4.7 Article

Sustainable transportation according to certification systems: A viability analysis based on neighborhood size and context relevance

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REVIEW
卷 63, 期 -, 页码 147-159

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.eiar.2016.10.005

关键词

Urban sustainability certification systems; Transportation assessment; LEED for Neighborhood Development; BREEAM Communities; CASBEE for Urban Development; The Pearl Community

资金

  1. Ministry of Higher Education in Egypt
  2. German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Urban sustainability certification (USC) systems comprehensively assess and benchmark the sustainability of neighborhoods, communities, etc. However, it is important to understand what USCs mean by neighborhoods and communities in terms of definition and their certified developments' size. This study focuses on sustainable transportation and its measures in USCs in order to discern: how relevant are these measures to the varied local conditions, especially in developing countries? And whether they can generate palpable benefits vis-a-vis the certified developMents' site areas. Taking descriptive analysis methods, this study focuses on four prominent USCs, namely, LEED for Neighborhood Development, BREEAM Communities, CASBEE for Urban Development, and The Pearl Community Rating System. The four USCs prescribed multiple measures for sustainable transportation, particularly in favor of active transportation and public transportation. However, the relatively small size of their citified developments and the varying transportation conditions among different contexts attenuate the viability and relevance of the advocated measures for both modes. In order to yield more benefits, USCs should underscore the integrative nature of neighborhoods and communities, and transportation within their prescribed criteria and measures. Moreover, sustainable transportation as a theme should be tailored to the local conditions rather than being adopted or adapted from global USCs. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据