Technical Committee Report of the 3rd Guangzhou Award

2016-10-17 16:49:42

Download 2016 Guangzhou Award TC Report.pdf


The Technical Committee (TC) met in Bogota from 11 to 14 October 2016 in parallel to the 5th UCLG World Congress. It met to select deserving and shortlisted initiatives with a view to enhancing the implementation of sustainable urban development through inspiration and knowledge sharing. It took into consideration the goal of the Guangzhou International Award for Urban Innovation (Guangzhou Award) to recognize innovations in improving the social, economic and environmental sustainability in cities and local governments worldwide and more specifically:

• To highlight exemplary models of innovative policies and practices in implementing the urban dimension of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the New Urban Agenda;

• To motivate cities and local authorities to further promote innovation and to learn from each other;

• To improve city governance.

The TC took also into consideration the objectives of the City of Guangzhou to promote the sharing of lessons learned from urban innovations between cities, regions, countries and thematic areas.

The TC wishes to express its appreciation to the City of Guangzhou, the United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG) and Metropolis for their vision in establishing the Guangzhou Award. The TC also wishes to express its appreciation to Cities Alliance, ICLEI, FLACMA and the University of Zaragoza for their active participation and support to the Award process.

The TC commends the Secretariat for the Guangzhou Award in the way it handled the call for submissions, the transparency in its guidelines and processes. It further commends the City of Guangzhou for its intention to invite all 15 shortlisted cities to present their initiatives to the International Conference on Urban Innovation as was the case in 2012 and 2014, and to allow the Jury to make its final decision after the conference.

The TC reviewed all initiatives among which 301 submitted from 171 cities and from 59 countries and regions were eligible. The TC would like to recognize all submissions for their commendable efforts in making their respective communities more sustainable. Of these 171 cities, 45 were identified as outstanding cities. It further shortlisted 15 cities of excellence from the 45. The 15 cities of excellence are presented in annex including the reasons behind the TC’s choice.

II. Evaluation Process

The TC assessed each submission using the main criteria established by the Guangzhou International Award for Urban Innovation namely:

• Innovativeness: the extent to which and the use of knowledge of information has been applied in developing new policies, practices and/or business models to address major urban issues and challenges;

• Effectiveness: the extent to which the initiative has achieved or is well on its way to achieve its stated objective(s) and effective social impact;

• Replicability: the positive demonstration effect and scalability of the initiative in inspiring others to adopt new ideas, policies or practices, including replication in other locations of the city, region or country for greater impact and sustainability;

• Significance: strategic importance and cross-cutting nature of the initiative; the importance of the initiative in addressing problems of public concern.

In addition to the above and to the traditional pillars and domains of sustainability (social, economic, environmental, governance and technology), the TC considered the integrated and transformative nature of each initiative.

III. Selection Procedure for the Short-listed Initiatives

In its first plenary session, the TC reviewed the African initiatives together and then divided into two groups (A and B). Each group reviewed about half of the submissions on a regional basis with a view to determining the qualifying initiatives. The work of the two groups resulted in a consolidated list of 90 initiatives from 70 cities and regions.

In its second plenary session, the members of the TC re-organized into two groups (C and D) with the purpose of identifying 45 outstanding cities. Each group came up with a list. The two lists were compared in plenary. Those common to both lists were unanimously admitted to deserving initiatives list. Those remaining were discussed in plenary until consensus of the final list of 45 cities was reached.

In its third plenary session, the members of the TC were re-organized into Groups E and F with the purpose of identifying 15 short-listed cities. The same methodology was applied and resulted in the shortlist.

The TC prepared a brief for each short-listed initiative to inform the Jury of the rationale of its selection. These briefs are contained in Annex III.

At its fourth plenary session the TC finalized the current report. It also presented the results of its deliberations to participants and leaders attending the 5th UCLG World Congress and to the media.

IV. Recommendations of the TC to the Secretariat

The TC appreciates the transparent process and rigorous procedures undertaken for the evaluation of the submissions to the 2016 award. The Technical Committee has the following suggestions on how to improve the reputation and credibility of the Award. With 301 submissions and a notable increase in the number of countries and territories participating in the third cycle of the award, the Award will need to plan for the future and the likelihood that more countries and cities will participate. A critical consideration will be to ensure the highest possible quality of submissions. Processes and procedures that could help achieve this objective include:

• A two stage technical review process whereby the first round of elimination (e.g. from 300+ to 100) is done on-line based on a two-page submission accompanied by one page of pictures or graphics. Those that are not eliminated are then invited to submit a full dossier for the second round. This would allow the TC to spend more time in the second round to assess the submissions including additional materials. It would also allow for providing feedback to those promising submissions that were weak in their presentation and use the interim period to improve their submissions.

• Ideally the first round assessment should be done by a network of partners and institutions representing regional expertise and experience as well as sectoral expertise (planning, architecture, urban management and governance, etc.). These institutions would also be invited to send experts to the 2nd round assessment, but not exclusively, so as to have new people and institutions participating in each cycle. The advantage of using a network of partner institutions lays also with their ability to undertake background checks.

• Encourage on-line submission that would oblige submitters to respect the submission template. This would avoid cities not respecting the word limitations. The use of on-line submission cannot be made exclusive as this would exclude some countries and cities from participating owing to the digital divide.

• Include as part of the submission requirement a signed letter by the mayor, governor, councilor or other senior official of the city/region.

• Minor adjustments to the reporting format to avoid repetition.

• With rapidly evolving technology, invite cities/regions to submit a limited amount of graphic material (maps, graphics and photos) as part of the submission (this does not exclude other additional material).

V. TC Members

1. Ms. Monika Zimmermann, TC Chair; Deputy Secretary General, ICLEI - Local Governments for Sustainability

2. Ms. Belinda Yuen, Chartered Town Planner; Research Director, Lee Kuan Yew Centre for Innovative Cities, Singapore University of Technology & Design; Vice President (Southeast Asia), Commonwealth Association of Planners; Former President, Singapore Institute of Planners

3. Mr. Ajay Suri, Regional Adviser – Asia, Cities Alliance

4. Mr. Chris Johnson, CEO, Urban Taskforce Australia; Former Executive Director, New South Wales Planning Department; Former Architect, New South Wales Government; Life Fellow, Australian Institute of Architects

5. Mr. Lin Zhu, Executive Chairman, China Urban Operation League; Consultative Committee Member, CITIC Foundation for Reform & Development Studies

6. Mr. Francisco Berruete, European Architect; Lecturer; University of Zaragoza, Spain; Founding Partner, BMASB Architecture, Urban Planning Consultant Office

7. Mr. Bachir Kanoute, Town Planner; Executive Coordinator, Enda Ecopop. Focal Point and Head of office Africa, International Observatory of Participatory Democracy (IOPD)

8. Ms. Sheila Ochugboju, Ambassador, Transformative Science and Urban Resilience, Government of Kisumu, Kenya; Head Researcher, UN-Habitat Global State of Urban Youth Report (GSUYR 2015/2016); Chair of Jury, Global Innovation Competition (2013-2016)

9. Ms. Elisa Silva, Architect; Professor, Simón Bolívar University; Consultant, CAF Development Bank of Latin American; Consultant, Sucre Municipality; Director & Founder, Enlace Arquitectura

10. Mr. Jorge Pérez Jaramillo, Architect; Former Dean, School of Architecture FAUPB; Deputy Planning Director, Area Metropolitana del Valle de Aburra (2004-08), Planning Director, Medellin (2012-15)

11. Mr. Augusto Mathias, Advisor, National Confederation of Municipalities of Brazil/FLACMA; Healthy City Planner; Research Associate, Smart- UMTRI University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute

12. Mr. Nicholas You , Moderator, TC Meeting; Advisor, Guangzhou Award

VI. Members of the Secretariat

1. Mr. Liu Baochun, Director General, Guangzhou Foreign Affairs Office

2. Mr. Lei Weiju, Deputy Director General, Guangzhou Foreign Affairs Office

3. Mr. Yang Zeliang, Director, Guangzhou Award Secretariat

4. Ms. Wu Xiaoling, Deputy Director, Guangzhou Award Secretariat

5. Ms. Chen Ming, Officer, Guangzhou Award Secretariat

6. Ms. Guo Jialin, Officer, Guangzhou Award Secretariat

7. Mr. Luo Jie, Officer, Guangzhou Award Secretariat

NEXT PAGE: List of 15 Shortlisted Cities


List of 15 Shortlisted Cities

(in alphabetical order of they city)

1. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Development of Sustainable Transport System

2 Asuncion, Paraguay

Master Plan of the Historic Downtown

3. Boston, United States

Youth Lead the Change: Youth Participatory Budgeting

4. Brussels-Capital Region, Belgium

(1) Greenbiz Incubator

(2) Abattoir 2020: Reconversion of the Slaughter House Site

(3) Urban Marketing: For a Farsighted and Sustainable Neighbourhood Image

5. Copenhagen, Denmark 

Copenhagen Climate Resilient Neighbourhood

6. Jakarta, Indonesia

Jakarta Participatory Planning and Good Governance

7. La Paz, Bolivia

The La Paz Zebras: A Citizen Culture Project

8. Luleburgaz, Turkey

Sex, Egalitarian Approach and Directives

9. Malang, Indonesia

Water Banking Movement

10. Menashe, Israel

Education Towards Coexistence between Israeli Jews and Arabs in our Regional Council and Its Surrounding Councils

11. Qalyubeya, Egypt

Integrated Community Based Solid Waste Management

12. Ramallah, Palestine

Ramallah Smart City “Freedom through Technology”

13. Songpa, Republic of Korea

Songpa Solar Nanum (Sharing) Power Plant

14. Tampere, Finland

Circular Economy

15. Tlajomulco de Zuñiga, Mexico

Environmental Law Prosecution Local Office

NEXT PAGE: List of 30 Deserving Cities


List of 30 Deserving Cities

(In alphabetical order of the city)

1. Barcelona, Spain

Trinitat Ex Nova. From Vertical Slum to Sustainable Neighborhood by Community Self-Empowerment

2. Berlin, Germany

m4guide - An Integrated Communication and Navigation System

Climate-Neutral Berlin 2050

3. Bogota, Colombia

(1) School at Hospital 

(2) Green Hospitals

4. Buenos Aires, Argentina 

My Vote, My Election

5. Busan, Republic of Korea

(1) Gamman Creative Cultural Villages, A Space for Creative Activities where Residents and Artists are Working Together

(2) Creative Urban Regeneration Project for the Establishment of a Sustainable City

6. Cape Town, South Africa

(1) A Transport Development Index

(2) Women at Work Empowerment Program

7. Caracas, Venezuela

Cultural, Recreational, Educational and Empowering Network Centersfor Vulnerable and Low Income People

8. Cartagena, Colombia

Fishermen School - Sowing Hope

9. Curridabat, Costa Rica

Ciudad Dulce

10. Dalifort Foirail, Senegal

UrbaPEJ- Dalifort: Support to Sustainable Social Development of Neighbourhoods and Associations, and the Promotion of Youth Employment in Dalifort Outskirts of Dakar

11. Guangzhou, China 

Real Bus

12. Guatemala City, Guatemala

Development Centre for the Municipal Program for Children at Risk

13. Istanbul, Turkey

Megacity Indicator System for Disaster Risk Management in Istanbul

14. Jambi, Indonesia 

Intensively Developing Sub-Districts through Community Effort

15. Jeonju, Republic of Korea

Innovative Food Waste Reduce and Recycling Project Using RFID Technology

16. Junin, Colombia

Ancestral Wisdom as a Tool for Peace

17. Kfar Saba, Israel

Innovative Public and Community Services to Better Social Inclusion of Population with Special Needs, through Local Economic and Social Development

18. Koh Kong, Cambodia

Linking Environmental Preservation with Economic Development: The Green Corridor of Koh Kong

19. Mashhad, Iran 

Young Consultants Group

20. Mexico City, Mexico

(1) Mexico City Open Contracting

(2) Mapatón CDMX

21. Milan, Italy

Sharing Mobility in Milan

22. Moscow, Russia

Collective Decision-Making System “VMESTE!” (“TOGETHER!”)

23. Medellin, Colombia

Innovative District

24. Nanning, China

Kitchen Waste Resource Utilization and Harmless Treatment Plant Project of Nanning City

25. Rosario, Argentina

Green Homes Network: Citizen Commitment Reduction of Energy,Water, Waste

26. Seferihisar, Turkey 

Public Card Financial Aid System aka Seferikart

27. Sydney, Australia 

Delivering Sustainable Sydney 2030

28. New Taipei, Taiwan (China) 

Transformation through empowering people: A structural approach to pursue green life

29. Utrecht, Netherlands

Utrecht: Enhancing the quality of life by localizing universal human rights

30. Valenzuela, Phillippines

Education 360-Degrees Investment Program

NEXT PAGE: Summaries of the 15 Shortlisted Cities’ Initiatives


Summaries of the 15 Shortlisted Cities’ Initiatives

1. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Development of a Sustainable Transport System

Addis Ababa is one of the oldest and largest cities in Africa. It is also one of the most rapidly urbanizing cities, home to 25% of Ethiopia’s urban population, 3.6 million residents, a figure that is expected to double in the next 15 years.

This initiative was chosen in part because the city is learning from neighboring Dar es Salaam, by taking an integrated municipal management approach to develop a high quality, affordable Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system. This system will help shape future metropolitan growth. However the BRT is much more than a public transport system — the corridor designs also offer many improvements for pedestrians and cyclists, high quality cycle tracks, footpaths, and pedestrian crossings. The fully dedicated BRT and pedestrian walkways provide public transport riders with quick access to the city center, without interference from private vehicles and minibuses.

This project is one of seven BRT corridors planned across Africa and is expected to serve over 3,000 passengers per hour in each direction.

2. Asuncion, Paraguay

Master plan for the Historical Downtown

The city of Asuncion in Paraguay has half a million people in a low-rise city that spreads out from its historic core. Many residents have moved out of the historic center due to the poor quality of the buildings. The city has initiated a project to bring residents back into the historic center by re-densifying the urban fabric with mixed-uses, providing the necessary facilities to make the city center attractive again to all of the population. Public space will also be improved, generating meeting places that promote new urban experiences. The currently empty historic buildings in the city center will be re-used and enhanced as part of the project.

As part of the urban renewal of the center the project will promote the creative economy, tourism and cultural industries and design strategies for sustainable mobility. Citizen and institutional participation will be developed through digital tools and establish finance mechanisms and management approaches. The relationship between the city, the bay and the nature reserve of San Miguel will be improved.

Importantly the initiative reconnects the city to the river with a series of parks and a nature reserve and flood management approaches and generates a new gateway between the city and the river. An informal settlement in the old center will benefit from the renewal process.

The approach to the initiative is to produce an “Urban Future Vision” with 10 strategies, an action plan and 40 pilot projects. An Asuncion Open Laboratory (ASU-LAB) is being established as a link between public institutions, private organizations and citizens. The city will work with students to develop new information and mapping of the city.

The Technical Committee was impressed with this initiative as an example of how towns with depopulated historic cores can reverse the decay by increasing density, providing public space and by involving and engaging the community. This approach is clearly  about  renewal and not only conservation. The balance of new buildings with public spaces including the creation of a “coastal active green space” and other environmental projects will lead to increased tourism for the city. Many other towns and cities with historic cores that need renewal can learn from this example of how to involve their communities in forging a new vision for the city.

3. Boston, United States

Youth Lead the Change: Youth Participatory Budgeting

The initiative empowers youth to participate in decision-making. Youth are directly involved in participatory budgeting with allocated resources (1 million US$ per year), participatory policymaking and citywide collaborations. Its objective is to increase youth engagement in civic affairs and thereby cultivate lifelong commitment. An extensive network of partners has been created with youth serving agencies, universities and schools. The project has evolved since its first phase to include children as young as 12 years old and incorporates the voice of disenfranchised groups such as homeless youth and youth involved in gangs in detention centers. National and international partnerships are being forged with other cities such as Baku in Azerbaijan.

The initiative is considered exemplary in its commitment to forging collaboration between cities facing challenges with rigorous participatory methodologies led by youth, and continued focus on increasing the voice of youth in local government decision making.

4. Brussels-Capital Region, Belgium

(1) Greenbiz Incubator

(2) Abattoir 2020: Reconversion of the Slaughter House Site

(3) Urban Marketing: For a Farsighted and Sustainable Neighbourhood Image

The Technical Committee commends the comprehensive urban renewal project that includes Greenbizz incubator-cum-SME low energy park, Abbatoir 2020: reconversion of the slaughter house side, & Innovative Initiative Urban Marketing. The innovation lies in the region’s definition and follow-up implementation of a holistic strategy for the sustainable urban revitalization of the Canal Area that encompasses not just physical infrastructure redevelopment and creation of economic opportunities but also place making and place branding, social engagement and environmental transformation. The Technical Committee finds the scale and partnerships of the redevelopment commendable. The Canal Area is a central development axis of Brussels, covering an area of 2509 hectares (15% of the city’s territory) and 17% of its residents.

Of significance is the effort directed towards sustainable economy, territorial cohesion and collective co-construction of projects with key stakeholders and the scale at which the initiatives operate. The comprehensive approach demonstrates how different stakeholders – public, private and people – can effectively come together to reimagine and redesign a new positive image of the city through urban regeneration and can serve as a reference for other cities. The regeneration projects further showcase how through architecture and design, existing and new economic activities can be harnessed to produce low energy people-centric industrial infrastructure and opportunities to support the growth of SME and circular economy.

5. Copenhagen, Denmark

Climate Resilient Neighborhood

This initiative is part of the strategy of City of Copenhagen for urban renewal of the neighborhood of St. Kjelds district, covering physical, social and cultural upgrading to address challenges of social housing, unemployment and low living standards. The cloudburst in Copenhagen in 2011 drew the attention of the city to the climate change risks. The Copenhagen Adaptation Plan was prepared and St. Kjelds was selected as the pilot area to build neighborhood resilience and improve urban life for 24,000 residents. The interventions include sustainable storm water management through green solutions on the surface to prevent flooding in the neighborhood; creating greener urban spaces through enhanced bio-diversity and branding of the neighborhood.

The Technical Committee selected the Copenhagen initiative because of the innovation in future-proofing the city with green climate change adaptation solutions at the street level, solutions which are scale-able to city-level and the prospective learning for other cities.

6. Jakarta, Indonesia

Participatory Planning and Good Governance

The participatory planning approach adopted in Jakarta is to capture the infrastructure, social and economic demands of its 2,726 sub-district communities and more than 30,000 neighborhood communities at sub-district level in its annual development and budgeting plan. The aspirations of the communities are captured through a networking mechanism developed by the city government. The community proposals are decided in area development planning meetings and are submitted to the city government through web-based  application- more than 46,000 proposals were received by the city government in 2016. This bottom-up process is combined with the top-down urban plans to formulate the annual development and budgeting plan, and this is implemented by 750 city departments/units.

The Technical Committee selected the Jakarta initiative because of its participatory planning approach to development of the mega-city and the learning prospects for mega-cities and metropolises globally.

7. La Paz – Bolivia

The La Paz Zebras: Citizen Culture Project

This is a city initiative to raise public awareness on road safety. The La Paz Zebra initiative  is a very successful undertaking aimed at actively involving highly vulnerable youth in a citizen education program. Youth at risk are trained to become “civic educators” and are paid a minimum wage disguised and role-acting as zebras, in reference to zebra crossings.

The aim is to change both driver and pedestrian behavior and to encourage both groups to obey traffic signs and rules. The outcome is both changing people’s behavior resulting in less traffic congestion and accidents, and providing youth at risk with a unique opportunity to become active and responsible citizens.

The impact of this initiative has been mostly local but is now spreading to other cities across Bolivia as well as to other countries in Latin America.

The transformational nature of this initiative lies in its friendly and comic dimension and the innovative manner of engaging and integrating youth at risk. Youth are given a meaningful role in society, one which both empowers them and provides them with respect and dignity.

As a result, many of the youth participating in this initiative have continued their education and found decent jobs; a few have pursued higher education. This initiative was selected due to its simplicity, transferability and social impact.

8. Luleburgaz, Turkey

Sex, Egalitarian Approach and Directives

This initiative consists of a plan for municipal transportation services that is comprised of a team of women that constitute 50% of the team. As a team of designers and users they plan and implement transportation policy focusing on meeting the demands of users including women. This represents a significant change when compared to previous practice of male centered public management, which condoned gender discrimination within public offices. Women have since taken on key management positions, which have helped empower women to have a voice in public transportation use and reflect the fact that they are the principle users of public transportation and spend more money for public transport than any other segment of society. The movement has also positively influenced other public and private professional working environments where female employment has steadily increased.

As a structural change in policy making, the Technical Committee sees this initiative as deeply transformative of how public resources are allocated in more gender-sensitive and egalitarian terms and can serve as an exemplar for other cities.

9. Malang, Indonesia

Water Banking Movement: Transforming Glintung Go Green from Flood Risk Area

Malang city has 5.5 per cent of the city that is characterized by slum conditions covering 608 Ha. The slum settlements are largely inhabited by informal sector workers and are often vulnerable to flood and disease. Glintung community, with the support of Malang city, has demonstrated an environmentally-sustainable approach to addressing climate change challenge through collective action. The neighborhood leaders inspired a planned social environmental movement to transform Glintung from a climate risk to a climate resilient kampong through a participative approach. Malang city government integrated this social movement with the pilot project – Water Banking movement. The community initiatives included tree planting in the neighborhood, building catchment areas in every house, building vertical sky gardens, producing organic produce and integrating local cultural heritage. The technical solutions were provided by Faculty of Engineering, Brawijaya University, and local businesses provided a dedicated market for organic food products.

The Technical Committee selected the Malang city initiative because of the innovative community approach to building resilience to climate change and the green approach to local economic development. The project has the potential to inspire other low-income communities and informal settlements worldwide to improve their living environment, engage in local economic development and improving food and nutrition.

10. Menashe, Israel

Education towards Co-existence of Israeli Jews and Arabs

The Jewish and Arab communities in the Wadi area of Menashe are totally segregated and do not socialize. They have limited knowledge of developments and happenings in each other’s ommunities. Against the backdrop of prevailing political tensions, this leads to stereo-typing, fear and hatred towards each other. In an effort to raise these communities´ understanding of each other, the Program brings together nine pair of school classes, one each from Jewish and Arab communities, for six months of intensive joint activities to know about each other, develop mutual trust and relation, share a common area and work collectively on projects. This effort has brought together 600 students, dozens of teachers and over a thousand parents.

The Technical Committee has selected this initiative of Menashe city as the innovative approach to addressing alienation, distrust and hatred in cities, and for its transferability to many other situations that are less tense but suffer nonetheless from similar social, cultural and religious divides.

11. Qalyubeya, Egypt

Integrated Community Based Solid Waste Management Project

Qalyubeya Governorate is part of Greater Cairo, which is one of the largest urban areas in Africa, with a mosaic of sub-cities where over 20 million people live. Rapid urbanization has caused an increase in informal housing areas, informal enterprises and growing inequality, which also affect the informal waste collectors and recyclers known as Zabaleen in Egypt. These communities are now critical in promoting urban sustainability as Cairo continues to grow. Every year, more than 21 million tons of municipal waste is generated and the city would not be able to manage this escalating volume of waste in an effective and environmentally sound manner, without the contribution of the these informal waste pickers, living around the cities of Khosoos and Khanka in the Qalyubeya Governorate.

This initiative was therefore chosen to recognize the innovative, integrated approach, which Qalyubeya has taken to manage waste management issues. There is a strong positive social, economic and environmental impact, affecting the lives of over 750,000 inhabitants and improving the living and working conditions of 20,000 informal waste collectors and recyclers residing in this area. These communities usually face challenges of stigmatization, social exclusion, poverty and serious health problems resulting from the hazardous substances that they collect everyday.

This team from the Qalyubeya Governorate, working with the Zabaleen, promoted several initiatives:

1. The Zabaleen created companies and collect waste on behalf of the District;

2. They now use more efficient motorized tricycles, which navigate the narrow streets and bring it to a transfer station, newly constructed by the governorate;

3. The city converts the waste to fuel for sale, at an Integrated Recycling Resource Center (IRRC), separating recyclables and Refused Driven Fuel (RDF) used by the cement industry.

4. The city is also developing an emergency unit that can deal generally with urgent health cases and particularly with frequent occupational injuries faced by this group of waste workers.

Nationally, the Qalyubeya experience serves as a model for the national solid waste management strategy and is now being promoted for replication. Locally, the initiative creates livelihood opportunities for the urban poor in Khosoos and Khanka cities and improves the overall environmental conditions for creating a better living environment.

12. Ramallah, Palestine

Smart City, Freedom thought Technology

This initiative proposes a resilient social and technical strategy for community development. Despite the limitations on the usage of technology, this project has become a powerful tool, through urban private partnership in collaboration with national and local governments, together with academia and international cooperation agencies.

Through its smart city support, the initiative offers inclusive opportunities for planning and decision-making, with reliable information updated from the field. The use of ICT, integrates dimensions of smart utilities, mobility, environment, education, living, health, planning and governance.

The Technical Committee wants to highlight and support this project for its right to provide services for all the citizens in a very unfavourable context. Ramallah municipality has been able to implement a data management system, with significant improvement in the quality of services whilst overcoming severe restrictions and challenges regarding access to ICT.

The Technical Committee also appreciates the principles and values that underscore the municipality’s actions notably in the fields of governance and transparency, quality and accessibility to services, responsiveness to emergency conditions, education, tourism and cultural activities.

13. Songpa, Republic of Korea

Songpa Solar Nanum (Sharing) Power Plant

This initiative presents a creative business and technology model to promote renewable energy - a public solar generation plant development that seeks to integrate issues of environmental sustainability and energy welfare. Its lessons are particularly relevant for energy-poor cities and countries. It offers an alternative to the common practice of energy subsidy. Despite challenges (e.g. high initial cost), the submission outlines how the poor and vulnerable groups (like the elderly and disabled) can and have benefitted from the redistribution of profits: 25% of net profit (or 200 million won) is devoted to people who lack access to energy. This support is comprehensive, ranging from support for energy costs to replacement of household lighting and equipment (e.g. washing machines and refrigerators) to improve energy efficiency. Part of the profit is also ploughed back into plant reinvestment and improvement as well as to support other developing countries (e.g. donation of wind solar integrated generator to Mongolia and Vietnam). The Technical Committee finds this business model and its internal redistributive allocation of resources particularly commendable. Another commendable feature is community involvement. The initiative is driven by local residents’ participation and efforts. From the outset, the community is involved and included in project conceptualization and development. The local residents are not just users but co-producers of energy. The initiative is financed through a combination of city budget, local residents’ donations and environmental/financial investment companies on a BOT public-private partnership model.

14. Tampere, Finland

Model of the Best Regional Circular Economy Concept for Cities, Companies and Citizens

This initiative is a non-profit company, owned by 17 municipalities, providing waste management services for the inhabitants of the 17 municipalities.

The concept is that of an open platform for private enterprises to develop advanced and innovative solutions in waste management based on the principle of a circular economy.

The benefits of this concept are the cost-efficiency in waste management and circular economy solutions, providing continuous development and avoiding overlapping investments.

The municipalities of the Tampere Region have decided that one of the main goals in the waste management is to develop the management of the entire waste chain with focus on the recovery and costs paid by the customers.

This initiative was selected for its innovative approach, environment impact, social cost benefit and transferability.

15. Tlajomulco de Zuñiga, México 

Environmental Law Prosecution Local Office

The Tlajomulco Municipality has created a Municipal Environmental Protection Agency to create a legal framework derived from participatory planning methodologies to build climate change and sustainability policy into local government. Once being an agricultural area at  the outskirts of Guadalajara City, the region is experiencing rapid urbanization that has saturated current public service capacities. The plan focuses on reducing air pollution, reducing water consumption and increasing social awareness of environmental challenges. Implementation strategies include education, enforcement, the establishment of a local reward system, and citizen involvement in surveillance.

The initiative is particularly relevant in the context of Latin America where environmental regulation and enforcement are weak or non-existent and natural resources landscape and habitat are under severe distress.