[MUSIC] Well, hello, it's Mary Sheehan. And in these session, we're going to talk about cities resilience to climate change. And to help us with this, I'm really pleased to welcome Dr. Mila Freire. Who is adjunct lecturer at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, or SAIS. And who's also an expert in global urban policy and economics. So prior to being at SAIS, Mila held many positions over more than two decades at the World Bank. including Director of Urban Programs for the World Bank Institute. Which is the bank's education and training organization. Where she worked in cities throughout the world. And she's also been senior advisor for the Sustainable Development Vice Presidency. Mila has written and researched on the challenges of climate change for cities, particularly in developing countries. And she's also the co-editor of a great volume called. Cities and Climate Change, Responding to an Urban Agenda. Some chapters of which are included in your resource list, and we highly recommend. So Mila, thank you very much for being with us. We've talked in the course about how cities are particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. Adapting to a warmer world, with more unpredictable weather is needed. And cities are especially taking the lead on this. So what are some of the key lessons that have emerged for cities on climate change adaptation? >> Mary, first, let me thank you for the opportunity to share some of the insights that we have been developing. This is just as a way of introduction. Mentioned that cities and climate change were not something that was automatic for researchers and policy makers. So everyone was speaking about the projections of climate change. And the impact of global warming in all sectors of activity. But cities as itself, they always were considered to be totally marginal. And so, it was very interesting that back, almost ten years ago, little by little. There was this sense that something was missing. Cities had really, those who were impact, cities knew that they had impact, and cities wanted to be at the table. At the global change international meeting in Denmark. For the first time they say, we have to be at the table, and we have things to say and things to contribute. And so, when we had the first international meeting in Marseille, on citizen climate change, it was an enormous success. This was after the Katrina disaster that affected tremendously in New Orleans, and took everyone by surprise. It was a fantastic opportunity for people to share ideas. And the volume you mentioned about Cities and Climate Change an urgent action. Was really coming out of that passion for knowing more about us cities, and really make themselves heard and to contribute. So going back to your question about what are the main lessons. I would start by saying that cities are really fundamental partner of this dialogue. And fortunately, now, everyone recognize that. First, cities as you know, represent more than 70% of the GDP. They represent, also more than 70% of the global emissions of carbon and greenhouses. And they impact on climate change and probably [INAUDIBLE] well being in very aspect. You are speaking about urban transportation and the enormous impact on air quality. You're speaking about urban settlements, the enormous impact. And the quality of living, and the water and sanitation. And all these that impact climate change, impact well being, impact health, impact public health. So cities provide a fantastic opportunity to put all these disciplines together. And eventually come up with the idea that is the human person. The resident, that is the final attitude against which we should measure success. Which I believe very much it goes exact in parallel to the philosophy and the objectives that public health pursues as the core. We can be the agents of our change, cities have the capacity to diagnosis, to Improvise, to prepare. And most of all, to engage the residents, in changing their situation. No one can really influence behavior more than cities. You can have national regulations, you can have national incentives, fantastic research. All of these is essential. And these are necessary condition for any change at the city level. However, they're not sufficient. You have to have the residents, you have to have the public, you have to have the city as a whole wanting to change. And we can see that motivation in climate change. We have big cities like São Paulo, New York, Chicago, Tokyo, which are always shining lights. They are rich, they are developed, they research, they ask, they tested, and now they are here to share. Cities have this fantastic capacity to collaborate across borders and across sectors. >> You've talked about public health and how climate change really impacts at the end of the day people at the local level. Is public health sufficiently integrated into climate adaptation efforts in cities, do you think? >> I see progress like the new kid in the block that can bring solutions. Public health was the first discipline that took the individual problem to a much higher level of humanity. It's no longer the person, it's the population. When you look at all the slums in London in the 18th Century. People were dying, and the public health start saying, look, this is not only a problem of the human beings. They are problems of the city, that needs to construct better sewage. So I see public health and adaptation will be a national marriage. I think public health is more used to deal with these human disasters. >> Yes, yes. >> I believe what the World Bank is doing, in terms in of the hotspot, is the right direction. Hotspots is about doing a good diagnosis that can share knowledge, being equal for agreement, and for action plans. So what they do, they identify at the global level several factors. We have the heat waves, we have the lack of water, we have deforestation. You have lot of agricultural output, you have the hunger, so you have ten of the components. And then, you look at those and how do they affect malnutrition for example? And respiratory illnesses, and the possibility of vector produced diseases. So it's a very clean way to show all the introductions of all these things happen. Then eventually you identify where are the countries where the risks are high and the preparation are the least. And you call the hotspots. So you have different maps where you have these areas. Most of them are South Asia and Africa, as you could expect. >> Many times, what we're talking about with developing country cities is a strong focus on poverty alleviation. And we've talked about the idea of vulnerability in the of course, vulnerability and poverty are interrelated. How do you see the challenges of cities in developing countries? >> Most of the economic models and how do we decide where to put investment, still, even if you don't want it, all these models. And that, by giving priority to the developed parts of the city, and why? Is because where the economic activity is. So therefore, if you invest $1 million in an industrial park, you generate more economic activity. Then if you invest the same $1 million in improving the health situation of the poor slum dwellers in Dhaka. I was wondering whether the pubic health aspect could really take us out of this conundrum. Because, public health, is related to a human value. Your maximum goal is to provide health for everyone. We can't put a value on health by default, by counting the days you cannot work because you are sick. But I think that there is a matrix that the global health that could really, for once, level up the life of a person in the slums. Or, the public health phenomenon there will be as important as having a new mall in the center of town. Bring public health into the dialog. And showing that really there is a social component on neighborhoods, on the way that the place is organized. It impacts now on the public health outcomes. >> We can talk about impacts, in terms of financial impacts of climate change from a disaster. Or, we can talk about it, in terms of people's lives and well being. And I think you're right. If we can bring more metrics. If we can bring more data on human impacts, whether it's deaths or it's morbidity. That will help, that will help make the case that it's not just the amount of dollars. Or, euros spent on trying to rebuild damaged assets. Could you give us an example of an urban climate adaptation. Or, resilience case with relevance for public health that you think is particularly interesting? >> There are cities, yes, there are many, many of them. And now we have this fantastic joint program of the sea fort in the Rockefeller and other cities that really are trying to help. And this may, and the whole community to understand adaptation in a better way, and what to do. What Singapore did, for example. Singapore is developed, the most sophisticated system of water management. Because, they have really facing the problem of water scarcity in Singapore. And desalination is very expensive. They have integrated a system of water management. That is not only engineering, but also financial, also tariffs, also consumer education. That is now being one of the best in the world. And they export it for free. They opened the doors and say, come municipalities, we can teach you what we learned. And municipalities of different levels, of different sizes across the world can benefit from these experiences, from cities. This is the beauty of city collaboration. I'd like to mention a very small project that the bank financed. And it shows how small actions can really take the consequential, but they require a bit of a change of mind. The city was extended to low areas, and the rest of it to flooding. Of course, flooding was a disaster, and it would represent 50% of the interruption of economic activities. People being poor, they would ruin their cars, and so on, so on. The urban project the World Bank would finance would in general be to improve the access roads. From the center of the cities to the fringes of the city. So obviously, more groups of population would settle in the fringes where the land was cheaper. These areas were the ones exactly where flooding occur. So it looked like we were just improving the roads. Just enough to promote settlements in the areas that were flood prone. Eventually, the city itself, and discussing, of course, with the project, that this was not the good size. Rather than investing in Euros to connect the center of the city to outside. Why don't we invest in rehabilitating the center of the city? So everyone going on that, you have now a denser city, which was also more favorable to economic development. To provision of services, to schooling, to the well being of people. >> So that's a great example, and would you say, Mila, that it was because of the growing awareness of flooding >> That the community decided that that's what they needed to do? >> I think so. The global warming and all these terrifying prospects. They made this act more like a humanity. They helped us to have common goals. My point is that, while traditional, we see the big stars. The small places, they will also be able to contribute to their own improvement. If they are given the knowledge, the respect. And the possibilities of contributing to the solutions of their own problems. >> So Mila, where do you see the most important challenges and opportunities. >> As we're thinking about this interesting idea of how we adapt to health risks from climate change in the urban context? I would suggest that public health take the leads in kind of maybe a brainstorming. Or, maybe in a kind of [INAUDIBLE] analytical arena. I think we need a fresh look to take to the lead with above transport, or flooding, or water. It gets really vague in the sense of what is really the goal of development? This is human beings and our health. I think that, let's imagine that the public health expert can tell us, at global level. Or, the city level, or a hotspot level, this is what will happen if nothing is done. Given the information we hear from our technical people, in terms of heat, in terms of hunger, in terms of disease. In terms of storm, this is what's going to happen in the next ten, 15 years, if nothing is done. And from then, what needs to be done at each of our level in order to contribute that this does not happen. We speak a lot about having planning and public health together. I think that every planning has been in the last 50 years doing zoning. And doing economic development, and doing this, your parks. And you're doing transport and doing malls. Or, try to accommodate slams. With more [INAUDIBLE] of planning and different perspectives, and very little impact, for example on health. Even that the poverty aspect is marginally considered. I think that the refocus on what is required for people to be healthier and happier. I've seen public health domain. I think you have the tools, you have the objectivity. And I think you are more advanced than urban, in terms of being able to manipulate data. And to have kind of a cool mind about what to do when these disasters strike. It be novel, it be innovative but you could try. >> Thank you so much Mila for these very helpful and insightful thoughts. And we've really appreciated your time. >> Thank you very much for having me. And I hope that the students will be part of the team that we will push forward the agenda. [MUSIC]
