Lützkendorf, Thomas

Volk, Rebekka

English

KITopen

Citation: Volk, R.; Lützkendorf, T.Editorial: Special Issue “ResourceManagement in Urban Districts—AContribution to Sustainable UrbanDevelopment”. Sustainability 2023, 15,4738. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15064738Received: 28 February 2023Accepted: 2 March 2023Published: 7 March 2023Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.This article is an open access articledistributed under the terms andconditions of the Creative CommonsAttribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).sustainabilityEditorialEditorial: Special Issue “Resource Management in UrbanDistricts—A Contribution to Sustainable Urban Development”Rebekka Volk 1,* and Thomas Lützkendorf 21 Institute for Industrial Production, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, 76187 Karlsruhe, Germany2 Institute of Sustainable Management of Housing and Real Estate, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology,76131 Karlsruhe, Germany* Correspondence: rebekka.volk@kit.edu1. IntroductionThe built environment is responsible for large shares of energy consumption as wellas use of water and natural resources—contributing to resource depletion, water pollution,land use and land use change, greenhouse gas and other emissions as well as wastegeneration. New ideas, concepts and research are needed to foster a truly sustainable development.This Special Issue focuses on the efficient and effective management of natural re-sources in the built environment to enhance a more sustainable development of urbandistricts or neighborhoods. Here, natural resources include energy carriers and raw materi-als, water, land, and soil as well as urban green (biodiversity). Target groups of this SpecialIssue include decision-makers from politics, municipal development, district and urbanplanning, as well as national and international scientists who deal with issues of resourcemanagement as part of sustainable district and urban development.A sustainable development of urban districts can be interpreted as a complex manage-ment task where different stakeholders in specific constellations are involved. However, asustainable urban development should not only include an improved resource efficiencyvia planning and assessment but also via influencing the use of resources and the flows ofmaterials. Original research on resource management in the built environment, on sharingeconomy, urban development, quantification, monitoring and optimization of resourceusage and its impacts, disruptive technologies, new management and business models, andrelated topics were invited and included in this Special Issue. Additionally, the monitoringof air quality, water consumption, emissions into ambient air, water and soil, dust, noise,debris, and waste production and treatment as well as the assessment of improvementmeasures are part of a process to support sustainably managed urban resources.In the literature, there is still a prevailing gap between scientific findings and theirconsequent transfer into the management and decision-making of stakeholders in the builtenvironment. In particular, urban data are not as utilized as they could be for convertingdistricts and cities to more sustainable ones (Punter 2007 [1], Mostafavi et al. 2014 [2], Jainand Espey 2022 [3]). Moreover, monitoring and performance assessment of concepts andmeasures is crucial to measuring and managing urban transition (Jain & Espey 2022 [3]).2. This Special IssueThus, this Special Issue aimed at bringing together natural science, social science,engineering, and management approaches to increase the impact of research on resourceusage, management, and investment decision-making towards more sustainable urbandevelopment. In this Special Issue, the editors could invite and publish nine papers de-scribing current state-of-the-art and new/innovative approaches that were developed inGermany recently. All contributions were developed within the funding scheme RES:Z“Ressourceneffiziente Stadtquartiere für die Zukunft” (“Resource-Efficient Urban DistrictsSustainability 2023, 15, 4738. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15064738 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainabilitySustainability 2023, 15, 4738 2 of 5for the Future”) funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF), Ger-many. The aim of this funding measure was to generate knowledge on urban resources andtheir management processes so that decision-makers and those involved in action can bettercarry out the tasks of conservation and provision, taking into account ecological, economic,and social concerns. The funding measure promotes interdisciplinary and transdisciplinaryresearch approaches that develop and test implementation-oriented concepts at an urbandistrict level.To cover a broad range of aspects of urban resource management, the presented paperscover different aspects (see Figure 1). The first three papers (Koller et al. 2022 [4], Schinkelet al. 2022 [5], and Schebek and Lützkendorf 2022 [6]) deal with the definition and principlesof indicators, indicator sets, and indicator systems to support resource management on adistrict level (blue).Koller et al. (2022) [4] learn from 12 publicly funded research projects of the FederalMinistry of Education and Research, Germany, that the optimisation of resource use inurban districts cannot take place independently of each other. Potential conflicting goalsand interests should be recognised at an early stage so that measures can be tailored tothe specific neighbourhood context when applying an integrated approach. Particularly,multifunctional and multi-beneficial implementation measures are seen as promising toenable/foster a sustainable transformation of urban districts.Schinkel et al. (2022) [5] developed a set of indicators for sustainable urban infras-tructures that include the ecological, economic, and social dimensions of sustainability.The indicator development is based on the results of literature and policy review but wasfurther developed and tailored to urban infrastructures and technologies. Moreover, theydemonstrate and test the applicability of the indicator set on a vertical air conditioning andwastewater treatment system.Schebek and Lützkendorf (2022) [6] present general principles for the developmentand application of indicators that are suitable for supporting sustainable neighborhooddevelopment. The differences between the assessment of a condition and the monitoringof development processes as well as between closed systems and open sets of indicatorsare discussed. A conceptual outline of a framework is shown, which includes a typologyof indicators. It’s embedding in urban planning processes is discussed. The frameworkcombines a theoretically concise unifying structure with a flexible practical approach forapplication in diverse areas of resource efficiency assessment.The next five papers (Naber et al. 2022 [7], Hörnschemeyer et al. 2022 [8], Beier et al.2022 [9], Boehnke et al. 2022 [10], and Kugler et al. 2022 [11]) show different assessmentmethods and tools that can be used for resource assessment purposes on a district level(green). In most of the papers, case studies of real urban districts show the application ofthe developed tools and methods.Naber et al. (2022) [7] present an innovative and integrated tool (software) “Namares“to assess urban resources that can moreover propose improvement measures and assesstheir expected environmental and economic impact. Nine intervention measures areimplemented to identify potentials, estimate investments and annual costs, and assess theappeal of existing subsidies. The approach was applied to a case study redevelopmentarea in a large city in Germany. Moreover, a five-level hierarchy for a land-sensitive urbandevelopment strategy was derived.Hörnschemeyer et al. (2022) [8] developed the integrated planning tool (framework)“ResourcePlan”, that covers water (storm- and wastewater) management, constructionand maintenance of buildings and infrastructure, urban energy system planning, andland-use planning. It helps to assess inter-disciplinary resource efficiency, supports thespatial identification of synergies and conflicting goals, and contributes to transparent,resource-optimized planning decisions.Beier et al. (2022) [9] investigated the effects of blue-green infrastructure elements(BGI) on air and surface temperature in courtyards. The effects are examined based onon-site measurements and simulations. Recognizable effects on the temperature wereSustainability 2023, 15, 4738 3 of 5observed. Model simulations with the software PALM-4U were performed and proved tobe useful to analyze the effects of BGI on the microclimate.Boehnke et al. (2022) [10] developed and described a method to quantify and mapprivate urban green on urban district scale. Based on this, they link local biotope and treemapping methods to the concept of ecosystem services and use it for comparative analyses.The methodology was tested in an inner-city district in Germany, comparing publiclyaccessible areas and non-accessible courtyards. In the case study results, the private urbangreen spaces and trees were very important for the overall urban ecology.Kugler et al. (2022) [11] developed a technical system to extract low-temperature heatfrom the underground wastewater network and distribute energy in the urban district.Therefore, they developed new pipes and propose an integrated energy concept (energymaster plan) on a district level. In their analyses, they show that the dual use of thepre-existing infrastructure, such as the wastewater system, significantly reduces CO2equivalents and that the sustainability of the system depends significantly on the usedenergy mix for electricity.Finally, Volk et al. (2022) [12] provides an overview on state-of-the-art assessment aidsand tools in urban resource management that can help stakeholders and decision makersto identify most suitable tools for developing strategies and implementing actions (orange).In this contribution, 51 urban resource assessment, management, and planning tools werereviewed and analysed. It shows that simple informational aids, such as visualizations orGIS viewers, are widely available. However, databases and tools for explicit and data-basedurban resource management are sparse. Only a few focus on integrated assessment withdecision and planning support for impact and cost assessments. Real-time dashboards,forecasts, scenario analyses, and comparisons of alternative options are rare.Sustainability 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 5  site measurements and simulations. Recognizable effects on the temperature were ob-served. Model simulations with the software PALM-4U were performed and proved to be useful to analyze the effects of BGI on the microclimate. Boehnke et al. (2022) [10] developed and described a method to quantify and map private urban green on urban district scale. Based on this, they link local biotope and tree mapping methods to the concept of ecosystem services and use it for comparative anal-yses. The methodology was tested in an inner-city district in Germany, comparing pub-licly accessible areas and non-accessible courtyards. In the case study results, the private urban green spaces and trees were very important for the overall urban ecology. Kugler et al. (2022) [11] developed a technical system to extract low-temperature heat from the underground wastewater network and distribute energy in the urban district. Therefore, they developed new pipes and propose an integrated energy concept (energy master plan) on a district level. In their analyses, they show that the dual use of the pre-existing infrastructure, such as the wastewater system, significantly reduces CO2 equiva-lents and that the sustainability of the system depends significantly on the used energy mix for electricity. Finally, Volk et al. (2022) [12] provides an overview on state-of-the-art assessment aids and tools in urban resource management that can help stakeholders and decision makers to identify most suitable tools for developing strategies and implementing actions (orange). In this contribution, 51 urban resource assessment, management, and planning tools were reviewed and analysed. It shows that si ple informational aids, such as visu-alizations or GIS viewers, are widely available. However, databases and tools for explicit and data-based urban resource management are sparse. Only a few focus on integrated assessment with decision and planning support for impact and cost assessments. Real-time dashboards, forecasts, scenario analyses, and comparisons of alternative options are rare.   Figure 1. Overview on covered fields in Resource Management in Urban Districts.   Resource Management in Urban DistrictsBasics:Definitions, IndicatorsResourcemanage-ment, resourcetermIndicators,assessmentofimprovementmeasuresAssessment:Inventory, interactions and impacts, dependenciesand goal conflicts of resource usageLand WaterRaw materialsEcosystemservices, biodiversityEnergy carriersRecommendationsfor action:Stakeholders, politicsState of theart ofcomplexplanningtoolsRole and options ofinvolvedstakeholdersSchebek & Lützkendorf [6]Volk et al. [12]Kugler et al. [11]Boehnke et al. [10]Naber et al. [7]Beier et al. [9]Koller et al. [4]Schinkel et al. [5]Hörnschemeyer et al. [8]Figure 1. er ie o co ere el s i eso rce a a e ent in rban Districts.3. ConclusionsTaking into account the contributions of this Special Issue, the editors come to thefollowing conclusions of this research field:Sustainability 2023, 15, 4738 4 of 5• A combination of urban district research and development of resource managementapproaches is a new field of research that opens up with a particular urgency andsocietal relevance.• Urban districts form an important level of action that allow local stakeholders to beinvolved and activated. Moreover, this level allows for a valid connection of (inter-)national and local goals, action requirements, and implementation options.• Indicators and assessment approaches should accompany planning, development,and implementation. For this, open indicator sets should be preferred over closed,non-recurring indicator systems to enable time series and extensions.• Roles and options of involved stakeholders in sustainable development at an ur-ban district level have not been systematically analysed so far. Especially, the roleof public administration in the provision and conservation of urban resources aspublic goods and the problems with public goods, e.g., market failure due to freeriders and unwillingness of private stakeholders to provide the services (“Tragik derAllmende”/“Tragedy of the Commons”) and the legal regulation on treating urbanresources requires consideration. Moreover, the role of civil society in sustainableneighborhood development should be analysed. Additionally, research on goal con-flicts or use conflicts could be extended—particularly with analyses and solutions tosolve the goal conflicts and interest/dispute settlements. Research in all these fieldsshould be escalated.• Research on implementation (e.g., real-world labs) is sparse—barriers and how toovercome the barriers are under-researched.• Despite some existing and further/newly developed tools, data-based urban resourcemanagement remains difficult due to unstandardized urban data, e.g., regardingavailability, data structure, quality, and timeliness of data. This makes quantitativeanalyses very time-consuming.• The use of integrated analyses and tools are indispensable, since the consideredresources are interlinked and competing with each other on land/surface coverageand investment/budget.Author Contributions: R.V. and T.L.: Conceptualization, Writing. All authors have read and agreedto the published version of the manuscript.Funding: All contributions were developed within the funding scheme “RES:Z—RessourceneffizienteStadtquartiere” funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF), Germany. Thisresearch was funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (Bundesministeriumfür Bildung und Forschung—BMBF) grant number 033W111A and research project ’Namares’ inthe funding program ’RES:Z—Ressourceneffiziente Stadtquartiere’. The BMBF is not responsible forresults or recommendations stated by the authors.Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.References1. Punter, J. Developing Urban Design as Public Policy: Best Practice Principles for Design Review and Development Management.J. Urban Des. 2007, 12, 167–202. [CrossRef]2. Mostafavi, N.; Farzinmoghadam, M.; Hoque, S. A framework for integrated urban metabolism analysis tool (IUMAT). Build.Environ. 2014, 82, 702–712. [CrossRef]3. Jain, G.; Espey, J. Lessons from nine urban areas using data to drive local sustainable development. NPJ Urban Sustain. 2022, 2, 7.[CrossRef]4. Koller, M.; Eckert, K.; Ferber, U.; Gräbe, G.; Verbücheln, M.; Wendler, K. Resource Management as Part of Sustainable UrbanDistrict Development. Sustainability 2022, 14, 4224. [CrossRef]5. Schinkel, U.; Becker, N.; Trapp, M.; Speck, M. Assessing the Contribution of Innovative Technologies to Sustainable Developmentfor Planning and Decision-Making Processes: A Set of Indicators to Describe the Performance of Sustainable Urban Infrastructures(ISI). Sustainability 2022, 14, 1966. [CrossRef]6. Schebek, L.; Lützkendorf, T. Assessing Resource Efficiency of City Neighbourhoods: A Methodological Framework for Structuringand Practical Application of Indicators in Urban Planning. Sustainability 2022, 14, 7951. [CrossRef]Sustainability 2023, 15, 4738 5 of 57. Naber, E.; Volk, R.; Mörmann, K.; Boehnke, D.; Lützkendorf, T.; Schultmann, F. Namares—A Surface Inventory and InterventionAssessment Model for Urban Resource Management. Sustainability 2022, 14, 8485. [CrossRef]8. Hörnschemeyer, B.; Söfker-Rieniets, A.; Niesten, J.; Arendt, R.; Kleckers, J.; Klemm, C.; Stretz, C.J.; Reicher, C.; Grimsehl-Schmitz, W.; Wirbals, D.; et al. The ResourcePlan—An Instrument for Resource-Efficient Development of Urban Neighborhoods.Sustainability 2022, 14, 1522. [CrossRef]9. Beier, M.; Gerstendörfer, J.; Mendzigall, K.; Pavlik, D.; Trute, P.; von Tils, R. Climate Impact and Model Approaches of Blue-GreenInfrastructure Measures for Neighborhood Planning. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6861. [CrossRef]10. Boehnke, D.; Krehl, A.; Mörmann, K.; Volk, R.; Lützkendorf, T.; Naber, E.; Becker, R.; Norra, S. Mapping Urban Green and ItsEcosystem Services at Microscale—A Methodological Approach for Climate Adaptation and Biodiversity. Sustainability 2022,14, 9029. [CrossRef]11. Kugler, T.; Schittenhelm, C.; Volkmer, S.; Ryba, M.; Moormann, C.; Kurth, D.; Koenigsdorff, R. Sustainable Heating and CoolingManagement of Urban Quarters. Sustainability 2022, 14, 4353. [CrossRef]12. Volk, R.; Rambhia, M.; Naber, E.; Schultmann, F. Urban Resource Assessment, Management, and Planning Tools for Land,Ecosystems, Urban Climate, Water, and Materials—A Review. Sustainability 2022, 14, 7203. [CrossRef]Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individualauthor(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury topeople or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Editorial: Special Issue “Resource Management in Urban Districts : A Contribution to Sustainable Urban Development”

https://publikationen.bibliothek.kit.edu/1000157273/150519901

Editorial: Special Issue “Resource Management in Urban Districts : A Contribution to Sustainable Urban Development”

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

KITopen