Calderon, C and Keirstead, J (2012) Modelling frameworks for delivering low-carbon cities: Advocating a normalized practice. Building Research & Information, 40(4), pp. 504-517. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
How do UK local authorities contribute to national carbon reductions? Urban energy and carbon models are emerging as a vital tool for local authorities that wish to understand the greenhouse gas emissions of their city and how to reduce them. The linkage between policy processes and tools is rarely recognized and tools are deployed ad hoc. A set of policy-relevant assessment criteria is proposed and used to review the emergent state-of-the-art in UK urban energy and carbon modelling. Drawing on the authors' own experience and the literature, a differentiation is made between accounting-style inventory tools and policy modelling tools. It is argued that although part of the same overall policy process, these two approaches lack consistency in methods and implementation. A comparison with local air pollution modelling makes this contrast apparent. A lack of clarity exists for the use of modelling in urban energy and carbon policy processes. A normalized urban modelling practice would ensure consistency while preserving local flexibility.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | built environment; carbon reduction; cities; climate policy; energy; local authorities; modelling; research challenges |
| Index terms: | greenhouse gas emission, built environment, state of the art, climate policy, accounting, implementation, modelling, differentiation, policy process, air pollution, inventory, carbon reduction, drawing, local authority, linkage |
| Subjects: | contractual arrangements, analytical methods, economic analysis, technical documentation, climate policy, climate science, research dissemination and communication, policy studies, business, organization, infrastructure and transport systems, environmental health, sociology, inventory management |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Governance, Procurement, Stakeholder Management, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Organizational Design, Supply Chain Management, Urban Studies, Design Practice |
| 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