Canada's Sustainability Report

8/8/2019 Canada's Sustainability Report

1/64

The Sustainable Cities Challenge in CanadaA research study addressing sustainability and infrastructure issues facing Canadians.

A research project conducted by GlobeScan. Sponsored by Siemens Canada.

www.siemens.ca


2/64

Content

2 Sustainable Cities Challenge

Acknowledgements

This report was written based on

research conducted GlobeScan.We would like to thank all those

who participated in the survey for

their valuable insights and time.


3/64

Content

About this Report

Executive Summary

The Context of Infrastructure Decision-making

Five Infrastructures

Transportation

Energy

Water and Waste Water

Healthcare

Safety and Security

City Governance and Finance

Appendix: Methodology

6

8

14

24

26

32

38

44

50

56

62

3Sustainable Cities Challenge


4/64

Foreword


Natural capital assetsThe key to sustainability

Urban sprawl, intensive farming, and other land use threaten not only biodiversity,like songbirds and wild owers, but also the health and wellbeing of our families and

our communities. Many of our development activities affect the goods and servicesthat nature provides for free. These goods and services are resources that are providedfor by the earths natural capitalecosystems, such as forests, wetlands, and rivers.Nature provides valuable economic commodities like the food we eat, the timber weuse to build our homes, and the medicines we use to heal ourselves.

Ecosystems also provide non-market services that regulate the climate, disease outbreaksand wastes; cultural services that provide aesthetic, recreational and spiritual value; andsupporting services, such as nutrient cycling and water purication. Forests in urban set-tings, between cities and in the countryside illustrate the importance of natural capital.

They ensure that steep slopes remain stable, that ood risks are lower, and that drinkingwater comes out of the tap ltered and clean. Recognition of the irreplaceable value of

ecosystem services and the impact of human development on them is emerging globally.

The rapid increase in population and intensity of land use in major Canadian cites andthe subsequent development of so-called megacities, such as Vancouver and Toronto,are placing unprecedented pressure on natural capital assets, such as forest, wetlandsand rivers. The consequences of this pressure are not only the degradation of ecologicalintegrity, such as reduced soil quality, increased lake pollution and species loss, but alsodeclining human health and other aspects of community wellbeing.

At the foundation, we believe that investments to protect and enhance natural capitalare urgently needed. In particular, the projected impact of global warming will place

additional pressure on the ecosystems, in and around Canadian cities where remainingnatural areas are already stressed and in decline. Human pressures on the natural capitalneed to be reduced to ensure our ecological systems can cope and adapt in the face ofclimate change. This is why we have to align our approaches when it comes to evaluat-ing solutions.

The David Suzuki Foundation encourages companies like Siemens Canada to continuetheir efforts to work towards a sustainable future. We encourage everyone to stop andthink about the importance of our natural capital assets as being the key to sustainabil-ity, and the interdependency between striking a balance between quality of human lifeand the quality and protection of our homethe biosphere.

Peter RobinsonCEO David Suzuki Foundation


5/64


SustainabilityNot just a buzz word at Siemens

Read any newspaper, listen to any talk radio station or catch the evening news andchances are you will hear the word sustainability. Whether we are talking about the

environment, business results, recruitment practices, or a sports team for that matter,sustainability seems to be making the headlines daily. At Siemens, sustainability is animportant part of our vocabulary toobut for Siemens, sustainability is not new andit is denitely not a avour of the monthit is more like a avour of the century.

For the past several years, we have taken a close look at our strategy and now Siemensis in a strong position to meet tomorrows business challengestoday. By concentratingour activities in the three SectorsIndustry, Energy and Healthcarewe have a structurethat enables us to focus on four key megatrendsdemographic change, urbanization,climate change and globalization. And, with our environmental portfolio, we have an

exceptionally broad spectrum of products and solutions for environmental and climateprotection thats unmatched worldwide.

However, even though we are in a strong position, we still have to ask ourselves ifsociety is really willing to take the next steps. For sustainability to be realized, future-oriented business decisions need to take place today. In a lot of cases, I know that it iseasier said than done. It basically comes down to the political will and a new mindsetor way of thinking. The political environment in Canada (like many countries) is suchthat a lot of short-term decisions are driven by mandates and terms of ofceusuallyfour years or less. So how do we drive change when the kind of change we are talkingabout takes years to implement before anyone can see a return on the investment?The answer is leading by example. A lot of our technology, already widely used today,signicantly reduces greenhouse gas emissions, pollution and carbon footprints.

We need to work with our customers and encourage governments to look beyondthe obvious and invest in the futurethe future of our youth and our planet.

And that is why we committed the necessary resources to commission this researchstudy and publish this report. We are very interested in knowing what Canadian cityleaders and key stakeholders are thinking. We want to engage Canadians alike indialogue about sustainable cities and working with organizations like the David SuzukiFoundation, we want to increase awareness of the subject and we want to encouragemore people to think about the future today.

I encourage you to use this report to connect your city, your organization or your family

and friends and transform discussion into action. Many say it is too late. We at Siemensdont think so. We are committed to be responsible, excellent and innovative when

it comes to the environment and sustainable cites, and want to work with Canadiansacross this great country to make a sustainable difference.

Roland AurichPresident & CEOSiemens Canada Limited


6/64

About this Report



7/64


This report examines the challenges facingCanadas largest and most important cit-ies in city management and ve importantinfrastructure areas. They include Trans-portation, Energy, Water and Waste Water,Healthcare and, Safety and Security.

The report is based on the results of a sur-vey of 243 stakeholders across 12 cities. Inorder to have broad geographic representa-tion, the research included several smaller

cities such as Saskatoon, St. Johns, andHalifax, and omitted larger cities in regionsalready well covered in the survey, amongthem Hamilton, Kitchener, Windsor, St.Catherines-Niagara, and Victoria.

Stakeholders are grouped into the follow-ing categories: City employees, both unelected and

elected senior ofcials Senior level staff at private sector

companies working in areas relatedto urban infrastructure

Senior managers and heads of non-governmental organizations

Professors or department heads at majoruniversities and think tanks

All survey participants hold senior roles intheir respective organizations and are fam-iliar with at least one of the ve infrastruc-ture areas or with city management gener-ally. The survey included general questions

on the broad theme of urban infrastructurethat were addressed to all 243 experts.More detailed questions on the specicinfrastructure areas, as well as city man-agement, were asked to those stakeholderswith the appropriate knowledge and experi-ence. Sample sizes range from 113 experts

in transportation to 26 in healthcare.

For the purposes of analysis, the cities havebeen grouped into the following regions:

Atlantic: Halifax, St. Johns Quebec: Montreal, Quebec City Ontario: London, Ottawa, Toronto Prairies: Saskatoon, Winnipeg Alberta: Edmonton, Calgary British Columbia: Vancouver

About this Report


8/64

Executive Summary



9/64


Executive Summary

While recognizing that cities are much morethan their infrastructure, this research dealswith ve urban infrastructure areas. Theyinclude transportation, energy, water andwaste water, healthcare, and safety andsecurity. The research also probes expertsviews on city governance.

This report discusses GlobeScans quantita-tive research with a total survey sample of243 respondents, all of whom are experi-

enced and knowledgeable about urbaninfrastructure. In order to present a bal-anced view, the research explores the opin-ions of stakeholders representing severalsectors including government, the privatesector, research/academe, non-govern-mental organizations, and healthcare. The

research was conducted in 12 of Canadaslargest cities between February 22 andApril 6, 2010.

Cities face a number of challenges. From an

environmental perspective, the experts sur-

veyed consider transportation, water, and

urban sprawl the most important. On thesocial front, they cite housing and poverty,

while urban funding and nances are con-

sidered their major economic issues. As for

infrastructure, the cities most serious chal-

lenges are renewal and upgrade, transpor-

tation issues, and infrastructure funding.

Canadian cities are generally perceived toplace high importance on making them-selves competitive to attract private invest-

ment when making infrastructure invest-ments. But, they are not considered veryprogressive in terms of understandingand managing the linkages between infra-structure, environment, and sustainabledevelopment. Experts are divided on howeffectively their cities are adopting sustain-

able infrastructure solutions. Moreover,less than a majority thinks that their citysleaders recognize the vital role that infra-structure decisions can play in protecting

the environment and addressing climatechange. It seems that, while the conceptof sustainable infrastructure is not foreignto cities, implementation is lagging. Evenless encouraging is the perception that cit-ies will continue to compromise environ-ment for growth. While four in ten experts


10/64

Executive Summary


predict that cities will protect the environ-ment from excessive infrastructure growth,three in ten disagree that they will.

Experts think that transportation is themost important infrastructural system forattracting investment to their cities and

predict that it will require the lions share ofinfrastructure investment.

Survey respondents are very positive abouttheir own citys quality of life compared toother large cities in Canada. Surprisinglythough, less than a majority is optimis-tic about their citys ability to successfullymanage its future, even over the next veto ten years.

TransportationExpected to dominate infrastructure debates

during the next decade, transportation is at

the root of the most serious urban environ-

mental problems. It is a key determinant of

city competitiveness, and places the biggest

demand on cities investment dollars.

Transportation faces signicant challenges.

Principal among them are aging infrastruc-

ture, public awareness, lack of planning,

and inadequate capacity. Up-front capital

costs and political inuence are seen as the

most important factors in transportation

infrastructure decision-making.

Cities are expected to lean heavily towardmass transit infrastructure rather than per-

sonal transportation. But high capital costswill likely cause cities to focus more onimproving current systems than on imple-menting new ones. Cities will likely placeincreasing emphasis on technology thattakes into account urban environmentalaspects, signalling a need for newer ap-proaches and, potentially, more up-frontcapital investment. In spite of the challen-ges, experts predict that cities will maintainownership of urban transportation infra-

structure.

EnergyPoor long-term planning and public aware-ness and behaviour are viewed as the big-gest challenges facing cities energy infra-structure. Energy experts in Ontario citiesare especially critical of energy planningand capacity. Interestingly, experts are notvery concerned about environmental dam-age caused by our energy infrastructure.


11/64


Energy infrastructure decisions are largelydriven by up-front capital costs and typeof energy source, making choices betweenfossil, nuclear, and renewables difcult.Impacts on economy and employment arealso important decision-making factors,as is political inuence. While experts pre-

dict more emphasis on renewable sourcesthan on fossil fuels, they expect far moreemphasis on fossil fuels (e.g., gas) thanon nuclear, probably because of capitalcosts. However, they prefer nuclear to fos-sil fuels, likely seeing nuclear as a solutionto climate change and a better long-termenergy source. The ndings suggest a polit-ically charged le and a contentious debateover energy generation technologies.

Other predictions for the next ve to tenyears include greater emphasis on demandmanagement over new capacity (a long-standing and largely ignored recommenda-tion by energy experts), free market oversubsidized pricing, local generation overlarge grids, and proven over new technolo-gies. Experts envisage a stronger role forthe private sector in energy than in otherinfrastructure areas.

Water and Waste WaterWater ranks among our cities most import-ant environmental challenges. The environ-mental impacts of waste water systems areconsidered to be especially serious. More-

over, water infrastructure is getting old.But, few experts consider water as oneof the most serious challenges facing cityinfrastructure, an indication that water andwaste water systems still work fairly welland, unlike transportation, are not consid-ered to be a major factor in driving city com-

petitiveness. Not surprisingly, water qualityand regulations are the most important fac-tors in cities decision-making about water,but cost is also a critical consideration.Experts predict that Canadian cities will in-creasingly look to water reuse as a sourceof water and will focus more on increasingefciencies than investing in new capacity.Rather than encourage private sector par-ticipation, cities are expected to own andoperate their water services.

HealthcareExperts, not to mention the general pub-lic, can feel very strongly about healthcareissues, more so than about other infrastruc-ture areas. Lack of capacity is seen as themost serious issue facing Canadas health-care system. With capital cost, in additionto political inuence, being a major factorin decision-making, it is expected that ourhealthcare systems will be encouraged tobecome more efcient rather than increase

in capacity. To that end, experts foreseemore emphasis on centralized hospitalworkow management, electronic docu-mentation systems, and shared services.

While the Canadian healthcare system isexpected to remain largely publicly ownedand operated, experts foresee a transitionto more fee-based services from the cur-rent emphasis on a free-for-all approach.

Safety and SecurityCanadian cities are relatively free fromdangers such as terrorism and ethnic con-icts affecting other large cities aroundthe world. In fact, road safety is consideredtheir most important safety and securitychallenge, followed by public behaviourgenerally and lack of strategic planningon security.

To enhance safety and security, expertsthink that the most effective measures

will involve improved communications,coordination, and planning. Rather thanmerely add manpower, cities will lean to-ward adopting better technology. Whilethe use of gated communities will likelycontinue to increase, cities will favouropen approaches to development. In thedebate between personal privacy and pub-lic surveillance, experts foresee increasingacceptance of surveillance. Even thoughthere is a benecial role for public securityresources, Canadian cities will emphasize

the use of resources owned and operatedby the public.


12/64

Executive Summary


GovernanceAs cities have expanded, some into largemetropolitan areas, city governance has

become more complex. The biggest chal-lenge facing city management is the over-all aging of its infrastructure, followed

distantly by awareness and behaviour onthe part of urban residents. With up-frontcapital cost, economic impacts, and politicsplaying key roles in city decision-making,wise urban governance is not easy.

Experts are critical of city decision-making

on infrastructure investments both for its

lack of transparency/consistency and for its

excessive focus on short-term needs at the

expense of long-term sustainability. Clearly,

more effective leadership and strategic plan-

ning at the city level are required. The key

challenge may be encouraging public con-stituents to endorse long-term planning.

City management experts foresee a num-ber of mainly positive trends in governance.

They predict that cities will lean towardgrowth based on good planning and con-trol, an approach that may, in part, address

urban sprawl. Cities will attempt to breakdown silo-based management and adopt amore holistic approach, ideally across infra-structure areas. They will also become moreresponsive to their citizens rather than con-tinue with a more authoritative approach.However, rather than take signicant stepsto de-regulate, cities will retain regulations

as their principal tools. To address inef-ciency and boost competitiveness, citiesare predicted to become smarter andwill increasingly embrace digitization ande-government technologies.


13/64


Role of the private sectorAcross the ve infrastructure areas sur-veyed, experts predict only slightly more

emphasis on public ownership, operations,and nancing, rather than on private. Thisis an indication that compared to the actual

situation today, there will be opportunitiesfor the private sector. Experts see more of arole for the private sector in energy than inwater, healthcare, security, and transporta-tion. They primarily see the private sectorparticipating in economic development in-itiatives but have less enthusiasm for pub-lic-private partnerships and the privatiza-

tion of public tasks. Interestingly, only onein ve experts thinks that privatization oftheir citys infrastructure would increase itsefciency.

The fact that experts frequently cite publicawareness and behaviour as issues of con-

cern suggests a possible need for more ef-fective public engagement and educationabout urban infrastructure and consump-

tion patterns.

Attracting the investments and people who

drive modern economies, protecting the nat-

ural environment, and providing a superior

quality of life will require Canadian cities to

take a longer view, put in place more com-

prehensive and efcient governance struc-

tures, and invest in modern, greener infra-

structure solutionsa tall order but well

worth tackling, given the survey respond-

ents prognosis of our cities futures.

The cities surveyed were selected for their size and geography. They include important cities in all regions from east

to west, but not Canadas northern cities. Aggregate ndings are sound, but analyses of smaller samples, such as at

an individual city level or individual infrastructure area, are prone to higher levels of statistical variation.


14/64



Key ndings

Transportation and water/waste water management issues are considered

the most serious environmental problems facing cities.

Housing and poverty are the most pressing social issues, while nancial issues

and economic diversication rank as the top economic problems.

The most serious challenges facing city infrastructure include transportation,

funding, and general upgrading and maintenance.

It is far from certain that cities will protect their environment from excessive

infrastructure growth.

Only one-half of experts think that when making infrastructure investments,their cities place high importance on making the city competitive to attract

private investment.

Experts are divided on whether city leaders recognize the vital role that

infrastructure decisions can play in protecting the environment.

Most experts, by far, think that investing in transportation is most important

in attracting investment to their cities.

Transportation will take the lions share of infrastructure investment.

A strong majority of experts believes the quality life in their city is better

than average, but far fewer are condent that their city will successfully

manage its future.


15/64


The Context ofInfrastructure

Decision-making

Approximately 81 percent of Canadas popu-

lation lives in urban areas, up about 5 per-

cent since 1980. Together, the cities includ-

ed in this study have a population of 18.2

million and account for about 53 percent

of the total population of Canada. Among

them, these cities drive Canadas economy,

house its universities, and attract new arriv-

als from across Canada and abroad.1

Challenges facing citiesExperts were asked, without prompting, toname separately the most serious environ-mental, social, and economic challengesfacing Canadas large cities.

1 Statistics Canada. 2010.


16/64


When it comes to environmental challen-

ges, stakeholders most mention transpor-

tation-related issues (20% of experts) and

water/waste water (19%), followed by urban

sprawl (14%), and atmospheric issues such

as air pollution and climate change.

Energy sources and waste management are

seen as far less serious, suggesting the latteris considered well managed.

Across regions there is differentiation. Ex-perts in Quebec and British Columbia per-ceive transportation to be the most serious,while in Ontario and Prairie cities waterchallenges hold the number one position.Experts in Atlantic Canada consider bothtransportation and water to be equally ser-ious, while urban sprawl is the most serious

for Alberta cities.


Reversing [urban] sprawl, shifting focus

from car-dependent, segregated develop-

ment in outlying areas to intensify

existing urban areas.

Stakeholder in Calgary

Environment


17/64


The most serious social issues identiedby experts involve housing (19%) and pov-erty (15%). Other issues are viewed as farless serious. Across regions there are slightdifferences. In Atlantic Canada, as well asOntario cities and Vancouver, housing isconsidered to be the most serious socialchallenge. However, in Alberta and Prairie

cities, poverty is the greatest concern. InQuebec, immigration issues stand out asmost serious.

SocialOverall, the most challenging economic

problems involve nancial issues, including

funding, budgets, and taxes (22%), followed

by economic diversication (17%), and the

availability of jobs (12%). Experts in Prairie,

Alberta, and Atlantic cities tend more than

others to worry about nances, while those

in Alberta also continue to be especially

concerned about economic diversication.Reacting to the manufacturing downturn,

Ontario experts point to availability of jobs.

Economic


18/64


When asked specically, again unprompted,about the most serious challenges facingcity infrastructure, stakeholders point to re-newal and upgrade, transportation issues,and infrastructure funding. Although thetop three challenges remain largely thesame across regions, infrastructure renew-al and upgrade top the list in the Atlantic

region, while transportation is prominentfor Quebec cities. Infrastructure funding is

seen as the most serious challenge for cit-ies in Alberta and Ontario, where budgetdecits are signicant.

With the exception of inadequate leader-ship and planning in Ontario cities (men-tioned by 18% of experts), other challengesare cited much less often. Challenges sur-

rounding water and waste water are rarelymentioned.


Infrastructure challenges

The GTA [Greater Toronto Area] needs a

transport governance structure that com-

bines democratic decision-making and the

capacity to act boldly at a regional scale.

It needs a massive inux of funding to

build new transit routes. It needs a major

shift in planning and development

policies and patterns.

Stakeholder in Toronto


19/64


Experts are divided about how well theircities perform on adopting sustainableinfrastructure solutions. Less than one-third (30%) of experts consider their city tobe above average or among the very beston this score, while slightly more think theyare below average or among the worst. Thebalance consider their cities average.

Stakeholders in Vancouver are especiallypositive about their city adopting green

infrastructure (71% rate above average oramong the best). Stakeholders in Montrealand Quebec are at the other end of thespectrum, with almost no one rating theircities above average and one-half ratingthem below average.

Experts give a mildly positive verdict on

whether their citys leaders recognize the

vital role that infrastructure decisions can

play in protecting the environment and ad-dressing climate change. Four in ten experts

(mainly in government) think that their cities

recognize this role, while three in ten (main-

ly in NGOs) disagree. Experts in Edmonton

tend to be more positive than others.

Environment and infrastructureExperts are not convinced that cities willprotect the environment from excessiveinfrastructure growth. While four in tenpredict that their cities will not sacrice theenvironment for growth, as many as threein ten disagree. Not surprisingly, govern-ment experts, again, are more likely thanNGO experts to give cities credit for en-

vironmental protection.

Overall, the research suggests that Canadian

cities have substantial room for improvement

in terms of understanding and managing

the linkages between infrastructure and en-

vironment. The 2007 Megacities Challenge

research2 showed that cities in developed

countries recognize how good infrastructure

decision-making can contribute to environ-

mental protection (68% agreed; 20% dis-

agreed) and do more to protect the environ-

ment from excessive infrastructure growth(68% disagreed that their cities would in-

crease infrastructure at the expense of the

environment and only 14% agreed).

2 MegaCity Challenges: A Stakeholders Perspective, Siemens AG Corporate Communications, 2006.


20/64


Experts were asked to rate the need forinvestment in a number of infrastructureareas in their city over the next ve to tenyears. The top tier issue is clearly transpor-tation, with 90 percent of experts believingthat requirements will be high in this area.

Forecasted investment requirements are

far less for other areas. The second tier ofareas, with about six in ten or more expertssaying there is a high need for investment,

include environmental protection, publichousing and civic buildings, and water sup-ply and waste water treatment.

The third tier includes social areas, such ashealthcare, education, and other social ser-vices, as well as solid waste management,all with at least a majority predicting highinvestment requirements. This list of prior-ities above echoes approximately the rank-

ing of environmental and social problemsidentied by stakeholders.

Bottom-tier issues (where, overall, less thanone-half of stakeholders identify a highneed for investment) include energy, citymanagement, leisure, safety and security,and communications. That being said, sixin ten or more experts in Toronto and Hali-fax express strong need for energy invest-ments. A majority of NGOs also see highrequirements for investments in energy,

presumably in renewable sources.


Investment needs

Regarding communications, including theInternet, the ndings suggest that Canadasprincipal cities are well served. This is likely

not the view held by residents in smallercommunities and rural areas.


21/64


One-half of experts (51%) believes thatwhen making infrastructure investments,their cities place high importance on mak-ing the city competitive to attract privateinvestment. Fewer than two in ten disagree(the balance neither agree nor disagree).Interestingly, government sector expertsare signicantly more inclined than those

in the private sector to agree that their cit-ies make the connection between infra-structure and competitiveness. Also, those

in Edmonton, London, Quebec, and Sas-katoon tend more than others to acknow-ledge their cities acumen here.

When asked to select from a list which kindof infrastructure is the most important inattracting investment to their cities, mostexperts, by far, across the 12 cities point totransportation (63%). Generally, across allcities, transportation is followed by a sec-

ond tier of softer infrastructure areas, in-cluding leisure, culture and recreation, andthe education system (mentioned by aboutthree in ten experts), as well as energy andenvironmental infrastructure. Experts inthe Atlantic region put emphasis not onlyon transportation, but also on leisure, cul-ture, and recreation.

Infrastructure and city competitiveness

Stakeholders in all cities consider infra-structure areas such as communications,water supply, safety, and healthcare to beless important drivers of competitiveness

in attracting private investment. Infrastruc-ture such as social services, solid wastemanagement, and public housing are con-sidered even less important factors.


22/64


Across all cities involved in this study, three-quarters of stakeholders rate the quality oflife in their respective cities as above aver-age or among the very best comparedto other large cities in Canada. This view isoptimistic given what the survey data showabout the challenges facing these cities.Stakeholders in Vancouver are the most

optimistic58 percent say their quality oflife is among the very bestwhile those inthe Prairie cities tend to be a lot less opti-

mistic (18%).

Notwithstanding todays optimistic assess-ment, when asked to rate their citys prob-ability of successfully managing its future inthe next ve to ten years, less than a majorityof stakeholders (44%) responds positively.While no regional differences are apparent,there is a difference between government(both elected and non-elected) and other

experts. Across all cities, nearly two-thirdsof government stakeholders express a posi-tive outlook, while NGO and private sector

stakeholders are less optimistic.


Stakeholder outlook


23/64



24/64




25/64


All cities require high-quality infrastructure

to enable the safe and efcient movement

of people, goods, and information and to

provide essential services to their residents.

The following section of this report deals

with ve major infrastructure areas: trans-

portation, energy, water and waste water,

healthcare, and safety and security. For each

infrastructure area, survey questions were

answered primarily by those stakeholders

with the most relevant knowledge of the

area, unless otherwise noted in the text.



26/64

Transportation


Key ndings

Transportation is considered the most important infrastructure issue facing

Canadian cities and will require the most funding.

Solving transportation challenges will not be easy; they include public awareness

and behaviour, aging infrastructure, lack of planning, and inadequate capacity.

Up-front capital costs and political inuence are the most important factors

in transportation infrastructure decision-making.

Cities will lean heavily toward mass transit infrastructure rather personaltransportation.

To address current transportation challenges, experts strongly recommend both

improving and expanding the current infrastructure, but cities are expected to

focus more on incremental improvements than on new systems.

Experts predict that cities will maintain ownership of urban transportation

infrastructure.


27/64


Transportation

In this report, transportation refers to themovement of people in cities, not to goodsor to transportation outside of cities.

Much of the transportation infrastructurein Canadian cities was built in the 1970sand 80s with little thought about how it

would perform 30 years later. In the mean-time, urban populations have grown andcities have sprawled to join neighbouringmunicipalities. Resulting low population

densities and different administrative bod-ies have made it difcult to provide effect-ive public transit. Canadas urban transitinfrastructure has probably fallen behindmany large cities in both developed and

developing countries. Rising car use, com-bined with many people living far fromtheir workplaces, has led to urban conges-tion and some of the longest commutesamong major cities in the world. The Or-ganization for Economic Co-operation andDevelopment estimates trafc congestion

in Toronto alone costs the country morethan $5-billion annually in lost produc-tivity.3 In addition to productivity issues,transportation is linked directly to a num-

ber of environmental issues, most notablyurban air pollution and climate change. Ac-cording to 2009 Greendex research,4 Can-adians transportation behaviour is amongthe worst in the world because of poor use

of public transit, driving large vehicles, anddriving alone.

Expanding and upgrading public transit isexpensive and difcult. However, there hasbeen signicant emphasis on infrastruc-ture expansion, in terms of mass transit fa-

cilities and road capacity in Canadas largecities. Moreover, Toronto and Calgary areplanning large expansions, with smallerdevelopments proposed for Vancouver,

Edmonton, and Ottawa. In addition to ex-panding mass transit, cities are also beingencouraged to make their streets safer andmore useful for bicyclists and pedestrians.

3 OCED Territorial Review: Toronto, Canada, January 2010.4 Finding from GlobeScan and National Geographic 2009 Greendex study. http://www.nationalgeographic.com/greendex


28/64


Transportation is an important issue forall experts compared to other infrastruc-ture challenges. Not only are transporta-tion-related issues among the most seriousenvironmental challenges facing cities,transportation is the most serious problemfacing municipal infrastructure, generally,across the country.

Stakeholders familiar with transportationinfrastructure believe that it faces a num-

ber of equally serious challenges; namely,

general public awareness and behaviour,old or obsolete infrastructure, lack of long-term strategic planning, and inadequatesystem capacity. At least six in ten expertsrate all four of these challenges as serious.

Experts in Alberta show the least concernabout old infrastructure and inefcient

operations, while those in the Prairie andAtlantic regions are the most concernedabout these aspects of their citys transpor-

tation infrastructure.

Challenges

Transportation


29/64


When stakeholders are asked how their cit-ies will approach transportation develop-ment in the next ve to ten years, theyforesee far more emphasis on mass transitthan on individual motorized transporta-tion (69% vs 31%).

Experts also predict that cities will lean

toward green technology vs browntechnology (62% vs 36%). Both of theseapproaches would mean signicant oppor-

tunities for technology development and

implementation, as well as the need forsignicant up-front capital investment, andan element of risk.

On other transportation choices, such asnancing transportation with user fees ortaxes, there is less consensus as experts aresplit on the issue (user fees 51% vs taxes

49%). Of course, higher user fees can leadto reduced transit use and reversion toautomobiles. Stakeholders are more deci-

sive on ownershipthey predict more em-

phasis on public ownership than on privateownership (71% vs 29%).

Interestingly, on some issues, experts pre-dictions differ signicantly from their pref-erences. For example, they prefer far moreemphasis on mass transit than they predict(84% compared to 69%). They would also

like to see more green technology thanthey predict will be used.

Transportation choices


30/64


Although transportation is seen as a seriouschallenge for the environment, the environ-mental impact of transportation is not seenas the number one inuencer of city deci-sion-making. Up-front capital costs and polit-ical inuence are clearly the most importantfactors, with nearly three-quarters of stake-holders agreeing.

Impacts on the community and economic and

employment impacts group together as the

next most important factors, followed by life

cycle costs. Regulations and the country of ori-

gin of solutions are seen as far less important

factors in transportation decision-making.

Decision-making factors

Transportation


31/64


When asked, unprompted, for the mosteffective measure cities could take to ad-dress their transportation challenges, 43percent of experts recommend improv-ing and expanding current transportationinfrastructure. However, when asked spe-

cically about what approaches cities willemphasize in the next ve to ten years,stakeholders are divided on whether citieswill focus on new transport capacity or in-creasing efciencies of existing infrastruc-ture (53% vs 47%).

Most effective measures to address transportation challengesBuild an efcient, coherent, and attractive

public transport system that could really be

an alternative to a car. We must go beyond

the current limited capacity of buses.

Stakeholder in Quebec City


32/64

Energy


Key ndings

Public awareness and inadequate long-term planning are the principal

energy challenges facing Canadian cities. Environmental damage is far

less of a concern.

Energy source (e.g., fossil, nuclear, renewables) is a signicant factor

in energy choices. Experts predict more emphasis on fossil fuels than

on nuclear.

Cities are expected to move more toward decentralized generation,demand management, free market pricing, and renewables.

The role of the private sector is more acceptable in energy than in water.


33/64


Energy

On energy use per capita, Canada ranks 27thout of 29 OECD nations. Canadians annu-ally consume 6.19 tonnes of oil equivalentper capita, almost double the OECD aver-age. Canada uses much more energy toproduce a unit of goods and services thanother OECD countries.5 In terms of electri-

city consumption alone, in 1960 Canadiansconsumed 5,631 kWh per capita. Consump-tion increased steadily to 16,578 kWh in1988, after which time growth leveled off

reaching 16,995 kWh per capita in 2007. Bycomparison, Americans consumed 13,652kWh per capita and the UK 6,120 in 2007.6

Canada has a diverse portfolio of electricalenergy resources. Nationally, hydroelectri-city accounts for over 55 percent of elec-tricity generation, followed by all fossilsources at about 26 percent, then nuclearat 15 percent. Biomass and other renew-able sources account for the balance of

electricity generation. Industry consumes40 percent of Canadas electricity, followedby residential use at 30 percent, and com-mercial and public services at 27 percent.7

While Canadas provinces play an important

role in energy policy, they coordinate with the

federal government in developing long-term

priorities and targets. These include a com-

mitment to achieving a 20 percent increase

in energy efciency by 2020, mainly through

improvements to building codes, regulation

of energy-consuming products, and home

energy audits and retrot assistance. The

federal government is also committed to en-

sure that 90 percent of electricity needs comefrom non-emitting sources by 2020. In Janu-

ary 2010, Canada announced an economy-

wide 17 percent reduction from 2005 emis-

sions levels as its 2020 emissions reduction

target under the Copenhagen Accord.

This section deals primarily with electricity.

5 Boyd, David R. Canada vs. the OECD: An Environmental Comparison, 2001.6 World Bank, World Development Indicators, 2009.7 International Energy Agency. Electricity/Heat in Canada, 2007.


34/64


According to energy experts surveyed, thetop challenges facing cities on energy arepublic awareness and behaviour and lack oflong-term strategic planning. Nearly six inten experts, especially those in the researchand NGO communities, consider the publicthe root of Canadas energy problems, pre-sumably in terms of excessive consumption

and not understanding the impacts of en-ergy generation. Interestingly, all expertsin the three Ontario cities surveyed are

critical of energy planning. The current de-bate over coal, nuclear, and renewables isundoubtedly a factor.

Overall, lack of system capacity is not viewedas a serious challenge (four in ten rate it asserious). However, experts in Ontario andBritish Columbia cities are more concernedthan average about capacity (more than sixin ten), ndings that are consistent with re-

cent announcements about renewables inOntario and a new large dam in BC. Also,experts who are more familiar or havemore years of experience with municipalinfrastructure tend to be more concernedthan others about capacity.

Challenges

Energy

Fewer than four in ten think that environ-mental damage caused by our energy infra-structure is serious, in spite of atmospheric

pollution and impacts on land use due tolarge dams (e.g., in northern Manitoba andQuebec).


35/64


Experts were asked which approach their

city will likely take across a number of im-

portant energy variables. For example, when

it comes to local generation or large grids,

experts emphasize the former by a margin

of 61 to 39 percent. They also predict a lean-

ing more toward free market as opposed to

subsidized pricing (57% vs 43%).

Interestingly, experts predict more em-phasis on demand management than on

new capacity (57% vs 43%). This would bea signicant departure from past and cur-rent approaches. When asked what theyprefer, experts would like the emphasis tobe even more pronounced in favour of de-mand management (68% vs 32%).

Not surprisingly, experts expect a strongbias for renewable energy technologies atthe expense of fossil fuels (61% vs 39%),

but not nearly to the extent that theywould like it to be: experts prefer an em-phasis of 81 percent to 19 percent in fa-vour of renewables.

Interestingly, for the choice between fossilfuels and nuclear, experts foresee the em-

phasis in favour of fossil vs nuclear (63%vs 37%). But experts prefer a markedly dif-ferent future from their prediction; theywould like majority emphasis on nuclearover fossil fuels (57% vs 43%). The ndingssuggest a contentious debate over energygeneration technologies.

When it comes to choosing new vs proventechnology, experts predict the safe ap-

proach will prevail (59% vs 41%). However,

they prefer a more progressive approach

with relatively strong emphasis on using the

newest technology (57%) rather than prov-

en technology (43%). The ndings here sup-

port experts preference for renewables.

The likely role of the private sector is muchstronger in energy than in water infra-structure, with experts foreseeing a bal-anced approach (51% emphasis on public

vs 49% on private). Experts expect only a32 percent emphasis on private operationof water infrastructure. The enhanced roleof the private sector in energy is probably,in part, related to a more distributed gen-eration system and fewer health risks inenergy than in water infrastructure.

Energy choices


36/64


Up-front capital costs and energy sources arethe most important factors affecting deci-sions about energy. Both of these factors areconsidered important by more than seven inten experts; moreover, more than four in tenbelieve that energy source is very import-ant, perhaps suggesting passionate viewson this subject.

Impacts on economy and employment rankthird, with seven in ten considering this im-

portant. Political inuence is ranked a closefourth, but the fact that four in ten expertssee it as very important suggests its po-tency in decision-making.

Experts rate other factors such as life cyclecost, regulations, user affordability, com-munity impacts, and environmental impactssimilarly (two-thirds rate each as important).As in other infrastructure areas, the origin of

solutions is decidedly not an important fac-tor when it comes to energy decisions.


Energy


37/64


Four in ten experts suggest that the best way

for cities to address their energy challenges

is to pursue renewable energy sources and

other green technologies, including con-

servation and tougher energy efciency

standards. Experts in the research and

NGO communities tend more than others

to endorse renewables and green technol-

ogies. One in ten experts points to more

public education and awarenessrecom-

mendations that are consistent with survey

ndings that public awareness is one of the

major energy challenges.

Almost four in ten suggest other measuressuch as demand management, carbontaxes, and system decentralization.

Most effective measures to address energy challenges


38/64



Key ndings

Aging infrastructure and poor public awareness are the principal

challenges facing cities water infrastructure.

Canadian cities are expected to own and operate their water services.

Expect growing debate about water reuse as a source of city water.

Water quality and regulations are the most important factors in

decision-making, but cost is also a critical consideration.


39/64


Water andWaste Water

Canadas wealth of water enables Canadiancities to enjoy among the best water supplyand sanitation services in the world. Resi-dential water use in Canada is about 340litres per person per day, which is very highcompared to Europe and most other indus-trialized countries. Although usage is high,prices are low, making conservation initia-tives challenging. Only about one-half ofthe cost of providing water services is cur-

rently recouped in user fees, the rest beingborne by government subsidies.

Municipalities are responsible for providingwater and sanitation services but dependheavily on provincial support. Much of thevast infrastructure supporting Canadas

water services is old and requires many bil-lions of dollars of investment in the nextone or two decades. Funding requirementsof this magnitude are encouraging a tran-sition toward more full-cost pricing (i.e.,prices that include the total costs of provid-ing water).

While some cities, for example in Ontario

and Quebec, rely on the surface water of the

Great Lakes and St. Lawrence, others rely on

smaller river systems (e.g., Calgary and Ed-

monton) and others like Vancouver depend

on precipitation. This creates a dynamic in

Canada in which water issues vary across

the country and a need exists for different

solutions depending on the local context.


40/64


When all survey experts are asked abouttheir citys greatest environmental chal-lenge, one in ve (19%) mentions waterand waste water management, equivalentto their mention of transportation-relatedenvironmental issues. Then, when askedabout the most serious challenge facingcity infrastructure, fewer than 10 percent

mention water or waste water specically,suggesting that our pumps and pipes areconsidered to work fairly well and are invis-

ible compared to other infrastructure suchas transportation and even energy.

Nonetheless, age matters. When asked torate a variety of water supply challengesfacing Canadian cities, almost six in tenstakeholders think that old or obsoleteinfrastructure is a serious problem. One-half feel the same about public awarenessand behaviour. Private sector stakehold-

ers and experts in Ontario are especiallyinclined to worry about the age of waterinfrastructure. Stakeholders in BC, Quebec,and Ontario focus on public awareness, thesecond biggest challenge.

Environmental damage is ranked as thirdmost serious, with eight in ten in Quebecbeing concerned. Lack of capacity and in-efcient operations are not considered asproblematic. Overall, the ndings point toa need for capital investment and for public

education and engagement.

Challenges


When it comes to managing waste water,

aging infrastructure is again the most ser-

ious issue, with six in ten respondents (es-

pecially those in government) considering it

so. But environmental damage, presumably

because of the impacts of pollutants in the

efuent, and public awareness/behaviour

are both rated nearly as serious. As with

water supply, inefciency in waste water

operations is not considered a serious chal-

lenge. So, the main message is consistent:

more capital investment and greater pub-

lic engagement are needed, as is environ-

mental protection on the waste water side.


41/64


When asked which approaches their city

will take on water and waste water man-

agement in the next ve to ten years, ex-

perts predict (and recommend) a strong

preference for public vs private operations

(68% vs 32%) and, interestingly more water

re-use vs developing new sources (57% vs

43%). Stakeholders in water-deprived Cal-

gary and in Montreal tend more than othersto support water reuse. In spite of concerns

about old infrastructure, experts predict

continuing efforts to increase efciencies

rather than investment in new water and

waste water capacity (58% vs 42%).

While the research indicates that city wat-er management will evolve largely in linewith experts preferences, it also revealsemerging tension in a number of areas.Most notably, experts want more focus

on prevention of contamination, greenertechnology, and water re-use than theypredict will occur.

Water and Waste Water choices


42/64


Water quality and regulations are clearly themost important factors in making decisionsabout water and waste water management,with seven in ten experts agreeing. Qual-ity is particularly signicant for experts inthe private sector and in London, Ottawa,Saskatoon, and Vancouver. Environmentalimpacts are a close third in terms of import-

ance, especially in Vancouver. The majorityof experts acknowledge the importance ofcost, both up-front and life cycle costs.

Experts consider the origins of water solu-tions (i.e., domestic or foreign) and impactson economy and employment far less im-portant factors in determining the courseof city water management.




43/64


When asked what their city could do tomost effectively address its water challen-ges, upgrading or maintaining the waterinfrastructure is the most common re-sponse, at one in four. Other suggestionsare far less popular, including public edu-cation and communication (12%), improv-

ing waste water and sewage management(10%), and demand management meas-ures such as taxes, price increases, andusage monitoring. Interestingly, a full onein four suggests other remedies includingfunding, watershed management, and im-proved planning.

Most effective measures to address water challenges[The City should] replace old

infrastructure to minimize water

lost in the system. This would

save on water treatment costs,

energy costs for pumping, and of

course would use less water.

Respondent in Saskatoon


44/64

Healthcare


Key ndings

Lack of capacity is the most serious issue facing Canadas healthcare system.

Capital cost and political inuence are the most important factors in

decision-making.

Experts, not to mention the general public, tend to feel very strongly about

healthcare issues, more so than other infrastructure areas.

Healthcare systems will be encouraged to become more efcient rather

than expand capacity.

Experts foresee a transition to more fee-based services from the current

emphasis on a free-for-all approach.

The Canadian healthcare system is expected to remain largely publicly

owned and operated.


45/64


Healthcare

Canadians are among the healthiest people

in the world. The life expectancy of Canad-

ians continues to rise, from 78 years in 1996

to 81 years in 2006.8 However, large inequal-

ities in health persist across socioeconomic

groups. The country has an aging population

and one that increasingly suffers from obes-

ity, diabetes, and high blood pressure.

Canada spends far more on its health caresystem than on upstream efforts to im-

prove health status at the population level.In 2008, $172 billion was spent on healthcarein real terms, nearly 60% more than

a decade ago. About half of this increaseis attributable to population growth,aging, and ination. The remaining moneybought more personnel, technology, in-novation, and services. Technological de-velopments include a move toward less in-vasive surgery, increased use of diagnostic

imaging, and the utilization of biologicaland tailored drug therapies. The numberof cardiovascular drug prescriptions has in-creased dramatically, as have age-standard-

ized joint replacement rates.9 Healthcare isa frequent top-of-mind issue in Canadianpublic polling.

Many strategies to better measure andmanage wait times have been put in place.Information has become much more de-centralized and democratized through thetechnology explosion of digitization andthe World Wide Web.

Policy recommendations include a greaterfocus on prevention through reduced pov-erty, early child development programs,and tapping opportunities to increase

value for money in the current system.

8 Canadian Institute for Health Information, Healthcare in Canada 2009: A Decade in Review. (Ottawa, Ontario: CIHI, 2009).9 Institute for Research on Public Policy (IRPP), Canadian Priorities Agenda: Improving Health Outcomes in Canada. (Montreal, Quebec: IPP, 2008)


46/64


According to the 26 experts surveyed on thisarea,10 the biggest challenges facing health-care in Canadian cities are lack of systemcapacity and, interestingly, public awarenessand behaviour. Approximately two-thirds ofexperts rate each of these issues as serious,but proportions considering them very ser-ious differ greatly. Three in ten, especially

those in Ontario, note that lack of capacityis very serious, while fewer than one in sixexperts overall feel the same about lack of

public awareness.

Six in ten respondents consider inefcientoperations and lack of strategic planning tobe important problems, but lack of planningis considered especially problematic withmore than one in four saying that it is veryserious. The age of facilities is considered tobe the least worrisome among issues listed,with fewer than one-half of experts consider-

ing this to be serious, but again, many (onein three) view the situation as very serious.

Challenges

Healthcare

10Note: Questions on healthcare were answered by 26 experts. Due to small sample size the differences

may not be statistically signicant.


47/64


Experts believe that their cities will lean

more toward increasing efciency than to-

ward adding new capacity by a ratio of 59

percent to 41 percent. However, they think

that society will focus somewhat more on

increased physical infrastructure (not neces-

sarily capacity) than on hiring more medical

staff (55% vs 45%). Experts preferences dif-

fer from their predictions: experts would liketo see more emphasis on efciency improve-

ments vs new capacity and on increased

stafng than on more infrastructure.

Likewise, experts foresee more emphasis

on centralized hospital workow manage-

ment and documentation systems (e.g.,

E-Patient cards) (67%) than on decentral-

ized approaches based on departmental

workow solutions and individual docu-

mentation systems (33%). They also predict

a tendency toward a common healthcare

infrastructure with shared services (68%) as

opposed to having every institution owning

its technical services independently (32%).

When it comes to prevention vs cure, ex-

perts foresee relatively equal emphasis(52% on prevention vs 48% on acute care).However, they endorse a marked shift toprevention (80% vs 20%). While they pre-

dict more emphasis on ambulatory carecentres than on tertiary care centres (55%vs 45%), experts would prefer even more(64% vs 36%).

Experts are split on whether the healthcaresystem will retain a free-for-all approach ormove toward a patient-pays system (51%

for free service vs 49% for fee-based ser-vices), but they favour the former (66% vs34%). They foresee continuing emphasis

on public ownership and operation ratherthan private (57% vs 43%).

Healthcare choices


48/64


When it comes to decision-making onhealthcare, two factors stand out for theirimportance: up-front capital cost and polit-ical inuence. A full eight in ten experts ratecost as important, with four in ten saying itis very important. In close second place ispolitical inuence, which three-quarters ofexperts rate as important (almost one-half

say it is very important).

Neither patient comfort nor patient afford-

ability is considered a relatively signicantfactor in healthcare decision-making (onlyfour in ten experts rate each as important).Digitization, regulations, and economic im-pacts are all rated about the same in termsof importance (i.e., four in ten). The coun-try of origin of healthcare solutions is a non-issue when it comes to decision-making.


Healthcare


49/64


When asked, unprompted, to recommend

the most effective measure that their cities

could take to address their healthcare chal-

lenges, the most experts (one in four) men-

tion expanding facilities. Less frequent sug-

gestions include more nancial assistance

and public education and awareness-raising

about healthcare. In addition, experts sug-

gest more focus on prevention and a more

candid public review of the system.

Most effective measures to address healthcare challenges


50/64

Safety and Security


Key ndings

Road safety is considered the most important safety and security

challenge in Canadian cities, far more serious than terrorism and

ethnic conicts.

Canadian cities will emphasize the use of public security resources

rather than private organizations.

Personal privacy will be sacriced in the interest of greater public

surveillance.

Cities will adopt better technology to enhance safety and security,

rather than merely add manpower.

The use of gated communities will increase, but cities will continue

to favour open approaches to development.

The most effective measures for cities to enhance safety and security

involve improved communications, coordination, and planning.


51/64


Safety andSecurity

This section of the report deals with crime,civil unrest, terrorism, and natural disas-ters. During the period 2000 to 2010, Can-ada had a total of 57 registered disasters.Three-quarters of these were oods, forestres, and storms, with the remainder beingindustrial res, chemical leaks, train derail-ments, etc.11 Many of the 57 disasters oc-curred well outside Canadas major cities.

There have been few incidents of domesticterrorism, the most recent involving nat-ural gas pipelines, a Jewish school library,and re-bombings in Quebec related to lan-guage or separatist issues.

There were 2.5 million crimes reported in2006, of which 13 percent were violentcrimes and almost one-half were property-

related. After increasing steadily through-out the 1960s, 70s, and 80s, the crime ratehas decreased by about 30 percent. How-ever, recently, there have been increases inserious violent crimes. Ontario and Quebechave the lowest overall crime rates, whileSaskatchewan has the highest rate amongthe provinces.12

Road safety, Canadians major risk, has im-proved, with reduced collisions and casual-ties on a national basis since the 1990s. In2007, there were 900 fatal collisions and97,115 personal injury collisions in all ofCanadas urban areas.13

The provinces are responsible for law en-forcement, although provincial policing

in many jurisdictions is contracted to theRoyal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP).In 2005 there were 61,050 police ofcersin Canada, equating to one ofcer per 529persons:14 a substantially lower rate than inmost developed countries. Electronic sur-veillance, including the use of surveillancecameras on city streets, is on the rise, butthe public does not appear concerned.

According to GlobeScans most recent pub-lic opinion research, when asked to namethe most serious problem facing the worldtoday, very few people in the general pub-lic in Canada (1%) mention crime and vio-lence, while 14 percent point to terrorism,war, and conict.

11Public Safety Canada, 2010. 12 Statistics Canada, 2010. 13 Transport Canada. Canadian Motor Vehicle Collision Statistics: 2007. 14 Statistics Canada, 2010.15 The GlobeScan Report on Issues and Reputation 2009.


52/64


Experts16 consider Canadian cities to berelatively peaceful and free from someof the risks experienced in cities in othercountries. Instead, they consider our citiesgreatest public safety and security chal-lenge to be road accidents, with six in tenexperts rating them as important. Further,ve in ten experts think that public behav-

iour, generally, is a serious security issue.The same proportion of experts thinks thatcities lack of long-term strategic planning

on security is problematic.

Other normally high-prole issues are ratedless important, some far less important.Less than one-half of experts thinks thatorganized crime is a signicant safety risk.

Fire safety is also considered an importantrisk by the same proportion. Four in tenview natural disasters (e.g., earthquakes,oods, storms, and related notication andmass evacuation) to be signicant risks totheir cities.Experts consider mass events, such as

sports venues and parades, and especiallyterrorism, and ethnic conicts to be signi-cantly less serious risks in their cities.

Overall, fewer than two in ten experts rateany of the issues as very serious, an indi-cation that public safety and security is nota major issue in Canadian cities relative toother challenges explored in this research.

Challenges

Safety and Security

16Note:Questions on public safety and security were answered by 33 experts. Due to small sample size the differences

may not be statistically signicant.


53/64


As a rst line of defense, society usu-ally counts on public resources to ensuresafety, but when those are not perceivedto be adequate, private security organiza-tions are engaged. Experts surveyed thinkthat cities will continue to strongly empha-size the use of public security authoritiesover private (63% vs 37%). That being said,

Torontos hosting of the 2010 G20 sum-mit will require the use of private securityforces to satisfy one of the largest security

undertakings in Canada.

In the debate between prevention andcure, as it applies to public safety, experts

predict slightly more emphasis on preven-tion of problems (54%) than on protectionfrom them (46%). However, they stronglysupport more use of prevention techniques(77% vs 23%).

Rather than emphasize adding more people(e.g., police) to solve the problem (46%

emphasis), experts think that our cities willfocus more on better security technology(54%). In the debate on public surveillance

vs personal privacy, experts foresee soci-ety leaning more toward surveillance bya margin of 57 percent to 43 percent. Ex-perts preferences echo this prediction. So,

it seems that security cameras and othersurveillance technology will increasinglybe part of our lives.

Experts predict more emphasis on opencommunities than on gated communities(58% vs 42%), but even this ratio suggeststhat cities will be building more closed

neighbourhoods in the coming years. Cer-tainly, the preference of security expertssurveyed is more heavily weighted toward

open communities, with three-quarterssuggesting this approach.

Safety and Security choices


54/64


Experts were asked to rate nine possiblefactors used in making decisions about citysafety and security. Experts responses clus-ter into three tiers. Up-front capital cost,alone, is clearly the most important, witheight in ten experts rating it important,including almost four in ten who considercost very important.

Occupying the second tier are communityimpacts and public satisfaction, both rated

as important by seven in ten experts. Thethird tier, rated important by six in ten ex-perts, includes user affordability, life cyclecost, regulations, economic impacts, aswell as political inuence, the last beingconsidered very important by almost fourin ten respondents.


Safety and Security


55/64


When asked, unprompted, to name themost effective measure that their citycould take to address its public safety andsecurity challenges, most experts (one infour) mention improved communications,coordination, and planning. The secondmost frequent response deals with in-creasing nancing and resources for safety

and security. Very few experts suggest areview of the justice system or public edu-cation and awareness raising (only one inten each). A further one in four expertsmakes other recommendations, includingmore policing (especially of venues thatare prone to violence) and crime preven-tion by reducing urban poverty.

Most effective measure to address security challenges


56/64


Key ndings

Aging infrastructure is the biggest challenge facing city management.

Up-front capital cost and political inuence are the most important factors

in city management decisions.

Cities will try to break down silo-based management to a more holistic approach.

Digitization and e-government will become more important as cities address

inefciency and boost competitiveness.

Cities infrastructure decision-making should become more transparent and

adopt longer term planning horizons.

The private sector will play a greater role, primarily in economic development

initiatives, rather than in privatizing city tasks.



57/64


City governance has become increasinglycomplex as cities expand into large metro-politan areas encompassing multiple juris-dictions and administrative organizations.While responsibility for provision of servi-ces is often borne by municipalities, theyrely very much on senior levels of govern-

ment for nancing.

One hundred experts in city managementresponded to questions on governance andnance, providing robust results. In thissection, we have also included related nd-ings on decision-making and the role of theprivate sector based on the total sample of243 respondents.

City Governanceand Finance


58/64


Addressing the challengesThe biggest challenge facing city manage-ment is clearly old or obsolete infrastruc-ture, as rated by seven in ten experts, es-pecially those in Atlantic Canada and thePrairies. Public awareness and behaviour isa distant second concern, while lack of cap-acity, inadequate long-term planning, andinefciency are all rated as serious by fewer

than one-half of experts.

There are three especially signicant fac-tors that inuence decisions about citygovernance: political inuence, up-frontcapital cost, and impacts on economy andemploymentall rated important by atleast two-thirds of experts surveyed. Trans-parency, community impacts, and life cyclecosts are all considered less important.

Experts suggest that the most effectivemeasure that their cities could take to ad-dress their management challenges wouldbe to do more strategic planning and dem-onstrate more effective leadership. Improv-ing nances and funding is also recom-mended.

The need for better decision-makingThe research explored, with the full re-spondent sample, a number of issues deal-

ing with city decision-making, includingtransparency and consistency, consideringthe metropolitan areas needs, long-term vsshort-term planning horizons, and qualityof implementation.

Transparency and consistency lackingAlmost one-half of experts think that theircity does not have transparent and consist-ent decision-making processes on infra-structure investments. The critics outnum-ber those who score their city positively bymore than two to one (47% vs 21%). Ex-perts in Vancouver and Quebec City tend tobe especially critical. Respondents in gov-ernment give themselves better, but nothigh, marks on running transparent andconsistent processes than their counter-

parts in research organizations, NGOs, andthe private sector give them. Clearly, infra-structure decision-making could use someimprovement.

Considering the metropolitan areaExperts are divided, but tend to give some-what poor marks to cities performance inbalancing their own needs with the needsof the greater metropolitan area. Thirty-seven percent of respondents give their citypoor marks compared to 26 percent giving

good marks. NGO respondents and experts

in Calgary tend to be more critical thanother experts. Given the growth in metro-politan areas, this shortcoming is becom-ing increasingly important, especially in thecontext of transportation infrastructure.

The need for long-term planningA small majority of experts (55%), espe-cially those in the research and NGO sec-tors, thinks that their citys infrastructureplanning focuses too much on short-termneeds at the expense of long-term sus-tainability. Only one in four respondentsthinks that their citys planning horizon isadequate. Making good infrastructure deci-sions requires a long-term perspective be-cause of the time-frame of implementationand use.

Divided on implementationAs most people know, planning is easy andimplementation is difcult. In this research,stakeholders are deeply divided on wheth-er their city does a good job implementinginfrastructure investment decisions. Aboutone-third each give good (34%), average(30%), and bad (31%) marks on city per-formance (the remaining 5% do not know).Government respondents and those in Sas-katoon and St. Johns tend to give higher

marks than others.



59/64


Management optionsCity management experts predict that Can-adian cities will emphasize planned andcontrolled city growth more than allowingpartially unregulated growth by a ratio of64 percent to 36 percent. This will help ad-dress the problem of urban sprawl, which ismentioned as one of the most serious chal-lenges facing cities. In fact, experts endorseeven stronger focus on controlled growth.

Experts foresee cities relying primarily onregulatory tools rather than taking signi-cant steps to de-regulate (56% vs 44%).

While anecdotally cities are sometimes criti-cized for managing in a silo environment,where one departments policies counteranothers, the survey ndings predict anemphasis on more holistic management asopposed to being based on separated re-sponsibilities (57% vs 43%). Not surprising-ly, experts surveyed strongly support such

a transition (71% for holistic managementvs 29% separated responsibilities).

Experts foresee more city responsivenessto citizens in the coming years rather thanreliance on authoritative administration(58% vs 42%). Certainly, communicationstechnology allows increasingly cost-effect-ive consultation with the general public.Cities are predicted to become smarter interms of more digitization and e-govern-

ment in order to improve efciency, ratherthan adding staff (62% vs 38%).


60/64




61/64


The Role of the Private SectorExperts foresee a role, albeit limited, forthe private sector in urban governance andnance. For example, they predict greateremphasis on the private sector in economicdevelopment initiatives (56%) than on pub-lic development initiatives (44%). However,experts are less enthusiastic about op-portunities for public-private partnerships(PPPs) and privatization of public tasks. Re-

garding PPPs, experts think that cities willplace essentially equal emphasis on PPPsand public nancing (52% vs 48%). But,when it comes to privatizing public tasks,experts foresee slightly more emphasis oncities acting in a sovereign capacity thanon privatization (52% vs 48%). Experts arestrong proponents of cities doing their workon their own behalf (61%).

Across the infrastructure areas surveyed,

experts predict more emphasis on pub-lic (rather than private) ownership, oper-ations, and nancing, but the margin overthe private sector is usually very small. Forexample, in energy, experts foresee em-phasis on the public role vs private role onownership, operations, and nancing ofabout 51 percent vs 49 percent, suggest-ing signicant opportunities for business inthe energy sector, compared to the statusquo. But it is different on water, security,and health. For water, experts predict two-

thirds emphasis on public operations,

on security 63 percent, and on health 57percent. So, while there are private sectoropportunities compared to the current situ-ation, they differ by infrastructure area.

Overall, a majority (55%) of the full sampleof experts disagree that privatization oftheir citys infrastructure would increase its

efciency. Only one in ve thinks it wouldboost efciency. Majorities in government,

NGO, and academic/ think tank stakeholdergroups are skeptical of privatizations bene-ts. In fact, slightly fewer than one-half(47%) of private sector respondents believethat infrastructure privatization would re-sult in better efciency. Experts in Calgary,London, and Halifax and those with thegreatest familiarity with infrastructure tend

to be the most skeptical of privatizationsefciency benets.


62/64


63/64

We would like to thank all those

who participated in the survey fortheir valuable insights and time.


64/64

Publisher: Siemens Canada Limited

Corporate Communications

Media Relations

1550 Appleby Line

Burlington, Ontario, L7L 6XL

Canada

Design/Production:CCL

Mississauga, Ontario, Canada

Printed in Canada. 05/18/10 [3408]

Whilst every effort has been taken to verify the

accuracy of this information, neither GlobeScan,

Siemens Canada Limited nor their afliates can

accept any responsibility or liability for reliance

by any person on this information.

Canada's Sustainability Report

Documents

Transcript of Canada's Sustainability Report