There is an economic as well as environmental case for promoting low-carbon cities

by Dermot Finch

Simon Jenkins thinks that we need to "make today's cities work better" to preserve the countryside and reduce emissions (Eco-towns are the greatest try-on in the history of property speculation, April 4).

He's right. If the government wants to get serious about climate change, and deliver 3m new homes over the next two decades, it will take far more than a handful of small, new eco-settlements. However, there's also an economic - as well as an environmental - case for promoting denser, low-carbon city neighbourhoods.

Most of the new eco-towns will be plonked in the countryside, miles away from the concentrations of jobs, shops, and services found in existing city centres. With public spending getting ever tighter, few eco-towns will have good public transport links into major cities. Jenkins says that "to be poor without a car in a British new town is hell". These car-less residents will have a tough time accessing work.

And for those more fortunate eco-town residents, symbolic measures like low-speed limits won't stop them from getting into their cars to commute to work, generating both congestion and emissions in the process. The danger is that eco-towns will be too small and too isolated to become anything but commuter dormitories or, in the worst-case scenario, undesirable sink estates.

If the government focused its energies on creating denser, more carbon-friendly eco-quarters in existing cities, the economic benefits over the long term would outweigh the initial costs. Jenkins is right that cities have good stocks of libraries, welfare services and schools, but there's more. It's the magic formula of higher density, good public transport links, and easy access to jobs that profits both city residents and the wider economy. Many cities owe their success to this formula - which cannot be replicated in small-scale eco-towns.

Jenkins is also right to say cities can become "the new green" - but they are not yet eco-angels. Cities account for 75% of the world's carbon emissions. The government must focus its climate-change agenda on Britain's cities precisely because they are the most prolific polluters. Reducing the carbon footprint of the existing built environment must take priority. At the same time, cities must be empowered to develop green ideas - from congestion charging to home insulation - at a local level.

It's not true, though, to say that "all governments hate cities". Over the past 20 years, cities have risen up the political agenda in Britain. Today, both Labour and the Conservatives are focusing policies - as well as political attention - on our urban areas. Today's politicians ignore cities, and their economic and environmental issues, at their peril.

I'd like to add my voice to Jenkins': let's relocate our greening efforts to Britain's existing towns and cities. Eco-towns are a distraction from the big national issues: the economy, housing and the environment. By putting our cities first, the government can deliver economic and environmental sustainability - alongside the homes and jobs that people need.

Dermot Finch is the director of Centre for Cities.

Thanks to Dermot Finch for permission to reprint.
Photo credit: Manuel Canévet