African Cities: Moving Beyond Concern

What do you get when you bring some 150 African mayors and city officials, urban researchers, and World Bank South African Country Director Ruth Kagia together to talk about climate change and African cities?  In a word: Concern.  All city officials and those who work with them are concerned about climate change.

Earlier this months, in partnership with France’s AFD and the Development Bank of South Africa, met to follow up the Fifth Urban Research Symposium held in Marseille last year (Cities and Climate Change: Responding to an Urgent Agenda). This local dissemination workshop held in South Africa focused on climate change in African cities. When you look at climate change through the lens of African cities, impacts appear closer, and more dire–climate variability is expected to be severe and the ability to respond often weak. With Africa’s current pace of urbanization, the number of people already living in informal communities, and the infrastructure backlog (e.g. the per capita installed electricity supply in Nigeria is less than 1% of the average OECD country), all participants agreed that climate change will only add to the problems and that an urgent response is needed.

Carbon footprints: What You Buy Matters, But Where You Live Is More Important!

Lots of people, companies, cities, and nations have started to calculate their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, since you can only change what you can measure. These measurements are starting to highlight some very interesting trends and show how complex the global results of our lifestyle are.

In a recent paper Lorraine Sugar and I prepared on GHG emissions, with detailed neighborhood information for the City of Toronto (from University of Toronto researchers VandeWeghe and Kennedy) we highlighted that what you buy is important in determining your GHG emissions, but where you live is much more important. The three neighborhood images, all in the Toronto region, show how urban form is the most important determinant of your carbon footprint.

The neighborhood of East York has the lowest per capita emissions (1.3 t). It is an area with high-density apartment complexes that are within walking distance to a shopping center and public transit.

Etobicoke has medium GHG emissions per capita (6.62 t). It is a neighborhood of high-density single family homes close to the city center and accessible by public transit.


The neighborhood of Whitby has the highest per capita emissions (13.02t)—it’s located in the suburbs of Toronto with large, low-density single family homes that are distant from commercial activity and public transit.

The affluence of the three neighborhoods is roughly equal, however when where you live is relatively dense, well served by public transport, and many destinations are within walking distance, per capita GHG emissions can be much lower. The three neighborhoods are all within the Metropolitan Toronto area, yet per capita emissions vary by an order of magnitude.


Emission reductions brought about by banning shopping bags, buying organic food, or even encouraging more fuel efficient vehicles or higher rates of renewable energy, although important, will never yield an impact similar to what can be brought about by living in better designed, better served, and healthier neighborhoods.

The numbers associated with the Toronto neighborhoods above are only for residential emissions, and may not include other lifestyle impacts such as emissions from employment and international travel, which are also important contributors to GHG emissions. However these numbers do highlight the dramatic importance that urban form has on our per capita greenhouse gas emissions. This information is part of a paper submitted to Environment and Urbanization.