We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Edited by
Claudia R. Binder, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne,Romano Wyss, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne,Emanuele Massaro, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne
This chapter presents Sustainability Solution Spaces for Decision-Making (SSP) as an integrative method for assessing sustainability. The SSP represents the room to manoeuvre in the system at hand so that it can develop sustainably. The approach fulfils (1) systemic criteria; (2) normative criteria; and (3) procedural criteria. It provides a consistent set of targets and considers the systemic relations among the indicators representing the city-region. This gives the decision-makers concise guidelines for sustainable decisions and makes them aware of the associated trade-offs. SSP can be pursued following a participatory and an expert approach. Whereas the expert approach requires high quality of data, preferably either over time or over a large number of cities, the participatory approach is more flexible and can deal with qualitative data. That is, the expert approach is appropriate for comparing large sets of cities with each other, clustering and providing benchmarks for specific city types, and delivering general indications where policy development is required. The participatory approach might be particularly useful for assessing the impact of a specific project or analysing a specific sector, such as mobility or housing, in depth.
Edited by
Claudia R. Binder, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne,Romano Wyss, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne,Emanuele Massaro, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne
The Integrative Concept of Sustainable Development (ICoS) was developed through an intensive process in order to operationalise the guiding rules of sustainable development in an interdisciplinary team. Through its three general sustainability goals and 25 sustainability rules, ICoS establishes that indicators are part of a step-wise, systematic, and consistent construction that links theoretical abstraction to deliberative action: the political and societal practice of sustainable development (Barton & Kopfmüller, 2012, p. 84). The application of the concept is presented through two examples: a completed project in Santiago de Chile, and a project currently being developed, which will enable the calculation of regional sustainable energy balances.
Edited by
Claudia R. Binder, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne,Romano Wyss, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne,Emanuele Massaro, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne
This chapter presents a comparative analysis of four Participatory Multi-Criteria Approaches (PMCAs) usually applied in sustainability assessments (SMCE, MCM, 3-SPM, and INTEGRAAL). Such approaches are presented in detail and subsequently compared to each other according to three elementary yet crucial questions: who assesses?; what is assessed?; and how is it assessed? The results outline potential synergies and theoretical incompatibilities between the four approaches. The analysis also supports future PMCA applications when choosing one particular approach according to: key meta-principles (i.e., epistemological stance, methodological emphasis); logistical constraints (e.g., time, budget); local idiosyncrasies (e.g., pertinent geographical scales, power asymmetries); and organisational factors.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.