Principles of sustainable urban planning
Big idea: Sustainable urban planning aims to create cities that are environmentally sound, economically viable, and socially equitable.
Key principles
- Compact development: Higher density reduces sprawl and preserves green space
- Mixed-use zoning: Combine housing, work, and services to reduce travel
- Public transport: Efficient, affordable alternatives to private cars
- Green infrastructure: Parks, urban forests, green roofs, permeable surfaces
- Energy efficiency: Green buildings, district heating, renewable energy
- Waste management: Recycling, composting, circular economy approaches
- Social equity: Affordable housing, accessible services for all
The 3 Es of sustainability
- Environment: Reduce pollution, conserve resources, protect ecosystems
- Economy: Create jobs, support businesses, ensure long-term prosperity
- Equity: Fair distribution of benefits and burdens, inclusion, accessibility
Sustainable planning must balance ALL THREE dimensions. A green city that displaces poor residents is not truly sustainable.
Exam tip: When evaluating planning strategies, consider impacts on environment, economy, AND equity. The best answers address all three.
Urban planning strategies
Big idea: Various urban planning approaches aim to improve sustainability — from retrofitting existing cities to designing new eco-cities from scratch.
Planning approaches
- Compact cities: High density, mixed use, walkable — reduce car dependency and sprawl
- Transit-oriented development (TOD): Dense development around public transport nodes
- Green belts: Protected rings of countryside preventing urban expansion
- Urban growth boundaries: Legal limits on where development can occur
- Smart cities: Technology-driven efficiency (sensors, data, automation)
- Eco-cities: Purpose-built sustainable cities (e.g., Masdar, Songdo)
Specific strategies
- Public transport investment: Metro, bus rapid transit, cycling infrastructure
- Green buildings: Insulation, solar panels, rainwater harvesting, green roofs
- Urban green space: Parks, street trees, urban farms, green corridors
- Water management: Sustainable drainage (SUDS), permeable surfaces, retention ponds
- Waste systems: Recycling infrastructure, composting, waste-to-energy
- Energy systems: District heating, solar installations, smart grids
Curitiba, Brazil is a classic example of sustainable urban planning — pioneering bus rapid transit, green spaces, and recycling programmes despite limited resources.
Exam tip: Use NAMED EXAMPLES of cities implementing sustainable strategies. Curitiba (transport), Freiburg (energy), Singapore (water), Copenhagen (cycling) are good ones.
Never wonder what to study next
Get a personalized daily plan based on your exam date, progress, and weak areas. We'll tell you exactly what to review each day.
IB-style question — sustainable urban planning [2]
A planner finds that the wealthiest districts of Rivermouth have 38% tree-canopy cover, while the poorest districts have only 9%. Using this data, describe two socio-economic problems faced by residents in the low-canopy districts. [2]
How to answer it, step by step
- Less shade costs money and health
• Fewer trees → hotter homes → higher cooling bills in summer
• More exposure to air and noise pollution - Fewer green spaces lowers wellbeing
• Less park space means fewer places to exercise or relax
• Linked to worse physical and mental health
Final answer
Anchor both points to the data gap (38% vs 9%) — examiners reward using the figures, not generic answers.
IB-style question — reading canopy data [1]
Rivermouth's poorest district has 9% tree-canopy cover; its richest district has 38%. Calculate how many percentage points more canopy the richest district has than the poorest. [1]
How to answer it, step by step
- Subtract the two values
• Richest − poorest = 38 − 9
• = 29 - State the answer with units
• The richest district has 29 percentage points more canopy
• Show the subtraction to earn the mark
Final answer
Write "29 percentage points", not "29%" — you're comparing two percentages, not finding a percentage of something.