sueddeutsche.de
High Costs Hamper Thuringian Cities' Efforts to Reduce Sealed Surfaces
Thuringian cities like Erfurt, Jena, and Gera are struggling with the high costs of reducing sealed surfaces, despite its importance for flood protection, urban cooling, and groundwater replenishment; funding and legal frameworks need improvement.
- How do the costs of descaling projects affect urban planning in Thuringian cities, and what funding mechanisms are available?
- The high cost of descaling projects in Thuringia is hindering progress despite widespread agreement on its importance for flood prevention, groundwater replenishment, and urban cooling. Funding programs from the federal and state governments are insufficient, requiring substantial local contributions. Legal frameworks for these measures also need improvements.
- What are the most significant challenges Thuringian cities face in reducing sealed surfaces, and what immediate impacts result?
- Thuringian cities face challenges in reducing sealed surfaces, impacting water retention and urban heat. Initiatives include creating green spaces and permeable pavements, though costs are significant and funding is a major obstacle. One project in Gera illustrates the unexpected expense: preserving a single tree during roadwork cost €45,000 due to underground infrastructure.
- What legal and administrative changes are needed to make descaling projects more feasible in Thuringian cities, and how can public support be fostered?
- Future success hinges on streamlining funding processes, revising urban planning regulations, and improving assessments of compensatory measures. Public acceptance of initiatives such as removing private parking spaces remains crucial. A long-term strategy needs to balance financial constraints with the escalating climate change challenges.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames the issue primarily around the difficulties faced by municipalities in undertaking de-sealing projects, emphasizing the high costs and logistical hurdles. While the benefits are mentioned, the focus on challenges could potentially lead readers to perceive de-sealing as overly complex and impractical. The headline isn't provided, but if it focused solely on costs, it would reinforce this framing.
Language Bias
The language used is largely neutral and objective. Terms like "Hitze-Hotspots" are translated, and the article avoids emotionally charged language. The tone is informative and balanced.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses primarily on the challenges and costs associated with de-sealing, and while it mentions the benefits (water retention, heat reduction, attractiveness of inner cities), it doesn't delve into potential negative consequences or alternative solutions. There is no discussion of potential job losses related to construction or the possible disruption to existing infrastructure during the de-sealing process. The perspectives of businesses or residents directly impacted by these projects are also absent. While this might be due to space constraints, the omission limits the scope of understanding.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article discusses multiple German cities implementing measures to reduce urban sealing, which directly contributes to SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities) by improving urban resilience, creating green spaces, and mitigating the urban heat island effect. The initiatives mentioned, such as the redesign of the Ernst-Abbe-Platz in Jena and the creation of urban climate oases, aim to make cities more livable and sustainable.