Report on Sustainable Urban Development Challenges in Belgrade

Executive Summary

The city of Belgrade faces significant, long-standing challenges that impede its alignment with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities). Key obstacles include unregulated construction, severe traffic congestion, poor air quality, and a deficit of green public spaces. Analysis indicates that achieving the standards of leading European cities requires systemic reforms, a clear development strategy rooted in sustainability principles, and robust financial and political commitment. This report outlines the primary areas of concern and provides recommendations for integrating SDGs into Belgrade’s urban planning and governance.

1. Architectural Identity and Cultural Heritage: Aligning with SDG 11.4

Achieving sustainable urban development necessitates a balance between modern construction and the preservation of cultural heritage, a core tenet of SDG 11.4. Belgrade’s historical architecture, particularly from the late 19th and early 20th centuries, is a vital component of its identity but remains vulnerable to incongruous development.

1.1. Heritage Preservation vs. Modern Development

• Challenge: New construction projects, such as the Belgrade Waterfront, have been criticized for adopting a generic “International Style” that disregards the city’s unique architectural context, including its heritage of Academism and Socialist Modernism. This approach fails to safeguard the city’s cultural identity as mandated by SDG 11.4.
• Proposed Solutions:
  1. Establish a professional oversight body of architects and art historians to review and approve new projects in historic zones, ensuring they are contextually appropriate.
  2. Promote local architectural talent through regular public competitions, as exemplified by the UNDP-supported competition for the new Belgrade Philharmonic building. This project, with its green roof and integration into the landscape, serves as a model for sustainable architecture.
  3. Consider heritage-sensitive designs for new landmark projects, such as the proposed opera house on Republic Square, which could incorporate elements of Academism to harmonize with surrounding historic buildings.

2. Sustainable Mobility and Public Health: Addressing SDG 3, SDG 11.2, and SDG 13

Traffic congestion and an over-reliance on private vehicles are major contributors to air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, directly impacting public health (SDG 3), sustainable transport systems (SDG 11.2), and climate action (SDG 13).

2.1. Deficiencies in Cycling and Pedestrian Infrastructure

• Challenge: Belgrade lacks a comprehensive network of safe, physically separated cycling lanes and adequate pedestrian zones. This discourages active mobility, exacerbates traffic congestion, and compromises public safety and air quality.
• International Best Practices:
  • Seville: The construction of a segregated bike lane network led to a 400% increase in bike trips and a 60% reduction in accident risk.
  • Paris: The city is actively reducing car dependency by closing streets to traffic, reducing parking spaces, and expanding green areas to create a more equitable and healthy urban environment.
• Recommendations:
  1. Prioritize investment in a city-wide network of protected bicycle lanes to encourage cycling as a safe and viable mode of transport.
  2. Expand pedestrian-only zones beyond the current limited areas, transforming car-congested historic districts like Kosančićev Venac into accessible public spaces.
  3. Integrate sustainable mobility planning into all urban development projects to reduce car dependency and support the city’s long-term resilience and public health goals.

3. Energy Efficiency in Buildings: Progress Towards SDG 7 and SDG 13

Improving energy efficiency in the building sector is critical for achieving affordable and clean energy (SDG 7) and taking climate action (SDG 13). Serbia, as an EU candidate, must align with increasingly stringent EU regulations.

3.1. Alignment with EU Standards and National Implementation

• EU Mandates: The EU’s Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD) requires all new public buildings to be Zero-Emission Buildings (ZEB) by 2028 and all new buildings by 2030.
• Serbia’s Status: National standards for nearly zero-energy buildings (nZEB) are not yet clearly defined, and implementation is lagging. Over 85% of Serbia’s residential building stock remains energy inefficient.

3.2. Current Initiatives and Financial Gaps

• Public Sector Projects: Several internationally supported projects are underway to renovate public buildings in Belgrade, with partners including the CEB, UNDP, EU, and EBRD (SDG 17). These projects are expected to yield significant energy savings (up to 86%) and CO₂ emission reductions.
• Residential Sector Gap: A dedicated city fund for residential energy efficiency has not been established. The current model of ad-hoc subsidies is insufficient. A revolving fund, financed by the city and donors and replenished by user repayments, would offer a more sustainable, transparent, and long-term solution.

4. Water Management and Sanitation: A Critical Failure in Meeting SDG 6

Belgrade’s failure to treat its municipal wastewater represents a severe environmental and public health hazard, falling critically short of SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation).

4.1. The State of Wastewater Management

• Challenge: The city discharges all its wastewater, via over one hundred direct outlets, untreated into the Sava and Danube rivers. This practice severely degrades water quality and prevents the recreational use of riverbanks, a key aspect of urban quality of life.
• Required Investment: An estimated EUR 1-1.5 billion is needed to construct a complete sewage collection system and five wastewater treatment plants.
• Current Plans: The “Clean Serbia” program, financed through a EUR 3.2 billion commercial loan, includes plans for the Veliko Selo treatment plant, but the scope and financing details remain to be fully clarified.

5. Urban Green Spaces: Falling Short of SDG 11.7 and SDG 3

Access to green public spaces is essential for urban well-being (SDG 3) and creating inclusive, sustainable cities (SDG 11.7). Belgrade currently fails to meet international standards.

5.1. Green Space Deficit

• Statistics: Belgrade provides an estimated 14-20 m² of green space per capita, far below the WHO’s ideal benchmark of 50 m² and its recommended minimum of 9 m². In central municipalities, this figure drops to as low as 2-3 m².
• Recommendations:
  1. Implement a long-term strategy to systematically increase the provision of green space per resident.
  2. Revitalize existing parks, such as Kalemegdan, by removing improvised commercial structures and restoring historical features to enhance their cultural and recreational value.
  3. Integrate green infrastructure, including parks and urban forests, into all new urban planning initiatives.

6. Housing and Financial Capacity: Barriers to SDG 11.1

The lack of affordable housing and severe budgetary constraints are fundamental barriers to creating an inclusive and sustainable city as envisioned in SDG 11.1.

6.1. Housing Affordability Crisis

• Challenge: Unlike Vienna, where 62% of residents live in subsidized housing, Belgrade has a negligible stock of municipal housing. Soaring rental and purchase prices are disproportionate to local incomes.
• Potential Solution: The public-private partnership (PPP) model (SDG 17) could be utilized to develop affordable housing and student dormitories, addressing a chronic shortage.

6.2. Budgetary and Fiscal Constraints

• Comparison: Belgrade’s annual budget of approximately EUR 950 per capita is dwarfed by that of Vienna (EUR 9,800) and Paris (EUR 5,500).
• Structural Issue: Serbia’s fiscal policy allocates only 66% of salary tax revenue to Belgrade’s budget and no direct share of VAT revenue, severely limiting the city’s capacity to fund large-scale, strategic projects essential for sustainable development. Fiscal reform appears necessary to empower the city to meet its SDG targets.

7. Conclusion and Strategic Recommendations for a Sustainable Belgrade

Belgrade’s transition to a sustainable, modern European city is contingent on a long-term, strategic vision aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals. Ad-hoc decision-making must be replaced by coordinated, well-funded initiatives.

Key Recommendations:

1. Adopt an Integrated SDG Framework: Embed SDG targets directly into all urban planning, policy-making, and budgetary processes.
2. Strengthen Governance and Financial Capacity: Pursue fiscal reforms to increase the municipal budget and establish sustainable financing mechanisms, such as a revolving fund for energy efficiency.
3. Prioritize Sustainable Infrastructure: Invest strategically in public transport, cycling and pedestrian infrastructure, wastewater treatment plants, and green spaces.
4. Protect Cultural and Natural Heritage: Enforce stricter regulations to ensure new developments respect Belgrade’s historical context and contribute positively to the urban fabric (SDG 11.4).
5. Foster Inclusive Development: Implement policies to develop affordable social housing (SDG 11.1) and ensure equitable access to public services and amenities.
6. Promote Participation: Foster active engagement from technical experts, the private sector, and the public to build consensus and ensure the long-term success of sustainability initiatives (SDG 11.3).

SDGs Addressed in the Article

1. SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

   • The article connects urban issues directly to public health. It highlights that traffic congestion and the lack of cycling infrastructure contribute to increased air pollution, which poses a health risk. The text explicitly states that addressing sustainable mobility is a “question of public health and the city’s long-term resilience” due to frequent air pollution episodes.

2. SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

   • This goal is central to the discussion on Belgrade’s rivers. The article points out that Belgrade has “over one hundred direct discharges flowing freely into the Sava and the Danube – without any purification.” It emphasizes the urgent need for constructing wastewater treatment plants to stop the pollution of these major rivers, drawing comparisons with other European cities that have cleaned up their waterways.

3. SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Energy

   • The article dedicates a significant section to energy efficiency in buildings. It discusses the EU’s nZEB (nearly-zero energy building) and ZEB (Zero-Emission Building) standards, Serbia’s obligation to align with these, and specific national projects aimed at renovating public buildings to reduce energy consumption and integrate renewable energy sources.

4. SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

   • This is the most prominent SDG in the article. It covers a wide range of issues discussed, including the need for regulated construction, sustainable mobility (pedestrian and cyclist infrastructure), preservation of cultural heritage, expansion of green public spaces, development of affordable social housing, and integrated urban planning to address these challenges.

5. SDG 13: Climate Action

   • The article links energy efficiency measures to climate goals. It mentions the EU’s “Fit for 55” package, which aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 55% by 2030. The projects for renovating buildings and installing solar panels are presented as actions that will lead to a significant reduction in CO₂ emissions, directly contributing to climate change mitigation.

6. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

   • The article addresses issues of governance and institutional capacity. It points to the need for “more decisive action by the city authorities,” a “more robust city budget,” and reforms in public finance. The suggestion to establish a professional body to oversee architectural standards and the critique of the current subsidy-based system for energy efficiency in favor of a transparent, self-sustaining fund also relate to building effective and accountable institutions.

7. SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

   • The article highlights multiple partnerships as crucial for Belgrade’s development. It mentions collaborations with international bodies like the UNDP, CEB, EBRD, and KfW for funding and implementing projects in energy efficiency and architecture. It also discusses a public-private partnership (PPP) model as a potential solution for building student housing.

Specific Targets Identified

1. Under SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities):

   • Target 11.1: By 2030, ensure access for all to adequate, safe and affordable housing and basic services.
     • The article directly addresses this by highlighting Belgrade’s lack of “meaningful stock of municipal housing” and contrasting it with Vienna, where 62% of residents live in subsidized apartments. It points out that high rental prices are disproportionate to local incomes and suggests the construction of socially affordable housing.
   • Target 11.3: By 2030, enhance inclusive and sustainable urbanization and capacity for participatory, integrated and sustainable human settlement planning and management.
     • The article calls for a “clear development strategy” and criticizes “poorly regulated construction” and short-term decision-making. It advocates for integrated planning that balances heritage preservation with modern needs and involves experts and the public.
   • Target 11.4: Strengthen efforts to protect and safeguard the world’s cultural and natural heritage.
     • This is discussed in the context of preserving Belgrade’s architectural identity, particularly buildings from the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The article mentions specific landmarks and proposes that new developments, like the opera house, should be harmonized with the historical context.
   • Target 11.6: By 2030, reduce the adverse per capita environmental impact of cities, including by paying special attention to air quality and municipal and other waste management.
     • The article identifies “high levels of air pollution” and the discharge of untreated wastewater into rivers as major environmental problems for Belgrade, directly linking them to the city’s environmental impact.
   • Target 11.7: By 2030, provide universal access to safe, inclusive and accessible, green and public spaces.
     • The text explicitly states that Belgrade has a “chronic lack of green spaces” and falls short of WHO recommendations. It calls for expanding parks, pedestrian zones (like in Kosančićev Venac), and ensuring better maintenance of existing greenery.

2. Under SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being):

   • Target 3.9: By 2030, substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water and soil pollution and contamination.
     • The article links “increased air pollution” from traffic to public health concerns and notes that encouraging cycling and walking helps reduce “harmful pollutants that significantly degrade air quality in Belgrade.”

3. Under SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation):

   • Target 6.3: By 2020, improve water quality by reducing pollution, eliminating dumping and minimizing release of hazardous chemicals and materials, halving the proportion of untreated wastewater and substantially increasing recycling and safe reuse globally.
     • The article directly relates to this target by stating that Belgrade discharges all its municipal wastewater into the Sava and Danube rivers “without any purification” and discusses the need to build wastewater treatment plants.

4. Under SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy):

   • Target 7.3: By 2030, double the global rate of improvement in energy efficiency.
     • The entire section on “Energy efficiency and urban sustainability” supports this target. It details projects to renovate public buildings with the goal of achieving energy savings of “36–50%” and “46–86%,” and discusses the need to adopt nZEB/ZEB standards.

Indicators for Measuring Progress

1. Proportion of population with access to affordable housing

   • This is implied through the comparison with Vienna, where “as many as 62% of residents live in subsidised apartments.” The article notes that Belgrade has “virtually no meaningful stock of municipal housing,” suggesting this indicator would be very low.

2. Amount of green space per capita

   • The article provides specific figures for this indicator. It states that Belgrade’s citywide estimate is “between 14 and 20 m² per person,” dropping to “just 2 to 3 m²” in central areas. This is directly compared to the WHO’s recommended minimum of “9 m² per person” and its ideal benchmark of “50 m² per person.”

3. Proportion of municipal wastewater safely treated

   • The article implies this indicator is effectively zero for Belgrade by stating that wastewater from “over one hundred direct discharges” flows into the rivers “without any purification.”

4. Reduction in energy consumption and CO₂ emissions

   • The article provides concrete quantitative indicators for specific projects. For one project, the expected reduction in energy consumption is “36–50%” and CO₂ emissions by “around 45%.” For another, energy savings are expected to be “46–86%” with CO₂ reductions of “41–74%.” A national project aims for an overall annual reduction of “around 11,750 tonnes” of CO₂.

5. Increase in the modal share of cycling

   • While not providing data for Belgrade, the article uses Seville as an example where the construction of bike lanes led to the “number of bike trips” rising “by more than 400%,” implying this is a key indicator for measuring the success of sustainable mobility infrastructure.

6. Municipal budget per capita

   • The article uses this financial indicator to compare Belgrade’s capacity with other European cities. It calculates Belgrade’s budget at “around EUR 950 per capita,” which is significantly lower than Vienna’s “roughly EUR 9,800 per person” and Paris’s “approximately EUR 5,500 per capita.”

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Analysis

Source: balkangreenenergynews.com