Y. Song
info
Please Note
<p>This page displays the records of the person named above and is not linked to a unique person identifier. This record may need to be merged to a profile.</p>
9 records found
1
Integrating Urban Metabolism Into Strategic Urban Planning
Theoretical Insights and Practical Applications
This thesis examines Urban Metabolism (UM) as a critical framework for advancing sustainability in urban development, focusing on its theoretical underpinnings, practical applications, and integration into strategic urban planning processes. The study aims to address the challenges cities face in resource management and environmental resilience by developing and applying UM indicators as tools to guide planners and policymakers. Structured across several chapters, the research explores UM’s conceptual evolution, methodological innovations, and practical implications for fostering circular and sustainable urban systems.
The introductory chapter contextualizes UM as an analytical lens to assess urban systems, akin to biological organisms, by tracking their resource flows and waste outputs. The concept has evolved over time, gaining relevance in addressing contemporary urbanization challenges such as resource depletion and environmental degradation. While aligning with global frameworks like the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), UM faces practical implementation barriers, particularly in translating its theoretical insights into actionable strategies for urban planners. This chapter emphasizes the critical need for tools that integrate resource flow analysis into planning processes to achieve circular and resilient urban ecosystems.
Building on this foundation, the research question and methodology outlined in Chapter 2 set the stage for a systematic investigation of UM indicators. The central inquiry focuses on how these indicators can enhance strategic urban planning by addressing the perspectives of actors, spatial dimensions, and resource flows. A combination of literature reviews, case studies, and surveys guides the study, ensuring a robust and multi-dimensional exploration of the topic.
Chapter 3 delves into the categorization and evaluation of UM indicators based on an extensive review of existing literature. Using a hierarchical framework, the research identifies 38 key indicators, grouped under three domains: environment (e.g., air quality, water conditions, carbon sinks), resource flow (e.g., material inputs, outputs, and throughputs), and city development (e.g., population growth, economic transitions, land-use changes). The chapter advocates for material flow analysis as a practical and accessible method for integrating these indicators into urban planning, distinguishing it from the more complex emergy synthesis analysis.
The challenges of implementing UM indicators are explored in Chapter 4, which highlights cognitive and practical disparities between stakeholders and urban planners. Stakeholders prioritize indicators that emphasize socio-economic outcomes, while planners focus on technical and spatial resource flows. Surveys reveal barriers such as inconsistent data availability and the difficulty of aligning indicators with spatial frameworks. To address these gaps, the chapter proposes strategies for improved communication and the development of tailored frameworks that reconcile diverse priorities.
Chapter 5 examines how UM indicators function across different spatial scales, ranging from global to local levels. Through case studies in the Netherlands, the chapter illustrates how some indicators are specific to particular scales, while others are adaptable across multiple contexts. The analysis underscores the importance of aligning indicator goals with the unique objectives and constraints of each spatial scale, ensuring their relevance in supporting sustainable urban development.
The integration of UM indicators into the planning process is explored in Chapter 6, which maps their application across distinct phases, including initial assessments, vision setting, strategy formulation, implementation, and monitoring. This chapter demonstrates how indicators can enhance decision-making at each phase, fostering more informed and sustainability-oriented planning outcomes. The dynamic interplay of indicators across phases is emphasized as a key element in promoting circularity and resilience in urban systems.
The final chapter synthesizes these findings into a comprehensive framework for integrating UM indicators into strategic urban planning. The framework comprises two instruments: (i) an abstracted timeline of iterations, serving as a guide that directs and concentrates the selection process of UM indicators (fig 7.1); and (ii) a graph that consolidates factors related to people, scale, and process, clearly outlining the specific objectives that the selected indicators are intended to achieve, based on their position in the timeline iteration (fig 7.2). These instruments empower a planning team to select and optimize UM indicators tailored for a particular strategic urban plan. Furthermore, it guarantees the selection of indicators by stakeholders and their involvement throughout the planning process, accounting for scalar interrelations and contextual specificities. By ensuring stakeholder involvement and addressing scale-specific needs, the framework equips planners with actionable tools for embedding UM principles into decision-making processes.
This research significantly advances the field of UM by bridging the gap between theory and practice. It offers urban planners and policymakers a set of actionable strategies and tools to incorporate UM into their work, promoting sustainability and resilience in urban systems. By focusing on the practical application of UM indicators, the study contributes to a deeper understanding of how cities can transition toward more circular, resource-efficient futures.
...
The introductory chapter contextualizes UM as an analytical lens to assess urban systems, akin to biological organisms, by tracking their resource flows and waste outputs. The concept has evolved over time, gaining relevance in addressing contemporary urbanization challenges such as resource depletion and environmental degradation. While aligning with global frameworks like the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), UM faces practical implementation barriers, particularly in translating its theoretical insights into actionable strategies for urban planners. This chapter emphasizes the critical need for tools that integrate resource flow analysis into planning processes to achieve circular and resilient urban ecosystems.
Building on this foundation, the research question and methodology outlined in Chapter 2 set the stage for a systematic investigation of UM indicators. The central inquiry focuses on how these indicators can enhance strategic urban planning by addressing the perspectives of actors, spatial dimensions, and resource flows. A combination of literature reviews, case studies, and surveys guides the study, ensuring a robust and multi-dimensional exploration of the topic.
Chapter 3 delves into the categorization and evaluation of UM indicators based on an extensive review of existing literature. Using a hierarchical framework, the research identifies 38 key indicators, grouped under three domains: environment (e.g., air quality, water conditions, carbon sinks), resource flow (e.g., material inputs, outputs, and throughputs), and city development (e.g., population growth, economic transitions, land-use changes). The chapter advocates for material flow analysis as a practical and accessible method for integrating these indicators into urban planning, distinguishing it from the more complex emergy synthesis analysis.
The challenges of implementing UM indicators are explored in Chapter 4, which highlights cognitive and practical disparities between stakeholders and urban planners. Stakeholders prioritize indicators that emphasize socio-economic outcomes, while planners focus on technical and spatial resource flows. Surveys reveal barriers such as inconsistent data availability and the difficulty of aligning indicators with spatial frameworks. To address these gaps, the chapter proposes strategies for improved communication and the development of tailored frameworks that reconcile diverse priorities.
Chapter 5 examines how UM indicators function across different spatial scales, ranging from global to local levels. Through case studies in the Netherlands, the chapter illustrates how some indicators are specific to particular scales, while others are adaptable across multiple contexts. The analysis underscores the importance of aligning indicator goals with the unique objectives and constraints of each spatial scale, ensuring their relevance in supporting sustainable urban development.
The integration of UM indicators into the planning process is explored in Chapter 6, which maps their application across distinct phases, including initial assessments, vision setting, strategy formulation, implementation, and monitoring. This chapter demonstrates how indicators can enhance decision-making at each phase, fostering more informed and sustainability-oriented planning outcomes. The dynamic interplay of indicators across phases is emphasized as a key element in promoting circularity and resilience in urban systems.
The final chapter synthesizes these findings into a comprehensive framework for integrating UM indicators into strategic urban planning. The framework comprises two instruments: (i) an abstracted timeline of iterations, serving as a guide that directs and concentrates the selection process of UM indicators (fig 7.1); and (ii) a graph that consolidates factors related to people, scale, and process, clearly outlining the specific objectives that the selected indicators are intended to achieve, based on their position in the timeline iteration (fig 7.2). These instruments empower a planning team to select and optimize UM indicators tailored for a particular strategic urban plan. Furthermore, it guarantees the selection of indicators by stakeholders and their involvement throughout the planning process, accounting for scalar interrelations and contextual specificities. By ensuring stakeholder involvement and addressing scale-specific needs, the framework equips planners with actionable tools for embedding UM principles into decision-making processes.
This research significantly advances the field of UM by bridging the gap between theory and practice. It offers urban planners and policymakers a set of actionable strategies and tools to incorporate UM into their work, promoting sustainability and resilience in urban systems. By focusing on the practical application of UM indicators, the study contributes to a deeper understanding of how cities can transition toward more circular, resource-efficient futures.
...
This thesis examines Urban Metabolism (UM) as a critical framework for advancing sustainability in urban development, focusing on its theoretical underpinnings, practical applications, and integration into strategic urban planning processes. The study aims to address the challenges cities face in resource management and environmental resilience by developing and applying UM indicators as tools to guide planners and policymakers. Structured across several chapters, the research explores UM’s conceptual evolution, methodological innovations, and practical implications for fostering circular and sustainable urban systems.
The introductory chapter contextualizes UM as an analytical lens to assess urban systems, akin to biological organisms, by tracking their resource flows and waste outputs. The concept has evolved over time, gaining relevance in addressing contemporary urbanization challenges such as resource depletion and environmental degradation. While aligning with global frameworks like the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), UM faces practical implementation barriers, particularly in translating its theoretical insights into actionable strategies for urban planners. This chapter emphasizes the critical need for tools that integrate resource flow analysis into planning processes to achieve circular and resilient urban ecosystems.
Building on this foundation, the research question and methodology outlined in Chapter 2 set the stage for a systematic investigation of UM indicators. The central inquiry focuses on how these indicators can enhance strategic urban planning by addressing the perspectives of actors, spatial dimensions, and resource flows. A combination of literature reviews, case studies, and surveys guides the study, ensuring a robust and multi-dimensional exploration of the topic.
Chapter 3 delves into the categorization and evaluation of UM indicators based on an extensive review of existing literature. Using a hierarchical framework, the research identifies 38 key indicators, grouped under three domains: environment (e.g., air quality, water conditions, carbon sinks), resource flow (e.g., material inputs, outputs, and throughputs), and city development (e.g., population growth, economic transitions, land-use changes). The chapter advocates for material flow analysis as a practical and accessible method for integrating these indicators into urban planning, distinguishing it from the more complex emergy synthesis analysis.
The challenges of implementing UM indicators are explored in Chapter 4, which highlights cognitive and practical disparities between stakeholders and urban planners. Stakeholders prioritize indicators that emphasize socio-economic outcomes, while planners focus on technical and spatial resource flows. Surveys reveal barriers such as inconsistent data availability and the difficulty of aligning indicators with spatial frameworks. To address these gaps, the chapter proposes strategies for improved communication and the development of tailored frameworks that reconcile diverse priorities.
Chapter 5 examines how UM indicators function across different spatial scales, ranging from global to local levels. Through case studies in the Netherlands, the chapter illustrates how some indicators are specific to particular scales, while others are adaptable across multiple contexts. The analysis underscores the importance of aligning indicator goals with the unique objectives and constraints of each spatial scale, ensuring their relevance in supporting sustainable urban development.
The integration of UM indicators into the planning process is explored in Chapter 6, which maps their application across distinct phases, including initial assessments, vision setting, strategy formulation, implementation, and monitoring. This chapter demonstrates how indicators can enhance decision-making at each phase, fostering more informed and sustainability-oriented planning outcomes. The dynamic interplay of indicators across phases is emphasized as a key element in promoting circularity and resilience in urban systems.
The final chapter synthesizes these findings into a comprehensive framework for integrating UM indicators into strategic urban planning. The framework comprises two instruments: (i) an abstracted timeline of iterations, serving as a guide that directs and concentrates the selection process of UM indicators (fig 7.1); and (ii) a graph that consolidates factors related to people, scale, and process, clearly outlining the specific objectives that the selected indicators are intended to achieve, based on their position in the timeline iteration (fig 7.2). These instruments empower a planning team to select and optimize UM indicators tailored for a particular strategic urban plan. Furthermore, it guarantees the selection of indicators by stakeholders and their involvement throughout the planning process, accounting for scalar interrelations and contextual specificities. By ensuring stakeholder involvement and addressing scale-specific needs, the framework equips planners with actionable tools for embedding UM principles into decision-making processes.
This research significantly advances the field of UM by bridging the gap between theory and practice. It offers urban planners and policymakers a set of actionable strategies and tools to incorporate UM into their work, promoting sustainability and resilience in urban systems. By focusing on the practical application of UM indicators, the study contributes to a deeper understanding of how cities can transition toward more circular, resource-efficient futures.
The introductory chapter contextualizes UM as an analytical lens to assess urban systems, akin to biological organisms, by tracking their resource flows and waste outputs. The concept has evolved over time, gaining relevance in addressing contemporary urbanization challenges such as resource depletion and environmental degradation. While aligning with global frameworks like the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), UM faces practical implementation barriers, particularly in translating its theoretical insights into actionable strategies for urban planners. This chapter emphasizes the critical need for tools that integrate resource flow analysis into planning processes to achieve circular and resilient urban ecosystems.
Building on this foundation, the research question and methodology outlined in Chapter 2 set the stage for a systematic investigation of UM indicators. The central inquiry focuses on how these indicators can enhance strategic urban planning by addressing the perspectives of actors, spatial dimensions, and resource flows. A combination of literature reviews, case studies, and surveys guides the study, ensuring a robust and multi-dimensional exploration of the topic.
Chapter 3 delves into the categorization and evaluation of UM indicators based on an extensive review of existing literature. Using a hierarchical framework, the research identifies 38 key indicators, grouped under three domains: environment (e.g., air quality, water conditions, carbon sinks), resource flow (e.g., material inputs, outputs, and throughputs), and city development (e.g., population growth, economic transitions, land-use changes). The chapter advocates for material flow analysis as a practical and accessible method for integrating these indicators into urban planning, distinguishing it from the more complex emergy synthesis analysis.
The challenges of implementing UM indicators are explored in Chapter 4, which highlights cognitive and practical disparities between stakeholders and urban planners. Stakeholders prioritize indicators that emphasize socio-economic outcomes, while planners focus on technical and spatial resource flows. Surveys reveal barriers such as inconsistent data availability and the difficulty of aligning indicators with spatial frameworks. To address these gaps, the chapter proposes strategies for improved communication and the development of tailored frameworks that reconcile diverse priorities.
Chapter 5 examines how UM indicators function across different spatial scales, ranging from global to local levels. Through case studies in the Netherlands, the chapter illustrates how some indicators are specific to particular scales, while others are adaptable across multiple contexts. The analysis underscores the importance of aligning indicator goals with the unique objectives and constraints of each spatial scale, ensuring their relevance in supporting sustainable urban development.
The integration of UM indicators into the planning process is explored in Chapter 6, which maps their application across distinct phases, including initial assessments, vision setting, strategy formulation, implementation, and monitoring. This chapter demonstrates how indicators can enhance decision-making at each phase, fostering more informed and sustainability-oriented planning outcomes. The dynamic interplay of indicators across phases is emphasized as a key element in promoting circularity and resilience in urban systems.
The final chapter synthesizes these findings into a comprehensive framework for integrating UM indicators into strategic urban planning. The framework comprises two instruments: (i) an abstracted timeline of iterations, serving as a guide that directs and concentrates the selection process of UM indicators (fig 7.1); and (ii) a graph that consolidates factors related to people, scale, and process, clearly outlining the specific objectives that the selected indicators are intended to achieve, based on their position in the timeline iteration (fig 7.2). These instruments empower a planning team to select and optimize UM indicators tailored for a particular strategic urban plan. Furthermore, it guarantees the selection of indicators by stakeholders and their involvement throughout the planning process, accounting for scalar interrelations and contextual specificities. By ensuring stakeholder involvement and addressing scale-specific needs, the framework equips planners with actionable tools for embedding UM principles into decision-making processes.
This research significantly advances the field of UM by bridging the gap between theory and practice. It offers urban planners and policymakers a set of actionable strategies and tools to incorporate UM into their work, promoting sustainability and resilience in urban systems. By focusing on the practical application of UM indicators, the study contributes to a deeper understanding of how cities can transition toward more circular, resource-efficient futures.
Beyond legislation and technological design
The importance and implications of institutional trust for privacy issues of digital contact tracing
For proper implementation of digital contact tracing technologies for fighting against SARS-CoV-2, participants' privacy vulnerability and the uncertainty from the relevant institutions' side could be seen as two core elements that should be dealt with, among others. In this paper, we propose to understand the current approaches for preserving privacy, referred to as privacy by legislation and privacy by technological design, as distrusting strategies that primarily work to reduce participants' vulnerability by specifying and implementing privacy standards related to this digital solution. We point out that mere distrusting strategies are insufficient for the ethically appropriate development of this digital solution, nor can they eliminate the need for institutional trust that plays an essential role in fostering voluntary support for this solution. To reach well-grounded trust in both an ethical and epistemological sense, we argue that trust in institutions concerning personal data protection in the case of digital contact tracing ought to be built on the relevant institutions' and individuals' goodwill towards the public and their competence in improving the actual effectiveness of this solution. We conclude by clarifying three dimensions, including the purpose, procedure, and outcome, where the relevant trustees can work to signal and justify their intentions and increase their trustworthiness via an effective communication strategy. Given the complementary qualities shown by the distrusting and trusting strategies, a combined strategy including both sorts seems closer to what we expect from the responsible implementation of this digital solution, which could also improve the effectiveness of this institutional response.
...
For proper implementation of digital contact tracing technologies for fighting against SARS-CoV-2, participants' privacy vulnerability and the uncertainty from the relevant institutions' side could be seen as two core elements that should be dealt with, among others. In this paper, we propose to understand the current approaches for preserving privacy, referred to as privacy by legislation and privacy by technological design, as distrusting strategies that primarily work to reduce participants' vulnerability by specifying and implementing privacy standards related to this digital solution. We point out that mere distrusting strategies are insufficient for the ethically appropriate development of this digital solution, nor can they eliminate the need for institutional trust that plays an essential role in fostering voluntary support for this solution. To reach well-grounded trust in both an ethical and epistemological sense, we argue that trust in institutions concerning personal data protection in the case of digital contact tracing ought to be built on the relevant institutions' and individuals' goodwill towards the public and their competence in improving the actual effectiveness of this solution. We conclude by clarifying three dimensions, including the purpose, procedure, and outcome, where the relevant trustees can work to signal and justify their intentions and increase their trustworthiness via an effective communication strategy. Given the complementary qualities shown by the distrusting and trusting strategies, a combined strategy including both sorts seems closer to what we expect from the responsible implementation of this digital solution, which could also improve the effectiveness of this institutional response.
The subject of modern landscape architecture in the Netherlands has a history of more than one hundred years. During this period, have not only many well-known landscape architects been educated, but also a modern and characteristically Dutch teaching system for landscape architecture has been developed. This article looks at three universities in the Netherlands that have master and doctoral degrees in landscape architecture in order to analyse their teaching and research systems. Firstly, by comparing the curricula, research specialisations and summer schools of each university, this article summarises the framework of the Dutch landscape architecture education system. Secondly, by analysing the different research themes selected in the graduation projects and theses in recent years, this article explores the practice and research trends within Dutch landscape architecture. Finally, the analysis results are combined with the feedback of Chinese students studying landscape architecture in the Netherlands to discuss the differences in practice and research between Chinese and Dutch landscape architecture educations. This article aims to learn from the diverse as well as interconnected landscape architecture teaching system in the Netherlands and provide suggestions for the current landscape architecture teaching system in China.
...
The subject of modern landscape architecture in the Netherlands has a history of more than one hundred years. During this period, have not only many well-known landscape architects been educated, but also a modern and characteristically Dutch teaching system for landscape architecture has been developed. This article looks at three universities in the Netherlands that have master and doctoral degrees in landscape architecture in order to analyse their teaching and research systems. Firstly, by comparing the curricula, research specialisations and summer schools of each university, this article summarises the framework of the Dutch landscape architecture education system. Secondly, by analysing the different research themes selected in the graduation projects and theses in recent years, this article explores the practice and research trends within Dutch landscape architecture. Finally, the analysis results are combined with the feedback of Chinese students studying landscape architecture in the Netherlands to discuss the differences in practice and research between Chinese and Dutch landscape architecture educations. This article aims to learn from the diverse as well as interconnected landscape architecture teaching system in the Netherlands and provide suggestions for the current landscape architecture teaching system in China.
Exhibition
(2020)
-
Alex Wandl, Y. Song, A. van Timmeren, L. Amenta, Gustavo Arciniegas, C. Furlan, M.M. Dabrowski, Hilde Remøy, Bob Geldermans, R. Šilerytė
The on-line exhibition presents the results of the Horizon20 Project REPAiR in virtual exhibition rooms. Check-out this next generation experience to learn all about circular economy contexts and solutions:
...
The on-line exhibition presents the results of the Horizon20 Project REPAiR in virtual exhibition rooms. Check-out this next generation experience to learn all about circular economy contexts and solutions:
Biotopes reveal a crucial role in the urban ecology, as they positively create habitat for the biodiversity development. With the increasing severe ecological challenge of urban high-density area and rising ecological awareness, people gradually realized the importance of biodiversity and began to explore the impact of urbanization on the biotope. This study in the city of Shanghai sets the framework for a study of the relation between spatial morphology and urban biotope, aims to discuss the impact of urbanization on the urban biotope. Two of high-density urban spaces and sub-urban spaces in the context of Shanghai area were examined as case studies, Huangpu District and Pujin Block, to demonstrate the biotope situations by disparate urbanization impact. In each study area, the urban biotope mapping methodology was developed base upon a general biotope classification method adapted to urban context. Main outputs are GIS based maps representing different biotopes, showing spatial difference in each area. Seven core biotope evaluation indicators of urban biodiversity were calculated: 1) area; 2) density; 3) shape index; 4) diversity index; 5) saturation index; 6) fragmentation index; 7) value index. Huangpu District and Pujin Block, although similar in size, exhibit distinct characteristics and perform different biotope situation by the impact of urbanization. This research aims to contribute to a better understanding and promotion of the relationship between biotope and urbanization, particularly for the disciplines involved in urban landscape planning, design and management.
...
Biotopes reveal a crucial role in the urban ecology, as they positively create habitat for the biodiversity development. With the increasing severe ecological challenge of urban high-density area and rising ecological awareness, people gradually realized the importance of biodiversity and began to explore the impact of urbanization on the biotope. This study in the city of Shanghai sets the framework for a study of the relation between spatial morphology and urban biotope, aims to discuss the impact of urbanization on the urban biotope. Two of high-density urban spaces and sub-urban spaces in the context of Shanghai area were examined as case studies, Huangpu District and Pujin Block, to demonstrate the biotope situations by disparate urbanization impact. In each study area, the urban biotope mapping methodology was developed base upon a general biotope classification method adapted to urban context. Main outputs are GIS based maps representing different biotopes, showing spatial difference in each area. Seven core biotope evaluation indicators of urban biodiversity were calculated: 1) area; 2) density; 3) shape index; 4) diversity index; 5) saturation index; 6) fragmentation index; 7) value index. Huangpu District and Pujin Block, although similar in size, exhibit distinct characteristics and perform different biotope situation by the impact of urbanization. This research aims to contribute to a better understanding and promotion of the relationship between biotope and urbanization, particularly for the disciplines involved in urban landscape planning, design and management.
A literature review and categorisation of sustainability-aimed urban metabolism indicators
A context, indicator, mechanism, outcome analysis
Urban metabolism has been advanced as an approach to quantifying energy and resource use and supply in the modern urban system. It is a multidisciplinary approach focused on providing insight into the behaviour of cities for drafting effective proposals for a more humane and ecologically responsible future.
Urban metabolism indicators could play an important role in promoting the science and practice of urban metabolism for sustainability. This paper presents a systematic review of literature centred on defining sustainabilityaimed urban metabolism indicators to improve the integration of urban metabolism and urban sustainability. Furthermore, this paper concentrates on two indicator sets (emergy synthesis and material flow analysis [MFA]), examining the relationship between these indicators and the three dimensions of sustainability (environment, economy, and society) in the literature. The paper thus builds
a bridge between urban metabolism and urban sustainability in the hope that urban metabolism indicators can be used to measure and assess urban sustainability. ...
Urban metabolism indicators could play an important role in promoting the science and practice of urban metabolism for sustainability. This paper presents a systematic review of literature centred on defining sustainabilityaimed urban metabolism indicators to improve the integration of urban metabolism and urban sustainability. Furthermore, this paper concentrates on two indicator sets (emergy synthesis and material flow analysis [MFA]), examining the relationship between these indicators and the three dimensions of sustainability (environment, economy, and society) in the literature. The paper thus builds
a bridge between urban metabolism and urban sustainability in the hope that urban metabolism indicators can be used to measure and assess urban sustainability. ...
Urban metabolism has been advanced as an approach to quantifying energy and resource use and supply in the modern urban system. It is a multidisciplinary approach focused on providing insight into the behaviour of cities for drafting effective proposals for a more humane and ecologically responsible future.
Urban metabolism indicators could play an important role in promoting the science and practice of urban metabolism for sustainability. This paper presents a systematic review of literature centred on defining sustainabilityaimed urban metabolism indicators to improve the integration of urban metabolism and urban sustainability. Furthermore, this paper concentrates on two indicator sets (emergy synthesis and material flow analysis [MFA]), examining the relationship between these indicators and the three dimensions of sustainability (environment, economy, and society) in the literature. The paper thus builds
a bridge between urban metabolism and urban sustainability in the hope that urban metabolism indicators can be used to measure and assess urban sustainability.
Urban metabolism indicators could play an important role in promoting the science and practice of urban metabolism for sustainability. This paper presents a systematic review of literature centred on defining sustainabilityaimed urban metabolism indicators to improve the integration of urban metabolism and urban sustainability. Furthermore, this paper concentrates on two indicator sets (emergy synthesis and material flow analysis [MFA]), examining the relationship between these indicators and the three dimensions of sustainability (environment, economy, and society) in the literature. The paper thus builds
a bridge between urban metabolism and urban sustainability in the hope that urban metabolism indicators can be used to measure and assess urban sustainability.
Urban metabolism is a multi-disciplinary approach to qualitatively and quantitatively evaluate resource flows in urban systems, which aims to provide important insights into the dynamics of cities to make them more ecologically responsible. It has been also introduced into the urban design domain, however most of the attempts concern only tracking of energy and/or material flows to reduce environmental impacts by redesigning closed loops in a specific area. The hypothesis of this paper is that the concept of urban metabolism, and its indicators, could play an important role in advancing the science and practice related to sustainability in urban design and development. At the moment, however we lack indicators to support evaluation of urban design related decisions from the perspective of urban metabolism. The aim of this paper is to explore the application of urban metabolism indicators in urban design based on their characteristics. It reviews development periods of the concept and analytical models of urban metabolism, in order to identify crucial urban metabolism indicators for urban design. Next, these urban metabolism indicators are classified regarding type of analytical model, accounting method, indicator type, and indicator level. Finally, several suggestions are offered on how to integrate urban metabolism indicators into urban design. In addition, directions for future research on the topic are discussed.
...
Urban metabolism is a multi-disciplinary approach to qualitatively and quantitatively evaluate resource flows in urban systems, which aims to provide important insights into the dynamics of cities to make them more ecologically responsible. It has been also introduced into the urban design domain, however most of the attempts concern only tracking of energy and/or material flows to reduce environmental impacts by redesigning closed loops in a specific area. The hypothesis of this paper is that the concept of urban metabolism, and its indicators, could play an important role in advancing the science and practice related to sustainability in urban design and development. At the moment, however we lack indicators to support evaluation of urban design related decisions from the perspective of urban metabolism. The aim of this paper is to explore the application of urban metabolism indicators in urban design based on their characteristics. It reviews development periods of the concept and analytical models of urban metabolism, in order to identify crucial urban metabolism indicators for urban design. Next, these urban metabolism indicators are classified regarding type of analytical model, accounting method, indicator type, and indicator level. Finally, several suggestions are offered on how to integrate urban metabolism indicators into urban design. In addition, directions for future research on the topic are discussed.
Workshop on the Epistemes of the Urban Landscape
How do we as designers see, think and represent urban landscapes?
The urban metabolism has been advanced as an approach for quantifying energy and resource use and supply in modern societal system. It is a multi-disciplinary research domain focused on providing important insights into the behaviour of cities for the purpose of advancing effective proposals for a more humane and ecologically responsible future. Urban metabolism indicators (UMIs) could play an important role in advancing the science and practice of urban metabolism towards sustainability.
This paper reviews the key concepts of urban metabolism and commonly used indicators for gauging the state and progress of urban metabolism, and discuss how UMIs can be further improved from an urban sustainability perspective. Primarily based on peer-reviewed journal papers, as well as books, and documents published by research institutions, international organizations and governmental agencies, this paper systematically examine what UMIs actually measure and whether they are adequate for gauging urban metabolism, and then discuss major oxymorons and challenges as well as ways forward in developing and implementing UMIs towards sustainability. Numerous UMIs have been developed, including single composite indices and indicator sets. Focusing on the indicators based on two indicator sets (emergy synthesis and material flow analysis), this paper analyses the relationships between these indicators and three dimensions of sustainability (environment, economy, and society). The core aim of this research is to figure out sustainability aimed urban metabolism indicators. In this way, this paper builds the bridge between urban metabolism and urban sustainability which can be a promising method using urban metabolism indicators to measure (assess) urban sustainability.
...
The urban metabolism has been advanced as an approach for quantifying energy and resource use and supply in modern societal system. It is a multi-disciplinary research domain focused on providing important insights into the behaviour of cities for the purpose of advancing effective proposals for a more humane and ecologically responsible future. Urban metabolism indicators (UMIs) could play an important role in advancing the science and practice of urban metabolism towards sustainability.
This paper reviews the key concepts of urban metabolism and commonly used indicators for gauging the state and progress of urban metabolism, and discuss how UMIs can be further improved from an urban sustainability perspective. Primarily based on peer-reviewed journal papers, as well as books, and documents published by research institutions, international organizations and governmental agencies, this paper systematically examine what UMIs actually measure and whether they are adequate for gauging urban metabolism, and then discuss major oxymorons and challenges as well as ways forward in developing and implementing UMIs towards sustainability. Numerous UMIs have been developed, including single composite indices and indicator sets. Focusing on the indicators based on two indicator sets (emergy synthesis and material flow analysis), this paper analyses the relationships between these indicators and three dimensions of sustainability (environment, economy, and society). The core aim of this research is to figure out sustainability aimed urban metabolism indicators. In this way, this paper builds the bridge between urban metabolism and urban sustainability which can be a promising method using urban metabolism indicators to measure (assess) urban sustainability.