Towards a comprehensive system of methodological considerations for cities' climate targets

Abstract

Energy Policy, VOL 62, pp. 1276-1287 [URL: http://dx.doi.org/10. 1016/j.enpol.2013.06.093 ] Access to the published version may require subscription. Publish with permission from: Elsevier This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution and sharing with colleagues. H I G H L I G H T SCities' climate targets are almost impossible to compare and benchmark. There is a need for consistent protocols and frameworks supporting target setting. A framework with key methodological considerations for cities' climate targets is identified. The framework is used to explore the climate targets for eight European cities. The difference between production-and consumption based accounting is illustrated in a new way. a r t i c l e i n f o b s t r a c tClimate targets for cities abound. However, what these targets really imply is dependent on a number of decisions regarding system boundaries and methods of calculation. In order to understand and compare cities' climate targets, there is a need for a generic and comprehensive framework of key methodological considerations. This paper identifies eight key methodological considerations for the different choices that can be made when setting targets for GHG emissions in a city and arranges them in four categories: temporal scope of target, object for target setting, unit of target, and range of target. To explore how target setting is carried out in practice, the climate targets of eight European cities were analysed. The results showed that these targets cover only a limited part of what could be included. Moreover, the cities showed quite limited awareness of what is, or could be, include in the targets. This makes comparison and benchmarking between cities difficult.

Urban Form and Mobility Choices: Informing about Sustainable Travel Alternatives, Carbon Emissions and Energy Use from Transportation in Swedish Neighbourhoods

“…It visualizes integration with transportation modes, modal shares, energy use and carbon emissions from transportation as heat maps to bring a concise information about environmental performance of transportation systems to urban planners and designers, municipal officials and developers. The research into carbon performance and sustainable transportation lacks specific measurements and tools [1,6,7]. Many Swedish municipalities have ambitious environmental goals and carbon management initiatives towards low or zero-carbon urban futures [6,13,14].…”

“…The urban transportation is responsible for roughly one third of all CO 2 emissions in the Earth atmosphere [4] making mobility a crucial sustainability challenge in cities. There is no universally accepted definition of sustainable mobility [1,[5][6][7][8][9][10] but is a considered as a process to deliver environmentally friendly and energy efficient transportation with help of mobility management, sustainable mobility indicators that capture economic, environmental and social aspects, public participation and envisioning futures [9][10][11].…”

“…Many municipalities in Sweden (and in other Nordic countries [12]) tackle the climate change and unsustainable transportation challenge by focusing on curbing carbon emissions and pursuing modal shift towards more walking, cycling and public transportation. During the past decade, it spurred a large number of low-carbon city initiatives [6]. Stockholm and Malmö have even more ambitious environmental goals [13,14] to break the dependence on petroleum and become fossil fuels free within the next 20 years.…”

Pentagram Sustainability Model

“…The concept of sustainability is very elusive (Kramers et al, 2013) and incorporates a plethora of meanings (Marshall & Toffel, 2005) which has raised debate about the emergence of competing definitions (Hopwood, Mellor, & O'Brien, 2005;Gibson, 2006) of sustainability and sustainable development since the publication of the Brundtland report "Our Common Future" (Komeily & Srinivasan, 2015). But most of these definitions incessantly refer to the critical concepts of intragenerational and intergenerational equity which are featured in the Brundtland report (Barrett & Grizzle, 1999); although researchers have not reached a consensus about what timescale should be considered for the applicability of such concepts (Bond, Morrison-Saunders, & Pope, 2012).…”

The City of the Future

“…Many cities are now showing that they can remove fossil fuels much quicker than their national commitments (Kramers et al, 2013;Newman, Beatley, & Boyer, 2017). In every city which is planning to remove fossil fuels the strategy is to build a renewable electricity system and then electrify the transport system.…”