For a modern, not sustainable, Venice.

For a modern, not sustainable, Venice.

Sustainable policy making has meant Venice has become stuck in the past, instead of being able to build on its unique history and geography to become a great city again.

Venice has become an international example of a sustainable city since it was examined as a special case study at the 1992 United Nations Rio conference. In a contribution to the World Wide Fund For Nature (WWF) publication 'Venice: a Future Capable System' (2001), Davide Dal Maso summarised how Venice symbolises sustainability:

Venice and its lagoon contain, express, are, an absolutely unique, unrepeatable cultural, environmental and social value. A Heritage of Mankind, they represent an asset to be safeguarded for our present and for the generations to come. As well as being, and perhaps more than, an “asset”, they give body to an idea, to a dream which is part of the collective image. But Venice and its lagoon are also more than this, they are a synthesis, a metaphor of what sustainability means.

In this spirit, the contributors to a prominent book 'Sustainable Venice' (edited by Ignazio Musu, 2001) examined how sustainable criteria should shape planning for the city. These criteria have guided many policy decisions for Venice. Alternatively, I am making the following proposals for a modern, not sustainable, Venice:

* Build an underground train system
Taking a water bus is a great way to see Venice when you have time and the boat is not overcrowded. But the public water bus system has become overcrowded and private boats are too expensive for most people. One recent response from Venice City Council was to introduce a 'residents only' water bus line (Number 3) in January 2008. This divides residents from tourists, resembling 1960s Alabama. Instead, building a subway train system would reduce congestion. It would also mean that people who work in the city can cross it quickly when they need to. This is vital to maintain Venice as a modern city where people work, study and live instead of it becoming little more than a theme park.

* Develop infrastructure for mass tourism
In 1882, the author Henry James deplored 'the barbarians' of tourists that were swarming into Venice. Tourism in the city was previously largely restricted to elite visitors as a key location on the European 'Grand Tour'. Since then the expansion of cheap travel means around 20 million tourists visit Venice each year. But instead of celebrating the fact that the masses can now enjoy the city too, Venice City Council wants to discriminate against poorer tourists by introducing a charge to enter Venice. In February 2008, the city transport head Pietro Mingardi outlined various plans for charging that are under review. In contrast to this additional discriminatory measure for the city, I propose encouraging more tourists to come to Venice and developing the infrastructure of hotels, transport and cultural attractions for them. Tourists bring a huge amount of revenue into Venice. We should plan to increase and use that money for the benefit of the city and tourists, not shut them out. One such infrastructure improvement would be to build a proper sewage system instead of relying on the 'natural' system of the sea washing away most sewage.

* Renew Venice as a gateway to the East
The American journalist John Keahey wrote a book titled 'Venice against the Sea. A City Besieged' (2002) that is typical in its depiction of the sea as a threat instead of a resource. Before the Venetian Republic fell in 1797, the sea and the lagoon were sources of wealth through trade, fishing, for salt and as a means of transport. Now Venice has the opportunity to benefit from the sea and lagoon through tourism and commercial shipping. 2006 was a record year for port traffic. The movement of passengers through the port increased by 6.5 percent in 2006 relative to 2005, amounting to 1,453,513 people. The commercial sector experienced an increase of 11.5 percent in 2006 compared to 2005, with containers coming from China, India and the Far East making a strong contribution. Venice should develop its port to expand shipping. An additional port facility outside the lagoon with transport links to the city and across the mainland should be a priority.

* Reduce flooding and sinking
Most environmentalists have spent more than ten years opposing the mobile barrier system being built at the three entrances to the Venetian lagoon. Despite their efforts, this system to protect Venice against very high tides is one third built and should be finished in 2012. Its completion will depend on financial support, which needs to be maintained. To complement this project, work to raise pavements, protect islands and buildings should continue to combat lower level flooding. Indeed, Venice has made enormous progress with these protection measures since the terrible floods in November 1966. Nevertheless, new proposals for further improvements should be assessed. Specifically, recent proposals to raise the city by pumping water into the aquifer deep below the city should be further reviewed by experts before being seriously analysed by city planners.

These proposals could help recreate Venice as a great city, building on its unique history and environment. But this will require rejecting the current policy making orientation, based on a negative conception of sustainability that will restrict the city's development and leave Venice stuck in the past. Instead of measures that will increase divisions between Venetians and tourists and between wealthy and poorer tourists, we need to develop Venice so it can be universally enjoyed.

Dr. Dominic Standish did his Ph.D on Venice and environmental risk and has published numerous articles, papers and chapters about Venice. He is now writing a book titled 'Venice, mobile barriers and environmental mythology.' He lives near Venice and can be contacted at dstandish@europe.com