Finding a balance between pluses and minuses of AI in sustainable cities

A scheme to use #AI to prioritise cyclists over cars at traffic light has grabbed the headlines. AI has huge potential to aid #urban #sustainability but will involve trade-offs between economics, society and the #environment.

Solihull, a town in the UK’s West Midlands, this month unveiled a pilot schemes that uses smart sensor technology to make a busy road crossing safer for cyclists and pedestrians.

The sensors made by VivaCity use intelligent video analytics and advanced algorithms to detect cyclists from up to 30 metres away, triggering the lights at a crossing of the A34 road to turn red for motorists. This early detection enables the traffic signals to go green quicker, giving cyclists a “smoother, uninterrupted journey” on their bikes.

The initiative will be welcomed by cycling campaigners and environmental groups alike for its potential to encourage active travel and environmentally friendly travel while reducing the number of car journeys.

This is likely to deliver secondary benefits such as cleaner air and support the goal of urban sustainability that is often defined as enabling its citizens to meet their current needs without harming the condition of future generations. That goal seen as based on the pillars of economic equity, social resilience, environmental gains and good governance.

This balance is hard to achieve at the best of times, particularly when implementing measures that favour the interests of one group over another. Inevitably the pilot, which could serve as a model for future projects in the West Midlands and perhaps further afield, has encountered some criticism.

One report cited privacy campaigners angry at the widespread use of AI cameras against motorists although they pointed to their use to spot drivers breaking the law on the use of mobile phones while driving. The Solihull scheme could also perhaps be criticised for causing cars to stop more frequently and for longer, creating more delays and more emissions while idling at red lights.

The point is that AI can be a powerful tool to impact human behaviour, either to enhance or restrict what we do. For instance staying within road transport, AI has been used to improve the flow of cars at junctions. An AI system developed by Aston University was developed to read live camera footage and adapt the lights to compensate, keeping the traffic flowing and reducing congestion in a dozen cities in four continents.

WIRED magazine has looked at how Google AI claims that its analysis of changes to traffic light timings could cut as many as 30 per cent of stops and 10 per cent of emissions for 30 million cars a month. On the other hand, it could be said that a potential downside is that by improving traffic flow, it makes driving more popular thus creating further problems down the road, as it were.

There is no doubt that AI tools are very powerful, as anyone who has asked it to write a letter and seen the fluent result delivered in less than a second will know. That has led to a debate over the potential input that a “smart city” can make towards sustainability goals on the one hand, and the risks and negatives impacts on the other.

A quick summary is that AI presents an exciting chance to create intelligent systems that can produce vital knowledge for protecting and sustaining the quality of city life. However, more effort is needed to limit the ethical and governance concerns raised by the greater use of AI, for instance by diverting resources such as traffic management away from other areas or by benefitting one group (drivers) over others (cyclists, pedestrians).

Given that more than two-thirds of people will live in cities by 2050, according to United Nations forecasts, there is an urgent need to ensure that cities are sustainable organisms that do not add to the environmental burden of future generations. AI clearly has the potential to reduce that threat, but at what cost?

UN-Habitat, the UN agency that has led much of the debate and research into urban sustainability is now working to help councils harness digital technologies while ensuring marginalised and vulnerable groups are included in smart cities and digital transformation processes

It is working on drawing up international guidelines on people-centred smart cities to be approved as a non-binding framework by the end of next year.

Technologists always move faster than regulators, but the hope is that policymakers can attempt to catch up by taking a proactive, rather than reactive stance, and ensure that cities can balance the needs of different groups of their citizens.

Sustainable city rankings are highly contested but Montréal earns its titles

A great pleasure to to be in #Montréal, the “most #sustainable destination in North America”. These titles are highly contested, but the Canadian #city has a lot going for it.

As urban sustainability becomes an increasingly desired accolade for city planners, thus the titles that are awarded annually become a focus of attention and competition. The tourism authority in Montréal is keen to highlight its status as the most sustainable destination city in North America.

But look closer and the reality is that it is 33rd out of the 100 destinations analysed by the Global Destination Sustainability Movement, whose index is based on destination management, the environment, social issues, and suppliers. In fact Canada held nine of the top 10 slots in the region with only Washington DC going into the list.

Other indices are available; such as that from sustainable-economy research firm Corporate Knights that ranked Montréal 14th – but it was only the fourth best in Canada, showing that the methodology is crucial in determining the rankings. It looks at environmental and social factors but adjusts them according to cities’ ranking on the UN human development index, which includes life expectancy, education and income per head; income inequality and economic output per person. Design and engineering company Arcadis ranked Montréal 24th in 2022 (and eighth best in North America) but the city did not make the cut in 2024.

This is not to criticise the array of indices, which are useful in incentivising city authorities to raise their sustainability game, whether that is to attract interest from tourists, employers or investors. But it highlights the importance of understanding what is being measured, by whom, and why.

Critical analysis of a range of indices by a team of Iranian academics identified the risk that reliance on such indices can have adverse outcomes in terms of urban development, increases in inequalities, and the diminution in importance of cultural values such as social and spatial justice and public participation.

Rank and file them

The risk is that urban development strategies will be threatened by  conventional ranking systems that overlooked complex interactions while solidifying traditional typecasts. These can, of course, be offset by ensuring that it is clear what the agenda of the indexation is and constantly reviewing the ways that the results are published and presented.  In particular urban sustainability agenda will be different for a developed than a developing city. While issues such as greenhouse gas emissions are a priority versus for the former, crime and poverty are the more urgent problems for the latter.

The reason for the focus on Montréal was a holiday visit, rather than a scientific analysis. But from a very personal and non-codified perspective, the city has a lot going for it. Its investment into cycling infrastructure has made two wheel transport safe and effective without impacting motor traffic directly.

It’s four-line metro system is the third busiest in north America behind New York City and Mexico City with a fifth line under construction and a sixth on the drawing board. The council has a 10-year plan through to 2030 with  four action areas, three scales, and 20 action priorities and a 2050 plan to increase the amount of affordable housing while at the same improving green-oriented mobility, safety, quality of life and climate resilience.

Urban sustainable rankings are a mixed blessing. They can distract from long-term development agendas especially if observers do not look closely at what the methodology and is and whom they are aimed at. But on the positive side they can both incentivise and support efforts by city authorities to set urban transformation targets, win approval from citizens, and attract outside investment to help fund those.

My personal perspective – as a European self-funded tourist – was that Montréal was a very liveable city thanks to its public transport, bike-friendly streets, the range of small non-chain restaurants representing all cuisines, and network of small and large scale parks. That is also a reminder that each individual take on sustainability is different, and that the personal is distinct from the institutional.

Peak tourism, peak anger: sustainable solutions needed

The last full week in August marks the peak in the #tourist season in many Western country resort #cities. Perceptions of over-tourism has led to protests, highlighting the need for #sustainable solutions.

This year is likely to see another record in tourism volumes across Europe, thanks to hot weather and a holidaymakers’ continuing desire to take advantages of travel opportunities closed off during the Covid-19 pandemic. More than 85 million tourists visited Spain, a prime destination, last year - a record that surpassed the previous peak in 2019.

The mass influx led to a flurry of mostly peaceful albeit noisy protests by native residents angry at overcrowding, higher prices, and fears that the growth in the number of homes being used as holiday stays was depriving locals of affordable housing and public services such as sewage, Mallorca, Malaga and the Canary Islands saw organised protests while residents in Barcelona sprayed dining tourists with water pistols to get their message across.

But these activities have not prompted an early, guilty flight home now will deter next years holidaymakers, who see a summer vacation as a right. Even official efforts to deter tourists have failed: Amsterdam’s attempt to put off “stag-do” Brits had little impact. Time will tell if Barcelona’s plan to scrap the licences of some 10,100 flats currently approved as short-term rentals benefits its citizens.

As students of urban sustainability know, a sustainable city rests on three pillars of social, economic and environmental benefits. As often happens, so-called over-tourism manifests as a victory of economic interests over those of a city’s environmental and social qualities.

Rather than one-off measures that may only have a minor or temporary effect, may even just displace the problem elsewhere, and could impose an economic cost on the local tourism industry, making tourism more sustainable will require a coordinated approach that strikes a balance between the three pillars.

Identify impacts, deliver gains

The first step is to get a full picture of the impacts rather than relying in an edit Al evidence. A survey of almost 225 destinations across all 27 EU states found the four strongest impacts were: the increased cost of housing and living; environmental degradation and congestion; economic problems during the low season; and irregular and precarious work.

The next step identifies the factors that makes destinations more resilient. The ones with most potential revolved around strategies to conserve natural features, create more effective destination management, and improve quality of local services and facilities.

As part of a two-year initiative that runs until December 2025, the Commission will identify what it sees as the key challenges to, and best practices for delivering sustainable and resilient tourism. It will then set up a “peer-to-peer twinning mechanism” for tourism destinations facing similar challenges, which will enable cities to share experiences, learn from each other, and collaborate on achieving common objectives. Finally it will communicate lessons learned to destination management organisations and tourists.

There are some signs of an impact. Two-thirds of destinations are already implementing measures to improve their tourism industry’s sustainability and resilience. These mainly address the environmental concerns, but others look sociocultural and economic aspects.

At a micro level measures are likely to include making tourism smarter, using digital technology to help tourists find alternative activities to spread the impact, and more sustainable tourism activities and transport. As with a holiday, the journey is an important as the destination.