5,357 research outputs found
Operationalizing the circular city model for naples' city-port: A hybrid development strategy
The city-port context involves a decisive reality for the economic development of territories and nations, capable of significantly influencing the conditions of well-being and quality of life, and of making the Circular City Model (CCM) operational, preserving and enhancing seas and marine resources in a sustainable way. This can be achieved through the construction of appropriate production and consumption models, with attention to relations with the urban and territorial system. This paper presents an adaptive decision-making process for Naples (Italy) commercial port's development strategies, aimed at re-establishing a sustainable city-port relationship and making Circular Economy (CE) principles operative. The approach has aimed at implementing a CCM by operationalizing European recommendations provided within both the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) framework-specifically focusing on goals 9, 11 and 12-and the Maritime Spatial Planning European Directive 2014/89, to face conflicts about the overlapping areas of the city-port through multidimensional evaluations' principles and tools. In this perspective, a four-step methodological framework has been structured applying a place-based approach with mixed evaluation methods, eliciting soft and hard knowledge domains, which have been expressed and assessed by a core set of Sustainability Indicators (SI), linked to SDGs. The contribution outcomes have been centred on the assessment of three design alternatives for the East Naples port and the development of a hybrid regeneration scenario consistent with CE and sustainability principles. The structured decision-making process has allowed us to test how an adaptive approach can expand the knowledge base underpinning policy design and decisions to achieve better outcomes and cultivate a broad civic and technical engagement, that can enhance the legitimacy and transparency of policies
Water and Development Strategy: Implementation Field Guide
This document is intended to serve as a reference tool to help USAID Operating Units understand and apply the agency's 2013-2018 Water and Development Strategy. By publicly sharing the document, USAID aims to ensure coordination of their efforts with the wider water sector. The Field Guide will be periodically updated and comments from readers are welcome
Sustainable investment in Turkey 2010
The main objectives of this report are as follows:
1 To understand and provide a review of the current state of the Sustainable Investment (SI) market in Turkey,
2 To identify the drivers and obstacles for sustainable investments, and assess the commercial feasibility of different approaches and initiatives that may stimulate the SI market in Turkey,
3 To analyze the institutional prerequisites and interventions that will fuel the development of investments, which would, in turn, encourage a betterallocation of local and international capital to sustainable enterprises and hence support sustainable development of the Turkish economy.
This study forms part of a series of assessments of Sustainable Investment (SI) in Brazil (2009), India (2009) and China (2009), and draws upon earlier reports published by IFC jointly with the Economist Intelligence Unit: Sustainable Invest ing in Emerging Markets: Unscathed by the Financial Crises (2010) and with Mercer; Gaining Ground, Integrating Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) Factors into Investment Processes in Emerging Markets (2009)
Recommended from our members
Towards evaluation design for smart city development
Smart city developments integrate digital, human, and physical systems in the built environment. With growing urbanization and widespread developments, identifying suitable evaluation methodologies is important. Case-study research across five UK cities - Birmingham, Bristol, Manchester, Milton Keynes and Peterborough - revealed that city evaluation approaches were principally project-focused with city-level evaluation plans at early stages. Key challenges centred on selecting suitable evaluation methodologies to evidence urban value and outcomes, addressing city authority requirements. Recommendations for evaluation design draw on urban studies and measurement frameworks, capitalizing on big data opportunities and developing appropriate, valid, credible integrative approaches across projects, programmes and city-level developments
Designing for Sustainability:Lessons Learned from Four Industrial Projects
Scientific research addressing the relation between software and sustainability is slowly maturing in two focus areas, related to `sustainable software' and `software for sustainability'. The first is better understood and may include research foci like energy-efficient software and software maintainability. It most-frequently covers `technical' concerns. The second, `software for sustainability', is much broader in both scope and potential impact, as it entails how software can contribute to sustainability goals in any sector or application domain. Next to the technical concerns, it may also cover economic, social, and environmental sustainability. Differently from researchers, practitioners are often not aware or well-trained in all four types of software sustainability concerns. To address this need, in previous work we have defined the Sustainability-Quality Assessment Framework (SAF) and assessed its viability via the analysis of a series of software projects. Nevertheless, it was never used by practitioners themselves, hence triggering the question: What can we learn from the use of SAF in practice? To answer this question, we report the results of practitioners applying the SAF to four industrial cases. The results show that the SAF helps practitioners in (1) creating a sustainability mindset in their practices, (2) uncovering the relevant sustainability-quality concerns for the software project at hand, and (3) reasoning about the inter-dependencies and trade-os of such concerns as well as the related short- and long-term implications. Next to improvements for the SAF, the main lesson for us as researchers is the missing explicit link between the SAF and the (technical) architecture design
Co-designing climate-smart farming systems with local stakeholders: A methodological framework for achieving large-scale change
The literature is increasing on how to prioritize climate-smart options with stakeholders but relatively few examples exist on how to co-design climate-smart farming systems with them, in particular with smallholder farmers. This article presents a methodological framework to co-design climate-smart farming systems with local stakeholders (farmers, scientists, NGOs) so that large-scale change can be achieved. This framework is based on the lessons learned during a research project conducted in Honduras and Colombia from 2015 to 2017. Seven phases are suggested to engage a process of co-conception of climate-smart farming systems that might enable implementation at scale: (1) “exploration of the initial situation,” which identifies local stakeholders potentially interested in being involved in the process, existing farming systems, and specific constraints to the implementation of climate-smart agriculture (CSA); (2) “co-definition of an innovation platform,” which defines the structure and the rules of functioning for a platform favoring the involvement of local stakeholders in the process; (3) “shared diagnosis,” which defines the main challenges to be solved by the innovation platform; (4) “identification and ex ante assessment of new farming systems,” which assess the potential performances of solutions prioritized by the members of the innovation platform under CSA pillars; (5) “experimentation,” which tests the prioritized solutions on-farm; (6) “assessment of the co-design process of climate-smart farming systems,” which validates the ability of the process to reach its initial objectives, particularly in terms of new farming systems but also in terms of capacity building; and (7) “definition of strategies for scaling up/out,” which addresses the scaling of the co-design process. For each phase, specific tools or methodologies are used: focus groups, social network analysis, theory of change, life-cycle assessment, and on-farm experiments. Each phase is illustrated with results obtained in Colombia or Honduras
- …