ABSTRACT

This paper proposes a case-based degrowth critique of sustainable urban development strategies. Copenhagen, European Green Capital in 2014, is considered a role model of planning for sustainability. Does this hold in a degrowth perspective? Sustainable development assumes that environmental impacts can decline while the economy grows. Degrowth maintains that such a process of absolute decoupling is infeasible. Analyzing Copenhagen’s planning documents in this perspective, I find three factors that make the city’s sustainability strategy ineffective for ecological sustainability. First, Copenhagen’s strategy for climate neutrality is based on externalization: only emissions produced locally are counted. Meanwhile, emissions produced outside of the city for products and services consumed locally remain high. Secondly, policies focus on the efficiency of activities rather than their overall impact: efficiency gains are considered reductions of impact, but really mean slower growth of impact. Finally, sustainability measures are proposed as a ‘green fix’, to increase competitiveness and promote economic growth, leading to increased consumption and impact. Analyzing the critical case of Copenhagen in a degrowth perspective, sheds doubts on sustainable urban development, but does not imply the rejection of all its typical planning measures. This induces reflections on how these results can contribute to a degrowth-oriented urban planning.

摘要

本文对可持续城市发展战略提出了基于案例的去增长批判。哥本哈根是 2014 年的欧洲绿色首都，被认为是可持续发展规划的榜样。这是否适用于去增长的观点？可持续发展假设环境影响可以随着经济增长而下降。Degrowth 认为这种绝对脱钩的过程是不可行的。从这个角度分析哥本哈根的规划文件，我发现三个因素使城市的可持续发展战略对生态可持续发展无效。首先，哥本哈根的气候中和战略基于外部化：只计算当地产生的排放量。与此同时，本地消费的产品和服务在城市以外产生的排放量仍然很高。第二，政策侧重于活动的效率而不是它们的整体影响：效率的提高被认为是影响的减少，但实际上意味着影响的增长放缓。最后，可持续性措施被提议为“绿色解决方案”，以提高竞争力和促进经济增长，从而增加消费和影响。从去增长的角度分析哥本哈根的关键案例，对可持续城市发展表示怀疑，但并不意味着拒绝其所有典型的规划措施。这引发了对这些结果如何有助于以去增长为导向的城市规划的反思。以提高竞争力和促进经济增长，从而导致消费增加和影响。从去增长的角度分析哥本哈根的关键案例，对可持续城市发展表示怀疑，但并不意味着拒绝其所有典型的规划措施。这引发了对这些结果如何有助于以去增长为导向的城市规划的反思。提高竞争力和促进经济增长，从而导致消费增加和影响。从去增长的角度分析哥本哈根的关键案例，对可持续城市发展表示怀疑，但并不意味着拒绝其所有典型的规划措施。这引发了对这些结果如何有助于以去增长为导向的城市规划的反思。