The physical characteristics of an urban system are typically heterogeneously expressed, creating distinct neighbourhoods shaped by specific local features. Hence, spatially explicit expression of sustainability across the urban system is expected and should not be ignored. In this paper, we present an empirical study that explicitly accounts for the spatial heterogeneity of local-scale urban form features and the significance of a neighbourhood in the canton of Geneva, Switzerland. Our work first established a typology of urban form features, followed by the definition of local-scale functional neighbourhood boundaries using well-established criteria across the study area. An assessment of the sustainability of the resulting neighbourhoods revealed that significant differences can be observed between the different neighbourhood types across various components of urban sustainability. These results highlight the relevance, and argue for the importance, of incorporating local-scale approaches for more effective urban sustainability assessment to support urban planning and policymaking in the transition towards sustainability.
Ali-ToudertFJiL (2017) Modeling and measuring urban sustainability in multi-criteria based systems - a challenging issue. Ecological Indicators73: 597–611. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.09.046.
2.
BalsasCJL (2004) Measuring the livability of an urban centre: an exploratory study of key performance indicators. Planning Practice and Research19(1): 101–110. Routledge. DOI: 10.1080/0269745042000246603.
3.
BaynesTMWiedmannT (2012) General approaches for assessing urban environmental sustainability. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability4(4): 458–464. Human settlements and industrial systems. DOI: 10.1016/j.cosust.2012.09.003.
4.
BinderCRWyssRMassaroE (eds), (2020) Sustainability Assessment of Urban Systems. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
5.
BourdicLSalatSNowackiC (2012) Assessing cities: a new system of cross-scale spatial indicators. Building Research & Information40(5): 592–605. DOI: 10.1080/09613218.2012.703488.
6.
CohenM (2017) A systematic review of urban sustainability assessment literature. Sustainability9(11): 2048. DOI: 10.3390/su9112048.
7.
Congress for the New Urbanism (2015) What is New Urbanism?Washington, DC: Congress for the New Urbanism. Available at: https://www.cnu.org/resources/what-new-urbanism (accessed 15 June 2021).
8.
CoombesM (2000) Defining locality boundaries with synthetic data. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space32(8): 1499–1518. DOI: 10.1068/a29165.
9.
DempseyNBrownCRamanS, et al. (2008) Elements of urban form. In: JenksMJonesC (eds) Dimensions of the Sustainable City. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer Netherlands, pp. 21–51. Future City. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4020-8647-2_2.
10.
DeweyR (1950) The neighborhood, urban ecology, and city planners. American Sociological Review15(4): 502–507. [American Sociological Association, Sage Publications, Inc.]. DOI: 10.2307/2087309.
11.
DistasoA (2007) Well-being and/or quality of life in EU countries through a multidimensional index of sustainability. Ecological Economics64(1): 163–180. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.02.025.
12.
DodmanD (2009) Blaming cities for climate change? An analysis of urban greenhouse gas emissions inventories. Environment and Urbanization21(1): 185–201. DOI: 10.1177/0956247809103016.
13.
DormannCFElithJBacherS, et al.(2013) Collinearity: a review of methods to deal with it and a simulation study evaluating their performance. Ecography36(1): 27–46. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0587.2012.07348.x.
14.
DuanyAMPlater-ZyberkE (1994) The neighborhood, the district and the corridor. In: KatzP (ed) The New Urbanism: Toward an Architecture of Community. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 17–20.
FlowerdewR (2011) How serious is the modifiable areal unit problem for analysis of English census data?Population Trends145(1): 106–118. DOI: 10.1057/pt.2011.20.
18.
FlowerdewRManleyDJSabelCE (2008) Neighbourhood effects on health: does it matter where you draw the boundaries?Social Science & Medicine66(6): 1241–1255. DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.11.042.
19.
GalsterG (2001) On the nature of neighbourhood. Urban Studies38(12): 2111–2124. DOI: 10.1080/00420980120087072.
GlaeserEKahnM (2008) The Greenness of Cities: Carbon Dioxide Emissions and Urban Development. 14238, Working Paper. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. DOI: 10.3386/w14238.
22.
GlassR (1948) The Social Background of a Plan a Study of Middlesbrough. International library of sociology and social reconstruction. London, UK: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
23.
GuoJYBhatCR (2004) Modifiable areal units: problem or perception in modeling of residential location choice?Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board1898(1): 138–147. DOI: 10.3141/1898-17.
24.
HaynesRDarasKReadingR, et al. (2007) Modifiable neighbourhood units, zone design and residents' perceptions. Health & Place13(4): 812–825. DOI: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2007.01.002.
25.
HobbsMGriffithsCGreenMA, et al. (2018) Neighbourhood typologies and associations with body mass index and obesity: a cross-sectional study. Preventive Medicine111: 351–357. DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2017.11.024.
26.
HuangC-LVauseJMaH-W, et al. (2012) Using material/substance flow analysis to support sustainable development assessment: a literature review and outlook. Resources, Conservation and Recycling68(Supplement C): 104–116. DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2012.08.012.
27.
JelinskiDEWuJ (1996) The modifiable areal unit problem and implications for landscape ecology. Landscape Ecology11(3): 129–140. DOI: 10.1007/BF02447512.
28.
JenksMDempseyN (2007) Defining the neighbourhood: challenges for empirical research. Town Planning Review78(2): 153–177. DOI: 10.3828/tpr.78.2.4.
29.
KallusRLaw-YoneH (2000) What is a neighbourhood? The structure and function of an idea. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design27(6): 815–826. DOI: 10.1068/b2636.
30.
RobertKWParrisTMLeiserowitzAA (2005) What is sustainable development? Goals, indicators, values, and practice. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development47(3): 8–21. DOI: 10.1080/00139157.2005.10524444.
31.
KaurHGargP (2019) Urban sustainability assessment tools: a review. Journal of Cleaner Production210: 146–158. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.11.009.
32.
KearnsAParkinsonM (2001) The significance of neighbourhood. Urban Studies38(12): 2103–2110. DOI: 10.1080/00420980120087063.
33.
KroppWWLeinJK (2013) Research articles: scenario analysis for urban sustainability assessment: a spatial multicriteria decision-analysis approach. Environmental Practice15(2): 133–146. DOI: 10.1017/S1466046613000045.
34.
KrupkaDJ (2007) Are big cities more segregated? Neighbourhood scale and the measurement of segregation. Urban Studies44(1): 187–197. DOI: 10.1080/00420980601023828.
35.
LebelAPampalonRVilleneuvePY (2007) A multi-perspective approach for defining neighbourhood units in the context of a study on health inequalities in the Quebec City region. International Journal of Health Geographics6(1): 27. DOI: 10.1186/1476-072X-6-27.
36.
LeeT (1968) Urban neighbourhood as a socio-spatial schema human relations. Human Relations21(3): 241–267. DOI: 10.1177/001872676802100303.
LuginaahIJerrettMElliottS, et al. (2001) Health profiles of Hamilton: spatial characterisation of neighbourhoods for health investigations. GeoJournal53(2): 135–147. DOI: 10.1023/A:1015724619845.
39.
McDonaldJH (2009) Handbook of Biological Statistics. 2nd ed. Baltimore, Maryland: Sparky House Publishing.
40.
MorrisRNMoheyJ (1968) The Sociology of Housing Studies at Berinsfield. [Repr.]. International Library of Sociology and Social Reconstruction. London, UK: Routledge & Kegan.
41.
MoserG (2009) Quality of life and sustainability: toward person-environment congruity. Journal of Environmental Psychology29(3): 351–357. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.02.002.
42.
MyagmartserenPBuyandelgerMBrandtSA (2017) Implications of a spatial multicriteria decision analysis for urban development in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia. Mathematical Problems in Engineering2017: 1–16. DOI: 10.1155/2017/2819795.
43.
NormanJMacLeanHLKennedyCA (2006) Comparing high and low residential density: life-cycle analysis of energy use and greenhouse gas emissions. Journal of Urban Planning and Development132(1): 10–21. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9488(2006)132:1(10).
44.
OpenshawS (1983) The Modifiable Areal Unit Problem. Norwick, UK: Geo Books.
45.
ParkRE (1915) The city: suggestions for the investigation of human behavior in the city environment. American Journal of Sociology20(5): 577–612. University of Chicago Press.
46.
SchlossbergM (2003) GIS, the US census and neighbourhood scale analysis. Planning Practice and Research18(2–3): 213. DOI: 10.1080/0269745032000168269.
47.
SharifiA (2013) Sustainability at the Neighborhood Level: Assessment Tools and the Pursuit of Sustainability. Nagoya, Japan: Nagoya University.
48.
SharifiAMurayamaA (2013) A critical review of seven selected neighborhood sustainability assessment tools. Environmental Impact Assessment Review38: 73–87. DOI: 10.1016/j.eiar.2012.06.006.
49.
SharifiAMurayamaA (2015) Viability of using global standards for neighbourhood sustainability assessment: insights from a comparative case study. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management58(1): 1–23. DOI: 10.1080/09640568.2013.866077.
50.
ShorttNKMooreACoombesM, et al. (2005) Defining regions for locality health care planning: a multidimensional approach. Social Science & Medicine60(12): 2715–2727. Burning Issues - Selected papers from the 10th International Symposium in Medical Geography, Manchester 2003. DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.11.016.
51.
SITG (2020) Decoupage En Sous-Secteurs Statistiques (Girec) | Catalogue. Geneva, Switzerland: SITG. Available at: https://ge.ch/sitg/fiche/7716 (accessed 2 November 2020).
52.
StojanovskiT (2019) Urban form and mobility choices: informing about sustainable travel alternatives, carbon emissions and energy use from transportation in Swedish neighbourhoods. Sustainability Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute11(2): 2548. DOI: 10.3390/su11020548.
53.
SuttlesGD (1972) The Social Construction of Communities. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
54.
SweetserFL (1942) A new emphasis for neighborhood research. American Sociological Review7(4): 525–533. [American Sociological Association, Sage Publications, Inc.]. DOI: 10.2307/2085048.
55.
TalenEAllenEBosseA, et al. (2013) LEED-ND as an urban metric. Landscape and Urban Planning119: 20–34. DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.06.008.
56.
TimperioACrawfordDBallK, et al. (2017) Typologies of neighbourhood environments and children’s physical activity, sedentary time and television viewing. Health & Place43: 121–127. DOI: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2016.10.004.
Ville de Genève (2020) Genève Marchés. Geneva, Switzerland: Ville de Genève. Available at: https://www.genevemarches.ch/ (accessed 26 November 2020).
59.
WilliamsonTAshbyDIWebberR (2005) Young offenders, schools and the neighbourhood: a new approach to data-analysis for community policing. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology15(3): 203–228. DOI: 10.1002/casp.817.
60.
ZhangLXuYYehC-H, et al. (2016) City sustainability evaluation using multi-criteria decision making with objective weights of interdependent criteria. Journal of Cleaner Production131: 491–499. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.04.153.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
