IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i2p460-d131097.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating the Practice and Outcomes of Applying Regenerative Development to a Large-Scale Project in Victoria, Australia

Author

Listed:
  • Dominique Hes

    (Faculty of Architecture, Building and Planning, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC 3010, Australia)

  • André Stephan

    (Faculty of Architecture, Building and Planning, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC 3010, Australia)

  • Sareh Moosavi

    (Faculty of Architecture, Building and Planning, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC 3010, Australia)

Abstract

Regenerative development is one of the critical pathways or processes towards an ecological worldview and a built environment in synergy with the natural environment. This vision aims to restore and support environmental, social and economic flows from a systems perspective. While regenerative development has been discussed in theory and applied to some projects, very few studies have analysed the processes that support its emergence. Our study investigates the design process of an ongoing development project, “Seacombe West” in Victoria, Australia. It evaluates the design outputs, using the LENSES Framework (Living Environments in Natural, Social, and Economic Systems) which is specifically designed to facilitate the emergence of regenerative development thinking. The project included a series of four workshops that led to a set of guidelines that in turn were used to design a masterplan. We evaluate the resulting guidelines, the masterplan, and the experience of the participants through an online survey (70% response rate) and semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders. Our results show that using LENSES encouraged systems thinking and helps facilitate a transdisciplinary approach towards regenerative development. This evaluation provides insights into how regenerative development can emerge in projects and how the potential for net benefit can be embedded.

Suggested Citation

  • Dominique Hes & André Stephan & Sareh Moosavi, 2018. "Evaluating the Practice and Outcomes of Applying Regenerative Development to a Large-Scale Project in Victoria, Australia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-24, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:2:p:460-:d:131097
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/2/460/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/2/460/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jahn, Thomas & Bergmann, Matthias & Keil, Florian, 2012. "Transdisciplinarity: Between mainstreaming and marginalization," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 1-10.
    2. Roberts, Anna M. & Pannell, David J. & Doole, Graeme & Vigiak, Olga, 2012. "Agricultural land management strategies to reduce phosphorus loads in the Gippsland Lakes, Australia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 106(1), pages 11-22.
    3. Hoffmann, Sabine & Pohl, Christian & Hering, Janet G., 2017. "Exploring transdisciplinary integration within a large research program: Empirical lessons from four thematic synthesis processes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 678-692.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alla Mostepaniuk & Turgay Akalin & Mohammad Reza Parish, 2023. "Practices Pursuing the Sustainability of A Healthcare Organization: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-21, January.
    2. Jane Toner & Cheryl Desha & Kimberley Reis & Dominique Hes & Samantha Hayes, 2023. "Integrating Ecological Knowledge into Regenerative Design: A Rapid Practice Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-29, September.
    3. Leah V. Gibbons, 2020. "Regenerative—The New Sustainable?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-18, July.
    4. Henrique Sala Benites & Paul Osmond & Deo Prasad, 2023. "A neighbourhood‐scale conceptual model towards regenerative circularity for the built environment," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(3), pages 1748-1767, June.
    5. Eduardo Blanco & Maibritt Pedersen Zari & Kalina Raskin & Philippe Clergeau, 2021. "Urban Ecosystem-Level Biomimicry and Regenerative Design: Linking Ecosystem Functioning and Urban Built Environments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-12, January.
    6. William Craft & Lan Ding & Deo Prasad, 2021. "Developing a Decision-Making Framework for Regenerative Precinct Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-23, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Brennan, Michael & Rondón-Sulbarán, Janeet, 2019. "Transdisciplinary research: Exploring impact, knowledge and quality in the early stages of a sustainable development project," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 481-491.
    2. Siebenhüner, Bernd, 2018. "Conflicts in Transdisciplinary Research: Reviewing Literature and Analysing a Case of Climate Adaptation in Northwestern Germany," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 117-127.
    3. Flurina Schneider & Zarina Patel & Katsia Paulavets & Tobias Buser & Jacqueline Kado & Stefanie Burkhart, 2023. "Fostering transdisciplinary research for sustainability in the Global South: Pathways to impact for funding programmes," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-11, December.
    4. Cornelia Fischer & Katharina Gugerell & Ursula Laa & Jannik Jacobsen & Marianne Penker, 2025. "Evaluating transdisciplinary methods: a new scale for measuring knowledge integration," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-19, December.
    5. Marina Knickel & Karlheinz Knickel & Francesca Galli & Damian Maye & Johannes S. C. Wiskerke, 2019. "Towards a Reflexive Framework for Fostering Co—Learning and Improvement of Transdisciplinary Collaboration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-22, November.
    6. Karin Fierke & Antje Wiener, 1999. "Constructing Institutional Interests: EU and NATO Enlargement," EUI-RSCAS Working Papers 14, European University Institute (EUI), Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced Studies (RSCAS).
    7. Nicolás Ruiz, Néstor & Suárez Alonso, María Luisa & Vidal-Abarca, María Rosario, 2021. "Contributions of dry rivers to human well-being: A global review for future research," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    8. Juerges, Nataly & Jahn, Stephanie, 2020. "German forest management stakeholders at the science-society interface: Their views on problem definition, knowledge production and research utilization," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    9. Eastwood, C.R. & Turner, F.J. & Romera, A.J., 2022. "Farmer-centred design: An affordances-based framework for identifying processes that facilitate farmers as co-designers in addressing complex agricultural challenges," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    10. Arora-Jonsson, Seema, 2016. "Does resilience have a culture? Ecocultures and the politics of knowledge production," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 98-107.
    11. Sloane, Peter J, 2010. "Symposium 7: The Fair Work Australia Minimum Wage Decision Viewed From Afar," Australian Bulletin of Labour, National Institute of Labour Studies, vol. 36(3), pages 346-350.
    12. Lundgren, Jakob, 2022. "Unity through disunity: Strengths, values, and tensions in the disciplinary discourse of ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    13. Smith, M, 2009. "Gender Pay Equity Reform in Australia: What is the Way Forward?," Australian Bulletin of Labour, National Institute of Labour Studies, vol. 35(4), pages 652-670.
    14. Haack, Frederik & Nagel, Manuel & Richters, Oliver & Schäfer, Ernst & Wunderlich, Sebastian, 2015. "Energieeffizienz & Rebound-Effekte im Kontext der Energiewende," EconStor Research Reports 142463, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    15. Eckard Rehbinder, 1997. "Environmental Agreements. A New Instrument of Environmental Policy," EUI-RSCAS Working Papers 45, European University Institute (EUI), Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced Studies (RSCAS).
    16. Hubeau, Marianne & Marchand, Fleur & Coteur, Ine & Mondelaers, Koen & Debruyne, Lies & Van Huylenbroeck, Guido, 2017. "A new agri-food systems sustainability approach to identify shared transformation pathways towards sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 52-63.
    17. Amy Verdun, 1998. "The Role of the Delors Committee in the Creation of EMU: An Epistemic Community?," EUI-RSCAS Working Papers 44, European University Institute (EUI), Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced Studies (RSCAS).
    18. Jane Wardani & Joannette J. (Annette) Bos & Diego Ramirez‐Lovering & Anthony G. Capon, 2022. "Enabling transdisciplinary research collaboration for planetary health: Insights from practice at the environment‐health‐development nexus," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(2), pages 375-392, April.
    19. von Wirth, Timo & Wissen Hayek, Ulrike & Kunze, Antje & Neuenschwander, Noemi & Stauffacher, Michael & Scholz, Roland W., 2014. "Identifying urban transformation dynamics: Functional use of scenario techniques to integrate knowledge from science and practice," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 115-130.
    20. Callum J Gunn & Sevgi E & Teresa Finlay & Lidewij Eva & Teun Zuiderent-Jerak & Tjerk Jan Schuitmaker-Warnaar, 2023. "Co-design and its consequences: developing a shared patient engagement framework in the IMI-PARADIGM project," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 50(6), pages 1018-1028.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:2:p:460-:d:131097. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.