Martek, I; Edwards, D J; Seaton, S and Jones, D (2022) An appraisal of Australia's approach to promoting urban sustainability. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 12(2), pp. 262-276. ISSN 2044-124X
Abstract
Much rhetoric exists on the urgency of transitioning from current practices to a more sustainable society. However, because this imperative is guided by strong ideological overtones, weaknesses and failures in the transition effort attract inadequate scrutiny. This paper reviews Australia's progress with sustainability in an urban domain and identifies key issues hindering the sustainability transition effort. Research on urban sustainability is ubiquitous but this weight of publications tends to emphasize technical, operational or prescriptive themes. This research uses an interpretivist philosophical lens and inductive reasoning to manually analyse pertinent literature sourced from the Scopus and Web of Science data-bases. Specifically, this study assembles outcome and evaluative assessments pertaining to Australia's urban sustainability efforts to identify both the progress achieved and residual structural impediments. Emergent findings illustrate that Australia's urban sustainability goals, as expressed by the Paris Accord, have not been met. Obstruction can be attributed to over-ambitious objectives combined with weak federal leadership, under-resourced local government, over-reliance on superficial rating systems and an ineffective regulatory regime. Elite "green branding" by image conscious corporations are insufficient to offset the general disinterest of the unincentivized majority of building owners and developers. This paper cogently summarizes Australia's urban sustainability status, along with complexity of the challenges it faces to meet targets set.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | sustainability; green buildings; green rating tools; Paris agreement; Australia; local government; leadership; emissions; urban areas; climate change; USA |
| Index terms: | complexity, publication, climate change, appraisal, green building, urban area, Paris, Australia, science, owner, face, society, reasoning, local government, green rating tool |
| Subjects: | sociology, cognitive psychology, systems engineering, administrative law, communities and social development, urban form and morphology, factor and component analysis, design practice, Geography, communication, psychology, research dissemination and communication, climate science, specialized education |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Information Management, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Stakeholder Management, Sustainability, Urban Studies, Design Practice, Legal Issues, Organizational Design, Education |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here