Sustainable Stockholm

Exploring Urban Sustainability in Europe's Greenest City

Jonathan Metzger, Amy Rader Olsson, Jonathan Metzger, Amy Rader Olsson

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2013
• ISBN:
  9781135036171
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Architecture
• Subtopic: Urban Planning & Landscaping

Sustainable Stockholm provides a historical overview of Stockholm's environmental development, and also discusses a number of cross-disciplinary themes presenting the urban sustainability work behind Stockholm's unique position, and importantly the question of how well Stockholm's practices can be exported and transposed to other places and contexts.

By using the case of Stockholm as the pivot of discussions, Sustainable Stockholm investigates the core issues of sustainable urban environmental development and planning, in all their entanglements. The book shows how intersecting fields such as urban planning and architecture, traffic planning, land-use regulation, building, waste management, regional development, water management, infrastructure engineering—together and in combination—have contributed to making Stockholm Europe's "greenest" city.

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

THE GREENEST CITY?

Jonathan Metzger and
Amy Rader Olsson

THE EUROPEAN UNION inaugurated the European Green Capital Award in 2010. The annual prize recognizes the consistent record of high environmental standards and commitment to ongoing and ambitious goals for further environmental improvement of one city within the European Union, which can then function as a role model to inspire and “promote best practice experiences in all other European cities” (European Green Capital, 2009). The first city to receive this award was Stockholm, the capital of Sweden.

Positioned on the Baltic rim, on the northern outskirts of Europe, Stockholm has long been renowned for its distinctive waterfront and extensive foliage, truly making this “Venice of the North” worthy of the moniker Green (and blue!) Capital in the literal sense of the term. But of course, in relation to urban development the adjective “green” also implies so much more, functioning as a synonym for sustainability, or sustainable development. The classic definition of sustainable development, as formulated in the Brundtland Report (World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987), states that sustainable development is development that “meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” In many contexts, the term is also used in a broad sense to denote action toward securing, sustaining, and developing the global preconditions for human life across multiple generations, while simultaneously paying attention to human well-being and prosperity, as well as safeguarding sensitive ecosystems and finite natural resources (for a more detailed discussion, see Chapter 3).

Cities and urban areas are increasingly in focus regarding questions of sustainable development. The United Nations estimates that in 2008 more than 50 percent of the world's population lived in cities. This share is steadily rising, and in many parts of the world the pace of urbanization is still rapidly accelerating – especially in the so-called Global South. Over 75 percent of EU citizens already live in urban areas. Cities themselves are not only distinguishable places that can be easily pinpointed on a world map, but also nodes, or rather bundles of nodes, within networks that both constitute and are constituted by innumerable flows of people, ideas, and resources – flows at the intersections of which the phenomenon of conurbation is generated. These networked relations sometimes span the globe: what happens in one city can have effects on other places that may physically be located on the other side of the earth. Hence, the city can be conceptualized as both a local phenomenon and a global one that has geographically distributed effects. What we do in one city – how we build, how we consume, how we act – often has repercussions globally (in terms of climate change, ozone, etc.) and also very concretely for other specific, sometimes distant, places.

Historically, cities have generally been associated with adverse environmental effects and therefore primarily have been seen as a problem that must be dealt with. Today, the vast bulk of environmentally detrimental production and consumption is still concentrated in urban areas. However, increasingly, urbanization and city development are also beginning to be seen not only as problems but also as important parts of the solution in the quest towards reaching worldwide sustainable development – for instance, in relation to issues such as climate change mitigation, energy conservation, protection of arable land, and water management. This is reflected in the ten key indicators of sustainable urban development used to determine the winner of the EU Green Capital Award: local contribution to global climate change, local transport, availability of local public open areas and green areas, quality of local ambient air, noise pollution, waste production and management, water consumption, wastewater treatment, environmental management by the local authority, and sustainable land use.

As a factor in motivating its choice to award Stockholm the Green Capital Award, the jury noted that Stockholm has an “outstanding, long historical track record of integrated urban management also confirmed by its ongoing credible green credentials,” and, further, that “ambitious plans for the future clearly demonstrate continuity” (European Green Capital, 2009). The independent expert panel that made an in-depth evaluation of the applications for the award chose to highlight a handful of areas in which Stockholm was judged to excel. To begin with, the panel underscored overarching policy structures and practices, such as the city council's holistic vision with ambitious long-term targets and performance indicators, as well as the solidly budgeted environmental program with its focus on combining economic growth with an environmental sensibility. A further area lauded by the panel was Stockholm's integrated city management system, which includes environmental factors and goals as an integral part of the city administration's management routines, and makes environmental issues constantly visible and present in the city's budget, operational planning, reporting, and monitoring.

After pointing out the history of good results in relation to executed environmental policies, the evaluation panel turned to more concrete and delimited systems and structures, such as the green structure of the city, with 95 percent of the population living only 300 meters or less from green areas; its integrated waste management, with a high level of recycling, particularly of bio-waste; and its transport system, with congestion charging to reduce car use, well-functioning public transportation, and pro-cycling policies. Finally, the panel emphasized an aspect of Stockholm's application that is of a somewhat different nature than the other performance areas: namely, the communication strategy of the city in relation to sustainability efforts. The panel was impressed by the level of commitment and eagerness on behalf of the city to “share its experiences and act as an inspiration to other cities” (European Green Capital, 2009).

The selection of Stockholm as the inaugural award winner probably did not surprise many in the international community of urban policy experts and planners, where the association between the terms “Stockholm” and “sustainable development” has been firmly established for decades. Even before receiving the recognition and publicity associated with the award, Stockholm has in professional circles been considered one of the few major metropolitan areas in the world that is on a path toward sustainable development. Stockholm has been recognized for its innovative take on urban sustainability, supported across the political spectrum and combining grand visions and goals (such as becoming 100 percent fossil-fuel-free by 2050) with practical interventions and measures (such as congestion charging and eco-profiled major redevelopment areas).

For sure, not all of Stockholm's sustainability scores are exemplary. It is no surprise that Stockholm does an excellent job of managing its scarce or expensive resources, such as energy for heating homes in its cold climate. However, Stockholm is well behind other European cities in areas where its resources are abundant and effects less costly in the near term. For example, Stockholm produces more municipal waste per capita than many other European cities, and also compares very poorly to other cities with regard to water-use efficiency. Nevertheless, it can be argued that environmental sustainability has become one of Stockholm's defining characteristics and is considered a major source of its attractiveness to residents, tourists, and firms.

Some of the roots of Stockholm's commitment to sustainable urban development can be traced to the social engineering approach of the Swedish modernist urban planning tradition – although this is a somewhat contested legacy, as the high modernist vision of the city also built upon ideas such as the car-based society, the physical separation of urban functions, and other notions that are today considered directly counterproductive to sustainability. Further, it can be speculated that the firm association between sustainable development and Stockholm that exists today might not originally fully stem from the city's own achievements, but might partly also be a residual effect of the city's hosting of an international conference in the summer of 1972, the United Nations Conference on Human Environment, colloquially known simply as “the Stockholm Conference.” As a direct predecessor to global environmental gatherings that followed, such as Rio de Janeiro in 1992 or Johannesburg in 2002, the Stockholm Conference was the first ever international top-level gathering that seriously addressed what has since come to be called sustainable development. Stockholm was chosen to host the conference primarily in its capacity as the capital city of the nation of Sweden, as a corollary of the Swedish national government's efforts to make the conference happen – and the choice of Stockholm as the venue for the conference was subsequently the result of national Swedish initiatives in the global arena rather than a reflection of any local interest or achievements on behalf of the Stockholm leadership and administration.

The city's reputation as a hotspot for sustainable development was further reinforced by Stockholm's bid for the summer Olympics in 2004. At the advice of marketing consultants, and in part to appease strong NGO opposition to the bid, Stockholm took a strong eco-profile in its candidacy, building upon inspiration from Sydney's successful branding of the summer games of 2000 as a “green Olympics.” Among other things, the proposal included a radical update of the existing infill construction plans for an extensive inner-city brownfield waterfront site so as to comprise a cutting-edge, systemically integrated Olympic Village of previously unheard-of environmental standards. Stockholm's Olympic bid eventually failed, and the games were awarded to Athens. But construction of the proposed eco-profiled Olympic village, Hammarby Sjöstad, still went ahead – as well as a new light rail line linking the area to Stockholm's extensive public transit system. The high-sustainability ambitions of the now world-renowned neighborhood neatly aligned with the governing Social Democratic Party's “green welfare state” policy doctrine from the mid-1990s (Gröna Folkhemmet, literally “Green People's Home”). The city council also received substantial financial support from the national government to further develop and implement the eco-profile of the area – which was seen as a flagship project for the national environmental policy orientation. Since then, and particularly after the sweeping national and local electoral victory of a conservative-led coalition in 2006, the Hammarby Sjöstad area has also been utilized and developed as a showcase for Swedish clean technology and eco-technology, as part of a national export strategy for such products that has now been in place for roughly a decade.

Successively, consensus has developed across the political spectrum in Stockholm's city council, positing urban sustainable development as a key goal for the city's future. Serious debate still remains concerning what in practice constitutes such development, what standards to aim for, and how best to work towards reaching this broad and somewhat vague goal. Moreover, broad political backing for a sustainable development focus in Stockholm is hardly of a completely altruistic or idealistic nature. Just as the Stockholm Conference in 1972 aimed both at protecting the global environment and at strengthening Sweden's international reputation and geopolitical position, the driving forces behind the “greening” of Stockholm's policies and investments reflect genuine environmental concern but are to some extent also fueled by recognition of the branding advantages and economic opportunities offered by establishing a green reputation. It is therefore not impertinent to ask how the broad political agreement to focus strongly on urban sustainable development can be maintained if future political actors judge there to be more goodwill and economic opportunities to be gained by focusing on some other branding profile for the city. Mistrustful of the political objectives behind Stockholm's urban sustainability push, critical observers have therefore dismissed Stockholm's green profile as somewhat of a marketing ploy. To an extent, it is difficult not to agree that the global narrative presently being woven around Stockholm as a beacon of urban sustainability sometimes may appear a bit uncritical and almost utopian, with stories often carrying a tinge of “in a magical land far, far away in the well-ordered, distant North.” These narratives commonly uncritically present Stockholm as a “best practice” example in the field of urban sustainable development, showcasing the city as some form of universal model to learn from – while, in the process, generating invaluable amounts of goodwill and brand value for the city and its firms.

Nevertheless, just because the “green” profile of Stockholm contains a marketing component, this does not necessarily mean that it also lacks substance. On the contrary, it could actually be argued that the Janus face of Stockholm's environmental ambitions actually neatly illustrates the two sides to the concept of sustainable development: to safeguard the living environment, while in the meantime also generating the necessary preconditions for human welfare and prosperity. Things may, nevertheless, be a little bit more complicated than this. For, even if Stockholm is recognized as the leading European city with regard to sustainable urban development, in this field “best” might actually be far from good enough if the aim is to achieve truly sustainable development on a global basis.

Of course, even leading academic researchers are divided in their position on the current status of things. Reflecting differences similar to those among the general public, some academics are quite sanguine about the current situation and future prospects, while others see a need for more fundamental changes in the fabric of the city and social life in general to achieve truly sustainable cities. These different perspectives are, to various degrees, also reflected among the researchers who have contributed to this book. Some choose to focus on concrete improvements; others express direct frustration about gaps and conflicts related to current sustainability efforts in Stockholm. There is no consensus among researchers in this question.

Therefore this book highlights a range of perspectives and tones, some more hopeful and others concerned about current development trajectories. It is up to the reader to balance the scales for her- or himself at the end of the story. Taking into consideration both the marketing and storytelling side of the Stockholm sustainability saga and the nitty-gritty work being done to achieve concrete urban transformations, the purpose of this book is therefore to attempt an evenhanded and sober assessment of Stockholm's achievements and shortcomings in the area of urban sustainable development. It also aims to provide a broad introduction to some of the key challenges and issues related to contemporary urban sustainable development, illustrated by relevant and inspiring examples from Stockholm.

Of necessity, a book such as this can only ever scratch the surface of a wide and crucial research topic such as sustainable urban development, despite focusing on only a single city. Our hope is therefore that readers will be inspired to pursue deeper investigations in the particular subareas of sustainable urban development introduced in this book – in Stockholm or elsewhere. Some of the technologies and practices employed in Stockholm's pursuit are most arguably truly unique – or at least context-specific. Nevertheless, we hope that Stockholm's story can inspire students, practitioners, and scholars to consider what can and must be done today, in Stockholm and in cities around the world.

1.1 STRUCTURE OF THE BOOK

As a result of both the multidisciplinary cooperation that has formed the basis of this book and its foundational ambition to get beyond established but highly limiting conceptualizations of sustainable development, we have chosen as our primary focus the interplay of networks and the geographies they generate; such as regions, functional urban areas and neighbourhoods. In the book, we therefore refer to “Stockholm” and “the Stockholm region” both as formally recognized administrative units and also as specific functional geographies of labor and housing markets, watersheds, energy flows, and similar systemic “hanging-togethers.” We are interested in tracing and mapping how different systems together generate urban structures and patterns that are concomitantly technical, social, political, economic, cultural, and natural in various aspects and from different perspectives; dimensions of the city which we see as being inevitably entangled.

To pursue this basic relational intuition, the chapters of this book are organized thematically rather than sectorally. The chapters cut across common disciplinary boundaries – incorporating aspects of urban planning, architecture, economics, engineering, environmental studies, and more – to discuss critical issues of urban sustainability. Each of the seven thematic chapters that follow has been authored by a constellation of urban scientists from a wide range of disciplines and departments, and has been reviewed or co-authored by practitioners in several fields.

Chapter overview

Given Stockholm's sustainability achievements, it can be a shock ...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Table of Contents
• List of Illustrations
• List of Contributors
• Preface
• Acknowledgments
• Chapter 1 Introduction: The Greenest City?
• Chapter 2 From Ugly Duckling to Europe's First Green Capital: A Historical Perspective on the Development of Stockholm's Urban Environment
• Chapter 3 Using the Concept of Sustainability: Interpretations in Academia, Policy, and Planning
• Chapter 4 A Sustainable Urban Fabric: The Development and Application of Analytical Urban Design Theory
• Chapter 5 Sustainable Urban Flows and Networks: Theoretical and Practical Aspects of Infrastructure Development and Planning
• Chapter 6 The Economics of Green Buildings
• Chapter 7 Performing Sustainability: Institutions, Inertia, and the Practices of Everyday Life
• Chapter 8 From Eco-Modernizing to Political Ecologizing: Future Challenges for the Green Capital
• Chapter 9 Urban Sustainable Development the Stockholm Way
• Index