Prerpints.org logo
Preprint
Review

The Role of Urban Design in Facilitating a Circular Economy: From Linear to Regenerative Cities

Altmetrics

Downloads

89

Views

47

Comments

0

Submitted:

19 September 2024

Posted:

19 September 2024

You are already at the latest version

Alerts
Abstract
The increasing urbanization of cities worldwide has driven a parallel rise in resource consumption, waste generation, and environmental degradation. The transition to a circular economy (CE) offers a sustainable alternative, shifting from traditional linear systems of resource use and disposal to regenerative systems that prioritize material reuse, resource efficiency, and ecological restoration. Urban design and planning play an essential role in facilitating this shift by creating the physical and regulatory infrastructure necessary to implement CE principles in cities. This paper explores the role of urban design in promoting circular economy strategies, with a focus on adaptive reuse of buildings, green architecture, and the integration of nature-based solutions (NBS) into urban environments. Through detailed analysis of these strategies and case studies from cities around the world, this paper demonstrates that regenerative design is essential for closing material and resource loops and creating more sustainable, resilient cities.
Keywords: 
Subject: Environmental and Earth Sciences  -   Sustainable Science and Technology

1. Introduction

Urbanization is a defining feature of the 21st century, reshaping landscapes, economies, and societies across the globe. As cities expand, they face growing challenges related to resource consumption, waste generation, and environmental degradation (UN-Habitat, 2020; Zora et al., 2021; Tzoulas et al., 2007). Traditional linear economic models— characterized by a sequence of resource extraction, product manufacturing, consumption, and disposal—have proven unsustainable in the face of these challenges. Such models contribute to resource depletion, environmental pollution, and increased greenhouse gas emissions, leading to a pressing need for more sustainable urban development approaches (Kabisch et al., 2016; Julia & Lars, 2023;).
The concept of the circular economy (CE) offers a transformative alternative to linear economic systems. Unlike linear models, CE principles emphasize designing out waste, keeping products and materials in use for as long as possible, and regenerating natural systems (Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2017; Ljla & Brostrom, 2015; Geng et al., 2013). The circular economy aims to create closed-loop systems where resource use is minimized, and waste is either eliminated or repurposed (Felipe et al., 2022; Fabi et al., 2021). This approach not only addresses environmental concerns but also seeks to create economic opportunities through innovative business models and technologies (Geissdoerfer et al., 2018; Coates, 2013).
Urban design and planning are critical in advancing the circular economy within cities. As the physical and spatial framework of urban environments, urban design influences how resources are managed, how buildings are constructed and used, and how waste is processed (Cramer, 2018; Tan & Sia, 2013; Raymond et al., 2017). Effective urban design can facilitate the transition from linear to circular systems by incorporating strategies such as adaptive reuse of buildings, integration of green architecture, and implementation of nature-based solutions (NBS) (Raymond et al., 2017; Tight, 2016; Wong, 2016). These strategies not only help in resource optimization and waste reduction but also enhance urban resilience and sustainability (Zora et al., 2021; Yigitcanlar & Kamruzzaman, 2015).
Adaptive reuse involves repurposing existing buildings for new uses, thus extending their lifecycle and reducing the demand for new construction (Wong,2016; Remoy & Van der Voordt, 2014). Green architecture focuses on designing energy-efficient and resource-conscious buildings that align with circular economy principles (Obersteg et al., 2019). Nature-based solutions integrate natural processes into urban design to manage resources, mitigate climate impacts, and enhance biodiversity (Kabisch et al., 2016). Each of these strategies offers unique opportunities for advancing circularity in urban settings, contributing to more sustainable and resilient cities. (OECD, 2016)
The shift from linear to circular urban systems requires a comprehensive understanding of how these strategies intersect and complement each other. This paper explores the role of urban design in facilitating this transition, examining how adaptive reuse, green architecture, and nature-based solutions contribute to circular economy goals. Through detailed case studies and theoretical analysis, this paper aims to provide insights into how urban planning and design can support the development of regenerative cities that are capable of thriving within the constraints of a circular economy.
Through the analysis of successful implementations of these strategies, the paper will offer a nuanced perspective on the practical and theoretical aspects of circular urban design. It will also identify challenges and opportunities associated with integrating circular economy principles into urban planning and design, providing recommendations for policymakers, urban planners, and researchers working towards more sustainable urban future

2. Adaptive Reuse of Buildings: Extending the Life Cycle of Structures

Adaptive reuse is the process of repurposing existing buildings for new functions, which not only extends the life cycle of structures but also aligns closely with the principles of a circular economy (Langston & Shen, 2010, Wong,2016;). This practice offers a viable alternative to new construction, significantly minimizing construction waste and preserving embodied energy, which is the energy embedded in materials and processes used to create buildings (Ijla & Brostrom, 2015; Coates,2013). Focusing on repurposing rather than demolishing and rebuilding, adaptive reuse reduces the environmental impact associated with new construction, including the substantial carbon emissions and resource consumption inherent in the production of building materials (Fabi et al., 2021; Felipe et al., 2022).
One of the most notable examples of successful adaptive reuse is the Van Nelle Factory in Rotterdam. Originally a state-of-the-art industrial facility, it has been transformed into a dynamic creative hub and cultural center, maintaining its architectural integrity while fostering local economic activities (Cramer, 2018). This project not only revitalized an underutilized industrial space but also significantly reduced demolition waste and conserved valuable resources. The transformation of the Van Nelle Factory exemplifies how adaptive reuse can contribute to urban regeneration and economic development while honoring historical and architectural heritage.
Adaptive reuse is particularly effective in addressing the issue of vacant and underutilized properties. According to research, repurposing existing structures can result in a 40% reduction in energy use compared to new construction (Tan & Sia, 2013; Remoy & Van der Voordt, 2014). This energy saving is critical for reducing the carbon footprint of urban areas, as the production and transport of building materials contribute significantly to global emissions. Moreover, by extending the life cycle of existing buildings, adaptive reuse mitigates the environmental impacts associated with the extraction and processing of raw materials (Circle Economy,2017; EU, 2017).
In addition to environmental benefits, adaptive reuse fosters community engagement by preserving historical landmarks and creating spaces that reflect local culture and identity. The transformation of old factories, warehouses, and other structures into community centers, office spaces, and residential units can enhance neighborhood vitality and cultural continuity (Frantzeskaki et al., 2019; Berardi, 2012). This approach not only preserves the architectural character of urban areas but also provides social and economic benefits to local communities (Berardi, 2012; Berardi, 2013).
However, implementing adaptive reuse projects can be challenging due to financial and regulatory barriers. Often, these projects require substantial investment in retrofitting and renovation, which can be a deterrent for developers and investors (Langston & Shen, 2010; Yigitcanclar & Kamruzzaman,2015). Additionally, navigating the regulatory landscape, including zoning laws and building codes, can pose obstacles to adaptive reuse (O'Toole & Becker, 2014). Overcoming these challenges necessitates collaboration between policymakers, architects, and developers to create incentives and streamline processes that support adaptive reuse initiatives (Williams, 2022; Zora et al., 2021).
Integrating adaptive reuse into urban design frameworks is essential for promoting circularity and ensuring the long-term sustainability of urban environments. As cities continue to grow and evolve, the ability to adapt and repurpose existing structures will be crucial for minimizing environmental impact and fostering resilient urban landscapes. By addressing both the practical and theoretical aspects of adaptive reuse, urban planners and policymakers can advance circular economy goals and contribute to more sustainable and livable cities (UN,2018; Langston & Shen, 2010).

3. Green Architecture: Designing for Circularity and Resource Efficiency

Green architecture, also known as sustainable or eco-friendly design, involves creating buildings that are energy-efficient, resource-conscious, and environmentally responsible throughout their entire life cycle (Julia & Lars, 2023). This approach overlaps with circular economy principles by focusing on optimizing resource use, minimizing waste, and ensuring that materials can be reused, recycled, or repurposed. Key elements of green architecture include passive design strategies, renewable energy integration, and the use of sustainable building materials (Remoy & Van der Voordt, 2014; UN,2018).
Passive design strategies leverage natural environmental conditions to minimize energy consumption. These strategies include optimizing building orientation, using thermal mass to regulate temperature, and maximizing natural light (Wong,2016; Tan & Sia, 2013; OECD, 2016). For example, buildings designed with large south-facing windows can harness solar energy for heating, reducing the need for mechanical heating systems. By incorporating such design principles, green architecture reduces the energy footprint of buildings and supports the circular economy by lowering the demand for non-renewable energy sources (OECD, 2016; Obersteg et al.,2019;). Furthermore, integrating renewable energy sources, such as solar panels, wind turbines, and geothermal systems, is another cornerstone of green architecture. These technologies reduce reliance on fossil fuels and contribute to a circular economy by generating clean energy on-site (EMF, 2017; Berardi, 2016). The incorporation of solar power in the Vauban district in Freiburg, Germany, demonstrates how renewable energy can be harnessed at the community level to support sustainability goals (Berardi, 2016; Berardi 2013). Furthermore, green roofs and vertical gardens not only enhance building insulation but also contribute to urban biodiversity and air quality (Bocken et al., 2016).
In contrast, the selection of building materials plays a crucial role in green architecture. Sustainable materials such as bamboo, reclaimed wood, and recycled metals are preferred due to their lower environmental impact and reduced resource consumption (Berardi, 2016). For instance, the use of reclaimed timber in construction minimizes the need for new lumber and reduces deforestation (Bocken et al.,2016). Additionally, incorporating materials with low embodied energy—such as recycled steel or concrete with supplementary cementitious materials—further supports circular economy principles by reducing the carbon footprint of construction activities (Berardi et al.,2012; EU,2017; Coates, 2013). Nevertheless, it is important to recognize modular and demountable design principles are integral to green architecture as they facilitate the disassembly and reuse of building components (Frantzeskaki et al., 2019; Fabi et al., 2021). The Edge in Amsterdam exemplifies this approach with its modular construction techniques, which allow for easy reconfiguration and adaptation over time (Circular Economy, 2017; Remoy & Van der Voordt, 2014). Through designing buildings that can be easily modified or deconstructed, architects and developers support the circular economy by extending the life cycle of materials and reducing waste (OECD, 2016).
Thus, Green architecture promotes the use of energy-efficient technologies, such as high-performance insulation, energy-efficient windows, and advanced heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems (Tzoulas et al.,2007; Raymond et al., 2017). These technologies reduce the energy demands of buildings and contribute to circular economy goals by minimizing resource consumption and emissions. Copenhagen’s green building codes and renewable energy initiatives illustrate how urban policies can drive the adoption of energy-efficient technologies and support sustainability objectives (European Commission, 2017). The city's commitment to achieving carbon neutrality by 2025 relies heavily on the integration of green architecture and renewable energy solutions (Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, 2021).
Drawing reflection, it is evident green architecture embodies the principles of the circular economy by focusing on resource efficiency, waste reduction, and the sustainable use of materials. Through passive design, renewable energy integration, and the use of sustainable and modular materials, green architecture contributes to the creation of more resilient and sustainable urban environments.

4. Nature-Based Solutions: Integrating Ecosystems into Urban Design

Nature-based solutions (NBS) utilize natural processes and ecosystems to address various urban challenges, including climate adaptation, resource management, and biodiversity conservation (Raymond et al., 2017). Integrating NBS into urban design, cities can enhance their regenerative capacity, close resource loops, and promote efficient use of natural resources, aligning with the principles of the circular economy (Tight, 2016; Wong, 2016). Moreover, one of the primary benefits of NBS is their ability to bolster urban resilience against climate change impacts. Green infrastructure such as parks, green roofs, and urban forests can mitigate the urban heat island effect, manage stormwater, and improve air quality (Tzoulas et al., 2007). Singapore’s "City in a Garden" initiative exemplifies how NBS can be integrated into urban environments to foster regenerative ecosystems. The city’s extensive network of green spaces, rooftop gardens, and vertical forests not only enhances biodiversity but also improves air quality and regulates urban temperatures, demonstrating the multifaceted benefits of NBS (Tan et al., 2013; Mguni et al., 2022).
NBS play a crucial role in urban water management by employing natural processes to address issues such as wastewater treatment, stormwater management, and flood risk reduction. Constructed wetlands and green roofs are effective at capturing and filtering rainwater, which reduces the burden on municipal water systems and promotes water reuse (Kabisch et al., 2016). For instance, the green roof installations in cities like Toronto have been shown to significantly reduce stormwater runoff and improve water quality by filtering pollutants (City of Toronto, 2020). Similarly, in Cape Town, nature-based approaches are being explored to enhance resilience to water scarcity and climate change. The city has implemented several projects incorporating NBS to improve water management and ecological health (Olivier et al., 2019).
Conversely adopting NBS into urban design also contributes to the preservation of biodiversity and the provision of essential ecosystem services. Urban green spaces offer critical services such as carbon sequestration, air purification, and habitat creation for wildlife (Frantzeskaki et al., 2019). For example, urban forests and green belts not only sequester carbon but also provide recreational spaces for residents, thereby improving overall quality of life (Nowak et al., 2014). The creation of wildlife corridors and green roofs supports urban biodiversity by providing habitats for various species and promoting ecological connectivity (Barton et al., 2015).
Similar studies suggest the incorporation of NBS into urban design can also foster community engagement and enhance well-being. Green spaces offer opportunities for recreation, social interaction, and environmental education, contributing to the overall livability of urban areas (Frantzeskaki etal.,2019; Coates, 2013). For instance, the transformation of former industrial sites into green parks in cities like New York has revitalized communities and provided spaces for leisure and social gatherings (Yigitcanclar & Kamruzzaman, 2015; OECD, 2016). In addition, involving communities in the planning and management of NBS projects, cities can ensure that these solutions meet local needs and preferences, thereby fostering a sense of ownership and stewardship (Raymond et al., 2017).
Despite the benefits, the implementation of NBS in urban design faces several challenges. Financial constraints, lack of technical expertise, and institutional barriers can hinder the adoption of nature-based approaches (Barton et al., 2015; Remoy & Van der Voordt, 2014). Overcoming these challenges requires coordinated efforts between policymakers, urban planners, and stakeholders to develop supportive frameworks and allocate resources effectively (Kabisch et al., 2016; Obersteg et al.,2019). Future research should focus on optimizing the design and management of NBS to maximize their benefits and address emerging urban challenges.
For societal transformations in the urban realm nature-based solutions offer a monumental approach to urban design by integrating ecosystems into city planning and management. Through their capacity to enhance resilience, manage water resources, support biodiversity, and promote community well-being, NBS contribute significantly to the goals of the circular economy. (Raymond et al., 2017; Kabisch et al., 2016; Frantzeskaki et al., 2019).

5. Urban Planning for Regenerative Cities: Shifting from Linear to Circular Systems

The transition from linear to circular urban systems represents a paradigm shift in urban planning, one that emphasizes regeneration over mere sustainability. Traditional linear urban models prioritize economic growth and expansion often at the cost of environmental degradation and resource depletion (Zora et al., 2021; Tzoulas & Venn, 2007). In contrast, regenerative urban planning seeks to create urban systems that restore and enhance natural resources, minimize waste, and bolster the resilience of cities through integrated, holistic design strategies (Geissdoerfer et al., 2018; Julia & Lans, 2023, Ijla & Brostrom, 2015). To facilitate this shift, urban planners must embrace systems thinking—a methodology that considers the interconnectedness of social, economic, and environmental factors (Geissdoerfer et al., 2018; Felipe et al., 2022; Bullen & Love, 2011). This approach involves integrating circular economy principles into urban planning processes, such as developing mixed-use neighborhoods that reduce transportation needs and support local economies. Through designing cities that blend residential, commercial, and recreational spaces, planners can enhance resource efficiency and minimize environmental impact (Fabi et al., 2021; Frantzeskaki et al., 2019).
For example, the concept of "15-minute cities" is an innovative urban planning approach that aims to ensure all essential services and amenities are within a 15-minute walk or bike ride from residents' homes. This model reduces reliance on private vehicles, thus cutting down greenhouse gas emissions and enhancing local economic activity. Such planning strategies contribute to circularity by promoting local resource loops and reducing the overall environmental footprint of urban areas.
Another important aspect is participatory design processes are critical for successful regenerative planning. Involving local communities, businesses, and other stakeholders ensures that circular economy initiatives are tailored to meet the needs and priorities of residents while fostering a sense of ownership and responsibility (Wong, 2016; Tan & Sia, 2013). Collaborative planning can also help to identify and address potential barriers, such as financial constraints and policy gaps. Engaging residents in the planning process not only enhances the relevance and acceptance of circular initiatives but also builds community support for sustainability efforts (OECD, 2016; Yigitcanclar & Kamruzzaman, 2015).
Effective governance frameworks and policy support are essential for the successful implementation of circular economy strategies. Urban planners need to collaborate with policymakers to develop and enforce regulations that promote circularity, such as waste reduction targets, resource efficiency standards, and incentives for sustainable practices (OECD, 2016; Zora et al., 2021). For instance, the city of Amsterdam has established a comprehensive Circular Strategy that integrates circular economy principles across various sectors, including waste management, construction, and consumer goods (Circle Economy, 2019). This strategy demonstrates how aligning urban design with circular economy principles can lead to more sustainable and resilient urban environments.
In an innovative space like today the integration of technology and innovation into urban planning can further enhance the shift towards circular systems. Smart city technologies, such as data analytics and the Internet of Things (IoT), can optimize resource management and improve the efficiency of urban systems. For example, smart grids and waste management systems equipped with sensors can provide real-time data on resource usage and waste generation, enabling more efficient management and reduction of environmental impacts (Bocken et al., 2016; Julia & Lars, 2023). These technological advancements support circularity by improving resource flows and promoting more sustainable urban practices.
However, despite the potential benefits, several challenges must be addressed to facilitate the transition to regenerative urban planning. Financial constraints, institutional barriers, and policy fragmentation can hinder the adoption of circular economy strategies (Williams,2022). Overcoming these obstacles requires innovative financing mechanisms, such as public-private partnerships, and coordinated efforts between various levels of government and stakeholders (Geng et al., 2013). Developing integrated policy frameworks and providing financial incentives for circular initiatives can help to address these challenges and promote the widespread adoption of regenerative urban practices (Zora et al.,2021; Williams, 2022).
When examining case studies of cities that have successfully implemented circular economy principles can provide valuable insights into effective planning and design strategies. Cities such as Copenhagen, known for its ambitious sustainability goals, and Freiburg, recognized for its green urban planning practices, offer practical examples of how circularity can be integrated into urban design (EC, 2017; EEA,2022). These cities demonstrate that adopting regenerative urban planning practices can lead to significant environmental, social, and economic benefits.

6. Final Remarks

The transition to a circular economy represents a transformative shift in urban design, offering substantial opportunities to enhance sustainability and resilience within cities. This shift is fundamentally reshaping how cities approach resource management, environmental impact, and overall urban planning. Key strategies such as adaptive reuse, green architecture, and nature-based solutions are pivotal in facilitating this transition and are critical for extending the life cycle of buildings, optimizing resource use, and integrating natural systems into urban environments. Adaptive reuse plays a vital role by repurposing existing structures, thus reducing the demand for new construction and minimizing associated waste and carbon emissions. Projects like the Van Nelle Factory in Rotterdam underscore the potential of adaptive reuse to revitalize underutilized spaces, preserve architectural heritage, and support local economies (Cramer, 2018). By extending the life cycle of buildings, adaptive reuse not only conserves embodied energy but also aligns with circular economy principles of minimizing waste and promoting resource efficiency (Langston & Shen, 2010). Green architecture further supports the circular economy by designing buildings that are energy-efficient and resource-conscious throughout their life cycle. The Vauban district in Freiburg and The Edge in Amsterdam illustrate how integrating energy-efficient technologies, renewable resources, and modular construction techniques can significantly reduce environmental impact. These approaches not only enhance resource efficiency but also demonstrate how green architecture can contribute to circularity by fostering sustainable building practices and reducing reliance on finite resources (Berardi, 2016).
Nature-based solutions (NBS) offer another crucial dimension by leveraging natural processes to address urban challenges such as climate adaptation and resource management. Singapore’s "City in a Garden" initiative and Cape Town’s exploration of nature-based water management solutions highlight how integrating ecosystems into urban design can improve environmental quality and enhance urban resilience (Tan et al., 2013). NBS not only support circularity by closing resource loops but also provide essential ecosystem services that improve livability and community well-being (Raymond et al., 2017).
Despite these promising strategies, the path to a circular economy is fraught with challenges. Financial constraints, political resistance, and institutional barriers must be navigated to implement circular economy practices effectively. Innovative governance models and robust policy frameworks are essential for overcoming these obstacles. Engaging stakeholders through participatory design and collaborative planning processes ensures that circular economy initiatives reflect local needs and foster community support. The experiences of cities such as Amsterdam, Copenhagen, and Singapore offer valuable lessons in how urban design can drive circularity and highlight the need for continued research and policy development (European Commission, 2017; Circle Economy, 2017).
Urban populations continue to grow and environmental pressures mount, integrating circular economy principles into urban design and planning will be crucial for creating sustainable and resilient urban environments. Recognizing and embracing strategies that extend building life cycles, optimize resource use, and integrate natural systems, cities can address pressing environmental challenges, enhance resource efficiency, and improve overall quality of life. The ongoing evolution of urban design in response to circular economy principles promises not only to transform cities but also to pave the way for a more sustainable and regenerative future.

Author Contributions

Williams Chibueze Munonye: Responsible for the conceptualization, data collection, writing of draft, review & editing, and supervision. George Oche Ajonye: Responsible for the proof reading, reading of drafts, writing and data collection.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

References

  1. Barton, H., Grant, M., & Guise, R. (2015). Shaping Neighbourhoods: For Local Health and Global Sustainability. Routledge.
  2. Berardi, U. (2016). The outdoor microclimate benefits and energy saving resulting from green roofs retrofits. Energy and Buildings, 121, 217-229. [CrossRef]
  3. Berardi, U. Beyond sustainability assessment systems: Upgrading topics by enlarging the scale of assessment. J. Sustain. Build. Technol. Urban Dev. 2011, 2, 276–282. [CrossRef]
  4. Berardi, U. Sustainability assessment in the construction sector: Rating systems and rated buildings. Dev. 2012, 20, 411–424. [CrossRef]
  5. Berardi, U. Sustainability assessments of communities through rating systems. Dev. Sustain. 2013, 15, 1573–1591. [CrossRef]
  6. Bocken, N. M. P., De Pauw, I., Bakker, C., & Van Der Grinten, B. (2016). Product design and business model strategies for a circular economy. Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering, 33(5), 308-320.
  7. Bullen, P. A., & Love, P. E. D. (2011). Adaptive reuse of heritage buildings. Structural Survey, 29(5), 411-421.
  8. Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2017). What is a circular economy? [Online] Available at: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/circular-economy/concept.
  9. European Environment Agency. Building renovation: where circular economy and climate meet. (2022) https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/building-renovation-where-circular-economy.
  10. European Commission. (2017). The Circular Economy: A European Overview. [Online] Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/circular-economy/.
  11. Circle Economy. (2017). Circular Amsterdam: Circular Amsterdam: A vision and action agenda for the city and metropolitan area. [CrossRef]
  12. Cramer, J. (2018). The function of transition brokers in the regional governance of implementing circular economy–A comparative case study of six Dutch regions. Sustainability, 10(9), 3233. [CrossRef]
  13. Fabi, V.; Vettori, M.P.; Faroldi, E. Adaptive Reuse Practices and Sustainable Urban Development: Perspectives of Innovation for European Historic Spa Towns. Sustainability 2021, 13, 5531. [CrossRef]
  14. Felipe Bucci Ancapi, Karel Van den Berghe, Ellen van Bueren,The circular built environment toolbox: A systematic literature review of policy instruments,journal of Cleaner Production,Volume373,(2022),133918,ISSN 09596526. [CrossRef]
  15. Frantzeskaki, N., et al. (2019). Nature-based solutions for urban sustainability: A review of the role of ecosystems in urban design. Urban Ecosystems, 22(2), 239-257.
  16. Geng, Y., Sarkis, J., & Ke, Y. (2013). Greening the supply chain: A review and some research directions. International Journal of Production Economics, 140(1), 150-159. [CrossRef]
  17. G.J. Coates. The sustainable urban district of vauban in Freiburg, Germany. (2013) Int. J. of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics. Vol. 8, No. 4 (2013) 265–286. [CrossRef]
  18. Geissdoerfer, M., et al. (2017). The circular economy – A new sustainability paradigm? Journal of Cleaner Production, 143, 757-768.
  19. Ijla, A., & Brostrom, T., The Sustainable Viability of Adaptive Reuse of Historic Buildings: the experiences of Two World Heritage Old Cities; Bethlehem in Palestine and Visby in Sweden (2015). International Invention Journal of Arts and Social Sciences (ISSN: 2408-7238) Vol.2(4)pp5266,August,2015Availableonlinehttp://internationalinventjournals.org/journals/IIJASS. [CrossRef]
  20. Julia Winslow, Lars Coenen, Sustainability transitions to circular cities: Experimentation between urban vitalism and mechanism, Cities,Volume 142,(2023),104531,ISSN 0264-2751. [CrossRef]
  21. Kabisch, N., et al. (2016). Nature-based solutions to climate change mitigation and adaptation in urban areas: Perspectives on indicators, knowledge gaps, barriers, and opportunities for action. Ecology and Society, 21(2), 39. [CrossRef]
  22. Langston, C., & Shen, L.-Y. (2010). Application of the adaptive reuse potential model in Hong Kong: A case study of Lui Seng Chun. International Journal of Strategic Property Management, 11(4), 193-207. [CrossRef]
  23. Mguni, P., Abrams, A., Herslund, L., B., Cardem, K., Fell, J., Armitage, N., & Dollie, A., Towards water resilience through Nature-based Solutions in the Global South? Scoping the prevailing conditions for Water Sensitive Design in Cape Town and Johannesburg. (2022). [CrossRef]
  24. Nowak, D. J., & Greenfield, E. A. (2014). Tree Cover and Urban Forest Effects on Air Quality. Springer.
  25. Obersteg, A., Arlati, A., Acke, A., Berruti, G., Czapiewski, K., Dąbrowski, M., Heurkens, E., Mezei, C., Palestino, M., Varjú, V., Wójcik, M., & Knieling, J. (2019). Urban Regions Shifting to Circular Economy: Understanding Challenges for New Ways of Governance. Urban Planning, 4(3), 19 . [CrossRef]
  26. OECD. (2016). Circular Economy in Cities: Overview of the policy landscape. [Online] Available at: https://www.oecd.org/environment/circular-economy/.
  27. Olivier, C., Dixon, K., & Fisher, D. (2019). Addressing Water Scarcity through Nature-Based Solutions: A Case Study of Cape Town. Springer.
  28. OECD. (2016). Circular Economy and the Role of Urban Planning. OECD Publishing. Raymond, C. M., et al. (2017). A framework for assessing and implementing the co-benefits of nature-based solutions in urban areas. Environmental Science Policy, 77, 15-24. [CrossRef]
  29. Remoy, HT., & van der Voordt, DJM. (2014). Adaptive reuse of office buildings into housing: Opportunities and risks . Building Research and Information: the international journal of research, development and demonstration, 42(3), 381-390. [CrossRef]
  30. Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland. 2021. https://www.seai.ie/news-and-events/news/energy-in-ireland-2021/.
  31. Tan, P. Y., Wang, J., & Sia, A. (2013). Perspectives on five decades of the urban greening of Singapore. Cities, 32, 24-32. [CrossRef]
  32. Tight, M 2016, 'Sustainable urban transport - the role of walking and cycling', Institution of Civil Engineers. Proceedings. Engineering Sustainability, vol. 169, no. 3, 87-91. [CrossRef]
  33. Tzoulas, K., Korpela, K., & Venn, S. (2007). Promoting Ecosystem and Human Health in Urban Areas Using Green Infrastructure: A Literature Review . [CrossRef]
  34. UN. (2018). World Urbanization Prospects: The 2018 Revision. United Nations. Williams, J. (2022). Challenges to implementing circular development – lessons from London. International Journal of Urban Sustainable Development, 14(1), 287–303. [CrossRef]
  35. Wong, L., Adaptive Reuse: Extending the Lives of Buildings (2016). [CrossRef]
  36. Yigitcanlar, T.; Kamruzzaman, M. Planning, Development and Management of Sustainable Cities: A Commentary from the Guest Editors. Sustainability 2015, 7, 14677-14688. [CrossRef]
  37. Zora, K., Strand, R., & Volker, T., The Circular Economy in EuropeCritical Perspectives on Policies and Imaginaries. (2021). https://www.routledge.com/The-Circular-Economy-in-Europe-Critical-Perspectives-on-Policies-and-Imaginaries/Kovacic-Strand-Volker/p/book/9781032085357.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Copyright: This open access article is published under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, which permit the free download, distribution, and reuse, provided that the author and preprint are cited in any reuse.
Prerpints.org logo

Preprints.org is a free preprint server supported by MDPI in Basel, Switzerland.

facebook logotwitter logolinkedin logo
MDPI Initiatives
Important Links
Subscribe

Disclaimer

Terms of Use

Privacy Policy

© 2024 MDPI (Basel, Switzerland) unless otherwise stated