Urban Sustainability Indicators: From Brundtland to Development Goals, Lecture notes of Sustainable Development

Download Urban Sustainability Indicators: From Brundtland to Development Goals and more Lecture notes Sustainable Development in PDF only on Docsity! journal valori e valutazioniNo. 23 - 2019 129 Giulio Mondini* keywords: integrated evaluation, decision-making processes, sustainable communities, urban transformations Sustainability Assessment: from Brundtland Report to Sustainable Development Goals 1. INTRODUCTION As it is well known, sustainable development has been defined in 1987 by the Brundtland Commission as the devel- opment that meets the needs of the present without com- promising the ability of future generations (UN, 1987). The characterizing aspect that emerges from this defini- tion is the long-term vision, which implies the need of addressing a high degree of uncertainty (Munda, 1987). Several dimensions have been identified in the concept of sustainable development (environmental, social, economic, cultural and technological dimension) which have to co- exist within an integrated perspective (Bottero and Mondini, 2009). The Brundtland report represents a fundamental act for the introduction of the concept of sustainability in the leg- islative frameworks. Indeed, starting from this document a continuous process has been set up for the consideration of the sustainability as fundamental paradigm of action (Lafratta, 2004). A further step in the process for the achievement of sus- tainable development refers to the identification of the Millenium Development Goals (MDG). These objectives have been defined in the year 2000 and they define a com- The increase in population, the urbanization processes and the heavy anthropic interventions are bringing new and differentiated stresses for environmental and urban systems, including socio-economic pressures and nat- ural disasters. The problems that societies have to address nowadays are numerous, ranging from environmental pollution to soil consumption, from the lack of water and food to the necessity of biodiversity protection and cli- mate change reduction. Immediate and efficient solutions are needed in order to avoid the achievement of an irreversible condition. In this context, the concept of sustainability has been pro- posed since many years as an innovative paradigm of intervention, with the objective of limiting these prob- lems and to mitigate their effect in the long period. The paper aims at briefly illustrating the concept of sus- tainable development, focusing on its evolution over the years, from the Brundtland Report to Sustainable Devel- opment Goals that have been recently proposed by the United Nations. Particular attention will be devoted to the analysis of the relationship between sustainability and urban and territorial planning, trying to identify the main existing approaches for the introduction of sustainability as the fundamental paradigm for future development. Abstract 130 journal valori e valutazioniNo. 23 - 2019 In the previous paragraph, reference was made to the eleventh UN Sustainable Goal, dedicated to the theme of “Sustainable cities and comminities”. Cities are emblematic elements for the definition of sustainable development. In fact, cities are at the same time critical and cardinal elements for achieving sustainable devel- opment (Mi, 2019). Cities are complex systems charac- terized by a high environmental impact, as energy con- sumption and depretion of a high quantity of natural resources (Booth et al., 2011; IPCC, 2014; Mi et al., 2019. Cities are therefore built as key players in the field of urban sustainability, helping to contrast climate change and reduce emissions into the atmosphere (Amendola, 2016). Sustainability has been used for several decades as a par- adigm for territorial and urban transformations and designs in order to mitigate its impacts on the environ- ment, with the ultimate goal of creating sustainable com- munities in response to the ongoing process of urban- ization (Roberts and Hugh, 2000; Bottero and Ferretti, 2010; UN-Habitat, 2015; Habitat_III, 2016; UN-Habitat, 2016). In the context of urban sustainability assessment, differ- ent models and frameworks have been proposed in the last years in order to support designers, planners and Deci- sion Makers in the choices related to urban transforma- tions. Table 3 summarizes the main initiatives available in the field of urban sustainability assessment methods. As it is possible to see from Table 2, sustainability indica- tors are a proven method for driving sustainable urban development, and hundreds of different sets and frame- works exist. As cities vary greatly in terms of available resources, population size and urban metabolic process- es, this wealth of tools is useful. However, choosing appro- priate sustainability indicators can be difficult. Scientific research in this field has highlighted that effi- cient and science-driven governance is a critical compo- nent of sustainable development. As instruments for mea- suring progress or diagnosing urban sustainability, sus- tainability indicators provide the simple and measurable tests needed to create and maintain cities not only respecting the environment, but also promoting long- term economic productivity and health and the well- being of their citizens (Ameen et al., 2015). 3. TOWARDS SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES As already mentioned, the process towards the achieve- ment of SDG 11 requires innovative solutions based on the integration of the different dimensions and on the consideration of the citizens as key players of the oper- ation. In this perspective, a very important role is covered by urban regeneration programmes, meaning not only build- ing-restoration operations, but also programs aiming at eliminating social decline, increasing the quality of life plex series of targets which range from halving extreme poverty rates to halting the spread of HIV/AIDS and pro- viding universal primary education (UN, 2015a). More recently, the United Nations defined 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). In particular, the SDGs address the global challenges, including those related to poverty, inequality, climate, environmental degradation, prosperi- ty, and peace and justice (Table 1). These objectives are strongly interconnected among them and involve all the sustainability dimensions at a planetary scale (Figure 1). In the context of urban transformations, a particular role is played by the SDG 11 “Sustainable cities and communi- ties”, which explicitly considers the relationship that exists between communities and the spaces in which they live. According to the fundamental principles of this goal, future cities should aspire to social inclusion and have to be designed for being compatible with the surrounding envi- ronment (Bond et al, 2012; Mondini, 2016). Specific impor- tance is attached to: 1. the availability of adequate, safe and affordable housing, 2. the protection of natural and cultural heritage and 3. the adoption and implementation of integrated policies and plans towards inclusion, resource efficiency, mitigation and adaptation to climate change and resilience to disasters. 2. THE SUSTAINABILITY PROJECT In terms of sustainability (maximizing and minimizing simultaneously in order to achieve a balanced develop- ment of the economic, social and ecological system), the evaluation process must be highly interdisciplinary, in order to identify possible synergies and develop “win – win” solutions (Kosko, 1986; Stellin and Rosato, 1998; Bot- tero et al., 2018a; Fattinnanzi, 2018). Given the growing interdependence between parties that characterizes the actual problems/contexts, the complexity notion became a crucial concept in sustainability evaluation and assess- ment (Figueira et al., 2015; Becchio et al., 2018; Bottero et al., 2018b. In particular, with regard to issues related to develop- ment, in the processing and management of territorial and urban systems, the complexity of decision-making requires the adoption of four levels of analysis: meta- strategic, strategic, tactic and operational (Girard and Nikkamp, 1997; Mondini, 2010; Trossero and Lombardi, 2013). Different methods can be employed for sustainability assessment and the choice of the method strictly depends from the phase in which the evaluation takes place: 1. knowledge phase, 2. concertation phase, 3. strategic definition of objectives phase, 4. systemic evaluation phase and 5. monitoring phase (Tab. 2) (Mondini, 2009). 133journal valori e valutazioniNo. 23 - 2019 economy designed to be able to regenerate on its own. This definition is based on the existence of two types of material flows: biological ones, able to be reintegrated into the biosphere, and technical ones, destined to be revalued without entering the biosphere (Figure 3). This is an overall and radical rethinking, based on the over- exploitation of natural resources and oriented towards the objective of maximizing profits through the reduc- tion of production costs. Adopting a circular approach means reviewing all stages of production and paying attention to the entire supply chain involved in the pro- duction cycle, through the enhancement not only of nat- ural capital (primary resources and environmental impacts), but also of the social (work and wellness) and economic one (investments and revenues) (Enea, 2019; Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2019). 4. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVES It is clear that the concept of sustainable development has become the paradigm of development interventions since several decades, giving a centrality to environmental issues (Mondini, 2010). of the inhabitants, supporting the valorization of cultur- al resources, protecting the environmental system, bring- ing economic development, and so on (Fig. 2) (Lombar- di, 2008; Haapio, 2012; Garsia, 2015; Ostanel, 2017; Brunet- ta et al., 2018). A second perspective that appears useful for achieving objective 11 is the approach offered by ecosystem ser- vices, which allow us to understand the benefits that nat- ural systems offer to human society to satisfy their well- being in the form of goods and services (Caldarice and Salata, 2019). According to this point of view, the mea- surement and evaluation of the goods and services offered by the ecological-natural systems becomes very important, not only from the bio-physical point of view, but also from the economic point of view so that these val- ues are included and considered in decision-making processes concerning the transformation of the city (MEA, 2005; Angilella et al., 2016; Bentivegna, 2016; Diaz-Saracha- ga and Jato-Espino, 2019). A third direction on which it is fundamental to reason is the one proposed by the circular economy. According to the definition of the Ellen MacArthur Foun- dation, circular economy is a generic term to define an Sustainability Assessment: from Brundtland Report to Sustainable Development Goals Figure 3 - The concept of circular economy (source: elaboration by Iveroth et al., 2013) journal valori e valutazioniNo. 23 - 2019134 Table 2 - Tab. Main methodologies for sustainability assessment (source: elaboration by Mondini, 2009) Phases Content Instruments K n o w le d ge p h as e The subjects involved: • Analysis of public and private interests • Analysis of current and potential loans • Analysis of transformation projects The socio-economic framework: • Territorial indicators • Economic indicators • Social indicators • Cultural tourism The environmental-cultural framework: • Risk card and territorial constrains • Environmental resources • Tangible and intangible assets • Infrastructures and accessibility • Map of socio-cultural events • Stakeholders Analysis • Analysis of real estate values • Reference regulatory framework • Socio-economic surveys • Estimate of Total Economic Value (TEV) • Cluster Analysis C o n ce rt at io n p h as e • Evaluation of critical issues, opportunities and weak- nesses • Rules for the formation of a concertation table • Techniques for accompanying decision-making processes • Activation of the public participation process • SWOT analysis • Interviews and questionnaires • Focus group • Contingency analysis St ra te gi c d ef in it io n o f o b je ct iv es p h as e • Definition of short-term objectives • Definition of long-term objectives • Verification of consistency of the objectives with the European Union • Multicriteria Analysis Sy st em ic e va lu at io n p h as e • Analysis of impacts • Evaluation of alternatives • Definition of mitigation measures • Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) • Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) • Ecological Impact Assessment • Cost-Benefit Anlysis (CBA)/Discounted Cash-Flow • Analysis (DCFA) • Social Return on Investment (SROI) • Community Impact Evaluation (CIE)/Commu- nity • Impact Assessment (CIA) • Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) • Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)/Life Cycle Cost (LCC) • Evaluation of the visual impact on landscape • Agent-Based Model (ABM) • System Dynamics Model (SDM) • Spatial Econometric Models (SEM) • Fuzzy Cognitive Map (FCM) M o n it o ri n g p h as e • Objectives • Monitoring procedures • Knowledge system • Timing and implementation methods • Monitoring by objectives • Monitoring by resources • Monitoring by actions • Monitoring the state of the environment • DPSIR model Sustainability Assessment: from Brundtland Report to Sustainable Development Goals journal valori e valutazioniNo. 23 - 2019 135 Table 3 -Main systems for assessing sustainability at the urban level (source: elaboration by Science for Environment Policy, 2018) Evaluation system Organization References BREEAM Communities Building Research Establish- ment Environmental Assess- ment Methodology (BREEAM) https://www.breeam.com/ China Urban Sustainability Index Urban China Initiative http://www.urbanchinainitiative.org/en/resour- ces/report.html City Blueprint Waternet Amsterdam; KWR Water Cycle Research Institute https://www.kwrwater.nl/en/tools-producten/city- blueprint/ Eco2 Cities Initiative World Bank http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTURBAN- DEVELOPMENT/Resources/336387- 1270074782769/Eco2CitiesBookWeb.pdf EEA Urban Metabolism Fra- mework European Environment Agency http://ideas.climatecon.tu-berlin.de/documents/wpa- per/CLIMATECON-2011-01.pdf European Green Capital Award European Commission http://ec.europa.eu/environment/european- greencapital/about-the-award/ European Green City Index Economist Intelligence Unit; Sie- mens https://www.siemens.com/press/pool/de/events/c orporate/2009-12- Cop15/European_Green_City_Index.pdf European Green City Tool European Union http://ec.europa.eu/environment/urban/tool.htm European Green Leaf Award European Union http://ec.europa.eu/environment/european- greencapital/europeangreenleaf/ Eurostat Sustainable Development Indicators Eurostat https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/sdi/sustaina- ble-cities-and-communities Global City Indicators Program Global City Indicators Facility https://www.citiesalliance.org/ Green Cities Programme OECD http://www.oecd.org/regional/greening-cities- regions/46811501.pdf Green Star Green Building Council of Aus- tralia https://new.gbca.org.au/green-star/ Indicators for Sustainability Sustainable Cities International https://sustainablecities.net/ LEED for Neighbourhood Devel- opment (LEED-ND) Leadership in Energy and Envi- ronmental Design (LEED) https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/citi- zens_guide_LEED-ND.pdf National Australian Built Environ- ment Rating System (NABERS) Government of Australia https://www.nabers.gov.au/ Reference Framework for Sus- tainable Cities (RFSC) RFSC http://rfsc.eu/ SDEWES Index International Centre for Sustain- able Development of Energy, Water and Environment Systems (SDEWES) Index http://www.piran2016.sdewes.org/sdewes_index.p hp