Comparative study of city-level sustainability assessment standards in China and the United States

被引:27
作者
Dang, Xianxian [1 ,2 ]
Zhang, Yu [2 ,3 ]
Feng, Wei [2 ]
Zhou, Nan [2 ]
Wang, Youwei [5 ]
Meng, Chong [4 ,5 ]
Ginsberg, Mark [6 ]
机构
[1] Xi An Jiao Tong Univ, Dept Architecture, Xian, Shanxi, Peoples R China
[2] Lawrence Berkeley Natl Lab, 1 Cyclotron Rd,MS90-2121, Berkeley, CA 94720 USA
[3] Southeast Univ, Sch Architecture, Nanjing, Jiangsu, Peoples R China
[4] China Acad Bldg Res, Beijing, Peoples R China
[5] China Soc Urban Studies, China Green Bldg Council, Beijing, Peoples R China
[6] US Green Bldg Council, Washington, DC USA
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Sustainability assessment standards; City-level; Green buildings; Rating system; Comparative study; China; ASSESSMENT SYSTEMS; ASSESSMENT TOOLS; URBAN; INDICATORS; FRAMEWORK; US;
D O I
10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119622
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
In analyses of urban environments, city-level sustainability assessments standards have received a lot of attention. Many countries, particularly in the developed world, have developed the standards to measure the performance of neighborhoods, districts, and cities in achieving sustainable development goals. In this study, four standards from China and the United States were selected and analyzed within the scope of green and sustainable development. China's new Assessment Standard for Green Eco-districts (ASGE) targets to support China's New-type Urbanization Plan from the conceptual stage to the concrete implementation. LEED (R) rating systems are one of the important references for the development of ASGE. By comparing ASGE with the advanced standards it draws from, this study aimed to evaluate ASGE's work in adapting to China's national conditions; pointing out the strengths and weaknesses and proposing improvements. The study results indicate that the rating systems of ASGE are in line with China's national conditions, and that some non-technical indicators are forward-looking, but that there is still room for improvement in terms of implementation paths, weight assignment, number of indicators, and index system. Based on these explorations, this study provides suggestions for aspects of principles and methods that could be used for the construction of similar standards in developing countries. (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 66 条
  • [1] Urban sustainability assessment framework development: The ranking and weighting of sustainability indicators using analytic hierarchy process
    Ameen, Raed Fawzi Mohammed
    Mourshed, Monjur
    [J]. SUSTAINABLE CITIES AND SOCIETY, 2019, 44 : 356 - 366
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2014, World's population increasingly urban with more than half living in urban areas
  • [3] [Anonymous], BREEAM WHAT IS BREEA
  • [4] A century of sprawl in the United States
    Barrington-Leigh, Christopher
    Millard-Ball, Adam
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 2015, 112 (27) : 8244 - 8249
  • [5] Batty M., 2003, University College London Centre for Advanced Spatial Analysis Working Papers Series
  • [6] Sustainability assessment of urban communities through rating systems
    Berardi U.
    [J]. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 2013, 15 (6) : 1573 - 1591
  • [7] Sustainability on the urban scale: Proposal of a structure of indicators for the Spanish context
    Braulio-Gonzalo, Marta
    Dolores Bovea, Maria
    Jose Rua, Maria
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REVIEW, 2015, 53 : 16 - 30
  • [8] BRE, 2018, BREEAM COMM INT TECH
  • [9] Urban growth in China: past, prospect, and its impacts
    Cao, G. -Y.
    Chen, G.
    Pang, L. -H.
    Zheng, X. -Y.
    Nilsson, S.
    [J]. POPULATION AND ENVIRONMENT, 2012, 33 (2-3) : 137 - 160
  • [10] The Evolution of the Sustainability Assessment Tool SBToolPT: From Buildings to the Built Environment
    Castanheira, Guilherme
    Braganca, Luis
    [J]. SCIENTIFIC WORLD JOURNAL, 2014,