Erin McMurtry’s research while affiliated with University of Southampton and other places

Any coastal eco-city project can be executed perfectly. However, its long-term success relies heavily on the attitude of its stakeholders. This specific key factor is studied through the legal aspects of two juxtaposed coastal eco-city projects. Projects examined here are the “Helsingborg Eco-city” from Sweden and the “Sino Singapore Tianjin Eco-city” from China. These two case studies utilized different forms of contracts, agreements and legal practices. The structure of this research is of the essence as it indicates the progress of the project as well as its results. The research methodology includes comparative studies of both projects, on varies legal aspects such as framework of the procuring process, type of procurement, decision making process, stakeholder engagement and contractual arrangements. This is followed by a survey and analysis of the benefits that accrue from the above choices, in order to identify optimized pathways to maximize the long-term success of the project. The study also identifies barriers in the project development and recommendations are made to policy makers and developers for future eco-city projects. Furthermore, transferability of the merits of each project regarding its legal aspects is examined for projects within its region and across EU-Asia borders. Keywords: stakeholder management, contract type, eco-cities

The requirement to tackle anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions has become increasingly urgent as understanding of the risks of climate change has advanced. The scientific community has been developing mechanisms to bring about a reduction in the quantities of anthropogenic GHG emissions in order that responsibility for anthropogenic climate forcing may be equitably assigned and specific, pragmatic emissions reduction targets can be set and progress measured. The ‘carbon footprint’ is increasingly being recognised as a valuable indicator in the field of GHG emissions management. For ease of application the definition the “carbon footprint” has been limited to the inclusion of emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4) by Wright et al. (2011). However, in some cases a more complete measure is needed that includes the full array of Kyoto “basket” GHGs – CO2, CH4, nitrous oxide (N2O), sulphur hexafluoride (SF6), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and perfluorocarbons (PFCs). Outside of the academic literature the conventional approach is to term this metric a “GHG inventory” (UN, 1998; Ranganathan et al., 2004). However, in the academic literature the term “GHG inventory” has been used to account for various different collections of GHGs and other climate-influencing gases, leading to confusion over the definition of the “GHG inventory”. Consequently, an alternative term, the “climate footprint”, has been proposed (Wiedmann and Minx, 2008; Wright et al., 2011) which aims to eliminate this confusion. The question is: should we continue using the commonly-used term, “GHG inventory”, and endeavour to impose and promote a strict definition or should we introduce a new, rigorously defined term, the “climate footprint”

On one level, it could be concluded that the 17th COP at Durban saw the same quarrelling, lack of movement and national protectionism that has plagued recent COPs. A cynic might claim that the overriding message was that “a plan was made to make a plan” and that no real progress was made. However, a more balanced conclusion might be that we are making slow but steady progress to address the long-term challenge of climate change collectively and comprehensively. The were two key positive messages to emerge from the meeting: - Driven by the EU countries, a pathway towards an international climate regime was agreed. A legally-binding agreement, based upon sound science, covering both developed and developing countries will be negotiated by 2015, which would cover post-2020 emissions targets and actions. - Real progress was evident on some key issues, including technological advances, REDD+ and adaptation. Conversely, the key negative messages were that: - There was little progress on how we might close the gap between countries’ emissions levels and what is required to maintain the planet within 2°C of warming. - Proposed funding levels are probably too low to facilitate the proper implementation of the Cancun Agreements, especially in terms of assisting developing nations to deal with the effects of climate change. - There is still no agreed common accounting framework for carbon emissions; without this, meeting the “within 2°C goal” will be extremely difficult.

This report presents a structured and informative analysis of two poignant European and Asian Coastal Eco-City projects. The scholars have recognised the diverse pathways Eco- City developments take within the duration their development; therefore we work towards a framework that draws upon influences from two, polarised developments in Eco-City design. Available data for both cities was not equally distributed for all aspects of the development process; however we present a comprehensive analysis throughout various stages, from initial project drivers, through to project outcomes. The environmental, social, and legal/political aspects of both developments are clearly outlined in order to reveal transferrable elements of Eco-City developments across EU- Asia borders. Equally, the pivotal role of contract arrangement and stakeholder engagement across two juxtaposed cultures are compared in context. We then give recommendations for an integrated framework for Eco-City design. We address green building standards, energy supply, waste management, transportation, and coastal infrastructures, as well as the integral role of Key Performance Indicators. We conclude the text with an analysis of transferability and the feasibility of combining EU-Asia Eco-City concepts towards the common goal of sustainable development.

The 17th COP to the UNFCCC met in Durban in November 2011. Carbon Management has invited a panel of experts to express their views on the talks. The experts speak to Lucy Marum, Assistant Commissioning Editor, as they speculate on the implications for industry and policy, and discuss how these may impact approaches to GHG management in the future.