sustainable tourism

"Sustainable tourism development requires the informed participation of all relevant stakeholders, as well as strong political leadership to ensure wide participation and consensus building. Achieving sustainable tourism is a continuous process and it requires constant monitoring of impacts, introducing the necessary preventive and/or corrective measures whenever necessary. Sustainable tourism should also maintain a high level of tourist satisfaction and ensure a meaningful experience to the tourists, raising their awareness about sustainability issues and promoting sustainable tourism practices amongst them. " 

source: World Tourism Organization, 2004

Sustainable tourism is defined as “tourism that respects both local people and the traveller, cultural heritage and the environment”. There are various forms of sustainable tourism such as: ‘nature-based tourism’, ‘eco-tourism’ and ‘cultural tourism’.

source: 

Rob Gilbert (2010). Teaching for a Sustainable World (UNESCO – UNEP International Environmental Education Programme)  (http://www.unesco.org)

Sustainable tourism is "about re-focusing and adapting. A balance must be found between limits and usage so that continuous changing, monitoring and planning ensure that tourism can be managed."

source: Sustainable tourism (2013)  (http://www.sustainabletourism.net)

source:http://www.campaya.co.uk/

personally feel that sustainable tourism is hard to be implement and sound unrealistic for me...

tourism is profitable while at the same time bring an experience or even awareness to tourists... 

the cultural product, the cultural practise, the natural environment used as a tourism product that attract tourists to visit...

let's take an example, a beautiful naturally mountain is allow visitor but each day 10 person only...ya, their impact to the biological environment is low, however the natural habitat life is been disturbed since the mountain is opened for visitors. ... everyday, people step on the same track which create the surrounding habitat, flora and fauna or even the life of an ant is being influenced, being disturbed frequently..even though with less visitors...

or take an another example about cultural product such as traditional dance... yes, that is good that traditional dance is being learn by young generation and which can inherit for next generation too... but the intention in carrying out the particular performance is the big question....i not means that every performance is profit based but what their intention, motive indeed?

the simple and clearly example; homestay...the homestay now compare to homestay formerly that provide in rural area was totally changed..now everywhere is provided homestay, some more their design is  modernized and function is also different for now..

CYCLING IN PENANG

 LIFE is like cycling BUT its putting your life at RISK ??

cycling as an alternative mode of transportation....
Source: http://www.baikbike.com

Troublesome when traffic jam during peak hours…Lacking of parking...  I will choose to abandon my car.. and choose for the bicycle to get to a destination if there an extensive safe cycling route has provided.

Cycling to destination whether to go work, study or have a bicycle tour not only save on parking fees but also in terms of car maintenance and petrol costs while travel all over without much trouble as compared to vehicles user. On the hand, it’s an exercises that helping us in setting up a health body as long as reducing stress levels. Best of all, cycling is leaving very little carbon footprint which is one of the way to reduce air pollution.

But…if giving you to choose, are you willing to do it? Ermmmm… I have to think twice and twice…as I'm putting my life at risk… This is because the roads and coastal highway in Malaysia are far from safeness for cyclists. Lets us take the example from the  incidents where cyclist killed.

“A motorcyclist was killed after he was knocked down by a factory bus…..”                                                                    

                                                                                                       Source:  thestar online 26.10.2012

 It should be an extensive provision separately lane for cyclists, motorcyclists and vehicles.  Not only in highway but cycling lanes should be create along the main roads in the town centre too.

Enforcement needs to be strait and effective, such as motorcycle are forbidden to ride, overtake or park in the lanes. Compound or summons should be taken toward those caught trespassing into the lanes. Local authorities must play a role in control the uses of lanes are not taken by hawkers as a place to set up their business. It’s always occurring in Malaysia where the hawkers are located their business everywhere even pedestrian walkways besides the road side as long as there are empty places.

It’s same to motorcyclists which they are always overtaking vehicles, take any possible lanes and parking everywhere. Motor are forbidden to parking along these lanes in order there are not any obstacles that will cause unwanted accident.

 Hope our country will take seriously in this such issues!!!

 Well, take a look here, a good starting in Penang where

“The local authorities are considering building a 12.5 km COASTAL BICYCLE LANE around the Bayan Baru and Gelugor area leading into Georgetown. The dedicated bicycle route, which will begin at Queensbay Mall in Bayan Baru and end in Georgetown, will allow cyclists to enjoy the sea breeze and scenery while pursuing recreational or training activities along the route. The project will also include features like green parks, toilets and bridges, and will boost Penang as a cycling state.”                                                                                              Source: Malaysian Daily News, Oct 11,2012

                                                                                                           Source: MPPP, Pulau Pinang

references
1. Majlis Perbandaran Pulau Pinang Official Websites.
2. Malaysian Daily News. Access on: 11 Oct 2012. Available on: www.malaysiandaily.com.my
3. The Star Online Access on: 26 Oct 2012. Available on: www.thestar.com.my

new Federal Government Administrative Centre; PUTRAJAYA

   

Figure 1.0. Putrajaya scenery.
Source: http://www.kl-photos.com/putrajaya.htm

Putrajaya is a planned city as the Malaysia new federal administrative centre, was shifted from Kuala Lumpur due to its overcrowding and congestion situation. This idea was actually the inspiration of Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohammad, and its final cost estimated is US dollar 8.1 billion. Putrajaya city design was to embrace two major themes, which are an intelligent city and “A city in a garden”. Putrajaya or called as a sustainable human development due to its design that able to meet the needs to the growing nation for a place 300 years.

   According to California Institute for Smart Communities on 2001, intelligent city is an urban city with agglomeration of high technology features in its development and management. In Putrajaya case, along with the initiative of being a Government’s e-Government, Putrajaya is implementing high technologies to ensure interaction and communication between public, business community, government agencies, and the government servants could be progressed and done in high efficiency way. Besides that, Putrajaya is located within Multimedia Super Corridor (MSC); constituting both local and foreign companies with high multimedia technology and innovative producers that cooperated with government sector.  In my opinion, Putrajaya is a ‘creative city’ that gathered all the ‘creative classes’. Richard Florida 2002, stated creative class is made by knowledgeable, talented, artists, entrepreneurs and creative people who have greater influence on the workplace; companies as well as the cities prosper.

Figure 2.0: Putrajaya Master Plan
Source: Putrajaya Structure Plan- Report of Survey 2009.

   On the other hands, “City in a Garden” means the integration of natural elements and environment into the urban city towards sustainable development. This concept is clear in the designation of almost 39% of the total city area is reserved for greenery and open spaces. As you can see in Figure 1.0 above, it’s described as a balance development where the public park, lake, wetland and the rainforest take out one third of the attire place. Putrajaya is being developed as a City in a Garden where it’s comprised a larger botanical garden in the country and a 600 hectare man-made lake that warmer surrounding area and decrease micro temperature. The greener city in a town could be functions as a climate moderator while create a ‘sense of place’ to the city. However, the city with well enough percentage of green able to provide a liveable city for its residents in term of live, work and play?    

   Besides that, the neighbourhood concept in Putrajaya is great where each distinct neighbourhood within a larger residential precinct will be well-serviced and has at least one neighbourhood park. It will have a critical mass of residents to make it liveable, regardless of housing density. Putrajaya is subjected to the sustainable planning design as the constructed buildings are incorporated with the renewable energy technology features as an effort of encouraging the use of renewable energy and thus minimise the negative environmental impacts. Then, the residential precincts at the peripheral are planned on a neighbourhood planning concept, as to promote a low carbon society scenario that favours the use of provided extensive pedestrian walkways & cycleway to reduce the needs of motorised transportation. Along with this aim, the use of land along main transportation routes is intensified and diversified with sufficient provision of basic infrastructures and facilities too.

   However, Putrajaya is still an automobile dependent city with the issue of traffic congestion problem during peak hours and also the insufficient car park. It has missed an important opportunity to advance the micro-climatic design response in landscape architecture. You can observe that the extensive walkways are exposed to the sun whereas there are mostly not covered nor they are shaded by trees. So, tell me, will you walk under the strong direct sunlight? Furthermore, bicycles are used only as recreation rather than as a mode of transportation as the lack of contiguous bicycles trails on key routes throughout the city. Public transportation does not reflected as an advantage in this city. Not to mention about the Putrajaya Monorail construction which was intended to be the city's metro system, was suspended due to costs. Also, the bus services in Putrajaya are considered as ineffective because the information, like routes and schedules, is not communicated to people before they get into their cars and start driving into Putrajaya.

   As we know, Putrajaya is a new high end living city and thus the living cost over there is not cheap at all. The residential houses price there is unaffordable to major group of Malaysia society, not even low-medium income group. For example in iproperty website, a single storey terrace house averagely cost RM400, 000. Normally, Putrajaya residence is only preferable for the government servants who work over there due to the nearer workplace.

   In addition, Putrajaya is often perceived as a boring spot, too far away and just an administrative city with the city's only shopping mall, the Alamanda. Of course, there are few other choices since Putrajaya has only a few numbers of small retails and eateries, such as the water sport complex and rock climbing facility. But by night, the area is virtually a ghost town as very minimal of night scene without many food beverage or casual dining areas for resident or visitors to enjoy. Comparing to Kuala Lumpur, Putrajaya is still less liveable in terms of amenities and entertainment.

   Another miss score of Putrajaya is the low vibrancy of the activities held over there. Basically the city is planned in form of many fragmented single use zone (residential, offices, shopping centre, cafes) that are all set apart from one another, meaning that the travels over long distance are indirectly encouraged. The wide streets that planned without following human scale and current policies causing little street level activities and low flexibility of activities anywhere, therefore the people stay away from street level activities and only having most activities confined to predetermined places.    

Figure 3.0: Large scale of pedestrian walkways within Putrajaya.
Source:http://luckyvirgo.wordpress.com/category/malaysia/

   In the conclusion, I personally do not think that Putrajaya is a well planned city enough. There are a lot of spaces to be improved in the planning design. The strong potential of this intelligent as well as the garden city needs to be presented through higher connectivity and activities stimulation in order to achieve another greater success of sustainable capital city. 

References:

1. California Institute for Smart Communities, (2001) Ten Steps to Becoming a Smart Community.

2. Florida, R. (2002) The Rise of the Creative Class and How It's Transforming Work, Leisure, Community and Everyday Life, New York.

3. www.iproperty.com.my

4. Putrajaya Official Website;  http://www.putrajaya.gov.my
5. Putrajaya Structure Plan- Report of Survey 2009.
6. http://luckyvirgo.wordpress.com/category/malaysia/
7. http://www.kl-photos.com/putrajaya.htm

Green Building Index (GBI)

The Green Building Index (GBI)

*green rating tool for buildings to promote sustainability in the built environment that recognised in Malaysia

*rating tool that design for Malaysian which is suit for tropical climate, environmental, cultural and social 

*it's created to:
• define green buildings by establishing a common language and standard of measurement;
• promote integrated, whole-building designs that provides a better environment for all;
• recognise and reward environmental leadership;
• transform the built environment to reduce its negative environmental impact; and
• ensure new buildings remain relevant in the future and existing buildings are refurbished and upgraded to improve the overall quality of our building stock.

Source: GBI official website 2013 (http://www.greenbuildingindex.org/)

source: penang monthly (http://penangmonthly.com)

GBI has six criteria as showed at above figure and they listed sequences according to their weight in the allocation of points . this is weight for non-residential building use. 

1. Energy efficiency -35
2. Indoor Environmental quality -21
3. Sustainable Site Planning  and Management -16
4. Material and Resources -11
5. Water Efficiency -10
6. Innovation -7

for the residential building, its weight in the allocation of points is distribute as showed below:-

1. Sustainable Site Planning  and Management -39
2. Energy efficiency -23
3. Water Efficiency -12
4. Indoor Environmental quality -11
5. Material and Resources -9
6. Innovation -6

GBI rating have prepare for different kind of development which they are included:-

1. NRNC  – Non-Residential New Construction 
2. RNC     – Residential New Construction
3. NREB   – Non-Residential Existing Building 
4. INC      – Industrial New Construction 
5. IEB       – Industrial Existing Building

The GBI assessment process includes three steps:

1. Application & registration

2. Design assessment

3. Completion & verification assessment

and for your information, there are total 234 is applied on 2002 but just have 3 building that completed and get the verification.  

GBI project listing on January 2002.
Source: GREENBUILDINGINDEX Sdn. Bhd.

below is the GBI rating classification based on their GBI points collected in the six criteria.

the higher is Platinum, Gold, Silver and lastly Certified.

source: penang monthly (http://penangmonthly.com)

 conclusion:
for my opinion, the GBI rating system is still alot of challenges... 
first, there are still low awareness about green building design... however, it's better than previous, where they are more and more company or industrial produce their product and claim their product is organic, use green material, renewable, produce less carbon emission and so on.... but does the purchaser or buyer care indeed? yes, they will tend to think this issues on future, they will care and think deeply but not now...now our country citizen not still that extent yet... for me, our awareness level now is just begin, where begin to abandoned plastic bag and use green bag, where every house is started planting landscape besides their house, their landscape purpose is more toward decoration part than other intentions i think...

however there is good beginning that we started do what western country had doing since century ago... besides that, the GBI system was a good initiator that encourage the increase of green building. however, the cost in implementing or building a green building was cost highly...and there are less developer that brave to take risks in building a green residential scheme widely due to its costs....and there is no fiscal incentive from government in encouraging this kind of project...

the crucial part is citizen is still lack of awareness and education about the importance of green building... 

"green" is a part of human solution as they started felt that the earth and the natural environment is time to need a good care...thus healthy environment will contribute to a higher quality life for its residents....

green building can improve human life to be quality !!

source: http://led.ideen.com.my

Traffic Planning related with Urban Planning ?

PENANG TRAFFIC SYSTEM IS EFFECTIVE & EFFICIENT ?  

On 25^th March 2013, Penang Chief Minister was launch the Penang Transport Master Plan (PTMP) which the plan is converged both island and Seberang Perai. The plan is divided into three phases in its implementation period which is the short term (from current to 2015); medium term (from 2015 to 2020) and the long term (2020 to 2030).

This comprehensive plan is coverage all scopes where its strategies start from a basic issues till a holistic suggestion such as improving pedestrian and cycling lanes, upgrading of existing highway networks, upgrading ferry services, works on the Georgetown Outer Bypass, as well as building new highways, introducing water taxis and building a third sea crossing under-seabed tunnel. Overall, this integrated PTMP is consists of six volumes which are:   

a)Highway Improvement Plan

b)Public Transport Improvement Plan 

c)Accessibility Improvement Plan

d)Institutional Plan

e)Water Transport Study 

e)The Recommended Transport Master Plan Strategy

Figure 1.0 is the PTMP's core strategy concept plan.
Source: YB Chow Kon Yeow; Moving People Not Cars 2010; Penang State Local Government and Traffic Management. 

The PTMP’s effort of seeking effective and efficient transportation in Penang from government is mainly due to the rising problems of the traffic congestion issue. Undeniably, traffic jams are nothing surprised any more and it seems inseparable when we mention about the urban development. It is so ironic to say that the traffic jams are the result of the vibrant and developing cities. Without a culturally vibrant and economically advancing city, the phenomena of traffic congestion just does not happen. Here, I wouldn't discuss further on the implication of PTMP, but I will seek traffic congestion solution by discuss about the urban planning design itself. 

As a planner, we should not quietly obey with this natural character of city development. I think there must be a way of developing a city while avoiding the haunting issue of traffic congestion. Look at the current urban design, the sprawled city planning of Penang indirectly encouraging the disconnecting between different zones. There is long distance between the residential area, supporting public facilities and work destination, and thus eventually promoting the forming of automobile centered culture.

To ensure good quality of life in the new suburban design, residential areas are located far away from the not-in-favour commercial and industrial area that believed to degrades the living standard of residents. Commercial zone often causes the densely circulation flow of people and traffic while industrial zone has the risk of environmental pollution in aspect of noise, air and hygiene. The peaceful and serene lifestyle aim has encourages the separation of residential area from the others. In another view, the needs of transport over longer distance have been promoted without offering a sufficient public transportation services. In the designed master plans, the suburban Penang residents are assumed to be capable of having their own car for travelling.

Perhaps the way the planning had been done is more suitable to the old times whereas the condition is of smaller population and lesser private transportation users. In my opinion, I don’t think that it can be really sustain the exponentially growth in volume of population either in urban or suburban. Traffic congestion is the best proof for it.

According to the Penang State Local Government and Traffic Management, they are around 80,000 public riders per day and the numbers projected to be increase around 50% by year 2020.  

Figure 2.0 showed the numbers of ridership from year 2007 to year 2010.
Source: YB Chow Kon Yeow; Moving People Not Cars 2010; Penang State Local Government and Traffic Management. 

Figure 3.0 showed the future forecast on the rideship numbers by year 2020.
 Source: YB Chow Kon Yeow; Moving People Not Cars 2010; Penang State Local Government and Traffic Management. 

Inevitably, the public transportation is the main solution treating the stated issue. Government is seems realized this crucial point with tend to tackling the issues by decrease the dependency on private transport where the PTMP is conceived a cost of RM3.2 million in introducing and improving public transport system to ensure the state aim “to achieve a 30% public transportation usage by the year 2030” can be achieve; said Penang Chief Minister, Lim Guan Eng during the launch of the PTPM.

The priority of such infrastructures should be higher than the efforts of seeking a more effective road building and the future third sea crossing. In long term, such investment in the public infrastructure will prove to us by how much worth it is and its return in aspects of financial and also environmental costs. We should promotes the environmental friendly travelling in short to long distance, in form of walking, cycling, car pooling, especially public transport such as public bus and train service.

Planners are responsible to play their role in designing and planning the whole master plan in a way of encouraging great access to basic amenities and infrastructures. I believe that the design without the needs of long distance travel and naturally promotion of cycling and walking could enhance the real quality of people life, perhaps their health. Live, work and play altogether within the small zone while destination for acquiring basic needs could be reachable in foot distance. I would not deny the thoughts that the smaller but denser self sustaining ‘villages’ design might be the direction of solving all these issues by enabling the ‘villagers’ to reach their basic needs in the one mile radius. 

Today we cannot blame over the Penang citizens choose to take their own automobile. The real reason I think is due to the chaotic sprawling pattern of Penang master planning that put the death sentence to the efficient public transportation. We require reviewing all the possibilities of the planning design so that a real sustainable urban planning without traffic congestion could be achieved one day later.

References:

1. YB Chow Kon Yeow; Moving People Not Cars 2010; Penang State Local Government and TrafficManagement.

2.http://ptc.penang.gov.my/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=100%3Apenang-transport-master-plan&lang=en

3. http://www.pemandu.gov.my/gtp/Media_Coverage-@-Penang_launches_transport_masterplan.aspx

Penang’s Development; people-centered development vs planning for community

Sustainable Governance is defined as a method for dealing with a broad range of conflicts to achieve mutually satisfactory and binding agreements through negotiations and cooperation. This method includes the creation and implementation of rules and for the establishment of different levels of institutions and organizations that regulate and enforce collective activities within given jurisdictions. Sustainable governance provides an effective way to deal with the broad ranging issues of sustainable development. (World Centre for Sustainable Development, 2010) 

Sustainable governance has three legs which are (World Centre for Sustainable Development, 2010) :
1. Economic governance function in making economic decision processes that affect country economic and others economic related activities such as citizens poverty and quality of life.

2. Political governance function in making political related decision processes to formulate country policy

3. Administrative governance is responsible in implementing the country policy.


By mixed all three legs, the sustainable governance is the process and         structure that guided the relationship of the political, social and economic together. 

Sustainable governance has all the characteristics (World Centre for Sustainable Development, 2010):-
1. Everyone have equal chance in voicing up their opinion and participate in the decision making process regardless of skin colours, gender and so on.

2. Public is free accessible in getting transparent, clearer and enough information.

3. Government is accountability and responsible about the public welfare and issues.

4. Government is effective and efficiency in meeting public needs with making a good decisions and wisely use of resource. 

5. Everyone have equal chance in improving their quality of life and well-being.

6. Promotes fairness in complying the rule of law especially law on human right. 

7. Government is responsible in serving all stakeholders.

8. Government leaders and public both have a broad and long term strategic vision on the country governance and human growth in towards sustainable way.

9. Government have a consensus orientation in reaching the best interests for the group particular on a policies and procedures.

The important thing is the sustainable governance must able in making sure that political, social and economic priorities are served all while the vulnerable group such as the poorest, women and children have power in participating the decision making processes.

Penang able in achieving as a sustainable governance? 

Today I came across Penang Forum 5 and found out a presentation A Current View of Penang’s Development: Rhetoric & Reality by MPPP Councillor and Dr. Lim Mah Hui. It is all about the current view of development in Penang city. I am glad enough that I, as a future planner, did not miss it.

The Penang Blueprint listed some definition of livable city where these can be defined in broad terms as:

• people centred with emphasis on well-being of their residents
• strengthening of community relationship
• increasing civic engagement and building environment facilitating human interactions
• need for well-functioning public realm for meetings and encounters
•  public places must be appropriately human scaled
•  liveable cities characterised by short travelling distances achieved with
•  pedestrian network, bicycle networks, efficient transport system

The presentation questioned if the current development in Penang moves towards the achievement of liveable city. And critically critiqued, it has made me a great period of brainstorming. Personally, I strongly believe that a real sustainable liveable city has to be people-centered development design.

Figure 1: Do planner listen what was human needed?
Source: http://www.plan-eu.org/youthcorner/child-rights/

 Mark my word, “people-centered development”; it is focuses on the real needs of local communities for the necessities of life. This concept will know how people perceive the surrounding changes and how they interact with the changes to their needs and priorities. As a planner, we should interact and knowing the reality or to be more specifically understand the world of real people so that we can plan according to their needs and aspirations. Besides that, Mathur 1990 stated that concept of "people-centered development per-supposes first-hand knowledge of the people concerned".

It is meaningless to only consider the rich society’s access to the great provided facilities such as private hospitals, gated communities with integrated sport facilities and even private parks, international school for them to send their children over there. Such planning would not be enough liveable for the lower categories of society such as for a low income industrial worker, it could be a totally different experience for him to perceive Penang with his very limited income which could hardly afford any of those luxury facility.

Without much consideration of the other lower categories of society access to a well-being lifestyle, the whole city planning system will only become less people-centric. Consequently, the developers will regarded as clients while the citizens will become complainants only. Therefore, I think there is always a need of listen the voice from the public association. Of course it is an encouraging situation that the Penang government has become more responsive to the public engagement, but why there is a still increase in the public complainants. Had their voices truly been referred?

When talking about people-centric planning, the availability of public amenities is certainly crucial in consideration. Protected greenery, clean open spaces and safe environmental-friendly transportation network linkage must be achieved. Would it happen in the rapid development of Penang city? On the contrary, I can foresee there are many concrete blocks ‘growing’ upwards instead of big trees, many trees will be chop down for highways and road construction, land reclamation for coastal property development, cutting down the hill slopes for higher land luxury development. To compensate the loss, few bicycle lanes and pocket parks will be provided in the master plan, in order to reach maximum monetary profit return while call the whole plan as a sustainable city planning.

Not to forget about public transportation, people-centered planning should offers an effective way for citizens to take the convenient service of public transport instead of paying high fuel cost for daily private vehicle transportation. Enough with the talks on how much liveable the city is while only focus on the roads building. It will only spoils the future sustainable city formation.

Besides, the issue of heritage preservation is raised when Georgetown had been proudly announced as a worldwide heritage site but the surrounding had been developed rapidly as long as the heritage zone requirement been complied with. It is funny when I saw high rise buildings around Georgetown have been forming a disgusting buffer zone and actively ‘rendered’ the low rise heritage buildings. I am not sure whether it is a well people-centric planning and really suitable to the local context or not.

Figure 2.0: Penang George Town view on 2007.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Georgetown_Penang_December_2007_003.jpg

Figure 3.0: Penang George Town view on 2012.
Source: Jamil Jusoh, Process and Methodology (Urban Renewal and Urban Transformation) 2012.

As a planner, it is significant for me to establish my own stand on the forming of a real sustainable liveable city. Even I could be wrong with my current point of view, all the readings and experiences will be shaping up my knowledge and perhaps one day later I could come up with my own philosophy for the sake of sustainable urban planning.

Planning for the people should be the right of the people, not of the state.

But, it the states are planning what people needs ?

References:

1. P.L.dEVKOTA, People-Centered Development In Nepal: An Innovative Approach 2010.   

2. MPPP Councillor & Dr. Lim Mah Hui.A Current View of Penang’s Development: Rhetoric & Reality 2012.

3.http://penangforum.net/penang-forum-5/presentations/

4. http://www.plan-eu.org/youthcorner/child-rights/

5.http://penanginstitute.org/v3/component/content/article/37-development/87-penang-blueprint
6.Jamil Jusoh, Process and Methodology (Urban Renewal and Urban Transformation) 2012.
7.World Centre for Sustainable Development.2010. http://worldcsd.com/sustainable_issues/
8..http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Georgetown_Penang_December_2007_003.jpg

SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY

Based on the Oxford Dictionaries;

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com

Sustainable means “able to be maintained at a certain rate or level. For example, sustain by conserving an ecological balance by avoiding depletion of natural resources.

Community means “a group of people living in the same place or having a particular characteristic in common.

On my own words, sustainable community means a group of people who practising similar objective in ensuring they are having better life for every well-being as well as for the next generations. Both present and future are taking into account through holistic view that included different aspects. They conserve the culture, social, economic and environment development from any harmful or destruction with wisely distribute so that we and future are equal to having equitably resources while fulfilling the needs of following components. Below is the components that we should concerning in creating a sustainable community.     

Environment (natural environment and man-made environment):
§  Citizens have high awareness and conservation upon natural resources.
§  Everyone is concern the ecosystem with tend to avoid high ecological footprint while protecting biological diversity.
§  Wisely usage on renewable resources with enhances the quality and quantity of resources.
§  Prevent pollution with utilize appropriate technology.
§  High accessible by using high quality service of public transport.
§  Protecting and re-plant carbon sink to warmth micro temperature.
§  Building green infrastructure such as using solar panels.
§  Highly concern the concept green building and maximize passive energy.
§  Create walkable, self-sustaining small town, human scale infrastructure and small pocket park than in a bigger scale.

Social:
§  Everyone is able to have equal access on clean water, air and food while affordable having their own shelter.
§  Citizens are equitable access to public services, education, infrastructure, health treatment services.
§  Improve a better quality of life with the concept all human are equal.
§  Public participation is important in making decision, where applying bottom up approach than the top down approach.
§  Caring and informed residents with leaded by a leader who are responsible, effective and concern about human right of all citizen members.
§  Wisely re-use and recycle solid waste.

Culture (tangible & intangible culture)
§  Practice, protect and appreciate cultural diversity of community; for example, customs, belief, tradition and so on so that it can be maintained for the next and next generations for the future.
§  Do conservation and preservation on existing tangible culture such as buildings, monuments and paintings for next generations.


Economic:
§  Business enhances public interest more than profit.
§  Local community are equitably to access employment opportunities.
§  Maximize of local businessman and investor participation and ownership than a foreign participant.  
§  Effective using local resources and reduce import input.
§  Applying technology that without harming to the environment.