SUIT Sustainable development of Urban historical areas through an active Integration within Towns

Task 3.3 b – Environmental Statement (alternatives, impacts and damage)

SDO – Sustainable development objectives assistant

Task leader: UNIDO Task partners: IFIB

Authors: Niklaus Kohler, Uta Hassler, Markus Joachim, Thomas Bender, Robin Gessmann, Petra von Both,

Frank Zentner

IFIB March 2003

This deliverable was produced under the SUIT project in the EU Programme Energy, Environment and Sustainable Development, Key Action 4 : The City of Tomorrow and Cultural

Heritage, Theme 4.2.3. : Foster Integration of Cultural Heritage in the Urban Setting

SUIT contract number : EVK4-CT-2000-00017 SUIT

2

Table of Content

Summary

1. Introduction 2. The different dimensions of Sustainable Development 3. Sustainable development objectives 4. The specification of the Sustainable Development Objectives Assistant (SDO) 5. Structure of the prototype 6. Annex: BEQUEST Procurement Protocol 7. References

3

1 Introduction The need to integrate sustainable development issues in EA , in particular in SEA procedures has been recognised by several institutions (EC Expert Group, 1997,Australia , German Enquete Kommission 1997) According to an Australian study key sustainability principles include:

- precautionary principle : err on the side of conservation as a hedge against irreversible or highly damaging changes;

- "anticipate and prevent" : a much cheaper and less risky approval than react and cure; - stay within source and sink constraints -- resource use/harvest within regenerative capacity;

pollution/waste output within assimilative capacity; - maintain natural capital at or near current levels -- no aggregate/net loss or draw down of

resource stocks or ecological diversity; as far as possible, avoid conversion of land use from less intensive to more intensive uses; and

- polluter-pays principle -- full costs for environmental damage must be borne by users, e.g., industry and consumers.

It is important to recognize that EA is only one policy instrument for sustainability. A comprehensive approach to maintaining ecological assets encompasses protected areas and maintenance of habitat ("12% set-aside rule") and rehabilitation of damaged and degraded areas, as well as full cost analysis (FCA) of development activities. EA, linked with other policy and planning instruments, can be applied in support of all three strategies. To promote the use of EA as "sustainability assurance" rather than an "impact minimization" tool, the following reinforcing adjustments to EIA and SEA appear to be needed:

- inclusion of sustainability principles in formal guidance or "best practice" advice; - upgrading impact significance criteria and indicators with a view to establishing "safe

minimum standards" for maintenance of critical ecosystem and habitat - functions, biotic integrity, keystone associations, i.e., in addition to reference to rare or

threatened species, valued, sensitive or heritage areas, etc.; and - full impact compensation ("like-for-like") to offset unavoidable residual losses after

mitigation. "A quick start" agenda for applying EA to global change could be to build on the existing process to address global change issues by:

- taking the UN conventions on climate change and biological diversity as policy references and legal commitments (for signatory countries);

- developing national guidance and interpretation as to the use of EA as an implementing mechanism;

- using existing methods and procedures to the fullest extent possible; - building more integrative approaches as required ; - recognizing the specific and differentiated problems and policy characteristics of biodiversity

and climate change in process design and application. “ To enlarge the scope from the generally mainly ecological (eco-system related) objectives to general urban objectives the Charter of European Cities and Towns Towards Sustainability (The Aalborg Charter 1994) can be considered as the basis for the mandatory consideration of sustainable principles in urban development :

4

“We, European cities & towns, signatories of this Charter, state that in the course of history, our towns have existed within and outlasted empires, nation states, and regimes and have survived as centres of social life, carriers of our economies, and guardians of culture, heritage and tradition. Along with families and neighbourhoods, towns have been the basic elements of our societies and states. Towns have been the centres of industry, craft, trade, education and government. We understand that our present urban lifestyle, in particular our patterns of division of labour and functions, land-use, transport, industrial production, agriculture, consumption, and leisure activities, and hence our standard of living, make us essentially responsible for many environmental problems humankind is facing. This is particularly relevant as 80 percent of Europe's population live in urban areas. We have learnt that present levels of resource consumption in the industrialised countries cannot be achieved by all people currently living, much less by future generations, without destroying the natural capital. We are convinced that sustainable human life on this globe cannot be achieved without sustainable local communities. Local government is close to where environmental problems are perceived and closest to the citizens and shares responsibility with governments at all levels for the well-being of humankind and nature. Therefore, cities and towns are key players in the process of changing lifestyles, production, consumption and spatial patterns. …. We, cities & towns, understand that the idea of sustainable development helps us to base our standard of living on the carrying capacity of nature. We seek to achieve social justice, sustainable economies, and environmental sustainability. Social justice will necessarily have to be based on economic sustainability and equity, which require environmental sustainability.” There are a number of more detailed applications of sustainable development to towns and neighbourhoods which are described in the report of wp 1.4. The general conclusion is that the solution of urban problems in urban historical areas in European towns must take into consideration sustainability principles in a mandatory way (Aalborg Charter) and that sustainability principles are in general implemented through the definition of protection goals and operation goals.

5

2 The different dimensions of Sustainable development Sustainable development is generally considered as something positive but rather vague. Perhaps this is why no one is explicitly opposed to it. The diffuse origin and the lack of a unique definition are therefore both a disadvantage and an advantage. There will always be multiple views of sustainability; they are not only equally legitimate, but also absolutely necessary to the health of the debate:

”Sustainable development can be successfully implemented only if each view makes its unique contribution to the solution. Since each represents only a part-truth, there is no single solution to a given environmental problem. In other words, sustainable development strategies cannot be attained through the dominance of a single view or by the exclusion of others; instead they require continual evolution and balance. " (Samson, 1995)

The historical (and etymological) origin of the terms varies from language to language. The English term "sustainability" was created in the 1970s. The corresponding French expression (développement durable) is also a recent fabrication. The German term (Nachhaltigkeit) derives from a traditional notion used in 19th century timber industry that was marked by shortage (Bächtold, 1998) and meant:

"... not to cut more wood annually than the forest could give each year" i.e. not to take more than nature could provide. In the following decades the economic interpretation (taking money as an equivalent for value) became dominant. In the mid- 20th century the complex functions of the forest as a climatic regulator, source of bio-diversity and as a space for recreation became apparent and a new definition of the long-term value of forests and of sustainability was established. This definition included four components:

- Long term (the effects had to be assured in the long-term) - Social concern (restriction of individual user rights in favour of the community) - Economy (use of resources taking into account economic principles) - Responsibility (towards a larger community and future generations)

Today the different aspects of sustainable development are generally recognised:

- Ecological aspects linked to resource conservation and carrying capacity - Economic criteria taking into account long term conservation of natural and man-made capital - Social aspects taking into account intergenerational equity - Cultural aspects taking into account the conservation of cultural diversity

6

Fig. 1 Different aspects of sustainable development. Translated and adapted from (Bächtold, 1998)

The ethical need for sustainable development is highlighted in the first paragraph of Agenda 21 (United Nations, 1992):

"Humanity stands at the defining moment in history. The world is confronted with worsening poverty, hunger, ill health, illiteracy, and the continuing deterioration of ecosystems on which we depend for our well being. The disparities between rich and poor continue."

For Bächtold (1998), the ecological, economic and social components are completed by a fourth ethical aspect. Other approaches (Hassler and Kohler, 2001) stress the cultural aspect as a fourth component of sustainability. Figure 1 combines the two approaches. Sustainability is a multi-dimensional concept and over-emphasising one aspect would diminish other aspects (Fig. 1, p. 6). The 1987 Brundtland Report and the Rio Earth Summit in 1992 marked the development towards a more comprehensive and integrated assessment of sustainability. The pre-Brundtland situation was influenced by environmental assessment methods, which did not adequately address the questions of resource conservation, environmental capacity or sustainable development. Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) was developed as a method concentrating exclusively on environmental aspects. Since the Brundtland Report, the practice of environmental assessment has been challenged both by the green movement and by other scientific or social communities (e.g. the cultural heritage community, third world movements, etc.). Critical distinctions have been drawn between eco- and anthropocentric techniques of analysis. Germany's Enquete Commission for the protection of man and nature linked the notion of sustainable development not only to the environment, but also to economy and society. In this approach, sustainable development encourages the conservation and preservation of natural resources and leads

7

to a reduction of energy consumption, waste production and transportation impacts. It is based on patterns of production and consumption that can be pursued without degrading the human or natural environment. It involves the equitable sharing of the economic benefits across all sections of society, to enhance the well being of humans, protect health and alleviate poverty. It argues that if sustainable development is to be successful, the attitudes of individuals as well as governments will need to change with regard to our current lifestyles and their impacts on the environment. The human settlement with all its economic, social and institutional arrangements forms a complex system which needs to be respected. The Rio Conference not only initiated the Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) which prepared the Kyoto Conference (1997) but also directed attention to the environment and its capacity to support the urbanisation processes and the "city of tomorrow". In Europe this idea is of particular importance as the majority of people already live in cities. The broader focus of assessment methods now encompasses economic structures and cultural heritage, and reflects their close relationship with ecological issues. As a result, attempts have been made to use environmental assessment methods to initiate a more sustainable development of cities considering environmental aspects (ecological integrity, equity, participation and futurity) as well as cultural heritage.

8

3 Sustainable development objectives The three main problems in the application of sustainable development objectives on an urban scale are :

- to relate the general objectives to concrete actions - to take into account the dynamic aspects in particular long time frames - to integrate the sustainable development principles both in current planning decision and

direct stakeholder participation procedures Protection objectives

On the most general level we consider 4 protection objectives (what must be protected):

- Ecological protection objectives - Economic protection objectives - Social protection objectives - Cultural protection objectives

Protection objectives can be considerably refined by including the protection of resources, the protection of compartments of nature and the protection of natural and man made systems (e.g. landscape). Protection objectives are composed of environmental objectives (what properties the environment in a large sense should have). These environmental objectives are sometimes also called partial protection objectives. They are structured along the 4 general protection objectives. On the third level there are operational objectives (related to parameters, actors etc.). They can be of several degrees (target objectives, limit objectives, thresholds, speed etc.) Generally objectives are expressed by a defined parameter which has to be maximised, minimised or has to stay within a defined interval. Objectives are on the side of the demand-parameteres, the real situation (offer) is characterised through indicators. Of course indicators and parameters have to have similar or identical units or they must be at least of the same form so that it is possible to judge if objectives are reached in reality. Indicators can in turn be of several types :

- Pressure indicators - State indicators - Response indicators

In the report of wp 1,4 it has been shown how the traditional indicator framework can be related to the different steps of Environmental Assessment, in particular how it can be related to the notion of the solution corridor. One of the crucial points is the interrelation of objectives (and of indicators). There are several types of relations (a influences b, a and b are mutually related). A framework should contain from the beginning the known interrelations. Furthermore on indicator can respond to several objectives and one objective can concern several indicators.

9

The reduction of the number of objectives or indicators can be necessary for several reasons:

- Reducing complexity - Lack of data

There are several techniques to reduce the number of objectives or indicators :

- Hierarchisation (one objective/indicator is considered more important than the others. It is possible to establish more or less complex and transparent weighting procedures through multicriteria analysis and other similar procedures)

- Aggregation (several objectives/indicators can be aggregated through a weighting procedure when related to specific effect. A good example is the Global Warming Potential)

- Choice of a proxy (one indicator replaces well several others) - Situate several objectives/indicators in a solution space (constraint satisfaction)

In LCA aggregation is currently used, based on scientific criteria. When there are no criteria which are related to evidence and can be identified independently of a social/political context, other methods can be used for weighting (Hofstetter, 1998). Classical optimisation methods by multicriteria analysis are not appropriate for complex social problems because the obscure issues rather than they make them transparent which is the condition for a social consensus. They are no more considered as state of the art (Martignon, 2001). In many cases they have been used in a manipulative way and have discredited EIA procedures in general, in the cultural heritage community there is a large scepticism towards such methods. The choice of proxies and constraint satisfaction are certainly the most promising methods and they will be considered as the most adapted solution in the development of the SDO Assistant.

10

4 The specification of the Sustainable Development Objectives Assistant (SDO) There are three possible applications of SDO :

- determination of objectives, - analysis of the urban situation (indicators), - compare objectives and indicators

4.1 Determination of objectives All four dimensions of sustainability must be considered even the level of detail in each dimension can be variable. For each environmental objective there must be at least one operational goal. This choice has to be made explicit and there must be a consensus on it. If only one operational goal is chosen it will function as a proxy. In this case the other proposed operational objectives should be used with default values as a control function. The control of the objectives with default values will come in a second step which can be exclusively done by experts. If serious contradictions appear, experts have to inform the group who has taken the decision. For the chosen environmental objectives, operational objectives must be determined. In the case of sustainable urban development these objectives can only be chosen in relation with the concrete situation of the urban, in particular in relation to the historical evolution and in relation to the probable future evolution. Operational objectives can therefore often take a purely relative value but they must be related to longer time frames (intergenerational). It is however recommended to chose a short/medium objective and long term objective to avoid that nothing could be done in the short term because objectives have to be reached only in 10 or 20 years. These long term objectives constitute however the principle motivation and decision of sustainable urban development. Once all operational objectives are fixed the next step can be to establish strong interrelations. This is important because there should be a correspondence between strongly related operational objectives and the choice of appropriate indicators. A good example is resource conservation which has an ecological aspect (=use the exist sting building resources as long as possible), economic aspect (=conserve the capital as long as possible), social aspect (maintain social diversity through identical use of buildings with raising rents too much), cultural aspects (=maintain existing buildings and signs as cultural resources). There can be separate indicators for all these operational objectives, but a common indicator could be : “The part of buildings which are refurbished, respecting environmental limit values, in particular energy consumption, without raising rents more than average inflation”. This part can be fixed by a % value over a certain time period. The assisting function SDO will be important. For all the terms specific definitions have to be given (and made available) through help functions. The detailed procedures to measure or to calculate an indicator, where to find basic data etc. will also be necessary as an assisting function. Furthermore the user should be able to see at each moment where he is in the processes and where objectives have been fixed already.

4.2 Analysis of the urban situation (base line, alternatives) This is important when establishing a base line in the scooping step. This implies also that the analysis of the situation always concerns the present situation and the historical evolution (as far as it is

11

possible to obtain information on the historical evolution). In many cases it will not be possible to determine the exact value from the real situation (through official documents) or through measurements. It will be necessary to chose plausible reference values from literature, databases or from simulation software. These default values have to be designated as such. There are checklists which assist the users how to find the values and how to calculate the indicators. They will be part of the SDO. The distinction between pressure and state indicator are very important at this level. Pressure indicators will show if there are urgent steps to be taken and in which direction the evolution goes. State indicators will be the reference base. Response indicators will be important to evaluate and compare alternatives.

4.3 Compare objectives and indicators This case of application will arrive in the scooping and environmental impact assessment steps when base line, projects/plans and alternatives will be compared. On one side there will be a complete tree of environmental protection objectives and of resulting operational objectives over a certain period of time. They will constitute the solution corridor. On the other side there will be projects and alternatives with their indicators. Furthermore there will be values for the historic evolution of state indicators (past solution corridor).

Protection objectives Environmentalobjectives

Operationalobjectives parameters values relations

Protection objective1

Environmenatlobjective 10

Environmenatlobjective 11

Operational objective110

Operational objective111 parameter 111 Value 111 relation to objective

xxx

Operational objective112

Environmentalobjective 12

indicator parameter indicator value relation to indicatoryyy

historic urban area

sustainable urban

development

12

5 Structure of the SDO prototype

5.1 System architecture SDO is both existing as independent tool and as part of CAESS (Computer Aided Environment Assessment System). It has therefore an entity-relation structure which is part of the E-R structure of CAESS. SDO has three levels of objectives :

- Protection objectives for the four dimensions of Sustainable Development - Environmental objectives - Operational objectives

Through relations these objectives are linked to specific steps in the EA procedures. This allows to adapt the formulation of the objectives to the different process levels. (scalability) Through the general structure the user is assisted at each process step by :

- Information objectives parameters indicators assessment methods values (target, limit) relations to other objectives

- Choice of an action

select an objective select an indicator associate a value to an objective set a value for an indicator make a comment on the process assign a task to an actor establish a report

5.2 Scenario of utilisation The utilisation of SDO begins with an introduction to the notion of sustainability, sustainable development and protection goals. Then a first series of protection goals is proposed. The choice will be assisted by additional information and relations to other objectives. The users can chose either one objective which would be a general proxy objective or several partial objectives. For each objective (on the level of environmental objectives) a series of operational objectives are proposed. Additional information and reference values will be proposed. This makes the process more complete and allows to integrate a larger number of stakeholders

5.3 Implementation of SDO

The Implementation of SDO is a web database application that is based on a three-tier architecture. This combination provides cheap ubiquitous access to the functions and information integrated in the SDO via internet. It has an existing user base with standardised web browser software that runs platform independent on ordinary computers. For further developers, web server software is freely available that can respond to requests for documents and programs.

13

SDO is built around a three-tier architecture model, shown in figureFig. 2 (p. 13). At the base of the application is the database tier, consisting of the database management system that manages the database containing the data users query. In this underlying stage are also dedicated folder that contain information objects. Built on top of the database tier is the complex middle tier, which contains most of the application logic and communicates data between the other tiers. On top of this is the client tier, usually web browser software that interacts with the application.

Fig. 2 The three-tier architecture model of the web based SDO (ifib 2002)

The chosen database for the database tier is the MySQL RDBMS. MySQL has a well deserved reputation for speed, and it is an open source software. Like in most three-tier web database systems, the majority of the application logic is in the middle tier. The middle tier serves most of the remaining roles that bring together the other two tiers. It drives the structure and content of the data displayed to the user, and it processes input from the user as it is formed into queries on the database to read or write data. The used application framework, the components of the middle tier are a web server, a scripting language, and the scripting language engine. For CAESS, PHP is used as scripting language. PHP is, like MySQL, a open source project. PHP has the flexibility of embedding scripts in HTML pages. This permits easy integration with the client tier. To reproduce the different goal dimensions with all the complex relations and the hierarchies to other objects in a RDBMS, different tables are necessary. Figure Fig. 3 (p. 14) displays the ER-model of the SDO database implementation.

14

Fig. 3 The ER-model of the SDO database (ifib 2002)

The goal table describes the different hierarchies of the protection goals and the indicators. The create table statement, that lists all the attributes with its variable types, is shown in code 1. Code 1: Create statement for the SDO.goal-table:

CREATE TABLE goal ( goal_id int(4) NOT NULL auto_increment, dimension varchar(15) NOT NULL DEFAULT '' , progoal varchar(50) NOT NULL DEFAULT '' , parprogoal varchar(80) , parameter varchar(80) , objective varchar(120) , indiovershot varchar(50) , indiderelic varchar(50) , indistate varchar(50) , indiresponse varchar(50) , PRIMARY KEY (goal_id), INDEX names (dimension,progoal) );

To avoid redundancy in the deposited content, the different assessment methods are kept in another table. The SDO.assessment table create statement is shown in code 2. Code 2: Create statement for the SDO.assessment table:

CREATE TABLE assessment ( ass_id int(4) NOT NULL auto_increment, dimension varchar(15) NOT NULL DEFAULT '' , ass_superior varchar(50) , ass_name varchar(80) , ass_description text , ass_link varchar(80) , PRIMARY KEY (ass_id), INDEX names (ass_name) );

15

To connect the different dimensions, protection goals, partial protection goals and objectives with the different assessment methods belonging to its dimensions like displayed in the ER-model, another table is necessary. The SDO.relation table (shown in code 3) keeps the relation information in the many-to-many relation between the SDO.assessment table and the SDO.goal-table. Code 3: Create statement for the SDO.relation table:

CREATE TABLE relation ( rel_id int(4) NOT NULL auto_increment, goal_id int(4) DEFAULT '0' , ass_id int(4) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0' , PRIMARY KEY (rel_id), INDEX names (rel_id) );

The access to the content in the database is managed with PHP-scripts that rehashes the information and interacts with the RDBMS. With that features, the user can easily select and modify data and navigate through the decision matrix (see Fig. 4, p. 15).

Fig. 4 Screenshot of the implemented SDO (ifib 2002)

16

6 References

AALBORG CHARTER (1994) The Aalborg Charter (1994) European Conference on Sustainable

Cities & Towns. Charter of European Cities and Towns Towards Sustainability

Aalborg,

ADRIAANSE, A., BRINGEZU, S., HAMMOND, A., MORIGUCHI, Y., RODENBURG, E.,

ROGICH, D., SCHÜTZ, H. (1997) Resource Flows – The Material Basis of

Industrial Economies. World Resources Institute. New York,

AMSTERDAM (1975) The Amsterdam Charter, Council of Europe

BACCINI, P. and BRUNNER P.H. (1991) Metabolism of the Antroposphere; Springer-Verlag,

Berlin

BACCINI, P. and OSWALD, F. (1998) Netzstadt, Transdisziplinäre Methoden zum Umbau

urbaner Systeme. VdF, ETH, Zürich

BACHTOLD, H.-G. (1998) , Nachhaltigkeit, Herkunft und Definitionen eines komplexen

Begriffs, in: Schweizer Ingenieur und Architekt. Schweizerische Bauzeitung, 116.

Jahrgang, Nr. 13, 3/1998, pp. 194-197

BECK, U. (1992) Risk Society: Towards a new modernity. Sage, London

BEQUEST, 2001) BEQUEST: Building Environmental Quality Evaluation for Sustainability

through Time. A concerted action. (http://www.surveying.salford.ac.uk/bqpart/)

BOURDIEU, P. (2000) Les structures sociales de l’économie. Seuil, Paris.

BOYER, CH. (1994) The City of Collective Memory. MIT Press, Cambridge:

BRAND, S (1999) The clock of the long now. Time and responsibility. Weidenfeld & Nicolson,

London 1999 (http://www.longnow.org).

BRANDON, P., LOMBARDI, P., AND BENTIVEGNA, V. (1997) Evaluation of the Built

Environment for Sustainability, Spon Press, London.

BRE (1993) BREAM - Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method. An

environmental assessment for new office designs. BRE, Garston,.

BRUNDLANDT (1987) World commission on Environment and Development ("Brundtland

Committee"). Our Common future. Oxford Univ. Press.

CEC (1998), First Framework programme in support of Culture (2000-2004) - COM (1998) 266,

Commission of the European Communities, Brussels.

17

CIB (1998) Conseil international du bâtiment: Sustainable development and the future of

construction. CIB working commission W92. CIB report Nr 225, May 1998.

COLE, R. (1999) Building environmental assessment methods: clarifying intentions, Building

Research and Information 27/4-5, pp.230-246.

COLE, R. and LARSON, N. (1998) Green Building Challenge Manual. Vancouver B.C.

COM (92) 23 Final, Towards Sustainability – A European Community Programme of Policy and

Action in Relation to the Environmental and Sustainable Development.

COM (99) 73, Amended proposal for a Council Directive on assessment of the effects of certain

plans and programmes on the environment. Community, Rome, 25th March 1957.

HMSO, London. 231 pp.

Council of Europe, 1975: Council of Europe Resolution (76)/28

CURWELL, S.R. and DEAKIN, M. (2002) Sustainable urban development and BEQUEST,

Building Research and Information 30/2, pp. 79-82.

DALY, H. (1992) Steady State Economics. London., Earthscan Publications.

DAVOUDI, S. (2001) Planning and Twin Discourses of Sustainability in LAYARD, A. et al

(2001) p. 85-99

DECKER, E.H. et al. (2000) Energy And Material Flow Through The Urban Ecosystem, Annu.

Rev. Energy Environ. 2000. 25:685–740

DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT (1989) Department of the Environment / Welsh

Office (1989) Environmental Assessment: A Guide to the Procedures. H.M.S.O.

EC-EXPERT GROUP (1996) EC-EXPERT GROUP ON THE URBAN ENVIRONMENT

European sustainable cities. Report. Directorate General XI, Bruxelles.

ENQUETE KOMMISSION (1997) Enquete Kommission zum Schutz von Mensch und Umwelt

des deutschen Bundestages: Konzept Nachhaltigkeit. Fundamente für die

Gesellschaft von Morgen. Hrsg. Deutscher Bundestag. Bonn

EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COMMUNITY (1967) Treaty setting up The European Economic

Community

GRANADA (1985) The Granada Convention, Council of Europe

HALBWACHS, M (1980) The collective memory. Harper and Row, New York (orig.1950)

HASSLER, U. and KOHLER, N. (2001) Cultural and environmental long-term strategies for the

built environment. In: Rational Decision-making in the Preservation of Cultural

Property, edited by N.S. Baer and F. Snickars, pp. 235-248. Dahlem Workshop

Report 86. Berlin: Dahlem Univ. Press.

HASSLER, U.; KOHLER, N. (2000) Interdisciplinary Architectural Research: Cultural Heritage

and Resource Conservation. 2nd conference of the ARRC-AEEA – Paris

HOFSTETTER, P (1998) Perspectives in Life Cycle Impact Assessment. A structured approach to Combine Models of the Technosphere, Ecosphere and Valuesphere. Kluwer, Boston

18

InterSAVE (1997), InterSAVE – International Survey on Architectural Values in the Environment,

Danish Ministry of Environment and Energy.

ISO (1997) International Standard Organization: Life cycle assessment - principles and guidelines.

ISO CD 14 040.2

JOHANSSON, B. O. (1996) The cultural environment as a resource in a sustainable urban culture.

In: Urban development in an eco-cycle adapted industrial society. Svensk

Byggforskingsradet. Report 96:2. Stockholm.

KOHLER, N. (1999) An observer’s perspective on the relevance of GBC’98. Green Building

Contest Conference-GBC‘98. Vancouver B.C. in Building Research and

Information (1999) 27(4/5), p.309-320

KOHLER, N. and HASSLER, U. (2002) The building stock as a research object. Building

Research & Information 30(5)

KOHLER et al (1999) KOHLER, N. and HASSLER, U. and PASCHEN, H. (Edit): Stoffströme

und Kosten im Bereich Bauen und Wohnen. Studie im Auftrag der Enquete

Kommission zum Schutz von Mensch und Umwelt des deutschen Bundestages.

Berlin

KRAKOW (2000) The Krakow Charter, Int. Conference on Conservation, Krakow, 2000

LAYARD, A., DAVOUDI, S., BATTY, S. (2001) Planning for a Sustainable Future. Spon ,

London:

LICHFIELD N. (1988), Economics in Urban Conservation, Cambridge University Press,

Cambridge.

LOWENTHAL, D. (1985): The past is a foreign country. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,

p. 213 and p.194

MACNAGHTEN, PH. (2001) Sustainable Development in Urban Areas: Setting the Scene. In

DEVUYST, D. et al (edit): Neighbourhoods in Crisis and Urban Sustainable

Development. VUB University Press. Brussels, 2001. p. 5-17

MADANPOUR, A., CARS, C., ALLEN, J. (1997) Social exclusion in European Cities, Regional

Policy and Development. Kingsley Publishers. London

MOFFAT, S. (2000) Tools for Evaluating the Environmental Performance of Buildings within an

Urban Context. The Sheltair Group Inc., Vancouver, Ca.(http://www.sheltair.com)

MURRAY and LOPEZ (1996) MURRAY, C.L.J.; LOPEZ, A.D.: The global burden of desease: a

comprehensive assessment of mortality and disability from deseases, injuries and risk

factors in 1990 and projected to 2020. Harvard School of public health, Cambridge

MA.

ODUM H.T. (1983) System Ecology, New York, 1983

PRESSON, U (2002) Managing sustainable construction– a steering model for the building process.

Sustainable building 2002, Oslo

19

RIFKIN, J (2001) The Age of Access: The New Culture of Hypercapitalism, Where all of Life is a

Paid-For Experience, J.P. Tarcher, New York

SAMSON, P (1995) The Concept of Sustainable Development. July 1995. http://www.gci.ch/DigitalForum/digiforum/discussionspapers/concept.html

SEA (2001) Strategic Environmental Assessment. See the site of the European Commission

http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/eia/home.htm

SUIT (2001) Sustainable development of urban historical areas through an active Integration

within Town. 5.th Framework key action ”The city of tomorrow and Cultural

Heritage”. (http://www.suit.lema.be)

THERIVEL et al, (1992) THERIVEL R., WILSON E., THOMPSON S., HEANEY D.,

PRITCHARD D., (1992), Strategical Environmental Assessment, Earthscan,

London,

UNITED NATIONS (1992), Agenda 21, Preamble

VENICE (1964) The Charter of Venice ICOMOS. 1964

WEAL (1993) Ecological modernisation and the integration of European environmental policy, in:

Liefferink et al (ed), European Integration and Environmental Policy, London:

Belhaven.

MARTIGNON, L. ( 2001)Principles of adaptive decision makingIn: Rational Decision-making in the Preservation of Cultural Property, edited by N.S. Baer and F. Snickars, pp. 235-248. Dahlem Univ. Press. Berlin

WILLIAMS, H. E.; LANE,D. (2002) : Web Database Applications with PHP & MySQL. Sebastapol : O'Reilly, First Edition March 2002. - ISBN 0-596-00041-3 WIDENIUS, M.; AXMARK, D.; MySQL AB: MySQL Reference Manual: Documentation from the source. Sebastapol : O'Reilly, First Edition June 2002. - ISBN 0-59600-265-3 WOLMAN, A. (1965) The Metabolism of Cities, in The Scientific American 213:1965, p. 179-

190

WORLD BANK (1994), Cultural Heritage in Environmental Assessment, Environmental

Assessment Sourcebook Update, September 94, no 8.

WORLD BANK (1998) Economic Analysis and Environmental Assessment. . Environmental

Assessment Sourcebook. Update. April 98. No 23

20

Annexe 1 : List of objectives, indicators and assessment methods

SUIT Protection goals and indicators

Dimension Protection goal Environmental goal Parameter Operational goal

(in fact defintion of points in the solution corridor, there can be 2 points e.g. : 3 years and 15 years)

Ecological Conservation of resources

conservation of unbuildt land built surface (m2)

Upper Limit % built surface (of total segment surface)

conservation of physical, man made capital (buildings and infrastructure) existing floor surface (m2)

Lower limit % surface in use

existing infrastructure network (ml)

Lower limit % network in use

building and infrastructure mass output from urban fragment (m3)

Upper oulimit of output flow per year in % of total mass volume (m3)

conservation of biotic resources

"urban wildland" surfaces (m2)

Lower limit of "urban wildland" surface (% of UF surface)

conservation of ground water ground water level

Lower limit of ground water level (% of present level)

conservation of energy

total input for building,infrastructure, use and transport non renewable primary energy (J)

Upper limit total input non ren. primary energy in % of existing level

Protection of the ecosphere unknown effects

total mass-flow, including rucksacks (MIPS or similar)

Upper limit total mass flow (including rucksack) to % of existing level

potential effects (emissions) global warming potential

Upper limit global warming level as % of existing glob al warming level

acidification potential

Upper limit acidification level as % of existing acidification level

summersmog potential

Upper limit summersmog level as % of existing summersmog level

local effects (immison, concentration)

water permeability coefficient of ground

lower limit average water permeability coefficient as % of existing level

biotic quality coefficient of unbuilt surfaces

Lower limit of average biotic quality coefficient as % of present level

volume of soil displaced (m3)

% volumen of soil displaced inside to ouside of fragment

waste water output (m3) limit waste water output as % of present output

21

Economical

Conservation of man made capital (use value) economical capital

age of buildings and infrastructure

Lower limit of average floor-surface and network length age as % of present fragment age

adapatability buildings

Lower limit of building surface with possible alternative use as % over present surface

adaptability of infrastructure

Lower limit of networks (ml) which are accessible as % of total

conservation of capital Upper limit of demolished surface per year

Economic Efficiency (cost/benefit ratio)

long term running costs

running cost private buildings

Upper limit of running cost private buildings as % of present running costs

running cost public infrastructure

Upper limit of running cost infrastructure as % of present running costs

external costs % of present of external costs

use efficiency use efficiency of infrastructure

Lower limit use of capacity of infrastructure as % of total capacity

use efficiency of buildings

Lower limit of real use-hours in % of possible use-hours per year

risk of economic loss

local threats of fire, flood, traffic and industrial accident (number)

Upper limit of the number of potential local threats as % of number of identified threats

mitigation structures for identified threats

Lower limit of realisation of technical /social mitigation structures for each identified threat

Social Protection of human (individual) environment human health human health (buidlings)

Upper limit DALY as % of present level

human health (use and traffic)

Upper limit DALY as % of present level

average weighted local noise level (dB*m2)

Upper limitof average weighted local noise level in % of present level

local microclimate

lower limit vegetation coefficient as % of present coefficient

wind coefficient (wind speed ?)

indoor air quality control hvac equipment

Protection of the social urban system social diversity

social diversity of population

Lower limit of difference of social diversity in relation to urban average diversity

age diversity of population

Lower limit of difference of age diversity in relation to urban average diversity

social activity level of local participation

frequency of local participation increase by %

Protection of urban functions urban diversity diversity of urban functions

Lower limit of difference of functional diversity in relation to urban average

22

diversity

diversity of daily schedules

Lower limit of difference of daily schedule diversity in relation to urban average diversity

diversity of public spaces

Number of separate public spaces and number of types of public spaces

security of public spaces

Lower limit of difference of daily schedule and functional diversity in relation to urban average diversity

cultural Protection of built heritage

architectural heritage

qualified maintenace existing buildings

average annual % of refurbishments

qualified maintenace existing infrastructure

average annual % of refurbishments

qualified maintenace exterior "amengés" surfaces

average annual % of maintainance exterior designed surfaces

conservation existing signsinventory of of existing building signs

qualified maintenace existing urban furniture

average annual % maintainance urban furniture

Protection of cultural heritage

historical knowledge

production of historical knowledge about fragment

Number of workdays in fragment specific historic and monument research

maintenance of historical knowledge about fragment

number of annual initiatives to inform population about fragment history (library, exhibition, signs etc.)

maintenance of artisanal knowldege in building

Lower limit of maintenance contracts of artisans situated in fragment as % of all maint. Contracts

Conservation of collective memory

"collective memory places"

collective memory of buildings and places

number of publications dealing with collective memory of urban fragment

collective memory of institutions

number of publications dealing with collective memory on institutions related to fragment

Conservation of urban form urban morphology developed structures

maintain imporatant developed structures

building pattern maintain building pattern

visual correlations maintain visual correlations

23

Annex 2: BEQUEST Procurement protocol

BEQUEST PROTOCOL: Actions

Scope Urban Design involves the three dimensional design of urban district, neighbourhood and/or estate and associated spaces. It includes the disposition of groups of buildings, landscape features and the associated infrastructure, i.e., roads, footpaths and other transport modes, as well as the utility services that connect the buildings. It is normally carried out in the context of a local plan or regeneration initiative (including spatial, economic and social elements) devised by municipal authorities. In this context it usually addresses short to medium term considerations. Usually Urban Design does not involve the design of the individual buildings or facilities other than in terms of the systemic or general form but can include the design of the hard and soft landscaping elements of the infrastructure and other spaces between buildings. The outcome is normally some form of master plan or urban design proposals within which detail design, specification of buildings and of transport and utility service facilities is to be carried out by others.

Actors The professional actors traditionally involved include architects, transport and utility engineers, cost consultants/surveyors, town and city managers and administrators. Additional specialists may need to be involved to address some of the actions listed.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: Urban Design

Natural resources - Review the need to build with the client or developer(s). Can requirements be met with

greater resource efficiency by re-using existing buildings and infrastructure? - Provide high occupational density whilst balancing the need for access to sunlight, to

adequate green, garden, and other recreational space. - Provide facilities to enable local waste management, local waste storage and recycling. - Provide adequate water conservation measures.

Environmental Pollution - Locate buildings to minimise transport requirements and infrastructure. - Set energy reduction targets of the order of 75% below current consumption for all

buildings to be designed and constructed in the development. - Provide high quality public transport, cycling and pedestrian routes. - Provide disincentives to private car use in city centres, by parking restrictions and pricing

as well as traffic calming measures. - Implement sustainable urban drainage systems.

Land Use - Select a brown-field site within existing urban areas in preference to green-field site. - Provide high occupational density with mixed use of dwelling, industry and retail as well

as access to transport, health -service and recreational facilities.

24

Bio-diversity - Audit flora and fauna before commencing re/development to identify endangered and/or

protected species. - Develop a protection strategy for endangered and/or protected species. - Replace flora and habitat for fauna destroyed or displaced by development. - Re/introduce locally relevant species such as planting drought resistance species in water

stressed areas, etc.

ECONOMIC ISSUES: Urban Design

Production - Wherever possible purchase all goods, materials and services from local sources. - Increase local employment opportunities. - Follow fair trade and fair employment practices.

Building Stock - Audit the existing building stock and infrastructure in order to maximise the reuse and

refurbishment of through the application of best available technology without excessive cost.

- Preserve and reuse heritage buildings. - Reuse and/or recycle materials from buildings to be demolished.

Transport and Utilities - Locate buildings to minimise transport requirements and provision of new infrastructure. - Provide high quality public transport, cycling and pedestrian routes. - Provide disincentives to private car use in city centres, by parking restrictions and traffic

calming measures. - Provide local treatment for human wastewater and effluent. - Provide adequate water conservation measures.

Finance - Assess the impact of the development on the economic sustainability of the neighbourhood

and adjoining areas.

SOCIAL ISSUES: Urban Design

Access - Provide adequate access to all facilities, buildings and mobility for all sectors of the

community, including the young, disabled and elderly. - Negotiate with local access groups and transport providers over the access proposals.

Safety and Security - Design the buildings and landscape to improve the sense of security and help reduce crime. - Negotiate with the police and other security concerns over the design proposals.

25

Health and Well Being - Increase local employment opportunities - Follow fair trade and fair employment practices. - Include appropriate provision of local health services. - Negotiate with the local health service provider(s) over the proposals in order to identify

the potential short and long-term impacts of facilities on the health of residents and neighbours.

Community - From the conception stage engage local community participation in decision making

especially in terms of how the project will impact on the human development aspects of local Agenda 21.

- Employ appropriate participation techniques, e.g. citizens advisory committees for negotiating with the community on the project proposals.

- Set up information systems appropriate to each stakeholder groups need, in order to advise the community of the project, its aims and objectives and on progress in the design phase.

INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES: Urban Design

Governance - Ensure the capacity of institutions and the community to maintain and enhance the

development and/or the urban space over time. - Require the application of environmental management during the implementation phase of

the development as a whole, for individual building design and for construction contractors.

Justice - Reduce the ecological footprint of development, against current norms and practice, by a

factor 4/10. - Ensure the development improves social inclusion in the neighbourhood and adjoining

areas. - Avoid contributing to social exclusion through Gentrification or ‚ghettoisation‘ of the

urban area.

Ethical Systems - Select material, components and services from suppliers who have sound sustainable

development policies and practice, through the application of social and ethical accounting and reporting techniques.

- Follow fair trade and fair employment practices