IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jenpmg/v58y2015i1p1-23.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Viability of using global standards for neighbourhood sustainability assessment: insights from a comparative case study

Author

Listed:
  • Ayyoob Sharifi
  • Akito Murayama

Abstract

Neighbourhoods are increasingly gaining attention as planning units of great potential for contribution to sustainable development. Many assessment tools such as LEED-ND, BREEAM Communities and CASBEE-UD have been developed to examine the sustainability of neighbourhood development projects. Some of these tools are claimed to be suitable for assessment in different contexts, and LEED-ND has already been utilised in various countries. This study investigates the viability of using global standards through a series of comparative case studies. One certified case from each of the aforementioned tools is chosen and evaluated against its non-corresponding assessment tools. Selected cases are, respectively, Hoyt Yards, MediaCityUK and Koshigaya Lake Town. Results of this study provide evidence that casts doubt on the viability of using global standards. The paper concludes that neighbourhood sustainability assessment should be regarded as a pluralistic practice. This implies that any realistic and reliable assessment should take account of the specificities of specific locations and varying needs of different stakeholders.

Suggested Citation

  • Ayyoob Sharifi & Akito Murayama, 2015. "Viability of using global standards for neighbourhood sustainability assessment: insights from a comparative case study," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 58(1), pages 1-23, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jenpmg:v:58:y:2015:i:1:p:1-23
    DOI: 10.1080/09640568.2013.866077
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/09640568.2013.866077
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/09640568.2013.866077?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.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:jenpmg:v:58:y:2015:i:1:p:1-23. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CJEP20 .

    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.