An extensive body of literature demonstrates how higher density leads to more efficient energy use and lower greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from transport and housing. However, our current understanding seems to be limited on the relationships between the urban form and the GHG emissions, namely how the urban form affects the lifestyles and thus the GHGs on a much wider scale than traditionally assumed. The urban form affects housing types, commuting distances, availability of different goods and services, social contacts and emulation, and the alternatives for pastimes, meaning that lifestyles are actually situated instead of personal projects. As almost all consumption, be it services or products, involves GHG emissions, looking at the emissions from transport and housing may not be sufficient to define whether one form would be more desirable than another. In the paper we analyze the urban form-lifestyle relationships in Finland together with the resulting GHG implications, employing both monetary expenditure and time use data to portray lifestyles in different basic urban forms: metropolitan, urban, semi-urban and rural. The GHG implications are assessed with a life cycle assessment (LCA) method that takes into account the GHG emissions embedded in different goods and services. The paper depicts that, while the direct emissions from transportation and housing energy slightly decrease with higher density, the reductions can be easily overridden by sources of indirect emissions. We also highlight that the indirect emissions actually seem to have strong structural determinants, often undermined in studies concerning sustainable urban forms. Further, we introduce a concept of 'parallel consumption' to explain how the lifestyles especially in more urbanized areas lead to multiplication of consumption outside of the limits of time budget and the living environment. This is also part I of a two-stage study. In part II we will depict how various other contextual and socioeconomic variables are actually also very important to take into account, and how diverse GHG mitigation strategies would be needed for different types of area in different locations towards a low-carbon future.

Urban structure influences directly or indirectly the majority of all green house gas (GHG) emissions in cities. The prevailing belief is that dense metropolitan areas produce less carbon emissions on a per capita basis than less dense surrounding rural areas. Consequently, density targets have a major role in low-carbon urban developments. However, based on the results of this study, the connection seems unclear or even nonexistent when comprehensive evaluation is made. In this letter, we propose a hybrid life cycle assessment (LCA) method for calculating the consumption-based carbon footprints in metropolitan areas, i.e. carbon consumption, with the emphasis on urban structures. The method is input-output-based hybrid LCA, which operates with the existing data from the region. The study is conducted by performing an analysis of the carbon consumption in two metropolitan areas in Finland, including 11 cities. Both areas consist of a dense city core and a less dense surrounding suburban area. The paper will illustrate that the influence of urban density on carbon emissions is insignificant in the selected metropolitan areas. In addition, the utilized consumption-based method links the climate effects of city-level development to the global production of emissions.

No abstract

No abstract

Negative relationships between urban density and greenhouse gas emissions from daily travel are well established in the literature. However, recent research suggests that higher urban density is associated with higher emissions from long-distance leisure travel, such as car weekend trips and international flights. This article presents the first systematic review of empirical evidence on these associations and discusses potential explanations. A two-step article selection process yielded 27 empirical articles, complemented by one article published during the review process. When international travel is included in the analysis, the results suggest that residents of the largest cities, and particularly those from centrally located and densely built areas, travel more to cover long distances than do others, after controlling for demographic and socioeconomic variables. When only domestic travel is included, residents of larger settlements and areas of higher density engage in less long-distance travel for leisure purposes than those living in smaller settlements and sparsely built areas. The results of the review are indicative and warrant more research. Generalization is currently limited because of the wide variety of travel behavior measures used, consideration of different travel modes and trip purposes, and geographic scope. There is a strong need for replication of the results using consistent methodology, using data from longer and more recent time spans, and expanding to more diverse geographical settings, especially outside Europe. The systematic review is followed by a narrative review of theoretical explanations of the associations. The most common explanations include: rebound effects, the compensation hypothesis, access to transport infrastructure, urban lifestyles, sociopsychological characteristics, and social networks. Socioeconomic variables are controlled in a majority of the reviewed studies, and business travel is excluded from the review, so the concentration of wealth and business in cities may explain the findings only to some extent. Nonetheless, there is not enough empirical evidence on the causal character of the associations and therefore further qualitative and multidisciplinary work is needed. Compact city and urban densification policies are not strongly challenged by current evidence, and most common policy recommendations point to including air travel into carbon taxing or quota schemes.

No abstract

Hindering urban sprawl is one of the main goals for contemporary urban planning. Urban density is considered crucial in climate change mitigation since it reduces automobile dependence and decreases unit sizes, for example. This letter analyzes the effect of density in a city context. In the study the Finnish capital Helsinki is divided into two areas of different urban densities: the high density downtown area and the more scarcely populated suburbs. The study is a continuation of a recently published study on the implications of urban structure on carbon emissions, and analyzes further the main finding of the first study-that higher urban density might have negligible or even reverse effect on the per capita carbon emissions. Similarly to the previous study, a consumption based tiered hybrid life cycle assessment (LCA) approach is employed in order to produce a comprehensive assessment, free of territorial boundaries and system cutoffs typical of traditional LCAs. Based on the findings of the previous study, it is hypothesized that when assessing city level carbon dioxide emissions from a wider, consumer oriented LCA perspective, increased urban density may not necessarily reduce carbon emissions. Surprisingly, the study finds that carbon dioxide equivalent (CO 2 e) emissions are substantially higher in the dense downtown area than in the surrounding suburbs, which is suggested to imply that the increased consumption due to the higher standard of living increases emissions more than the higher density is able to reduce them. The results demonstrate that, while increasing urban density can be justified from a number of ecological, social and economic viewpoints, density is not necessarily a key parameter in the particular case of climate change. In cities like Helsinki, where wealth is concentrated in the downtown area, climate policies should give higher priority to the energy consumption of buildings, to alternative energy production and distribution modes, as well as to low carbon consumption within the city.

Traditionally, the emissions embodied in construction materials have not been considered important; however, they are becoming crucial due to the short time-frame in which the emissions should be reduced. Moreover, evaluating the environmental burden of construction materials has proven problematic and the reliability of the reported impact estimates is questionable. More reliable information from the construction sector is thus urgently needed to back and guide decision-making. Currently, the building sector environmental impact assessments predominantly employ commercial software with environmental impact databases and report results without knowledge about the impact of the software/database choice on the results. In this study, estimates for the embodied environmental impacts of residential construction from the two most widely used life cycle assessment (LCA) database-software combinations, ecoinvent with SimaPro software and GaBi, are compared to recognize the uniformities and inconsistencies. The impacts caused by two residential buildings of different types, a concrete-element multi-story residential building and a detached wooden house, both located in Finland, were assessed, including all building systems with a high level of detail. Based on the ReCiPe Midpoint method, fifteen impact categories were estimated and compared. The results confirm that the tool choice significantly affects the outcome. For the whole building, the difference is significant, around 15%, even in the most widely assessed category of Climate Change, and yields results that lean in different directions for the two cases. In the others, the estimates are entirely different, 40% or more in the majority of the categories and up to several thousand percentages of difference. The main conclusion is that extensive work is still urgently needed to improve the reliability of LCA tools in the building sector in order to provide reliable and trustworthy information for policy-making.