Suchergebnisse

Many countries encourage brownfield regeneration as a means of sustainable development but define "brownfield" differently. Specifically, the definitions of brownfield in the regeneration policies of countries with higher population densities usually promote recycling land that is previously developed, whether or not there is chemical contamination. Further, the de facto definition of brownfield used by the UK government focuses on previously developed land that is unused or underused. The ANOVA in this study revealed that local authorities in England (n = 296) with higher percentages of derelict and vacant land tended to be more deprived based on the English Indices of Multiple Deprivation, which evaluate deprivation from the aspects of income, employment, health, education, housing, crime, and living environment. However, the percentage of previously developed land in use but with further development potential had no significant effect on the deprivation conditions. The Blair-Brown Government (1997~2010) encouraged more than 60% of new dwellings to be established on the previously developed land in England. The analyses in this study showed that this target, combined with the definition of brownfield in the policy, may have facilitated higher densities of residential development on previously developed land but without addressing the deprivation problems. These observations indicate that a definition of brownfield in regeneration policies should focus on previously developed land that is now vacant or derelict if land recycling is to contribute to sustainable communities.

Sustainable remediation is the elimination and/or control of unacceptable risks in a safe and timely manner while optimizing the environmental, social, and economic value of the work. Forthcoming International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Standard on Sustainable remediation will allow countries without the capacity to develop their own guidance to benefit from work done over the past decade by various groups around the world. The ISO standard has progressed through the committee draft (ISO/CD 18504) and draft international standard (ISO/DIS 18504) stages. The risk-based approach to managing the legacy of historically contaminated soil and groundwater has been incorporated into policy, legislation, and practice around the world. It helps determine the need for remediation and the end point of such remediation. Remediation begins with an options appraisal that short lists strategies that could deliver the required reduction in risk. A remediation strategy comprises one or more remediation technologies that will deliver the safe and timely elimination and/or control of unacceptable risks. The ISO standard will help assessors identify the most sustainable among the shortlisted, valid alternative remediation strategies. Practitioners presenting case studies claiming to constitute sustainable remediation should now report how they have aligned their work with the new standard. Indicators are used to compare alternative remediation strategies. The simplest metric that allows a characteristic to act as an indicator should be chosen. Weightings indicators can become a contested exercise and should only be undertaken where there is a clear desire for it by stakeholders and a clear need for it in identifying a preferred strategy. The simplest means of ranking alternative remediation strategies should be adopted.

We introduce the INSPIRATION bottom-up approach for the development of a strategic research agenda for spatial planning, land use and soil-sediment-water-system management in Europe. Research and innovation needs were identified by more than 500 European funders, endusers, scientists, policy makers, public administrators and consultants. We report both on the concept and on the implementation of the bottom-up approach, provide a critique of the process and draw key lessons for the development of research agendas in the future. Based on identified strengths and weaknesses we identified as key opportunities and threats 1) a high ranking and attentiveness for the research topics on the political agenda, in press and media or in public awareness, 2) availability of funding for research, 3) the resources available for creating the agenda itself, 4) the role of the sponsor of the agenda development, and 5) the continuity of stakeholder engagement as bases for identification of windows of opportunity, creating ownership for the agenda and facilitating its implementation. Our derived key recommendations are 1) a clear definition of the area for which the agenda is to be developed and for the targeted user, 2) a conceptual model to structure the agenda, 3) making clear the expected roles, tasks, input formats regarding the involvement and communication with the stakeholders and project partners, 4) a sufficient number of iterations and checks of the agenda with stakeholders to insure completeness, relevance and creation of co-ownership for the agenda, and 5) from the beginning prepare the infrastructure for the network to implement the agenda.