{"title":"环保的城市吗?新城市环境制度的(后)政治","authors":"M. Rosol, Vincent Béal, Samuel Mössner","doi":"10.1177/0308518X17714843","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Urban areas are increasingly recognized as strategic sites to address climate change and environmental issues. Specific urban projects are marketed as innovative solutions and best-practice examples, and so-called green cities, eco-cities and sustainable cities have emerged worldwide as leading paradigms in urban planning and policy discourse. The transformation of cities into eco-cities (Kenworthy, 2006; Roseland, 1997) is often based on big data and – widely varying – indicators that should proof the success of urban climate governance (Bulkeley, 2010). The European Commission with its ‘Green Capital’ program, Britain’s ‘Sustainable City Index’, France’s ‘EcoCité’ scheme, the US-American’s ‘Greenest City’ ranking developed by WalletHub’s, the US and Canada ‘Green City Index’ sponsored by Siemens – these programs are all examples of public and private initiatives aimed at identifying and ranking the ‘greenest’ city or cities according to a competitive rationality. They are mostly quantitative approaches, based on ‘hard’ and ‘scientific’ indicators that allow cities to be compared according to their efforts in sustainable urban development. Using these indicators, cities worldwide have increasingly promoted sustainability initiatives in order to position themselves advantageously on the global scene (Chang and Sheppard, 2013; Cugurullo, 2013; Swyngedouw and Kaika, 2014; While et al., 2004). These urban ranking efforts tie into the fact that sustainability has become a metaconsensual policy term (Gill et al., 2012), resting upon broad support from diverse sectors of society. Promoted at first as a way of bringing forward an ecological urban agenda connected to social development, sustainability has lost much of its transformative potential. By now, even car manufacturing in Germany, oil pipelines in Alberta, Canada and nuclear power plants worldwide are being politically justified with reference to sustainability and climate change prevention. Despite controversial national positions regarding the processes, pace and extend of implementing environmental policies – a divergence that became very evident, for example, during the 2009 United Nations","PeriodicalId":11906,"journal":{"name":"Environment and Planning A","volume":"23 1","pages":"1710 - 1718"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"67","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Greenest cities? The (post-)politics of new urban environmental regimes\",\"authors\":\"M. Rosol, Vincent Béal, Samuel Mössner\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/0308518X17714843\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Urban areas are increasingly recognized as strategic sites to address climate change and environmental issues. Specific urban projects are marketed as innovative solutions and best-practice examples, and so-called green cities, eco-cities and sustainable cities have emerged worldwide as leading paradigms in urban planning and policy discourse. The transformation of cities into eco-cities (Kenworthy, 2006; Roseland, 1997) is often based on big data and – widely varying – indicators that should proof the success of urban climate governance (Bulkeley, 2010). The European Commission with its ‘Green Capital’ program, Britain’s ‘Sustainable City Index’, France’s ‘EcoCité’ scheme, the US-American’s ‘Greenest City’ ranking developed by WalletHub’s, the US and Canada ‘Green City Index’ sponsored by Siemens – these programs are all examples of public and private initiatives aimed at identifying and ranking the ‘greenest’ city or cities according to a competitive rationality. They are mostly quantitative approaches, based on ‘hard’ and ‘scientific’ indicators that allow cities to be compared according to their efforts in sustainable urban development. Using these indicators, cities worldwide have increasingly promoted sustainability initiatives in order to position themselves advantageously on the global scene (Chang and Sheppard, 2013; Cugurullo, 2013; Swyngedouw and Kaika, 2014; While et al., 2004). These urban ranking efforts tie into the fact that sustainability has become a metaconsensual policy term (Gill et al., 2012), resting upon broad support from diverse sectors of society. Promoted at first as a way of bringing forward an ecological urban agenda connected to social development, sustainability has lost much of its transformative potential. By now, even car manufacturing in Germany, oil pipelines in Alberta, Canada and nuclear power plants worldwide are being politically justified with reference to sustainability and climate change prevention. Despite controversial national positions regarding the processes, pace and extend of implementing environmental policies – a divergence that became very evident, for example, during the 2009 United Nations\",\"PeriodicalId\":11906,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environment and Planning A\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"1710 - 1718\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-07-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"67\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environment and Planning A\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/0308518X17714843\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environment and Planning A","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0308518X17714843","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 67
摘要
城市地区越来越被认为是应对气候变化和环境问题的战略场所。具体的城市项目被宣传为创新的解决方案和最佳实践的例子,而所谓的绿色城市、生态城市和可持续城市已经成为世界范围内城市规划和政策讨论的主要范例。城市向生态城市的转变(Kenworthy, 2006;Roseland, 1997)通常基于大数据和(差异很大的)指标,这些指标应该证明城市气候治理的成功(bulkley, 2010)。欧盟委员会的“绿色资本”计划、英国的“可持续城市指数”、法国的“生态城市”计划、WalletHub开发的美国“最绿色城市”排名、西门子赞助的美国和加拿大“绿色城市指数”——这些项目都是公共和私人倡议的例子,旨在根据竞争理性确定和排名“最绿色”城市。它们大多是基于“硬”和“科学”指标的定量方法,使城市能够根据其在可持续城市发展方面的努力进行比较。利用这些指标,世界各地的城市越来越多地推动可持续发展举措,以使自己在全球舞台上处于有利地位(Chang和Sheppard, 2013;Cugurullo, 2013;swyngedown and Kaika, 2014;而et al., 2004)。这些城市排名的努力与可持续性已经成为一个元共识的政策术语(Gill et al., 2012)这一事实联系在一起,它依赖于社会不同部门的广泛支持。可持续性最初是作为一种与社会发展相联系的生态城市议程的一种方式而推广的,但它已经失去了很大的变革潜力。到目前为止,就连德国的汽车制造业、加拿大阿尔伯塔省的石油管道和世界各地的核电站,都在可持续性和预防气候变化方面得到了政治上的辩护。尽管各国在执行环境政策的过程、速度和范围上的立场存在争议,但这种分歧在2009年联合国大会期间变得非常明显
Greenest cities? The (post-)politics of new urban environmental regimes
Urban areas are increasingly recognized as strategic sites to address climate change and environmental issues. Specific urban projects are marketed as innovative solutions and best-practice examples, and so-called green cities, eco-cities and sustainable cities have emerged worldwide as leading paradigms in urban planning and policy discourse. The transformation of cities into eco-cities (Kenworthy, 2006; Roseland, 1997) is often based on big data and – widely varying – indicators that should proof the success of urban climate governance (Bulkeley, 2010). The European Commission with its ‘Green Capital’ program, Britain’s ‘Sustainable City Index’, France’s ‘EcoCité’ scheme, the US-American’s ‘Greenest City’ ranking developed by WalletHub’s, the US and Canada ‘Green City Index’ sponsored by Siemens – these programs are all examples of public and private initiatives aimed at identifying and ranking the ‘greenest’ city or cities according to a competitive rationality. They are mostly quantitative approaches, based on ‘hard’ and ‘scientific’ indicators that allow cities to be compared according to their efforts in sustainable urban development. Using these indicators, cities worldwide have increasingly promoted sustainability initiatives in order to position themselves advantageously on the global scene (Chang and Sheppard, 2013; Cugurullo, 2013; Swyngedouw and Kaika, 2014; While et al., 2004). These urban ranking efforts tie into the fact that sustainability has become a metaconsensual policy term (Gill et al., 2012), resting upon broad support from diverse sectors of society. Promoted at first as a way of bringing forward an ecological urban agenda connected to social development, sustainability has lost much of its transformative potential. By now, even car manufacturing in Germany, oil pipelines in Alberta, Canada and nuclear power plants worldwide are being politically justified with reference to sustainability and climate change prevention. Despite controversial national positions regarding the processes, pace and extend of implementing environmental policies – a divergence that became very evident, for example, during the 2009 United Nations