Skip to main content

Ecological footprints and sustainable urban form

Abstract

This paper presents the results of a four-yearresearch project (1997–2001) entitled `Housingas a basis for sustainable consumption'. Theoverall aim was to obtain more empirical andtheoretical knowledge about the connectionbetween physical urban planning and householdconsumption. This knowledge provides a platformfor discussing principles and practices forsustainable urban development.

This project was based on two main assumptions.First, it was suggested that the significantand increasing environmental damage due toprivate household consumption presents a majorchallenge in achieving sustainable development.Second, a large part of this consumption appears to be influenced by our physical livingsituation, i.e., the way we design and locateour houses. This also applies to energy use forheating and technical appliances, transport,and even to the considerable amount ofequipment that is needed for householdoperation, redecoration and maintenance. Withrespect to transport, the study team includedboth everyday travel and leisure-time journeysin this research. While everyday trips such astravelling to work, shopping and taking thechildren to school are strongly influenced bythe living situation of the household, thismight also be true for leisure-time travel.

Based on two large surveys in the Norwegiantowns of Greater Oslo and Førde, the studyteam collected data on housing-relatedconsumption from 537 households. Ecological Footprinting was then used asan analytical tool to analyse the environmentalconsequences of this consumption. Theseecological footprint analyses suggest thatsustainable urban development points towardsdecentralized concentration, i.e.,relatively small cities with a high density andshort distances between the houses andpublic/private services.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. Bannister, D. (1992) Energy Use, Transport and Settlement Patterns. In: Sustainable Development and Urban Form (Ed, Breheny, M.), Pion, London.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Breheny, M. (1992) Sustainable Development and Urban Form: An Introduction, In: Sustainable Development and Urban Form (Ed, Breheny, M.), Pion, London.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Buxton, M. (2000) Energy, Transport and Urban Form in Australia. In: Achieving Sustainable Urban Form (Eds, Williams, K., Burton, E. and Jenks, M.), E&FN Spon, London and New York.

    Google Scholar 

  4. CEC (1990) Green Paper on the Urban Environment. Commission of the European Communities, European Commission, Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Chambers, N., Simmons, C. and Wackernagel, M. (2000) Sharing Nature's Interest. Ecological Footprints as an Indicator of Sustainability, Earthscan Publications Ltd.

  6. Elkin, T., McLaren, D. and Hillman, M. (1991) Reviving the City: Towards Sustainable Urban Development, Friends of the Earth, London.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Enwicht, D. (1992) Towards an Eco-City: Calming the Traffic, Envirobook, Sydney.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Frey, H. (1999) Designing the City. Towards a More Sustainable Form, E&FN Spon.

  9. Hille, J. (1995) Sustainable Norway, The Project for an Alternative Future, Oslo.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Holden, E. (2001) Boligen som grunnlag for bærekraftig forbruk (Housing as basis for a sustainable consumption), Doktor ingeniøravhandling (Ph.D. Dissertation), Department of Town and Regional Planning, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, p. 115.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Høyer, K.G. (2002) Analyseverktøy i miljøplanleggingen — Verktøy for mer enn festlige anledninger? (Analytic tools in environmental planning). In: Fra miljøvern til bærekraftig utvikling i kommunene. Erfaringer med Lokal Agenda 21 (From environmental protection to sustainable development in municipalities. Experiences with Local Agenda 21) (Eds, Aall, C., Høyer, K.G. and Lafferty, W.), Gyldendal Akademisk, Oslo.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Høyer, K.G. and Holden, E. (2001) Housing as Basis for Sustainable Consumption, International Journal on Sustainable Development, 4(1), 48–58.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Jacobs, J. (1961) The Death and Life of Great American Cities. The Failure of Town Planning, Random House, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Jenks, M. Burton, E. and Williams, K. (Eds) (1996) The Compact City: A Sustainable Urban Form? E&FN Spon.

  15. Jørgensen, A.E. et al. (2002) Assessing the Ecological Footprint. A Look at the WWF's Living Planet Report 2002, Environmental Assessment Institute, København.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Lewan, L. (2000) Ecologiska fotavtryck & biokapacitet — verktyg för planering och uppföljning av hållbar utveckling i ett internationellt perspektiv (Ecological footprints and bio-capacity — tools for achieving sustainable development), The National Board for Housing, Building and Planning in Sweden, Karlskrona / Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, Stockholm.

    Google Scholar 

  17. McLaren, D. (1992) Compact or Dispersed? Dilution is No Solution, Built Environment, 18(4), 268–284.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Masnavi, M-R. (2000) The New Millennium and the New Urban Paradigm: The Compact City in Practice. In: Achieving Sustainable Urban Form (Eds, Williams, K., Burton, E. and Jenks, M.), E&FN Spon, London and New York.

    Google Scholar 

  19. MFA (2002) National Strategy for Sustainable Development, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Oslo.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Newman, P. and Kenworthy, J. (1989) Gasoline Consumption and Cities. A Comparison of U.S. Cities with a Global Survey, Journal of American Planning Association, 55(1), 24–37.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Newman, P. and Kenworthy, J. (2000) Sustainable Urban Form: The Big Picture. In: Achieving Sustainable Urban Form (Eds, Williams, K., Burton, E. and Jenks, M.), E&FN Spon, London and New York.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Næss, P. (1997) Fysisk planlegging og energibruk (Physical Planning and Energy Use), Tano Aschehoug, Oslo.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Owens, S. (1992) Energy, Environmental Sustainability and Land Use Planning. In: Sustainable Development and Urban Form (Ed, Breheny, M.J.), Pion Limited, London.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Rolness, K. (1995) Med smak skal hjemmet bygges (The home should be built with taste), Aschehoug, Oslo.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Røe, B. (1990) Fysisk planlegging — faglig innhold og utfordringer — konsekvenser for utdanningen (Physical planning — content and challenges — consequences for education). Forum for utdanning i Samfunnsplanlegging. Konferanse 12–13 Juni 1990, Norges Tekniske Høgskole, Trondheim (The Norwegian Institute of Technology, Trondheim).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Scherlock, H. (1991) Cities are Good for Us, Paladin, London.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Smyth, H. (1996) Running the Gauntlet: A Compact City within a Doughnut of Decay. In: The Compact City: A Sustainable Urban Form? (Eds, Jenks, M., Burton, E. and Williams, K.), E&FN Spon.

  28. Wackernagel, M. and Rees, W. (1994) Ecological Footprints and Appropriated Carrying Capacity, Island Press.

  29. Wackernagel, M. et al. (2002) Tracking the Ecological Overshoot of the Human Economy, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, pp. 1–6.

  30. WCED (1987) Our Common Future, The World Commission on Environment and Development, Oxford University Press.

  31. Williams, K., Burton, E. and Jenks, M. (Eds) (2000) Achieving Sustainable Urban Form, E&FN Spon, London and New York.

    Google Scholar 

  32. WWF (2002) Living Planet Report 2002, World Wide Fund for Nature, Gland, Switzerland.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Holden, E. Ecological footprints and sustainable urban form. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment 19, 91–109 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JOHO.0000017708.98013.cb

Download citation

  • decentralized concentration
  • ecological footprints
  • planning
  • sustainable consumption
  • sustainable development
  • sustainable urban form