Natural Resources in Urban Contexts: Actions and Evaluation Tools in Local Planning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper is focused on the local sustainability approach involved in the local plan. Local sustainability can be defined as the chance by an intervention on the building-environmental system of locally fostering the relationship between natural value, considered as the sum of all the intervention’s positive impacts in terms of environmental compatibility, cultural and natural improvement, induced social and economic effects, and total costs, considered as the sum of production costs, management costs, social costs through time, building deconstruction or refurbishment. The ‘local’ concept of sustainability plays a key role in adapting choices and actions to prearranged aims. This term relates to the territorial context in which the intervention lays, identified by an integrated framework of social, cultural, environmental and landscape elements. The boundaries of such a context can’t be outlined in a clear and ultimate way, because of the ever-changing of its own components. In order to test the local acceptation of sustainability as practice, we are working on the implementation of Green Building Challenge (GBC), an international project initiated in 1998 by a group of researchers from University of British Columbia and Natural Resources Canada. The GBC process has now been through two cycles: the first phase has been called GBC ’98, instead the second one is named GBC 2000. Starting from the comparison with other already existing assessment methods, such as LEED or BREEAM, the first objective of the working group was to overcome the shortcomings of those tools tied to contingent needs and designed to achieve pragmatic aims. The purpose was to integrate a number of heterogeneous performance issues in a unique consistent framework. The second objective was to integrate new issues not adequately been considered until then, such as indoor environmental quality, building’s longevity, etc. An another new element compared to existing evaluation methods was the international nature of the project, which could bring an exchange of information and results otherwise confined to a either national or regional context. The working hypothesis under development consists in designing a method extended to the building’s context, in order to optimize not only the building itself but also the area in which the latter is placed and the respective urban connections. Indeed, despite the constant references to sustainability, the GBC suggested method is focused on the assessment of environmental building performance. The working group is nevertheless oriented at regarding the health of the biosphere, that is its ability to maintain its own functional integrity and to remain biologically productive, as the limiting factor for sustainability and its prerequisite. This layout is stemmed from the belief that the economic and social issues which complete, together with the environmental one, the complex notion of sustainability, can’t be usefully assessed at the scale of an individual building. The developed case study allows a concrete description of the formulated hypothesis and the played out research.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".