intake, energy demand, consequent growth and production of metabolic wastes of a
living organism [17]. It is defined as “a broad range of quantitative methods that
attempt to conceptualize urban areas as organisms, requiring goods and energy to
maintain functionality and support growth, while emitting waste as a by-product”
[15]. Due to the complexity of urban systems, they can be considered to be more
similar to ecosystems encompassing a group of multiple individuals, located within
their environment, interacting among themselves and in a place [16] rather than
single organisms. UM supports LCA by allowing the practitioner to analyse
interlinked urban sub-systems from a holistic point of view.
UM of cities can be studied alternatively by different approaches, one of which is
Odum’s emergy approach, which describes the accounting of UM flows in terms of
(solar) energy equivalents, thus translating city’s flows of material, nutrient, services and wastes in one common unit of measurement [17]. Beyond conceptual
system model definition, UM also supports LCA through the identification of urban
metabolic flows. This identification entails two basic types of cycles within the
cities; the operating cycle and investment cycle. Operating cycle is comprised of the
continuous flows within the system boundary, whereas the investment cycle contains the flows that turn into stock, which has a non-continuous and accumulative
character [18]. By analysing these different types of urban cycles, UM approach
allows us to monitor the temporal changes within cities and supports dynamic urban
LCA studies. This can enable the assessor to identify hotspots of the indicator
studied within the determined period of time, allowing to identify and mitigate
extremities, make decisions based on desired performance patterns over time and
optimize the life span of the study.
Although LCA is a methodologically well-established assessment with applicable
ISO standards 14040 and 14044, data availability and quality can become important
bottlenecks for an LCA study. This limitation imposed can be more pronounced for
complex urban systems, where without proper inclusion of all relevant data on flows,
benefits of sustainability strategies with multiple target improvements such as NBS
cannot be revealed. Furthermore, the evaluation of resilience issues and decisions on
adaptation and mitigation strategies for cities is highly dependent not only on the
current status of the environment but also on future trends. Finally, the environmental
performance of cities, their vulnerability to extreme events and the availability of
resources to all citizens in fairness has direct implications on social structure.
Therefore, sustainability assessment needs to consider problems of urban planning
interlinked to its scope and cover social aspects.
The question here is how to amend and support environmental sustainability
assessment through LCA with additional tools. Opportunities in achieving data
for such a tool lie in supplementing LCA with BIM and dynamic social
assessment.
Dynamic Assessment of Nature …
297
living organism [17]. It is defined as “a broad range of quantitative methods that
attempt to conceptualize urban areas as organisms, requiring goods and energy to
maintain functionality and support growth, while emitting waste as a by-product”
[15]. Due to the complexity of urban systems, they can be considered to be more
similar to ecosystems encompassing a group of multiple individuals, located within
their environment, interacting among themselves and in a place [16] rather than
single organisms. UM supports LCA by allowing the practitioner to analyse
interlinked urban sub-systems from a holistic point of view.
UM of cities can be studied alternatively by different approaches, one of which is
Odum’s emergy approach, which describes the accounting of UM flows in terms of
(solar) energy equivalents, thus translating city’s flows of material, nutrient, services and wastes in one common unit of measurement [17]. Beyond conceptual
system model definition, UM also supports LCA through the identification of urban
metabolic flows. This identification entails two basic types of cycles within the
cities; the operating cycle and investment cycle. Operating cycle is comprised of the
continuous flows within the system boundary, whereas the investment cycle contains the flows that turn into stock, which has a non-continuous and accumulative
character [18]. By analysing these different types of urban cycles, UM approach
allows us to monitor the temporal changes within cities and supports dynamic urban
LCA studies. This can enable the assessor to identify hotspots of the indicator
studied within the determined period of time, allowing to identify and mitigate
extremities, make decisions based on desired performance patterns over time and
optimize the life span of the study.
Although LCA is a methodologically well-established assessment with applicable
ISO standards 14040 and 14044, data availability and quality can become important
bottlenecks for an LCA study. This limitation imposed can be more pronounced for
complex urban systems, where without proper inclusion of all relevant data on flows,
benefits of sustainability strategies with multiple target improvements such as NBS
cannot be revealed. Furthermore, the evaluation of resilience issues and decisions on
adaptation and mitigation strategies for cities is highly dependent not only on the
current status of the environment but also on future trends. Finally, the environmental
performance of cities, their vulnerability to extreme events and the availability of
resources to all citizens in fairness has direct implications on social structure.
Therefore, sustainability assessment needs to consider problems of urban planning
interlinked to its scope and cover social aspects.
The question here is how to amend and support environmental sustainability
assessment through LCA with additional tools. Opportunities in achieving data
for such a tool lie in supplementing LCA with BIM and dynamic social
assessment.
Dynamic Assessment of Nature …
297