BALANCE 4P: Balancing decisions for urban brownfield redevelopment. Technical report of the BALANCE 4P project of the SNOWMAN Network coordinated call IV.

Land take as a result of urbanization is one of the major soil threats in Europe. One of the key measures to prevent further urban sprawl and additional land take, is redevelopment of urban brownfields: underused urban areas with, in many cases, soil and groundwater pollution. The latter issue can be a bottleneck for redevelopment of brownfields instead of green fields. A difficulty for brownfield redevelopments is that in urban projects the responsibilities, tools and knowledge of subsurface engineering and urban planning and design are not integrated; they depend heavily on each other but work in sectors. The urban designer usually deals with opportunities for socio-economic benefits while the subsoil engineer deals with the technical challenges of the site. Balance 4P suggests a holistic approach to brownfield redevelopment that (i) recognizes all phases of the urban redevelopment process which are influenced by the planning conditions set by laws, regulations, policy and institutions; (ii) acknowledges multiple subsurface qualities in the brownfield redevelopment project; (iii) promotes knowledge exchange between the surface and the subsurface sectors, across disciplines within each sector, and over time, about the subsurface qualities of the specific project; (iv) focus on the urban redevelopment project by identifying strategies for redevelopment that can fulfil a good quality of the built environment; (v) assesses the three P’s (People, Planet, Profit/Prosperity) in each urban redevelopment phase; and (vi) puts the Process in focus rather than specific instruments by focusing on identification of WHO should be involved in the knowledge exchange process and HOW it can be mediated. The developed decision support framework is aimed to guide project teams willing to implement a more holistic approach in practice. The framework includes four steps carried out in iterative manner: (1) stakeholder analysis, (2) generation of redevelopment alternatives, (3) sustainability assessment of the alternatives, and (4) synthesis of the assessment results, including uncertainty analysis. The guidance describing the steps in the decision support framework and activities within each step can help to structure the decision process and provide support to project teams. The anticipated advantages of the holistic approach are redevelopment plans that allow for smart, cost-effective and sustainable solutions in the implementation process by making explicit use of subsurface information and knowledge in the planning process, and possibilities for more long-term sustainable planning with regard to the subsurface by increased awareness of the subsurface as a resource and the associated risks and possibilities.

[1]  Jenny Norrman,et al.  Cost-benefit analysis as a part of sustainability assessment of remediation alternatives for contaminated land. , 2015, Journal of environmental management.

[2]  Leon M. Hermans,et al.  Actor analysis for water resources management: Putting the promise into practice , 2005 .

[3]  M. Sagoff The Economy of the Earth: Philosophy, Law, and the Environment , 1988 .

[4]  P Ekins,et al.  A Framework for the practical application of the concepts of critical natural capital and strong sustainability , 2005 .

[5]  S. Arnstein,et al.  Ladder of Citizen Participation , 2020 .

[6]  J. D. Vries,et al.  Planning and Culture Unfolded: The Cases of Flanders and the Netherlands , 2015 .

[7]  Deborah Rigling Gallagher,et al.  Advocates for environmental justice: the role of the champion in public participation implementation , 2009 .

[8]  Irene van Kamp,et al.  Urban environmental quality and human well-being Towards a conceptual framework and demarcation of concepts; a literature study , 2003 .

[9]  Carlo Giupponi,et al.  Environmental decision support systems: Current issues, methods and tools , 2007, Environ. Model. Softw..

[10]  Magnus Boström,et al.  The problematic social dimension of sustainable development: the case of the Forest Stewardship Council , 2012 .

[11]  Petra Brinkhoff,et al.  Multi-Criteria Analysis for Assessing Sustainability of Remedial Actions-Applications in Contaminated Land Development , 2011 .

[12]  C. Paul Nathanail,et al.  Sustainability and Remediation , 2011 .

[13]  M. Cuthill,et al.  Strengthening the ‘social’ in sustainable development: Developing a conceptual framework for social sustainability in a rapid urban growth region in Australia , 2010 .

[14]  Alena Bleicher,et al.  Corrigendum to “Spatially explicit computation of sustainability indicator values for the automated assessment of land-use options” [Landscape Urban Plan. 111 (2013) 34–45] , 2013 .

[15]  Farzad Ferdos Environmental footprints and sustainability of contaminated land remediation , 2011 .

[16]  F. Vanclay Principles for social impact assessment: A critical comparison between the international and US documents , 2006 .

[17]  Linda Maring,et al.  Optimising value from the soft re-use of brownfield sites. , 2016, The Science of the total environment.

[18]  S. Vallance,et al.  What is social sustainability? A clarification of concepts , 2011 .

[19]  B. Littig,et al.  Social sustainability: a catchword between political pragmatism and social theory , 2005 .

[20]  Jenny Norrman,et al.  SCORE: Multi-Criteria Analysis (MCA) for Sustainability Appraisal of Remedial Alternatives , 2013 .

[21]  Stephan Bartke,et al.  Integrated planning and spatial evaluation of megasite remediation and reuse options. , 2012, Journal of contaminant hydrology.

[22]  N. Brandt,et al.  The development of a sustainable urban district in Hammarby Sjöstad, Stockholm, Sweden? , 2011 .

[23]  Ginés de Rus,et al.  Introduction to Cost-Benefit Analysis: Looking for Reasonable Shortcuts , 2010 .

[24]  O. Rentz,et al.  Multi‐criteria Analysis for Technique Assessment:Case Study from Industrial Coating , 2005 .

[25]  Daniel M. Hausman,et al.  Economic analysis and moral philosophy , 1996 .

[26]  Jenny Norrman,et al.  Incorporating the soil function concept into sustainability appraisal of remediation alternatives. , 2013, Journal of environmental management.

[27]  Frank Vanclay,et al.  SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT: A CONTRIBUTION TO THE STATE OF THE ART SERIES , 1996 .

[28]  Appu Haapio,et al.  Towards sustainable urban communities , 2012 .

[29]  Andrea Colantonio,et al.  Measuring socially sustainable urban regeneration in Europe , 2009 .

[30]  Cristian Nicolae Stanica Impact of Fiscal Policies Changes on the Budgetary Revenues and Sustainable Economic Growth , .

[31]  H. Noll,et al.  Social Indicators and Quality of Life Research: Background, Achievements and Current Trends , 2004 .

[32]  Robert Goodland,et al.  Sustainability: Human, Social, Economic and Environmental , 2002 .

[33]  Bo Bengtsson,et al.  Housing and Housing Policy , 2013 .

[34]  S Schädler,et al.  Designing sustainable and economically attractive brownfield revitalization options using an integrated assessment model. , 2011, Journal of environmental management.

[35]  Jenny Norrman,et al.  Using soil function evaluation in multi-criteria decision analysis for sustainability appraisal of remediation alternatives. , 2014, The Science of the total environment.

[36]  Douglas Crawford-Brown,et al.  Measuring site-level success in brownfield redevelopments: a focus on sustainability and green building. , 2007, Journal of environmental management.

[37]  R. O'Neill,et al.  The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital , 1997, Nature.

[38]  Stephan Bartke,et al.  No perfect tools: trade-offs of sustainability principles and user requirements in designing support tools for land-use decisions between greenfields and brownfields. , 2015, Journal of environmental management.

[39]  R. Goodland The Concept of Environmental Sustainability , 1995 .

[40]  A. Basiago,et al.  Economic, social, and environmental sustainability in development theory and urban planning practice , 1998 .

[41]  Frank Vanclay,et al.  International Principles For Social Impact Assessment , 2003 .

[42]  D. Stead,et al.  European Spatial Planning Systems, Social Models and Learning , 2008 .

[43]  Peter Roberts,et al.  Urban Regeneration: A Handbook , 2016 .

[44]  M. Roseland Sustainable community development: integrating environmental, economic, and social objectives , 2000 .

[45]  Joop J. Vegter,et al.  Risk-based land management - a concept for the sustainable management of contaminated land , 2003 .

[46]  T. Sullivan EVALUATING ENVIRONMENTAL DECISION SUPPORT TOOLS. , 2004 .

[47]  Ruut Veenhoven,et al.  Quality-of-Life in Individualistic Society , 1999 .

[48]  R. Phillips,et al.  An Indicator Framework for Linking Historic Preservation and Community Economic Development , 2011, Social Indicators Research.

[49]  P. Johansson Cost-benefit analysis of environmental change , 1994 .

[50]  Sarah L. Hickmott,et al.  Reframing social sustainability reporting: towards an engaged approach , 2013, Environment, Development and Sustainability.

[51]  Rita Garcao Assessment of alternatives of urban brownfield redevelopment. Application of the SCORE tool in early planning stages , 2015 .

[52]  Steven Broekx,et al.  Sustainability appraisal tools for soil and groundwater remediation: how is the choice of remediation alternative influenced by different sets of sustainability indicators and tool structures? , 2014, The Science of the total environment.

[53]  Ingo Müller,et al.  Developing decision support tools for the selection of "gentle" remediation approaches. , 2009, The Science of the total environment.

[54]  C. P. Nathanail,et al.  Sustainable Brownfield Regeneration , 2011 .

[55]  Frank A. Swartjes,et al.  Introduction to Ecological Risk Assessment , 2011 .

[56]  N Witters,et al.  Developing principles of sustainability and stakeholder engagement for "gentle" remediation approaches: the European context. , 2013, Journal of environmental management.

[57]  F. L. Hooimeijer The tradition of making: Polder cities , 2011 .

[58]  M. Chan,et al.  Stakeholder analysis for natural resource management in developing countries , 1995 .

[59]  M. Patterson,et al.  A framework for classifying and quantifying the natural capital and ecosystem services of soils , 2010 .

[60]  Thijs Asselbergs,et al.  Making explicit in design education: generic elements in the design process , 2011 .

[61]  Å. Moberg,et al.  Exploring Social Sustainability: Learning from Perspectives on Urban Development and Companies and Products , 2014 .

[62]  E. Ostrom Social capital: a fad or a fundamental concept?* , 2005 .

[63]  Tan Yigitcanlar,et al.  Rethinking sustainable urban development: towards an integrated planning and development process , 2014, International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology.

[64]  Zillur Rahman,et al.  Evolution of sustainability as marketing strategy: Beginning of new era , 2012 .

[65]  K. Murphy The social pillar of sustainable development: a literature review and framework for policy analysis , 2012 .

[66]  M. Reed Stakeholder participation for environmental management: A literature review , 2008 .

[67]  Jenny Norrman,et al.  SCORE: a novel multi-criteria decision analysis approach to assessing the sustainability of contaminated land remediation. , 2015, The Science of the total environment.

[68]  A. Dale,et al.  Sustainable development for some: green urban development and affordability , 2009 .

[69]  J. Cutcher-Gershenfeld,et al.  Lean Thinking , 2019, Encyclopedia of Sustainable Management.

[70]  B. Flyvbjerg Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research , 2006, 1304.1186.

[71]  Gerhard Larsson,et al.  Spatial Planning Systems in Western Europe: An Overview , 2006 .

[72]  J. Chan,et al.  Reconsidering Social Cohesion: Developing a Definition and Analytical Framework for Empirical Research , 2006 .

[73]  Kurt Jax,et al.  Function and “functioning” in ecology: what does it mean? , 2005 .

[74]  Maarten Loopmans,et al.  De argeloze transformatie naar een diffuse stad: Vlaanderen als nevelstad , 2003 .

[75]  Han Vandevyvere Strategieën voor een verhoogde implementatie van duurzaam bouwen in Vlaanderen. Toepassing op het schaalniveau van het stadsfragment , 2010 .

[76]  R. Haines-Young,et al.  Ecosystem Services : Exploring a Geographical Perspective , 2022 .

[77]  J. D. Macarthur Stakeholder analysis in project planning: origins, applications and refinements of the method , 1997 .

[78]  Bart Bossink,et al.  Institutional entrepreneurship in sustainable urban development: Dutch successes as inspiration for transformation , 2013 .

[79]  Robin Grimble,et al.  Stakeholder methodologies in natural resource management: a review of principles, contexts, experiences and opportunities , 1997 .

[80]  Benjamin L. Crosby,et al.  Stakeholder Analysis: A Vital Tool for Strategic Managers , 1993 .

[81]  H. Daly Toward A Steady-State Economy , 1973 .

[82]  Dale S. Rothman,et al.  Formalised and Non-Formalised Methods in Resource Management—Knowledge and Social Learning in Participatory Processes: An Introduction , 2008 .

[83]  R. Costanza,et al.  Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making , 2009 .