IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/rensus/v137y2021ics1364032120308960.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Future city visions. The energy transition towards carbon-neutrality: lessons learned from the case of Roeselare, Belgium

Author

Listed:
  • Pulselli, Riccardo Maria
  • Broersma, Siebe
  • Martin, Craig Lee
  • Keeffe, Greg
  • Bastianoni, Simone
  • van den Dobbelsteen, Andy

Abstract

As climate change develops, with most of the world population living in urban areas, decarbonisation of cities is among the greatest challenges of the coming decades. In the framework of the EU City-zen project, a number of so-called Roadshows has been organised in ten cities within and outside Europe in order to plan and kick-off their transition towards an energy- and climate-neutral economy. During the Roadshows, a group of experts is engaged to perform co-working activities and participative labs involving local stakeholders. These activities support cities in identifying their own decarbonisation pathways, mainly by combining three mutual processes, i.e. energy design, urban design and carbon accounting. The latter, in particular, has been used to quantify the greenhouse gas emissions of cities and neighbourhoods and to estimate the mitigation effect of a combination of measures towards the desirable condition of carbon neutrality. This exploratory and proactive design process has been successfully demonstrated through intensive workshops and can be potentially replicated in other cities. This paper provides a schematic overview of the main results achieved in the Belgian town of Roeselare, but more significantly it describes the techniques needed to make that cooperative process understandable, impactful and implementable. It is likely that 2050 European goals will drastically change urban environments and socio-economic dynamics in cities, due to the fragmentation of energy sources. Hence, from this standpoint there is a vital need for integrated technologies and infrastructures, a circular economy and community-based processes such as food production, sharing of facilities and valorisation of ecosystem services. The City-zen Roeselare Roadshow brought over 300 stakeholders into the process of re-imagining and visualising their 2050 future city with these solutions. Stakeholders, with no particular expertise in carbon accounting or sustainability, would now have the capability of understanding and applying these solutions in a combined effort to meet the zero-carbon challenge. The approach is generally replicable elsewhere being highly visual, impactful, transferable, and multi-stakeholder friendly. Given that data are made locally available, the combination of this general approach, site-specific assessments and the involvement of both experts and local stakeholders (i.e. policy makers, citizens, etc) allow the transition to start by referring to any real city or neighbourhood.

Suggested Citation

  • Pulselli, Riccardo Maria & Broersma, Siebe & Martin, Craig Lee & Keeffe, Greg & Bastianoni, Simone & van den Dobbelsteen, Andy, 2021. "Future city visions. The energy transition towards carbon-neutrality: lessons learned from the case of Roeselare, Belgium," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:137:y:2021:i:c:s1364032120308960
    DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2020.110612
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032120308960
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.rser.2020.110612?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Braat, Leon C. & de Groot, Rudolf, 2012. "The ecosystem services agenda:bridging the worlds of natural science and economics, conservation and development, and public and private policy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 4-15.
    2. Andy Van den Dobbelsteen & Craig Lee Martin & Greg Keeffe & Riccardo Maria Pulselli & Han Vandevyvere, 2018. "From Problems to Potentials—The Urban Energy Transition of Gruž, Dubrovnik," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-18, April.
    3. Kennedy, Scott & Sgouridis, Sgouris, 2011. "Rigorous classification and carbon accounting principles for low and Zero Carbon Cities," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(9), pages 5259-5268, September.
    4. Guangwu Chen & Thomas Wiedmann & Michalis Hadjikakou & Hazel Rowley, 2016. "City Carbon Footprint Networks," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-16, July.
    5. Marchi, Michela & Jørgensen, Sven Erik & Pulselli, Federico Maria & Marchettini, Nadia & Bastianoni, Simone, 2012. "Modelling the carbon cycle of Siena Province (Tuscany, central Italy)," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 225(C), pages 40-60.
    6. Andrés Esteban Acero López & María Catalina Ramirez Cajiao & Mauricio Peralta Mejia & Luisa Fernanda Payán Durán & Edier Ernesto Espinosa Díaz, 2019. "Participatory Design and Technologies for Sustainable Development: an Approach from Action Research," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 167-191, April.
    7. Manfred Lenzen & Greg M. Peters, 2010. "How City Dwellers Affect Their Resource Hinterland," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 14(1), pages 73-90, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sławomira Hajduk & Dorota Jelonek, 2021. "A Decision-Making Approach Based on TOPSIS Method for Ranking Smart Cities in the Context of Urban Energy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-23, May.
    2. Yayu Xiao & Honghua Yang & Yunlong Zhao & Geng Kong & Linwei Ma & Zheng Li & Weidou Ni, 2022. "A Comprehensive Planning Method for Low-Carbon Energy Transition in Rapidly Growing Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-17, February.
    3. Ma, Y. & Li, Y.P. & Huang, G.H., 2023. "Planning China’s non-deterministic energy system (2021–2060) to achieve carbon neutrality," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 334(C).
    4. Yang, Chuxiao & Wu, Haitao & Guo, Yunxia & Hao, Yu, 2024. "Possible carbon circular pathway exploration for oil transition under the consideration of energy supply constraint and uncertainty," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
    5. Derkenbaeva, Erkinai & Halleck Vega, Solmaria & Hofstede, Gert Jan & van Leeuwen, Eveline, 2022. "Positive energy districts: Mainstreaming energy transition in urban areas," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    6. Xu, Renjing & Xu, Bin, 2022. "Exploring the effective way of reducing carbon intensity in the heavy industry using a semiparametric econometric approach," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 243(C).
    7. Kılkış, Şiir & Ulpiani, Giulia & Vetters, Nadja, 2024. "Visions for climate neutrality and opportunities for co-learning in European cities," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Albert, Osei-Owusu Kwame & Marianne, Thomsen & Jonathan, Lindahl & Nino, Javakhishvili Larsen & Dario, Caro, 2020. "Tracking the carbon emissions of Denmark's five regions from a producer and consumer perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    2. Chen, Guangwu & Wiedmann, Thomas & Wang, Yafei & Hadjikakou, Michalis, 2016. "Transnational city carbon footprint networks – Exploring carbon links between Australian and Chinese cities," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 1082-1092.
    3. Thomas Wiedmann, 2017. "An input–output virtual laboratory in practice – survey of uptake, usage and applications of the first operational IELab," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(2), pages 296-312, April.
    4. Hendrawan, Dienda C P & Musshoff, Oliver, 2022. "Oil Palm Smallholder Farmers' Livelihood Resilience and Decision Making in Replanting," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322441, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Gregg C. Brill & Pippin M. L. Anderson & Patrick O’Farrell, 2022. "Relational Values of Cultural Ecosystem Services in an Urban Conservation Area: The Case of Table Mountain National Park, South Africa," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-28, April.
    6. Tania Pinto & Telmo Machado & Diana Nicolau & Nuno Gaspar Oliveira & Ana Sofia Vaz, 2024. "Accounting for nature contributions to people in corporate sustainability: The case of a waste management company in Portugal," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(4), pages 2619-2628, July.
    7. Frélichová, Jana & Vačkář, David & Pártl, Adam & Loučková, Blanka & Harmáčková, Zuzana V. & Lorencová, Eliška, 2014. "Integrated assessment of ecosystem services in the Czech Republic," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 110-117.
    8. Agudelo, César Augusto Ruiz & Bustos, Sandra Liliana Hurtado & Moreno, Carmen Alicia Parrado, 2020. "Modeling interactions among multiple ecosystem services. A critical review," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 429(C).
    9. Sun, Ya-Yen & Cadarso, Maria Angeles & Driml, Sally, 2020. "Tourism carbon footprint inventories: A review of the environmentally extended input-output approach," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    10. Zhong, Zhangqi & Jiang, Lei & Zhou, Peng, 2018. "Transnational transfer of carbon emissions embodied in trade: Characteristics and determinants from a spatial perspective," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 858-875.
    11. Bojie Wang & Haiping Tang & Qin Zhang & Fengqi Cui, 2020. "Exploring Connections among Ecosystem Services Supply, Demand and Human Well-Being in a Mountain-Basin System, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(15), pages 1-15, July.
    12. Karen T. Lourdes & Chris N. Gibbins & Perrine Hamel & Ruzana Sanusi & Badrul Azhar & Alex M. Lechner, 2021. "A Review of Urban Ecosystem Services Research in Southeast Asia," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-21, January.
    13. Fan, Fan & Henriksen, Christian Bugge & Porter, John, 2016. "Valuation of ecosystem services in organic cereal crop production systems with different management practices in relation to organic matter input," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 117-127.
    14. Salisu Barau, Aliyu & Stringer, Lindsay C., 2015. "Access to and allocation of ecosystem services in Malaysia's Pulau Kukup Ramsar Site," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 167-173.
    15. Heink, Ulrich & Jax, Kurt, 2019. "Going Upstream — How the Purpose of a Conceptual Framework for Ecosystem Services Determines Its Structure," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 264-271.
    16. Xingyun Yan & Lingyu Wang & Mingzhu Fang & Jie Hu, 2022. "How Can Industrial Parks Achieve Carbon Neutrality? Literature Review and Research Prospect Based on the CiteSpace Knowledge Map," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-29, December.
    17. Margarita Ignatyeva & Vera Yurak & Alexey Dushin, 2022. "Valuating Natural Resources and Ecosystem Services: Systematic Review of Methods in Use," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-17, February.
    18. Brathwaite, Angelique & Pascal, Nicolas & Clua, Eric, 2021. "When are payment for ecosystems services suitable for coral reef derived coastal protection?: A review of scientific requirements," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    19. Marie Balková & Lucie Kubalíková & Marcela Prokopová & Petr Sedlák & Aleš Bajer, 2021. "Ecosystem Services of Vegetation Features as the Multifunction Anti-Erosion Measures in the Czech Republic in 2019 and Its 30-Year Prediction," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-16, January.
    20. Brill, Gregg & Anderson, Pippin & O'Farrell, Patrick, 2017. "Urban national parks in the global South: Linking management perceptions, policies and practices to water-related ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PB), pages 185-195.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:137:y:2021:i:c:s1364032120308960. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600126/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.