 hugging and ladies and gentlemen thank you for joining us for the fourth issue briefing this afternoon Simmons summit on the Global Agenda Day 2 this one is particularly interesting and particularly relevant for the venue here, it's on the future of cities and I cant think of a more future facing then our host here in the UAE. Now two billion extra people will be living in the cities by 2050 the UN believes and Not our numbers, what's quite clear is that if that migration is going to be managed in an efficacious way then lots of work needs to be done not in terms of planning, in terms of building up-city economies. I'm very glad we joined here by two experts in these respective fields. I'm going to waste no more time introducing myself, but I will introduce them briefly and then ask them to make some opening remarks. I'm joined by Susan Zilinski, managing director of SMART at the University of Michigan in the USA. Yng nghymru, Rosine Sallu, gyda profesiol yng Nghymru Lleithwyr Cwarn Yw'r Fylltafol Cymru, Cymru Unedigol, ac yng Nghymru Llyfrgellol Llyfrgellol Llyfrgellol Cymru, mae'n ymdegwch i ddweud y cyfnodol ar y cyfnodol o'i cyfrifolau. Rosine, gallwn gweld yn fyddo chi, ac yna'n ysgrifennu ymdegwch ar y cyfnodol o'r cyfnodol yn ei wneud yn y rhaid, i'r ddweud â'r cyfnodol, o'r ddweud yn y cyfrifolau ymdegwch? Before the age of nation states, the so-called Westphalian system in Europe and in other parts of the world, governance was really a matter of cities or of city regions. We tend to forget that in the age of the nation state. It's becoming even more important because of this megatrenda-verbanisation that we have in the 21st century.ödol, mae'n gweithio i'r ffordd yn 50% o'r hwyl populadau yn cyffredig ar gyfer, ond mae'r gweithio'n 80% o'r ddechrau'r cyffredig o'r wyf. 60% o'r ddweud o'r ddweud o Chyna yn y bwysig yn 2020 o'r ddweud o'r gyffredig. A'r ddweud o'r ddweud o'r cyffredig yn y ddweud yn y ddwaith yn gweithiau, a'r ddweud o'r ddweud o'r cyffredig yn y ddweud yn y ddweud o'r gweith yng nghymhiliadau, Myricting Darkness because the projections are That the urbanisation that we're going to see over the next few decades about 90 to 95% of it, is going to happen outside the west. And the really big growth is going to come in what the MacKinsey Global Institute calls Middleweight cities cities with a population between five and ten million where we're going to see a much bigger emerging Yn ymdilyniad llwyddo mewn gwirionedd, ac mae'n digwydd o ffocl o bwysig, dyn ni'n mynd i ddechrau mega'r cyflau cyflwyno cyflwyno a oedd ymdilyniadol. Felly, mae'n rhaid o'r cilio sydd eich cyflwyno rhaid o'r cyflwyno, ac mae'n cyflwno i gynnwys cyflwyno, a'r cyflwno i gyrweithio gyflyg, yng Nghymru? How they plug into the world economy? What are city economies doing right and economies doing wrong in general? What would you like to see as an academic studying the competitiveness of cities? What kind of best practices are many cities missing out on? Well, my council, we did a report on the competitiveness of cities last year. It's on the forum website. We covered about 35 case studies, some big cases, some smaller cases. We had a simple taxonomy. We looked at the policies that regulate the business climate in these cities. Firstly, secondly, we looked at the institutions of the city. In other words, the decision-making framework. Thirdly, the hard infrastructure, roads, rail, airports. Fourthly, a bit more difficult, the soft infrastructure or connectivity, including the digital economy. We use those four pillars and also how they come together to assess how cities are doing. Our case studies are a mixture of those that have been rip-roaring successes, like Singapore and Dubai. Those that have been failures, perhaps like Chandigarh in India, which was terribly over-planned. Those that have succumbed to urban sprawl because they haven't got the governance and the infrastructure right. All the way to those that have hit rock bottom and are attempting a turnaround. Detroit is one of our big cases and the jury is out on Detroit because it has hit rock bottom. It's only attempted the turnaround just in the last few years, so we'll see. We also point to cities that are good or best practice examples of genuine innovation. There are several in the United States that were industrial cities that grew big and strong in the 19th century and then went into post-industrial decline, but which have found their niches in all kinds of new, mainly services activities as a means of regenerating themselves. I believe Anil Menon from Cisco, who is a member of our Future of Cities Council, wrote a blog claiming that he believed that Kansas City was one of his favourite smart cities of the future. Just to put that one out there. Now, Susan, plenty of ways to bring you in, but before I do, if I may, let's just stick on the urban vision from the economic perspective. In Africa, we're seeing a decoupling from industrialisation and urbanisation for the first time. Is this sustainable or is it something that African cities, for example, need to get an industrial policy? Well, I'm generally a skeptic on the kind of industrial policy where government believing it's more intelligent than market actors themselves, pick certain sectors and say, you know, we're going to target these for success. Because that kind of industrial policy is littered with failures all over the world. The best industrial policy in my book is policy that provides an enabling framework for the whole economy. And then you'll see how the market evolves and you'll have different outcomes in different places. Africa has a problem when it comes to industrialisation because it's abundant in land, it's abundant in natural resources, but it's not abundant in people, not compared with Asia. At least that's the historical record. So, East and South Asia have done well and are doing well by taking poor people from the countryside and putting them into manufacturing jobs in urbanising areas. Now, that hasn't happened to Africa so far. So Africa has concentrated on other things like resources, bits and pieces of services increasingly. But Africa is probably going to be the biggest beneficiary of this so-called demographic dividend in this century. So Africa is going to become much more populated. And as Africa becomes more peopled, looking beyond the medium term, we may actually see a continent that might be able to specialise profitably in manufacturing, starting at the lower end as parts of Asia vacate the lower end of manufacturing because their real incomes are rising. We're already seeing this in much of East Asia, including China today. So that may be Africa's future, but it's not inevitable. It depends on getting the policies right and getting the institutions right and correcting the very large deficits in both compartments that exist to date. Susan, Rosemary was talking about sprawl being an unsavory and unsuccessful characteristic of a modern city. As an urban planner, what's your vision of a successful, smart city? Well, my focus is on transportation or sort of the urban mobility space. And I think we're one of the most exciting times we've been in in a long, long time. I mean, we have urbanisation and everyone's worried about the huge sort of crowding in cities. But I think what that's done for us is it's given us this great gift of having to think differently and think smarter. Used to be that we could think, oh well, I'll just get a Prius or I'll just get alternative fuel car and then I can move farther and farther and farther away and continue the sprawling pattern that has been set up at least in North America and also in some other parts of the world. But now we have this great opportunity to combine the urbanisation. In the US it's also 80% I think and I think China as well, 80% urban or at least urban region. And the mobility around that is mainly car-based in the US. And I think what we've got is the situation of urbanisation coupled with digital technology that allows for a much greater, more nimble, more door-to-door, multi-modal, IT-enabled transport system that doesn't require so much bricks and mortar, doesn't require such huge kind of capital funding. It says, ah, how can we, first of all, look at what we already have, look at the system that's already connecting. What kinds of multi-modal system do we have? And then how do we build on that? How do we identify the gaps? How do we move from there? So one of the things we've done to, I don't know, understand the complex system of mobility plus this new solution space around new services, new business models, new products, new modes of transportation and how they connect together as a whole with the user in mind. And we've been able to sort of begin to understand, well, what's your system? How do we add things, not even necessarily in terms of a master plan, which is sort of like a finite game. A master plan is something that you often think of as, OK, we're going to get that master plan done and then it's going to be finished. Then by this year, it'll be perfect transportation system or perfect design. But that's not the way, I mean, basically, technology is outpacing policy, especially in the transportation realm. So what this also means is because we don't know what we don't know, we have to actually develop these cross-sectoral alliances. We have to be working with each other. And so in every city we've gone to, we bring together people across the different sectors that are related to transportation. And it's many more than you think normally. I mean, you think, OK, well, it must be the planners and maybe some infrastructure folks. But actually, it's a huge industry cluster, the new mobility industry cluster that's grown out of this sort of shift, this sort of industrial shift. So what we've got is not only manufacturing but also transit, energy, real estate, tourism, economic development, finance, and then all of these disruptive new mobility enterprises, the Uber's, the apps, the car share, the bike share, and a whole bunch of informal transportation opportunities that are being linked in with the rest of the system in a door-to-door way. So I think this kind of, let's say this nimblness is spilling over into the sort of more policy-heavy countries and teaching us how we can maybe look at how we experiment with certain things, how we put things in place, how we pilot integrated systems linking all the different modes across. And I guess one of my favorite sort of frameworks for this is there's a person named James Kars who talks about finite and infinite games. And finite games are played with the purpose of winning, and infinite games are playing the play. And I think with transportation it's something where we continually have to have the alliances there so that when the next Uber-like thing comes along and confuses us from a policy point of view, from a social equity point of view, we're able to immediately know who we can work with, what kinds of immediate sort of technology support solutions to put in, and what kinds of things we have to look at in the long term. What are the business models you're most excited about? Let's put Uber to one side because we understand Uber. I think we just, I've just back on my head around it. What else, I mean you study this area. It's a limo company basically. Yes, it's a limo company. It's not really the most innovative. Exactly, it even works at Geneva. What else is exciting in this space? Well to me it's fairly obvious from what I've just said. The most exciting business models is what takes us from mode to system, right? So what we had before is the information technology explosion, it's not exactly typewriter to laptop, desktop, printer, camera, all these things working in a customized way in an interoperable way. But there are now business models. One of them is called mobility as a service. We used to call it new mobility industry or new mobility in general. But now mobility as a service is taken off. So for example we gave an award, we have something called the Moby Prize which we award entrepreneurs that are in new mobility doing really cool stuff. But then we thought actually we should award cities and states that are incenting, they're doing what you're doing in terms of competitiveness or the encouraging entrepreneurship in this. So Scotland apparently has it in their constitution or their active parliament that they're to get their 100 million euro per year budget and have it matched to bring in tier ones and enterprises and have them all come together to develop these different industries and opportunities that are going to link all the modes of transportation on a platform. And there are a number of different platforms. We're also working with Finland and Sweden that have different approaches to those platforms. But basically to say how can this platform enable this multimodal door-to-door system. So it's supported by national government. It's developed within cities and tested within cities in Scotland and then it's going to be many of the different elements of it are going to be developed for export and developed with even some multinational tier ones. So to me that business model is just bringing so many different things together and from my perspective what I love about it the most and this is why I'm in this is that it's goal based. What are the kinds of things we need to be achieving in this world? How are we going to live? What are our goals in this region? What problems do we need to address? Therefore what kinds of innovations do we need to develop as opposed to we have this industry. How are we going to tweak these things and put them out in a different way? And that's really a stark comparison. And I really value the idea of building with what's there. And that's what we do. We sort of look at what's there and say okay what can we enhance and what can we make better. But I think in terms of how the business model has moved from something I can choose between a bus or a car into I can choose between one mode of transportation or a whole on demand a set of options that means I don't even have to own anything. I can get around whenever I want and it's all seamless and flexible. And very briefly how is Detroit doing just to go back to Rosie? Well I was going to say it is fantastic lately. I mean the mood has just changed. The soul of it has just turned around. And I can really feel the downtown if you go to the downtown it's already kind of shifted a fair bit and a lot more is happening. Go to go visit Susan. Rosie quick schedule for questions. Please do. Just wait for the microphone so our online audience can hear. Frank Cain from the national newspaper Nubby Dubby. The whole idea of cities being created most of the great cities of the world began organically almost satisfied people's economic and human needs London, Paris, Rome, blah blah blah. And for every city that you've mentioned as a great success recently created Abu Dhabi device of Singapore we have Canberra, we have Brasilia which are urban disasters really. So that's one question how far can people artificially create cities and secondly it seems that the ones that have been successful have been created in rather undemocratic places and I'm wondering if a lack of democracy is a prerequisite for urban success. It's a good question and a difficult one. So the organic visit plan. Indeed. Well let's not forget that nearly all cities that are old or ancient that have grown organically started out in authoritarian polities. Even London perhaps not New York. Well New York under the Dutch yes and others besides. I would put it this way to make a stab at answering your second point. It depends very much on the stage of development. If you're a poor country or city or region you can grow fast, you can have catch up growth by getting the basics right and that can happen under a variety of political systems. It's happened under some authoritarian systems but it's also happened under some democratic systems as well. Democratic India got it wrong with growth from independence until the early 1990s but then that same Democratic India has done much better with kickstarting growth once they opened up the economy in the early 1990s and at least got some of the basics more right than they used to do. So it's not to say that authoritarian systems are definitely the best at kickstarting this type of growth but it can happen under different political systems. My answer I think becomes somewhat different when you're talking about growth that depends more on productivity and innovation. In other words doing new and creative things as opposed to growth that's about catching up. When you're basically copying what others have done. Paul Krugman distinguishes growth by perspiration which is catch up growth, you're mobilising your resources from growth by inspiration which is about ideas the knowledge economy and so on. Now when it comes to growing through productivity gains there I think liberal democracies have an advantage over others because the kind of institutions that might deliver catch up growth are not necessarily going to be the institutions that deliver ideas based growth and it's not just a question for many states in the Middle East but also for China is China really capable of getting out of this middle income trap and becoming an advanced country with a pretty static Leninist political system. I have my doubts about that. That system was enormously successful at delivering catch up growth but without checks and balances, without openness, without transparency, without a free and open society can they really deliver the kind of sophisticated growth that we have seen in the West or even in places like Hong Kong and Singapore or Japan and South Korea and Taiwan. That lesson applies to cities as well. Okay, well, time is passing and marching on and unfortunately we have to draw an end to this session on the future of cities. Thank you for joining us today. Thank you for watching us online and thank you for being panellists. This session is now closed.