements made annually
3. Effects
a. Ford assembly factory adopted changes in production processes: new technique allowed the recapture and reuse of spray paint
b. Other European cities adopted similar strategies (e.g. Kolding, Denmark: 200 companies formed Green network: commitment
to reduce pollution and improve resource efficiency)

ECONOMIC STRATEGIES
DEVELOP NEW INDUSTRIES EVALUATION
EFFECTIVE WEAKNESS
CHENGDU + 1. Creation of many jobs 1. Unemployment in other areas
> High unemployment resulting in social > Expanding industrial zones create jobs > Rural migrants (minorities) lack skills
polarization, poverty, disparity between - Sichuan Singapore hi-tech innovation needed in hi tech industries
unemployed and employed constructed in Chengdu hi-tech > REBUTTAL :
- Advent of market economy led to closure of development zone inside Tianfu area in > Other job opportunities as services and
building sites
state owned enterprise causing dismissal of 2012 are major sources of employment
workers since 1994 - Created 150k jobs

- Rates reach up to 13%

Tianfu software park

SINGAPORE +
TIANJIN ECO-CITY -/+
> Sino-Singapore joint-cooperation, $24 billion
investment
> Plan: to develop National Animation Park,
National Audio-visual park, a Green Industry
Park, an Information Technology Park
> To attract companies in new energy and new
materials sector, technology research and
development, animation and creative
industries, education and training
1. Creation of many jobs
> Creation and development of large job
market with variety, large no. of FDIs (such
as Phillips), which effectively allowed for
economy to grow
- Philips FDI, allowed 150000 jobs to enter
market (LEDC)
1. Creation of higher-end jobs
> Such as R&D
2. Income generated from investments
- Attracted S$230 million worth of
investments from Singapore-based
companies
- Makes up 46% of the Eco-city’s total
commercial investments
1. Dominated by overseas MNCs
> Counter: Local SMEs were also created in
the process, such that the economy was not
dominated by overseas MNCs
1. Lack of skilled workers and manpower
> Virtual ghost town as it has yet to draw
many people and businesses
2. Lack of development
> Empty shopping malls, no hospital facilities
3. Inaccessibility
> Inconvenient transport
- Slow development of the proposed railway
track, take at least 30 minutes to enter the
city centre of Tianjin

CONTROL MIGRATION STRATEGIES

HUKOU SYSTEM EVALUATION
EFFECTIVE WEAKNESS
CHINA + 1. Reduce immigration 1. Rural - urban divide widened, not enough jobs and money
WHY? into cities 2. Difficult to attain Hukou, caused illegal smuggling etc.
> Rapid urban growth due to Rural 3. Children could not get education/proper healthcare etc.
to urban migration (wellbeing was not ensured for those without hukou)
HOW? 4. Only authoritarian regime can implement
- Hukou system: refer to migration policies 5. ‘Rat tribe’ or the urban underclass : 300k