Future scenarios provide challenging, plausible and relevant stories about how the future could unfold. Urban Futures (UF) research has identified a substantial set (>450) of seemingly disparate scenarios published over the period 1997-2011 and within this research, a sub-set of >160 scenarios has been identified (and categorized) based on their narratives according to the structure first proposed by the Global Scenario Group (GSG) in 1997; three world types (Business as Usual, Barbarization, and Great Transitions) and six scenarios, two for each world type (Policy Reform-PR, Market Forces-MF, Breakdown-B, Fortress World-FW, Eco-Communalism-EC and New Sustainability Paradigm-NSP). It is suggested that four of these scenario archetypes (MF, PR, NSP and FW) are sufficiently distinct to facilitate active stakeholder engagement in futures thinking. Moreover they are accompanied by a well-established, internally consistent set of narratives that provide a deeper understanding of the key fundamental drivers (e.g., STEEP-Social, Technological, Economic, Environmental and Political) that could bring about realistic world changes through a push or a pull effect. This is testament to the original concept of the GSG scenarios and their development and refinement over a 16 year period.

Making cities more sustainable is a top priority – for national governments, for cities and for the people who live, work and visit urban areas. The past decade has seen a concerted UK effort to develop, apply and assess sustainability solutions for the present and near future; however, little has been done to test urban regeneration solutions beyond that. This paper describes a methodology that has developed future scenarios for the year 2050 against which to test the robustness of current engineering solutions, thereby providing unique insights into the potential impacts of present urban planning and design decisions, and thus financial investments. If a proposed solution delivers a positive legacy, regardless of the future against which it is tested, then it can be adopted with confidence. When there are very different outcomes depending on the future, the solution can either be modified to create an improved outcome regardless of the future or implemented in the knowledge of the likely impacts if the future develops in different ways. The urban futures methodology has been applied to the Lancaster Luneside East regeneration site, for which contextual information is described along with a justification for its use as a case study to trial the methodology.

No abstract

Abstract:The rise in the influence of sustainability principles has resulted in an almost overwhelming number of methods for defining, measuring and assessing sustainability and liveability. For such assessments to be accurate they must have a clearly defined 'sustainability and liveability space', be designed for the context in which the measurements are to be taken, evidence a clear causal chain and make explicit interdependencies. The degree to which current methods meet these criteria is varied. This paper introduces the City Analysis Methodology (CAM), an innovative urban analysis framework for holistically measuring the performance of UK cities with regard to sustainability and liveability. It demonstrates the need for, and defines the Measuring urban sustainability and liveability performance 87 parameters for, interventions that enhance rather than compromise wellbeing and provides a model for other countries to leverage the sustainability and liveability of their cities. The paper concludes with an application of the CAM to the design of city infrastructure. Biographical notes: Joanne M. Leach has been a researcher on the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council-(EPSRC-) funded program grant Liveable Cities since May 2012, which aims to create an holistic, integrated, truly multi-disciplinary city analysis methodology, which uniquely integrates wellbeing indicators, is founded on an evidence base of trials of radical interventions in cities, and delivers realistic and radical engineering solutions. Prior to Liveable Cities, she worked as a project manager on multi-disciplinary research projects in the field of sustainable urban environments. These included VivaCity2020 and Designing Resilient Cities. Her research interests are varied, but have a common focus: sustainable cities. These include understanding and assessing urban sustainability and liveability, futures thinking and designing for future resilience, crime and fear of crime and soundscapes. She is particularly interested in how to facilitate the decision-making processes of local authorities to ensure future resilience along a path of increasing sustainability and liveability. KeywordsPeter A Braithwaite has a varied international career in the construction industry and the built environment gaining expertise in sustainability, urban regeneration, geotechnical engineering, mining and environmental services. He is a former Director at Arup and Head of Sustainability (CH2M HILL) for the London 2012 Olympic Development Agency Delivery Partner, with special responsibility for delivering energy, waste, water, materials, biodiversity and environmental impact sustainability targets. He has a particular interest in developing frameworks, key performance indicators, monitoring and assurance tools for cities and corporate business. He was conferred as Honorary Professor, School of Engineering, University of Birmingham in 2006. Susan E. Lee is a Research Fellow on the Liveable Cities Project funded by the EPSRC. She has published in a variety o...

No abstract

No abstract

Tree planting is widely advocated and applied in urban areas, with large-scale projects underway in cities globally. Numerous potential benefits are used to justify these planting campaigns. However, reports of poor tree survival raise questions about the ability of such projects to deliver on their promises over the long-term. Each potential benefit requires different supporting conditions-relating not only to the type and placement of the tree, but also to the broader urban system within which it is embedded. This set of supporting conditions may not always be mutually compatible and may not persist for the lifetime of the tree. Here, we demonstrate a systems-based approach that makes these dependencies, synergies, and tensions more explicit, allowing them to be used to test the decadal-scale resilience of urban street trees. Our analysis highlights social, environmental, and economic assumptions that are implicit within planting projects; notably that high levels of maintenance and public support for urban street trees will persist throughout their natural lifespan, and that the surrounding built form will remain largely unchanged. Whilst the vulnerability of each benefit may be highly context specific, we identify approaches that address some typical weaknesses, making a functional, resilient, urban forest more attainable.

Abstract:Recently, much of the literature on sharing in cities has focused on the sharing economy, in which people use online platforms to share underutilized assets in the marketplace. This view of sharing is too narrow for cities, as it neglects the myriad of ways, reasons, and scales in which citizens share in urban environments. Research presented here by the Liveable Cities team in the form of participant workshops in Lancaster and Birmingham, UK, suggests that a broader approach to Sustainability 2017, 9, 701; doi:10.3390/su9050701 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability Sustainability 2017, 9, 701 2 of 16 understanding sharing in cities is essential. The research also highlighted tools and methods that may be used to help to identify sharing in communities. The paper ends with advice to city stakeholders, such as policymakers, urban planners, and urban designers, who are considering how to enhance sustainability in cities through sharing.