A comparison of two selected cases

This section provides a comparison between the two cases in Tianjin and Shanghai to illustrate the rationale for the two case selections at a theoretical level. It first compares similarities between the two cities with respect to their geographical, demographic, and political features. Then it examines the principles and priorities of delivering both eco-city projects based on the planning documentation submitted in order to illustrate the in-depth reasons for selecting the two specific cases.

In terms of geographical and demographic features, there was a close relationship between the two programmes. Table 5.3 provides an overview of the general information of the two cases. Both eco-city projects are located near mega-cities, Shanghai and Tianjin, on the east coast of China. When the size of the city was considered it was proposed that the Dongtan Eco-city should house roughly half a million people (2050) which is slightly more than the programme in Tianjin (350,000), probably because Shanghai (24.1 Million) has a larger population than Tianjin (14.1 Million). Both eco-city projects were charged with lessening the population burden of the two mega-cities (Cheng and Hu, 2009; Shi, 2013).

Despite the similarities in geographic and demographic dimension, there is a significant difference between the two programmes in respect of the status of the proposed land.

Dongtan Eco-city was proposed to be built near a national ecological wetland with rich natural resources. In contrast, Tianjin Eco-city is located in a barren area formally home to the salt industry. Opponents of the Dongtan Eco-city pointed out that the development programme might bring negative influences to the ecological system of the natural wetland (Zhang and Dai, 2009a; ifeng, 2012). Moreover, there was concern about the natural environment, including the poor environmental conditions and the quality of water resources in Tianjin Eco-city (Cong, 2011). It seems difficult to seek common ground for choosing a proper place to deliver eco-city projects in China. Therefore, selecting Tianjin Eco-city and Dongtan Eco-city could provide an opportunity for scrutinising whether the original environment conditions of the two sites significantly impacted upon the actualisation of the two development programmes.

81

Table 5.3 General Information of Dongtan and Tianjin Eco-city Programme

Dongtan Eco-city Tianjin Eco-city

agricultural land and green space) 350,000/23 km²

Original Land

status Ecological wetland, cultivated land Brown field, Salt pan (abandoned) Dependent

In the terms of political environment, the two eco-cities were proposed to be built in 2007 and 2008 respectively. Both were affected by the 11^th Five Year Plan to some degree. As discussed in Chapter 3.4, growing attention was paid to ecological developments in the process of decision-making during this period in China. Both eco-city projects therefore have a similar political environment at the strategic level. Moreover, Tianjin Eco-city was initiated by political government, which was conducted by SSTEAC and MND. It had more political implications than the programme in Shanghai, since Dongtan Eco-city is a programme that has been undertaken by two business companies, SII and ARUP, forged under a strategic political collaboration between China and UK. It thus provides the study with an ability to examine the influence of different levels of political collaboration during the delivery of eco-city projects.

82

This section examines the principles and priorities of delivering eco-city projects by scrutinising the planning documents written by ARUP in Dongtan and SSTEAC in Tianjin.

Both eco-city projects established a comprehensive framework for plan-making. Instead of delivering an ecological programme focusing on the relationship between urban development and environmental protection, both eco-city projects paid attention to the delivery of an independent and self-sufficient city in economic, social and environmental terms (ARUP, 2007; SSTEAC, 2008A). Moreover, the Dongtan programme delivered a relatively detailed plan with higher standard criteria than that of the Tianjin Eco-city. There are more than 22 subsets of objectives for delivering Dongtan Eco-city in the arenas of environment, social, economic, and natural resources (ARUP, 2007). In contrast, Tianjin Eco-city set up 12 subsets of achieving ecological balance in the natural environment, as well as social harmony, economic cycle, and regional co-operation (SSTEAC, 2008A).

Dongtan Eco-city aims to collect and manage 100% of waste. It is only 60% in Tianjin Eco-city.

It seems, therefore, that Dongtan Eco-city had a greater intention of achieving ecological development than Tianjin Eco-city. This is another reason for comparing two similar cases;

to explore why an eco-city programme that contained more considerations in the field of urban ecology was delivered less successfully.

83

Table 5.4 Key Principles and Priorities of Dongtan and Tianjin Eco-city projects Objectives

Dongtan Eco-city  Long-term objectives:

Water and Flood Management: Water consumption 16,500 T per Day (down by 43%); Water Consumption 80 lt. per person per day;

Water Discharge 4,300 T per Day (down by 88%) (2020)

Energy Production, Use and Emission Reduction: Energy Demand 600 GWH/year; No carbon emission from energy for power and heat (2020)

Waste Management: 100% Waste collection; 5000 T/year to landfill (2020)

Accessibility and Transport: vehicles daily travel distance 0.6 million km; zero carbon emissions; average trip length 6 km (2020)

Construction impact: twice the volume of materials; balance of cut and fill; consolidation centre for management of deliverables; bunds to manage water and pollution; off-site manufacture and

pre-assembly to reduce waste; local souring where possible;

sustainable housing for workers. (2020)

 Short-term objectives:

Environmental Protection: Zero emission transport; water treatment and recycling; low traffic noise; light pollution control; no landfill;

biodiversity in landscape

Social and Economic Benefit: 80,000 residents; More visitors daily;

51,000 jobs Carbon footprint Per GPD: 150 T c/million $ Maintain existing wetland

84

Foremost, this research attempts to explore whether the plan-making and implementation could be affected by local actors who may or may not have engaged in communicative planning.

It aims to discover the universality of communicative rationality in Chinese sustainable development, especially in the process of plan-making and implementation. Furthermore, although there are various similarities between two eco-cities, the two programmes were divergent in terms of their implementation in practice. This research therefore proposed that whether the process of plan-making and implementation in such eco-city projects is varied and subject to the variation of communicative activities during the delivery of eco-city projects. The universality of a set is inevitably included in individual cases within the set (Feng, 2013), that is to say the data collected in Tianjin and Dongtan in respect of communicative rationality contains evidence that can be used to advance the case for adopting communicative planning in sustainable development in China.