Defining a procedure to identify key sustainability indicators in Spanish urban systems: Development and application
Introduction
The accelerated urban population growth in the last century has resulted in cities that constitute an important economic source generating more than 80 % of the global gross domestic product (GDP). At the same time, however, cities play a predominant role in the consumption of natural resources, as well as being a major actor in the impacts on the three environmental compartments: air, water and soil (Kennedy, Cuddihy, & Engel-yan, 2007; World Bank, 2019). Based on population projection studies for the next two decades, it is foreseeable that 60 % of the total world population will live in cities (John, Luederitz, Lang, & von Wehrden, 2019), with consumption profiles higher than the earth's capacity to provide natural resources (Goldstein, Birkved, Quitzau, & Hauschild, 2013). The displacement of the population from low-productivity rural and agricultural areas to large cities such due to economic expansion may, on the other hand, increase inequality in the distribution of income, so that unbalanced growth could affect citizens in terms of unemployment rates, social inequality, poverty and/or cost of living (Feleki, Vlachokostas, & Moussiopoulos, 2018). The concern for sustainability assessment in cities and/or urban systems is reflected in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the United Nations, such as SDG-11, whose main target is to make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable (United Nations, 2015). Kennedy et al. (2007) defined a sustainable urban system as one that consumes resources and generates waste without exceeding the capacity of nature to regenerate more resources and assimilate that waste. Nevertheless, there is no agreement between researchers and policymakers on the definition of “sustainability” when applied to urban systems.
The use of sustainable development indicators has become popular in the last decade among public administrations and policy makers as a way of identifying the degree to which the proposed objectives have been met and, from there, to improve strategies and action plans (Tanguay, Rajaonson, & Lanoie, 2010). Nevertheless, the number of available indicators is quite high (Feleki et al., 2018), and it is necessary to reduce this number to a more manageable set of indicators (González-García et al., 2019). On the other hand, depending on the study, the set of indicators selected varies according to the evaluator’s point of view (Tanguay et al., 2010).
For this reason, the selection of the indicators set is a critical step in the sustainability assessment. There are different international standard organizations, such as International Organization for Standardization (ISO), European Telecommunication Standards Institute (ETSI) and Telecommunication Standardization Sector (ITU), which provide and recommend different indicators to assess the sustainability of urban systems (International Standardization Organization, 2014). These recommended indicators could be considered as a starting point, which, according to the needs of each city, includes a more manageable set that provides the information required for the city under study (Huovila, Bosch, & Airaksinen, 2019). However, the most common application is the comparison between cities in terms of sustainability (Tanguay et al., 2010). Accordingly, if each study considers different indicators for evaluation, such comparison will not be possible. In this sense, it is necessary to develop methodologies focused on the selection of potential indicators to assess the sustainability of cities in a more holistic and systematic way (Feleki et al., 2018).
In addition, the comparative analysis between cities provides information on the shortcomings of cities with lower indicator values and, on the other hand, makes it possible to identify the cities with better results, which are usually linked to sustainability policies (Rozhenkova et al., 2019). For example, if one city has an unemployment rate of around 20 % but another city in the same country has around 10 %, this implies that the policy makers of the first city must orient their employment policies and strategies according to those of the second city. The main difference between comparative and individual analysis is that in the latter it is difficult to know whether 20 % of the unemployment rate, following the example, is a bad or a good value. In this way, reference values or thresholds could be calculated and established in the comparative analysis within a sample of the cities studied. Moreover, the threshold may help to define the criteria under which a city is established whether or not it is considered sustainable (González-García et al., 2019). However, the comparative analysis of cities requires an exhaustive compilation of data. It is therefore necessary to collect information at city level for all selected indicators.
In this context, some authors developed and applied different methodologies to evaluate the sustainability of cities using indicators. Some studies proposed a set of indicators taking into account the specific characteristics of the case study, such as the study of peripheral informal settlements in Latin American cities (Montoya, Cartes, & Zumelzu, 2020), or the study of the strengths and weaknesses of a specific area (Hély & Antoni, 2019) or even the study of some characteristic sector, such as tourism (Biagi, Ladu, Meleddu, & Royuela, 2020). However, the number of indicators could be low (no more than 10) and very specific to the case study. In this regard, there are other studies in which the selection of the set of indicators was first introduced based on databases, regardless of the characteristics of the urban system. It is necessary to incorporate screening methods to identify indicators that are representative of each case study in order to establish specific criteria for the selection of key indicators (Bienvenido-Huertas, Farinha, Oliveira, Silva, & Lança, 2020; Chen & Zhang, 2021; González-García et al., 2019; Karji, Woldesenbet, Khanzadi, & Tafazzoli, 2019). Consequently, the set of indicators identified in these studies can be easily adapted and used in the analysis of other case studies (Rama, González-García, Andrade, Moreira, & Feijoo, 2020). However, despite reducing the number of indicators, these studies required a large amount of data to be compiled, which requires time and resources.
The main objectives of this study are to develop a methodology to predict the sustainability of a Spanish city with only three indicators and to apply the methodology developed on a case study. For this purpose, two analysis models (Classification and Regression Trees and Random Forest) were applied on an initial case study of Rama et al. (2020) composed of a sample with the 31 most representative Spanish cities and 38 indicators. Once the methodology was developed from the case study as a starting point, it was applied to a new case study composed of the 32 Spanish cities with more than 100,000 inhabitants that were not considered in the initial stage. Consequently, the novelty of this study is the use, for the first time, of these analysis models to identify key indicators for assessing sustainability in urban systems without losing accuracy.
Consequently, this study has been structured in five stages: 1) description of the analysis models; 2) description of the case study as a baseline reference; 3) identification of key sustainability indicators; 4) calibration on the aforementioned case study and, finally, 5) application to a new sample, with the objective of determining its sustainability ranking.
Section snippets
Materials and methods
The analysis methodology consists of two analysis models applied to a sample of 31 cities in which 38 indicators were previously measured, divided into 14 social, 13 economic and 11 environmental indicators. Bearing in mind which cities were sustainable and which were not, according to the values reached in the indicators, the two analysis models predicted which indicators had the greatest predictive capacity to determine the sustainability profile of each city. Moreover, they made it possible
Results and discussion
This section has been divided into three sub-sections taking into account the main objectives of this study. First, the key indicators and corresponding thresholds resulting from the application of the analysis models were identified. In this sense, the set of 38 indicators was reduced to a set of keys. Secondly, the sustainability scores of these cities were again recalculated using only the key indicators and the corresponding thresholds to calibrate the method. Finally, a new case study
Conclusions
Concern about the sustainability of urban systems and cities has been growing in recent decades. Within the definition of a sustainable city, in addition to environmental factors, social and economic ones must also be considered. For this reason, the use of the analysis of the sustainability of urban systems with indicators grew in recent years because it allows evaluating sustainability from the point of view of these three factors. However, there is a lack of consensus when it comes to
Declaration of Competing Interest
All authors have participated in (a) conception and design, or analysis and interpretation of the data; (b) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and (c) approval of the final version.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by a project granted by the Spanish Government and FEDER/ Ministry of Science and Innovation – Spanish National Research Agency (CTQ2016-75136-P) and by a project granted by Xunta de Galicia (project ref. ED431F 2016/001). Dr. S.G.-G. would like to express her gratitude to the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness for financial support (Grant reference RYC-2014-14984). The authors belong to the Galician Competitive Research Group GRC ED431C 2017/29 and to
References (52)
- et al.
Evaluation and driving factors of city sustainability in Northeast China: An analysis based on interaction among multiple indicators
Sustainable Cities and Society
(2021) - et al.
Spatial prediction of flood potential using new ensembles of bivariate statistics and artificial intelligence: A case study at the Putna river catchment of Romania
The Science of the Total Environment
(2019) - et al.
Characterisation of sustainability in urban areas: An analysis of assessment tools with emphasis on European cities
Sustainable Cities and Society
(2018) - et al.
Environmental predictors of stream flow in semi-arid watersheds for biological assessments
Ecological Indicators
(2019) - et al.
A data science approach for spatiotemporal modelling of low and resident air pollution in Madrid (Spain): Implications for epidemiological studies
Computers, Environment and Urban Systems
(2019) - et al.
Assessing the sustainability of Spanish cities considering environmental and socio-economic indicators
Journal of Cleaner Production
(2018) - et al.
Embedding environmental, economic and social indicators in the evaluation of the sustainability of the municipalities of Galicia (northwest of Spain)
Journal of Cleaner Production
(2019) - et al.
A Random Forest-Cellular Automata modelling approach to explore future land use/cover change in Attica (Greece), under different socio- economic realities and scales
The Science of the Total Environment
(2019) - et al.
Combining indicators for decision making in planning issues: A theoretical approach to perform sustainability assessment
Sustainable Cities and Society
(2019) - et al.
Comparative analysis of standardized indicators for Smart sustainable cities: What indicators and standards to use and when?
Cities
(2019)