In 1900 only 10 percent of people lived in cities; now it’s more like 50 percent. By 2050 the forecast is for more than 75 percent of the world’s population to be in the city.

While growth has not happened overnight it has certainly accelerated over time. With each passing age, from the agrarian through to the information age, the city has grown in stature.

Cities quickly became the centres of activity and, thus, increasingly represent the concentration of humanity. Inventions such as the Internet and rapid transit have only added to their growth.

And as the emphasis shifts to intellectual property, cities become even more important. In order for a city to be successful you need the right networks to form, the right groups of individuals coming together in a concentration of infrastructure and an environment that provides that right social and intellectual stimulation for innovation to happen.

Australian cities aren’t doing so well on this front. Too many decisions on changes to our cities are based on limited information. How do we cater for the growing population, for example? We determine where the cheapest land is and build there. Never mind that this land happens to be further and further away from the city centre, making it more difficult for us to operate efficiently, reducing the quality of available employment and transport. In other words, building cities that are inherently less sustainable into the future.

European cities, on the other hand, have a degree of maturity that recognises sustainability as a survival strategy. They know from experience how important the allocation of resources is to the future.

Necessity is the mother of invention. Without enormous resources to haul out of the ground or sheep’s backs to ride on, countries such as Finland have shown just how to turn an apparent negative into a longterm positive – creating cities that are based around the growth of knowledge industries, cities that take the allocation of resources seriously and look at all relevant indicators, not single factors such as the availability of land.

Too many Australian cities are mired in the short-term fix. In Perth in particular, where the memory of WA Inc still burns brightly, there is almost a terror of anything that hints at the public and private sector working in concert.
Government operates in three year cycles; decisions are too often made with one eye on the next election for fear of changes in public opinion. We need a more balanced long term view of all the structures for a viable city.

The private sector which can react very quickly and institutions which can find solutions very quickly need to be given equal weight and access to decision making. They need to share equal billing if cities are to move forward.

You only have to look at the squandered riches of the state’s boom to realise the risk of not acting. Where are the major pieces of infrastructure, the innovative projects to come out of all those mining dollars? We need a complete rethink of governance.