Smart Cities as Engines of Sustainable Growth

Dennis Frenchman, Leventhal Professor of Urban Design and Planning Michael Joroff, Senior Lecturer Allison Albericci, editor Massachusetts Institute of Technology prepared for the World Bank Institute June 14, 2011 The 21st century is witnessing urbanization at an unprecedented rate. New cities are rising to meet the demands of expanding populations seeking a higher quality of life, just as city-builders worldwide begin to realize the stark ramifications of reproducing outdated urban models on a global scale. How to meet the challenges of doing better, for more people, using fewer resources? Recent trends in digital technology may offer some clues toward harnessing our cities potential as the new engines of sustainable growth. This paper challenges city planners, policy-makers and developers to think about urban growth in the context of powerful new forces and opportunities that didnt exist in the past. It draws upon current research at MIT and elsewhere involving advanced, city-scale development, and the interrelationships among sustainability, digital technology, and city design.

Overview
After three decades of alarm over climate change and natural resource depletion, real measureable progress towards sustainable development remains elusive. To date, the global policy debate has primarily focused on how to promote sustainable development, most often defined as economic growth achieved through ever-cleaner industrial and energy production. In this paper we also consider the other side of development: the physical and functional organization of the city that influences all human activity and the efficiency of resource consumption. The way in which cities are organized and operated has an enormous impact

on economic growth, energy requirements, natural systems, and quality of life, yet thus far there has been little policy discussion, and even less action to impel more sustainable (and ultimately more productive) forms of urban development. The stakes are exceedingly high. According to UN-HABITAT, the worlds cities emit almost 80% of global carbon dioxide (UN-HABITAT, 2005), leading the UKs Tyndall Center for Climate Change Research to declare, the fate of the Earths climate is intrinsically linked to how our cities develop over the coming decades. (Oliver, 2007) The operative word in this statement is how since not all forms of urban development

are equal some are more efficient, consume less, and in the future will be more productive than others. Over the long term, the total productive potential of any city or industry is inexorably linked to efficient use of resources, with vital implications. As city-builders worldwide begin to wrestle with such realizations, urbanization in the developing world continues to accelerate. The United Nations estimates that China alone will need to build new cities accommodating over 350 million people in the next 20 years (McKinsey, 2009; 32). Over the same period, 250 million new urban dwellers are expected in India (McKinsey, 2010; 37) and 380 million in Africa (United Nations, 2008; 4). The amount of development needed to meet this demand will organize patterns of human behavior, movement, business operations, and urban systems that will persist for decades, if not centuries. Astonishingly, unless new strategies are adopted, much of this growth will be constructed using a pattern of city form invented in the early 20th century when, fuel was cheap, land was open, the air was clean, and global population was one fifth of what it is projected to be in 2050. The early 20th century city was also designed for fundamentally different types of economic activity, modes of production, employment, and life choices. We understand from experience in developed countries that this kind of city, replicated on a mass scale, consumes vast quantities of resources and is highly inefficient. Over time, this excessive consumption will affect the environment, but it will also sap the capacity of cities to invest in more economically-productive 21st century enterprises. If more sustainable forms can be deployed, cities will reap enormous environmental, social, and economic benefits at

virtually no additional cost (since development would occur under any circumstances). In other areas of human development, organizational structures are now changing dramatically. New models of business, logistics, social interaction, and planning are emerging in part because of the failure of obsolete systems, and in part because of opportunities provided by 21st century digital systems and advanced communication technologies that are vastly more potent. These technologies can and will increasingly be applied to the planning and organization of cities, offering a new paradigm of more productive and sustainable growth. This scenario raises some fundamental questions:

What does it mean to plan sustainable cities in the 21st century context? Are new urban forms, information, and organizational arrangements needed? Given the unprecedented rate of change and complex challenges that cities now face, are traditional plans and processes established in more stable times still effective? Do those responsible for our cities now and in the future need merely to perform current tasks better or do they need to be doing something else, something transformative, to achieve sustainable growth?

These questions highlight the challenges to achieving large scale, sustainable urban development in the 21st century. Some concern the physical qualities of environment, while others speak to the nature of organizations and businesses that will plan and operate it, and still others address the integration of new forms of digital information and feedback. In all, we have identified seven key challenges to achieving smart, sustainable urban growth. These challenges 2

address the evolving form and function of cities, the processes employed in their planning and operation, and new organizational arrangements required for city-making in this century. Challenge 1: Abandoning the Modernist Ideal, in which resources were plentiful and efficiency was achieved through standardization, repetition, and segregation of functions typically oriented around the automobile. The 21st century city requires the integration of uses, the blending physical and virtual venues, and the balancing of complex interrelationships among building use, spatial organization, and travel behavior. Challenge 2: Building a Networked Environment, in which proliferating digital technology enables a more efficient approach to city making, whereby physical, social, and economic systems are interrelated and interdependent. Digital technology is changing both the city-making process and the way in which people use cities connecting them to infrastructure, enterprises, and their environment as never before. Challenge 3: City Making as a Platform of Innovation, where experimentation, feedback and refinement processes are incorporated into everyday development and urban operation. Opportunities to integrate new, sustainable technologies and to prototype new patterns of work, social networking and service provision are cropping up in all city venues. Challenge 4: City Making as a Platform for Meaning, where cities use local knowledge and culture as a source of inspiration. This tradition is enhanced by ubiquitous communications and advanced information technology, whereby media amplifies the unique narrative of a people and their environment, cultivating meaning for residents and visitors.

Challenge 5: Managing Risk through Agility, when sustainable growth is pushed to the forefront by risks that cities now face in terms of growth, resource depletion and climate change. These factors must now be recognized by city planners and managed through times of uncertainty. Challenge 6: City Planning in Fast Time, when managing urbanization requires unprecedented speed in marshaling forces of development, organizing players, analyzing context, developing concepts and plans, incorporating public feedback, and implementing projects. As this pace intensifies, city planning and building processes will be compressed into ever-tighter timelines, for which traditional, sequential development processes are inadequate. Challenge 7: Growing the City Making Enterprise, to meet the new challenges and the faster pace of transformative urban development. This requires new, synergistic alliances among technology companies and universities (both newcomers to the city-shaping process, and traditional planning and development entities. Such expanded alliances portend the emergence of a new city- making industry, suited to the unique needs of different regions and their cities. These challenges are discussed in more detail on the following pages.

Challenge 1: Abandoning the Modernist Ideal

By in large, the patterns of urbanization witnessed in the developing world today are versions of the modernist city designed in the 1920s to reflect the ideals of industrialization and to accommodate the (then new) technology of the automobile. Rooted in the Fordist mindset where efficiency was achieved through standardization, repetition, and the segregation of functions modernist cities were planned with separated housing estates consisting of identical buildings, shopping centers, recreation parks, office and industrial districts, all organized within a vast undifferentiated space where the car was free to roam. In this paradigm whether manifested as urban towers-in-a-park or suburban sprawl it is machines that link together the various activities of daily living. It is no surprise then that this form of city is particularly wasteful in terms resource consumption. A study for the Energy Foundation on Making the Clean Energy City in China, now underway at MIT (Frenchman and Zegras, 2010), has demonstrated the relationship between urban design and energy performance in prototypical neighborhood developments (using the city of Jinan as a test case). The study is looking for the first time at the consumption of energy by people living in different urban forms, involving complex interrelationships among building operations, spatial organization, construction, and travel behavior. All things equal, the modern high-rise tower-in-a-park form that we see proliferating across China (and elsewhere in the developing world) consumes nearly twice as much energy as traditional mixed use neighborhoods at similar densities developed on city blocks. Other studies have shown that modernist, sprawled, low rise, single use suburban developments dependent on

the car are equally consumptive. In an era of dwindling resources and rising greenhouse gases, the modernist city (and lifestyle) conceived as progressive in the 1920s is instead highly inefficient and ultimately untenable. Many developing countries are now adopting ambitious policy goals for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and the impact of economic activities on the environment. For example, China aims to improve the energy efficiency of its economic output by up to 45% over 2005 by the year 2020; India, by 25%; Brazil by 39%; Mexico by 30%. (WRI, 2010) The means identified to reach these goals focus mainly on cleaner energy and industrial production. However, while conservation is called for, the full impact of urban form as the driver of consumption has hardly been considered. This may be attributed to a lack of knowledge among policy- makers about the built environment in general, but is primarily due to a blind embrace of the modernist ideal as the only progressive way to build. We will need to abandon the singular adherence to this ideal in favor of more diverse modes of city-making if the policy goals are to be reached. Left to market forces, a shift in the dominant pattern of development may eventually occur on its own, due to rising energy costs, demographic trends, and changing modes of work and living. But today we are in a race with time, since urbanization once built will establish patterns of activity and human behavior that will last far into the future as long as the environment exists (retrofit is impossible at this scale). Furthermore, we will have lost the opportunity to improve sustainability at virtually no cost, since growth will occur under any circumstances. To jumpstart the transformation, a new policy regime is needed.

 However, if we look at current policy and practice related to sustainability and the built environment, almost all effort has been focused on the scale of the individual building. We have Energy Star in the US offering incentives for insulated windows, for example, the voluntary LEED rating system for sustainability, and other efforts worldwide. While important, such measures are on track to reduce total energy consumption by just 1-2% (Block, 2004; 87-99). But savings from even the most efficient buildings mean little if they are set within an inefficient urban context. To illustrate the point, the energy savings offered by, say, more efficient air- conditioners, amount to little if occupants must use elevators and private cars just to get a loaf of bread. To grow sustainable cities, we need to widen the frame of policy and practice to the scale of urban development that is the neighborhood scale. This is the scale at which urbanization is actually happening one (ever larger) project at a time. While we can argue to abandon the modernist ideal of city making, from a policy perspective what is there to replace it with? At present, there is no ideal model for the best form of sustainable city nor do we advocate one. In rush to urbanize, any model deemed to be the right model stands to be repeated endlessly, to the detriment of cultural diversity, livability, and we will argue later, to sustainability itself. The concept that environmental policy should be based on model development forms or minimum design standards is in itself a modernist invention, the limitations of which are clear when we observe the uniform character of large scale, rapid growth. Across the globe from roads, to water systems, to housing the minimum standard becomes the maximum provided and endemic flaws are repeated over and over.

In the case of sustainable development, the challenge is to devise more ways of achieving it not fewer that may vary from site to site, city to city, climate to climate. In fact, there are many avenues to sustainability, as shown in a global scan of clean energy neighborhoods recently conducted by MIT (Frenchman and Zegras, 2010; 38). The study identified six prototypical urban forms with eleven variations, and more in the making. Each prototype embodies a complex set of tradeoffs among movement, materials, operations, and organization to achieve sustainability. To facilitate such diversity, MIT has proposed to create a set of tools and measures of development performance such as an Energy Pro- forma that could be broadly adopted. The tools will enable the energy performance of projects to be quantitatively compared so that policy for sustainable urban development may be established, while leaving local communities, developers and designers to create their own place-specific solutions. Beyond the environmental benefits, this is also a way to encourage testing and experimentation leading to new approaches that are sorely needed at this juncture. And, as we suggest in the next sections, the realm for experimentation and the avenues to achieve sustainable urban development have expanded dramatically from the modernist era.

Modernist development in Shanghai. (The Perfect Image)

Challenge 2: Building a Networked Environment

The advent and proliferation of digital technology offers an alternative, more efficient approach to city making, in which physical, social, and economic systems are interrelated and interdependent. In the process, digital technology changes how people use cities, connecting them to infrastructure, enterprises, and their environment as never before. This is in contrast to the 20th century ideal of city-making based on spatial separation of urban functions into districts that require travel to enable even the most basic processes of daily life and the functioning of industry and commerce. The 21st century paradigm is to concentrate and mix people in highly interconnected ways, both physically and digitally. This has many advantages for sustainability and productivity:

organizations can adjust their behavior and consumption in real time. It eliminates the embodied and operational energy that would be required to construct and maintain parts of the city that are no longer needed because their functions have been replaced by digital transactions in virtual venues.

It reduces the amount of travel needed for daily life, since many functions from shopping to business meetings to medical consultations can take place on line; It encourages walking as a primary mode of transportation, since services and social interactions that benefit from propinquity can be located nearby as part of the urban mix as was the case in pre-modern cities and neighborhoods; Urban systems traffic flow, waste removal, public lighting, etc. can be managed digitally in real time to provide services only when and where needed, rather than over- engineered to accommodate peak demands; Built spaces served by digital media become more agile and can serve multiple functions, intensifying their use. Feedback on performance can be built into the system, so that people and

The potential efficiencies to be gained by such integrations of the digital and physical realms are remarkable. For example, it has been estimated that approximately 30% of the fuel used by cars in cities comes from searching for parking (SFMTA, 2010). Smart parking systems can eliminate this inefficiency by assigning parking, which is dynamically priced, then guiding drivers to their spaces. Beyond this, managed street systems can sense the flow of traffic, and change signage and lane markings to maximize utilization of the system. In an MIT Media Lab project sponsored by General Motors, electric vehicles can fold and stack at the curb, where they are recharged, and mobility is purchased on demand, as from a vending machine. These shared electric vehicles consume much less energy than conventional cars, but also consume much less parking and road space up to 25% less, since they take up less space, and fewer are needed to provide equivalent levels of service (Mitchell, Borroni-Bird and Burns, 2010). Such agile infrastructure can make our day- to-day interaction with the city both more efficient and more productive (in terms of land and resources consumed). In existing cities, digital systems can achieve these benefits at vastly less cost than rebuilding or expanding physical infrastructure the only way to improve services in the past. In contemporary urbanization, digital systems facilitate higher density environments

that finely mix the functions of living, working, learning, and recreation. William J. Mitchell contrasted 20th century urban systems of distribution, processing, and waste disposal which deliver standardized services on a mass scale, with 21st century digital infrastructures which are small, unobtrusive, and can respond individually to different people and places (Frenchman, Amendola, Beamish and Mitchell, 2009). The two generations of systems satisfy urban functions in different ways the former by coordinated movements in which most people live, work, and play on the same schedule traveling to discrete areas of the city for each separate function; the latter by disaggregated movements and locating the activities of life simultaneously in space and time, linked by asynchronous digital media. This time-share strategy increases spatial productivity, since space may be used for multiple purposes on a more or less continuous basis, rather than dedicated to a singular purpose and therefore vacant most of the time. The enormous opportunities for cost savings, efficiency gains, and increased personal satisfaction have not been lost on cities, or technology companies. For example, Cisco Systems has invested heavily in its Connected Cities initiative and is partnering with several cities world-wide to begin implementation:
Cisco envisages a future where successful communities and cities will run on networked information, and where information technology will help the world better manage its energy and environmental challenges. Cities of the future, and many innovative cities now, are addressing the issues and opportunities of this new world by thinking about the network as the platform for economic development, better city management and an improved quality of life for citizens. Everything connected to the network in

these smart+connected communities can be greener. (Wim Elfrink, chief globalization officer and executive vice president, 2009)

The company projects that cities may reduce overall energy consumption by as much as 30% through online transactions and new forms of collaboration. IBM has made a similar business commitment with its Smarter Cities program, advancing solutions for intelligent transportation, education, development, utilities, healthcare, and public safety:
Rising to the challenges and threats to sustainability requires a city to be more than just focused or efficient; it will require the next generation of city to emerge one based on smarter systems. These systems are interconnected people and objects can interact in entirely new ways. These systems are instrumented the exact condition of the systems different parts can be measured. These systems are intelligent cities can respond to changes quickly and accurately, and get better results by predicting and optimizing for future events. (Dirks and Keeling 2010, 13)

Technology companies see cities as markets in which they can: 1) build the wired and wireless infrastructure that make cities digital; 2) design and manage infrastructure systems; and, 3) provide applications that digitally enhance an array government and private services to the public. There should be little surprise in this interest: the investment bank CIBC, estimates that cities will spend $30 trillion on such infrastructure over the next 30 years (Boudreau, 9 June 2010).

Challenge 3: City-making as a Platform for Innovation

As the pace of growth and change accelerates, the traditional ways that cities adapt are becoming less and less viable. In the past, new organizations and new forms of infrastructure, like the urban expressway, took a generation or more to be designed, accepted, and incorporated into cities. Today we find experimentation and feedback being incorporated into the act of everyday development. Not just in the exotic high- end projects, but in common places as well. Opportunities to integrate new sustainable technologies and businesses are cropping up in all venues of the city. Evidence of this paradigm shift can be found in the growing network of cities that call themselves living laboratories. Seeking greater adaptability, cities see their urban fabric as a testing ground for open-ended experimentation, inviting businesses, institutions, even users to propose innovations, test prototypes and evaluate multiple solutions. Among the early living labs was Arabianranta in Helsinki, where residents, businesses, and schools linked themselves into a new form of digital-physical community termed the Virtual Village integrating the internet, cell phones, and digital TV. In three years, the European Network of Living Labs has grown from a handful of projects into a formal association of 212 cities, with a staff headquartered in Brussels (ENOLL, 2010). The idea of using the city as a platform for invention is not new. Urban innovation has typically emerged during periods of rapid technological and social change. In the 1820s, for example, the mill town of Lowell, MA embodied a new form of city, designed and developed by early corporations to facilitate water-powered

industrial production. Meticulously divided into functional zones, with daily life regulated by the clock, raw materials were converted into printed cloth in the worlds first modern factories. The Lowell System was fed by inventions such as the turbine and a sophisticated energy distribution system, products of the first technology laboratories. The new industrial system in Lowell was paralleled by a new social order in which institutions the earliest high school, savings banks, and unions were developed to meet the needs of mill girls separated from their families to work in the factories. This combination of capital, energy, and technology, within a new social and physical order created an engine of economic growth unparalleled in its time. Working condition and labor exploitation issues notwithstanding, Lowell became one of the most competitive cities on the planet developing from open fields to a city of almost 50,000 within 20 years.

Lowell, MA, c1875.

Today, urbanization is occurring more rapidly and on a much larger scale. Observers point in awe to China and India, which will need to build thousands of cities over the next 20 years. It is natural to assume that these will be planned like the modernist cities we know but perhaps not. If we consider another statistic of urbanization, that

India is adding 20 million mobile phones per month, another picture begins to emerge (Lacy, 13 May 2010). The roll-out of this new urban infrastructure is occurring at unprecedented speed, yet remarkably, without any plan. As with Lowell, the new technology brings powerful capabilities to change social interactions, ways of doing business, and the form of urban life. Indications that business may not be as usual in India can be seen in the urban innovations that are multiplying along with the phones. To pick an example, SMSONE provides incoming text messages on very local news to poor people living in rural villages: The weather will be cool todays crop prices at the market are low the bus is coming now the water will be turned on in ten minutes. Information is supplied by an entrepreneurial network of youth reporters, providing them a source of income supported by local advertising, itself a service. Since its establishment just a few years ago, SMSONE now counts over 400,000 readers in 400 communities (Lacy, 30 Nov. 2009). The success of SMSONE has been enabled by another new company, VNL which has developed a very cheap, rock solid durable, solar- powered microwave station that almost anyone can assemble and deploy. The devices extend existing mobile service footprints, enabling phone service in even the most remote locations at very low cost. Cited as one of the Worlds 50 Most Innovative Companies by FAST Company, VNL is now rolling out the technology in Latin America and has plans to expand into major cities, challenging traditional providers. Examples such as these defy the notion dating back to Lowell that urban innovation is controlled by the powerful and must be delivered from the top down. Digital infrastructure offers a different paradigm because it is ubiquitous. The

challenge for city builders public and private is to view the entire city as both a market and a source for technological innovation. The extents of this challenge multiply when one considers that all urban systems are becoming intelligent from elevators to taxis, sewers to streetlights. Each system is being transformed through the addition of sensors and wireless access enabling management and coordination in real time. Not only is this is a vastly more efficient, sustainable way to operate the city, but also it presents new paradigms for services and products that we now find being tested in the public realm. In the Seoul Digital Media City, for example, LG is experimenting with intelligent streetlights that respond to people and events; in Zaragoza, Spain, digitally responsive water has become an activator of public spaces; and highly intelligent bus systems are being deployed in cities from Bogota, Columbia to Florence, Italy. Across the globe, these scattered efforts are multiplying and will accumulate over time to form a different kind of city.

VNL base station and network strategy. (VNL)

Challenge 4: City-making as a Platform for Meaning

One of the persistent complaints about modernist development is that it all looks the same from Shenzhen to Abu Dhabi, Bangalore to LA. This is more than an aesthetic observation. By valuing the universality of standardized appearance and performance, the modernist city seeks to erase differences and eschew local meaning. In contrast, the emerging digital city seeks out local knowledge and culture as a source of value and inspiration. This is a consequence of ubiquitous communications and advanced media that can transmit local content immediately across the planet. Through transmission, the unique narrative of a people and their environment is imbued with amplified meaning both for residents and for a potential global audience. As David Harvey first observed, information technology is encouraging communities to return to their pre- modern roots, when environments were individually shaped by local inhabitants and culture (Harvey, 1990; 285-307). The challenge for city-makers is to harness this rediscovered source of value as an engine for positive economic growth. In research on New Century Cities, we found that a strong narrative is a key tool of integration, a central function of the new city-making industry:
As the urbanization, growth and development process becomes more fragmented, the need for a narrative to coalesce the enterprise becomes more important. All of the advanced NCC projects we have studied have such a narrative. More flexible than a master plan, more inspired than guidelines, narratives speak to the purpose of a project beyond the bricks and the mortar. It is the antidote to uniformity and standardization

In the hands of a skilled integrator, the narrative becomes a well-spring of creative ideas that serves the project as a whole, even as it respects the objectives of individual stakeholders. (Joroff, Frenchman and Rojas, 2009; 9)

Contemporary urban narratives are moving beyond traditional themes to produce rich and varied resources for growth. The massive new development twofour54 in Abu Dhabi, for example, is driven by such a narrative:
...to enable the development of world class Arabic media and entertainment content, by Arabs for Arabs, and to position Abu Dhabi as a regional center of excellence across all media platforms, including film, broadcast, music, digital media, events, gaming and publishing A symbol of Abu Dhabis commitment to deliver on the Emirates 2030 economic vision, (Joroff, Frenchman and Rojas, 2009; 9)

which is to move beyond oil into more diversified 21st century economic growth. This narrative in turn has helped to shape the institutions of the city and give meaning to its innovative public realm, which is being conceived as a setting not only for day-to-day activities but also for media production engaging those who live, work, and visit the site in both experiencing and making contemporary Arabian culture. Such a participatory undertaking is only possible through digital technology. Twofour54 is just one of a collection of large scale, media themed projects now under construction, including: Digital Media City in Seoul, on track to house 66,000 media workers and 20,000 residents by 2014; MediaCity:UK, near Manchester where the BBC is moving its central operations from London; and the Digital Creative City being planned around the film industry in Mexico. Elsewhere, new communities and

10

industry clusters are emerging around other narratives: Arabianranta, mentioned earlier, grew around the story of Finish art and design. One North, in Singapore is being built around the theme of life sciences. Masdar, in Abu Dhabi is striving to become a global cluster of clean- technology industries and research. The message of these projects is that to create value in urbanization, the narrative meaning counts on several levels. First, it can assist in differentiating the project from the sea of anonymous development; second, it can shape a cluster of businesses and industries that will provide jobs and economic growth. Third and perhaps most importantly, in an increasingly competitive global labor market, a strong narrative can help attract skilled professionals to live in the place, thus cultivating social capital. In short, a strong narrative can help to unite residents, businesses, students and others into a functioning community with shared meaning and purpose. It is relevant to note that the theme of sustainability in one form or another is increasingly prevalent in new urban narratives. All of the projects mentioned above describe themselves as highly sustainable developments, with strong justification. Seoul DMC is powered by methane gas from the former landfill on which it is built; Media City: UK is the worlds first BREEAM community (a globally recognized assessment of sustainability); and Masdar is proposed to become the first zero emission city, powered by photovoltaics, and excluding automobiles. While admittedly these are specialized examples, they suggest that the integration of sustainable growth into the place narrative is important if broad advancement towards more efficient, productive urbanization is to be achieved.

Particularly important is the impact narratives can have on human and organizational behavior, a critical factor in the overall sustainability equation. In MITs study of clean energy communities world-wide, it was found that the most successful cases engaged people directly in the program of reducing energy use (Frenchman and Zegras, 2010; 48). To do this, communities focused on making energy consumption and performance visible in the public realm, while obtaining feedback from people on their level of comfort and satisfaction. The same digital media and communications that are encouraging the development of local narratives can simultaneously be harnessed as mediums of feedback and interaction to shape the attitudes and behavior of people and groups. Many studies have shown that such real-time engagement can change peoples energy behavior (Darby, 2006; 3). And so, for the sustainable narrative to succeed, it needs to be personalized. Inhabitants need to feel that what they do matters.

Advanced user interface for responsive energy feedback. (Masdar)

11

Challenge 5: Managing Risk through Agility

The narrative of sustainable growth is being pushed to the forefront by the unprecedented risks that cities now face. Foremost among these is the sheer scale of urbanization, itself. The task of developing homes, water, sanitation, transport and employment will eclipse all former waves of city making. Another major risk is posed by climate change, with its dual consequences: sea level rise most urbanized areas are on the seacoast and increasingly powerful weather incidents floods, storms, and drought (Rosenweig, et al, 2009; 24). The challenge of confronting these intensified risks with diminishing resources of land, water, food, and fuel is unprecedented. As cities grew in the past, they learned to confront existential challenges through increasingly large-scale engineering and mechanical systems: higher flood walls, larger landfills, wider highways, more extensive water and sewer systems, taller housing projects each designed and managed by a different organization seeking to maximize its particular objectives and minimize risk of failure. Many observers have suggested that we may now be reaching the limits of this paradigm. From traffic gridlock in Beijing to breeched levees in New Orleans, there is ample evidence of the limitations inherent in modernist forms of infrastructure. Economic and political forces often lay behind these situations, but just as often they occur because engineering design and location decisions are made from singular points of view, without due regard to systemic consequences. This same lack of regard for interdependency among disparate functional elements marks the underperformance of modern cities in general, even as they now seek to become more sustainable.

An alternative vision would see cities that are integrated, agile, responsive and adaptive to changing conditions, either drastic or gradual, that will inevitably come behaving more like living systems than inanimate objects. But to achieve this vision would demand much greater levels of integration in the design, management, and real- time operation of urban systems than we currently have. This can only be provided by inserting the equivalent of a nervous system into the city. In a sense, such systems are now being devised and implemented as digital capabilities are introduced across the whole spectrum of urban functions. As with living things, this nervous system will enable not only more agile management of functions, but also a more agile physical structure enhancing performance and reducing risk. From a management perspective, agile development aims to avoid both failure and underperformance, not by seeking perfection in plans or actions (indeed, agile approaches understand that this is not possible) but by building flexibility and resiliency into structures and organizational responses. The key objective is to anticipate underperformance and missed targets even if their precise nature and timing cannot be predicted and be ready to respond and adapt. Agile development also anticipates continuous improvement. It begins with stakeholders collaborating in a rigorous, systemic co-design of interrelated elements so that each entity is aware of the assumptions that underlay the plan and the interrelations among elements. This is the cornerstone of agility. Launching prototypes and rehearsals in situ, and learning from the outcomes, prepares the parties to act in

12

concert if problems arise, and strengthens their ability to co-create as projects progress. The key ingredients of this paradigm are: transparency, monitoring, feedback, and the ability to quickly adapt to changing circumstances. Among these, transparency of information is the most essential. Systemic interrelationships and organizational interdependencies need to be apparent to provide a base of mutually shared knowledge around which disparate groups can come together to develop strategies and to act in ways that are lean, fast, and innovative. Co-creation similarly lays the groundwork for multiple parties to engage one another across functional and jurisdictional lines. Participants gain common knowledge which helps to build shared ability and responsibility for outcomes among stakeholders and provides guideposts for system operation and recovery. This knowledge and shared ownership of ideas helps to eliminate the fragmentation of interests that frequently occurs between government and the private sector organizations. At the same time, roles and responsibilities are clarified, making it easier to execute the agreements and processes that align interests and priorities. Alliances are enhanced. From a design perspective, agile urban development offers a way of stepping back from the dilemma of ever-larger infrastructure, which has become increasingly expensive to build and maintain, and ever more intrusive as wider highways cut up the landscape and taller dikes separate people from their natural settings. By contrast, agile development seeks to understand and work with nature rather than confronting it; to interconnect systems so they function more efficiently; to make multiple use of space and facilities so they are more productive; to deliver services only when and where needed; to produce locally rather than centrally, thereby minimizing

distribution; and to provide flexibility to evolve with changing circumstances. Using these principles, efforts are now underway to make the infrastructure of existing cities more adaptable to change. A recent study of the effects of climate change on New York City, for example, pinpointed anticipated impacts on transit, water, sewer, power, and other infrastructure and proposed strategies to adapt (Rosenweig et al, 2009). These range from moving vulnerable facilities, to designing more intelligent structures and response mechanisms that can anticipate events and initiate precautions. In new growth, more fundamental changes are possible from the start. Integrated sensor networks can give a greater understanding of the functioning of complex natural systems and the potential impacts of development. In extreme cases, the same sensors can be used to track failures as they occur, mitigating the consequences by adjusting infrastructure (if so designed) or warning potential victims. For example, a Tsunami sensing system proposed by MITs SENSEable City Lab would send warnings by mobile phone to all people in low lying areas, giving them precious minutes to prepare. In architecture and real estate, agile, multipurpose use of land and facilities is a growing theme, since it enhances the value of built space and reduces development risk. The home can be a workplace, a doctors office, a place of learning, and an entertainment venue. A sports arena can be a convention center, a shopping experience, and the public square. Offices can accommodate recreation, health care, even living space. Such agility is enabled by advanced communications and visual media that can virtually connect people and places. In this new realm, physical and virtual experiences co-exist, sometimes substituting one for the other, sometimes blending in continuously 13

evolving ways. This aspect of agility was not possible even a decade ago. On an urban scale, multi-use concepts of city-making are gradually replacing the single purpose districts promoted in 20th century planning. Flexible spaces that accommodate multiple activities can be used more intensively than those dedicated to a single purpose such as classrooms that are vacant much of the time. In the same vein, districts that integrate multiple uses are more efficient and livable, as well as more diversified and therefore less vulnerable to long-term economic and social change. To understand the limitations of single purpose districts, one need only look at the vast former industrial areas abandoned in cities after the shift from an industrial to an information economy. The new information economy is inherently more agile than the one it replaced, since production can occur and value can be created in a wide variety of disaggregated places indoors and out. This suggests a form for more sustainable cities in which productive capacity is entwined across an urban fabric of fine grained mixed use. Such agile environments are more efficient and livable, since all activities are close to hand, and also less risky, since the failure of any geographic area has less impact on the system. Encouraging this alternative, agile form of urbanization in developing countries is a key challenge.

Challenge 6: City Planning in Fast Time

The Koreans have a phrase that captures the rapid urbanization of their country: pali pali, (translated as hurry, hurry). Pali pali also expresses the challenge of managing urbanization in a growing multitude of cities around the world. In such cities, the pace now required to marshal the forces of development to organize players, analyze context, develop concepts and plans, incorporate public feedback, and implement projects on the ground is unprecedented. As this pace intensifies, city planning and building processes are compressed into ever-tightening timelines and feedback loops, rendering the traditional, sequential development process completely inadequate. The city founded on modernist principles, planned today, designed next year, and built over the course of a decade, emerges already a century behind the curve. In this context, conventional sequential planning models are being abandoned in favor of simultaneous, customized, and adaptive processes. This same need for immediacy, also serves to explain the desire in many cities to harness communications technology and real-time planning methods to engage and empower citizens in the policy making processes underpinning both environmental and social sustainability initiatives. Information and communication technologies are already accelerating many city- building processes, allowing a growing number of decisions and design modifications to be made as the need arises. The combination of environmental sensors, wireless networks, radio frequency ID tags, and CATV, coupled with automated computer algorithms dramatically changes the information milieu within which planning takes place, enabling city-makers to view 14

Hurricane flood risk in New York City. (Rosenweig et al, 2009)

the physical and virtual forms and functioning of the city in real-time and with a degree of specificity that was previously impossible. Real- time data reveals complex relationships and interfaces among people, including:

Public and private movement patterns; Waste management flow; Patterns of communication among people within neighborhoods and between neighborhoods and other countries; Twenty-four hour patterns of shopping in retail districts and in the virtual marketplace; Individual, family and neighborhood resource consumption; and

the world which involve integrative, future- oriented planning. These are platforms for innovation now, even before more encompassing global, national and citywide policies are decided or technology is available to fully implement the vision. Many examples of such projects are underway, launched under a variety of banners, including: ubiquitous or U-cities; smart cities; new century cities; connected, eco, or green cities. Although each project has its own value proposition, they are similar in testing new approaches to technology integration, city planning and management, and organizational alliances. Some of the most advanced examples of these projects may be the so called U (for ubiquitous technology)-cities in Korea, which have been elevated to the level of a national development priority:
U-cities (e-cities) are seen as the economic focus and showcase for the next generation global growth engine that will achieve world leadership for Koreas ICT industry and its construction industry This has led to a plethora of smart city projects across the country. Seoul commenced planning of its Sangham Digital Media City (DMC) as far back as 1992, and completion is due in [2014]. Sangham DMCs goal is to become the IT industrial center (global leadership) for digital media and entertainment in NE Asia. This has been followed by a cluster of developments around Seoul Paju, Kwanggyo, Hwasung, Yongin and one of the largest and most ambitious developments of all the $128 billion (15% of Koreas GDP) Incheon Free Economic Zone (IFEZ), 1 Hour South West of Seoul This massive development includes the Songdo District ICT Hub, Cheongna Tourism Hub, and Yengjon Global Logistics Hub and is expected to embrace a combined population of 2.66 million As a result, the Korean e-city strategy had by 2008 rapidly developed into a petri dish for

As digital technology uncovers the multifaceted inner workings of the city, including the real time behavior of systems and people, patterns can be recognized, studied, and acted on. Furthermore, diverse scenarios can be modeled to test the impact of alternative development options, using the city, itself. For example, in Rome, MITs SENSEable City Lab is tracking the movement of all buses, taxis, and pedestrians simultaneously, enabling the city to dynamically tune transportation supply to demand, and to test new strategies in the real-time context. The data required for these tasks is derived from mobile phone usage with no need for a special purpose infrastructure. As such capabilities expand, the sequential planning cycle data collection, analysis, design and implementation is being replaced by flexible strategies that observe, launch and learn. As a consequence, the notion of a fixed master plan is giving way to a set of strategic visions that initiate agile developments which are continuously monitored, evaluated and adjusted. In the spirit of launch and learn, a number of city-scale projects have been initiated around

15

urban planners, environmentalists technologists. (E-service-expert, 2009)

and

These and other U-city projects across Korea have been aided by a new U-city planning regime (embodied in legislation such as the 2006 U-Korea Plan and 2008 Act on Ubiquitous Construction) that promotes the convergence of government agencies, construction companies, and IT businesses essential to the projects. Beyond this, guidelines from the National Information Society Agency for u-planning, u-infrastructure, u-spaces, and u-citizenship have helped to establish common digital platforms at the local level that avoid duplication of systems and technologies. With this support, Korean Chaebols (multinational companies such as Korea Telecom, LG, Samsung, Posco, and Daiwoo) are investing heavily in U-city technology, financing, real estate, and planning capabilities seeing these as the next technology products to be exported from the peninsula. Public support for the projects has been relatively easy to obtain in Korea, which has a long history of public investment in technology industries and job creation.. The country benefits from a more or less homogenous culture with the highest broadband penetration and cell phone usage in the world (Strategy Analytics, 2009). In other countries, however, traditional planning regimes may be more entrenched, and constituencies for planning may be more fractured, even hostile, and less empowered. In such contexts, institutions may be more resistant to change, but the challenge of pali pali is no less urgent witness the spread of mobile phones across the face of India. These phones, and the internet capable phones that will follow them, can open a window on the workings of urban life by tapping into the data streams and debates being produced by the city. Where enabled, ubiquitous information technology has

the capability of making the workings of the city more transparent, shedding light on the collaboration of government and industry, and providing an avenue for public response. While its easy to be cynical about this capability arguing that those in power can exert control over the flow of information (as is happening with Google in China) in practice it becomes exceedingly difficult to maintain such control if governments and businesses want to take full advantage of the value creation of digital networks. For example, it was recently announced by state media in Beijing that plans for the controversial Time Cultural City have been abandoned, in what many observers call a turning point for the city (Foster, 8 Sept. 2010). Like preceding projects in Beijing, the development would have demolished blocks of ancient hutongs dating back to the Ming dynasty. This time, however, opposition was mobilized globally over the internet by individual citizens along with an independent, largely volunteer non-profit organization, the Beijing Cultural Heritage Protection Center. Examples such as this illustrate how, in the face of intertwining government and private sectors, digital technology also has the potential to protect and empower a multiplicity of grassroots interests. Planning entities in industry and government increasingly recognize the value of continuous feedback among stakeholders to avoid misadventures like the Time Cultural City and encourage co-creation, which is more productive. In his book One Report, Charles Eccles of the Harvard Business School charts the growing use of Web 2.0 by companies to provide detailed, integrated information to their stakeholders while raising the level of dialog and engagement with them (Eccles and Krzus, 2010). The methods they describe go far beyond traditional financial

16

reporting to include plans under discussion and the performance of the company on important social issues like sustainability. Contrary to conventional wisdom, such openness can add competitive value to both organizations and their stakeholders. The lessons for the global development community are clear: as interactive technologies become universally available, the city-making enterprise must transform to incorporate faster, more integrated, empowering, and ultimately more equitable methods of

Challenge 7: Growing the CityMaking Enterprise

The arrival of technology companies on the urban scene points to the changing nature of organizations responsible for planning, developing and managing the city. Today, as in the past, individual functions in most cities are handled by an array of public agencies with their own technologies, systems and cultures, often fiercely protective of their information and turf. Coordination depends on a mayor or city planning and development department with proactive capacity. In this environment, private developers are often the project initiators. In this case, they select the security, energy, and movement systems that underpin the projects, but even here, systems are independently deployed and often do not work together. The advent of digital networks has opened the door to interconnecting these agents and systems leading to new organizational structures and partnerships. These organizations are likely to be less hierarchical and compartmentalized, since information is becoming increasingly transparent, and the same cross-platform infrastructure can be used to manage multiple systems from trains to traffic. New players and partners in the business of planning and growing cities come with a wide array of interests and capabilities. They constitute what may be termed a new City-Making Industry. One might say, since cities have emerged as engines of digitally enhanced growth, everyone is getting onboard. To give an example, the JC Decaux Group now provides and maintains most of the street furniture benches, kiosks, rest rooms, bus stops in hundreds of cities on several continents, along with the widely popular bike sharing program in Paris. These public amenities and services are provided by private enterprise at little or no direct cost to the user, paid for through

planning.

Pedestrian movement tracked via mobile phone in Rome. (SENSEable City Lab)

17

the digital advertising integrated into their systems. In a similar vein, technology and media companies are expanding beyond their conventional role of providing software and hardware to city agencies. These companies are becoming active stakeholders in the city-making enterprise, offering urban solutions of their own, sharing knowledge from city to city and, bringing with them the culture of research, innovation and horizontal decision making that has undergirded their business success. Standing out from the array of firms are several global players, most notably Cisco, IBM, Siemans, and Samsung. While these companies continue to target specific infrastructure and application markets, their interests stretch much further. At a fundamental level, they seek to be integral players in the entire process of developing and managing the city. Many cities are eager to get them on board. In a global era, where urban centers worldwide vie for investment and labor, cities are under increasing pressure to develop the digital infrastructure necessary to remain economically competitive and create the environmental and social capital needed to attract top industries and workers. In such cases the technology companies provide expertise, credibility, and cutting edge concepts. Moreover, in a time of escalating municipal austerity, cities are financially stressed and increasingly look to the private sector (technology companies included) both to help finance and build infrastructure and to generate income. Recognizing the potential, technology companies, are partnering with cities to making strategic investments that will jumpstart the new infrastructure. For example, IBM recently inaugurated a $50 million grant program to help municipalities achieve successful growth, better delivery of municipal services, more citizen

engagement, and improved efficiency. This follows $186 million in cash, technology, and consulting services, provided by the company to cities in 2009 (IBM, 9 November 2010). Similarly, in 2006, Cisco launched a 5-year program that has invested $15 million in people, research, and equipment to help create a global community of cities committed to addressing environmental sustainability. Press release claims to the contrary, such programs are not merely philanthropic gifts, but efforts to prime the emerging market for digital urban systems and services with strong potential for substantial financial return. The combination of intensified economic pressure and new market opportunity has also brought expanded interest in more complex financing approaches such as public private partnerships, as well the reemergence of infrastructure as a distinct asset class with opportunities for both privately held and publicly traded investment. Additional new players who have emerged on the city-making scene include universities and other knowledge-based institutions, which are rooted to place and have a long-term stake in the effective functioning of a city. They too have become active stakeholders in the process of city making, often producing plans and building key pieces of development and infrastructure. In project after project, universities and cultural institutions have become the cornerstone of urban growth and competitiveness but not as in the past from within campus boundaries but as stakeholders in communities bringing their own research and expertise to bear in the wider process. Finally, community interests are coming to the table with renewed strength, empowered by the internet, which is providing new ways of building strong organizations that can intervene in the development process.

18

 As the number of stakeholders expands, the coordination of multiple contributors into coherent patterns of sustainable growth is a fundamental challenge. This issue is revealed in our studies of advanced urban developments, so called New Century Cities. Emerging worldwide, these city-scale projects integrate technology to develop new industry and knowledge clusters. As illustrated by the Seoul Digital Media City, they are being implemented by complex arrays of partners with diverse objectives and varying degrees of authority and power.
In such cases, an individual or group is often designated or evolves into an integrator of the NCC project. This integrator recognizes the objectives of all key stakeholders, speaks the technical or professional language of each, works across boundaries to build consensus, facilitates joint development, and brokers the deals that must be made for a project to move forward. The integrator understands the projects story and helps key stakeholders shape it in terms that others understand and accept. (Joroff, Frenchman and Rojas, 2009; 34)

sense, since in addition to building the hardware they may be focused on developing human social capital, education, technology systems, business, and global connections, as well as invention of new systems, programs, and techniques all of equal importance to the success of the enterprise. Furthermore, unlike traditional developers, they are neither fully public nor fully private entities, but combine aspects of both. Emaar for example, is publically traded company half owned by global investors and partially by the Dubai government, which retains a significant stake in the firm (Weikal, 2008; 183). These new venture types are all still in the early stages of maturity. Their business visions are coming into focus; they are still forming their strategies, alliances, and testing business models. What is clear, however, is that city-making organizations must transform themselves to provide the expertise, to integrate across functional lines, and to finance infrastructure build out in innovative ways. This portends the emergence of a new city-making industry that will deal with the challenges of future-oriented deployment of technology and resource sustainability for city development and regeneration in this century.

Another potential path to addressing the integration problem is the emergence of holistic city-building organizations. Either drawing from divisions within their own company or working with alliances among firms with different expertise, these enterprises plan, develop and manage urbanization across multiple dimensions. These enterprises like Emaar or Mubadala in the UAE, Vanke in China, and Gale in the US are global in reach, with projects in more than one country. Such enterprises can have access to global sources of capital sovereign wealth, real estate investment trusts, international financial support and talent. Some do their own research, develop their own knowledge and apply it across multiple projects. They are not real estate developers or design consultants in the traditional

Seoul Digital Media City. (Donyun Kim)

19

Conclusion
The cities we make are not inevitable or beyond control. Their forms respond to social ideals, available resources, and the technologies we invent to make use of them. In many ways urban ideals in developing countries are still catching up with the early 20th century, and this is reflected in the kind of cites being built. But the resources available to make and operate such cities are dwindling, so unless we are willing to accept degraded living conditions for the vast majority of urban dwellers in the future, we will need an ideal that consumes fewer resources per person yet still allows growth and improvement in quality of life. Current efforts to do better, to improve the performance of existing cities of the type we are continuing to build will fall far short of what is required to reduce greenhouse gases and achieve broad sustainability. What can we do? One way forward is to pursue a different ideal of city in which digital technologies are integrated into the urban fabric, creating an intelligent and more efficient form. This is not a utopian vision, its a survival strategy. In this paper we have tried to show how this new paradigm is already being implemented through experiments, deliberate action, or coincidentally as cities and industries seek more efficient and productive processes and products. Some of the examples we have used are concrete successes on the ground, others are ideas, experiments or proposals, and some will fail. We are not arguing that any one of these examples is a model for sustainable development in a particular situation. Our aim has been to look across the many transformations (large and small) now underway in cities, and to connect the dots. When this is done, there is ample evidence that a fundamental shift in the ways we conceive,

design, and implement urban development is underway. We can see the outlines of a new city- making enterprise in which diverse stakeholders co-create an urban fabric of fine-grained mixed use where all activities are physically and digitally accessible. This may suggest some priorities for investment by the World Bank, which can encourage transformation to more sustainable models of growth. Priority could be given, for example, to projects that expand access to digital networks and capabilities through bottom-up innovation and entrepreneurship; or projects that enhance connectivity and deliver information to more people and places; or developments that integrate living, working, learning and play. The returns on such investments may be far greater in the long run than widening a road or dike. This is because digital infrastructure is vastly less expensive than physical infrastructure and much easier and faster to deploy. Of course, communities will still need roads, water and health services. Even there, however, digital platforms can make traditional infrastructure more efficient and enhance services and productivity across all sectors of human activity. Most importantly, digital access can link disadvantaged people to global sources of value, enabling them to innovate their own ways out of poverty. This raises two key challenges for the World Bank: first, how to expand digital infrastructure and access to the new economy; and second, how to encourage physical development that maximizes the benefits of this infrastructure in the form and organization of daily life in cities. The networked city ideal is not a substitute for conservation or for the more-conventional building efficiency measures now being deployed in existing cities, both of which will remain

20

important. In fact, the urban forms and technologies we are discussing are not typically part of the sustainable conversation at all, but they will have powerful impacts on resource consumption, nevertheless. Simply stated, as we deploy this new infrastructure we will be able to do more with less: less space to better house activities, fewer roads and vehicles to provide better transport, less consumptive patterns of human behavior. Recall that the industrial production responsible for the phenomenal

growth of Lowell was entirely driven by renewable resources and carbon free. We are in the early stages of another new urban ideal we dont have all the answers we are searching for the 21st century Lowell that will put all the pieces together for the challenges of our time. 2011 Dennis Frenchman and Michael Joroff, MIT

21

References:
Bradsher, Kieth. May 6, 2010. Chinas Energy Use Threatens Goals on Warming. NY Times. Blok, Kornelius. 2004. Improving Energy Efficiency by 5% and More a Year? Journal of Industrial Ecology, Vol. 8, Issue 4. Bodreau, John. June 9, 2010. Cysco Systems helps build prototype for instant city in a box. LA Times. Climate Change Adaptation in New York City: Building a Risk Management Approach NPCC Report. 2010. New York Academy of Sciences Annals. Wiley/Cambridge University Press. Darby, Sarah. 2006. The Effectiveness of Feedback on energy Consumption. Oxford University: Environmental Change Institute. Dirks, Susan and Mary Keeling. 2010. A Vision of Smarter Cities. Dublin: IBM Institute for Business Value. Elfrink, Wim. July 1, 2009. Cisco Live event, San Francisco. Eccles, Robert and Michael Krzus. 2010. One Report. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. ENOLL (European Network of Living Labs). 2010. ENOLL. http://www.openlivinglabs.eu/aboutus E-service expert. 2009. E-Cities in South Korea. http://www.e-service-expert.com/e-Cities- Korea.html Foster, Peter. September 10, 2010. Beijing hutong saved after heritage groups campaign. The Telegraph (UK Edition).

Frenchman, Dennis, Giandomenico Amendola, Anne Beamish, and William J. Mitchell. 2009. Technological Imagination and the Historic City. Milan: Ligouri. Frenchman, Dennis and Christopher Zegras (Principal Investigators). 2010. Making the Clean Energy City in China. MIT/The Energy Foundation (draft research report). Harvey, David. 1990. The Condition Postmodernity. London: Basil Blackwell. IBM. November 9, 2010. Press release. Joroff, Michael, Dennis Frenchman, and Francisca Rojas. 2009. New Century Cities: Creating Extraordinary Value. Urban Land Institute. Lacy, Sarah. November 30, 2009. Tech Crunch. http://techcrunch.com/2009/11/30/smsone- micro-local-india-news/ Lacy, Sarah. March 13, 2010. Indias Rural Cell Phone Movement: Can You Hear Me Now? Tech Crunch. http://techcrunch.com/2009/03/13/indias- rural-cell-phone-movement-can you hear- me-now/ McKinsey and Company. 2009. Chinas Green Revolution. MGI/McKinsey Global Institute. 2009. Preparing for Chinas Urban Billion. MGI/McKinsey Global Institute. 2010. Indias Urban Awakening: Building Inclusive Cities, Sustaining Economic Growth. Mitchell, William J., Christopher E. Borroni-Bird, Lawrence D. Burns. 2010. Reinventing the Automobile. Cambridge: MIT Press. of

22

Oliver, Rachel. December 31, 2007. Cities and United Nations. 2007. State of the World Population, 2007: Unleashing the Potential of Energy Consumption. CNNTech. Urban Growth. (New York: United Nations http://articles.cnn.com/2007-12- Population Fund) 31/tch/eco.cities-energy-rural- areas?_s=PM:TECH United Nations. 2008. The State of African Cities, 2008. Nairobi: UN-HABITAT. Pandey, Peeta. September 2, 2010. Delhi Looses Patience with Commonwealth Games. BBC Weikal, Steve. 2008. Emerald Cities: The News South Asia. Emergence of Mega Developments in the 21st http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south- Century. MIT Thesis: Masters of Science in asia-11101288 Real Estate Development Rosenweig, Cynthia and William Solecki, et al World Resources Institute. 2010. Summary of GHG 2009. Climate Risk Information. New York City Reduction Pledges Put Forward by Developing Panel on Climate Change. Countries. San Francisco Metropolitan Transportation Yurman, Daniel. December 5, 2009. Indias Climate Authority. 2010. SFPark. http://sfpark.org/ Change Goals and Nuclear Energy. The Energy Collective. Strategy Analytics. 2009. Global Broadband http://theenergycollective.com/TheEnergyColl Forecast: 1H 2009. ective/52839 http://www.strategyanalytics.com/default.asp x?mod=PressReleaseViewer&a0=4748 UN-HABITAT. 2005. Climate Change: The Roll of Cities.

23