This is feasible idea for city states like Singapore where land is very limited therefore the total number of vehicles on the roads need to be regulated to prevent traffic jams as a daily problem. And it is sustainable for lower overall carbon emissions, healthier lifestyles, and connecting different part of the city through a networks of pedestrians and bicycles lanes.

Two buildings have an age span of over a century (1905 vs. 2010), while two buildings show contrasting visual effects. This may lead to conflicts in aesthetic harmony and structural integration, and disturbance of urban form and functions within the locality. This can be controversial for city administrators to decide between the form and function of Copenhagen, while it directly shows an aesthetic disturbance to the unique identity of Rådhuspladsen.

Nevertheless, these experiments keep cities alive and dynamic, meeting timely needs through modern design interventions. Monitoring how such changes affect city users is essential to making a sustainable and inclusive city for people who experience it in their own way.

The unique oval-shaped design of the allotment gardens invites the gardeners and visitors to explore the transition spaces between gardens, not just focus on what lies inside the boundary as happens with rectangular structures. The design also links to the idea of circularity in sustainability- that our resources are always connected to one another and ourselves.

What makes it possible in Copenhagen is the land space. Singapore has allotment gardens but renting plots are difficult due to limited land and cost. Nonetheless, I would love to see smaller-scale versions of such unique allotment gardens which will bring Singaporeans closer to nature and their food source appeals to beauty that can be in sustainability.

However, replicating this idea in Malaysia poses challenges. While it may suit freshwater environments like lakes and major rivers, it's less viable along coastal areas. Harsh marine conditions accelerate ship degradation, risking heavy metal pollution that threatens marine ecosystems and human health through seafood consumption. Therefore, any implementation must be limited to freshwater systems and preceded by a thorough environmental impact assessment to ensure potential risks are well understood and managed.

This photo captures one of the most thoughtful sustainable features I saw in Copenhagen: a dedicated slot on public bins for deposit bottles (“Giv din pant videre” – “Give your deposit forward”). Beyond promoting recycling and reducing litter, it integrates a strong social dimension : many people intentionally place their bottles there so that homeless or low-income individuals can collect them and return them for the deposit refund. It’s a beautiful, low-effort act of solidarity embedded in the city’s design.

This works in Copenhagen because of widespread environmental awareness, trust in public systems, and a culture that values social inclusion. It’s not just sustainability, it’s social sustainability.

In France, despite good recycling infrastructure, we lack this kind of small-scale, everyday gesture of sharing in public spaces. Introducing such a system could work well, especially in urban areas, if paired with public education and support for deposit-return schemes. It’s a smart, human way to close the loop.

However, replicating it in Delhi would be quite difficult because of extreme weather conditions both in summer and winter. Thus, instead Delhi has tried to address the issue with electric bikes. While it does in some way help with reducing emissions, it's not the best solution for making people's lifestyle very active.

Unfortunately, I don't think this initiative would be possible to implement in Hong Kong due to the large space requirement, large-scale industrial development, and architectural planning needed. Although there is a demand for landfill alternatives in HK, land is scarce, and the initiative would require a large investment. Moreover, the smell and vapour would be disruptive to nearby neighbourhoods, so it would be hard to convince stakeholders and citizens to support this initiative.

Natural green facades, walls, roofs or vertical gardes help to reclaim green spaces within urban sprawls to improve air quality, temperature regulation and biodiversity; as well as reconnect with nature to improve human wellbeing.

Why It Works In Copenhagen (and Lund)?

Green facades work in Copenhagen (and Lund, such as with the Lund University Library) because research and testing have gone into optimising aesthetic, year-round plants that are localised to different Scandinavian climates and ecosystems.

Would It Work In Sydney?

Green facades could work in Sydney, and the University of Sydney campus. Care will need to be taken to ensure new buildings are meaningfully designed with greenery that adapts and thrives in hot and drier Australian climates in the longer-term, or for existing buildings, that greenery is not simply added on without ecological consideration and value.

This powerful art piece from the ART-2030 exhibition in Copenhagen challenges us to consider the depth of human impact and introspection in the context of sustainability. Inspired by Franz Kafka's “Parables & Paradoxes,” it metaphorically proposes the act of digging a small hole daily — placing your head into it for 60 seconds, then refilling it — as a ritual for reflection. This symbolic gesture addresses the problem of disconnection between human behavior and environmental consequences. In a city like Copenhagen, where sustainability is deeply integrated into daily life and policy, such artistic provocations work effectively. The city’s open-minded public and progressive cultural environment make it a fitting place for conceptual sustainability education. In my city, Chhatrapati Sambhaji Nagar (India) or on my university campus, this may seem unconventional, but I believe it would provoke needed conversations about introspection, personal responsibility, and climate action. Art that invites physical engagement could make sustainability more personal and memorable.

Mussels works especially well in Copenhagen that is such a sea close city.

The picture I am showing I initially thought was a bee house promoting biodiversity in the local area- in the harbour north east of the city centre (~30 mins bus). Today I found out it was not that. It is a 3d printed structure from a company in Denmark that wishes to 3d print housing structures that are low in co2. This addresses the issue of housing in a more sustainable way. I don’t see why it couldn’t work elsewhere beyond Copenhagen. While I don’t know much about 3d printing so i do not know how feasible it is / anyone who lives in a 3d printed house, I imagine it is an early sustainable initiative that with investment could be really beneficial and possible in other countries with adaptation

For South Africa, the spirit of this development is relevant. We urgently need to create well-designed, equitable, and integrated urban spaces. However, a direct application of this "canal city" model is unlikely. South Africa faces water scarcity in many regions, making open water features environmentally questionable without sustainable water management. Also, the socio-economic context differs; high-end developments would need adaptation to address housing needs and spatial inequality.

Instead, South Africa can draw inspiration by focusing on rehabilitating existing rivers, developing green infrastructure, promoting sustainable water use, and ensuring that quality urban design is inclusive and accessible to all communities.