Desde el papel del Estado colombiano

Although cities are one of the major sources of waste and emissions, they are also considered possibly the best scale to tackle global ecological problems (Trogal, et al., 2019). Sustainable development is also seen increasingly dependent on the successful management of urbanisation and the sustainability of cities (Ahern, 2011). United Na-tions (2018d) consider all three dimensions of sustainability — ecological, social, and economic — to be closely related to urbanisation. They assert that minimising adverse impacts on the environment are possible, if urbanisation is managed in a proper way.

United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goal 11 — making “cities and human set-tlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable” — is monitored through indica-tors like proportion of urban dwellers living in informal settlements, proportion of population with convenient access to public transport, number of people affected by disasters, proportion of urban solid waste collected, and average share of open public space relative to built-up area (United Nations, 2018a). The same criticism presented before on the SDGs in general also applies to Goal 11; although the overarching goal is essential, none of the indicators gives concrete, measurable targets to be achieved. All the targets are about providing access, significantly reducing one thing, or substantially increasing another, with no implication of how much access is enough, or what is a

44

significant reduction or substantial increase in percentage. Thus, the goal and defini-tion of a resilient and sustainable city remain vague.

Despite the vagueness of the goal, urban design and planning are in the heart of man-aging urbanisation in a sustainable way and making cities resilient and sustainable. In Oxford English Dictionary (Oxford University Press, 2019), sustainable architecture and sustainable city are characterised by minimising environmental degradation, us-ing low-impact materials and energy sources, and designus-ing infrastructure in such a way as to limit their impact on the natural environment. Wording here follows the popular definition of sustainability today: instead of avoiding, sustainability is about minimising; instead of zero-impact, sustainability is about low-impact; and instead of preventing, sustainability is about limiting. This vocabulary has been criticised, amongst others, by Braungart and McDonough (2008, p. 45), who argue that “being less bad is no good”.

If sustainability is considered as presented above as human development that respects the limits of planet Earth, there is an inherent fault in the definition of the tool — sus-tainable architecture — and the outcome — sussus-tainable cities. The definition of both allows the exploitation of natural resources and pollution of the environment, as long as there are efforts at minimising and limiting. If cities are developed following this definition and if cities are considered as part of the core solution of sustainable devel-opment, there will be serious difficulties in achieving sustainability.

Sustainable cities and sustainable urban design and planning must be redefined based on the theories presented previously. For urban design and planning to be compatible with the goal of sustainability, they must follow the principles of eco-effectiveness, in other words, respect nature’s laws and integrity and imitate its cycles of matter. Sus-tainable cities, on their part, must avoid environmental degradation, use zero-impact materials and energy sources, and design infrastructure in such a way as to prevent their impact on the natural environment.

Even though ecological sustainability is prioritised here, it is not plausible to neglect the social dimension, when addressing the sustainability of cities. As the SDG 11 states, from the social perspective, sustainable cities are safe and inclusive. Good ur-ban planning can guide cities towards this ideal, but architecture can also be harnessed as a tool for segregation. Architect David Adjaye (2015) writes that zoning in urban planning is no longer the only way of segmenting the city. Today, segregation may also be achieved vertically: high-rise developments enable the elite class to escape the unliveable conditions on the ground. Adjaye points at the big cities of the developing world where “glittering towers stand in stark contrast to ground-level chaotic slums that lack the most basic infrastructure” and calls for new innovations in vertical ogies to respond to the unprecedented densities in cities. Adjaye states that these typol-ogies must empower people, enrich their surroundings, and build a more egalitarian future. (Ibid.) In summary, when employed appropriately, urban design and planning have the opportunity to respond to all the requirements of the SDG 11, making cities inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable.

45

CHAPTER 2

2.5 Conclusion

As a conclusion of the views presented in this chapter, this thesis proposes that sustain-able development should be redefined as human development that is equally availsustain-able for all and that avoids all kind of environmental degradation. This thesis argues that it is irrelevant to address social or economic sustainability, unless ecological sustainabil-ity is ensured. Without the stabilsustainabil-ity and sustainabilsustainabil-ity of the environment, there will be no conditions for social or economic development. However, the social dimension must be acknowledged to ensure the realisation of global equality in the future.

Image 6. Biking will be an important means of transport in sustainable cities.

Man biking on Malawi Road in Chuini, Zanzibar Town.

chapter 3

THE MEANS: IMPROVING RESILIENCE