If we are to deliver the type of cities that we talk about in our growth and development strategies – cities that are liveable, inclusive, sustainable and resilient – then we need to take a step back and take a critical look at the current form of spatial planning and infrastructure provision we are perpetuating.
If we are to juxtapose the envisaged outcomes of our growth and development strategies with the guaranteed outcomes of the current land use patterns and infrastructure provision that we so heavily rely on and continually invest in, the picture that emerges is one of stark contrasts and contradictions that cannot be ignored, or rather ignored at our peril.
Green infrastructure can be the lens that is used to begin to bring into focus these contrasting visions and help us take steps to align green infrastructure to mainstream spatial planning and infrastructure provision approaches.
However, integrating green infrastructure into spatial planning in city contexts where land use decision-making must address the demand for housing, water and sanitation, transport and other infrastructure services is a huge challenge, but so is the opportunity for restoring and regenerating urban ecosystems as an integral part of infrastructure investment, increasing resilience and adapting cities to climate change effects.
Nature has systemically been engineered out of and removed from the urban fabric and what remains are hard, lifeless concrete jungles. This makes cities more vulnerable to the effects of climate change – floods, droughts and to all the cascading effects that follow.
Now there are movements and initiatives for rewilding the city, bringing nature back, and the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration is a rallying call for the protection and revival of ecosystems all around the world, for the benefit of people and nature. Launched in June this year it runs from 2021 to 2030, which is also the deadline for the sustainable development goals and the timeline that scientists have identified as the last chance to prevent catastrophic climate change.
It is against this backdrop that SA cities urgently need to invest differently in urban infrastructure and place green infrastructure firmly on the local urban policy agenda as a critical and essential climate change adaptation measure.
The Integrated Urban Development Framework (IUDF) is intended to address the conditions and challenges facing SA’s cities and towns, by advocating effective management of urbanisation, and is underpinned by a growth model of compact, connected and co-ordinated urban areas driven by integrated infrastructure investments.
The benefits of green infrastructure not only address the effects of climate change, which poses threats to food security, water resources, infrastructure, biodiversity, health and ecosystem services, but also covers the economic and governance aspects of climate adaptation.
The intergovernmental panel on climate change (IPCC) working group I sixth assessment report released in August has been described as a "code red" for humanity and makes it clear that climate change is widespread, rapid, intensifying and unprecedented. It calls for strong and drastic action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
The outlook for Southern Africa is bleak. The climate will become drier with more frequent and prolonged droughts, as it has been previously reported and reiterated that the region is warming at twice the global average. Added to this, SA is already water-stressed and the country’s water future is precarious. Across the country we have experienced devastating droughts, the most noteworthy being the Day Zero disaster in Cape Town in 2018 and more recently in Gqeberha.
Incorporating green infrastructure into spatial planning approaches entails multidisciplinary collaboration and planning. Further, there is a very real and tangible argument for the direct and indirect financial benefits of investing in green infrastructure, and which has direct benefits to municipalities, including minimising the cost of maintenance, stormwater management and pollution.
Consider its economic benefits: on a household level, implementing green infrastructure approaches raises property prices while contributing to home buyers’ preferences. It also increases personal wellbeing, requires lower maintenance costs than “grey” or hard infrastructure and appreciates over time, compounding its benefits.
On a neighbourhood level, it enhances competitiveness of place, increases property market value, boosts retail sales, lowers stormwater costs and helps reduce air pollution and emissions. Indirectly, it contributes to urban renewal and liveability, enhances wellbeing and stress relief, uplifts community cohesion and establishes a sense of place while offering recreational value among its key benefits.
Such benefits, based on the economic valuation of green spaces, could sensitise planners, policymakers and the public to realise the value in these areas.
• Makhele is programmes manager: sustainable and resilient cities at SA Cities Network
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.