Future Challenges in Evaluating and Managing Sustainable Development in the Built Environment E-Book
110,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
- Kategorie: Wissenschaft und neue Technologien
- Sprache: Englisch
Future Challenges in Sustainable Development within the Built Environment stimulates and reinterprets the demands of Responsible and Sustainable Development in the Built Environment for future action and development. It examines the methods of evaluation, the use of technology, the creation of new models and the role of human factors for examining and developing the subject over the next twenty years.
Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:
Seitenzahl: 753
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2017
Ähnliche
Table of Contents
Cover
Title Page
List of Contributors
Acknowledgements
Chapter 1: Initiative and Obsolescence in Sustainable Development
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Section 1: World views and values
1.3 Section 2: Design and evaluation tools and technology
1.4 Section 3: Engaging with practice, stakeholders and management
1.5 Initiative and obsolescence
1.6 Final statement
References
Section 1: World Views and Values
Chapter 2: Cities of Tomorrow
2.1 Exordium
2.2 Disquisition
2.3 Propositum
References
Chapter 3: Going Beyond Sustainability
3.1 Introduction
3.2 What lies beyond sustainability?
3.3 Changing views: Transforming story, transforming thought
3.4 Changing self: Transforming knowledge into wisdom
3.5 Changing ways: Transforming practice
3.6 Conclusions
Acknowledgements
References
Chapter 4: Transition Towards a Post Carbon City – Does Resilience Matter?
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Cities and climate change
4.3 Approaches to sustainable development
4.4 Concluding remarks
Acknowledgements
References
Chapter 5: Sustainable Urban Development – Where Are You Now?
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Establishing the BEQUEST network
5.3 Building the BEQUEST team
5.4 The legacy of BEQUEST
5.5 Defining SUD
5.6 The diffusion of SUD
5.7 The framing of and tools for SUD
5.8 Expansion/dilution of SUD
5.9 Elaborating, not extending, SUD
5.10 Conclusions
References
Section 2: Design and Evaluation Tools and Technology
Chapter 6: Crowdsourcing Public Participation in Sustainable Built Environment Development: The Democratisation of Expertise
6.1 Introduction
6.2 The context of sustainable built environment development
6.3 Background to technology‐enabled public participation
6.4 The potential of virtual reality
6.5 Using virtual reality as a crowdsourcing approach to public participation in urban planning
6.6 Summary
References
Chapter 7: 2050 – The Invisible Future
7.1 The future
7.2 What future?
7.3 The present and the future
7.4 Future city in 2050
7.5 Invisible BIM 2050
7.6 Constraints to the vision
References
Chapter 8: The Role of Carbon in Sustainable Development
8.1 Introduction
8.2 Operational and embodied carbon in construction
8.3 Estimating OC and EC
8.4 Shifting of focus
8.5 Drivers and barriers in managing carbon emissions in construction
8.6 Need for carbon estimating in construction
8.7 Future trends
8.8 Conclusions
Acknowledgements
References
Chapter 9: Supporting Risk Assessment in Building Resilient Cities
9.1 Introduction
9.2 Theoretical framework for capturing the degree of vulnerability of a place
9.3 Local risk assessment process
9.4 Multi‐agency collaboration and community engagement
9.5 Technology platforms for interactive risk assessment
9.6 Conclusion
References
Chapter 10: Towards an Intelligent Digital Ecosystem – Sustainable Data‐driven Design Futures
10.1 Introduction
10.2 Changing role of ‘design’ for sustainable futures
10.3 Emerging concepts, challenges and trends
10.4 The rise of big data
10.5 From green to smart: New focus/new metrics
10.6 Predicted versus actual performance
10.7 Towards a digital ecosystem – Scenarios for implementation
10.8 Conclusions: Future value propositions
References
Chapter 11: Smart Cities Case Study – The Nottingham Experience
11.1 Background
11.2 Remourban
11.3 Nottingham case study
11.4 Integrated infrastructures
11.5 Discussion on added value
References
Section 3: Engaging with Practice, Stakeholders and Management
Chapter 12: Value‐oriented Stakeholder Engagement in Sustainable Development: A Conceptual Framework
12.1 Stakeholder engagement in sustainable development
12.2 Approaches to stakeholder engagement
12.3 Value‐oriented approach of stakeholder engagement in sustainable development
12.4 Process of the value‐oriented stakeholder engagement approach
12.5 Using SNA to analyse stakeholder interrelationships
12.6 The conceptual framework and its potential applications
12.7 Conclusions
Acknowledgements
References
Chapter 13: Sustainability in Practice in the United Kingdom – A Reflective Analysis
13.1 Introduction
13.2 Method
13.3 Reflective analysis
13.4 Property Tectonics
13.5 Economics, investment and finance
13.6 National grid pressures
13.7 Waste recycling
13.8 Lifespan software
13.9 Energy management in social housing
13.10 Energy Company Obligation
13.11 Compliance and warranties
13.12 Conclusion
References
Chapter 14: Understanding Value Generation in Complex Urban Regeneration Projects
14.1 The context: Social housing projects in Brazil
14.2 Management of urban regeneration projects
14.3 Value generation
14.4 Research method
14.5 Main results
14.6 Discussion and conclusions
References
Chapter 15: Integrating Sustainable Urban Development
15.1 Problem realisation
15.2 Towards a solution
15.3 Globalisation and virtualisation
15.4 The city and its hinterland
15.5 Towards better governance structures
15.6 Mind the skills gap
References
Further reading
Chapter 16: Sustainability – The Role of Construction Contracts
16.1 Introduction
16.2 The JCT consultation
16.3 Specification or contract conditions
16.4 JCT standard form contracts and sustainability
16.5 The framework objectives
16.6 The provider’s supply chain
16.7 Sustainable development and environmental considerations
16.8 Aspirational or legally binding provisions
16.9 The future
16.10 Conclusion
References
Chapter 17: Transforming Communication and Decision‐making Practices for Sustainable Renewal of Urban Transport Infrastructure
17.1 Introduction
17.2 Aim, objectives and methods of study
17.3 Sustainable renewal of urban transport infrastructure
17.4 Analysis of key issues in urban transport renewal
17.5 Findings and discussion
17.6 Conclusion
References
Chapter 18: Rethinking the Role of Time in Sustainable Urban Development
18.1 Introduction
18.2 Why time?
18.3 Planning with time
18.4 Time as a linking factor. Hermann Dooyeweerd’s philosophy of the law idea
18.5 The grave of time. Why current planning approaches fail
18.6 Summary
18.7 A future challenge
References
Chapter 19: Suggestions for Future Sustainability
19.1 Sustainability
19.2 Dooyeweerd’s philosophy
19.3 The longer view
19.4 The importance of attitudes and beliefs to sustainability
19.5 Conclusion
References
Index
End User License Agreement
List of Tables
Chapter 08
Table 8.1 OC and EC (and energy) relationship from various studies.
Table 8.2 The RICS guidance on measuring EC during various life cycle stages of a building (After: Victoria
et al
., 2015).
Table 8.3 An overview of the identified EC estimating tools.
Table 8.4 Embodied carbon analysis of office buildings (After: Victoria
et al
., 2015).
Table 8.5 Carbon and cost plans during design developments.
Chapter 12
Table 12.1 An example of the adjacency matrix.
Chapter 13
Table 13.1 UK domestic feed‐in tariffs (FIT).
Chapter 14
Table 14.1 Sample size for the five housing estates.
Table 14.2 Change in the profile of families in five housing estates.
Table 14.3 Housing retention rate for five housing estates.
Chapter 18
Table 18.1 List of modalities.
Chapter 19
Table 19.1 Dooyeweerd’s aspects.
Table 19.2 Aspects on which the chapters focus. Chapter numbers are given in parentheses in column 1.
List of Illustrations
Chapter 03
Figure 3.1 Shifting from degenerative to regenerative development.
Chapter 04
Figure 4.1 Who does own the problem? The key role of the city
Figure 4.2 Societal process
Figure 4.3 Model of Sustainable development
Chapter 05
Figure 5.1 PICABUE’s representation of the four principles underpinning sustainable development.
Figure 5.2 Individual BEQUEST member’s commitment to sustainable development principles.
Figure 5.3 BEQUEST members’ aggregated levels of commitment to sustainable development principles at the start and end of the concerted action.
Figure 5.4 The BEQUEST Framework.
Figure 5.5 The BEQUEST Toolkit.
Figure 5.6 The ESDN radar graph for visualising sustainable urban development.
Figure 5.7 The UDIA Sustainable Urban Development Matrix.
Figure 5.8 Kohler’s Cycles of Transformation for the city and its culture.
Figure 5.9 Five‐generation decision‐making: a framework for giving equal attention to the past, present and the future.
Chapter 07
Figure 7.1 Future model: people and creativity.
Figure 7.2 The future.
Chapter 08
Figure 8.1 Emission by sector – Global and the UK.
Figure 8.2 Emissions from construction industry.
Figure 8.3 The scope of EC in the life cycle of a building.
Figure 8.4 OC versus EC of various types of buildings.
Figure 8.5 System boundaries mapped onto TC350, EN 15978:2011 standard methodology for the assessment of a building life cycle.
Figure 8.6 Order of data entry into iSBEM to calculate the BER for a proposed (non‐domestic) building.
Figure 8.7 Mapping the identified carbon‐estimating tools according to their application during different design stages.
Figure 8.8 The EC elemental profile of case study buildings.
Figure 8.9 The zero carbon definition.
Figure 8.10 The dual currency of construction projects.
Figure 8.11 2050 low carbon trajectory – the UK.
Figure 8.12 Drivers and barriers for carbon management in construction.
Figure 8.13 Benefits of carbon management.
Chapter 09
Figure 9.1 The six‐step risk assessment process.
Chapter 10
Figure 10.1 Comparison of median CO
2
emissions between actual and predicted performances of buildings across three sectors.
Figure 10.2 Four major factors contributing to the gap between the predicted and the actual performance of a non‐domestic building.
Figure 10.3 Feedback cycle waves in relation to states of digital maturity.
Figure 10.4 A possible scenario for embedding
Amplified Intelligence
into the whole building life‐cycle, from conception through to design, realisation and post‐occupancy.
Figure 10.5 Comparison of energy Intensity per floor area between two Walt Disney buildings, HKDL in Hong Kong, WDW in Orlando.
Figure 10.6 Comparison of energy Intensity per transaction between two Walt Disney buildings, HKDL in Hong Kong, WDW in Orlando.
Chapter 11
Figure 11.1 Multi‐dimensional urban regeneration model.
Figure 11.2 Replication of findings across EU cities.
Figure 11.3 Sneinton demonstration site.
Figure 11.4 Green’s windmill.
Figure 11.5 450 houses will be retrofitted for 50% energy efficiency.
Figure 11.6 Nottingham enjoys 45 fully electric buses.
Chapter 12
Figure 12.1 A value‐oriented approach of stakeholder engagement in sustainable development.
Figure 12.2 The concept map of project stakeholders.
Figure 12.3 A conceptual framework of the value‐oriented stakeholder engagement approach in sustainable development.
Chapter 14
Figure 14.1 Conceptual framework adopted in this study for explaining value generation.
Figure 14.2 Location of PIEC intervention areas in Porto Alegre.
Figure 14.3 Photos of slums (a, b) before and housing estates (c, d) after PIEC interventions. (a) Slum at PIEC area, 2004. (b) Slum at PIEC area, 2005. (c) Por do Sol project, 2008. (d) Arco Iris project, 2008.
Figure 14.4 Physical progress (%) of PIEC and sub‐projects (2005–2008).
Figure 14.5 PIEC logical framework overview.
Figure 14.6 Set of constructs used in the evaluation of PIEC.
Figure 14.7 Summary of post‐occupancy evaluation for the five housing estates.
Chapter 15
Figure 15.1 The view of the Earth from Space.
Figure 15.2 The ‘Pillars’ of sustainable development.
Figure 15.3 Elements of the BEQUEST Toolkit and how to use them.
Figure 15.4 The e‐agora: a place to integrate virtual and physical space?
Figure 15.5 London’s population growth 1939–2015.
Figure 15.6 UK Urban Task Force – hierarchical scale for communities.
Figure 15.7 Phoenix.
Figure 15.8 Durban, South Africa. The gap between rich and poor.
Figure 15.9 Florence.
Figure 15.10 River Severn Catchment.
Figure 15.11 Salford Central regeneration area’s proximity to Manchester’s central business district.
Figure 15.12 The Egan wheel (with the addition of Equity added subsequently).
Chapter 18
Figure 18.1 Temporal modal order. How time links modalities.
Chapter 19
Figure 19.1 A depiction of built environment sustainability issues discussed in the other chapters.
Guide
Cover
Table of Contents
Begin Reading
Pages
iii
iv
x
xi
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
193
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
Future Challenges in Evaluating and Managing Sustainable Development in the Built Environment
Edited by
Peter S. Brandon
Patrizia Lombardi
Geoffrey Q. Shen
This edition first published 2017© 2017 by John Wiley & Sons Ltd
Registered OfficeJohn Wiley & Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, United Kingdom.
Editorial Offices9600 Garsington Road, Oxford, OX4 2DQ, United Kingdom.The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, United Kingdom.
For details of our global editorial offices, for customer services and for information about how to apply for permission to reuse the copyright material in this book please see our website at www.wiley.com/wiley‐blackwell.
The right of the author to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, without the prior permission of the publisher.
Designations used by companies to distinguish their products are often claimed as trademarks. All brand names and product names used in this book are trade names, service marks, trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. The publisher is not associated with any product or vendor mentioned in this book.
Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and author(s) have used their best efforts in preparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this book and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. It is sold on the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services and neither the publisher nor the author shall be liable for damages arising herefrom. If professional advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought.
Library of Congress Cataloging‐in‐Publication data applied for
ISBN: 9781119190714
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic books.
Cover image: Flying explorations over the city – Charlie LombardiCover design: Wiley
List of Contributors
Matar AlzahmiThinklab, University of Salford, Salford, M5 4WT, UK
Andrew BasdenBusiness School, University of Salford, Salford, M5 4WT, UK
Sara BiscayaArchitecture, University of Salford, Salford, M5 4WT, UK
Peter S. BrandonSchool of the Built Environment, University of Salford, Salford, M5 4WT, UK
Ian CooperEclipse Research Consultants, Cambridge, CB4 2JD, UK
Stephen CurwellHeys Environmental, Oldham, OL3 5RL, UK
Manila De IuliisMunicipality of Santo Stefano al Mare, 18010 Santo Stefano al Mare, Italy
Chrisna du PlessisDepartment of Architecture, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, 0028, South Africa
Terrence FernandoThinklab, University of Salford, Salford, M5 4WT, UK
Carlos T. FormosoBuilding Innovation Research Unit,Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul,Porto Alegre, Brazil
Ghassan AouadApplied Science University, East Al‐Ekir, Bahrain
Kaichen GohDepartment of Construction Management, Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Johor, Malaysia
Peter HibberdThe Joint Contracts Tribunal, London EC1N 6TD, UK
Anton IanakievSchool of Architecture, Design and the Built Environment, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, NG1 4FQ, UK
Tuba KocaturkDepartment of Architecture, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L69 7ZN, UK
Dezhi LiDepartment of Construction and Real Estate, Southeast University, 210018, Nanjing, China
Patrizia LombardiInteruniversity Department of Regional and Urban Studies and Planning, Politecnico di Torino, Torino, 10125, Italy
Luciana I.G. MironBuilding Innovation Research Unit, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil
Margaret K.Y. MokDepartment of Building and Real Estate, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China
Trevor MoleProperty Tectonics, Manchester, M27 8UX, UK
Sidney NewtonFaculty of Built Environment, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia
Giulia SonettiInteruniversity Department of Regional and Urban Studies and Planning, Politecnico di Torino, Torino, 10125, Italy
Srinath PereraSchool of Computing, Engineering & Mathematics, Western Sydney University, Penrith, NSW 2751, Australia
John RatcliffeThe Futures Academy, Taplow, SL6 0GA, UK
Marjan SarsharSchool of Architecture, Design and the Built Environment, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, NG1 4FQ, UK
Geoffrey Q. ShenDepartment of Building and Real Estate, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China
Alison StaceyEconomic Development, Nottingham City Council, Nottingham, NG2 3NG, UK
Michele Florencia VictoriaDepartment of Architecture and Built Environment, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 8ST, UK
Jay YangSchool of Civil Engineering and Built Environment, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD 4001, Australia
Tan YigitcanlarSchool of Civil Engineering and Built Environment, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD 4001, Australia
Acknowledgements
The authors of this book wish to express their sincere gratitude to Professor Hisham Elkadi, Head of the School of the Built Environment at the University of Salford, for his generous support of the August 2015 workshop in Cheshire, UK, on which this book is based.
Apart from providing a platform for deliberating each chapter of the book and making necessary amendments, the workshop also provided an opportunity to celebrate Professor Peter Brandon’s remarkable achievements in education and research within the built environment over the past 40 years, particularly in the field of construction economics and management, information technology applied to construction and the evaluation of sustainable development.
Peter Brandon was appointed the UK’s first Professor of Quantity and Building Surveying at the University of Salford, where many of the authors of this book have worked or studied. In the first five years of his time at Salford, he helped to raise the research performance of the School to the highest level attainable under the UK’s Research Assessment Exercise, and in 2003 became Pro Vice Chancellor for research. In 2006 Professor Brandon led the University to the highest rise in the league tables of any university and, few years, later has been awarded an OBE in the HM The Queen’s Birthday Honours List.
In addition to his academic career at Salford, Professor Brandon has held many major posts related to surveying and construction in the UK, including Chair of the Construction and Built Environment Panel of the Science and Engineering Research Council, Inaugural Chair of the Research Committee of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors, Chair of the Built Environment Panel of the UK’s Research Assessment Exercise in 1996 and 2001 and Chair of the Ross Priory Group (incorporating all the major research organisations in the Built Environment in the UK) and many others. He has also been on a number of committees and delegations of the Higher Education Funding Councils and has toured the Institutional bodies of Vice Chancellors and Senior University staff in Europe addressing the subject of Research Quality Assessment.
Last but not least, our sincere thanks are due to Ms Hanneke Van‐Dijk without whose dedicated support and professional services the workshop would not have been such a great success. We would also like to thank Ms Federica Borio for her help in the preparation of this book.
Chapter 1Initiative and Obsolescence in Sustainable Development
Peter S. Brandon
School of the Built Environment, University of Salford, Salford, M5 4WT, UK
1.1 Introduction
There comes a time within every academic discipline or topic where we need to stop and take stock, consider the future and recognise that some of our cherished ideas must die. We can no longer persevere with the norms we have enjoyed in our research and we must think anew about discarding those which no longer have anything to offer, regenerating those which still have potential and exploring the horizon for new insights which will give us encouragement in the future. It is the history of scientific discovery and is often referred to as a paradigm shift (Kuhn, 1962).
Sustainable Development has been a latent factor in emerging research for a very long time although not always made explicit as such. Since the concept was formalised largely through the concerns about pollution, climate change and non‐renewable resources. It has become almost a cliché. After more than 50 years of international focus it has become an umbrella term which encompasses many different things for many different people. The underlying concept of intergenerational justice (not penalising future generations by what we do today) permeates all discussion. However this important notion can give rise to everything from making people happy to conserving the planet to planning resilience to disaster and much more. This creates difficulties in establishing a vocabulary for communication of ideas and determining where to focus attention in research and application. Each focus has different ideas and different processes and often their own language. The temptation is to retreat into reductionism and, by so doing, ignore the dependencies between the complex variables which go to make up a sustainable environment. While we focus on climate change we may miss the importance of social cohesion. If we focus on energy production we may miss the side effects of other pollutants which are just as dangerous. If we concentrate on crime in a community we may miss the underlying problems of design of buildings which enable people to live together in harmony. If we focus on conservation we may play down the impact on the economy by which we maintain our style of living.
These examples of inter‐dependencies are reflected in the way we classify and structure the subject. They are also prevalent in what we measure and how we assess performance. Measurement and assessment enables us, or should enable us, to determine whether we are making progress in the field and also challenges us to make explicit what we mean by sustainable development. We cannot measure if we are not able to define the term explicitly.
This book attempts to shine light on some of these issues within the Built Environment. This admittedly is a subset of the whole subject of sustainability. It is however a significant sector dealing as it does with the quality of life (in accommodation for most human activity), the heavy use of scarce resources (including energy) and the transport and movement of people and goods across the globe. The subject, by its very nature, is concerned with the future and how we should design and shape it. What cities do we want to live in? What relationship do we want between ourselves? How do we want to travel? How do we protect ourselves against future possibilities of failure? What level of comfort do we want to achieve and how will we achieve it? How do we create harmony in all aspects of life? The list is endless but vital to our understanding of how and what we bequeath to future generations.
The book has been divided into three sections, each with experienced and knowledgeable authors who are leading thinkers in that field. The grouping is:
Section 1 – World Views and Values
Section 2 – Design and Evaluation Tools and Technology
Section 3 – Engaging with Practice, Stakeholders and Management.
These groupings are important for a number of reasons. First, the world view helps us identify the lens by which we view the problem. Do we use the economy as the key feature by which we view and evaluate all others or is there something else? It would seem in most Western nations the economy would be the pre‐eminent concern but is it right? Second, the growing use of information and other technologies in design is allowing us to communicate effortlessly between each other and promote ideas to much larger groups. Will this allow us to democratise decision making or will it lead to autocratic rule demanded by the controller of the machine? As artificial intelligence begins to make inroads into our decision making, upon whose values and whose world view will it be based? These are not trivial questions but must be addressed if we are to seek a sustainable future. Third, we need to devise methods by which the future thinkers can link with existing practice to create a seamless development so there is not a divide between theory and practice which has been the downfall of so many bright ideas. Here we have included, for example, a case study in Chapter 13 by Trevor Mole which illustrates how a small professional firm is engaging with the subject within its business plan. It is not an academic paper but it demonstrates that the subject can provide competitive advantage.
Some will argue that science is a major factor in understanding sustainable development. One feature of science is that we use the existing paradigm to build our accepted knowledge for as long as it meets the need of the problem it seeks to understand or seeks to solve. There is a natural inclination to give up what we know to move forward into a new way of thinking. John Brockman (Brockman, 2015) edited a book which is entitled ‘This idea must die’. It contains 165 short essays by a varied group of authors, spelling out what current ideas should be jettisoned within the natural sciences because they are blocking progress. Similarly there may be a requirement for us even at this stage of sustainable development to challenge our current thinking and decide which paths should continue and which should stop!
This book attempts to identify problems caused by existing methods and provide a challenge for the future. Paradoxically it uses active researchers to explain from their own research what these challenges might be and what ideas might be left on the junk heap of discarded imagination.
1.2 Section 1: World views and values
At the heart of any debate about the future is the lens through which we focus and view the whole problem. If we feel that little can be done without ensuring that economic development continues unabated then our prism is the economy. If we think that conservation of all non‐renewable resources is key then we will look at preservation as being the key factor, that is, we do not want to leave future generations with an absence of key resources. On the other hand, if we consider that religion is central then we seek out the precepts of a religion and its beliefs and adhere to these at all costs. If we think that science and technology will eventually resolve our problems then that is where we put our effort.
It may be hard to harmonise these broadly and firmly held views (and others) but if we are to seek a global consensus then we shall have to try and seek common ground.
The root of the world view can be seen in its definition of sustainable development. Perhaps the most well known and well used definition is the WCED Brundtland Commission (WCED, 1987) which states the following:
‘Sustainable Development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs’.
This definition does not attempt to define the needs of the present or the needs of the future, both of which are difficult to assess. If we cannot define our present needs without compromise then what chance have we of understanding future needs? This definition is often quoted but the real world view it represents is seen in the next paragraph of the report which says:
‘In essence sustainable development is a process of change in which exploitation of resources, the direction of investments, the orientation of technical developments and institutional change are all in harmony and enhance current and future potential to meet human needs and aspirations’.
Now we see a shift towards what many people would say would be the predominately Western view of development although it does leave scope for others. It does not talk about sharing or making sacrifices for future generations. It appears to be the sort of statement large global companies would want to make to secure their future. The statement may be right but who has the power to implement and what will be their priorities? It may be that we all have to make sacrifices even for selfish reasons to avoid social conflict but will the people with power really choose this world view? It is an enormous agenda just to find the harmonious common ground.
So what is a world view? At the heart of a discussion on sustainable development must be the very essence of the attitudes and beliefs which influences our thinking. One definition of a world view is as follows:
‘A comprehensive view or personal philosophy of human life and the universe’
(Collins, 2000)
Others have enlarged upon this definition and Wikipedia has suggested:
‘A World View is the fundamental cognitive orientation of an individual or society encompassing the entirety of the individual or society’s knowledge and point of view. A World View can include natural philosophy, formative, existential and normative postulates; or themes values and ethics … additionally it refers to the framework of ideas and beliefs forming a global description through which an individual, group or culture watches and interprets the world and interacts with it’.
Probably it is the latter part of the last statement which is most pertinent to this book. In particular it is the way in which we interpret the world and how this interpretation allows us to interact with it which is important. In fact professional knowledge and skill within the design and construction professions is largely based on the way we interpret and act upon our understanding of the built environment.
Leo Apostel (1925–1995) was a Belgium philosopher who was interested in bridging the gap between exact science and the humanities (Anon, 2015). He suggested that a ‘world view’ is an ontology or a descriptive model of the world and should comprise six elements, namely:
An explanation of the world
A futurology answering the question ‘Where are we heading?’
Values, answers to ethical questions such as ‘What shall we do?’
A praxeology or methodology or theory of action
An epistemology or theory of knowledge ‘What is true or false?’
An aetiology (the study of causation) as it should contain an account of its own building blocks, its origins and construction on which it is based.
These six facets give us an indication of what we should be addressing when we explore and challenge the issues related to Sustainable Development. This book is mainly concerned with item two, futurology examining where we are heading. Since Sustainable Development covers such a wide range of subject matter this is not a trivial matter. It is not surprising, that in general debate, one or more of these characteristics is missing. Andrew Basden in Chapter 19 uses the work of the Dutch philosopher Herman Dooyeweerd to provide a framework for discussion which is outlined by Brandon and Lombardi (2011). The Dooyeweerd approach to the cosmos (Dooyeweerd, 1955) is gaining momentum and may assist in dealing with the inter‐dependencies between various aspects of what make development sustainable.
In this book, John Ratcliffe (Chapter 2) calls on his vast knowledge and experience in considering sustainability futures to examine the changes that are likely to happen to cities. Chrisna du Plessis (Chapter 3) uses her renowned knowledge of examining sustainable development in developing countries to challenge the prevailing views of sustainable development, while Patrizia Lombardi (Chapter 4), through her extensive work on evaluating sustainable development, focuses on the post carbon city and whether resilience has a part to play in future assessments. Finally, Ian Cooper (Chapter 5) reflects on the outcomes of the successful European BEQUEST network – one of the pioneer projects in the field – where he had a key role in analysing the methods by which sustainability in the built environment was evaluated. All these chapters reflect on the persistence of current world views and those which should replace them.
It is unlikely that we will ever get a full and complete World View defined but our explanation and recognition of what World View we are using may help us to understand our limitations and may help us appreciate others. Even within a single world view we find a large number of unintended consequences caused by not taking a holistic view of the problem. For example the Aswan Dam in Egypt, built to stop flooding of the river Nile and to generate hydroelectric power, has also stopped the natural deposition of silt during the annual flood. The farmers now require artificial fertiliser, which leads to pollution of the river as the fertiliser seeps out from the land. One solution provides another problem! If it is a problem within one world view then it is likely to be a greater problem when more than one view is seeking to be harmonised with others.
1.3 Section 2: Design and evaluation tools and technology
The recognition of a world view influences our view of how we should act to realise development of that view in practice. To achieve this we need a series of tools which enable us to act in a sensible and structured way. These tools allow us to communicate and build knowledge as a community. They can vary from paper‐based calculations derived from measurements and evaluations, to technical support, all in the form of solutions to various aspects of the physical built environment. These might include innovation in heat storage, passive design for energy reduction, extraction of materials, dealing with pollution and in fact the list could go on forever! Alternatively they might be more abstract issues which deal with qualitative judgements, feelings and emotions which are difficult to assess. Our way of handling this complexity is to build models with different levels of granularity to address different levels of knowledge and hopefully at some time we can bring them together to deal with the interdependence they have upon each other. Gaining harmony among the myriad of models is probably one of the most difficult and challenging things we seek to achieve, as it is in real life. A decision in one area can have repercussions in any number of different areas and in ways which are not always predictable. Nevertheless the way forward must be to strive for models which give us a better picture of the world as we observe it and which can be inter‐related.
The introduction of information and communication technologies (ICT) has provided a springboard from which real advances in integration and computation can take place. The limitations of the human mind are gradually being overtaken by the computing power of the machine. We are not yet at a stage where we can realistically claim artificial intelligence is available but the signs are there for massive improvement in the next 50 years. This development raises all sorts of ethical and moral questions regarding the delegation of authority. At what point do we delegate authority to the machine on issues which affect human lives? The truth is that we are already delegating much of human decision making to machines and to some extent we are happy to do so. It is expedient for us because human beings do not have the capability to deal with very large scale problems involving masses of data. At the moment the machine models our thinking once we have given the parameters and inputs it requires. However the modelling process within the machine is largely a model of our own form of reasoning. As time goes on then the machine may well develop its own form of reasoning following the evolution which we have given it in the form of its architecture and software. It will have its own equivalent of DNA and it may be difficult for mere humans to understand what has developed. Booth, the Chief Scientist of IBM, saw the development of software intelligence developing in three stages (Booth, 2007): first, transparency in the development of the model, second, dependence on the machine to write software and then, third, what he called ‘the rise of the machine’. His prediction for these stages was three 10‐year developments running sequentially.
Already developments are taking place where the machine is required to solve common problems in engineering and design. We cannot design and build the designs created by, say Frank Gehry and others, without the use of the computer. In medicine we are jacking microprocessors into the human brain to compensate for hearing and sight loss. It is not too big a step before we use the machine for enhancement of the brain rather than repair. It may be difficult to know whether it is the human aspect of the brain or the model in the microprocessor which is influencing our decisions. There are serious ethical and moral problems associated with such advancements.
The danger is that it becomes expedient for us to allow the machine to take decisions. If we do not have the means by which we can challenge its decisions or we choose not to worry about such issues then we can find ourselves in a situation where we are reliant on the intelligence of the machine alone. It may be difficult for us to design intelligent machines which are challengeable and they may become ‘black boxes’ to most people. We are then in the hands of the machine or an elite human population which has power to control both us and the machine. This sounds like science fiction but we are slowly moving to this threshold by default. In the context of sustainable development where we might not be able to understand our current human needs nor those of future generations we are placing human beings in a precarious position. When we create these models we build in the programmers view of what ‘values’ the machine should hold and we find that other programmers adopt the same routines until one person’s values get embedded so deep that we cannot clearly identify the source, let alone challenge the content. In addition values and knowledge need to evolve and change over time and this becomes more difficult as the models are adopted and extended. One postulated solution to this problem is to allow the machine to learn of itself using the routines embedded by humans which by themselves may have built in bias and prejudice. Unfortunately if the machine can change these learning processes on its own then there is likely to be a loss of transparency in the process. How will we be able to democratically change what the machine has determined? Will there still be scope for dialogue?
These are not trivial issues and they are magnified by attempting to use these tools for a subject with so many interdependent variables such as in Sustainable Development. It may be easy to write a program that calculates heat loss. However when we try and look at the reasons why we are concerned about this issue, namely the cost and nature of fossil fuel, then it becomes an extremely complex situation for which most of our current models are ill prepared. The political ramifications, the competitors in the market, the prevailing economic models, the geopolitical alliances, the pollutants in the fuel, the comfort level expected by users, the transport requirements, consideration of the needs of future generations and so on; we can see that we are dealing with a much larger universe of issues, many of which are changing with time and possibly values. Inevitably many of the variables will be qualitative and almost by definition will require human judgement. We then have the problem of which human, or humans, do we model to make these judgements? This is a gross simplification of the problem but it illustrates a few of the difficulties we would face.
This book cannot deal with a problem of this magnitude and the issues raised in Section 2 are more immediate and the models created are heavily constrained. Nevertheless they outline the direction of flow within the research community towards new tools to enable us to be for effective and efficient in our decision making.
Section 2 has a wide variety of chapters by significant authors engaged in the development of tools. Tuba Kocaturk (Chapter 10) addresses the role of design in shaping a sustainable future using ICT through ‘digital ecosystems’. Sidney Newton (Chapter 6), Sara Biscaya and Ghassan Aouad (Chapter 7) and Marjan Sarsha et al. (Chapter 11) look at tools that might provide new approaches. Srinith Perera and Michele Victoria (Chapter 8) look at evaluating carbon in sustainable development and Terence Fernando and Marta Alzhami (Chapter 9) examine the tools used in disaster management, an extreme form of instability.
Although computer technology will dominate this area of modelling for many years to come it is not just the architecture, capacity and speed which will have impact. It is also the type of measurement, the source data and the assumptions in such models which will influence our behaviour. This is true even without the computational power of machines. Bentivegna (1997) in his chapter on the Limitations of Environmental Evaluations suggests that:
‘Environmental evaluation is still a controversial question because its theoretical and empirical outcomes do not yet allow generally valid results. Therefore they need to be put into practice cautiously. Moreover, when environmental evaluation is used in decision making within public decision processes, its intrinsic limitations are magnified by its multi‐functional task’.
There is evidence that there have been major errors in prediction caused by incorrect assumptions in relatively simple measures. If this is true for simple evaluation it is even more true when the whole of the factors contributing to Sustainable Development are taken into account. The number of variables and the number of permutations coupled with the uncertainty and fuzziness of the data leads to vast potential for error. At the present time there is considerable interest in integrating large data sets and trying to solve big data problems. One specific area is the integration of computer systems throughout a city in order to take a more holistic view of any problem relating to the sustainability of the city and/or the community. The Salford University Thinklab1 has been using such major data sets for many years in matters such as crime detection and flooding and in social aspects such as employment, health and planning.
The fact that we can put information into a machine and we can model aspects of city structure and life does not mean that we will get a sensible result. The assumptions in the models and structure of the data lead to a combination which can only increase the uncertainty of the results. Nevertheless the process should be evolutionary. Providing appropriate feedback is available, the systems can be modified to improve performance and over a long period of time this process may be enhanced by computer self learning. It may be that we can create an intelligent digital ecosystem as suggested by Tuba Kocaturk in Chapter 10 of this book. In such a system the dependencies between variables must be made explicit and quantified and the modelling of the process of change over time must be modelled too.
At the moment we have a long way to go before we can rely on these systems. We do not have robust models, we do not have a significant understanding of inter‐dependence and we do not have the robust feedback mechanisms needed to modify the system as the physical and community systems change. It is a massive multi‐disciplinary research agenda. To approach such a task we do need a robust world view structure which will allow all disciplines to contribute, from the humanities and the arts to the engineering and science communities and from the social sciences to the designers of the physical attributes of the built environment. Whichever structure and approach is adopted it must also include a method of challenging the results and understanding its argument otherwise the computer and its models can become an oppressive tool operated by an elite. Some of the early work on knowledge‐based systems provided ideas for such a democratic approach (Brandon et al., 1996) but the problems tended to be formulaic and the arguments rudimentary whereas the real world is difficult to define in these terms. The result was useful but too simple for further development.
Section 2 of this book gives some insights into current thinking within members of the research community engaging with these problems. It will be interesting to observe how far these ideas can be taken in the foreseeable future.
1.4 Section 3: Engaging with practice, stakeholders and management
Once our current and future world views have been established and once we have considered how technology can provide the tools by which we can support sustainability it is important that we consider the manner in which we can expedite any change through practice. If we need to go from one paradigm to another we must be prepared to take our fellow practitioners on the journey. It is often the implementation which slows down the whole process. This implementation inevitably requires communication, education and sometimes regulation and a legal framework for it to be successful. Bright ideas remain hidden because these factors are not addressed within the practice of professional and other interest groups. There is inertia to change which can delay acceptance and implementation for decades and even longer. Even now in the climate change agenda there are still those, expert and non‐expert, who refuse to believe that human intervention is the cause of changes in greenhouse gases and must be remedied. Gore (2006) in his book ‘An Inconvenient Truth’ addresses a readership of perceived sceptics in an attempt to convince them that we need a shift in our thinking. It is part of the communication and education that needs to prevail to exercise change. Albert Einstein was aware of this in his own domain of physics and drew attention to the fact that we often look for solutions to a problem within those ideas which caused the problem in the first place! Hence the solutions fail. James Lovelock (2000) in his book ‘Homage to Gaia’ outlined his struggle to develop a theory that would redefine how we see the Earth and come to terms with what it means to be a responsible ‘child’ of Earth. It was this struggle which played a major part in establishing the Green Movement which is a significant aspect of sustainable development. These leaders were or are in the vanguard of change and though they would not claim perfection in their thinking they adjust the social attitudes and willingness of peoples to change that which is necessary for a revolution in human thought.
The practitioners then follow with their response to the challenge of the thinkers once the thinkers message is beginning to influence the world. The problem for many small firms is ‘how to begin to immerse themselves in the new paradigm’. For many it is a question of timing. Engaging too quickly may mean that the markets (within a Western view of economic activity) may not be receptive to a new idea. On the other hand move too late and your competitors are leaving you behind. To them in it can be a matter of life or death within a commercial environment. In this book Trevor Mole (Chapter 13) explains how his medium sized building surveying firm is tackling the issue in a very pragmatic and practical way. His clientele are open and willing to change and his commercial antenna is such that he knows he has to provide new products and new processes to suit their requirements. This response provides him with a competitive edge.
These practitioners also work within a professional environment, often facilitated by a professional Institution which seeks to set standards and encourage education on sustainability matters. In the Built Environment most of the professional institutions are encouraging various approaches to Sustainable Development. They have limited powers to enforce a view but they have a great opportunity to promulgate new ideas through their education and research activities. They have a major impact on attitudes within their membership to any new paradigm. They have power through the organisations and bodies they support. For example in this book Peter Hibberd (Chapter 16) outlines how the UK Joint Contracts Tribunal have attempted to bring aspects of sustainable development into their Standard Forms of Contract for the Industry. (As Chair of the JCT he has a unique insight into the current thinking on the issue.) It is unlikely that his would have happened if it were not for the groundwork done by the Thinkers and the Educators related to Property and Construction.
Important issues arise when addressing the engagement of practice and these link back to the ‘world view’ of practice and the tools that are available to them. The delay in implementation of ideas very often arises because the technology that is needed for implementation has not developed or been made available at an economic cost for general acceptance.
Implementation research is a key investment for any idea. Lester Thorow (1971) in his book ‘The Zero Sum Society’ suggested that there are three major forms of research and he used the analogy of road building to illustrate the purpose of each. The first he described as ‘Scientific Research’ where the researcher scours the horizon and explores the terrain to find new ways across the landscape. The second he called ‘Engineering Research’ where the researcher addresses the problem of ‘How to get from where we are to where we want to be; and the third was ‘Implementation Research’ (although he did not call it by this name) where the researcher finds out whether it is possible to adopt the engineers solution at a reasonable cost and in reasonable time to get a return on the investment. Very often the cost of the implementation research far exceeds the cost of the other two. These three types of research address the why, how and when of progress.
The chapters in the third section of this book embrace the views of those who are attempting to bring sustainable development to the forefront of practice. These include the Institutions such as the Joint Contracts Tribunal (Chapter 16, by Hibberd) and firms such as Property Tectonics (Chapter 13, by Mole) as well as researchers working in combined teams with practitioners. The recognition of identifying our values (Chapter 12, by Shen and Mok; Chapter 14, by Formosa and Miron) is important in this field as we shift from our present view of practice to that of the future. Within practice there is the question of how we integrate sustainable development in urban environments (Chapter 15, by Curwell) and with reference to urban transport systems and infrastructure (Chapter 17, by Yang et al.). Permeating all the chapters is the important issue of time and our understanding of the multiple horizons within which we work (Chapter 18, by De Iuliis). Time is critical to our conceptual thinking engaging our world view but is often ignored. We need to address what we mean and over what period when we evaluate sustainable development (Schwartz, 1991; Brand, 1999).
If Sustainable Development is to continue to be an important theme then the relevance to practice is essential and we need to take all stakeholders on the journey!
1.5 Initiative and obsolescence
Having considered the world view that is appropriate to progress, the tools that can enable the view to be realised and the means by which we can make it a reality we then need to address how we identify ideas that are most likely to achieve positive results and those which are no longer pertinent to achieving progress. Neither are easy to achieve. We know there is massive investment in our current models, not only in monetary terms but in education, research and belief systems. If we are to change then the investment must change too and there will almost certainly be inertia to anything that requires these aspects to be challenged. Ideas which have been held for considerable lengths of time will need to be ditched to allow new models to emerge. Some will be embedded in history, in markets, in belief systems and attitudes which may be centuries old. They do not fall easily! It is probably easier to postulate something new than to let go of the old. What ideas are we prepared to let die?
In this book the death of ideas is not made explicit but rather implicit in the discussions which follow in the text. The problem is that most authors will have sought a reductionist approach which allows them to handle a complex problem through a focus on part of sustainability and it is usually a simplification. This is understandable. Virtually all researchers take this approach in order to be able to achieve an output which is accessible to their clientele and acceptable to the research community within the time that is available before their money runs out! However there must come a point when the inter‐dependence between models and ideas needs to be addressed as a whole in order to gain the harmony that sustainability demands.
In the author’s view and in the context of evaluating sustainable development certain principles should be adopted for examining the models and systems which we might develop to achieve sustainable development. These should be (Brandon and Lombardi, 2011):
Holistic:
They should encompass all the key aspects needed to establish Sustainable Development.
Harmonious:
They should endeavour to balance or be used to balance the criteria upon which sustainability will be judged and particularly the inter‐dependence between all the contributing factors.
Habit forming:
They should be a natural tool to all concerned and encourage good habits.
Helpful:
They should assist in the process of evaluation and not confuse matters by further complexity or conflict.
Hassle‐free:
They should be able to be used by a wide range of people, both expert and non‐expert (although at different levels) and the results and limitations should be easy to communicate and explain.
Hopeful:
They should point towards a possible solution and not leave the user in a state where there appears to be no answer.
Human:
They should seek solutions which by their nature assist the development of human beings without pain, suffering and undue anxiety.
Of course it is much easier to say these things and rather more difficult to achieve them. They represent aspirations but nevertheless they provide a check list for any future approach. The first two items in the list are key to addressing sustainable development and the remainder outline the importance of recognising the human and social requirements if such a system is to be adopted and used.
If we relate this to the main sections of the book we can probably say that:
World View:
This represents the biggest challenge facing us today. We have made progress in recent years in recognising at an international level the importance of sustainable development in terms of climate change. The Leaders of the world have committed themselves to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions to avoid global warming. However this is only part of the change in world view that needs to be addressed and there is far less unanimity about all the other issues such as pollution, population control, mutual sacrifice for mutual benefit and a re‐prioritisation of values to assist the whole human race. This is not a trivial issue and it will take much political, scientific and sharing of belief before a world view can be established. Present value and belief systems have taken centuries to develop and it would be difficult and optimistic to expect change in much shorter time periods. However the growth in exchange of knowledge and the way in which social media now permeates large parts of the world can give us a realistic expectation of faster change. This informal method of education coupled with formal approaches may well be the best way of changing viewpoints and may be preferable to imposition.
ICT Design and Evaluation:
