Scottish Government

Review of Scotland's Cities - The Analysis

7.2.6 What the Footprints tell us

Based on the available data, the 'league table' of Scottish City footprints is (per capita footprint in brackets):

Glasgow therefore appears to be the city with the lowest per capita impact on the environment - and Aberdeen the greatest. All of the cities except Aberdeen would appear to be lower than the all-Scotland figure of 5.85 and the UK figure of 6.30. ⁶⁷This is to be expected, when one considers that the economics of, for example, public and other more sustainable forms of transport are generally more favourable in major population centres. However, caution is required in making comparisons. The all-Scotland figure is a broad estimate based on simple extrapolation from the UK figure and is likely to change as a result of the detailed analysis for Scotland currently being undertaken. All of the footprints have an element of non-city-specific data in them.

Table 7.6 shows a breakdown of the Ecological Footprint of the four Scottish Cities by component, measured in area units, ⁶⁸ and enables key areas of concern to be identified.

TABLE 7.6: Summary Ecological Footprint for the Four Cities

Note: All figures should be treated with caution. Scotland-wide data is highlighted in grey
Source: Best Foot Forward (2002) Five Cities Footprint

Once footprints for the cities have been calculated it is possible to compare the use of bioproductive area by an 'average' Aberdonian or Glaswegian with the available 'earthshare', and thereby estimate each city's ecological sustainability. The earthshare is calculated by dividing the total amount of productive land on the planet by the population. The average 'earthshare' has been estimated to be about 2.18 hectares - which reduces to 1.92 hectares when 12% global provision for biodiversity protection is considered. ⁶⁹

Using the city footprints and the average 'earthshare' we can therefore say that if everyone in the world lived like the population of the Scottish cities we would need about two to three additional Earths to support global demand.

This is because the footprints indicate that the average city resident in Scotland uses about 2.5 to 3 times the average earthshare of resources. The average Aberdeen resident uses the greatest share of global resources at 3.06 times the average earthshare, while Glasgow residents on average use approximately 2.8 times their share of resources.

7.2.7 Comparing the Footprint of Scottish Cities and Identifying Priority Areas for Action

The footprint of cities and regions in Table 7.7 have been calculated using a standardised ecological footprint methodology and are thus comparable to the Scotland figures.

TABLE 7.7: Ecological Footprint per capita of selected UK cities/regions (figures are in hectares)

Source: Best Foot Forward (2002) Five Cities Footprint

Table 7.8 presents the footprints calculated for other cities (or regions) where the method is considered to be broadly equivalent.

TABLE 7.8: Ecological Footprint per capita of selected cities, towns and regions (figures are in hectares)

Source: Best Foot Forward

From Tables 7.7 and 7.8 we can see that Scotland's cities are better than the UK average and compare favourably to some international comparators. However, as discussed above, given the complexity of the ecological footprint methodology, comparisons between studies, which may incorporate quite different assumptions, should be treated with caution.

When one examines the individual components of the Scottish city footprints it is possible to identify areas where they perform particularly well or poorly and thus where action is needed - both collectively across the four cities and by individual cities.

7.2.8 Waste

Waste is the largest component of the footprint for each of the cities, contributing approximately a third of the total footprint, and must therefore represent an area for priority action by each of the cities. As has already been noted, Scotland's record on recycling and waste management is poor and if the city footprints are to be reduced to nearer the average "earthshare" then waste management represents an area in which improvements are both urgently required and achievable. The Executive's recent announcement of increased funding to support local authorities in improving waste management, working towards a target of 25% recycling and composting of municipal waste by 2006, should lead to a significant reduction in the footprint of Scottish cities. This target is however an overall Scottish target, and would not necessarily be common across all cities.

7.2.9 Energy Consumption

Domestic and commercial energy consumption vary a good deal between the four cities though the footprint components for all four cities are higher than the Scottish average. Each of the four cities (but particularly Dundee and Aberdeen) need to take action to tackle higher energy consumption.

7.2.10 Passenger Transport

Travel by city residents represents approximately one tenth of their average footprint. Travel in Dundee and Glasgow contributes the lowest share of their average footprint (at 8.7% and 8.6% respectively), and these two cities also have the lowest absolute footprints for passenger travel (reflecting the greater availability of public transport and lower levels of car ownership in the less affluent cities of Dundee and Glasgow). Aberdeen, Edinburgh and Inverness all have lower absolute travel footprints than the Scottish average of 0.7 hectares.

In relative terms therefore, passenger travel represents a greater challenge for Edinburgh and Aberdeen than it does for the other two cities, although care should be taken in interpreting the results since (as Chapter 6 has shown) the pattern of commuting into the cities is growing and must be tackled alongside 'resident' travel if the overall sustainability of Scotland is to be improved.

7.3 PLANNING FOR SUSTAINABILITY: CITY DESIGN AND MANAGEMENT

If Scotland's cities are to become more sustainable then there can be little doubt that the land-use planning system has a key role to play in planning for, and controlling, future development. This is because urban design and the internal structure of cities, and their surrounding regions, materially affect their environmental sustainability.

Choices about the location, design and interconnectedness of housing, shops, offices, factories and public infrastructure will determine patterns of living in cities, and thereby how sustainable our lifestyle choices are. If designed and managed well, then cities can be highly sustainable forms of living. But if designed and managed poorly, then the impact of cities, through pollution from travel and energy consumption, can be highly detrimental to both the environment and people's health. As the spatial design of our cities has an impact economically and socially, so it will have a profound impact environmentally. Key features of a 'sustainable' city are shown in the Box below.

Scottish Executive National Planning Policy Guidance (NPPGs) stresses that sustainable development should lie at the heart of structure and local plans and that the environmental impact of new developments should be a key consideration in whether to grant planning permission. Considerable attempts have been made in recent drafts of structure plans to 'plan-in' sustainability, and to 'plan-out' travel and pollution.

But how well designed are our cities? How well do current plans control growth? And how well will they cope with future changes in our society and economy?

Much debate in academic and planning circles during the 20th century focused on the concept of urban sprawl and the need to control the spatial growth of towns and cities. It is now commonly agreed that spatially compact settlements are more sustainable and thus a legitimate goal of town and country planning.

Table 7.9 shows the population density of the five Scottish cities. Glasgow is the most spatially compact city with a population density of 34.82 persons per hectare. Dundee has the next highest density, while Aberdeen is the least spatially compact, with a population density of only 11.36 persons per hectare. These are relatively low compared to some of our counterparts in other countries. For example, population densities in Amsterdam, Frankfurt, Stockholm, London and Paris are all about 50 persons per hectare. Scottish cities compare more closely with Copenhagen and some American and Australian cities at between 15-30 persons per hectare.

However, care should be taken in interpreting these figures since measures of population density are reliant upon the definition of the city area chosen for the calculation. For example, the figures in Table 7.9 (except for Inverness) use the area of the local authority when calculating density. However, the density figure for Edinburgh and Aberdeen may be artificially low given the large expanse of agricultural green-belt within their respective boundaries.

TABLE 7.9: Population Density of Scottish Cities (persons per hectare)

* Estimated by Highland Council. All other statistics from Office of National Statistics.

The number of households has been growing in all of the core city authorities in recent years and is likely to continue to grow in the future in all of the core cities, except Dundee. But for both past and forecast changes, household growth is stronger in the rest of the city-region than in the core cities. This suggests that our cities will continue to grow and expand in the future. Ensuring that growth in households and their associated demands in terms of housing, travel and energy consumption are catered for in a sustainable way will be a significant challenge.

The challenge is exacerbated when one considers the impact of the trend towards the formation of smaller households on consumption patterns. Although population densities have fallen in our cities, the number of households has generally risen. However, reductions in household size have been shown to have little impact on overall patterns of household energy consumption, and therefore the impact of household growth in Scottish cities is likely to have significant implications for their sustainability. Research has shown, for example, that the fastest growing group of households, single persons in the 35 to 54 age range, are mainly house purchasers with a preference for 2 or even 3 bedroom properties. ⁷⁰ Only 10% of this group would prefer a flat, and a third would not consider one. Such analysis raises challenges around how cities will meet these demands.

Figures for housing development show that the areas surrounding our cities are increasingly important locations for development. Table 7.10 shows the number of new homes sold to individuals by builders in the 4 largest cities and their surrounding regions. It shows that between 1991-2000 about half of all new private sector homes in the Aberdeen, Dundee and Edinburgh city-regions were built in the core cities, but that only about a third of new homes in the Glasgow city-region were built in the city.

TABLE 7.10: Sales of new homes to individuals by builders 1991-2000

Source: Communities Scotland

This suggests that Glasgow, with its multiple regional centres, may be dispersing new development to a greater degree. However, given the presence of extensive tracts of brownfield land in the city this could be deemed unsustainable. As discussed in Chapter 3, there is a need for renewed efforts to tackle the inheritance of vacant and derelict land in a co-ordinated fashion.

In addition, Chapter 4 has also highlighted how the lack of 'suitable' family housing impacts Glasgow, and the problems associated with re-invigorating the private sector housing market in the city. Arguably, land-use planning could play a stronger role in ensuring that residential and other development in the city-region is focused on the city to help ensure that, as a whole, the region becomes more sustainable. Ensuring that plans for residential development along the Clyde are relatively sustainable will be particularly important in this respect.

It is however important to stress that there is no 'one size fits all' solution to planning sustainable towns and cities. One person's 'urban consolidation' programme is another's 'town cramming'. The design, amenity and attractiveness of cities will also impact upon their sustainability and it is therefore important for plans to identify the most appropriate solution, from a variety of approaches, for a particular location. Higher land values in Edinburgh and central Aberdeen, for example, have led to higher residential new build densities, often in excess of 200 units per hectare, whilst virtually no low density housing is being built. ⁷¹ Such development, largely on windfall sites, has often been poorly co-ordinated with little open space planned in, with unbuilt areas frequently given over entirely to car parking. Although most Local Authorities require a certain amount of open space for new developments, these often relate to the area of land being developed. Since high density flatted building may create a high number of new units, whilst occupying a relatively small site, this can lead to little provision of green space. Open spaces are needed for recreation and leisure, to enhance the appearance of the built environment and to provides places for children to play. Arguably, there is a need for planning briefs or development guidelines that address these concerns, as well as a need to both release more space for residential development in high demand areas, and ensure that major sites are delivered in appropriate time frames.

Interest has been growing in recent years about how people in cities 'experience' their environment and the potential impact of urban form on people's sustainability choices, as discussed in Chapter 4. The growth of urban living has caused concern amongst some about the potential disconnection between people and their 'natural' environment. The increasing importance given to encouraging the provision of connected greenspace in settlements ⁷² is, to some extent, an attempt to address these concerns and 'reconnect' people with the natural environment.

Table 7.11 shows the proportion of each of the 4 largest city areas designated under various nature conservancy categories by Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH). It shows that, despite its low population density, Aberdeen has the lowest proportion of its area designated as of conservation interest. Dundee and Edinburgh have much higher proportions of their area designated.

TABLE 7.11: Proportion of city authority areas designated for protection under nature conservancy legislation

Source: SNH Facts and Figures 2001

Table 7.12 shows the results of a 1997 study ⁷³ into the provision of greenspace and semi-natural areas within Scottish cities. The study was confined to greenspace within the 'built up area' and excluded greenbelt or agricultural/countryside areas on the margins of the cities, private gardens and wildlife corridors. Inverness was not included in the study. The study shows that Edinburgh has the highest amount of greenspace and natural area per person, while Aberdeen has a relatively large amount of greenspace but little semi-natural space.

TABLE 7.12: The Quantity and Quality of Greenspace in Selected Scottish Cities

All figures are pre-local government re-organisation (1996)

Spatial planning, relative population densities, and the provision of greenspace all have an impact on the relative sustainability of cities and the quality of the cityscape for residents and visitors. Structure and local plans seek to control the provision of each of these but at present there is a paucity of information about the impact of greenspace provision on sustainability behaviour, and how people make use of greenspace. Therefore, if spatial planning is to make a more effective contribution to making our cities more sustainable, by influencing their design, a better understanding of how people in cities interact with their environment will be needed.

Once a vision for a sustainable Scotland has been translated into a vision of sustainable cities, sustainable towns and sustainable rural areas, it will be the job of local authorities, engaging with communities and other local players, to make that vision real by incorporating it into structure, community, local and other plans for their areas. In particular, Community Planning provides an opportunity for partners to join up the economic, social and environmental aspects of development.

Cities have a particular contribution to make to the realisation of a more sustainable Scotland. In setting out their vision for their cities ( see Chapter 8) a commitment to realising development in a sustainable way must be at the heart of all plans.

Too often sustainable development has been seen as an add on, or something that those concerned with economic and social development need not concern themselves with. Such a perception is beginning to change and recent drafts of structure plans have placed sustainable development firmly at the centre of their strategic aims (see for example the draft Edinburgh and Lothian Structure Plan). Proposed changes to the planning system will place an increasing emphasis on the importance of structure plans for co-ordinating development, and achieving a sustainable economy and society, in our city-regions. It is therefore vital that the city-region structure plans contain at their heart a vision of sustainable development and that they set out a framework within which economic and social goals can be realised in a sustainable way.