Testing PETUS: Expectations and Outcomes of the

Abstract

This paper presents the methodological approach applied within the FP5-funded `Practical Evaluation Tools for Urban Sustainability' (PETUS) project to test the applicability of the developed `decision support system' (DSS) with current working practices and varying local conditions in different European countries. The effectiveness criteria applied, the testing strategy, procedures and instruments are outlined. The author analyses the results of the collaboration with potential end-users of the DSS during the testing and discusses the contributions made by testing to the DSS development, to the debate on sustainability in urban policy and in the broader `theory—practice' dialogue. The work shows a need for further mutual learning of theory and practice about urban change, political processes and partnerships to build on the path to sustainable development.

Keywords

Sustainable urban development Urban research methodology International research co-operation Evaluation Urban technical infrastructure

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Henkel M. : Government, Evaluation and Change. London, Jessica Kingsley 1991.

Khakee A. : The Emerging Gap between Evaluation Research and Practice, SAGE Publications 2003;9(3):340—352.

Healey P. : Planning through debate — the communicative turn in planning theory . Town Planning Rev 1992;63(2).

Healey P. : Collaborative Planning: Shaping Places in Fragmented Societies. London, Macmillan 1997.

Innes J. : Information in communicative planning. J Am Planning Assoc 1998;64(1): 52—63.

Innes J. : Viewpoint. Challenge and creativity in post-modern planning. Town Planning Rev 1998;69(2):v—ix.

EEA Designing Effective Assessments: The role of Participation, Science and Governance, and Focus. Environmental Issue Repost No. 26, 2001 , www.eu.int.

Rammel C. : Sustainable development and innovations — lessons learned from the red queen. Intl J Sustainable Develop 2003;6:395—414.

EEA Europe's Environment: The Dobris Assessment, Copenhagen 1995.

10.

ICLEI Charter of European Cities and Towns “Towards Sustainability”. (The Aalborg Charter). European Conference on Sustainable Cities & Towns 1995.

11.

EC: A European Union Strategy for Sustainable Development, 2002, http://europa.eu.int.

12.

Pezzoli K. : Comment in Policy Forum on Tate, J., Y. Mulugetta `Sustainability: The Techno-centric Challenge'. Town Planning Rev 1997; 69(1):82—84.

13.

Bossel H. : Earth at a Crossroads. Paths to a Sustainable Future. Cambridge University Press 1998.

14.

Archibugi F. : Urban Planning and Ecology: What relationship? Some considerations on the definition of an integrative methodology. Proc 8th AESOP Congress, Istanbul, Turkey, 1994; 1:192—211.

15.

Voogd H. : Comment in policy forum. Town Planning Rev 1997;69(1):79—82.

16.

Kastenhofer K. , Rammel C. Obstacles to and potentials of the societal implementation of sustainable development: a comparative analysis of two case studies, sustainability: science, practice, & policy, fall 2005;1(2); http://ejournal.nbii.org.

17.

Martinuzzi A. , Langer M. , Schubert U. : Evaluation of Sustainable Development. Research Focus “Managing Sustainability”, University of Economics, Vienna, Austria 2003 , http://www.sustainability.at/easy/easy_net/easy_net.html .

18.

Gallopín G. : Science and Technology, Sustainability and Sustainable Development. Document prepared for ECLAC, Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean 2001, http://www.istas.ccoo.es/escorial04/material/dc12.pdf .