IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v8y2016i5p461-d69720.html

Towards the Development of an Integrated Sustainability and Resilience Benefits Assessment Framework of Urban Green Growth Interventions

Author

Listed:
  • Stelios Grafakos

    (Institute for Housing and Urban Development Studies (IHS), Erasmus University Rotterdam (EUR), 3062 PA Rotterdam, The Netherlands)

  • Alberto Gianoli

    (Institute for Housing and Urban Development Studies (IHS), Erasmus University Rotterdam (EUR), 3062 PA Rotterdam, The Netherlands)

  • Alexandra Tsatsou

    (Institute for Housing and Urban Development Studies (IHS), Erasmus University Rotterdam (EUR), 3062 PA Rotterdam, The Netherlands)

Abstract

Considering the current emerging demographic, urbanization and climatic trends, integrating sustainability and resilience principles into urban development becomes a key priority for decision-makers worldwide. Local and national governments, project developers and other urban stakeholders dealing with the complexities of urban development need projects with clear structure and outcomes in order to inform decision-making and ensure sources of financing. The need for developing an integrated assessment methodology that would capture and quantify multiple urban sustainability and resilience benefits of projects in one common framework and eventually lead to verifiable sustainability and resilience outcomes is immense and challenging at the same time. The main objective of this paper is to present the development of a methodological approach that aims to integrate sustainability and resilience benefits, derived from the implementation of green growth urban projects, into a unified framework of criteria addressing environmental, social, economic and institutional perspectives. The proposed sustainability and resilience benefits assessment (SRBA) methodology is a combination of top down and bottom up approaches, including GIS-based scenario building. The different types of sustainability and resilience benefits of urban green growth projects are also identified at different levels ( i.e. , individual, neighborhood, city and global). Moreover, the proposed methodology creates scenarios that can be illustrated by a map-based approach to enable a better illustration and visualization of benefits. It demonstrates how a map-based approach can assess not only the extent of sustainability and resilience benefits accrued (how much is benefitted), but also their spatial distribution (who is benefitted). The main methodological challenges and issues on developing an integrated sustainability and resilience benefits assessment are identified and discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Stelios Grafakos & Alberto Gianoli & Alexandra Tsatsou, 2016. "Towards the Development of an Integrated Sustainability and Resilience Benefits Assessment Framework of Urban Green Growth Interventions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-33, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:8:y:2016:i:5:p:461-:d:69720
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/5/461/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/5/461/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:wbk:wbpubs:16091 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. repec:wbk:wbpubs:11846 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Drupp, Moritz A., 2011. "Does the Gold Standard label hold its promise in delivering higher Sustainable Development benefits? A multi-criteria comparison of CDM projects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1213-1227, March.
    4. repec:wbk:wbpubs:11845 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. repec:wbk:wbpubs:15790 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Hayek, F. A., 2012. "Hayek on Hayek," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226321202 edited by Kresge, Stephen & Wenar, Leif, December.
    7. Stephen Hammer & Lamia Kamal-Chaoui & Alexis Robert & Marissa Plouin, 2011. "Cities and Green Growth: A Conceptual Framework," OECD Regional Development Working Papers 2011/8, OECD Publishing.
    8. repec:wbk:wbpubs:11844 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Nussbaumer, Patrick, 2009. "On the contribution of labelled Certified Emission Reductions to sustainable development: A multi-criteria evaluation of CDM projects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 91-101, January.
    10. Stelios Grafakos & Elena Marie Enseñado & Alexandros Flamos & Jan Rotmans, 2015. "Mapping and Measuring European Local Governments’ Priorities for a Sustainable and Low-Carbon Energy Future," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-26, October.
    11. repec:wbk:wbpubs:13109 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Derissen, Sandra & Quaas, Martin F. & Baumgärtner, Stefan, 2011. "The relationship between resilience and sustainability of ecological-economic systems," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(6), pages 1121-1128, April.
    13. Koichiro Mori & Toyonobu Fujii & Tsuguta Yamashita & Yutaka Mimura & Yuta Uchiyama & Kengo Hayashi, 2015. "Visualization of a City Sustainability Index (CSI): Towards Transdisciplinary Approaches Involving Multiple Stakeholders," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(9), pages 1-23, September.
    14. Charoenkit, Sasima & Kumar, S., 2014. "Environmental sustainability assessment tools for low carbon and climate resilient low income housing settlements," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 509-525.
    15. Olsen, Karen Holm & Fenhann, Jørgen, 2008. "Sustainable development benefits of clean development mechanism projects: A new methodology for sustainability assessment based on text analysis of the project design documents submitted for validation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 2773-2784, August.
    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. Meng Meng & Marcin Dabrowski & Dominic Stead, 2020. "Enhancing Flood Resilience and Climate Adaptation: The State of the Art and New Directions for Spatial Planning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-23, September.
    2. Aleksey I. Shinkevich & Alsu R. Akhmetshina & Ruslan R. Khalilov, 2022. "Development of a Methodology for Forecasting the Sustainable Development of Industry in Russia Based on the Tools of Factor and Discriminant Analysis," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-16, March.
    3. Marijke Dijkshoorn-Dekker & Vincent Linderhof & Thomas J.M. Mattijssen & Nico Polman, 2020. "Food Secure Metropolitan Areas: The Transition Support System Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-16, July.
    4. Ayyoob Sharifi & Lorenzo Chelleri & Cate Fox-Lent & Stelios Grafakos & Minal Pathak & Marta Olazabal & Susie Moloney & Lily Yumagulova & Yoshiki Yamagata, 2017. "Conceptualizing Dimensions and Characteristics of Urban Resilience: Insights from a Co-Design Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-20, June.
    5. Patrick Bergmann & Endre Kamarás & Werner Gleißner & Edeltraud Guenther, 2020. "Enhanced Cash Flow Valuation in Real Estate Management by Integrating Innovative Materials and Risk Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-26, March.
    6. Zhimin Liu & Chunliang Xiu & Wei Song, 2019. "Landscape-Based Assessment of Urban Resilience and Its Evolution: A Case Study of the Central City of Shenyang," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-20, May.
    7. Jam Shahzaib Khan & Rozana Zakaria & Siti Mazzuana Shamsudin & Nur Izie Adiana Abidin & Shaza Rina Sahamir & Darul Nafis Abbas & Eeydzah Aminudin, 2019. "Evolution to Emergence of Green Buildings: A Review," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-20, January.
    8. Chun-Fa Cheng & Kuo-Tai Cheng & Kirk Chang & Hsing-Wei Tai, 2024. "Resilience Governance and Acceptance of Climate Change Policy in Taiwan Special Municipalities," SAGE Open, , vol. 14(3), pages 21582440241, September.
    9. Xun Zeng & Yuanchun Yu & San Yang & Yang Lv & Md Nazirul Islam Sarker, 2022. "Urban Resilience for Urban Sustainability: Concepts, Dimensions, and Perspectives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-27, February.
    10. Stelios Grafakos & Kate Trigg & Mia Landauer & Lorenzo Chelleri & Shobhakar Dhakal, 2019. "Analytical framework to evaluate the level of integration of climate adaptation and mitigation in cities," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 154(1), pages 87-106, May.
    11. Sedigheh Meimandi Parizi & Mohammad Taleai & Ayyoob Sharifi, 2021. "Integrated methods to determine urban physical resilience characteristics and their interactions," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 109(1), pages 725-754, October.
    12. Sedigheh Meimandi Parizi & Mohammad Taleai & Ayyoob Sharifi, 2022. "A GIS-Based Multi-Criteria Analysis Framework to Evaluate Urban Physical Resilience against Earthquakes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-31, April.
    13. Saba Alnusairat & Jenan Abu Qadourah & Rawan Khattab, 2023. "Assessing the Future City Post COVID-19: Linking the SDGs, Health, Resilience, and Psychological Impact," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-24, January.

    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. Mori-Clement, Yadira, 2019. "Impacts of CDM projects on sustainable development: Improving living standards across Brazilian municipalities?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 222-236.
    2. World Bank, 2012. "Carbon Livelihoods : Social Opportunities and Risks of Carbon Finance," World Bank Publications - Reports 18369, The World Bank Group.
    3. Wang, Can & Zhang, Weishi & Cai, Wenjia & Xie, Xi, 2013. "Employment impacts of CDM projects in China's power sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 481-491.
    4. Parnphumeesup, Piya & Kerr, Sandy A., 2011. "Stakeholder preferences towards the sustainable development of CDM projects: Lessons from biomass (rice husk) CDM project in Thailand," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 3591-3601, June.
    5. Watts, David & Albornoz, Constanza & Watson, Andrea, 2015. "Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) after the first commitment period: Assessment of the world׳s portfolio and the role of Latin America," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 1176-1189.
    6. Pécastaing, Nicolas & Dávalos, Jorge & Inga, Andy, 2018. "The effect of Peru's CDM investments on households’ welfare: An econometric approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 198-207.
    7. Yadira Mori Clement & Birgit Bednar-Friedl, 2017. "Do Clean Development Mechanism projects generate local employment? Testing for sectoral effects across Brazilian municipalities," Graz Economics Papers 2017-05, University of Graz, Department of Economics.
    8. Papapostolou, Aikaterini & Karakosta, Charikleia & Nikas, Alexandros & Psarras, John, 2017. "Exploring opportunities and risks for RES-E deployment under Cooperation Mechanisms between EU and Western Balkans: A multi-criteria assessment," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 519-530.
    9. Lema, Adrian & Lema, Rasmus, 2016. "Low-carbon innovation and technology transfer in latecomer countries: Insights from solar PV in the clean development mechanism," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 223-236.
    10. Parnphumeesup, Piya & Kerr, Sandy A., 2011. "Classifying carbon credit buyers according to their attitudes towards and involvement in CDM sustainability labels," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 6271-6279, October.
    11. Vasa, Alexander & Neuhoff, Karsten, 2011. "The Role of CDM Post-2012," EconStor Research Reports 65871, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    12. Jingjing He & Yongfu Huang & Finn Tarp, 2014. "Has the Clean Development Mechanism assisted sustainable development?," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 38(4), pages 248-260, November.
    13. Horstmann, Britta & Hein, Jonas, 2017. "Aligning climate change mitigation and sustainable development under the UNFCCC: a critical assessment of the Clean Development Mechanism, the Green Climate Fund and REDD+," IDOS Studies, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS), volume 96, number 96, March.
    14. Uddin, Noim & Blommerde, Mascha & Taplin, Ros & Laurence, David, 2015. "Sustainable development outcomes of coal mine methane clean development mechanism Projects in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 1-9.
    15. Drupp, Moritz A., 2011. "Does the Gold Standard label hold its promise in delivering higher Sustainable Development benefits? A multi-criteria comparison of CDM projects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1213-1227, March.
    16. Mori-Clement, Yadira & Bednar-Friedl, Birgit, 2019. "Do Clean Development Mechanism Projects Generate Local Employment? Testing for Sectoral Effects across Brazilian Municipalities," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 47-60.
    17. Niki-Artemis Spyridaki & Nikos Kleanthis & Dimitra Tzani & Mia Dragović Matosović & Alexandros Flamos, 2020. "A City Capability Assessment Framework Focusing on Planning, Financing, and Implementing Sustainable Energy Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-23, October.
    18. Kneteman Christie & Green Andrew, 2009. "The Twin Failures of the CDM: Recommendations for the "Copenhagen Protocol"," The Law and Development Review, De Gruyter, vol. 2(1), pages 225-256, October.
    19. Igor Shishlov & Valentin Bellassen, 2012. "10 lessons from 10 years of the CDM," Working Papers hal-01151437, HAL.
    20. Johannes Alexeew & Linda Bergset & Kristin Meyer & Juliane Petersen & Lambert Schneider & Charlotte Unger, 2010. "An analysis of the relationship between the additionality of CDM projects and their contribution to sustainable development," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 233-248, September.

    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:8:y:2016:i:5:p:461-:d:69720. 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 The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address (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.