■ 55

Comparing Mitigation Policies

in Five Large Cities: London,

New York City, Milan,

Mexico City, and Bangkok

Edoardo Croci, Sabrina Melandri, and Tania Molteni

Urban areas contribute signifi cantly to global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions,
in particular carbon dioxide (CO 2 ), with some estimates suggesting this con-
tribution may be as high as 80 percent (UNEP and UN-HABITAT 2005). Th is
refl ects the concentration of people and economic activities in urban agglom-
erations and the high levels of energy consumption associated with residential,
production, and mobility needs. Th e negative externalities associated with con-
gestion and pollution tend to increase with urbanization. Nevertheless, in most
cases, major cities have lower per capita CO 2 -equivalent emissions (CO 2 e) than
at the corresponding national level (Dodman 2009).
As cities assume a higher profi le in the area of climate change, many are
recognizing the potential to reduce emissions and are committing to volun-
tary reduction targets. Th is can happen both individually and as part of collec-
tive commitments (such as the U.S. Conference of Mayors Climate Protection
Agreement and the European Covenant of Mayors).^1 International associations
and city networks (such as ICLEI and the C40 Climate Leadership Group) play
a major role in sharing best practices on mitigation. In the past 20 years, many
cities in industrialized countries have developed climate change plans. More
recently, cities in developing countries have followed suit, as in the cases of
Mexico City and Bangkok.
Th e objective of this chapter is to identify the main drivers of emissions and
the most relevant mitigation measures planned or adopted by fi ve global cities:
London, New York City, Milan, Mexico City, and Bangkok.^2 Th e selection was

3