Towards a systemic understanding of compact city qualities

References

• Adelfio, M., I. Hamiduddin, and E. Miedema. 2020. “London’s King’s Cross Redevelopment: A Compact, Resource Efficient and ‘Liveable’ Global City Model for an Era of Climate Emergency?” Urban Research & Practice 1–21. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/17535069.2019.1710860.
   Google Scholar
• Adelfio, M., J.-H. Kain, L. Thuvander, and J. Stenberg. 2018. “Disentangling the Compact City Drivers and Pressures: Barcelona as a Case Study.” Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift - Norwegian Journal of Geography 72 (5): 287–304. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/00291951.2018.1547788.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahlfeldt, G. M., and E. Pietrostefani. 2017. The Compact City in Empirical Research: A Quantitative Literature Review. Swindon, UK: Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC).
   Google Scholar
• Ajuntament de Barcelona. 2012. Marc Estratègic De l’Ajuntament De Barcelona: Programa d’Actuació Municipal 2012–2015. Barcelona: Ajuntament de Barcelona.
   Google Scholar
• Ajuntament de Barcelona. 2018. Barcelona Climate Plan 2018–2030. Barcelona: Ajuntament de Barcelona.
   Google Scholar
• Angel, S., S. A. Franco, Y. Liu, and A. M. Blei. 2020. “The Shape Compactness of Urban Footprints.” Progress in Planning 139: 100429. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2018.12.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arabzadeh, V., J. Mikkola, J. Jasiūnas, and P. D. Lund. 2020. “Deep Decarbonization of Urban Energy Systems through Renewable Energy and Sector-coupling Flexibility Strategies.” Journal of Environmental Management 260 (110090): 110090. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110090.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arbaci, S., and I. Rae. 2013. “Mixed-Tenure Neighbourhoods in London: Policy Myth or Effective Device to Alleviate Deprivation?” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 37 (2): 451–479. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2012.01145.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asara, V., I. Otero, F. Demaria, and E. Corbera. 2015. “Socially Sustainable Degrowth as a Social–ecological Transformation: Repoliticizing Sustainability.” Sustainability Science 10 (3): 375–384. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-015-0321-9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berghauser Pont, M., and P. Haupt. 2009. Space, Density and Urban Form. Delft: Technische Universiteit Delft.
   Google Scholar
• Bettencourt, L. M. A., J. Lobo, D. Helbing, C. Kühnert, and G. B. West. 2007. “Growth, Innovation, Scaling, and the Pace of Life in Cities.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 104 (17): 7301–7306. doi:https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0610172104.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boussauw, K., T. Neutens, and F. Witlox. 2012. “Relationship between Spatial Proximity and Travel-to-Work Distance: The Effect of the Compact City.” Regional Studies 46 (6): 687–706. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2010.522986.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boyko, C. T., and R. Cooper. 2011. “Clarifying and Re-conceptualising Density.” Progress in Planning 76 (1): 1–61. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2011.07.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Breheny, M. 1996. “Centrists, Decentrists and Compromisers: Views on the Future of Urban Form.” In The Compact City: A Sustainable Urban Form? edited by M. Jenks, E. Burton, and K. Williams, 13–35. London: E & FN Spon.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, V., M. Moodie, and R. Carter. 2015. “Congestion Pricing and Active Transport – Evidence from Five Opportunities for Natural Experiment.” Journal of Transport & Health 2 (4): 568–579. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2015.08.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burton, E. 2001. “The Compact City and Social Justice.” Paper presented at the The Housing Studies Association Spring Conference: Housing, Environment and Sustainability, York, 18-19 April 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Burton, E. 2002. “Measuring Urban Compactness in UK Towns and Cities.” Environment and Planning. B, Planning & Design 29: 219–250. doi:https://doi.org/10.1068/b2713.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Calthorpe, P. 1993. The Next American Metropolis: Ecology, Community, and the American Dream. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.
   Google Scholar
• Carr, E. R., P. M. Wingard, S. C. Yorty, M. C. Thompson, N. K. Jensen, and J. Roberson. 2007. “Applying DPSIR to Sustainable Development.” International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology 14 (6): 543–555. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/13504500709469753.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheshire, P. C. 2006. “Resurgent Cities, Urban Myths and Policy Hubris: What We Need to Know.” Urban Studies 43 (8): 1231–1246. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/00420980600775600.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cho, I. S., Z. Trivic, and I. Nasution. 2015. “Towards an Integrated Urban Space Framework for Emerging Urban Conditions in a High-density Context.” Journal of Urban Design 20 (2): 147–168. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2015.1009009.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Churchman, A. 1999. “Disentangling the Concept of Density.” Journal of Planning Literature 13 (4): 389–411. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/08854129922092478.
   Google Scholar
• Churchman, C. West. 1967. “Wicked Problems.” Management Science 14 (4): B141–142.
   Google Scholar
• Cooper, L. M. 2004. Guidelines for Cumulative Effects Assessment in SEA of Plans. London: Imperial College.
   Google Scholar
• Coral, C., and W. Bokelmann. 2017. “The Role of Analytical Frameworks for Systemic Research Design, Explained in the Analysis of Drivers and Dynamics of Historic Land-Use Changes.” Systems 5 (20): 1–13. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/systems5010020.
   Google Scholar
• Covenant of Mayors for Climate & Energy. https://www.covenantofmayors.eu/en/ [Accessed 16 December 2020].
   Google Scholar
• Dale, A., J. Robinson, L. King, S. Burch, R. Newell, A. Shaw, and F. Jost. 2020. “Meeting the Climate Change Challenge: Local Government Climate Action in British Columbia, Canada.” Climate Policy 20 (7): 866–880. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2019.1651244.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dantzig, G. B., and T. L. Saaty. 1973. Compact City: Plan for a Liveable Urban Environment. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.
   Google Scholar
• De Roo, G. 1998. “Environmental Planning and the Compact City a Dutch Perspective.” In Studies in Environmental Science, edited by T. Schneider, 1027–1042, Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Dempsey, N., and M. Jenks. 2010. “The Future of the Compact City.” Built Environment 36 (1): 116–121. doi:https://doi.org/10.2148/benv.36.1.116.
   Google Scholar
• Dill, J. 2004. “Measuring Network Connectivity for Bicycling and Walking.” 83rd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board: Washington, D.C.
   Google Scholar
• Echenique, M. H., A. J. Hargreaves, G. Mitchell, and A. Namdeo. 2012. “Growing Cities Sustainably: Does Urban Form Really Matter?” Journal of the American Planning Association 78 (2): 121–137. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2012.666731.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• EEA. 1999. Environmental Indicators: Typology and Overview. Copenhagen: European Environment Agency.
   Google Scholar
• EEA. 2016. Soil Resource Efficiency in Urbanised Areas: Analytical Framework and Implications for Governance. Luxembourg: European Environment Agency.
   Google Scholar
• EEA-FOEN. 2016. “Urban Sprawl in Europe (Joint EEA-FOEN Report).” European Environment Agency and the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2011. Cities of Tomorrow – Challenges, Visions, Ways Forward. Brussels: European Commission, Directorate General for Regional Policy.
   Google Scholar
• Ewing, R., and R. Cervero. 2010. “Travel and the Built Environment.” Journal of the American Planning Association 76 (3): 265–294. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/01944361003766766.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fertner, C., and G. Juliane. 2016. “Compact and Resource Efficient Cities? Synergies and Trade-offs in European Cities.” European Spatial Research and Policy 23 (1): 65–79. doi:https://doi.org/10.1515/esrp-2016-0004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frey, H. 1999. “Compact, Decentralised or What? the Sustainable City Debate.” In Designing the City. Towards a More Sustainable Urban Form, edited by H. Frey, 23–35. London: E & FN Spoon.
   Google Scholar
• Fujii, H., K. Iwata, and S. Managi. 2017. “How Do Urban Characteristics Affect Climate Change Mitigation Policies?” Journal of Cleaner Production 168: 271–278. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.08.221.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geurs, K. T., and B. Van Wee. 2004. “Accessibility Evaluation of Land-use and Transport Strategies: Review and Research Directions.” Journal of Transport Geography 12 (2): 127–140. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2003.10.005.
   Google Scholar
• Gleeson, B. 2012. ““Make No Little Plans’: Anatomy of Planning Ambition and Prospect.’.” Geographical Research 50 (3): 242–255. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-5871.2011.00728.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Górgolas, P. 2018. “El reto de compactar la periferia residencial contemporánea: Densificación eficaz, centralidades selectivas y diversidad funcional.” ACE: Architecture, City and Environment = Arquitectura, Ciudad Y Entorno 13 (38): 57–80. doi:https://doi.org/10.5821/ace.13.38.5211.
   Google Scholar
• Greensurge. 2015. “A Typology of Urban Green Spaces, Eco-system Provisioning Services and Demands.”
   Google Scholar
• Haase, D., and H. Nuissl. 2007. “‘Does Urban Sprawl Drive Changes in the Water Balance and Policy?: The Case of Leipzig (Germany) 1870–2003.” Landscape and Urban Planning 80 (1): 1–13. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2006.03.011.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haase, D., N. Schwarz, M. Strohbach, F. Kroll, and R. Seppelt. 2012. “Synergies, Trade-offs, and Losses of Ecosystem Services in Urban Regions: An Integrated Multiscale Framework Applied to the Leipzig-Halle Region, Germany.” Ecology and Society 17 (3):22 17 (3): 22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haccou, H. A., T. Deelstra, A. Jain, V. Pamer, K. Krosnicka, and R. De Waard. 2007. MILU: Multifunctional and Intensive Land Use – Principles, Practices, Projects and Policies. Gouda: Habiforum Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Hadorn, H., D. B. Gertrude, C. Pohl, S. Rist, and U. Wiesmann. 2006. “‘Implications of Transdisciplinarity for Sustainability Research.” Ecological Economics 60 (1): 119–128. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.12.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamiduddin, I. 2018. “Journey to Work Travel Outcomes from ‘City of Short Distances’ Compact City Planning in Tübingen, Germany.” Planning Practice & Research 33 (4): 372–391. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2017.1378980.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hillier, B. 1996. Space Is the Machine: A Configurational Theory of Architecture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Holman, N., A. Mace, A. Paccoud, and J. Sundaresan. 2015. “Coordinating Density; Working through Conviction, Suspicion and Pragmatism.” Progress in Planning 101: 1–38. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2014.05.001. October 2015.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobi, J., A. Llanque, S. Bieri, E. Birachi, R. Cochard, N. Depetris Chauvin, C. Diebold, et al. 2020. “Utilization of Research Knowledge in Sustainable Development Pathways: Insights from a Transdisciplinary Research-for-development Programme.” Environmental Science & Policy 103 (21): 21–29. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2019.10.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs, J. 1965. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. 2 ed. London: Penguin Books.
   Google Scholar
• Karlsson, M., E. Alfredsson, and N. Westling. 2020. “Climate Policy Co-benefits: A Review.” Climate Policy 20 (3): 292–316. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2020.1724070.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kasraian, D., K. Maat, and B. Van Wee. 2017. “The Impact of Urban Proximity, Transport Accessibility and Policy on Urban Growth: A Longitudinal Analysis over Five Decades.” Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science 46 (6): 1000–1017. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/2399808317740355.
   Google Scholar
• Kirkwood, C. W. 1998. System Dynamics Methods: A Quick Introduction. Tempe, AZ: Arizona State University.
   Google Scholar
• Kjærås, K. 2020. “Towards a Relational Conception of the Compact City.” Urban Studies published online: 1–17. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098020907281.
   Google Scholar
• Koomen, E., P. Rietveld, and F. Bacao. 2009. “The Third Dimension in Urban Geography: The Urban-volume Approach.” Environment and Planning. B, Planning & Design 36 (6): 1008–1025. doi:https://doi.org/10.1068/b34100.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kvale, S. 1996. Interviews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Larco, N. 2016. “Sustainable Urban Design – A (Draft) Framework.” Journal of Urban Design 21 (1): 1–29. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2015.1071649.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lehmann, S. 2016. “Sustainable Urbanism: Towards a Framework for Quality and Optimal Density?” Future Cities and Environment 2 (1): 8. doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/s40984-016-0021-3.
   Google Scholar
• Lehmann, S. 2019. “Understanding and Quantifying Urban Density toward More Sustainable City Form.” In The Mathematics of Urban Morphology. Modeling and Simulation in Science, Engineering and Technology, edited by L. D'Acci, 547–556. Cham: Birkhäuser.
   Google Scholar
• Lozano, E. 1990. “Density in Communities, or the Most Important Factor in Building Urbanity.” In The Urban Design Reader., edited by M. Larice and E. Macdonald, 312–327. London, New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Manitiua, D. N., G. Pedrini, R. A. Grant, T. A. Baker, and R. T. Sauer. 2016. “‘Urban Smartness and Sustainability in Europe. An Ex Ante Assessment of Environmental, Social and Cultural Domains.” European Planning Studies 24 (10): 1766–1787. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2016.1193127.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCann, E. 2017. “Mobilities, Politics, and the Future: Critical Geographies of Green Urbanism.” Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space 49 (8): 1816–1823. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0308518X17708876.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDonnell, S., and M. Zellner. 2011. “Exploring the Effectiveness of Bus Rapid Transit a Prototype Agent-based Model of Commuting Behavior.” Transport Policy 18 (6): 825–835. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2011.05.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meadows, D. 2009. Thinking in Systems: A Primer. London: Earthscan.
   Google Scholar
• Næss, P., and N. Vogel. 2012. “Sustainable Urban Development and the Multi-level Transition Perspective.” Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 4: 36–50. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2012.07.001.
   Google Scholar
• Nations, U. 2017. Resolution Adopted by the General Assembly on 23 December 2016: 71/256. New Urban Agenda. New York: United Nations.
   Google Scholar
• Neuman, M. 2005. “The Compact City Fallacy.” Journal of Planning Education and Research 25 (1): 11–26. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X04270466.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Niemeijer, D., and R. De Groot. 2008. “Framing Environmental Indicators: Moving from Causal Chains to Causal Networks.” Environ Dev Sustain 10 (1): 89–106. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-006-9040-9.
   Google Scholar
• O'Brien, K., and E. Selboe, E. eds. 2015. The Adaptive Challenge of Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• OECD. 2012. Compact City Policies: A Comparative Assessment. OECD Green Growth Studies. Paris: OECD Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Peponis, J., S. Bafna, and Z. Zhang. 2008. “The Connectivity of Streets: Reach and Directional Distance.” Environment and Planning. B, Planning & Design 35 (5): 881–901. doi:https://doi.org/10.1068/b33088.
   Google Scholar
• Porqueddu, E. 2015. “Intensity without Density.” Journal of Urban Design 20 (2): 169–192. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2015.1009008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rekolainen, S., J. Kämäri, M. Hiltunen, and T. M. Saloranta. 2003. “A Conceptual Framework for Identifying the Need and Role of Models in the Implementation of the Water Framework Directive.” International Journal of River Basin Management 1 (4): 347–352. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/15715124.2003.9635217.
   Google Scholar
• Rittel, H. W. J. :., and M. M. Webber. 1973. “Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning.” Policy Sciences 4: 155–169. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01405730.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rode, P., G. Floater, N. Thomopoulos, J. Docherty, P. Schwinger, A. Mahendra, and W. Fang. 2014. “Accessibility in Cities: Transport and Urban Form.” NCE Cities Paper 03. LSE Cities. London: London School of Economics and Political Science.
   Google Scholar
• Rosol, M., V. Béal, and M. Samuel. 2017. “Greenest Cities? The (Post-)politics of New Urban Environmental Regimes.” Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space 49 (8): 1710–1718. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0308518X17714843.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rotterdam, G. 2007. “Stadsvisie Rotterdam: Ruimtelijke Ontwikkelingsstrategie 2030 (Rotterdam Urban Vision: Spatial Development Strategy 2030).”
   Google Scholar
• Rueda, S. 2007. “Barcelona, ciudad mediterránea, compacta y compleja: Una visión de futuro más sostenible.” Barcelona: Ayuntamiento de Barcelona/Agencia de Ecología Urbana.
   Google Scholar
• Rueda, S. 2014. Ecological Urbanism. Barcelona: Urban Ecology Agency of Barcelona.
   Google Scholar
• Spanò, M., F. Gentile, C. Davies, and R. Lafortezza. 2017. “‘The DPSIR Framework in Support of Green Infrastructure Planning: A Case Study in Southern Italy.” Land Use Policy 61 (242): 242–250. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.10.051.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• TEEB, (The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity). 2011. TEEB Manual for Cities: Ecosystem Services in Urban Management. Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme.
   Google Scholar
• The Global Commission on the Economy and Climate. 2014. Better Growth, Better Climate: The New Climate Economy Report. Washington, DC.: World Resources Institute.
   Google Scholar
• The Urban Task Force. 1999. Towards an Urban Renaissance. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Tscherning, K., K. Helming, B. Krippner, S. Sieber, and S. G. Y. Paloma. 2012. “Does Research Applying the DPSIR Framework Support Decision Making?” Land Use Policy 29: 102–110. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2011.05.009.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• UNEP. 2013. ‘Integrating The Environment In Urban Planning And Management: Key Principles And Approaches For Cities In The 21st Century ‘. Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme.
   Google Scholar
• UN-Habitat. 2012. Urban Planning for City Leaders. Nairobi: UN HABITAT.
   Google Scholar
• UN-Habitat. 2014. A New Strategy of Sustainable Neighbourhood Planning: Five Principles. Nairobi: UN Habitat.
   Google Scholar
• UN-Habitat. n.d. A New Strategy of Sustainable Neighbourhood Planning: Five Principles (Draft with References). Nairobi: Urban Planning and Design Branch, UN Habitat.
   Google Scholar
• Vedung, E. 2006. “Evaluation Research.” In Handbook of Public Policy, edited by B. Guy Peters and J. Pierre, 397–416. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Wamsler, C., and E. Brink. 2015. “The Urban Domino Effect: A Conceptualization of Cities’ Interconnectedness of Risk, Input Paper.” In Global assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction. United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction.
   Google Scholar
• Westerink, J., D. Haase, A. Bauer, J. Ravetz, F. Jarrige, and B. E. M. A. Carmen. 2013. “Dealing with Sustainability Trade-Offs of the Compact City in Peri-Urban Planning across European City Regions.” European Planning Studies 21 (3): 473–497. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2012.722927.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, Y. 2017. “CityMatrix – An Urban Decision Support System Augmented by Artificial Intelligence.” Masters thesis, MIT.
   Google Scholar
• Zhao, X., and M. Bottero. 2010. “Application of System Dynamics and DPSIR Framework for Sustainability Assessment of Urban Residential Areas.” Paper presented at the SB10 Espoo: Sustainable Community - buildingSMART, 2010, Espoo, Finland, September 22-24, 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Zonneveld, W. 2005. “In Search of Conceptual Modernization: The New Dutch ‘National Spatial Strategy’.” Journal of Housing and the Built Environment 20 (4): 425–443. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10901-005-9024-3.
   Google Scholar