Conceptual frameworks in indicator‐based assessments of urban sustainability—An analysis based on 67 initiatives

Abstract

Urban sustainability is today commonly considered to be a crucial determinant of global sustainable development, and indicator‐based assessments represent a popular means of operationalizing this complex concept. An important aspect of these assessments concerns the elaboration of accompanying conceptual frameworks. Despite the pivotal role of such frameworks, they are often developed in an unstructured manner, without consideration of their potential purposes and impacts, and without awareness and evaluation of available options. Here, we discuss this topic based on both theoretical considerations and the analysis of the conceptual frameworks of 67 urban sustainability indicator initiatives. The discussion makes two contributions: First, we provide guidance for assessment developers for leveraging the potential of conceptual frameworks. Second, considering the analyzed frameworks as de facto definitions of urban sustainability allows us to advance understanding of the meaning of this complex concept, and to critically discuss the conceptual shortcomings that remain in current assessment practice.

Sourcing Sustainability Transition in Small and Medium-Sized Ports of the Baltic Sea Region: A Case of Sustainable Futuring with Living Labs

“…In terms of the former, the coordination role is highly linked to knowledge and information pertaining to automation in SMSPs, thus making the coordination function a domain-and system-based one. Domain-based coordination can be referred to as coordination within a sub-system, such as operational or environmental domains, where actor interactions are concerned within a system, among the system and its surroundings [171], (pp. 1059-1060).…”

The double negative approach to sustainability

“…However, the Local Agenda 21 chapter lacked clear objectives as it only advanced procedures intended to implement the global goals (Holden et al, 2017). Yet, when sustainability is discussed at the urban, local or regional levels different issues may need to be addressed, as can be seen in the recent review of 67 urban initiatives (Halla & Morino Saum, 2022). Consequently, local goals may or may not coincide with those advanced at the global level (Dearing et al, 2014; Zinkenagel et al, 2018).…”

“…As noted above local or urban sustainability may pertain to dimensions that have no parallel at the global or national level. In their discussion of indices for urban sustainability Halla and Morino Saum (2022) reviewed 67 urban sustainable initiatives. Some of the most frequent topics included in these initiatives were transportation congestion and proximity, urban planning, urban landscapes and security (crime and gender‐based violence)—all topics that tend to receive lesser prominence, if any, at the national and global levels.…”

“…Furthermore, the dimensions and indicators put forward are largely advanced by academics, with little input from stakeholders at different scales. Thus they may not reflect local concerns, which are central in local assessments of sustainability (Halla & Morino Saum, 2022).…”

Study of Environmental Economic Performance According to Energy Use and CO2 Emissions, Air Quality, and Government Policies to Achieve SDGs in Baubau City

“…Not only focus on big cities and metropolitan cities but must shift to developing cities, in this case, medium-scale cities and/or small cities. This is because people's current behavior prefers cities as a destination for living with a composition of 50-60% of the total world population (Halla and Saum, 2022), so developing cities will later become migration destinations. Therefore, earlier strategic efforts need to be made to design future cities that are more livable.…”