Search

Neighborhood sustainability assessment systems support the planning of sustainable and resilient cities. This research analyses, compares, and evaluates three neighborhood sustainability assessment systems (NSA) of (i) the German Sustainable Building Council for Urban Districts (DGNB–UD), (ii) the USA Leadership in energy and environmental design for Neighborhood Development (LEED–ND), and (iii) the Indian Green Rating for Integrated Habitat Assessment for Large Developments (GRIHA–LD). The theoretical background, certification types, process, and evaluation methods of the three NSAs are discussed. The qualitative and quantitative comparative analysis and evaluation methods of the NSAs included identifying and assessing ten weighted essential urban sustainability themes. Indicators under each theme were identified and compared in the NSAs. The comparison showed the importance of particular themes based on assigned weights. LEED–ND focuses on "transportation" and "site planning", while DGNB–UD addresses all dimensions of sustainability in a balanced manner. GRIHA–LD has limitations concerning social, economic, and governance concerns. The research results define differences and similarities in international neighborhood sustainability assessment and illustrate the quality and quantity differences of sustainability and resilience aspects addressed by the three existing NSA systems as a starting basis for the future improvement of existing and development of new land sustainability and resilience assessment systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Neighborhood sustainability assessment systems support the planning of sustainable and resilient cities. This research analyses, compares, and evaluates three neighborhood sustainability assessment systems (NSA) of (i) the German Sustainable Building Council for Urban Districts (DGNB–UD), (ii) the USA Leadership in energy and environmental design for Neighborhood Development (LEED–ND), and (iii) the Indian Green Rating for Integrated Habitat Assessment for Large Developments (GRIHA–LD). The theoretical background, certification types, process, and evaluation methods of the three NSAs are discussed. The qualitative and quantitative comparative analysis and evaluation methods of the NSAs included identifying and assessing ten weighted essential urban sustainability themes. Indicators under each theme were identified and compared in the NSAs. The comparison showed the importance of particular themes based on assigned weights. LEED–ND focuses on “transportation” and “site planning”, while DGNB–UD addresses all dimensions of sustainability in a balanced manner. GRIHA–LD has limitations concerning social, economic, and governance concerns. The research results define differences and similarities in international neighborhood sustainability assessment and illustrate the quality and quantity differences of sustainability and resilience aspects addressed by the three existing NSA systems as a starting basis for the future improvement of existing and development of new land sustainability and resilience assessment systems.

Importance of the indicator-based neighborhood sustainability assessment (NSA) systems is widely accepted. The requirement of NSA systems for assisting and monitoring neighborhood sustainability is evident. Development of such systems needs analysis, frameworks, methods, expertise, etc. However, due to the large geographical area and regional variations, international application of these systems is an issue. Similarly, there lie contextual differences in developing and developed countries. Here, we derive a framework for formulating sustainability assessment system for developing countries. The available literature shows scarce research on NSA systems in developing countries. The study classifies the popular sustainability assessment systems from both context (developed and developing countries), presenting their approaches. Our results help in knowing the focus of NSA systems in each context. The classification is based on parameters (input, evaluation and output) and indicator distribution. The study finds that energy, water and wastewater, and transportation themes are given emphasis in NSA systems of developing countries, whereas the social theme is given attention in developed countries. We anticipate the results to be useful for classifying NSA systems. Furthermore, the framework can be a starting point for researchers to formulate new assessment systems for developing countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]