Why the US Needs Smart Cities Ranking

The time has arrived to compare and rank US smart cities as we move into the second greatest techno-cultural wave of the century, after the mobile revolution. Smart cities will digitize and profoundly transform our energy, mobility, water, waste and municipal services, including safety and outreach.

smart citiesClearly, smart cities and its Internet of Things (IoT, along with blockchain, etc.) underbelly will catalyze and energize many sectors of our economy in software, hardware, services and infrastructure.

Ten years ago, I wrote the book How Green is Your City?: The SustainLane US City Rankings, which benchmarked the largest 50 cities in 15 categories of economic and environmental sustainability, as well as climate resilience, and provided an aggregate ranking—from #1 Portland, Oregon to #50 Columbus, Ohio.

Since How Green Is Your City? came out in with its 1,000 data points and three billion media impressions, mayors from Michael Bloomberg of New York (#4 overall), to Richard Daley of Chicago (#6), lauded the study; cities like Houston (#39) formed sustainability departments in reaction; while the national leadership of China asked for guidance on how to similarly measure and rank its cities. Meanwhile, Hurricane Sandy took aim on New York City, and the Paris Climate Accord, approved in 2015, was driven significantly by the participation of the more sustainable cities in national coalitions.

So why embark on a similar ranking for smart cities? As our climate-change impacted and globalized world becomes primarily urban, and with cities as the molten core of financial, political and economic power, we will require the new ability to use sensors to provide Big Data, and then there must be responses based upon artificial intelligence.

The need for smart cities has long been evident. The Bay Area consultancy I founded, Common Current, has worked globally since 2008 with smart city issues regarding water, infrastructure, transportation, air quality, buildings and energy. Through government and private sector clients in the United States, I have addressed national, urban and industry leaders throughout Asia as well as the European Union, and a French national ministry session on achieving net zero buildings at COP 21 in Paris.

Clearly there is acute interest in smart cities, especially in Europe and Asia. The present field of US smart cities is highly active, but it is also fragmented and opaque, just as US cities were in sustainability a decade ago.

For smart cities, Common Current has been tracking developments in more than 25 large US cities so far, from Google’s Sidewalk Labs and the Vulcan mobility project in Columbus, Ohio (Columbus, Ohio, won a $40 million US Department of Transportation grant for last year’s Smart Cities Challenge), to Comcast’s new wide area networks for sensors in Chicago, the Bay Area and Philadelphia.

Unlike Singapore or Barcelona on the international level, there is no clear smart city leader in the United States. There are many participants and key early projects: San Diego (LED street lighting platform), Boston (smart intersection), San Francisco (smart parking), New York (smart microgrid), Cincinnati (smart sewers), Atlanta (AT&T cross-sector framework), Los Angeles (smart poles for lighting and broadband), Louisville (the grassroots “Louie Lab”), and Kansas City (Smart City Streetcar Corridor).

The goal of the US Smart Cities Ranking is to cover the largest 50 cities by population with a unified research methodology and survey project, rank the cities in each category and overall, and to publish the results in an open-source format.

Through involvement with technology, infrastructure and financing entities in smart cities, we may have some biases, but transparency and consistent data values will be evident, as it was with the rankings in How Green Is My City? Former Seattle Sustainability Director Steve Nicholas, vice president of Climate and Environmental Programs at the Institute for Sustainable Communities, said, “I’ve been in the sustainability business for 15 or 20 years now. And these types of rankings have been tried dozens and dozens of times and this in my opinion is the best one in terms of its rigor and how much care they’ve given to apples-to-apples comparisons. A lot of that comes from Warren’s commitment.”

To be clear, creating a study on the scale that the US Smart City Rankings necessitates requires resources for primary research, travel, networking, data analysis and results dissemination. Thus, Common Current invites sponsorship from large smart city players, including Global 1000 brands such as AT&T, Comcast, Verizon, IBM, Cisco, Deloitte, Intel, GE, Audi, Google, Microsoft and others, including the financial services, real estate and insurance industries.

With any benchmarking a central issue is effectively defining the universe: besides the activities in the cities themselves, what are smart city categories, their components and services, and emerging trends? How can performance measures best be applied to discrete categories? These answers will provide valuable insights and data, perhaps even more valuable than the results of the overall smart cities ranking.

Most importantly, benchmarking US smart cities by defined categories will enable city and market participants to move forward with a clearer sense of thoroughness and standards by which to measure innovation as well as general progress. Just as 2007 was the right time for US cities to have a template by which to guide their leadership in the sustainable economy and world politics, 2017-2018 is the right time for US cities and their partners to embark upon becoming global forces in smart technologies, management and economics.

I hope you’ll agree about the need for US Smart City Rankings. Please send inquiries to me:

warren (at) commoncurrent.com

regarding the US Smart Cities Rankings, which will be under development through 2018.

Share

My TEDx Talk: Collective Intelligence for Sustainable Cities

Warren Karlenzig at TEDx Mission

TEDx Mission recently invited me to speak at their San Francisco event on how cities are using collective intelligence approaches to address climate change and climate change adaptation. Crowdsourcing and savvy planning are producing healthier quality of life and more resilient urban economies.
The talk drew upon my experience with Common Current, which is working with governments, the private sector and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) globally on urban sustainability master planning, policy and technology around energy, water, infrastructure, mobility, land use and economic issues.
An underlying premise is that as we increasingly become an urban planet, diverse cities will provide the key to sustainability innovations. Others, such as Asian Development Bank’s Guanghua Wan and UCLA’s Matthew Kahn in a report released last week (pdf), “Key Indicators for the Pacific (2012)“, have made similar observations.
Common Current is now helping Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory design indicators software for China’s Ministry of Urban Rural Development so China can better manage its 654 cities as “Low Carbon Ecocities.” China has been leading the trend toward urbanization, going from approximately 20 percent urbanites in 1980, to 53 percent now, to an estimated 70 percent by 2030. In our lifetimes, China has already experienced the fastest and largest mass migration of humans in the history of Earth.
Within this dynamic context, Common Current collaborates extensively with the United Nations, China, South Korea, Japan and the United States, as well as individual cities and communities, on green urban development policy and projects.
As you will see in the TEDx talk, effective strategy and management by city leaders is critical, but bottom-up approaches are also having surprisingly dramatic and replicable impacts that address climate change and resilience.
Climate change has been shown to be linked to prolonged drought, more frequent and damaging heat waves, record number of high temperatures (a 2-to-1 ratio over record lows in US over past decade), wildfires, record urban flooding, record urban rainfall amounts and record deadly superstorms, including violent tornadoes.
Nonetheless, on every inhabited continent, legions of talented and dedicated urban citizens (yes, suburbanites are included) are acting to slow climate change and protect us from its worst impacts through collective crowdsourcing, large-scale citizen participation and social media.
As you will see in the TEDx talk, green urbanization utilizing collective intelligence will assist a needed turnaround from our current plight. Instead of needlessly facing the brink of a volatile future completely unprepared, we are beginning to experience how the whole is indeed greater than the sum of its individual parts.

Share

My Two Cents in Wall Street Journal’s How to Build a Greener City

building green.jpg
I was quoted in the lead article by Michael Totty in Monday’s Wall Street Journal on “How to Build A Greener City.” The article (and quote) leads off a special section, including the following articles:

  • An Apple Tree Grows in Suburbia
  • The Urban Quest for Zero Waste
  • Testing Their Metals (on reducing industry material use)
  • Building Owners Want Water That Never Leaves
  • Power Play: GE Makes Big Bet on Little Firms
  • In Fracking’s Wake
  • Talking About Waste With P&G
  • Cities as Ecosystems a Fresh Look
  • Reduce Energy Usage at Home

Warren
Karlenzig is president of Common
Current
. He is a fellow at the Post-Carbon Institute,  and co-author of
a
forthcoming United Nations manual on global sustainable city planning and
management. 
 

Share

What’s an Ecocity and Why Should We Care?

tianjinEcoCity master plan.jpg

“Ecocity” is a popular designation for dozens
of global urban centers. Indeed the 9th Ecocity World Summit next week in Montreal,
Canada will be packed with city officials, planners, activists, educators, and
corporations from 75 nations, as well as the United Nations–all trying to plan how the city can
be designed and conducted more in harmony with ecosystems, culture and the biosphere.

The summit will also present a scheme to assess ecocities on
defined standards and indicators. Seeing that international standards for overall
sustainability at the city level do not yet exist, how can ecocities take
things to the next level and collectively push forward urban sustainability
performance across borders, languages, cultures and local conditions?

Cities are where sustainability meets true systems approaches
and economic need: they’ll go from harboring more than half of the planet’s
people to about 70 percent of humanity by 2050.
The Earth is undergoing the greatest mass migration in its history as hundreds
of millions of rural residents of China move to its booming cities.

Some of the largest ecocity projects include Tianjin, China (pictured above);
Waitakere, New Zealand (208,000 pop.) was self-designated as an ecocity before
it was absorbed by neighboring Auckland
in 2010.

A host of other
cities in China including Changchun, Rizhao and Tangshan (“Caofeidian International Eco-city”are modeled as eco-cities, while India is
also planning development of several eco cities along its new Delhi-Mumbai
transportation and industrial corridor
. Japan, which has been
helping India plan its largest ecocity, is also sponsoring development or retrofitting of numerous ecocities or “eco towns.”

The term “ecocity” was first used by Richard Register in
1987: Register went on to found in 1992 Ecocity Builders, a non-profit based in Oakland, California. (Disclosure: my consultancy Common
Current just finished helping Ecocity Builders
and its international advisors develop standards and indicators for ecocities,
called the International Ecocity Framework and Standards, or IEFS.)

Ecocity Builders’ Register, Executive Director Kirstin
Miller, Ecological Footprint co-creator Bill Rees and other participants will be addressing the Montreal Ecocity
Conference to present the IEFS to participants and partner cities. Four Early
Partner Cities (EPCs) for the IEFS–Vancouver and Montreal, Canada; Curitiba, Brazil and Kirtipur, Nepal–will also participate.
These cities or communities are already gathering information and data for the
IEFS in order to provide initial feedback on the standard and indicator development
process.

The IEFS consists of 15 system “conditions” or
categories. Cities will eventually be
analyzed and measured based on the performance of these components, which have
an integral relationship to the city’s bioregions (bioregional mapping will
become a key IEFS activity). The 15 IEFS categories include:

·        
Access by Proximity: Walkable access from housing to basic urban services and transit access
to close-by employment options.

·        
Clean Air: Air quality conducive to good health within
buildings, the city’s air shed, and the atmosphere.

·        
Healthy Soil: Soils meet
their ranges of healthy ecosystem functions as appropriate to their types and
environments; fertility is maintained or improved.

·        
Clean and Safe Water:
Access to clean, safe, affordable water; the city’s water sources, waterways
and water bodies are healthy and function without negative impact to
ecosystems. Water is primarily sourced from within the bioregion.

·        
Responsible Resources/
Materials
: Renewable and non-renewable resources are sourced, allocated,
managed and recycled responsibly and equitably, without adversely affecting
human health or the resilience of ecosystems.

·        
Clean and Renewable
Energy
: The city’s energy needs are provided for, and extracted, generated and
consumed, without significant negative impact to ecosystems or to short- or
long-term human health and do not exacerbate climate change. Energy consumed is
primarily generated within the local bioregion.

·        
Healthy and Accessible
Food
: Nutritious food is accessible and affordable to all residents and is
grown, manufactured and distributed by processes which maintain the healthy
function of ecosystems and do not exacerbate climate change. Food consumed is
primarily grown within the local bioregion.

·        
Healthy Biodiversity: The
city sustains the biodiversity of local, bioregional and global ecosystems
including species diversity, ecosystem diversity and genetic diversity; it
restores natural habitat and biodiversity by its policy and physical actions.

·        
Earth’s Carrying
Capacity:
The city keeps its demand on ecosystems within the limits of the
Earth’s bio-capacity, converting resources restoratively and supporting
regional ecological integrity.

·        
Ecological Integrity: The
city maintains essential linkages within and between ecosystems and provides
contiguous habitat areas and ecological corridors throughout the city.

·        
Healthy Culture: The city
facilitates cultural activities that strengthen eco-literacy, patterns of human
knowledge and creative expression, and develop symbolic thought and social
learning.

·        
Community Capacity
Building
: The city supports full and equitable community participation in
decision making processes and provides legal, physical and organizational
support for neighborhoods, community organizations, institutions and agencies.

·        
Healthy and Equitable
Economy
:
An economy favoring
economic activities that reduce harm and positively benefit the environment and
human health and support a high level of local and equitable employment options
– the foundation for “green jobs”.

·        
Lifelong Education: All
residents have access to lifelong education including access to information
about the city’s history of place, culture, ecology, and tradition provided
through formal and informal education, vocational training and other social
institutions.

·        
Well Being–Quality of
Life
: Strong citizen satisfaction with quality of life indicators including
employment; the built, natural and landscaped environment; physical and mental
health; education; safety; recreation and leisure time; and social belonging.

While some of these categories are being matched to existing
tools and indicators (i.e., Walk Score and similar GIS mapping for Access by
Proximity), other categories will need a period of innovation around analytical processes or tools such as the Gini co-efficient (which may be used to measure income level disparities in the category Healthy and
Equitable Economy) and the Ecological Footprint (to determine Earth’s Carrying Capacity).
These have been extensively modeled on the national level, for instance, but have
yet to be consistently applied on the local level.

The lack of international urban sustainability standards has
perplexed and bedeviled cities, planners, developers and companies wanting a
consistent scorecard across global urban management and development.

True,
international sustainability standards exist for buildings, such as the US
Green Building Council’s LEED, and the BREEAM
standards from the United Kingdom, even neighborhoods (LEED for Neighborhood Development). China is also developing its
own Three Star standard for buildings. Emerging from the Harvard School of Design is the Zofnass Program for Sustainable Infrastructure, while BREEAM is launching BREEAM for Communities.

But the time has come for consistent urban sustainability
frameworks and indicators across everything from infrastructure and mobility, to
urban agriculture, energy, water, materials and biodiversity.

The International Ecocity Framework and Standards (IEFS) is
one of the main entrants in the global race to define and measure what makes a
city sustainable. With the cooperation
of its Early Partner Cities, Ecocity Builders and the IEFS will hopefully begin
to answer these key questions along while getting down to the real business: helping solve how the cities of the world are
remaking themselves as ecocities or more sustainable cities to prepare for a future
of more extreme risk–which equals opportunity.

Warren
Karlenzig is president of Common
Current
. He is a fellow at the Post-Carbon Institute,  and co-author of
a
forthcoming United Nations manual on global sustainable city planning and
management. 
  

Share

Post Carbon Institute Uses Expert Network to Take on Climate, Energy and Community Challenges

pcilogo.jpg

Tonight the Post Carbon Institute (PCI), a California-based think tank addressing sustainability issues associated with climate change, peaking resources and community resiliency, kicks off a three-day gathering with its Fellows (of which I am one) in Berkeley.

The Institute was founded in 2003, largely around the issue of peaking oil and energy supplies. Author Richard Heinberg (The Party’s Over, Peak Everything) was the group’s first Senior Fellow. Heinberg has been now joined by 28 other Fellows, and this is their first gathering.

From an initial focus on peaking energy resources and their potential impacts, PCI now addresses multiple areas and issues including climate change, consumption/ waste, communities, economies, ecology, education, energy, food/ agriculture, government, health, social justice, population, water, transportation.

Eighteen of those who are coming to Berkeley (five will join in remotely) to address how our government, society, communities and different industry sectors can prepare better for the system-based or “wicked problems” that climate change, peaking energy supplies and global recession present.

Participants will include:

  • David Orr (author and professor Oberlin College)
  • David Fridley (energy efficiency and renewables expert, Lawrence Berkeley National Labs)
  • Chris Martenson (“Crash Course” economist)
  • Josh Kaufmann (US Department of Energy’s Pacific Northwest Labs)
  • Michael Bomford (food and energy scientist, Kentucky University)
  • Sandra Postel (author, director Global Water Policy Project)
  • Tom Whipple (energy expert, former CIA analyst)
  • Zenobia Barlow (author, director Center for Ecoliteracy)
  • Bill Sheehan (consumption and waste expert, Product and Policy Institute)
  • Gloria Flora (public lands expert, director Sustainable Obtainable Solutions)
  • Erika Allen (urban agriculture expert, manager Growing Power)
  • Anthony Perl (author, transportation expert and professor, Simon Frazier University)
  • Hillary Brown (partner, New Civic Works, founder NYC Office Sustainable Design)
  • Stephanie Mills (author, bio-regionalism expert)
  • Wes Jackson (author, founder/ president The Land Institute)
  • William Ryerson (director Population Media Center)
  • Brian Schwartz (public health expert, professor Johns Hopkins University)
  • Bill Rees (community resilience expert, author, University British Columbia)
  • David Hughes (energy expert, geoscientist for Canadian Geological Survey)
  • Warren Karlenzig (urban expert, author, president Common Current)

Other participants that will join in remotely include authors Michael Shuman, Josh Farley, Bill McKibben and Richard Douthwaite, Transition Town movement originator Rob Hopkins; Johns Hopkins’ Cindy Parker.

Look for my report next week on the outcome of this historic gathering.

Share