Speaker
Description
Urban settlements are a major source of carbon emissions globally, with sustainable forms of development widely acknowledged as a key pillar of climate action.
While efforts to reduce environmental impacts have generally focused on individual buildings, there is recognition that shared methods for measuring and evaluating the performance of built form at the wider neighbourhood level are required. This has led to the development of numerous tools intended to define and rate sustainability at the scale of urban districts – commonly known as Neighbourhood Sustainability Assessments (NSAs).
Despite a growing literature on the topic, direct comparisons between NSAs remain challenging. While many share a similar hierarchical structure, the meaning and intent of similar categories can differ. Additionally, the modes of measurement and weighting applied to individual indicators are rarely consistent, resulting in various methods of comparison in prior research. This hinders the ability to understand how different neighbourhood ratings relate to one another and whether projects perform as claimed. It also limits the comparison of findings on the structure and methodology of NSAs within the literature.
To address these challenges, this paper outlines a systematic method for the documentation and analysis of NSAs. 13 national tools, covering 3 global regions, were selected due to their shared status, purpose, and scope. The assessment criteria of each NSA were catalogued according to submission requirement (mandatory/option), data type (quantitative/qualitative), and whether benchmarking applied, with core trends noted. Further analysis of benchmarked indicators allowed for detailed comparison and recategorisation in terms of metrics, unobscured by stated themes or intent.
The findings reveal that the majority of measured categories across NSAs are optional, with qualitative data being the primary source for assessment. Moreover, a significant proportion of categories lack a reference benchmark as part of the evaluation process.
In cataloguing the types of data required and the standards set for each criterion, the priorities and intentions embedded in these frameworks are revealed. According to this review, benchmarked indicators are relatively evenly distributed across sustainability categories but are largely adopted as proxy metrics for indirectly related performance variables.
This research highlights that many NSAs, in their current form, are insufficient as reliable barometers of sustainable urban development. Additionally, it provides the first catalogue of internationally adopted quantitative metrics for assessing sustainability at the neighbourhood scale. In doing so, it clarifies the diverse ways in which sustainable urban design is currently defined and evaluated globally.
| Keywords | Neighbourhood sustainability assessment; district scale; design performance; sustainable urbanism |
|---|---|
| Best Congress Paper Award | Yes |
