This is the author’s version of a work that was submitted/accepted for publication in the following source: el-Baghdadi, Omniya, Desha, Cheryl, & Hargroves, Charlie (2013) An exploration into retrofitting cities with natural design elements - learning from the city of Berlin, Germany. In 8th Conference on Sustainable Development of Energy, Water and Environment Systems, 22-27 September 2013, Dubrovnik, Croatia. This file was downloaded from: http://eprints.qut.edu.au/70186/
c Copyright 2013 Please consult the authors
Notice: Changes introduced as a result of publishing processes such as copy-editing and formatting may not be reflected in this document. For a definitive version of this work, please refer to the published source:
AN EXPLORATION INTO RETROFITTING CITIES WITH NATURAL DESIGN ELEMENTS - LEARNING FROM THE CITY OF BERLIN, GERMANY Authors: Omniya el-Baghdadi (QUT/SBEnrc); Dr Cheryl Desha (QUT/SBEnrc); Charlie Hargroves (Curtin/SBEnrc) Contact: Omniya el-Baghdadi (
[email protected])
ABSTRACT Natural design features in the built environment or biophilic elements are emerging as a potential response to the challenges of climate change, urbanisation and population pressures which have invited issues such as rising urban heat island effect, rising pollution, increased congestion, among others. This concept of living cities was made popular by Professor Tim Beatley in his book titled ‘Biophilic Urbanism’. Evidence of biophilic urbanism can be seen in some cities from around the globe since decoupling environmental pressures from future development is a priority on many agendas. Berlin is an example of a modern economy that has adopted an ecological sustainable development approach to reduce environmental degradation while driving innovation and employment. Berlin serves as a notable case study as it is a city with a prominent history of retrofitting the built environment with vegetation and has some of the most accomplished and successful urban greening programs in the world. For instance, the ‘Biotope Area Factor’ (BAF) is a program that requires 60 per cent of ecological area on applicable new residential structures, and 30 per cent on new commercial structures. With such programs and widespread support from the community, approximately one third of Greater Berlin is natural habitat. The research design and methodology employed is qualitative, and included distilling key information and synthesising data to present an informative literature review, and conducting interviews with relevant candidates to add depth to the research. The sources referenced include journal articles, industry and government reports, online pages and interviews. This paper will begin by outlining the key drivers in propelling biophilic urbanism in the city of Berlin, and why this city is stringent in protecting them from changing political and economic fortunes. It will then explore the barriers and challenges faced and the business case presented. The paper concludes by highlighting the lessons learned from this city, having implications for expanding the use of ecological sustainable development in cities worldwide.
INTRODUCTION The concept of biophilic urbanism was inspired by E. O. Wilson’s theory of ‘Biophilia’, which suggests that there is an innate bond between humans and the living environment. i A number of biophilic elements can be integrated into urban environments as natural design features. ii The City of Berlin, Germany, has a long history of biophilic urbanism, and has some of the most innovative and advanced urban greening policies and programs in the world. These policies are strongly supported by citizens and developers, whose experiences of urban nature over time have led to an inherent understanding of the financial and broader social, environmental and personal benefits. These policies related to environmental protection and conservation have been mainstreamed in all areas of the City’s economic activity, creating a city that enjoys approximately one third of the area as natural habitat, iii and through mechanisms such as the Biotope Area Factor (BAF) and offset mechanisms for nature conservation, green space and nature continues to be added to the city. Berlin also recognises the environmental and economic benefits of a biophilic city causing these policies and programs to be underpinned by strong legislation at a federal and city level, which immunise these initiatives from changing political and economic fortunes. This paper will begin by outlining the key drivers in propelling biophilic urbanism in the city of Berlin, and why this city is stringent in protecting them from changing political and economic fluctuations. It will then explore the barriers and challenges faced and the business case presented. The paper concludes by highlighting the lessons learned from this city, having implications for expanding the use of ecological sustainable development in cities worldwide.
WHAT WERE THE KEY DRIVERS FOR INTRODUCING URBAN GREENING IN BERLIN? A review of the literature and interviews dictate that the City of Berlin has not undertaken an economic assessment of the local urban greening projects, as it was deemed unwarranted. Rather, the City has focused on understanding and mapping the environmental conditions throughout Berlin to inform biophilic urbanism efforts. iv v vi This was further verified in interviews, which explained that a quantification of the costs and benefits was not necessary since a history of political and public support was already in place. vii Interviews also noted that there is already an inherent understanding of the benefits of urban ecology, as evidenced by the prominent bi-partisan political support, as well as community advocacy for and developer interest in vegetating the city in several ways, which will be discussed in more detail below.
1. Historical and cultural concern for the environment Looking at the City’s history provides some context and insights into why the City of Berlin has openly embraced the concept of greening the urban environment. During the 19th century, the allotment-garden system commenced in Berlin to help the needy to grow their own food, as well as help the city mitigate against the implications of the industrial revolution and rapid growth. viii In parallel to this, the first comprehensive urban plan, the 1910 Jansen-Plan, for Greater Berlin was produced clearly outlining the significance of incorporating open space in the city by identifying and meeting the need to find solutions ‘for the demands of traffic as well as beauty, public health and economic efficiency’. ix With this precedent, in 1929 the first open space plan was formulated stating minimum requirements for the provision of open space to further encourage and mainstream the implementation of this notion in Berlin. x Following the World War, the Scharoun-Plan was also developed to provide a comprehensive urban renewal concept, which outlined how Berlin would reintroduce the city’s natural assets. Urban greening continued to grow with the Federal and City’s Nature Conservation Acts and the revised 1965 Land Use Plan; all of which paved the way for the first 1984 Landscape Programme. With the reunification of Germany in 1990, urban planning for Berlin had to once again be discussed anew and the 1994 Landscape Programme including Nature Conservation was developed. This Programme became a tactical urban planning instrument in the City of Berlin as it aimed to promote precautionary environmental protection measure. xi Public consultation has also been consistently utilised in Germany, cultivating a community appreciative of environmental protection. For instance, the Landscape Programme and the revised Landscape Programme including Nature conservation were extensively consulted with the public as part of a targeted consultation exercise called “Berlin has plans”. xii Enthusiastic participation in both consultations, interviews noted, clearly displays the community’s dedication and their cultural appreciation of nature within Berlin. Due to these farsighted plans and continuous cultural support of urban ecology, Berlin today enjoys a ring of parks, allotments, extensive forests and agricultural areas in and around city proximity. As a consequence of the history of urban greening and the current programs and policies in place, Berlin City’s land use consists of: 15.2% Traffic areas, 43.6% Developed areas, 4.9% Agriculture, 11.9% Open space, 18% Forest and 6.7% Water. xiii
2. Inherent policies and programs With a strong ecological tradition in Germany, Berlin continues to ensure that the city preserves and even enhances its urban nature in the face of financial pressures and a demand for urban development. This strong environmental sensitivity amongst the citizens of Berlin provides a strong mandate for urban greening policies and programs. xiv Hence, biophilic elements such as green roofs and living walls have been supported by a complex collection of
political requirements at multiple levels of government. With four levels of political pressure (International, European, National and local), the City of Berlin is fully committed to protecting the natural environment. Some of the most prominent policies and programs are highlighted in the table below: Table 1: A Summary of Biophilic Urbanism related policies and programs Policy or Program The Federal Nature Conservation Act, and Berlin Nature Conservation Act. The Federal Code
Building
The Federal Building Code establishes the legal requirements for building in Germany, requiring the minimisation of the impact of development on the environment. xvi Natura 2000 is a coherent network of protected areas throughout Europe to ensure that habitat and species are protected to permanently preserve biodiversity. xvii
Natura 2000 Landscape and Land (LaPro)
Description of the policy or program The German Federal Nature Conservation Act was first established in 1976 to regulate development in order to conserve, preserve and develop nature and landscapes throughout Germany, while balancing these objectives against other demands of the community on nature and landscapes. xv
Programme Use Plan
The LaPro specifies the strategic background policies related to environmental and landscape issues on a citywide level, and sets a city level basis for evaluating environmental issues required under federal legislation. xviii
General Urban Mitigation Plan
The General Urban Mitigation plan supports the LaPro, and defines the areas throughout the city where there is a particular need for urban greening, as potential offset sites. xix
Biotope (BAF)
The Biotope Area Factor policy dictates what percentage of total land should incorporate vegetation to provide an ecologically-effective surface. xx
Area
Factor
Berlin StEPKlima
Berlin’s climate change action plan, the StEPKlima, passed by the Senate in May 2011 as a binding plan of action for addressing climate change in Berlin. xxi
Environmental Atlas
The Atlas uses GIS to depict the information on over 80 topics, with over 500 maps under the broad headings of soil, water, air, climate, land use, traffic, noise and energy.
Berlin Agenda 21
The Berlin-Agenda provides an overarching structure for Berlin’s social and physical development, and allows for future links and synergies between these development goals to be made. xxii
4. Enhanced standard of living As urban densification intensified, so did the desire to maintain and even enhance the city’s standard of living. With growing population pressures in a confined geographical space, came considerable ecological damage, particularly in the inner city. Hence, with these contending land space demands for residential, commercial and infrastructure purposes, the need to for certain measures to protect residents’ well-being became necessary. xxiii Hence, within the Landscape Programme and other supplementary ecological urban re-development plans were tools and programs created to help reduce existing development impacts to create a biophilic environment that will lead to a rich urban life. xxiv
5. Waterway protection Collectively, 6.6 per cent of the total area of Berlin is water. xxv The City protects these waterways for their aesthetic and environmental value, as well as for drinking water, by classifying ‘water protection areas’ throughout the City and subjecting them to special protection. xxvi Recognition of the impact of urbanisation and soil sealing on stormwater runoff and receiving water bodies has led to holistic stormwater management policies that aim to increase rainwater infiltration, to decentralise stormwater retention and to treat rainwater as close to the source as possible, further encouraging the use of urban nature throughout Berlin. xxvii
6. Recognising externalities With reports by the United Nations xxviii on the implications of global warming being recognised by the Federal Environment Ministry xxix and Berlin’s Senate report xxx, it is evident that externalities such as rise in temperature and stormwater runoff are clearly acknowledged and are being addressed. xxxi After the fall of the Berlin Wall, the city developed rapidly, particularly in inner-city areas. The city centre was characterised by high density, resulting in significant soil-sealing, inadequate infiltration of rainwater, a lack of green space cover, and low humidity. xxxii These factors contributed to the urban heat island (UHI) effect, which is most pronounced in this inner-city area of Berlin, and have been measured to be 9oC higher than surrounding areas. A study by the Kiel Institute for Economic Research has developed a map of Berlin’s urban heat island effect to study and determine its severity. xxxiii The study estimated that the number of heat deaths is expected to rise by 7,500 in 2100 from 4,500 experienced today. This is due to the increased temperature, which is triggering cardiovascular problems that in some cases leads to death. Identifying this, the City of Berlin continues to vouch for urban greening throughout the city. Stormwater runoff appears to also be recognised in Germany as far as the 1970s. xxxiv German households had to pay stormwater rates equating the stormwater burden produced from their property. Tax assessor’s data and aerial photographs were used in Berlin to calculate the cost of stormwater runoff from each property. Households then reviewed these estimated figures and public information campaigns were run simultaneously to spread awareness of this externality. Although, there was an attempt to account for this externality, the fees charged were not high enough to result in land use changes. xxxv Nonetheless, the City of Berlin is actively searching for solutions to account for this externality.
WERE THERE ANY BARRIERS OR CHALLENGES FACED BY THE CITY OF BERLIN? The success of Berlin’s urban greening policies and programs and level of integration into the City’s planning and development processes does not negate that these were without challenges and barriers. As for most cities, the competition between land uses in Berlin puts constant pressure on green and open space, while financial pressures limit the City’s ability to maintain existing green space and develop new areas. These challenges (among others) are briefly discussed below, providing some insights into how these were addressed in Berlin. 1. Initial lack of capacity in green roof development The green roof industry in Germany initially faltered due to a rapid boom in green roof construction that led to the emergence of new, inexperienced companies making and installing poor quality green roofs and cutting corners on installation to keep costs down. This resulted in many failures by such companies during that period, and a consequential public impression that green roofs can be problematic. xxxvi This lack of consumer confidence affected the entire green roof industry, and led to Landscaping and Landscape Development
Research Society to develop the German Standard "Guidelines for the planning, execution and upkeep of Green Roof sites", which gives design and construction standards and recommendations, including considerations for various types of green roofs, vegetation types, building techniques and ongoing maintenance of green roofs. 2. Economic downturn With the Global Financial Crisis (GFC), the budget for the Department of Urban Planning and Environment has had to experience some budget cuts. Hence, a shortage of staff made it difficult to check the developments for compliance with the standards. xxxvii Interviews reiterated this by explaining a whopping drop in staff from 35 to 13 has taken place between 1995 and today. xxxviii However, with a strong environmental framework and legally binding environmental initiatives in place, Berlin was still able to pursue their goals and satisfy public demand. 3. Competing land uses Renewed economic growth in Berlin has resulted in demand for additional housing, which puts pressure on remaining open space throughout the City. Berlin is economically reliant on construction and in encouraging increased population density, and this influences planning and land use decisions around remaining undeveloped areas in the city. xxxix
LESSONS LEARNED It is clear that the City of Berlin is consistently driven to search for ways to integrate vegetative assets into the urban environment. Having explored this, the authors recognise the lessons learned from this city that have implications for expanding the use of ecological sustainable development in cities worldwide; these lessons are discussed below: An appreciation of co-benefits: Looking back at the allotment-garden system and appreciating the role of those gardens in securing subsistence in times of difficulty, such as the World War 1 and the world economic crisis, it has become evident the various usefulness of vegetation in providing nutrition to the urban population. Along with serving as an economic utility for allotment gardeners, allotment gardens also provide open and green space for recreation and leisure for the rest of the local community. Control and command regulation: Use of regulations rather than financial incentives has proven to be an effective means of increasing green cover in Berlin. However, this control and command regulation system was successfully coupled with flexibility, such as the case of the ‘Biotope Area Factor’. Developers can choose between a number of different options for greening or creating permeable surfaces and pick those that are the most beneficial for themselves and the users of the development. Taking a whole of government approach: Policies related to environmental conservation have
been successfully mainstreamed in numerous departments within government, creating a holistic approach to nature protection. For instance, collaboration between staff from Berlin’s Landscape Planning and Town Planning departments helped to develop new classifications (e.g. for environmental mitigation and replacement measures) in the Landscape Programme. Cross-departmental working also helped to develop a better mutual understanding of the various laws applicable to green spaces, allowing departments to effectively work together towards a common goal. Even though a cultural and political understanding of the significance of protecting and enhancing urban green space has existed for quite some time in Berlin, it is still of use to put together an economic report quantifying the costs and benefits as well as the economic considerations Berlin took into account. This is to: 1) Allow Berlin to determine how effective they have been. 2) Facilitate the
adoption of greening the built environment elsewhere. 3) Fostering a share of knowledge amongst cities and countries worldwide. Hence, further exploration into this economic comprehension of urban ecology is necessary.
i
Wilson, Edward O. (1984) Biophilia, Cambridge University Press. SBEnrc, 2012, ‘Can biophilic urbanism deliver strong economic and social benefits in cities?: An economic and policy investigation into the increased use of natural elements in urban design’, Curtin University and Queensland University of Technology. iii Retrieved from http://www.citypopulation.de/php/germany-berlin.php on the 02/08/2013 iv Statistisches Bundesamt Wiesbaden. (2012) Germany: Berlin, www.citypopulation.de/php/germany-berlin.php, accessed 02 August 2013. v Senate Department of Urban Development and the Environment (n.d.) The Berlin cityscape: An analysis. Berlin, Germany, www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/umwelt/landschaftsplanung/stadtland/en/stadtfreir.shtml, accessed 02 August 2013. vi Maps of the World. (n.d).) Berlin Map, Germany, www.mapsofworld.com/germany/berlin-city-map.html, accessed 02 August 2013. vii Cloos, I. (2012) Personal Communications, Senate Department for the Urban Development and the Environment 30 August 2012. viii Senate Department for Urban Development and the Environment (nd) Allotment Gardens, facts and figures, Government of Berlin, Germany. www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/umwelt/stadtgruen/kleingaerten/de/daten_fakten/index.shtml, accessed 03 September 2013 ix The Museum of Architecture, Berlin University of Technology and Design for London (2010) City Vision 1910: 2012. www.designforlondon.gov.uk/uploads/media/City_Visions__Exhibition_Guide.pdf. accessed 03 August 2013. x The Museum of Architecture, Berlin University of Technology and Design for London (2010) City Vision 1910: 2012. www.designforlondon.gov.uk/uploads/media/City_Visions__Exhibition_Guide.pdf. accessed 03 August 2013. xi Senate Department of Urban Development and the Environment (n.d.) Landscape Planning. Berlin, Germany, www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/umwelt/landschaftsplanung/lapro/index_en.shtml, accessed 02 August 2013. xii Senate Department of Urban Development and the Environment (n.d.) The Berlin cityscape: An analysis. Berlin, Germany, www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/umwelt/landschaftsplanung/stadtland/en/stadtfreir.shtml, accessed 02 August 2013. xiii Senate Department of Urban Development and the Environment (n.d.) The Berlin cityscape: An analysis. Berlin, Germany, www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/umwelt/landschaftsplanung/stadtland/en/stadtfreir.shtml, accessed 02/08/13. xiv Buehler, R. et al, (2011) How Germany Became Europe’s Green Leader: A Look at Four Decades of Sustainable Policymaking, Solutions For a sustainable and desirable future, Vol 2, Issue 5, www.thesolutionsjournal.com/node/981, accessed 03 September 2013 xv Senate Department for the Urban Development and the Environment (nd) Agenda 21, Recommendations, Germany, www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/agenda21/en/empfehlungen.shtml, accessed 04 September 2013. xvi ibid xvii ibid xviii ibid xix ibid xx ibid xxi ibid xxii ibid xxiii Senate Department of Urban Development and the Environment (n.d.) Landscape Program Including Nature Conservation. Berlin, Germany, www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/umwelt/landschaftsplanung/lapro/en/plaene/ef.shtml, accessed 05 August 2013. xxiv Beatly, (2009) Biophilic Urbanism. xxv Senate Department for Urban Development (nd) Water and Geology, Berlin Government, Germany. www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/umwelt/wasser/ogewaesser/accessed 03 September 2012 xxvi Senate Department for Urban Development (nd) Water and Geology, Berlin Government, Germany. www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/umwelt/wasser/grundwasser/ accessed 03 September 2012 xxvii Senate Department for Urban Development (nd) Water and Geology, Rainwater, Berlin Government, Germany. www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/umwelt/wasser/regenwasser/index.shtml accessed 03 September 2012 xxviii Sukhdev, Wittmer, Schröter-Schlaack, Nesshöver, Bishop, Brink, Gundimeda, Kumar and Simmons, (2010), “The Economic of Ecosystems and biodiversity”, Mainstreaming the economics of nature, a synthesis of the approach, conclusions and recommendations, ii
www.teebweb.org/ForLocalandRegionalPolicy/LocalandRegionalPolicyMakersChapterDrafts/tabid/29433/Defa ult.aspx, accessed 28 August 2012. xxix Federal Ministry for the Environment (2011) Report on the Environmental Economy, Facts and Figures for Germany, www.bmu.de/files/english/pdf/application/pdf/umweltwirtschaftsbericht_2011_en_bf.pdf, accessed 24 August 2013. xxx Senatsverwaltung für Stadtentwicklung Kommunikation (2011) “Stadtentwicklungsplan Klima Urbane Lebensqualität im Klimawandel sichern”, www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/planen/stadtentwicklungsplanung/download/klima/step_klima_broschuere.pdf, accessed 22 August 2013. xxxi Federal Ministry for Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (2011) Report on the Environmental Economy. Berlin, Germany, www.bmu.de/english/publication/content/35028.php#Nature, accessed 29 August 2013. xxxii Kazmierczak, A. and Carter, J. (2010) Adaptation to climate change using green and blue infrastructure. A database of case studies. University of Manchester, prepared for the Interreg IVC Green and blue space adaptation for urban areas and eco towns (GRaBS) project. www.grabseu.org/membersArea/files/Database_Final_no_hyperlinks.pdf, accessed 03 September 2013. xxxiii Senatsverwaltung für Stadtentwicklung Kommunikation, 2011, “Stadtentwicklungsplan Klima Urbane Lebensqualität im Klimawandel sichern” Retrieved from http://www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/planen/stadtentwicklungsplanung/download/klima/step_klima_broschuer e.pdf Accessed on August 22, 2013. xxxiv Keeley, M. (2007) Using Individual Parcel Assessments to Improve Stormwater Management, Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol 73, Iss2, 149-160 xxxv Keeley, M. (2007) Using Individual Parcel Assessments to Improve Stormwater Management, Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol 73, Iss2, 149-160 xxxvi Ngan, G. (2004) Green Roof Policies: Tools for Encouraging Sustainable Design, Landscape Architecture Canada Foundation, Canada. www.gnla.ca/assets/Policy%20report.pdf, accessed 29 August 2013. xxxvii City of Berlin (nd) Budget and Finance, Berlin, Germany. www.berlin.de/berlin-imueberblick/wirtschaft/haushalt_finanzen.en.html, accessed 03 September 2013 xxxviii Cloos, I. (2012) Personal Communications, Senate Department for the Urban Development and the Environment 30 August 2013. xxxix UN-Habitat (2012) Urban Patterns for a Green Economy, Working with Nature, Case Study: Berlin, United Nations Human Settlements Project (UN-Habitat), Kenya. www.uncsd2012.org/content/documents/499Urban%20Patterns%20For%20A%20Green%20Economy%20%20Working%20With%20Nature.pdf, accessed 30 August 2013.
