Evaluating Sustainable Development in the Built Environment

By Peter S. Brandon and Patrizia Lombardi

The first edition was extremely well received, providing an introduction and insight to this important topic in a comprehensive yet easy to read form. It was chosen to be issued to the representatives of the organizations from the G8 and G20 countries attending the University Summit held in Turin in 2009 which addressed the issue of how education and research can assist sustainable development. 

The second edition, completely updated to reflect the significant advances and new insights that have been made since publication of the first edition, focuses on two main issues:

• Facilitating a dialogue between all stakeholders so that the complexity of the problem can be exposed, structured and communicated
• Understanding how to assess progress in sustainable development

It continues to provide coherent guidance on the techniques that can be used to assess sustainable development in a rigorous manner. The approach is introduced using illustrations and case studies, together with follow-up references. It remains the ideal starting point for those trying to get a handle on the subject and for those who wish to examine a structured and systematic approach to the evaluation of sustainable development in the built environment.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Wiley
• Release date: Dec 1, 2010
• ISBN: 9781444340785

Book preview

EVALUATING SUSTAINABLE

DEVELOPMENT

in the Built Environment

This leading book is about one of the greatest challenges faced by human kind. Sustainable development impacts on everyone and all need to take ownership of, and get involved with, the concept. Universities are strongly engaged in this process, as recognised by both the Hokkaido and Turin G8 Summit Declarations. This book represents a reference point in the field, for both students and lecturers. It is clearly written and it illustrates evaluation approaches to, and frameworks for decision-making for, sustainable development. The book was selected to be circulated to the over 150 delegates who attended the G8 countries’ Turin University Summit on this important subject.

Professor Francesco Profumo – Rector of Politecnico di Torino,

Italy, Chair of the 2009 G8 University Summit

This book addresses a key aspect of sustainable development. It asks what framework is required to answer the question ‘have we made progress?’ and it also suggests the mechanisms and methods which might be used in the assessment of such progress. The first edition of the book has been well received and this revision updates the reader and suggests in more detail how it might work in practice. It is an enormous issue and the authors have provided a very clear introduction to this complex subject. The book is fast becoming a standard text in the field and has an international readership. Practitioners, academics, students and universities will find it extremely useful in developing their thinking.

Professor Martin Hall – Vice Chancellor of

the University of Salford, UK.

This edition first published 2011

© 2005 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

© 2011 Peter Brandon and Patrizia Lombardi

Blackwell Publishing was acquired by John Wiley & Sons in February 2007. Blackwell’s publishing programme has been merged with Wiley’s global Scientific, Technical, and Medical business to form Wiley-Blackwell.

First edition published 2005

Second edition published 2011

Registered office

John Wiley & Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, United Kingdom

Editorial office

9600 Garsington Road, Oxford, OX4 2DQ, United Kingdom

2121 State Avenue, Ames, Iowa 50014-8300, USA

For details of our global editorial offices, for customer services and for information about how to apply for permission to reuse the copyright material in this book please see our website at www.wiley.com/wiley-blackwell.

The right of the author to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, without the prior permission of the publisher.

Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic books.

Designations used by companies to distinguish their products are often claimed as trademarks. All brand names and product names used in this book are trade names, service marks, trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. The publisher is not associated with any product or vendor mentioned in this book. This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to the subject matter covered. It is sold on the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services. If professional advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Brandon, P. S. (Peter S.)

Evaluating sustainable development in the built environment / Peter S. Brandon and Patrizia Lombardi. – 2nd ed.

p. cm.

Includes bibliographical references and index.

ISBN 978-1-4051-9258-3 (alk. paper)

1. Urban ecology (Sociology) 2. City planning–Environmental aspects. 3. Sustainable architecture. 4. Sustainable development. I. Lombardi, P. L. (Patrizia L.) II. Title.

HT241.B73 2010

307.76–dc22

2010029191

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

Contents

About the Authors

Preface

Acknowledgements

1 Setting the Context for EvaluatingSustainable Development

The environmental perspective

The international policy debates

Extension of the debate

The impact of the built environment

The current response of the built environment community

Sustainability: a definition

Seeking a shared set of values

Striving for a common frameworkand classification system

The characteristics of assessment and measurementfor sustainable development

Management and intervention for sustainable development

Implementing management decisions

Summary

2 Time and Sustainability

Innovation and stability

Perceptions of sustainable development

Critical failure points

Time in evaluation

Future aversion

Clever or wise?

Practical assessment of ‘time’

The luxury of the ‘time’ horizon

3 Approaches to Evaluation

The Natural Step

The concept of community capital

The ecological footprint

Monetary (capital) approach

The driving force-state-response model

Issues or theme-based frameworks

Accounting frameworks

Frameworks of assessment methods’ tool kits

Summary and conclusions

4 Indicators and Measures

Why evaluate?

Traditional versus sustainable development indicators

Generic and specific questions

International indicators

Aggregated indicators

Discussion

Summary

5 Assessment Methods

A directory of assessment methods

An outline summary of the main assessment methods, toolsand procedures in use

Summary and conclusions

6 A Proposed Framework for EvaluatingSustainable Development

The need for a holistic and integrated framework

The theoretical underpinning of the framework

The built environment explained by the modalities

The 15 modalities for understanding sustainabledevelopment in the built environment

Development of the multi-modal frameworkfor decision-making

Key questions for examining sustainable developmentwithin each modality

Synthesis of results

Summary

7 The Framework as a Structuring Tool: Case Studies

Case study 1: selection of a municipal wastetreatment system

Case study 2: evaluation of sustainable redevelopmentscenarios for an urban area

Case study 3: ‘multi-stakeholder’ urban regenerationdecision-making

Case study 4: social reporting of Modena City strategic plan

Summary and conclusion

8 Towards Management Systems and Protocols

Who manages?

The planning framework

Management in a learning organisation

Soft system methodology

Wicked problems

Process protocols

A possible approach

The Vancouver study

The conclusions of the Vancouver study

Follow through on the Vancouver study

Resilience

9 Education and Research

A research agenda

In conclusion

Appendix A: The Philosophy of the ‘Cosmonomic Idea of Reality’

References

Websites

Bibliography

Index

About the Authors

Professor Peter S. Brandon OBE was a pro-vice chancellor for research and postgraduate studies at the University of Salford and the director of the University Think Lab and is now a professor emeritus in the School of the Built Environment. He has played a major role in the development of research in the UK and internationally, and when head of the present School of the Built Environment at Salford, he led the school to the highest ratings for research in the UK, a position they have held ever since. He has written widely on a number of topics, including building economics, construction management, construction information technology and sustainable development. He has over 30 books to his credit as author, co-author or editor, and has published over 150 papers in more than 30 countries.

Professor Patrizia Lombardi from the City and Housing Department at the Politecnico di Torino is a leading expert in the use of environmental assessment methods and an established figure in the field of evaluating sustainable development and has been active in the field for over 20 years. She has coordinated or served as lead partner in several pan-European projects on topics related to sustainable urban development, including the BEQUEST network, the INTELCITY Roadmap, the INTELCITIES integrated project, the SURPrISE (Sustainable Urban Renewal Programs In Southern Europe) Interreg III C, the ISAAC (Integrated e-Services for Advanced Access to Heritage in Cultural Tourist Destinations) project and PERFECTION (Performance Indicators for Health, Comfort and Safety of the Indoor Environment). She is the editor or co-author of about 10 books on sustainability evaluation and is the author of over 100 papers in specialised textbooks and international scientific journals.

Preface

Five years is a long time in the development of an emerging subject, especially when it seems the whole world is now interested in its content. Since the first edition, the concept of sustainable development has risen in the human consciousness and is beginning to change behaviour around the globe. It is being driven by the concern about climate change and the impact this will have on human settlements. Individuals, governments, institutions and agencies are making their own contributions to change the rate of global warming or at least to mitigate its consequences. The situation is considered to be extremely serious and every ‘foresight’ type exercise has placed ‘sustainable development’ at the top of its agenda. In 2008, the US National Academy of Engineers identified 13 ‘grand challenges’ for engineering and of these 5 were directly related to climate change and all of the remainder were related to human survival.

In fact, human survival is at the root of the whole debate on sustainable development. The planet will look after itself and, indeed, it has for millions of years. It is life forms, sustained by the planet, which suffer as the surface is altered and changed by the natural evolution of planets and cosmic systems. It is estimated that 97% of all species that have lived on earth are now extinct. However, the human species is a relative latecomer to life on earth and is the first to begin to exercise conscious mediation of the planet’s subsystems. In previous millennia, ‘nature’ would have controlled human growth and its chance of survival. As Derickson (2006) suggests ‘We are not dumb enough to survive, but are we clever enough?’ In other words, if nature took its course then natural selection would take place and it is probable that the earth’s population of humans might well diminish. The current massive interest in what is often described as ‘the most important issue to ever have faced mankind’ is largely concerned with the human race attempting to prove it can be sufficiently clever to adapt to a change in climate which threatens a very significant proportion of the population. The question is still whether we can do it.

However, climate is not the only feature of sustainable development, important though it is. Within the subject is also the quality of life enjoyed by current and future generations. Survival is the most important factor but even without this threat there appears to be a moral duty not to impair the life of future generations by the actions we take today. Once we move into the quality-of-life dimension, the subject becomes exceptionally complicated. It is one reason why there are so many definitions of sustainable development. All aspects of life are interrelated and a decision in one area has impacts elsewhere, often without our knowledge. It is one of the reasons why we face climatic problems. Our decisions, particularly with regard to technology supporting economic development have resulted in consequences which were not foreseen. The subject becomes so complicated that simple definitions always appear inadequate in time (see Chapter 1). Perceptions change, needs change, the technological infrastructure changes, our scientific knowledge changes and what future generations of humans will require is impossible to predict. However, we believe we can avoid creating an environment which destroys the capacity for future generations to respond positively to change; otherwise, the subject would be pointless.

The last 30 years have seen a plethora of measures, indicators and evaluations which attempt to make some assessment of what is happening to our planet and the actions of human beings upon it. The origins of this book lie in trying to get a grasp on what we mean by ‘sustainable development’. The authors felt, in their research, that if they could measure it then they would be forced to define it, otherwise how would we know what to measure? In addition, the measure would allow us to discover whether we were making progress or not. However, the complexity of the problem makes an exhaustive measure impossible. Whatever we do, it will be partial. That is not to say it will not be useful and provide potentially new insights. It will and it does. It can only be part of a recognition that our tools and our ‘cleverness’ are often helpful but inadequate for the task as defined by most commentators.

So, how do we address this problem? At the heart of the issue is the interdependence between events, activities and processes. To address this, it is important to ask ‘why’ these events occur and where their behavioural relationship lies. This leads to a much more fundamental investigation of the problem and engages philosophy. Philosophy is ‘the academic discipline concerned with the nature and significance or ordinary and scientific beliefs, investigating the intelligibility of concepts by means of rational argument concerning their presuppositions, implications and inter-relationships’ (Collins English Dictionary, 2000). It should shed light on the key issues and how they emerge and evolve over time. It recognises that its work is almost never complete but it guides and directs our thinking towards solutions which are appropriate for the time, including our response to future events.

Like all emerging subjects for study there is a period of transition from the original concept to an established structure upon which knowledge can build. This structure needs to be robust yet flexible enough to accommodate new thinking. In Chapter 6, we have put forward a secularised view of one philosopher, Herman Dooyeweerd, as a possible basis for this structure. The background material for Dooyeweerd’s work is complex but rich and at an application level the authors and others have found it intuitive and enlightening particularly with regard to interrelationships between all the aspects of the cosmos which impinge on sustainable development.

This book will focus on two main issues. These are, firstly, how do we create a structure of knowledge and thinking which will allow us to develop a vocabulary which all participants in sustainable development can own and to which they will feel able to contribute and, secondly, how do we assess progress in sustainable development? The first is important because it enables a dialogue to take place between all the stakeholders in such a way that the complexity of the problem can be exposed, structured and communicated in order to gain confidence from all the parties. The second is important because unless we can evaluate what contributes to sustainability it will be very difficult to know whether a sustainable environment has been created.

These are fundamental and important issues. Implied in the structuring is not only a recognition that many people are engaged but also that they come from a variety of backgrounds, disciplines and levels of commitment which all provide a different ‘filter’ for the individual or group to view the problems or issue through. For them to come to agreement requires a structure which they can all understand and to which they can contribute their particular view. It also requires mutual respect and a desire to come to a solution that may involve compromise. It involves education because all need to understand the position of the others and it needs a language, which is not exclusive, but which includes all participants wherever possible. In terms of technique, it requires a confidence that the techniques for evaluation are fair and transparent so that the inputs and outputs are not favouring one particular view or, if they are, that all parties are aware of this limitation. There are very few, if any, techniques that are completely neutral in their advice.

This book is an explanation of some of these concepts and it attempts to provide an approach that can be built on and evolve over the ensuing years. There is a fast-developing subject known as ‘sustainability science’ which has been described by the Harvard University Centre for International Development as seeking to ‘advance basic understanding of the dynamics of human–environment systems; to facilitate the design, implementation and evaluation of practical interventions that promote sustainability in particular places and contexts; and to improve linkages between relevant research and innovation communities on the one hand and relevant policy and management communities on the other’. Others have focused more on the practical application and have defined it as ‘use-inspired basic research that seeks to learn about the interactions among humans (including their cultural, political, economic, and demographic characteristics), their technologies and the environment’ (Burns & Weaver, 2008). Note that it is the dynamics of the human/technology interface which is central. One without the other will not result in a satisfactory understanding of the problem.

This subject is emerging and evolving as the subject matter becomes more of an established domain of study. Our understanding of what we mean by the term, and how it will be viewed, will change, but this book attempts to provide a contribution towards a structure and approach which will endure these evolving concepts and processes and provide a platform which allows the subject to grow and develop in a consistent and coherent way.

Peter S. Brandon and Patrizia Lombardi

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the important contribution made to this book by a number of individuals, including:

The members of the BEQUEST European Network (sponsored by the European Commission and led by Professor Steve Curwell of the University of Salford), who have debated many of these issues over the past 12 years. Their work has provided a useful source of information for many aspects of this book and we value the critique that they have provided of many of the ideas presented. In particular, we would like to thank Steve Curwell and Mark Deakin (of Napier University, Edinburgh) who have critically analysed and interpreted the results of the assessment methods survey reported in Chapter 5.

Hanneke van Dijk, who has played a very important role in bringing this volume to print. Her patience, particularly in the later stages, was exemplary and we appreciate the task she undertook in conforming to the publisher's requirements.

Dr Andrew Basden, who provided guidance on the work of Herman Dooyeweerd and enabled us to create the structure proposed in Chapter 6.

Our respective families, who suffered from the time demands but provided support throughout.

The sections Monetary (capital) approach (part of), The driving force–state–response model, Issues or theme-based frameworks (part of) and Accounting frameworks (part of) in Chapter 3 and Aggregated indicators (part of) in Chapter 4 are reproduced with permission from Indicators of Sustainable Development: Guidelines and Methodologies © United Nations, 2007.

1

Setting the Context for Evaluating Sustainable Development

The environmental perspective

The subject of sustainable development is one of the key research and policy issues as we enter the early years of the twenty-first century. This book takes the broad view, but the world focus at the time of writing appears to be the concerns on climate change and on pollution levels threatening the survival of the human species. The importance of this focus can be seen by the high regard that the global community places on these problems. At the Rio conference in 1992, 100 heads of states attended, representing 179 governments that committed themselves to an agenda for addressing the perceived problem. In 2002, 109 governments were represented at the Rio + 10 conference in Johannesburg and vowed to continue the focus on what they considered to be an important area. More recently, the Kyoto Protocol regarding carbon emissions has been ratified by most of the countries of the world and the Copenhagen World Summit on climate change has committed itself to an accord to prevent the rise in global temperature going beyond a further 2°C (although this was not made legally binding). This is the maximum that experts feel the world can accommodate without major catastrophe, although many will still suffer. Over the past 5 years the European Union has committed a substantial proportion of its research and development monies to sustainability issues and the majority of governments that have a national research programme have also committed funds to the cause. So why the interest and why is it at, or near, the top of global policy for research and development?

With all new ideas, there is a long gestation period before they are taken up as policy or identified as a key issue for researchers to address. There is little doubt that the current interest in sustainable development has come from the pressure groups and particularly those associated with the green movement who saw the depletion of non-renewable resources (and particularly energy stocks), the pollution of the air and water and the breakdown of social conscience through globalisation as leading to the demise of mankind and the balance of nature (the ecosystem), which presently sustains living creatures. They considered that there was a moral imperative to take the long-term view and to consider the impact of decisions taken now on generations that would follow. It is true to say that within this general thrust there was, and probably will be, a variety of opinions on such matters as the extent of the damage being done to the environment, the responsibility for the current situation and the manner in which it can be remedied.

There is, however, a growing consensus that something is wrong and that mankind has a duty to do something about it. There has been a crescendo of concern from almost every quarter of human society led by some very significant figures in government, academe and pressure organisations. These are the new prophets, forecasting a calamity and demanding that the world turn from its fallen ways! In nearly all cases, their forecasts have been on the conservative side in recent years, particularly with regard to global warming. It appears that the world is getting warmer at a faster rate than was expected, that it appears to be accentuated by the behaviour of mankind and that humankind is facing a losing battle to remedy the situation. Hence, the focus on resilience (i.e. the ability to retain function through adversity) to assist in containing the problem. Leading thinkers and politicians such as Gore (2006), Lovelock (2009), Rees (2004), Jackson (2009) and many others have brought to the attention of the world the potential plight which faces life on earth.

Knowing what to do is of course another matter and there is a spectrum of views (see Fig. 1.1). At one end of the spectrum are those who suggest that we should conserve at all costs, change the way we live and seek a reduction in economic growth as a means of reducing consumption. At the other end are those who believe that necessity is the mother of invention and that a ‘technical fix’ will be found which will remove the need for such drastic measures to be taken. They believe that the markets will drive up the price of non-renewable resources and that this in turn will encourage innovators to provide sensible alternatives. Against this argument others would say that in the time it takes for the markets to realise what is happening, irreparable damage may have been done to the planet for which future generations may have to pay the full price.

These two extremes can also be viewed through the themes which arose from the Johannesburg Summit. There were two major schools of thought. One appeared to be arguing that man could exercise control and dominion over the earth, mainly by technological advancement. The other thought that humans must review their position as part of nature and seek to work in harmony and in empathy with the cycles of nature and the planet. This polarisation of view is often seen as detrimental to advancement and that much can be achieved by developing the technology whilst appreciating, respecting and recognising the second. There is a paradox in this dialogue because if we were not able to intervene then nature would probably have found ways to limit population growth (as it has with so many species) and avoid the excessive use of non-renewable resources. Population growth is at the heart of the problem – we cannot sustain this number of people with the resources available.

Figure 1.1 The spectrum of views on sustainability.

c01f001

Despite this, much of this debate is at the level of the planet. Saving spaceship earth is the clarion call and we must all be engaged in the earth’s preservation and its delicate ecological systems. This attitude may also be debated, for many would point out that the earth has been in turmoil ever since its formation and species have come and gone, climatic changes far outweigh the actions of mankind in terms of their devastation and in the very long term the earth itself will disappear and will probably be engulfed in a black hole or other stellar catastrophe. The response to this would be that we are the first species able to create its own downfall and the first to be able to at least extend its sojourn on earth, so why should we not rise to the challenge and try to extend the life of the species? The focus is on the environment and it is through this filter that human activity will be judged. This does not seem unreasonable as future generations will probably judge the activities of the current generation in the same way that we often judge the misdemeanours of the past: by the way they affect us now.

The question of time is a key one and the text will return to this in due course. Over what period should we view sustainable development? It is a critical issue for the systems and techniques we employ to measure progress. If we take the very long term, the planet is probably doomed anyway. If we take the short term, we can probably muddle through and overcome or manoeuvre around the problems that we have created. How far ahead can we look? Is it one, two, several or hundreds of generations? Most commentators would suggest that our ability to make interventions that would aid future populations is limited to two or three generations. Beyond this, we would probably need to be prophets or exercise witchcraft to know what to do. Predictions made 200 years ago, extrapolating the knowledge of the time, seem naive and stupid with the benefit of hindsight. For example, it was thought that London would be waist-deep in horse manure at the turn of the nineteenth/twentieth century because of the growth of horse-drawn transport! Would it have been sensible to ask the people of Europe 300 years ago to sacrifice their gruel in order that our generation would benefit from having the asset of computer technology? Of course not.

There is perhaps one area where we can predict a potential problem and that is with the demise of non-renewable resources. Who knows of what value these resources will be to those who will follow? We do not know what benefits to health, to quality of life and to the supply of useful products these resources will bring, because our knowledge of their potential is still limited. We do not understand how they may be used in different, complex combinations linked to other knowledge, for example of the nature of genes, to the benefit of our children and beyond. If some of these resources disappear, what legacy are we leaving? We tend to view these resources in terms of what they can provide now and not what their potential benefit could be in the future. Our outlooks are determined by their impact on us and the horizons that science and technology have set for us at this point in time. Often these are limited to the human lifespan.

Since the mid-1970s, these debates have grown in intensity and have risen up the international agenda to the point where it is heads of government who find themselves gathered together to address the problem. Partly this is a recognition that it is a global problem. Most of the environmental problems are not confined within national boundaries. (A hole in the ozone layer or a leak from a nuclear energy plant does not respect the arbitrary limits of territory designated by human beings.) Partly it is because this subject is recognised as being an issue of morality in which all must cooperate if action is to be taken that will change the course of environmental well-being. No one wants to be seen to show a lack of commitment to such a key issue. Partly it is because in each country there is a political imperative to address these issues because the nature of the problem has permeated the public conscience. It is unlikely that the subject will go away and indeed for some time to come it is likely to be a major item on the international agenda despite the fact that there are differences of opinion on how the matter should be tackled. For example, President George W. Bush of the USA refused to sign the Kyoto Agreement on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in his first term of office because of the vested interests of industry in the USA. It was not until President Obama came into office that a new narrative was created and the USA joined in the debate to limit the speed of climate change. Sometimes the rapidly developing countries such as China and India are criticised for following the development path of the developed nations but the signs are that they are more sensitive to this problem and are addressing the issue