The assessment of sustainable urban development

Authors: Deakin M.; Huovila P.; Rao S.; Sunikka M.; Vreeker R.

Source: Building Research and Information, Volume 30, Number 2, 1 March 2002 , pp. 95-108(14)

Publisher: Routledge, part of the Taylor & Francis Group

Abstract:

This paper describes the outcomes of a survey of assessment methods for sustainable urban development (SUD) undertaken by an international network called BEQUEST. It addresses aspects of good practice in terms of SUD, explores the range of methods available and explains the classification used in the directory of methods included in the BEQUEST Toolkit available on the web. An exercise undertaken to map the range of assessment methods to the various sustainability issues and development activities is described. The strengths and weakness and other deficiencies in current forms of sustainability assessment are explored. The key gaps in sustainability assessment are identified for further research and the importance of greater integration in assessment and evaluation, across professional and subject boundaries is emphasized.

Cet article analyse les résultats d"une étude portant sur les méthodes d"évaluation du développement urbain viable (DUV) entreprise par un réseau international dénommé BEQUEST. Il traite de certains aspects des bonnes pratiques en termes de DUV, explore l"éventail des méthodes disponibles et explique le classement utilisé dans le répertoire des méthodes qui est inclus dans le Dossier BEQUEST disponible sur Internet. Il décrit également un exercice de cartographie du choix des méthodes existantes en fonction de divers problèmes de viabilitéet des activités de développement. Les points forts, les points faibles et autres déficiences des formes actuelles de l"évaluation de la viabilité y sont étudiés. L"article poursuit en recensant les principales lacunes dans l"évaluation de la viabilité dans la perspective de futures recherches et en insistant sur l"importance d"une meilleure intégration de l"évaluation entre les professions et les sujets.

Keywords: CLASSIFICATION OF ASSESSMENT METHODS; EVALUATION; GOOD PRACTICE PROTOCOL; SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT; SUSTAINABLE URBAN DEVELOPMENT; URBAN DEVELOPMENT; URBAN PLANNING; MOTS; CLES; CLASSEMENT DES METHODES D"EVALUATION; EVALUATION; PROTOCOLE DE BONNES PRATIQUES; DEVELOPPEMENT URBAIN VIABLE; EVALUATION DE LA VIABILITE; DEVELOPPEMENT URBAIN; AMENAGEMENT URBAIN; SUD IS INCREASINGLY BEING RELATIVE RATHER THAN ABSOLUTE CONCEPT; I.E. AS A PROCESS CLEAR OR FIXED OUTCOMES; BENTIVEGNA; HOW PROFESSIONAL ACTORS CAN USE ASSESSMENT METHODS TO EFFECTIVELY IMPROVE THE "SUSTAINABILITY" OF URBAN

Language: English

Document Type: Research article

Publication date: 2002-03-01

More about this publication?

• Editorial Board
• Information for Authors
• Subscribe to this Title
• ingentaconnect is not responsible for the content or availability of external websites

Related content

• In this: publication
• By this: publisher
• In this Subject: Construction
• By this author: Deakin M. ;  Huovila P. ;  Rao S. ;  Sunikka M. ;  Vreeker R.

Website © Publishing Technology. Article copyright remains with the publisher, society or author(s) as specified within the article.

• Terms and conditions
• Privacy policy
• Information for advertisers