Ambio

, Volume 45, Issue 5, pp 567–580 | Cite as

An urban approach to planetary boundaries

  • Daniel Hoornweg
  • Mehdi Hosseini
  • Christopher Kennedy
  • Azin Behdadi
Report

Abstract

The achievement of global sustainable development goals subject to planetary boundaries will mostly be determined by cities as they drive cultures, economies, material use, and waste generation. Locally relevant, applied and quantitative methodologies are critical to capture the complexity of urban infrastructure systems, global inter-connections, and to monitor local and global progress toward sustainability. An urban monitoring (and communications) tool is presented here illustrating that a city-based approach to sustainable development is possible. Following efforts to define and quantify safe planetary boundaries in areas such as climate change, biosphere integrity, and freshwater use, this paper modifies the methodology to propose boundaries from a city’s perspective. Socio-economic boundaries, or targets, largely derived from the Sustainable Development Goals are added to bio-physical boundaries. Issues such as data availability, city priorities, and ease of implementation are considered. The framework is trialed for Toronto, Shanghai, Sao Paulo, Mumbai, and Dakar, as well as aggregated for the world’s larger cities. The methodology provides an important tool for cities to play a more fulsome and active role in global sustainable development.

Keywords

Sustainability Planetary boundaries Bio-physical and socio-economic limits Urbanization Cities 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Jeffery Boyce and Richard Marceau Research Chairs at University of Ontario Institute of Technology (UOIT). The approach was vetted by a Global Environment Facility working group meeting August, 2014 and the International Society of Industrial Ecology (ISIE) Conference, July 2015, Surrey, UK.

Supplementary material

13280_2016_764_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (857 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 858 kb)

References

  1. Ahern, J. 2013. Urban landscape sustainability and resilience: The promise and challenges of integrating ecology with urban planning and design. Landscape Ecology 28: 1203–1212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Banister, D. 2012. Assessing the reality—transport and land use planning to achieve sustainability. The Journal of Transport and Land Use 5: 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bechtel, M.M., and K.F. Scheve. 2013. Mass support for global climate agreements depends on institutional design. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 110: 13763–13768.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bettencourt, L., and G. West. 2010. A unified theory of urban living. Nature 467: 912–913.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blackburn, S., and M. Pelling. 2014. Coastal megacities: Risks and opportunities. Global Change 82: 8–11.Google Scholar
  6. Committee on Climate Change (CCC). 2014. Setting a target for emission reduction. Retrieved August 7, 2014, from http://www.theccc.org.uk/tackling-climate-change/the-science-of-climate-change/setting-a-target-for-emission-reduction/.
  7. Dahl, A.L. 2012. Achievements and gaps in indicators for sustainability. Ecological Indicators 17: 14–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dearing, J.A., R. Wang, K. Zhang, J.G. Dyke, H. Haberl, M.S. Hossain, P.G. Langdon, T.M. Lenton, et al. 2014. Safe and just operating spaces for regional social-ecological systems. Global Environmental Change 28: 227–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. de Brito Jr., I., B.C. Kawasaki, A. Leiras, and H.T.Y. Yoshizaki. 2011. The profile of the population affected by natural disasters in Brazil. POMS 23rd Annual Conference, Report 025-1388.Google Scholar
  10. Demographia 2006. World urban population density by country & area. Retrieved August, 28, 2014, from http://www.demographia.com/db-intlua-area2000.htm.
  11. Duren, R.M., and C.E. Miller. 2012. Measuring the carbon emissions of megacities. Nature Climate Change 2: 560–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gerst, M., P. Raskin, and J. Rockström. 2013. Contours of a resilient global future. Sustainability 6: 123–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gnanapragasam, N.V., B.V. Reddy, and M.A. Rosen. 2010. A methodology for assessing the sustainability of hydrogen production from solid fuels. Sustainability 2: 1472–1491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Grimm, N., S. Faeth, N. Golubiewski, C. Redman, J. Wu, X. Bai, and J. Briggs. 2008. Global change and the ecology of cities. Science 318: 756–760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Guha-Sapir, D., and P. Hoyois. 2013. Disaster deaths: Proposed indicators for monitoring disaster-related mortality. In Disaster risk management in post-2015 development goals: Potential targets and indicators Google Scholar
  16. Guha-Sapir, D., P. Hoyois, and R. Below. 2013. Annual disaster statistical review 2012: The numbers and trends. Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED).Google Scholar
  17. Hoornweg, D., L. Sugar, and L.T. Gomez. 2011. Cities and greenhouse gas emissions: Moving forward. Environment & Urbanization 23(1): 207–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hoornweg, D., and M. Freire. 2013. Building sustainability in an urbanizing world. The World Bank Urban Development Series Knowledge Papers, No. 17, Washington, USA.Google Scholar
  19. Hoornweg, D., and K. Pope. 2013. Socioeconomic pathways and regional distribution of the world’s 101 largest cities. Global Cities Institute Working Paper No. 04.Google Scholar
  20. International Energy Agency (IEA). 2011. World energy outlook—energy for all. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)/IEA, Paris, France.Google Scholar
  21. International Finance Corporation (IFC). 2014. Economy rankings. Retrieved August, 14, 2014, from http://www.doingbusiness.org/rankings.
  22. International Labour Organization (ILO). 2013. Global youth unemployment trends and projections from 2007 to 2013. Retrieved August, 14, 2014, from http://www.ilo.org/global/about-the-ilo/multimedia/maps-and-charts/WCMS_212430/lang–en/index.htm.
  23. International Standardazation Organization (ISO). 2014. Sustainable development in communities: City indicators for service delivery and quality of life. ISO, Report 37120, Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar
  24. International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). 2014. The IUCN red list of threatened species. Retrieved August, 19, 2014, from http://www.iucnredlist.org/about/summary-statistics#Tables_1_2.
  25. Internet Live Stats. 2014. Internet users. Retrieved August, 14, 2014, from http://www.internetlivestats.com/internet-users/.
  26. Kennedy, C.A., A. Ramaswami, S. Carney, and S. Dhakal. 2011. Greenhouse gas emissions baseline for global cities and metropolitan regions. In Cities and climate change: Responding to an Urent Agenda.Google Scholar
  27. Kennedy, C.A., N. Ibrahim, I. Stewart, A. Fachini, and R. Mele. 2014. An urban metabolism survey design for megacities. Toronto: University of Toronto and Enel Foundation.Google Scholar
  28. MSW Management. 2014. Municipality waste management. Retrieved August, 14, 2014, from http://www.mswmanagement.com/MSW/MSWhome.aspx.
  29. Newman, P., and I. Jennings. 2008. Cities as sustainable ecosystems: Principles and practices. Washington: Island Press.Google Scholar
  30. Nordhaus, T., M. Shellenberger, and L. Blomqvist. 2012. The planetary boundaries hypothesis: A review of the evidence. Oakland: Breakthrough Institute.Google Scholar
  31. Raworth, K. 2012. A safe and just space for humanity. Oxford: Oxfam International.Google Scholar
  32. Rockstrom, J., W. Steffen, K. Noone, A. Persson, F.S. Chapin, E.F. Lambin, T.M. Lenton, M. Scheffer, et al. 2009. A safe operating space for humanity. Nature 461: 472–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rosen, M.A. 2012. Engineering sustainability: A technical approach to sustainability. Sustainability 4: 2270–2292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Steffen, W., K. Richardson, J. Rockström, S.E. Cornell, I. Fetzer, E.M. Bennett, R. Biggs, S.R. Carpenter, et al. 2015. Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet. Science 327: 6223.Google Scholar
  35. Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform. 2014. Sustainable development goals. Retrieved August, 29, 2014, from http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/?menu=1300.
  36. Transparency International. 2014. Corruption perceptions index 2013.Google Scholar
  37. UNICEF and World Health Organization (WHO). 2012. Progress on drinking water and sanitation 2012 update. UNICEF-WHO, New York, USA.Google Scholar
  38. United Nations. 2010. The World’s Women 2010: Trends and statistics. United Nations, New York, USA.Google Scholar
  39. United Nations. 2013. The millennium development goals report. United Nations, Report 13-26318, New York, USA.Google Scholar
  40. United Nations. 2014. World urbanization prospects. Department of Economic and Social Affairs.Google Scholar
  41. United Nations. 2015. Sustainable development goals.Google Scholar
  42. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNDOC). 2014. Global study on homicide 2013: Trends, contexts, data. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, Vienna, AustriaGoogle Scholar
  43. Valipour, M., M. Ahmadi, M. Raeini-Sarjaz, M. Sefidkouhi, A. Shahnazari, R. Fazlola, and A. Darzi- Naftchali. 2015. Agricultural water management in the world during past half century. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science 61(5): 657–678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wang, H.G., M. Montoliu-Munoz, and N.F.D. Gueye. 2009. Preparing to manage natural hazards and climate change risks in Dakar, Senegal: A spatial and institutional approach. The World Bank.Google Scholar
  45. World Bank. 2000. Senegal urban mobility improvement project. Report 20345-SE.Google Scholar
  46. World Bank. 2010. World development report: Development and climate change.Google Scholar
  47. World Bank. 2011. World development report: Gender equality and development.Google Scholar
  48. World Resources Institute (WRI) and World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD). 2011a. Corporate value chain (scope 3) accounting and reporting standard. WRI and WBCSD, Conches-Geneva, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  49. World Resources Institute (WRI) and World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD). 2011b. Greenhouse gas protocol product standard adopted by the sustainability consortium. WRI and WBCSD, Conches-Geneva, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  50. World Wildlife Fund (WWF). 2014. Living planet report 2014. WWF, Gland, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Energy Systems and Nuclear ScienceUniversity of Ontario Institute of TechnologyOshawaCanada
  2. 2.Faculty of EngineeringUniversity of VictoriaVictoriaCanada

Personalised recommendations