Urban sustainability issues : resource-efficient cities: good practice.
Date: 2016-01-06
Institutions: European Environment Agency
Subjects: EU environmental policy, EU policy, common transport policy, energy policy, environmental impact, exploitation of resources, land use, management of resources, natural resources, research report, sustainable development, town, town planning, urban area, urban centre

EEA Technical report  No 24/2015

Urban sustainability issues —    
Resource-efficient cities: good practice

ISSN 1725-2237

EEA Technical report  No 24/2015

Urban sustainability issues —    
Resource-efficient cities: good practice

Cover design: EEA
Cover photo: © Barcelona city Council
Layout: EEA/Rosendahls a/s

Legal notice
The contents of this publication do not necessarily reflect the official opinions of the European Commission or other 
institutions of the European Union. Neither the European Environment Agency nor any person or company acting on 
behalf of the Agency is responsible for the use that may be made of the information contained in this report. 

Copyright notice
© European Environment Agency, 2015
Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.

More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://europa.eu).

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2015

ISBN 978-92-9213-711-3
ISSN 1725-2237
doi:10.2800/69420

European Environment Agency
Kongens Nytorv 6
1050 Copenhagen K
Denmark

Tel.: +45 33 36 71 00
Web: eea.europa.eu
Enquiries: eea.europa.eu/enquiries

Contents

Contents

List of figures, tables and boxes ............................................................................................... 5

Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................... 7

Executive summary  ................................................................................................................... 8

1  What is this report about? ................................................................................................. 14

1.1  Three reports on resource-efficient cities ..........................................................................14

1.1.1  What is a resource-efficient city? .............................................................................15

1.1.2  Resource-efficient cities: good practice ..................................................................15

1.1.3  Enabling resource-efficient cities .............................................................................15

1.2  Scope of this report ...............................................................................................................15

2  Avoiding, preventing and reducing ................................................................................... 17

2.1 

Integration of demand and supply .....................................................................................17

2.1.1  Oversized or underused infrastructure ..................................................................17

2.1.2  Housing bubbles and waste of resources ..............................................................18

2.1.3  The empty buildings challenge ................................................................................18

2.2  The supply of resources from the hinterland ....................................................................19

2.2.1  Conflict between water users...................................................................................20

2.2.2  Surrounding areas as suppliers of renewable energy ..........................................20

2.3 

Integrated urban developments  ........................................................................................21

2.3.1  Changes in the dense urban system  ......................................................................21

2.3.2  The scale issue ...........................................................................................................21

2.3.3  No unique strategy to become a 'green' city ..........................................................22

2.3.4  The ecodistrict as an integrated approach at the district level ............................24

2.4  Renovating the building stock  ............................................................................................25

2.4.1  Developing a holistic approach to renovation .......................................................29

2.4.2  Renovation of the built heritage  .............................................................................31

2.4.3  Scaling up renovation ................................................................................................33

2.4.4  Enabling changes  ......................................................................................................33

2.5  The urban transport system ................................................................................................35

2.6  The urban water system  ......................................................................................................37

2.6.1  The role of the urban pattern  .................................................................................37

2.6.2  Water losses ...............................................................................................................37

2.6.3  Water–energy nexus .................................................................................................38

3

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceContents

2.7  Demand-side policies............................................................................................................40

2.7.1 

Infrastructure shapes our everyday practice .........................................................40

2.7.2  Preventing resource consumption  .........................................................................41

2.7.3  Sharing or borrowing rather than owning .............................................................51

2.8 

In a nutshell ............................................................................................................................ 54

3  Reusing, recycling, harvesting and producing  ................................................................ 56

3.1  Reusing and recycling  ..........................................................................................................56

3.1.1  Energy losses ..............................................................................................................57

3.1.2  Water cascading  ........................................................................................................59

3.1.3  Recovery of nutrients from wastewater  ................................................................60

3.1.4  Waste challenges .......................................................................................................60

3.1.5  Organic waste.............................................................................................................65

3.1.6  Reusing products and preparing for reuse   ..........................................................67

3.1.7  Recycling waste from construction and demolition ..............................................70

3.2  Harvesting and producing  ...................................................................................................72

3.2.1  Local energy production ...........................................................................................72

3.2.2  Producing heating and power  .................................................................................74

3.2.3  Urban water harvesting ............................................................................................76

3.3 

In a nutshell ............................................................................................................................ 82

4  The key lessons learnt ........................................................................................................ 84

Bibliography .............................................................................................................................. 85

4

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceList of figures, tables and boxes

List of figures, tables and boxes

List of figures

Figure 1.1  
Figure 2.1 
Figure 2.2 
Figure 2.3  

Figure 2.4  
Figure 2.5  
Figure 2.6 
Figure 2.7 
Figure 2.8 
Figure 2.9 
Figure 2.10 
Figure 3.1 
Figure 3.2  
Figure 3.3  
Figure 3.4 

The links between the three reports on resource-efficient cities ..................................... 16
The principles of green urbanism  ........................................................................................ 22
Smart and bioclimatic densification  .................................................................................... 25
Drivers of the change in average annual energy consumption  
per household in the EU-27 between 1990 and 2010 ........................................................ 27
Composition of housing stock, 2012 .................................................................................... 29
Energy loss for buildings with a floor area of 96 m² and different envelope areas ....... 30
Water losses in some European cities .................................................................................. 38
Municipal waste generated per capita in 36 European countries (2004 and 2012) ....... 42
Waste generation per capita by city and country ............................................................... 44
Waste generation and GDP per capita in European cities by country ............................. 44
Waste generation and GDP per capita by size of European city ....................................... 45
Scaling up urban harvesting from block to city scale ......................................................... 57
Drivers for transforming cities into zero waste cities ......................................................... 61
Bristol has designed a Good Food Plan to coordinate its food system  .......................... 80
Some opportunities for action at city level .......................................................................... 81

List of tables

Table 2.1 
Table 2.2  
Table 2.3 
Table 2.4 
Table 2.5 

Table 3.1 

List of boxes

Box 1.1 
Box 2.1 
Box 2.2 
Box 2.3 
Box 2.4 
Box 2.5 

Box 2.6  
Box 2.7  
Box 2.8  
Box 2.9 
Box 2.10 
Box 2.11 
Box 2.12 
Box 2.13 
Box 2.14 

Age of housing stock in Europe ............................................................................................. 28
Framework of policy instruments to promote sustainable mobility ................................ 36
Estimation of energy consumed in water management for the household sector ....... 39
Causes of food waste in households and the food service sector ................................... 48
The role of local authorities in preventing and reducing the consumption  
of resources ............................................................................................................................. 54
The role of citizens, businesses and local authorities in reusing, recycling,  
harvesting and producing resources in urban areas ......................................................... 83

Urban areas, cities and the urban environment  ................................................................ 14 
Turning vacant spaces into community spaces in Budapest ............................................ 19
Green urbanism  ..................................................................................................................... 22
The Venlo-region: an approach to stop the decline ........................................................... 23
The integrated approach of Copenhagen ............................................................................ 24
Well-designed buildings do not guarantee high energy efficiency:  
the case of ZAC de Bonne in Grenoble ................................................................................ 26
Buildings are the largest energy-consuming component of infrastructure .................... 27
Building shape influences energy performance ................................................................. 30
Demolition or refurbishment?............................................................................................... 32
Cities tackle energy poverty  .................................................................................................. 34
The urban water cycle ............................................................................................................ 37
Reducing energy consumed in water collection in Grobbendonk, Belgium ................... 39
Carbon-neutral wastewater treatment plant ...................................................................... 39
Hamburg water cycle .............................................................................................................. 40
Waste generation in European cities .................................................................................... 43

5

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
List of figures, tables and boxes

Box 2.15 
Box 2.16  
Box 2.17  
Box 2.18 
Box 2.19 
Box 2.20 
Box 2.21  
Box 2.22  
Box 2.23 
Box 2.24 
Box 2.25 
Box 2.26 
Box 3.1 
Box 3.2  
Box 3.3 
Box 3.4 
Box 3.5 
Box 3.6 
Box 3.7  
Box 3.8 
Box 3.9 
Box 3.10 
Box 3.11 
Box 3.12 
Box 3.13 
Box 3.14 
Box 3.15 
Box 3.16 
Box 3.17 
Box 3.18 
Box 3.19 
Box 3.20 
Box 3.21 
Box 3.22 
Box 3.23 
Box 3.24 
Box 3.25 
Box 3.26 
Box 3.27 
Box 3.28 
Box 3.29 
Box 3.30 
Box 3.31 
Box 3.32 

Waste prevention measures in accordance with the life cycle approach  ....................... 46
Labels for ecodynamic companies in Brussels ................................................................... 46
Eco-labelling for packaging in Poland ................................................................................... 46
Waste avoidance: from information to action .................................................................... 47
Municipalities acting to prevent food waste........................................................................ 47
The role of demand-side policies in Barcelona's water crisis ............................................ 49
Thames Water's water efficiency programme .................................................................... 50
Smart City Cologne ................................................................................................................. 51
Learning to save energy ......................................................................................................... 51
Learning to lead a green lifestyle ...............................................................................................51
Sharing clothes instead of owning them ............................................................................. 52
Lending tools instead of owning them ................................................................................. 52
What does it mean? ................................................................................................................ 57
CitInES (City and Industry Energy Strategy) ......................................................................... 58
Stockholm biogas for vehicle transport  ...................................................................................58
Micro-turbines in a drinking water treatment plant in Nice  ............................................. 58
New technologies for heat recovery from wastewater ...................................................... 59
Learning to use greywater in the metropolitan area of Barcelona .................................. 59
Research on the zero waste index  ....................................................................................... 61
'Pay as you throw' in Flemish municipalities ....................................................................... 62
Pay-per-weight charging system ........................................................................................... 62
Eco Shop in the Greater Oporto Area .................................................................................. 62
Door-to-door information campaign in Elefsina (Greece) ................................................. 63
The Treynntstadt Berlin initiative to increase participation in waste separation  .......... 64
Two types of compost in Odense ......................................................................................... 65
Waste food collection, the United Kingdom's experience ................................................. 66
Collection and treatment of food waste in Malmö ............................................................. 66
Milan: door-to-door food waste collection  ......................................................................... 67
Developing a local market for reusing and recycling materials in Ferrara ...................... 68
The swap market — Byttemarked ........................................................................................ 68
Vienna Repair Network  ......................................................................................................... 69
Repair and reuse centre in the city of Graz ......................................................................... 69
Examples of good practice in national waste prevention programmes .......................... 70
The recycling of plasterboard waste .................................................................................... 71
A cooperative for producing renewable energy ................................................................. 72
Ambitious goals are achievable, even for a medium-sized city ........................................ 73
The London Energy Master Plan ........................................................................................... 74
From consumer to 'prosumer' .............................................................................................. 76
Water harvesting in Berlin ..................................................................................................... 77
Rainwater harvesting in the metropolitan area of Barcelona ........................................... 77
Bristol's Food Policy Council  ................................................................................................. 80
The potential for production in rooftop gardens in Bologna ............................................ 80
Creating space for sustainable food systems in urban communities .............................. 81
Sustainable urban gardening in Berlin ................................................................................. 82

6

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceAcknowledgements

Acknowledgements

This report was written and coordinated by 
Marie Cugny-Seguin and reviewed by: 

•  European Environment Agency colleagues: Almut 
Reichel, Anca-Diana Barbu, Andrus Meiner, Bo 
Neergaard  Jacobsen, Geertrui Louwagie, Jasmina 
Bogdanovic Milutinovic, Rastilav Stanik and Ronan 
Uhel;

• 

the European Topic Centre 'Urban, land and soil 
systems': Cristina Garzillo, Ece Aksoy, Jaume Fons, 
Mirko Gregor and Raquel Ubach, 

•  partners from the 'Integrated urban metabolism 
in Europe' network: David Ludlow (University 
of the West of England), Didier Vancutsem 
(International society of city and regional planners 
(ISOCARP)), Floriane Bernardot (Energy Cities), 
Lorenzo Bono (AmbienteItalia). 

This report is based on different studies developed by 
ETC 'Urban, land and soil systems' for the EEA: 

• 

• 

'Ensuring efficient cities in Europe: urbanisation, life 
styles and consumption': Jaume Fons-Esteve, Mirko 
Gregor, Alejandro Simon, Colina, Miquel Sainz and 
Emmanuel Mancosu;

'Resource efficient cities': Mirko Gregor, Jaume Fons, 
Raquel Ubach, Roger Milego, and the participation 
of Floriane Bernardot (Energy Cities).

The information on waste collection and the analysis 
of Urban Audit data on waste is broadly based on 
the study 'Waste in urban areas' prepared in 2013 
by David McKinnon, Andrea Rispo, Leonidas Milios, 
Tamas Kallay, Peter Szuppinger, Christian Löwe from 
European Topic Centre 'Sustainable consumption and 
production'.

Floriane Bernardot (Energy Cities) has contributed 
to the different parts of the report with a focus 
on energy. Christine Marlet, Secretary General 
of Eurogypsum, has contributed to Box 3.22 on 
plasterboard waste.

7

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceExecutive summary

Executive summary 

Our current pattern of resource use is leading to 
the depletion and, consequently, scarcity of natural 
resources (1), the degradation of ecosystems and 
volatile and increasing prices of natural resources. 
On a planet with finite resources, the challenge is to 
find a way of delivering greater value and more services 
with fewer inputs (EC, 2011a). Resources are defined 
as raw materials, such as fuels, minerals and metals, 
but also food, soil, water, air, biomass and ecosystems 
(EC, 2011b). 

Resource efficiency is a priority objective of the 
Europe 2020 Strategy. The 'Roadmap to a resource 
efficient Europe' is one of its seven flagship initiatives 
(EC, 2011a). It sets out a framework to support the 
shift towards a resource-efficient and low-carbon 
economy in many policy areas: agendas for climate 
change, energy, transport, industry, raw materials, 
agriculture, fisheries, biodiversity and regional 
development. The Roadmap also gives guidance 
on the design and implementation of measures to 
transform the economy (EC, 2011c). According to the 
Roadmap, resource efficiency 'is a way to deliver more 
with less'. (EC, 2011a). The 7th Environment Action 
Programme (7th EAP), 'Living well, within the limits of 
our planet', which will guide European environment 
policy until 2020, identifies a resource-efficient, green 
and competitive low-carbon economy as a key objective 
(EU, 2013). Priority 8 of the 7th EAP focuses on urban 
sustainability.

Traditionally, resource efficiency policy has focused on 
production and consumption. However, urban areas 
have considerable potential for improving resource 
efficiency and helping to deliver the climate and energy 
package (the 20-20-20 targets) (2). Cities are home to 
72,4% of the total EU28's population (Eurostat, 2015), 
are the engines of the economy, seats of learning 
and fertile ground for innovation, and, overall, 
municipalities supply and control public services to 

city residents and businesses that are responsible for 
the majority of resource and energy consumption and 
harmful emissions. However, owing to the density of 
the population and the proximity of the population to 
businesses, the urban system is a resource-efficient 
one. 

Like living organisms, cities require considerable 
flows and stocks of physical, chemical and biological 
resources through the goods and services they import 
or export to supply the urban population and to 
maintain their functions (Barles, 2010). They need 
input flows (such as energy, fuel, metal, wood, water, 
food, materials for building and infrastructure, space) 
to maintain their vital functions (Decker et al., 2000). 
After transformation and use, these 'metabolic inputs' 
are discharged to the environment (atmosphere, water 
and soils) as 'metabolic outputs' in the form of air 
emissions, liquid and solid effluent and waste materials 
that have upstream and downstream environmental 
impacts. 

These urban metabolic flows can be considerably 
reduced and recycled through better design, planning 
and management of the urban socio-technical system 
and by raising awareness in society. The main challenge 
for cities is to move from the current linear model, 
an open system depending on the hinterland (3) for 
both supply and disposal, to a circular model, thereby 
not only reducing metabolic flows but also recycling 
resources, harvesting (e.g. water harvesting) and 
producing energy (e.g. local production of renewables) 
and food (e.g. urban farming, including rooftop 
gardens). Owing to cities' critical mass, a slight change 
in the way they use resources can have a huge effect. 

The density of cities makes them a resource-efficient 
model. The consumption per capita of resources 
(in particular biomass, metals and industrial minerals) 
is lower in densely populated areas than in relatively 

(1)  Natural resources can be defined as all inputs into the economy (EC, 2011a) such as raw materials (fuels, minerals and metals) and food, soil, 

water, air, biomass and ecosystems (EC, 2011b).

(2)  The EU climate and energy package sets targets for the year 2020: a 20% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions (compared with 1990); 20% of 

energy from renewable sources; and a 20% improvement in energy efficiency.

(3)  The hinterland can be worldwide for the supply of certain resources (e.g. raw materials, food).

8

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceExecutive summary

sparsely populated areas (Krausmann et al., 2008). 
Urban density reduces commuting distances, 
air pollution, energy demand, land take and soil 
destruction, and the fragmentation of habitats. It allows 
economies of scale in citizen-oriented services such 
as collective transport, power, water and sanitation 
services, waste management and district heating. 
Municipalities are key players in managing resources. 
They also have the capacity to raise urban players' 
(policymakers, city managers and stakeholders) 
awareness of urban flows and their impact and to 
encourage participation in decision-making. 

Nevertheless, municipalities face diverse problems in 
managing resources, such as the temporal variations 
in quantity and quality that affect the supply of and 
the demand for resources or their dependency 
on trans-boundary engineered infrastructures 
(e.g. power grid, drinking water network). Their latest 
challenge is to move away from the current centralised 
system with one-site and end-of-pipe utilities driven 
by municipalities or utility suppliers to decentralised 
systems in which users are simultaneously owners 
and producers. Despite this complexity, some cities 
find a way of developing innovative place-based 
policies and strategies with local participants and of 
cooperating with neighbourhood municipalities instead 
of competing. Some cities have adopted ambitious 
agendas with targets, based on a long-term vision, and 
have successfully implemented transition management 
based on a co-creative and participatory process to 
bring about changes in society. 

There is no 'one-size-fits-all' strategy. Each city needs 
to develop appropriate integrated place-based 
solutions, taking into account all the factors that 
influence resource efficiency. Technological solutions 
alone, such as the traditional end-of-pipe and one-site 
solutions, are no longer sufficient. Examples of good 
practice show that urban 'flows' and urban 'forms' 
need to be integrated, and spatial development 
(urban planning, land use, urban design, density) has 
to be coordinated with the planning of infrastructure 
systems (location, concentration, distribution, nature 
of demand, capacity thresholds, technology choices). 
Transition towards resource- and energy-efficient cities, 
and more generally sustainable cities, is a systemic 
challenge that will require radical transformation 
of every dimension of the urban system: technical 
(e.g. the interactions between policies, the long-term 
impacts, the integration of supply and demand), social 
(e.g. civil society's expectations, social practices) and 
institutional (Lorenzoni et al., 2007). Urban authorities 
need not only to develop better integration of sectoral 
policies but also to collaborate with different levels of 
government, cutting across jurisdictional boundaries, 

and to develop the art of working with participants with 
different interests. 

This report is one of a series of three short reports, 
described below, based on an overview of recent 
literature and successful case studies focusing on 
resource efficiency issues in urban areas. The reports 
analyse the challenges faced by cities and some of the 
solutions developed to meet these challenges, including 
governance and finding ways of engaging society in the 
decision-making process. As there is no one-size-fits-all 
solution, each city has to find its own path to resource 
efficiency and, more generally, sustainability. 

What is a resource-efficient city? 

This report focuses on the concept of urban 
metabolism and the circular model. Compactness is 
highlighted as a way of minimising input and output 
flows. It analyses in particular the need for land and 
the link between spatial development and the need for 
energy for transport. Causal loops are developed for 
water use and energy use related to transport. 

Key findings

Urban flows
Urban flows depend on drivers (e.g. urban planning, 
infrastructure, demography, economic specialisation), 
spatial patterns (e.g. land use intensity, land cover 
change, urban density, urban form) and the lifestyle 
of the population (e.g. mobility, food, income). The 
spatial pattern is key to shaping flows, in particular 
those related to mobility. Apart from an efficient public 
transport system, sufficient street intersections and 
connectivity are required to achieve walkability and 
cyclability.

Compactness
A liveable, compact and dense urban area with an 
efficient public transport system, mixed land use at 
the local scale, and green spaces is considered to be 
a resource-efficient model making lower demands 
on resources per capita compared with a less dense 
city. In particular, compactness results in using less 
energy for mobility and less water and material 
for infrastructure and reduces the carbon dioxide 
emissions from housing. Good robust urban planning 
is crucial to densify the city and limit urban expansion 
at the same time as improving the quality of life for city 
residents. Strong urban planning that goes beyond the 
limits of an individual municipality is critical to achieving 
compactness.

9

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceExecutive summary

Research and methodology
Researchers have developed different methodologies 
to analyse urban material flows. The major limitation 
of these methodologies (e.g. material flows analysis) 
is the lack of data on material flows at the city or 
metropolitan scale. However, studies have been carried 
on different cities in Europe that help us to understand 
the quantities in resource flows passing through cities 
and remaining as stocks (e.g. building, infrastructure) 
and therefore the opportunities for decoupling. 

Land as a finite resource 
Land is a finite resource providing space for people and 
supporting terrestrial ecosystems. Limiting land take 
is already an important land policy target at national 
(e.g. Germany) or sub-national level. Studies show that 
there is no correlation between growth in the urban 
area and population growth. 

Land recycling
Land recycling, i.e. regeneration of previously 
developed land that is currently not in active use or 
available for redevelopment (so-called brownfield sites), 
is seen as a solution to limit land take. The reuse of 
brownfield land (e.g. former industrial areas, waterfront 
areas) has become important in developing housing, 
modernising cities and regenerating deprived areas. 
In many European cities, the reuse of former industrial 
and waterfront areas has become a key instrument in 
combatting urban sprawl and densifying urban areas. 

Resource-efficient cities: good practice 

This report analyses innovative measures taken by 
local authorities to minimise the use of resources 
and to harvest resources (e.g. rainwater) in the city. 
It considers issues of both supply and demand, from 
upstream measures (e.g. avoidance, prevention, 
reduction) to downstream action (reusing, recycling, 
harvesting). 

cities have developed community mapping initiatives 
(e.g. Hamburg, Vienna, Budapest). 

The role of the hinterland
Cities depend on their hinterland — a worldwide 
hinterland for globalised trade and regional and 
surrounding rural areas for ecosystem services 
(e.g. recreational areas, flood protection) — for the 
supply of resources (e.g. water, food, renewable 
energy), for the disposal of waste (e.g. waste 
management, wastewater management plan) and 
for space for an interconnected infrastructure 
(e.g. road network, power grid). This interdependence 
between urban areas and their rural surroundings, far 
from the limit of the city's jurisdiction, poses a major 
problem for resource management and governance. 
Some cities succeed in integrating their surroundings 
into the supply of resources (e.g. Copenhagen's 
offshore wind power development, Vienna's forest 
biomass power station, Amsterdam's food strategy). 

Integrated urban developments
The complexity of the metabolism increases with the 
spatial scale, the mix of functions and sectors, and the 
complexity of the stakeholders and institutions. To 
optimise integration, all the initiatives need to be scaled 
up or down in order to be connected each other. There 
are many initiatives at the scale of the building unit 
where technology can be easily changed. The district 
scale offers more potential to significantly increase 
the benefits and savings. However, this requires acting 
on all components of the urban design, not only at 
the controlled scale of the district. Changes in dense 
urban areas need to take into account the existing 
urban fabric, the infrastructure networks and the social 
consequences (e.g. accessibility to green areas and 
services, exposure to noise and pollution, regulation 
of temperature). This requires an understanding 
of life cycles and flows within and beyond the site. 
Some cities have demonstrated that it is possible to 
develop an integrated approach at the urban scale 
(e.g. Amsterdam).

Key findings

Integration of the demand for and supply of resources 
Oversized infrastructures that are not adapted to needs 
(e.g. the housing bubble in Spain and Ireland) result in a 
waste of resources and of funding for construction and 
maintenance. They may also limit the options in the 
future and lock the city in to an outdated vision of the 
urban environment. Empty buildings and apartments 
indicate a misuse of resources that is difficult to map 
owing to the dispersion of the information. Some 

Improvement of the urban technical system
Improving resource efficiency requires renovation of 
the urban technical system — that related to energy 
and water supply, waste management, mobility and 
housing — that shapes the resource flows and affects 
the well-being of city residents. The renovation of 
existing buildings remains a major challenge, although 
there are technical solutions even for heritage 
buildings. The main obstacles are lack of motivation on 
the part of owners due to the cost, uncertainty over the 

10

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceExecutive summary

payback period and the lack of expertise. The existence 
of a reliable framework to promote energy saving and 
to provide information (e.g. Lyon, Grenoble, Bristol) 
seems a good way of motivating individual owners and 
community initiatives.

cities cannot be self-sufficient in food, energy and 
water, this sustainable approach changes perceptions 
regarding resources and therefore urban management 
and planning.

Demand-side policies
Lifestyle is matter of choice as well as habits that are 
shaped by the context. Everyday practices depend 
on normal standards (e.g. going on holiday, owning 
a computer), the existing infrastructure (e.g. a lack 
of public transport increases the use of cars) and the 
awareness of citizens. Municipalities have opportunities 
to develop demand-side policies to prevent waste 
(e.g. Brussels), including food waste (e.g. Halmstad, 
Brno), or to save water (e.g. Barcelona during its water 
crisis) or energy (e.g. Sønderborg, Gothenburg).

Reusing and recycling resources 
The potential for reusing and recycling local resources 
depends on the scale, local conditions and urban 
patterns and activities. Some cities reuse energy 
losses through district heating (e.g. Copenhagen), 
energy stored in the water cycle (e.g. production of 
biogas from sewage sludge in Stockholm, energy 
from micro-turbines installed in the drinking water 
supply in Nice), promoting the reuse of greywater 
(e.g. some municipalities in the metropolitan area of 
Barcelona), and encouraging the reuse and swapping 
of goods, as well as markets for second-hand goods 
(e.g. a repair and reuse centre in the city of Graz). 
Some municipalities have also developed economic 
instruments to improve their recycling performance 
(e.g. 'pay as you throw' schemes in Flemish 
municipalities), targeted information aimed at reducing 
waste (e.g. the Trenndstadt Berlin initiative), and 
collection and treatment of organic waste (food waste, 
garden waste) to produce compost (e.g. Odense) or 
biogas (e.g. Malmö).

Harvesting and producing
The built environment and city surroundings can be 
self-producers and reservoirs of primary resources 
that can be harvested. Some cities have developed 
their own municipal energy company (e.g. Montdidier) 
or district heating incorporating a high proportion 
of renewable energy (e.g. Berlin, Copenhagen, 
Gothenburg, Helsinki, Stockholm, Vienna), some are 
promoting rainwater harvesting (e.g. some towns in 
the metropolitan area of Barcelona encourage the 
use of rainwater after recurrent droughts threatened 
their domestic supply), and some encourage local food 
production (e.g. Bristol, Berlin, Bologna). Even if most 

Smart cities
Information and communications technology is a key 
enabler in addressing urban challenges. It is a way of 
providing tools to manage utilities efficiently as well as 
providing intelligent organisation solutions (e.g. smart 
tickets and information on public transport such as 
in Vienna, a smart grid such as that in Sønderborg, 
car-sharing tools such as the Getaround app), and 
governance and participatory tools (e.g. smart cycling 
plans in Copenhagen). 

Enabling resource-efficient cities 

The policy instruments for achieving resource and 
energy efficiency are inadequate to deal with the 
complexity of urban challenges owing to the variety of 
individuals and organisations contributing to resource 
efficiency through their daily decisions and practices. 
Some cities have adopted targeted policy agendas and 
developed a transition management approach based 
on dialogue between the participants.

Key findings

Transition management
Achieving the shift towards a resource-efficient 
society requires fundamental changes, not merely 
simple optimisation of urban flow management but 
a transformation in institutional frameworks, mindsets 
and practices. These changes cannot simply be 
planned by policymakers and city administrators. Cities 
and regions that have been successful in following 
ambitious agendas towards resource efficiency have 
engaged society in the decision-making process 
(e.g. the circular economy in Flanders, the sharing 
economy in Seoul, the transformation of the city of 
Bottrop). Engaging society ensures a solid knowledge 
base and co-ownership of the strategy, making it less 
vulnerable to short-term political changes.

As an entry point for mobilising people, the process 
can start with something practical and operational. 
Policymakers can also foster changes by empowering 
users and stakeholders (e.g. the Bicycle Account in 
Copenhagen), using grassroots initiatives that emerge 
at the local level and explore innovative solutions 
(e.g. 'organically grown' communities, collective 
gardening, sharing communities) (InContext, 2013).

11

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceExecutive summary

The arena
Success stories show the importance of 'the arena' 
in the participatory process, a forum in which 
all stakeholders (users, firms, public research 
organisations and public authorities, non-governmental 
organisations) network to envisage a common future, 
identify pathways and start experimenting to put things 
into practice. It is a tool to facilitate societal change 
(e.g. Bottrop). 

Institutionalisation
To ensure long-term commitment, institutionalisation 
goes hand in hand with sharing responsibility. The 
adoption of strategic frameworks or the establishment 
of new institutional actors (e.g. InnovationCity 
Management GmbH in Bottrop) act as a driving 
force for resource efficiency, as well as an insurance 
policy in the event of short-term changes in political 
commitment (e.g. Bologna's annual use of ecoBudget 
since 2001).

Striving for excellence
Choosing an ambitious goal, one that all stakeholders 
can get behind, has the power to set the entire city 
or region on a completely new path, setting off 
a transformative dynamic process and inspiring new, 
even more ambitious, goals (e.g. Güssing, Växjö).

Scale and level
There is no 'correct' level of governance at which to 
address the resource efficiency issue. Measures can be 
taken at all levels, ranging from the neighbourhood to 
the city, from the metropolitan area to the entire region 
or on another scale altogether. To a certain extent, 
the scale depends on the resources in question. For 
instance, vacant spaces can more easily be addressed 
at the neighbourhood level (e.g. cataloguing vacant 
spaces in Budapest, energy targets in Copenhagen's 
building code), whereas other issues are more 
appropriate at the regional level (e.g. developing 
a circular economy in Flanders) or the national level 
(e.g. legislation with national targets for daily land 
take in Germany), and some are best handled at the 
European level (e.g. the Covenant of Mayors).

Taking stock
Each city is unique and there are no one-size-fits-all 
solutions. Local specifics have to be taken into 
consideration in defining appropriate solutions. It is 
important to understand the assets of a territory and to 
make best use of them, and it is crucial to play to local 
strengths. Experience in different cities shows that it is 

important to learn from local participants and initiatives 
(Roorda and Wittmayer, 2014) and what already works 
(e.g. Güssing developed its project based on its rural 
setting, with an abundance of wood from its forests 
that could be used as biomass to produce energy).

Monitoring
A long-term vision and a strategic framework need 
to be combined with monitoring to analyse the 
effectiveness of policies. Pioneering monitoring 
initiatives show that one of the major difficulties 
is finding a reference point against which to judge 
efforts. Considering the diversity of European cities, 
any set of quantitative indicators will offer only limited 
information without the potential for comparison with 
other cities. 

Conclusion

To define strategies and long-term visions and to 
support dialogue with stakeholders during the 
decision-making process, policymakers need to 
understand the metabolism of cities to properly 
assess their current situation and to predict the 
potential consequences of their policy decisions. 
Existing information on European cities has been 
growing and improving in quality since 2006, thanks 
in particular to Urban Audit and Urban Atlas. 
However, there is no comprehensive database on 
urban metabolism, except for certain case studies 
developed as part of projects. The major limitations 
are different definitions of cities, different time series 
and sometimes different methodologies (measured 
versus estimated or modelled). There are considerable 
differences between European cities concerning the 
scope and quality of available information. Some 
Member States have very complete databases, while 
in other countries data are less systematic and 
more fragmented. Therefore, finding appropriate 
information to implement and interpret flows analyses 
remains a major challenge.

Priority 8 of the 7th EAP underpins the need for 'criteria 
to assess the environmental performance of cities, 
taking into account economic, social and territorial 
impacts'. Some initiatives are either under way or 
have already been developed to help local authorities 
to define sustainability criteria and to facilitate 
comparison between cities with similar characteristics. 
At the same time, cities are heterogeneous (e.g. in 
terms of climate, heritage, morphology, demography, 
geographical situation, trajectory, activities, local 
culture). The complexity of the urban system makes 
comparisons difficult but not impossible if they are 

12

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceExecutive summary

done within a group of similar cities. In this way, the 
EEA has developed a typology of EU-28 cities (based 
on 383 cities) in order to analyse groups of cities with 
similar characteristics rather than an individual city.

Finally, these three reports show that the main 
limitation on developing resource-efficient policies 
in urban areas is not a lack of technical solutions 
but more a lack of vision in local participants. Some 

territories, even small towns, have demonstrated 
that it is possible to set and achieve ambitious goals 
by systematically implementing them in all domains 
(sectors and areas) over a long period of time and 
by mobilising stakeholders. They have experienced 
not only a new way of managing their city, more goal 
oriented, but also a new way of thinking about the 
complexity of the urban system and of cooperating 
with stakeholders and neighbourhood areas.  

13

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceWhat is this report about?

1  What is this report about?

Our current pattern of resource use is leading to 
the depletion and, consequently, scarcity of natural 
resources (4), the degradation of ecosystems, and 
volatile and increasing prices of natural resources. 
On a planet with finite resources, the challenge is 
to find a way of delivering greater value and more 
services with fewer inputs (EC, 2011a). The 7th EAP, 
'Living well, within the limits of our planet', identifies 
a resource-efficient, green and competitive low-carbon 
economy as a key objective (EU, 2013). 

Traditionally, resource efficiency policy has focused on 
production and consumption. However, urban areas 
(see Box 1.1) have considerable potential for improving 
resource efficiency and helping to deliver the climate 
and energy package (5). Cities require considerable 
flows, stocks and sinks of physical, chemical and 
biological resources through the goods and services 
they import or export to supply the urban population 
and to maintain their functions (Barles, 2010). These 
urban metabolic flows can be reduced and recycled 
through better design, planning and management 
of the urban socio-technical system and by raising 
society's awareness. Cities can undergo a radical 
transformation in different domains — energy, housing, 
transport systems, waste management, green areas, 
public spaces. Preparing for transformation towards 
resource-efficient urban areas in a controlled manner 
not only reduces the levels and impact of resource use 
but will also increase cities' prosperity, reduce the costs 

in the long term and improve the well-being of their 
citizens. 

To ensure their long-term viability, some cities have 
developed an urban model using less material, 
less carbon and less nutrients. Some are already 
implementing innovative thematic programmes, such 
as those oriented towards zero carbon or zero waste, 
that cut across sectors, levels, institutions and scales. 
This report presents some examples of measures 
developed by innovative cities to manage resources 
flows more efficiently and closing the urban cycle. It 
analyses integrative solutions (e.g. ecodistricts) as well 
as sectoral solutions and optimisation on all scales 
— from the lowest possible (building) to larger scales.

1.1  Three reports on resource-efficient 

cities

This report is part of a series of three short reports, 
based on an overview of recent literature and successful 
case studies focusing on resource efficiency issues in 
urban areas (see Figure 1.1). The reports analyse the 
challenges faced by cities and some solutions to these 
challenges, including those related to governance 
and ways of engaging society in the decision-making 
process. As there is no one-size-fits-all solution, each 
city has to find its own path towards resource efficiency 
and, more generally, urban sustainability. 

Box 1.1  Urban areas, cities and the urban environment 

Urban areas are generally differentiated from other settlements by their population size and functional complexity. 
Most commonly, they are characterised by a particular human settlement pattern, a critical mass and density of people, 
a concentration of man-made structures and activities.

For ease of reading, the terms 'urban area', 'urban environment' and 'city' are used interchangeably throughout this report, 
and no specific distinction is made among the terms with regard to distinct morphologies or administrative boundaries.

(4)  Natural resources can be defined as all inputs into the economy (EC, 2011a), such as raw materials (fuels, minerals and metals) and food, soil, 

water, air, biomass and ecosystems (EC, 2011b).

(5)   The EU climate and energy package sets targets for the year 2020: a 20% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions (compared with 1990); 20% of 

energy from renewable sources; and a 20% improvement in energy efficiency.

14

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
What is this report about?

•  The objective of these reports is to support policy 
development and decision-making. They are 
targeted at policy-makers, decision-makers and 
stakeholders involved in urban management at the 
local and city level as well as at the regional level. 
They analyse the following:

•  Why do resource-efficient urban areas matter?

•  What are the main challenges and what can be done 

to meet these challenges? 

•  What solutions can be implemented on different 

scales and across sectors?

•  What are the drivers of change?

•  How can cities be governed to achieve the transition 

to resource-efficient urban areas?

the majority of resource and energy use and the 
production of emissions and waste. Local authorities 
have the capacity to implement responses on multiple 
scales. The main challenge is to scale up actions from 
the most simple, one function, such as a building for 
housing, or one resource, such as water management, 
to integrated solutions in a large urban area (e.g. an 
ecodistrict) with many functions (e.g. housing, economic 
activities, green areas, renewable energy production, 
water harvesting). Another challenge is to move from 
the current centralised system, with mono-site and 
end-of-pipe utilities driven by municipalities or utility 
suppliers, to decentralised systems in which users are 
owners and producers. The report analyses both the 
supply and the demand issues. It is divided into two 
parts: the first is devoted to how to avoid, prevent and 
reduce the use of resources, and the second addresses 
reusing, cascading, recycling and harvesting.

•  How can we involve society in the decision-making 

1.1.3  Enabling resource-efficient cities

process?

This report is part of the following series of three short 
reports (see Figure 1.1), based on an overview of recent 
literature and successful case studies, that addresses 
resource efficiency issues in urban areas. 

1.1.1  What is a resource-efficient city?

The report presents the concept of urban metabolism, 
the circular model and the role of compactness in 
urban resource efficiency. Cities requires natural 
resources and energy to sustain the daily life and 
activities of the urban population. Nevertheless, 
there are opportunities to minimise input and output 
flows. As the urban form shapes the way people 
live, work and move in urban areas, compactness 
offers the potential to reduce urban flows. The most 
well-documented effects of compactness are the 
reduced need for land and energy for transport. Urban 
planning, based on a vision of the future, developed 
with local stakeholders and crossing administrative 
borders, is a key factor in increasing the density of 
urban areas, developing mixed land use, avoiding the 
unnecessary uptake of land and soil sealing, reducing 
car dependency and encouraging the use of public 
transport, walking and cycling. 

1.1.2  Resource-efficient cities: good practice

Cities are key players in minimising the use of resources 
and in developing the circular model. Generally, 
municipalities provide utilities and control public 
services for citizens and businesses that influence 

To achieve resource- and energy-efficient cities, local 
authorities have to overcome the limitations of policy 
instruments that are insufficient to deal with the 
complexity of urban challenges. They face not only 
strategic, technical and financial challenges but also 
institutional barriers created by the fragmentation 
of responsibilities and decision-making, the number 
and variety of actors (public, private, civil society, 
individuals) contributing to resource efficiency through 
their daily decisions and practices and operating at 
different levels, the challenge of addressing the urban 
system as a whole, and the characteristics of the city 
(geography, economy, climate, history, natural capital, 
social capital, etc.). Despite this complexity, some cities 
have adopted ambitious policy agendas with targets, 
managing the city in a far-sighted goal-oriented way, 
cooperating with surrounding municipalities and other 
levels of governance, and developing a transition 
management approach. This is a form of governance 
that facilitates societal change. It is based on a dialogue 
between private and public actors (users, citizens, 
firms, universities, public authorities) that envisages 
a common future and identifies ways of achieving 
a resource-efficient society and, more generally, 
sustainability.

1.2  Scope of this report

The report presents a wide range of examples 
drawn from European cities to illustrate innovative 
approaches to resource efficiency. Even small cities 
with limited budgets have developed powerful 
solutions. The report is not exhaustive, and other 
solutions may exist. It emphasises the integrated 

15

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceWhat is this report about?

Figure 1.1  

The links between the three reports on resource-efficient cities

Resource-eﬃcient cities 

The context, the concept of urban metabolism, the circular model 

Integration

Compactness
Urban planning
Land recycling

Urban technical system 
Supply

Society
Demand

The factors of complexity, the role of diﬀerent levels of governance,
transitional management in cities

'What is a resource-
eﬃcient city?'

'Resource-
eﬃcient cities:  
good practices'

'Enabling 
resource-
eﬃcient cities'

approach and highlights the capacity of cities to change 
their way of thinking, decision-making and acting. 
Cities that are successful in this respect cooperate, 
collaborate, experiment, innovate and finally develop 
a new model. They succeed in finding solutions despite 
administrative, financial and technical constraints. 
In general, they define ambitious goals, targets and 
strategies for the long term and achieve them step by 
step. 

The first part of the report is focused on 'avoiding, 
preventing, reducing' the use of resources. It analyses 
how a city can be planned and urban flows managed 
in order to use less resources. In general, it is relatively 
easy to take action at the small scale (e.g. a building) 
and in infrastructure having only one function 
(e.g. housing), but there is no significant effect on the 

urban metabolism. The impact of change increases 
with the degree of complexity, involving the spatial 
scale (building, block, neighbourhood, city, region, 
country), a mix of functions and sectors, and a number 
of different stakeholders and institutions. 

The second part of the report analyses the potential for 
improvements in reusing and recycling local resources. 
It addresses not only the circular approach to the 
urban system but also ways of producing energy and 
harvesting food and water. Cities can be considered as 
a source of resources. In this perspective of 'productive' 
cities, the potential resource flows and self-production 
have to be identified so that they can be integrated 
into urban planning to allow efficient harvesting and 
self-production by reducing the distance between the 
source and the demand.

16

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice     
Avoiding, preventing and reducing

2  Avoiding, preventing and reducing

There are different options for improving resource 
efficiency, which can be ranked according to their 
feasibility and efficiency. The most desirable and 
feasible option is to avoid, prevent or minimise the 
use of resources and consequently to decrease 
the amount of waste. There is no unique path to 
resource efficiency, or more generally to urban 
sustainability, because there is no unique city model. 
Resource-efficient development depends on many 
parameters such as existing infrastructures and 
buildings, climate, natural capital, social capital, 
history, size, form and dynamics. 

To develop relevant policies that encourage a culture 
of valuing resources and make preventing and 
reducing waste easier for people and businesses, local 
authorities need not only to network with all urban 
actors but also to cooperate with the surrounding 
rural neighbourhoods that are involved in supplying 
resources and waste disposal (Zaucha and Świątek, 
2013). 

This chapter explores ways of implementing projects 
to reduce resource use in cities — from the most 
complex and integrated solutions at the city level to 
the easier technical solutions at the building level. 

2.1 

Integration of demand and supply

Why develop a new infrastructure if demand is falling 
or if it is possible to make more efficient use of the 
existing infrastructure? Integration of demand and 
supply is a way of avoiding the use of raw materials 
and energy in the construction of infrastructure 
(e.g. the power grid, streets, housing, pipe networks) 
and its associated maintenance. It also helps to 
reduce the budget for investment and maintenance 
and the tariffs of utilities when they are based on the 
principle of cost recovery. An infrastructure that is 
not adapted to demand will be underused. Hence, 
the material used for its construction, the investment, 
the maintenance and the tariffs will be higher than is 
necessary (Didier and Prud'homme, 2007).

2.1.1  Oversized or underused infrastructure

The infrastructure supplies 'infrastructure services' 
(UN-Habitat, 2012). It supplies city residents with 
natural resources, goods and services from outside 
the city. Without the necessary basic infrastructure 
(transport systems, electricity grids, water pipelines) 
the quality of life of city residents would be threatened 
and cities could not fulfil their full potential for growth. 
In slums, it is the lack of streets that results in the lack 
of a basic infrastructure.

Conversely an oversized infrastructure that is not 
adapted to needs results in cities wasting resources and 
money on construction and maintenance. It might limit 
options in the future and lock the city in to an outdated 
vision of the urban environment, as reconfiguring 
the building fabric and other infrastructure is a long, 
complex and expensive process. For example, in Paris, 
the existing roads along the riverside, built in the 
1960s when the vision of urban planning was very car 
oriented, have made it difficult to reclaim the space for 
new uses (walking, recreation) (Les Echos, 2014). 

The demand for infrastructure is driven by many 
factors: the need to replace existing assets built many 
years earlier; the need for increased productivity, 
safety, care for the environment; a growing population; 
and new needs. As a result of such complexity, errors 
in predicting demand are not rare, in particular for 
the transport infrastructure because of the systemic 
characteristics of transport. The most well-known 
case is Montréal–Mirabel International Airport, which 
opened in time for the 1976 Summer Olympic Games. 
When it opened, Mirabel was the world's largest 
airport. It was intended to replace Montréal's other 
airport (Dorval), which was predicted to be at full 
capacity within a decade. However, badly connected, 
oversized and obsolete, Mirabel airport is now due to 
be demolished (ArchDaily, 2014). 

Estimates of numbers of passengers are often 
optimistic. A French report from the Conseil d'Analyse 
économique (Didier and Prud'homme, 2007) highlights 

17

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceAvoiding, preventing and reducing

some mistakes in estimating the demand for transport 
in some French high-speed railway projects, for 
example – 50% for the TGV Paris-Nord and – 39% 
for Interconnection TGV Ile-de-France (Chapulut and 
Taroux, 2006).

2.1.2  Housing bubbles and waste of resources

A housing bubble is characterised by a 'period of 
fever' during which the market supplies more real 
estate than is necessary and then the housing market 
collapses. As a result large numbers of houses, 
either fully or partially built, remain empty. To avoid 
oversupply in the housing market, construction must 
meet the real needs of the population.

The consequences of the housing bubble are not 
only social and economic but also environmental. 
Housing bubbles generate a high demand for natural 
resources, in particular a high rate of land take. 
Energy and raw materials are used for manufacturing, 
transporting materials and building houses and 
infrastructure; waste and emissions are released. All 
this consumption of resources results in a significant 
increase in urban stocks that will generate costs for 
demolition, rehabilitation and maintenance.

Ireland experienced a phenomenal growth in property 
during the 'Celtic Tiger' boom from 1993 to 2007. 
Similarly, between 1997 and 2007, Spain experienced 
a long period of housing expansion. In 2007, Ireland 
and Spain alone created more than twice as many 
dwellings per capita as other European countries 
(Kitchin et al., 2010). In Ireland, more than 10% of 
the housing stock remains vacant and that figure 
reached around 15% in the 2011 census (CSO, 2011); 
it has been estimated than the housing bubble left 
behind more than 2 800 so-called 'ghost estates' 
— urban developments of 10 or more dwellings in 
which more than 50% of the houses are empty or 
incomplete (CSO, 2011). In Spain nearly seven million 
homes were built between 2001 and 2010, more 
than the population growth over the same period 
(López Moreno and González Blanco, 2014).

A lack of urban planning 
Explanations of housing bubbles are focused almost 
exclusively on the role of the banks and tax incentives 
and failures on the part of the financial regulators. 
The role of urban planning has been given very little 
consideration. However, rapid growth in the housing 
market has led to increasing urban sprawl, with the 
development of scattered low-density settlements 
with detached or semi-detached housing and large 
commercial strips.

Even if Spanish cities have traditionally been compact 
compared with those in northern Europe, they 
have seen rapid expansion since the mid-1990s 
(Kasanko et al., 2006). The spatial structure of 
many Spanish cities is changing — e.g. Barcelona 
(Garcia-López, 2010), Madrid (EEA, 2006), Valencia 
(Membrado, 2012) — because of the process of 
suburbanisation, and they are notably becoming 
less dense (Schwarz, 2010). After the housing bubble 
burst, latent problems have emerged such as the 
lack of a territorial model, the unsustainability of 
urban projects and urban poverty. All these issues are 
addressed by, for example, the new Madrid Master 
Plan (Isocarp, 2014).

In a housing boom, planning should act as a 
counter-balance to the pressures of development to 
maintain a stable housing market and try to prevent 
the boom. A study on urban planning in Ireland 
revealed that a number of local authorities did not 
heed either good planning guidelines or regional and 
national objectives (Kitchin et al., 2010). They did not 
take account of the fact that much of the land zoned 
for housing lacked essential services (e.g. sewerage 
treatment plants, energy supply, public transport). 

All these examples show the important role of 
diagnostics and long-term vision in setting relevant 
goals and developing strategies adapted to the 
needs of the place. In the case of housing bubbles, 
many decisions were based on insufficient evidence 
with respect to long-term demographics, market 
conditions and issues of sustainability, and cautious 
voices were marginalised and ignored. Beyond the 
well-known drivers of housing bubbles (such as 
speculation, easy access to credit, tax incentives form 
pro-growth authorities and a growing economy) social 
representation needs to be highlighted. The desire 
to own a higher standard of home (with a bigger 
floor area per capita, garden, etc.) has been a strong 
contributor to housing bubbles. 

2.1.3  The empty buildings challenge

Empty properties correspond to a misuse of resources 
(buildings stock and land). However, this is a problem 
that many municipalities across Europe face. Some 
national governments have introduced extra taxes on 
properties vacant for more than 6 months (e.g. the 
United Kingdom), while other states have offered 
tax breaks for owners who allow social or cultural 
activities in their empty properties (e.g. Czech Republic, 
Poland). Some municipalities have created online maps 
of available vacant properties (e.g. Amsterdam) or 
established legal and financial incentives to encourage 
the temporary use of unrented shops (e.g. Vienna). 

18

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceAvoiding, preventing and reducing

Many local authorities have no means of cataloguing 
the vacant spaces in their territories and therefore 
they cannot estimate the potential for reuse. The 
main problem in cataloguing vacant spaces is how to 
share the information between the administration 
and individual citizens.  In many cases, the solution is 
community mapping initiatives (the crowdsourcing of 
real estate data). Many cities, with diverse development 
contexts, have now initiated the collective mapping of 
vacant properties (6) (e.g. New York, Paris, Hamburg, 
Vienna).

In addition, many public buildings are empty for part 
of the day (e. g. schools or offices in the evening) or the 
week or the year (in popular tourist areas). However, 
it is possible to integrate different uses for a common 
space over time (known as layering) (Suzuki et al., 2010). 
A school and its playgrounds might be used to educate 
children during the day; then it might host after-school 
programmes in the afternoon and classes for adults in 
the evening and, on weekends, serve as a coffee house, 
a theatre or a farmers' market. For example, in the case 
of the 'Sharing City Seoul' project, 779 public buildings 
have been open to the public during vacant times for 
events, meetings and more.

Similarly, the same place can be used for different 
purposes. The most common example is to put 
photovoltaic and solar water heating panels on 
rooftops (buildings, commercial buildings, parking) 
where they can take advantage of sunlight and provide 
useful shading for buildings. 

2.2  The supply of resources from the 

hinterland

Cities depend on their hinterland and on a worldwide 
hinterland for globalised trade: food, goods and raw 
materials are shipped long distances by rail, ship and air. 
Regional and surrounding rural areas provide valuable 
ecosystems services for urban areas. The nearby 
surrounding areas play an important role in the supply 
of drinking water, local food, materials for construction, 
biomass, recreational areas, and places for developing 
renewable energy production (e.g. wind turbines, solar 
plants) and an interconnected infrastructure (e.g. roads, 
the power grid). This interdependence between urban 
areas and their rural surroundings, far from the city 
boundary, poses a major problem for resources 
management and governance. 

Box 2.1 

Turning vacant spaces into community spaces in Budapest

The problem of vacant buildings and spaces was particularly serious in Budapest. The recession, combined with many 
obsolete buildings and the mismanagement of real estate properties has left a significant proportion of the city's buildings 
empty. The vacancy rate of office stock in Budapest (7) was the highest among the central eastern European capitals, 
reaching 26% in 2012. 

To address this situation, in 2012 the Hungarian Contemporary Architecture Centre (KÉK (8)) launched a research and 
advocacy project called Vacant City (Lakatlan) (9). This has succeeded in drawing the attention of both citizens and the local 
administration to the problem of vacant spaces in the city. KÉK has launched an online mapping tool, inviting citizens to 
create a map of vacant properties and spaces around the city. This crowd-sourced database acts as a tool to support citizen's 
participation and stimulate discussion. 

In 2013, KÉK has started the Vacant City_Reload (Lakatlan_Reload) (10) project (11), which aims to identify communal, social 
and cultural initiatives in need of space and pair them with the owners of vacant properties. 

Source: 

 ICLEI, 2014.

(6)  L. Polyak, 2013, The Recycled City: New uses in old settings, Contribution to Europan 13, (http://europan-europe.eu/media/default/0001/09/

e13_themecontr_38_lpolyak_pdf.pdf) accessed 20 November 2015.

(7)  Cushman & Wakefield, 2014, MarketBeat Office Snapshot: Hungary (http://www.cushmanwakefield.com/~/media/marketbeat/2014/02/

hungary_off_4q13.pdf) accessed 30 January 2015.

(8)  KÉK: Founded in 2005, KÉK is a cultural institute that promotes architectural education, awareness and innovation among professionals and the 

general public. KÉK's objectives are to initiate dialogue about architecture, the city and its culture and about the built environment 

(9)  Based on http://lakatlan.kek.org.hu (accessed 3 July 2014).
(10)  http://toltsdujra.hu (accessed 3 July 2014).
(11)  In partnership with the Kreater Social Innovation Agency, Habitat for Humanity Hungary and the Oslo School of Architecture and Design. The 

project was funded by Norway Grants.

19

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
Avoiding, preventing and reducing

2.2.1  Conflict between water users

Cities are dependent on their surrounding areas for 
water supply and discharge. Water is a renewable 
and mobile resource that needs integrated resource 
management at the appropriate natural scale 
(e.g. the catchment area). The demand for water and 
pollution of it by cities puts pressure on ecosystems 
(e.g. stream degradation) that can affect ecosystem 
services. Generally, drinking water is extracted beyond 
the city limits from surface or ground water bodies, 
and  sometimes this extends far beyond the city's 
nearest watershed (e.g. around 200 km in the case of 
Athens). 

Water scarcity results from a combination of natural 
and human factors. The natural factors include specific 
geographic, hydrologic or climatic conditions. The 
human factors are the lack of governance (e.g. spatial 
planning, consultation, cooperation, price policy, 
regulation, investment), mismanagement and a poorly 
adapted infrastructure. The available water must be 
allocated between the urban and non-urban users, 
mainly agriculture, energy, large industrial consumers 
and navigation. Without appropriate governance, 
competition for water generates social conflicts 
between users and can lead to overexploitation. 

Water scarcity does not concern only Mediterranean 
cities. England and Wales have periodic problems 
that can affect the urban water supply (Houses of 
Parliament, 2012). Owing to their high population 
density, the available water resources per person 
and per year are on average less than that of some 
Mediterranean countries. Water companies in charge 
of utilities regularly have to prepare 'drought plans' that 
set out measure to prevent water scarcity, including 
demand-side measures.

In many cases, to meet the growing demands of 
urban agglomerations, the main strategy has been the 
construction of large-scale, sophisticated, expensive 
and resource-consuming infrastructures such as dams 
or canal for transporting water by (e.g. Barcelona) 
(Saurí and del Moral, 2001). This technical approach 
is now being replaced by demand-side strategies. 
For example, in the metropolitan area of Barcelona, 
demand-side strategies using water from sources 
that differ from traditional surface or underground 
extraction (e.g. desalination, reusing greywater and 
rainwater, and controlling the demand for water) are 
growing in importance (Vidal et al., 2011). 

Cities can be affected by water shortage whatever 
their size. For example, the medium-sized city of 
Niort in France and its surrounding areas, around 
100 000 inhabitants, suffered a shortage in 2005 due 

to the characteristics of its underground resources 
(karst with limited reserves) and competition between 
agricultural needs for irrigation and urban uses. The 
solution has been based on a combination of scientific 
tools and indicators to allow better forecasting of 
supply and demand (in particular peaks in demand) 
and fostering better dialogue between stakeholders 
(Dörfliger and Perrin, 2011). 

2.2.2  Surrounding areas as suppliers of renewable 

energy

The production of renewable energy, which is an 
important part of cities' low-carbon strategy, is 
developed inside or beyond the city limits. Although 
some cities succeed in installing wind power 
plants within the city limits (e.g. Copenhagen), the 
development of such an infrastructure in a dense urban 
fabric is more expensive and technically difficult than in 
the open spaces of the surrounding rural areas.

In larger cities, only a portion of the total energy 
demand is likely to be met by renewable energy 
production located within the city boundary (IEA, 2009) 
through mainly waste-to-energy combined heat and 
power plants, geothermal heat systems, solar thermal 
collectors on roofs, and buildings with integrated 
solar power systems. Other forms of renewable 
energy, such as wind power, hydro power, big solar 
power plants, solid biomass and liquid biofuels, are 
generally produced beyond the city limits in the nearby 
hinterland and brought to the city by power lines, 
pipes, road, rail or boat. 

In densely populated urban areas, the production of 
renewable energy is complex owing to the orientation 
of buildings, available space, noise, visual effects, 
planning constraints and characteristics of old buildings. 
However, complex does not mean impossible. There 
are successful examples of micro-wind turbines or 
solar power, as well as heating production in schools, 
sports centres, business parks and residential buildings. 
It is usually easier for a small town, located in rural 
surroundings, to make a big contribution to renewable 
energy than it is for a mega-city. For example the small 
Austrian town of Güssing produces its entire energy 
requirements — electricity, heating/cooling, transport 
fuel — from renewable resources. 

Cities near the coast benefit from offshore wind power 
and, in the future, will benefit from ocean energy 
technologies currently under development. In the case 
of the city of Copenhagen, which has an ambitious 
programme to develop wind power, a significant 
proportion of its wind turbines are installed offshore 
but close to the city.

20

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceAvoiding, preventing and reducing

In the case of combined heat and power plants fired 
totally or partly by wood (e.g. pellets), the location of 
the plant is dependent on the spatial distribution of 
resources, the size of the plant and the technology. 
Forest in the surrounding areas is considered to be an 
important factor for securing the supply, limiting the 
need for storage, and reducing the costs of transport 
and its associated emissions. To compete with fossil 
fuels, biomass must have a relatively low value. That 
means the wood has to be easily harvested and 
produced nearby. 

Since 2006, Vienna has developed a forest biomass 
power station (in Simmering district) to replace two 
fossil fuel-fired power plants. It is fed by timber, 
waste wood fractions and garden waste. The plant 
uses an existing chimney and cladding plus additional 
infrastructure such as cooling systems using 
water from the Danube. The existing rail and road 
infrastructure simplify the delivery of biomass to the 
facility and minimise costs.

the forefront of eco-city development (Joss and Cowley, 
2011). All these projects have been developed in newly 
urbanised areas where the urban fabric can be strongly 
integrated, the infrastructure network can achieve high 
levels of sustainability and innovations can be quickly 
and easily introduced. This model of the eco-city, a 
new city built on a greenfield site with the best current 
sustainable technologies, is not applicable to Europe, 
where the existing urban systems and infrastructures 
are very dense. 

In Europe, urban sustainability is mainly based on 
the retrofitting of the existing urban infrastructure 
and building stocks (residential and non-residential), 
the conversion of underused or abandoned 
industrial zones into new dense mixed-use zones, the 
conversion of low-density suburban environments into 
high-density areas and the upgrading of unsustainable 
settlements. Changes in such a dense urban system 
generate systemic effects affecting different scales, 
resource flows and social behaviour.

2.3 

Integrated urban developments 

2.3.2  The scale issue

As planners, providers of utilities and regulators, 
municipalities play a central role in developing 
strategies and plans including a mix of policies. In 
particular, they elaborate urban planning, target 
and prioritise investments in infrastructure, propose 
regulations and incentives and support innovative 
projects. 

Many cities are developing integrated sustainable 
initiatives that are known by a variety of names 
(e.g. sustainable city, smart city, solar city, low-carbon 
city, carbon-neutral city, transition city, ecodistrict, 
etc.). Sustainable initiatives, and therefore 
resource-efficient cities, are much more than just 
adding some sustainable buildings or ecodistricts. 
To make sustainability citywide, all initiatives and 
projects have to be scaled up and down so that they 
are connected each other, to optimise effects, to avoid 
conflicts, to find synergies and to provide multi-function 
solutions. 

2.3.1  Changes in the dense urban system 

There are many initiatives at the scale of the building 
unit where the majority of resource consumption takes 
place and where technology can be easily and rapidly 
changed. As a building or a block has generally only 
one function (e.g. residential), it is not the optimal 
scale for water conservation, energy efficiency and 
renewable energy systems. The complexity of the 
metabolism increases with increasing spatial scale 
(building, block, neighbourhood, city, region, country), 
the mix of functions and sectors, the complexity 
of stakeholders and institutions (municipalities/
metropolitan authorities/regional government/national 
government/Europe) (Agudelo-Vera et al., 2012; 
Ramaswami et al., 2012). 

The district scale offers much more potential to 
significantly increase the benefits and savings through 
greater systems optimisation and integration because 
of the larger, yet manageable, scale of the district 
(Portland Sustainability Institute, 2012). It is small 
enough to innovate quickly and large enough to have 
a significant impact. Ecodistricts offer a format for 
testing the technical and financial viability of different 
applications and their acceptability to residents. 

The concept of the eco-city has become mainstream 
around the world. Some flagship projects (12) 
(e.g. Masdar (13) city in the United Arab Emirates) are at 

However, making urban areas sustainable is much 
more than just taking action at the relatively controlled 

(12)  For example Tianjin Binhai  in China; the four eco-cities (Changodar, Dahej, Manesar Bawal, Shendra) planned in the Delhi–Mumbai industrial 

corridor; Masdar in the United Arab Emirates; Hacienda Ecocities in Kenya (Joss and Cowley, 2011).

(13)  http://www.masdar.ae/en/#city/all (accessed 20 November 2015).

21

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceAvoiding, preventing and reducing

scale of the district. It is necessary to take action on 
all components of the urban design and sectors. This 
requires a holistic understanding of the existing life 
cycles associated with each development site, including 
the study of complex energy/water/materials flow 
patterns within and beyond the site (Carbon Disclosure 
Project, 2012)).

2.3.3  No unique strategy to become a 'green' city

The concept of green urbanism has already been 
successfully adopted in many cities around the 
world (e.g. Europe, Australia, United States, Canada). 
Ecodistricts were constructed during the first decade 
of the 2000s, mainly in the Scandinavian countries 
and in the United Kingdom, as well as in France, 

Germany and the Netherlands. Some examples are 
well known such as the Vauban district in Freiburg 
(Germany), Västra hamnen in Malmö (Sweden), 
BedZED in London (United Kingdom), ZAC de Bonne 
in Grenoble (France), Hammarby Sjöstad in Stockholm 
(Sweden) (Joss et al., 2011), Pilestredet Park in Oslo 
(Norway), Greenwich Millennium Village in London, the 
city of Delft (Netherlands) and Tweewaters in Leuwen 
(Belgium. Generally, social housing programmes are 
integrated into residential projects (e.g. the districts of 
Bo01 in Malmö and Hammarby Sjöstad in Stockholm) 
(Locasso and D'Ambrosio, 2012). 

Whatever the size, the history, the location, the wealth, 
the human capital of a city, policymakers can develop 
a long-term vision tailored to its characteristics. The 
paths to urban sustainability are diverse and include 

Box 2.2 

Green urbanism 

An Australian researcher, Steffen Lehman (14), has defined a conceptual framework, based on 15 holistic principles 
(see Figure 2.1), to achieve more sustainable cities (Lehmann, 2010; Lehmann, 2014). These principles can be effective in 
a wide variety of situations according to the specifics of the city such as size, form, climate, location, social capital, natural 
capital. The long-term goals of green urbanism concerning resources are zero emissions, zero waste and avoiding waste of 
energy/water/materials.

Figure 2.1 

The principles of green urbanism 

•   Green infrastructure

Landscaping

  Working with nature 
  Biodiversity in parks and gardens
  Accessible green areas for recreational activities 
  Green roofs, green walls, linear trees

•   Resource
  Renewable or regional materials for construction
  Regional food supply, including from urban areas 

Zero-waste city and a circular approach
Zero-land take

  Closing the water cycle through collection, 
  ﬁltration and rain gardens

Grey 
infrastructure

Natural 
resource 

Green 
urbanism

Society

•   Culture
   Values, behaviour, lifestyle, identity
•   Governance and leadership

•   Urban planning 
  Densiﬁcation, land recycling, 
  programmes for mixed land use
  Retroﬁtting buildings and infrastructure 
  Aﬀordable housing

Eco-districts and eco-buildings 

•   Urban design
  High quality public spaces 
  Architecture and place identity

Eco-construction 
•   Urban management

Smart management of resource ﬂows

•   Mobility

Eﬃcient public transport
  Cyclability and walkability
•   Energy
  Production of renewable electricity

Smart grids for eﬃcient use of energy

Long-term vision, planning, programmes 
Integrated place-based approach
Liveability, health and well-being as main objectives

  Cooperation with surrounding areas
  Participation of citizens at the decision-making process
  Green procurement
•   Education, research, knowledge sharing

Information to raise awareness, training on sustainability issues 

  Participation at networks to share experiences 

Note:  

  The 'grey' infrastructure system or the urban technico-system (roads, metro, railways, buildings, utilities) determines the spatial 

extent of the city and the urban pattern (urban form, density, design) (EEA, 2015).

Source:    Adapted from Lehmann, 2014.

(14)  Head of School, School of Built Environment, Curtin University, GPO Box U1987, Perth WA6845, Australia.

22

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Avoiding, preventing and reducing

carbon-neutral goals (e.g. Copenhagen, Växjö) and 
'zero waste' in Capannori (Italy) (15). These different 
examples show that, even if local policy is focused on 
a specific topic, as a result of the necessary integration 
of policies, the objectives tend to become larger 
and finally to encompass many aspects of resource 
efficiency and more generally of urban sustainability. 

Leadership and a vision of the future
Leadership is crucial to setting targets for the long 
term. In the city of Växjö in Sweden, political leadership 
was the important starting point for the 'Fossil fuel-free 
strategy' (16) elaborated in 1996. When the decision 
was taken, nobody really knew either if it was possible 
to achieve the goal by 2010 or what kind of measures 
would need to be taken (EnergyCities, 2009). The Växjö 
strategy is focussed on a combination of measures 
(Nordic Energy Municipality, 2011). Overall, Växjö has 
adopted ecoBUDGET, a sustainability-oriented method 
that provides information for political decision-making 
and city managers.

Changes in the dense urban fabric
All changes need to take into account the existing 
urban fabric, even if it is a difficult challenge. For 
example, in Rotterdam (Tillie et al., 2012), densifying 
and greening associated with low-carbon transport 
were identified as a pathway towards sustainability and 
a better quality of life. The challenge was not only to 
add many dwellings to the inner city but at the same 

time to increase the number of attractive houses and 
the citizens' quality of life, to improve the microclimate 
of the inner city and to expand and upgrade green 
areas. Densification of an already dense urban fabric is 
a matter of precision. 

Regenerating and rebuilding some areas of the city 
is challenging because of the political and social 
consequences, the economic cost, and the necessary 
adaptation of the transport infrastructure (roads, public 
transport, cycle lanes, rapid transit lanes for buses) and 
utility networks (drinking water, wastewater, power, 
waste collection) to achieve better efficiency. Adding a 
building in dense urban fabric can have a positive effect 
if it is in the right place (Tillie et al., 2012). Bioclimatic 
design (see Figure 2.2) can help to develop a city with 
improved thermal comfort and therefore reduced 
energy consumption (Doepel, 2012). 

Compared with development in dense existing urban 
fabric, it is easier, less expensive and more efficient to 
develop new urbanised areas in underutilised areas 
or brownfield sites. It is possible to provide innovative 
urban design, high-quality architecture, 'smart' 
buildings (with, in particular, high energy efficiency 
but also ventilation, optimised natural lighting, good 
indoor air quality), green areas (including green 
walls and green roofs), a closed water cycle (through 
collection, filtration, ponds and rain gardens), mixed 
uses and efficient and affordable public transport and 
to produce renewable energy. However, most of the 
current building stock will remain throughout the next 

Box 2.3 

The Venlo-region: an approach to stop the decline

The Venlo-region in the south-east of the Netherlands has embraced the cradle to cradle principles at regional scale. It was 
experiencing a decline in population, and this trend would have continued in the absence of any initiative to stop the decline. 
In 2009, at the beginning of the project, the cradle to cradle approach was regarded as a tool to achieve not only resource 
efficiency but also growth. The intention was to develop the highest possible levels of sustainability while at the same time 
boosting welfare across the region and creating a knowledge base that could be exported across Europe and the world.

Cradle to cradle principles have been applied in all domains, including manufacturing, construction, organisation and living 
and working areas. The city of Venlo's adoption of cradle to cradle® products (certificate and label) has been a driver for 
the economic development of the region, and it offers wider possibilities for systemic eco-innovations such as industrial 
symbiosis (EC, 2012). The city's procurement criteria have also been oriented towards innovative outcomes (e.g. building 
purifying water). 

Sources:   http://www.innovationseeds.eu/Policy-Library/Core-Articles/Cradle-To-Cradle-C2C--The-Dutch-Region-Of-Venlo-Towards-A-Circular-

Economy.kl (accessed 29 June 2014).

  http://www.c2c-centre.com.

  http://www.c2cn.eu.

(15)  http://www.zerowasteeurope.eu/2013/09/the-story-of-capannori-a-zero-waste-champion/ (accessed 10 September 2014).
(16)  The real objective was to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels per inhabitant by at least 50% by the year 2010 and by at least 70% 

by the year 2025 compared with those in 1993 (Växjö Kommun, 2011).

23

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
 
 
Avoiding, preventing and reducing

Box 2.4 

The integrated approach of Copenhagen

Copenhagen aims to achieve carbon neutrality by 2025. This means that heat and power production will be carbon 
neutral and that the city's renewable energy production will be sufficient to compensate for traffic emissions, wastewater 
management and industrial processes. Consequently, the production of renewable energy must be greater than the annual 
energy consumption (City of Copenhagen, 2012a). According its Climate Plan, more than 75% of the reduction has to be 
realised through changes in energy production and 10% has to come from energy savings. 

To meet the goal of carbon neutrality, a long-term strategy for an energy supply based on a mix of renewables (biomass, 
wind, geothermal and solar) has been defined. The city has maintained and developed an extensive district heating network 
(98% of all homes are connected), switching progressively from non-renewable energy to biomass. Onshore and offshore 
wind turbines have been erected to produce electricity. Heat generated by the incineration of waste is used for heating 
houses within the municipality and the electricity generated goes into the grid. 

The city has defined five main plans setting goals for transport planning to ensure a reduction in emissions and an increase 
in the percentage of people commuting by bike or public transport. The goal is to have 50% of people cycling to work or their 
place of education in 2015, compared with 35% in 2010 (City of Copenhagen, 2012b). The city of Copenhagen also has very 
strict energy standards to improve energy efficiency in new and existing buildings. 

Carbon neutrality is only part of a larger sustainable urban policy focused on quality of life (City of Copenhagen, 2009). The 
urban environment offers parks and pocket parks for daily use in a dense city (City of Copenhagen, 2011). The city's green 
areas represent about 25% of the overall area (17), and 80% of Copenhageners live within 300 metres of a green area. 

This sustainable approach is focused not only on the carbon-neutral goal. It also addresses most of the items of green 
urbanism. The success of the carbon-neutral policy is due to a combination of ambitious long-term targets and detailed 
short-term goals that have been rendered credible by immediate action (City of Copenhagen, 2012b). A political consensus 
has been forged around the carbon-neutral goals, and the project has won general support through the involvement and 
empowerment of a wide range of stakeholders. Local firms have seen business opportunities and citizens have seen the way 
to a better quality of life. 

Copenhagen was awarded 'European Green Capital' for 2014 (18).

decades, and the morphology of European cities will be 
quite similar in the future. Most improvements need to 
focus on the existing city.

In an ecodistrict, net zero standards (zero fossil fuel 
energy use and zero carbon emissions, net zero waste, 
net zero water use) are achieved by residents closing 
the loop of production and consumption:

2.3.4  The ecodistrict as an integrated approach at the 

•  energy standards address the production of local 

district level

An ecodistrict is a small-scale area such as a 
neighbourhood or a district where integrated urban 
planning and design are oriented to sustainable 
development goals, in particular a drastic reduction in 
the consumption of energy and resources (PUCA, 2008). 
An ecodistrict is based on principles similar to those of 
green urbanism. Ecodistricts promote compact urban 
development using smart building techniques and 
sustainable land use strategies. The land area required 
for human settlement is decreased by intensifying land 
uses through mixed use that balances human needs 
and environmental constraints. 

renewable energy, energy management and control, 
energy costs and energy emissions; 

•  water standards address water use, collection, 

storage and reuse;

•  waste standards address the production, reuse and 
recycling of materials to decrease the consumption 
of raw materials. 

High quality of life standards
Urban design and planning are people oriented. 
Districts have mixed-use planning that integrates daily 
amenities and services (supermarkets, shopping centres, 

(17)  Around 42 m² of green area per inhabitant.
(18)  http://ec.europa.eu/environment/europeangreencapital (accessed 20 November 2015).

24

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
Avoiding, preventing and reducing

Figure 2.2 

Smart and bioclimatic densification 

Reduce heat 
stress

Diversity of 
housing typologies

Solar rights

Wind

Noise

Private and 
collective gardens

Higher density 
near public transport

Collective parking 
facilities and 
carfree zones

Energy use

More and improved 
green space

Urban agriculture

Safe pedestrian 
and bicycles routes

Daylight and 
ﬂexible plinths

Privacy and 
access

Water square

Increased leasure 
services and 
employment

Continuity and identity

View

Sources:   Adapted from Doepel, 2012; Tillie et al., 2012.

schools, etc.) located within walking and cycling distance 
of residences. Mobility prioritises pedestrians, cyclists 
and public transport. In general, cars are relegated to the 
periphery. Greenery, including green roofs and green 
walls, is included in the built environment to improve 
the well-being of the inhabitants and provide services 
such as temperature regulation , clean air and noise 
reduction (Lehmann, 2014). Every resident has easy and 
open access, by walking or cycling, to green open areas. 
Community gardens can also be dispersed throughout 
residential areas to encourage urban agriculture and 
provide residents with space to grow their own food. 

Ecodistricts offer attractive places not only for 
residents but also for businesses. The mix of land 
uses, with a balance of housing, employment 
and green areas facilitates place-based economic 
development. Residents, businesses and consumers 
are attracted to live, work and shop in an area by its 
physical features. In addition, the place provides food, 
waste with the potential for reusing and recycling, 
and the potential for energy generation that offers 

opportunities for local businesses and the community 
(Seltzer et al., 2010).

The ecodistrict is not only a resource-efficient place, 
it is also a community. Because of its neighbourhood 
scale, people are empowered to make it prosper. 
It is a framework for facilitating acceptance of new 
resource-efficient technologies and for developing the 
culture and values of sustainably, leading to changes in 
behaviour and consumption (Seltzer et al., 2010). 

2.4  Renovating the building stock 

Socio-technical transitions in response to major 
environmental challenges require renovation of the 
urban infrastructure — that related to energy and water 
supplies, waste management, mobility and housing — 
that sustains everyday life. As planners, providers of 
utilities and owners of social housing, municipalities 
have an important role to play in the retrofitting, 
refurbishing and re-engineering of the urban fabric 

25

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceAvoiding, preventing and reducing

(in particular buildings) that shapes resource flows and 
affects the well-being of the city's residents. 

Renovating buildings is a key priority owing to their high 
energy consumption. It is a low-cost way of reducing 
emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and saving 
energy (McKinsey & Company, 2010; Copenhagen 
Economics, 2012). It is also a way of reducing energy 
bills, improving the aesthetic of buildings, increasing 
asset values and providing a healthier and better 
quality of life for citizens. 

The adoption of long-term strategies by national and 
local governments to frame the energy transition will 
require long-term investment in the renovation of 
buildings and in the production of renewable energy 

in cities (by means of solar, wind and geothermal 
energy, waste incineration, biomass production). 
Deep renovation of building stocks is expected to 
create around two million jobs in the EU and have a 
beneficial impact on the economy (19).The so called 
'deep renovation' is a combination of adopting energy 
efficiency measures (improving insulation, draught 
excluders, windows, ventilation, heating/cooling 
system) and use of renewables (Lewis et al., 2013).

The study by Ecofys for Eurima (Bettgenhäusser et al., 
2014) looks at different scenarios for the renovation 
of buildings. In the case of 'deep renovation', the total 
energy use for space heating, hot water and cooling will 
be reduced by 66%, gas consumption reduced by 95% 
and oil consumption reduced by 97%. 

Box 2.5  Well-designed buildings do not guarantee high energy efficiency: the case of ZAC de Bonne in Grenoble

Launched in 2000, ZAC de Bonne in Grenoble (France) is an ecodistrict on a 8.5-hectare site, with 5 hectares of green areas. 
The project was developed taking a bioclimatic approach (20) to building design and a new approach promoting energy 
efficiency and innovative energy management.

The district was designed and built between 2000 and 2010 under the framework of the 'Sustainable Energy Systems in 
Advanced Cities' (21) (SESAC) project within the EU's Concerto initiative. In 2009, the project gained an award for its quality (22) 
from the French government. 

The initial goal for new buildings was to halve energy consumption (23) compared with the French regulation in force at the 
time. To improve the understanding of energy use in such buildings and to suggest future strategies, a study was carried out 
to check the real energy performance of the buildings. 

The study (24) showed that some of the assumptions used to calculate expected consumption did not reflect the intrinsic 
performance of buildings. The gap between observations and expectations could be explained by several factors: 

• 

• 

• 

 The choice of high-quality materials is not enough in itself to achieve high performance; the installation is almost as 
important and needs to be done carefully.

 The energy performance of a building can change after it has been used for a while. Servicing and maintenance of 
facilities, such as boilers and solar thermal systems, are crucial to avoid a decline in the building's energy performance.

 The building must be used in accordance with the way it has been designed. Its performance depends on the behaviour 
of the occupants: for example, regulation of the heating thermostat, opening windows, at home all day or for only parts 
of it, and number of showers or baths taken. 

The ZAC de Bonne has taught us many lessons. Efficient technical solutions can be jeopardised by failure to involve all the 
different actors — such as the construction company, the owner of the building, the occupants — throughout the process, 
from construction to living in the building. 

Sources:   EnergyCities, 2010; Enertech, 2011; Fumagalli, 2013.

(19)  http://www.renovate-europe.eu/ (accessed 20 November 2015).
(20)  http://www.energy-cities.eu/IMG/pdf/De_Bonne_EN.pdf (accessed 22 November 2015).
(21)  http://concerto.eu/concerto/concerto-sites-a-projects/sites-con-projects/sites-con-projects-search-by-name/sesac.html
(22)  The award was presented by the French Ministry of Ecology and Sustainable Development: http://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/fr/IMG/pdf/

pfvt_18sept_cle471bd2.pdf

(23)  The goal in the ZAC de Bonne project for primary energy use was 50 kWh/m² of living area per year.
(24)  Between 400 and 700 sensors were placed on each of the eight buildings selected for the study, which recorded, at intervals of 10 minutes for a 

full year, temperature, instant power, air flow, etc. (Enertech, 2011).

26

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
Avoiding, preventing and reducing

Box 2.6   Buildings are the largest energy-consuming component of infrastructure

Residential and non-residential buildings together consumed 
around 40% of total energy requirements in the EU-28 in 
2012. Residential energy consumption (for space and water 
heating and the use of electric appliances) accounted for 26% 
of total energy consumption in 2012 (Eurostat database) and 
non-residential buildings accounted for 14% (EU, 2014). Space 
heating accounts for 67% of total energy consumption in 
dwellings (25), lighting and electrical appliances for 15%, water 
heating for 14% and cooking for 4%. 

Industry and households were the leading sectors in 
terms of energy efficiency during that time. In the case of 
households, efficiency increased by 27%, at an average rate 
of 1.6% per year (26). This was mainly due to improvements 
in space heating and large electrical appliances. Mandatory 
efficiency standards for new buildings have facilitated 
the use of condensing boilers and heat pumps; all this, 
combined with the retrofitting of existing dwellings, has 
improved the thermal performance of buildings. However, 
the greater number of electrical appliances and the need to 
heat larger homes offset the improvements made through 
technological innovation.

In the EU-28, residential buildings account for three-quarters 
of the total floor area. Single family houses account for 65% 
and flats for 35% of the total floor area. It is estimated that 
67% of total household energy consumption (EEA, 2012a) is 
used for space heating. 

Improvements in the efficiency of space heating 

Figure 2.3  

Drivers of the change in average annual 
energy consumption per household in 
the EU-27 between 1990 and 2010

Annual % change

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0

– 0.2

– 0.4

– 0.6

– 0.8

– 1.0

– 1.2

Consumption per dwelling

More appliances

Larger homes
Eﬃciency progress

Behaviour, others

Source:    EEA, 2013c (ENER-37 based on Odyssee database).

The efficiency of space heating is continuously being improved. Mandatory efficiency standards for new buildings 
(insulation, condensing boilers, heat pumps, etc.), combined with the diffusion of more efficient heating appliances and 
the retrofitting of existing dwellings, have improved the thermal performance of buildings. Between 1990 and 2010, the 
energy efficiency of space heating per unit area increased in nearly all European countries (except Greece and Hungary). 

It is estimated that new dwellings built in 2010 consume around 40% less energy than dwellings built in 1990 owing to 
new building regulation (27). By 2020 all new buildings in the EU should be 'nearly zero-energy buildings' according to the 
Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (28) (EPBD). 

At the EU level, the annual energy consumption for buildings is around 220 kWh/m², with a large gap between residential 
(200 kWh/m²) and non-residential (295 kWh/m²) buildings. Despite the improvement, average energy consumption 
for space heating is still high, particularly compared with current state-of-the-art buildings such as low-energy houses 
(depending on the national classification, less than 70 kWh/m² or < 50 kWh/m²), passive houses (< 15 kWh/m²), 
zero-energy houses or plus-energy houses.

The reduction in consumption has been quite significant in the Netherlands, Ireland and France, as well as in Romania, 
Latvia, Estonia and Poland (Odyssee-Mure, 2013). The Netherlands is the EU country with the lowest levels of energy 
consumption per unit area and is at the same time among the countries that have made the greatest improvements in 
energy efficiency. 

(25)  Odyssee indicators: http://www.buildup.eu.
(26)  EEA, 2013c (ENER-37 based on Odyssee database): http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/progress-on-energy-efficiency-in-

europe/assessment (accessed 28 July 2014).

(27)  EEA. 2013b. Progress on energy efficiency in Europe (ENER 37). http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/progress-on-energy-

efficiency-in-europe/ds_resolveuid/MNOAOE5FNC (accessed 20 November 2015).

(28)  Directive 2002/91/EC,EPBD.

27

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
Avoiding, preventing and reducing

Box 2.6   Buildings are the largest energy-consuming component of infrastructure (cont)

Floor spaces per capita increases over time in the EU, especially under favourable economic conditions. A larger floor space 
per capita increases the energy demand of buildings and therefore the energy efficiency of the current building stock needs 
to be greater. Improvements in energy efficiency are offset by increased floor space per capita and the proliferation of new 
electrical appliances. Larger dwellings and the fitting of central heating in the south of Europe have offset the equivalent of 
25% of the energy efficiency gains (Odyssee-Mure, 2013). 

Great inertia in changing the building stock

The low volume of construction limits the impact of energy 
efficiency standards on new dwellings. There is considerable 
inertia in the renovation of the building stock. Only around 
1% of the existing floor area is renovated annually (Atanasiu 
and Kouloumpi, 2013). As changing the building stock is a 
slow process, the composition of the housing stock gives an 
idea of the required renovation techniques and technologies 
and the measures that will be needed to change it. Energy 
consumption in buildings is influenced by many factors, such 
as economic development, weather conditions, consumption 
pattern, age of buildings, size, etc. The period of construction 
is important because it determines construction techniques 
and building regulations that impose standards during the 
design phase (see Table 2.1). Without renovation to improve 
energy performance, the age of building is strongly linked to 
its level of energy use. 

The composition of the housing stock

Table 2.1 

Age of housing stock in Europe

Geographical area

Built before 1960 (%)

South

North and west

Central and East

37

42

35

Note: 

South: Cyprus, Greece, Italy, Malta, Portugal, Spain.

North and west: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, 
France, Germany, Ireland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, 
Sweden, United Kingdom, Norway, Switzerland.

Central and East: Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, 
Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, 
Slovenia.

Source:   BPIE survey (Atanasiu et al., 2011).

The composition of the housing stock by type (detached house, semi-detached house and apartment) has significant 
implications for the kind of renovation techniques and technologies and the type of measures that can be employed. There 
is great variation between European countries in the composition of their housing stocks. Single homes represent more 50% 
of the building stocks in Austria, Finland, Romania, France, Belgium, Denmark, Portugal, Hungary, Croatia, the Netherlands, 
Portugal and Ireland (see Figure 2.4). Increasing energy efficiency results in a large number of small renovation sites. Other 
countries such as Italy and Germany have a majority of apartments.

Density and type of dwellings

According Eurostat, in 2012, 41.3% of the EU-28 population lived in apartments, just over one-third (34.1%) in detached 
houses and 24.0% in semi-detached houses (Eurostat (29)). Clearly, as urban density increases, the percentage of people 
dwelling in apartment blocks (multi-family dwellings) increase, while the percentage living in houses (single family and two 
families) decreases. Around 60% of the European population living in densely populated urban areas lives in apartments, 
while around 72% of Europeans live in dense or medium-density urban areas. 

However, these averages hide significant differences between countries. The proportion of the population living in 
these urban areas varies significantly between countries: from close to 100% of the population in Malta and over 95% in 
Belgium, to just over 35% of the population in Sweden. Houses are by far the most common form of dwelling in dense or 
medium-density urban areas in Belgium, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Norway. Elsewhere (Spain, Greece, 
Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, for example) the vast majority of the population living in dense or medium-density urban 
areas live in multi-family dwellings.

(29)  Eurostat database: ilc_lvho01.

28

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
 
 
Avoiding, preventing and reducing

Box 2.6   Buildings are the largest energy-consuming component of infrastructure (cont)

Figure 2.4  

Composition of housing stock, 2012

%

100 

75 

50 

25 

0 

EU-28  

Euro area (EA-18)  

Spain 

Czech Republic 
Lithuania 
Estonia 
Latvia 
Greece 
Germany 

Malta 

Italy 
Poland 
Slovakia 

Finland 
Sweden 
France 
Romania 
Austria 
Bulgaria 
Portugal 
Belgium 
United Kingdom 
Croatia 
Cyprus 
Switzerland 
Iceland 
Slovenia 
Hungary 
Luxembourg 
Ireland 
Netherlands 
Denmark 

Norway 
Serbia 

Other 

Semi-detached house 

Detached house 

Flat 

Note: 

  http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Housing_conditions (accessed 20 November 2015).

Source:    Eurostat database.

2.4.1	 Developing	a	holistic	approach	to	renovation (30) 

Technical solutions for renovation on the market
The energy performance of buildings is influenced by 
many factors, such as ambient weather conditions, 
wind, exposure, area (e.g. green areas, shadows, the 
elevation of adjacent buildings), the urban pattern 
(e.g. dispersion, compactness, density), the use of the 
building (residential, commercial) the building structure 
(detached, semi-detached, multi-storey house), the 
number of occupants and their behaviour, and the 
building dimension and morphology (e.g. floor space, 
height, windows, façade and roof surfaces, lighting 
system, heating and ventilation systems, materials, 
insulation, function, age). There are technical solutions 
for renovating buildings already on the market, and 
many new solutions are being developed. There are 
also good instructive examples of successful building 
renovation (31). 

Retrofitting can involve demand-side management, 
supply-side management and energy consumption 
patterns (Ma et al., 2012):

•  Heating and cooling: reducing the need through 
insulation of the building's fabric (roof, walls), 
retrofitting windows, increasing air tightness, etc.

•  Energy-efficient equipment and low-energy 

technologies: making use of natural ventilation, 
upgraded lighting, thermal storage, energy-efficient 
equipment and appliances, heat recovery, etc.

•  Renewable energy technologies and retrofitting the 
electric system: solar thermal system, wind power 
system, biomass system, geothermal system, etc. 

•  Human factors: comfort requirements, occupancy 

regimes, management and maintenance, occupancy 
activities, access to controls, etc.

Resource-intensive materials and products can 
be replaced and insulation can be improved. New 
materials with better energy and environmental 
performance are being developed, such as cement 
using less energy (Global Cement Magazine, 2011), 
wood (which is a way of increasing the sustainability 

(30)  More information and case studies are available on the following websites: Mangenergy: http://www.managenergy.net (accessed 

20 November 2015).

(31)  Accessed 20 November 2015: http://www.managenergy.net/, http://www.energy-cities.eu, http://www.eu-smartcities.eu,  

http://www.eu-smartcities.eu/, http://www.buildup.eu/cases.

29

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
Avoiding, preventing and reducing

of buildings throughout their life cycle), even in 
multi-storey buildings (32), and straw (33), which is 
characterised by high insulation capacity creating a 
comfortable indoor climate.

emissions. Refurbishments account for roughly 2% of 
the housing stock per year. It is estimated that around 
one million dwellings are refurbished every year 
(R2Cities, 2014).

An urban sustainability issue
Renovation of existing buildings can have a substantial 
impact in terms of energy saving and reducing GHG 

The technical measures required for the refurbishment 
of only one building are different from those for the 
refurbishment of a whole residential area. Although it 
is reasonable to start with small-scale pilot projects to 

Box 2.7   Building shape influences energy performance

The energy performance and the comfort of buildings depends on different factors: compactness, size, site, orientation related 
to the sun, solar shading, insulation, interaction with surrounding buildings, orientation of wind, buffer spaces, windows, 
thermal mass, air tightness and moisture, ventilation, and hours of daylight. For optimum performance, it is necessary to 
reduce or even eliminate the need for active mechanical systems.

Building shape and the geometry and orientation of the building have great potential to reduce the building's intensity of 
energy, use, but they are often influenced by other planning considerations, the type of building and its use, the feasibility and 
initial cost, liveability, etc. Buildings with a smaller exterior envelope area (for a similar floor surface area) will achieve better 
energy efficiency (see Figure 2.5). The more compact a building, the easier it is to achieve high energy performance, and less 
insulation is needed to achieve a given level of performance. As a result detached houses require more energy than similar-
sized attached houses because they have more outer walls (CSTB, 2012). Bigger houses require more energy than smaller ones 
because there is more space to heat and cool. 

Figure 2.5  

Energy loss for buildings with a floor 
area of 96 m² and different envelope 
areas 

The ideal form is a sphere or a cube. For the same shape, 
the compactness factor decreases with size (34). The outer 
walls have a high cost economically and ecologically. 
Reducing the surface area of the outer walls reduces 
heat loss and the cost and impact of buildings on the 
environment. For example, the heat loss of an attached 
house (96 m²) with one floor is 40% less than that of a 
detached house of the same size with one floor (Effinergie, 
2008).

A life cycle energy analysis of a recent residential 
development in the Greater Dublin Area (Duffy, 2009) 
showed that operating emissions from dwellings in the 
commuter and extra-urban zones were almost twice those 
in the city centre, due to both the larger dwelling sizes and 
the predominance of detached and semi-detached houses, 
which consume large amounts of energy because of their 
completely exposed external envelopes. Conversely, 
apartments have the lowest per dwelling consumption 
owing to both their smaller size and their smaller external 
envelope area. 

Compact low-rise buildings are more energy efficient than 
high-rise buildings (City of Vancouver, 2009), which are 
subject to the effects of too much sun and wind. All-glass 
skin high-rise buildings are inefficient because glass provides minimal insulation; however, the production of steel and concrete 
generates a lot of GHG emissions (Wong and Hallsworth, 2012).

Source:    Effinergie, 2008.

(32)  The 'life cycle tower' in Austria demonstrates that is possible to build energy-efficient buildings with up to 20 storeys in wood:  

www.rhombergbau.at (accessed 10 July 2014).

(33)  It can be produced regionally at a low cost. A two-storey house has been built in Austria (the so-called S-House) that uses only 10% of the 

resources and energy of conventional construction. Around 400 multi-storey buildings were built in Europe in 2011.

(34)  The form coefficient is the ratio of the surface of the building (only the outer walls and the roof) to the heated volume of the building. In an 

attached house, the party walls are not taken into account in the calculation.

30

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
Avoiding, preventing and reducing

test feasibility, the project will have to be embedded in 
an integrated urban development plan for the entire 
city area (HELCOM, 2010; URB Energy, 2011a).

For the renovation and refurbishment of buildings 
on a large scale, a systemic approach and innovative 
solutions need to be developed for the whole 
construction process using tools and procedures 
that already exist, such as Leadership in Energy and 
Environmental Design (LEED) (35), the Building Research 
Establishment Environmental Assessment Method 
(BREEAM) (36), integrated project delivery (37), building 
information modelling (38), life cycle assessment, life 
cycle cost and simulation software. 

It is possible to meet ambitious targets for 
refurbishment with technologies already on the market. 
For example, in the R2Cities project (39), the objective is 
to achieve an energy consumption of 70 kWh/m² per 
year, representing around a 60% reduction compared 
with the current situation (R2Cities, 2014). The project 
is based on holistic approaches combining technologies 
already on the market such as insulation, information 
and communications technologies (ICTs) and renewable 
energy systems. 

A city is made up of a multitude of diverse buildings. 
Some are very old, even historic, while others are 
more recent, and their thermal quality may vary from 
1 to 10 (EnergyCities, 2014a). The spectrum of potential 
management and decision-making systems is very large 
and the solvency of owners is variable. It is useful to 
develop specific recommendations for neighbourhoods 
with similar characteristics in relation to the provision 
of utilities, socio-spatial organisation and urban 
development, rather than examining each building 
individually (URB Energy, 2011b).

Energy-efficient refurbishment cannot be seen only 
as an improvement in the energy performance 
of buildings but must be seen also as an issue of 
urban sustainability embedding many other fields 
(e.g. the upgrading of the neighbourhood, mobility, 
the development of district heating and combined 
heat and power, green infrastructure) (URB Energy, 
2011b). Urban planning needs to be energy efficiency 
oriented through increasing compactness and mixed 

uses, reducing traffic, and developing public transport. 
Attention also needs to be paid to adapting the urban 
structure to manage the consequences of climate 
change (e.g. avoiding the heat island effect, creating 
ventilation corridors, protecting against flooding) 
(EEA, 2012b). 

Energy efficiency projects can be an opportunity to 
create a vision for the future of a city or a district. 
For example, the refurbishment of the centre of 
Jelvaga in Latvia has used an urban energy project 
to build an integrated urban development plan. 
In terms of the energy-efficient upgrading of 
infrastructure and multi-storey buildings, the objective 
is the enhancement of the environment and the 
improvement of the whole area (URB Energy, 2011b). 

Older, pre-First World War property is the least energy 
efficient but is also often the easiest to renovate to 
make it more energy-efficient. Social housing estates 
and concrete blocks of flats can also be renovated 
to high environmental standards, as a German 
programme has shown. In Ireland, the Empty Homes 
Agency (2005) has also demonstrated the feasibility of 
cost-effective and energy-efficient renovation.

2.4.2  Renovation of the built heritage 

The challenge in historic buildings is to maintain the 
existing quality of the built heritage while improving 
the quality of housing in accordance with modern 
energy standards. Ancient buildings are often not only 
very inefficient buildings but also damaged buildings. 
Historic city centres have to offer comfortable and 
energy-saving housing in order to offer a credible 
alternative to peripheral housing estates. It is necessary 
to find a balance between the needs of the inhabitants 
and the economic development of the centre. 

One major issue is how to renovate older and damaged 
areas without moving out the most vulnerable 
populations. It is necessary to find a balance between 
the residential functions, often the most fragile ones, of 
a city centre and its urban centrality and attractiveness 
(Lewis et al., 2013). The plan for the regeneration of 
Delft since the year 2000 is a good example of the 

(35)  LEED is a green building certification programme that recognises best-in-class building strategies and practices: http://www.leed.net  

(accessed 30 October 2014).

(36)  BREEAM sets the standard for best practice in sustainable building design, construction and operational performance: http://www.breeam.org 

(accessed 20 November 2015).

(37)  The Integrated Project Delivery Guide is a tool to assist owners, designers and builders to move towards integrated models and improved design, 

construction and operational processes (American Institute of Architects, 2007).

(38)  Building information modelling (BIM) is a set of interacting policies, processes and technologies generating a 'methodology to manage the 

essential building design and project data in digital format throughout the building's life-cycle' (Penttilä, 2006).

(39)  Three demonstration sites: Kartal in the municipality of Istanbul, Valladolid in Spain and Genoa in Italy: http://r2cities.eu/Demos/The_Case_

Studies.kl (accessed 20 November 2015).

31

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceAvoiding, preventing and reducing

reuse of historic buildings in the city centre (Urbact, 
2013) and of how the transformation and reuse of 
buildings has stimulated eco-restoration. 

In some cities where a major part of the city centre 
is listed, it is crucial to find a way of refurbishing 
buildings without incurring high costs. For example 
the city of Westminster, London, accounts for over 
11 000 listed buildings (in 56 conservation areas 
covering 76% of the city). The main problems were 
fuel poverty and new obligations for landlords making 
it impossible to rent the most inefficient properties 
after 2018. The guide to retrofitting historic buildings, 
published by the municipality (City of Westminster, 
2013), proposes an energy hierarchy from the lowest 
cost and simplest solutions (e.g. insulating hot water 
tanks and pipes, draught proofing doors and windows, 
repairing and using original internal shutters) to the 
most complex and expensive solutions (e.g. insulating 
roofs and floors, installing condensing boilers, 
installing heat pumps or micro-combined heat and 
power plants). 

In Austria, around one-fifth of the total number of 
buildings were built between 1848 and 1918 (known 
as the 'Gründerzeit'). The flagship 'Building of 

Tomorrow' project (a Federal Ministry of Transport, 
Innovation and Technology research and technology 
programme) is focused on the modernisation of 
these buildings. The aim is to raise the thermal 
efficiency of these buildings to a modern standard. 
The annual energy demand for space heating ought 
to be cut from around 120–160 kWh/m2 to less than 
30 kWh/m² (Federal Ministry for Transport, Innovation 
and Technology, 2014). To achieve this result a 
combination of measures has been established 
(e.g. thermally efficient building envelope, efficient 
heating and ventilation strategy). Apart from technical 
issues, a comprehensive strategy (taking into 
account economic, social and legal aspects) has been 
developed (Bettgenhäusser et al., 2014). In Vienna, 
the first-ever renovation of a 'Gründerzeit' building to 
passive house standard (40) has been completed. The 
renovation was carried out in close cooperation with 
the tenants living in the building. 

In Berlin, the refurbishment of the 'Bremer Höhe' 
(a historic building) presented a challenge owing 
to the strict conservation requirements. However, 
a photovoltaic plant was installed on the roofs. Electricity 
is produced by photovoltaic areas of 341 m² that feed 
the local network (URB Energy, 2011a). 

Box 2.8   Demolition or refurbishment?

As regeneration and restructuring sometimes are difficult and costly, the idea of demolishing the oldest homes and those 
in the poorest condition has gained in importance. However, throwing away material is harmful to the environment and 
wasteful of energy and materials. Demolishing houses, which are bulky and valuable material objects, should be a last resort 
(Power, 2010). 

To planners and policymakers, it may seem easier and cheaper to demolish extremely rundown areas than to renovate 
them. However, demolition is not a socially acceptable or resource-efficient way of solving the shortage of housing. 
Demolition is slow, and often unpopular. It may provoke opposition in the community that is supposed to benefit from it. 
It often leads to a loss of social capital that takes decades to rebuild (Power, 2007). 

New building developments are resource and energy consuming. Energy, materials and environmental impacts (land take, 
habitat fragmentation, water consumption, emissions, pollution, waste) are embodied in the new material produced, 
processed and transported for construction; the development of new builds increases land take and urban sprawl if there is 
no land recycling; the demolition and the construction processes generate waste. In addition, new building areas need new 
and adapted infrastructure, in particular for public transport. Essential infrastructure that has been demolished will take 
decades to rebuild. 

A new home uses up to eight times more resources than an equivalent refurbishment (Empty Home Agency, London, 2008). 
This is because most of the building mass and structural elements are already there and rarely need to be replaced 
(Power, 2010). Even given the extremely high energy performance of new buildings, and including the necessary maintenance 
and permanent renewal of the building stock, only extreme physical dereliction justifies such social and environmental costs 
(Power, 2010). There are good solutions for retrofitting and they are becoming more and more energy efficient. 

(40)  The renovation was based on the installation of a composite thermal insulation system outside the façades, top-grade windows and doors, 

a passive house standard, central ventilation system with ultra-efficient heat recovery, a groundwater heat pump and photovoltaic equipment. 
The entire electrics, heating and ventilation were replaced by an energy-efficient system that saves even more primary energy. After renovation, 
the building qualified as a zero-energy building.

32

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
Avoiding, preventing and reducing

2.4.3  Scaling up renovation

and specific requirements (e.g. 'fossil fuel-free city' 
for Växjö) are defined and included in planning.

A city cannot be considered only as an aggregation of 
buildings. The major issue is not increasing the energy 
performance of individual buildings but extending the 
improvement to a larger scale (at district or city level) 
and integrating the change into the urban planning 
process. When scaling up, there can be complex 
interactions with the urban fabric, and measures 
that were successful at the building scale can have 
quite different results on a larger scale (Bourdic and 
Salat, 2012). 

Building efficiency is just part of urban energy 
efficiency, which also depends on urban morphology, 
the system's efficiency (e.g. transport, energy grid) and 
social behaviour. Systemic, multi-scale and transverse 
approaches take into account the intrinsic complexity 
of the urban fabric. A strong planning framework is 
required to secure reductions in the use of energy and 
resources.

Plans for driving energy (and, more generally, resource) 
reductions have to consider the relationship of the city 
with its rural hinterland and avoid too narrow a focus 
on the building, site and district. Renewable resources 
need to be harnessed if they would be the easiest 
and most cost effective (TCPA and CHPA, 2008). There 
are opportunities for the cost-effective deployment 
of medium- to large-scale wind power generation 
(and, for some cities, offshore power generation), 
the development of biomass supply chains and solar 
photovoltaic plants. Planning implies exploring which 
combination of technologies makes best sense on the 
different scales for developing local energy solutions. 

For example, Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council, 
in a former coal-mining region of the United Kingdom 
has reduced GHG emissions through a comprehensive 
programme to improve the energy efficiency of its 
buildings and to switch from coal to biomass for heating 
(schools, public buildings, council blocks of flats). The 
wood comes from locally managed woodland and 
wood waste that would otherwise be sent to landfill. 
Neglected woodlands have been brought into active 
management, enhancing woodland biodiversity, and 
jobs have been created (Forestry Commission England, 
2010).

2.4.4  Enabling changes 

As efficient building solutions are often technically 
demanding, cities can stimulate innovation and the 
development of new skills by public procurement  
(Liimatainen et al., 2014). For example, the city of 
Cologne has launched the Climate Round Table Cologne 
(KlimaKreis Köln) to promote projects addressing 
climate change issues. It comprises a group of experts 
in the field of climate and energy issues, representing 
academic institutions and others actors (associations, 
administrators, economists) (Celsius-Smart Cities). 

The resource and energy efficiency policies of local 
governments have to confront individual motivations 
and beliefs around the environment (Dixon, 2011). 
They can set ambitious sustainability targets, but 
without regulation to enforce the renovation, effective 
retrofitting depends on voluntary decision on the part 
of building owners. If they do not feel that national, 
regional or city sustainability goals are their concern, 
buildings owners have no motivation for retrofitting 
buildings, leading to a locked-in situation. Relying on 
voluntary action creates considerable uncertainties that 
hamper the practical realisation of the strategy defined 
by local government (Lepoutre et al., 2007). Cities can 
create reliable frameworks of stakeholders dedicated 
to providing information on refurbishment that include 
planners, tenants and landlords, the municipality 
administration, and chambers of professional 
associations (URB Energy, 2011b). Individual ownership 
structures are a real challenge. 

A lack of technical and financial expertise is often 
an obstacle to refurbishment. Local governments 
can create interface capacities between public 
authorities and civil society to accelerate the transition 
by supporting stakeholders and giving advice and 
information. For example, Bristol City Council in the 
United Kingdom has created Bristol Tenants' Energy 
Advice to provide advice on energy. In the main French 
cities (41), a local energy agency provides technical 
and financial information to promote energy saving 
(e.g. Lyon, Grenoble, Toulouse). 

A long-term vision to 2020 and 2050 is generally 
the starting point for developing a city's strategy 
(e.g. Copenhagen, Delft). A strategy tailored to the 
characteristics of the city influences all the components 
of the planning policy and city management. Targets 

The lack of resources and uncertainty about the payback 
period for retrofitting measures (Lewis et al., 2013) is a 
major difficulty. The selection of retrofitting measures 
is a trade-off between capital investment and benefits 
that can be achieved by implementing the retrofitting 

(41)  Thirty-two local energy agencies funded nationally.

33

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceAvoiding, preventing and reducing

measures. The heterogeneity and dispersion of owners 
is a major barrier to financing retrofitting. It is difficult to 
stimulate collective action and adopt the best technical 
solutions when individual property owners tend to 
operate in isolation, in particular when this is combined 
with owners on low incomes (URB Energy, 2011b). 

Scaling up urban retrofitting activities implies dialogue 
and cooperation between multiple stakeholders that 
do not necessarily have the same social interests 
(e.g. policymakers, owners, occupiers, developers, 
financiers, utility providers). For example, in the city 

of Rakvere (Estonia), residents, who were satisfied 
with their living situation, had little interest in 
energy-efficient refurbishment and the municipality 
has had to convince them (URB Energy, 2011b). 
Modelling and decision support tools can help to 
elaborate long-term planning for urban retrofitting, 
taking into account the complexity of the built 
environment. For municipalities, it is not easy to 
estimate the scale of retrofitting; a municipal or 
regional analysis of the situation is the first step in 
developing targets and a strategy and estimating the 
financial requirements.  

Box 2.9 

Cities tackle energy poverty 

There is no European definition of energy poverty, but European Council Directive 2009/72/EC (42) acknowledges that energy 
poverty not only exists but is also a growing problem. Energy poverty is a situation in which a household is unable to access 
a socially — and materially — necessary level of energy services in the home (43) (Walker et al., 2013; Bouzarovski, 2014). This 
reduces quality of life, influences attainment and poses health problems. The link between excess winter deaths and cold 
temperatures is well established, as is the role of inadequate housing (WHO, 2007; McMunn et al., 2009). The elderly, young 
children and people with a disability suffer more from cold.

Energy poverty cannot be described only as the inability to access affordable warmth. It is a combination of low incomes, 
homes with poor thermal properties and, in some cases, high energy prices. Other factors can increase energy poverty, such 
as the nature of heating systems and socio-demographic characteristics such as household size, age, gender and level of 
education. 

In 2012, 10.8% of the total EU-28 population were unable to keep their homes adequately warm, increasing to 24.4% when 
people on low incomes were considered (Eurostat, 2014). (This figure includes urban and rural energy poverty.) The highest 
proportions of the population with inadequate domestic warmth are concentrated in the EU-10, especially Bulgaria and 
Lithuania. On the contrary, in colder northern countries (Sweden, Finland, the Netherlands and Denmark), only a small 
percentage of the population is unable to afford an adequately heated home (Bouzarovski, 2014). 

Energy price regulation, direct financial support to low-income households and social tariffs offer only a temporary solution 
to the energy poverty problem (BPIE, 2014). They address the effect rather than the cause of the problem. A long-term 
sustainable solution will require the renovation of poor energy-performance buildings and enhanced local energy planning. 
However, homeowners in energy poverty cannot afford significant investments (Power, 2010), and landlords expect 
incentives. Therefore, energy efficiency measures for fuel-poor people largely depend on the availability of public finance 
schemes and regulatory measures. 

Urban planning policies at the city scale are also crucial to tackling energy poverty. For example, household electricity use is 
disproportionately high in the United Kingdom's cities and in municipal housing (Bouzarovski, 2014). Energy-related forms of 
deprivation and inequality are inextricably tied to planning practices and spatial morphologies. Some national programmes 
involving municipalities are entirely or partly dedicated to energy poverty (e.g. 'Kirklees Warm Zone' (44) in the United 
Kingdom (45), 'Warmer Homes Scheme' (46) in Ireland and 'Habiter mieux' in France (47)). 

(42)  Directive 2009/72/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 concerning common rules for the internal market in 

electricity and repealing Directive 2003/54/EC.

(43)  In the United Kingdom, fuel poverty is defined as the circumstance in which a household spends more than 10% of its income on energy bills 

(Bouzarovski, 2014).

(44)  A programme of cooperation between local authorities, energy companies and other entities interested in fighting energy poverty in the United 

Kingdom: http://kirkleeswarmzone.wordpress.com/social-issues/ (accessed 20 November 2015).

(45)  In the United Kingdom the 'Fuel Poverty Strategy' was launched in 2001.
(46)  A programme that provides advice and funds for the adoption of energy efficiency measures in vulnerable and energy-poor homes:  

http://www.seai.ie/Grants/Warmer_Homes_Scheme/ (accessed 20 November 2015).

(47)  http://www.anah.fr/proprietaires/proprietaires-occupants/etre-mieux-chauffe/ (accessed 20 November 2015).

34

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
Avoiding, preventing and reducing

2.5  The urban transport system

The urban transport system, carrying both passengers 
and freight, is crucial for economic prosperity and 
competitiveness of cities and the everyday life of the 
people living and working within and around cities. As 
transport systems become more complex, a successful 
urban mobility policy needs to combine both individual 
and societal points of view to find a balance between 
competing interests. 

The Green Paper on urban mobility (EC, 2007) identified 
five challenges faced by cities:

1.  congestion that has negative economic, 
environmental and health impacts;

2.  dependency on fossil fuels and the resulting GHG 

emissions, air pollution and noise;

3.  increases in freight and passenger flows;

4.  a public transport system that meets people's needs 
(accessible, affordable, frequent, fast, flexible, safe, 
reliable and connected to a variety of sustainable 
modes of transport);

5.  ensuring the safety of the infrastructure, rolling 

stock and citizens. 

The annex of the Roadmap to a resource efficient Europe 
(EC, 2011c) analyses the interlinkages between sectors 
and resources and outlines possible improvements to 
achieve resource efficiency in urban transport:

• 

• 

reducing dependency on fossil fuels by using more 
efficient vehicles, renewable energy and better 
transport networks;

reducing air pollution and GHG emissions from 
urban transport; 

easier and commuting times are reduced. Finally, that 
results in an increasing use of cars which, in turn, calls 
for further infrastructure development, and so on. To 
break this cycle and reduce congestion and fuel use, 
and therefore air pollution and GHG emissions, urban 
policies can act in different ways (see also Table 2.2): 

•  Urban planning and a sustainable urban mobility plan: 

The integration of transport and land use planning, 
encouraging density and mixed land use, with 
easy access to public transport and walking and 
cycling facilities to reduce the use of private cars, 
congestion, air pollution, GHG emissions and land 
take (EEA, 2015). 

•  Efficient public transport: The transport infrastructure 
and equipment and the amount of traffic cannot 
be changed quickly. However, efficient public 
transport helps address the increase in the 
demand for transport. The attractiveness of public 
transport can be increased by providing reliable, 
frequent, affordable, comfortable, safe, fast and 
accessible public transport in most of the urban 
area, in particular in the most deprived districts. 
Interconnectivity and interoperability of the 
different networks will increase the number of users 
and the area covered. 

•  Tariff scheme: Taking measures to simply and unify 
the tariff scheme for different forms of public 
transport in the urban area. Some cities have 
integrated into one ticket the fares for buses, trams, 
subway, cycles or car sharing (e.g. in La Rochelle 
in France the entire transport system is accessible 
with a single electronic ticket). Other cities 
(e.g. Winchester in the United Kingdom) have 
developed a push-and-pull strategy through the 
pricing scheme: the most environmentally friendly 
vehicles are encouraged into the centre of the city 
and high-emission vehicles are encouraged to use 
parking on the outskirts of the city.

• 

increasing the resource efficiency of infrastructures; 

•  Regulation and charging: Some cities have restricted 

•  minimising the impacts of soil sealing and land 

fragmentation and pollution; 

the access of private vehicles to certain zones 
(e.g. the Central London congestion charge, 
Stockholm, Milan).

•  optimising the logistics of transporting materials; 

•  New technology: Besides the reduction in the 

•  ensuring the efficient recycling of end-of-life 

vehicles.

The standard response to improving urban mobility 
typically has been to increase the infrastructure, mostly 
for cars. Unfortunately, such developments engender 
a vicious circle: more infrastructure stimulates urban 
sprawl because access to peripheral urban areas is 

number of vehicles, the use of more energy-efficient 
technologies for both private and public transport 
can be promoted and the necessary infrastructure 
(e.g. vehicle charging stations, compressed natural 
gas stations) installed.

•  Smart mobility: Using ICT, mobility and transport 
systems can be optimised and better oriented 
to societal needs and environmental challenges. 

35

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceAvoiding, preventing and reducing

ICT applications allow optimisation of transport 
logistics, improvements in the energy efficiency 
of vehicles, cost-effective management, travel 
dematerialisation (telepresence), traffic monitoring 
and control, simulation of planning changes, and 
crowd-sourcing, a tool to encourage citizens' 
participation (European Parliament, 2014). 

•  Freight transport: Some cities have worked with 
the private sector to take measures to improve 
the efficiency of the delivery of goods to urban 
areas (in particular to the centre of the city and 
pedestrianised areas) and to reduce air pollution. 
The use of smaller and cleaner vehicles for city 
deliveries in dense urban areas is encouraged.

•  Changes in behaviour and lifestyle: Cities can launch 

public transport. They can also promote smart 
organisational approaches, such as teleworking 
and telepresence, in order to reduce the number 
of daily commutes (Akyelken et al., 2013).

This report does not present a detailed review of 
opportunities or examples of good practice. To support 
the exchange of information and highlight the best 
practices, the European Commission has developed 
several initiatives:

•  CIVITAS Initiative (48): Several cities are working 
together on urban sustainability. They have 
developed a body of evidence on the impacts 
of single and integrated measures and on the 
implementation of these measures.

campaigns to raise the awareness of citizens 
and to promote more sustainable transport 
through a range of options such as changes in 
fares, frequency, accessibility and comfort of 

•  ELTIS PLUS programme (49): This offers practical 

support to cities for the development of sustainable 
urban mobility plans through workshops and 
guidelines.

Table 2.2  

Framework of policy instruments to promote sustainable mobility

Avoid (Reduction) 

Shift (Alteration) 

Improve (Efficiency) 

Car-free events 
Spatial planning 
Urban planning 

Restricted zones (e.g. environmental zones, 
car-free districts, pedestrian areas) 
Separate lanes for public transport 
Lanes for high-occupancy vehicles 
Spatial planning 

Environmental zones 
Speed limits 
Emission standards 
End-of-life treatment 

Strategies and 
instruments 

Direct regulatory 
instruments 

Market-based 
financial 
instruments 

Fuel tax 
Congestion charge 
Registration tax 
Fares on public transport 

Comparative labels 
Endorsement labels 
Rankings 
Mass awareness campaigns 
Carbon footprint calculators

Scrapping schemes 
Tax incentives 
Annual circulation tax 
Registration tax 
Road pricing 
Green public procurement 
Research subsidies

Comparative labels 
Endorsement labels Rankings 
Mass awareness campaigns 
Carbon footprint calculators 

Information-based 
instruments

Mass awareness 
campaigns 
Endorsement labels 

Support for 
behavioural change

Flexible working models 
Car-sharing schemes 
Car-free residential areas 

Social marketing campaigns 
Job tickets 
Car-sharing schemes 

Carbon compensation 
schemes 
Eco-driving programmes 

Provision of 
infrastructure

Integrated city planning

Public transport infrastructure 
Cycling infrastructure (e.g. cycling lanes, 
bicycle parking facilities) 
Park and ride facilities 
Bicycle-sharing schemes
Integrated city planning 

Source:   Rubik et al., 2011; Filcak et al., 2013.

(48)  http://civitas.eu (accessed 20 November 2015).
(49)  http://www.eltis.org (accessed 20 November 2015).

36

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceAvoiding, preventing and reducing

2.6  The urban water system 

In cities, the demand for water is concentrated into 
a small area. This concentration of the population 
increases the pressure on fresh- or groundwater. 
However, as cities also represent a concentration of 
economic and political power, they have the financial 
and human resources to develop resource-efficient 
integrated urban water management and smart 
infrastructure. However, leakages in water supply 
networks and energy consumption for water 
treatment remain an ongoing issue. For European 
cities, the maintenance and upgrading of ageing and 
deteriorating water infrastructure is a technical and 
financial challenge (WssTP, 2010).

2.6.1  The role of the urban pattern 

The form of urban areas affects their water use. 
Low-density development means a more extensive 
water supply network than that required in a compact 
development. Therefore, it means more leakages, 
greater demand and higher cost. 

Urban sprawl and rapid growth bring problems related 
to financing the water infrastructure. The housing 
bubbles in Spain and Ireland showed that new housing 
developments lead not only to an increase in water 
demand but also a need for more water infrastructure. 
The consumption of water per capita is bigger in single 
houses with gardens than in multi-storey houses 
(see Chapter 4), because the surface area per capita is 
bigger and watering gardens (50) (and filling swimming 
pools in southern countries) increases the consumption 
of water. 

susceptible to water loss through leakage, and to 
reduce the need for maintenance and therefore the 
cost of water. There is a good relation between the 
cost of water and the distance from the water service 
centre. The demand for water for gardens is directly 
related to the size of the lot for both residential and 
non-residential buildings (EPA, 2006). 

2.6.2  Water losses

Water losses are an inevitable part of the public water 
supply infrastructure. For economic and technical 
reasons, water losses cannot be entirely eliminated. 
The urban water infrastructure is vulnerable owing 
to deterioration with age, damage from excavations 
or overloading. Currently, water leakage rates are not 
subject to any regulation other than management 
decisions taken by utility suppliers. 

Leakage in sewerage systems will result in infiltration 
or exfiltration depending on the local groundwater 
tables. Exfiltration of wastewater may result in the 
contamination of groundwater. Infiltration dilutes 
wastewater and increases the pollution load on the 
environment (EEA, 2012c).

Leakage in public water supply systems results not 
only in the loss of purified drinking water but also in 
a waste of the energy and material resources used 
for abstraction, transport and treatment. It increases 
the risk of bacterial contamination of water for 
human consumption and the pollution load on the 
environment. Distribution losses (between 5% and 
50%) are much larger than production losses 
(between 2% and 10%) (EEA, 2014a). 

Smart compact urban planning, with high-density and 
mixed land use is the way to reduce the demand for 
water per resident, to reduce the length of the pipe 
network, therefore making it more efficient and less 

A benchmarking study on water distribution 
losses in three federal states in Germany (Hesse, 
Rhineland-Palatinate and Schleswig-Holstein) shows a 
range of mean values between 0.9 and 3.1 m3/km per 

Box 2.10  The urban water cycle

The urban water cycle relies on water supply, wastewater and storm water systems. These include water abstraction, 
storage, supply, distribution, wastewater treatment, and storm water collection disposal and control systems. Resource 
efficiency in the urban water cycle includes the use and reuse of treated effluents in water-scarce environments but also the 
use of material resources and the output of emissions in water utility operations. Water can be provided by public utilities or 
commercial organisations. Some municipalities are directly in charge of the water supply.

(50)  EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency) — Growing Toward More Efficient Water Use: linking development, infrastructure 

and drinking water policies http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2014-01/documents/growing_water_use_efficiency.pdf (accessed 
20 November 2015).

37

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
Avoiding, preventing and reducing

day. Aggregated benchmark data for 32 water utilities 
in Germany (representing around 75 million persons 
served) for 3 years show a mean value of 8.3–8.4 m3/km 
per day. Other data for Denmark, France and Sweden 
put losses at between 1 and 10 m3/km per day. The 
lowest losses are in Germany, Denmark and France and 
the highest in Sweden (EEA, 2014a).

32% of cities of the 46 European cities analysed 
by Informed Cities, have leakages below 10%, and 
15% below 5% (see Figure 2.6). With the exception 
of Barcelona, no southern cities have less than 
10% leakage.

However, stopping water leakages is not always easy 
and might have also negative economic and social 
costs, especially in low-density cities where the water 
pipe network is long and the number of people to pay 
for servicing and maintenance is relatively low. The first 
difficulty is detecting and measuring water leakages. In 
some countries such as Sweden, active leakage control 
is not cost-effective; owing to deep pipes and frozen 
ground digging is too expensive. Only major leakages 
are repaired and 10–15% 'background leakage' is 
accepted (WssTP, 2011). 

Different technologies can be used to detect leakages 
(e.g. monitoring leakages in district metering areas, night 
flow analysis, acoustic and gas tracer technologies). 

Some cities use the district metering technique in 
combination with other methods such as the leak 
noise cross-correlation technique and surveys using 
acoustic loggers (e.g. city of Bresca in Italy).

Water leakages are expected to increase because 
of climate change (Markopoulos et al., 2012). In hot 
climates, the dehydration will cause pipe breakages. 
In cold climates, pipe breakages will increase during 
a thaw. This has already been observed in European 
and North American cities. The higher number of 
freeze/thaw periods increases the strain on pipes and 
the corrosiveness of the ground. 

2.6.3  Water–energy nexus 

Water utility suppliers take significant measures 
to reduce their energy consumption, in particular 
electricity use, and increase their energy recovery. 

Global targets for energy efficiency in water utilities 
were one of the outcomes of the Sixth World Water 
Forum (12–17 March 2012 in Marseille). Following 
the forum, some public authorities and water utility 
suppliers are implementing measures to improve 
energy efficiency in water and wastewater systems; 
the target (51) is to reduce energy use by 20% by 2020, 
compared with 1990 levels (EEA, 2014a).

Figure 2.6  Water losses in some European cities

% 
45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5 

0 

Munster  
Faro 
Amsterdam 
Ravenna 
Bremen 
Rotterdam 
Zaragoza 
Kuopio 
Torino 
Bolzano 
Odense 
Vaxjo 
Stockholm 
Vranje 
Timisoara 
Praha 
Sﬁntu Gheorghe 
Dublin 
Barcelona 
Ferrara 
Porto 
Vantaa 
Granada 
Firenze 
Kobenhavn 
Chrudim 
Antwerpen 
Genova 
Bologna 
Nantes 
Plymouth 
Turku 
Napoli 
Bristol 
Bydgoszcz 
Liepaja 
Bordeaux 
Vitoria Gasteiz 
Parma 
Oeiras 
Nuremberg 
Leicester 
Aalborg 
Knurow 
Helsinki 
Poznań

Source:  

Informed Cities, 2009–2010.

(51)  This target has been endorsed by the International Water Association, the worldwide network for water professionals and companies on behalf 

of the sector.

38

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceAvoiding, preventing and reducing

There is considerable variation in energy consumption 
in drinking water production and distribution, which 
depends to a large degree on the source water quality, 
the distance it has to be transported and the elevation for 
pumping (Table 2.3). Energy consumption for wastewater 
treatment depends on several factors, including the type 
of treatment and size of plant. Energy consumption for 
wastewater transport (pumping) in sewerage systems 
depends to a very high degree on the topography of 
the service area but also on the technology installed 
(pumping yield efficiency and automated control).

By comparison, the EU-27 average household electricity 
consumption in is about 70 million tonnes of oil 
equivalent (toe) (52) or 814 TWh, which, with a population 
of about 500 million people (53), corresponds to an 
average of about 1 600 kWh/year per person. The 

net annual electricity consumption for urban water 
management represents about 5.5% for the household 
sector, and corresponds to each person constantly 
burning a 10 W light bulb (EEA, 2014a). This does not 
include the management of industrial wastewater or 
storm water run-off.

The chemical composition of wastewater and its 
available heat enable energy recovery and therefore 
reduce or eliminate the plant's dependence on 
conventional electricity (WERF, 2011; Markopoulos et al., 
2012). Energy savings can be obtained by optimising 
the process, in particular the most energy-intensive 
steps such as pumping, the aeration process or aerobic 
digestion. Automated control is a way of quickly 
adjusting the process to variable conditions and saving 
energy (EPA, 2010).

Table 2.3 

Estimation of energy consumed in water management for the household sector

Drinking water production and supply 

Wastewater transport

Wastewater treatment (total consumption) 

Cogeneration of electricity 

Total, net consumption 

Source:   EEA, 2014a, p. 52.

+34 kWh/year per person 

+20 kWh/year per person 

+43 kWh/year per person 

– 9 kWh/year per person 

+88 kWh/year per person 

Box 2.11  Reducing energy consumed in water collection in Grobbendonk, Belgium 

The Provincial and Interurban Drinking Water Company provides water to 65 municipalities. The water is produced from 
30 wells that collect groundwater. The water collection system was susceptible to blockages. The groundwater level can vary 
by between 2 and 5 metres. Therefore, the wells were equipped with oversized pumps. 

Variable frequency drives were installed to vary the speed of the pump to match the flow conditions. The result was a close 
match between the electrical power input to the pump and the hydraulic power needed to pump the water. This technology, 
often used where the flow rate is highly variable, saves power. 

Around 15–20% was saved, representing a payback time of 2.5 years.

Source:    Markopoulos et al., 2012. 

Box 2.12  Carbon-neutral wastewater treatment plant

Hamburg Wasser Central wastewater treatment plant 'Köhlbrandhöft' (2.7 million inhabitant equivalents) is carbon neutral. 
It has taken many projects to reach this target. Waste heat from the sludge incineration process supplies district heating. 
Two wind turbines provide the wastewater management plant with electric power. Surplus digester gas is purified and 
converted into biomethane and then fed into the grid of the local gas supplier.

Source:    TRUST, 2014.  

(52)  http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/table.do?tab=table&init=1&language=en&pcode=tsdpc310&plugin=1 (accessed 20 October 2014).
(53)  Eurostat database: http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php?title=File:Demographic_balance,_2011_(1)_(1_000).png&filet

imestamp=20130129110805.

39

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
 
Avoiding, preventing and reducing

Box 2.13  Hamburg water cycle

The city of Hamburg has developed a new approach to wastewater management, HAMBURG WATER Cycle®, which is 
different from conventional sewerage systems. It takes into account the entire water cycle, with the aim of upgrading local 
drainage systems through decentralised storm water management.

The HAMBURG WATER Cycle® takes a holistic approach to the energy supply and sanitation needs of urban areas. The 
objective is to close the material cycles within the residential environment. The water and energy infrastructures are 
interdependent, simultaneously protecting water resources and utilising wastewater to produce energy. 

The most critical component of the HAMBURG WATER Cycle® is the separate treatment of the different wastewater 
streams, the so-called partial flow treatment. Storm water, wastewater from the toilet, and wastewater from the kitchen 
and bathroom (from handwashing or using the washing machine, for example) are collected separately and then treated 
separately. 

The 'Jenfelder Au' will be the first neighbourhood project in Hamburg incorporating the HAMBURG WATER Cycle® into newly 
constructed buildings. 

Source:    TRUST, 2014 — http://www.hamburgwatercycle.de/ (accessed 20 November 2015).

2.7  Demand-side policies

•  geographical factors such as culture, geography, 

The transition towards a sustainable society cannot be 
achieved only by policies focused on the supply side 
and technological interventions. Policies acting on the 
demand side are opportunities for overall long-term 
improvement in resource and energy efficiency and 
sufficiency. Transition is a dynamic societal process 
of radical and structural changes that need to be 
accompanied by public policies. It is a society-wide 
transformation that aims to change the everyday 
behaviour of citizens, as consumers, users and 
residents. To a certain extent the transition phase can 
be seen as a period of destabilisation. It is why there 
is a clear need for transition management to facilitate 
and accelerate societal change.

Local governments can play an important role in 
enabling change by supporting socio-technical 
transition, planning compact cities with a high quality 
of life, developing decentralised supply systems, 
encouraging eco-industrial development, stimulating 
innovation and promoting smart measures. They can 
develop forms of governance that encourage dialogue 
and the participation of stakeholders, support 
individual and collective initiatives (led by market or 
non-market initiatives) and promote a city-wide vision 
that goes beyond each project and the limits of the 
city (e.g. city-region) (Dixon, 2011). 

2.7.1 

Infrastructure shapes our everyday practice

Human behaviour is influenced by different types of 
factors (DEFRA, 2011):

social network, institutional framework, 
information, infrastructure; 

•  behaviour factors such as beliefs, norms, attitudes, 

habits, values, knowledge, perceptions; 

•  environmental changes such climate change, loss 
of biodiversity, change in natural hazards, water 
scarcity. 

Lifestyle refers to our ways of doing, having, using, 
consuming, moving, working and displaying — in 
effect, our behaviour (Backhaus et al., 2012). It is a 
matter of choice, as well as habits that are shaped 
by the context (social, cultural, technical, economic, 
political, institutional and geographical surroundings). 
Our everyday practices are routine behaviour that 
depends on 'normal standards' (such as taking a 
daily shower, travelling by car, owning a computer, 
going on holiday, etc.), existing infrastructure (e.g. the 
use of public transport is dependent on affordable, 
efficient and accessible means of public transport), 
pricing policies, regulation and technological 
innovations. 

Practices change over time. Technical change leads 
to the emergence of new practices (e.g. the new role 
of ICT and mobile phones in our daily lives). Technical 
development and rising living standards are drivers for 
consumption. At the same time, technology provides 
smart tools to support better sustainable lifestyles 
(e.g. energy-efficient products and communication 
and information services that support public transport 
information services).

40

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
Avoiding, preventing and reducing

Even if people undertake symbolic actions to 
demonstrate their 'green credentials' (e.g. sorting 
waste), most everyday practices are undertaken with 
little consideration for the environment and often they 
conflict with other concerns (e.g. price, time taken, ease 
of use) (Røpke, 2009). Shortage of time is an important 
factor that determines the strategies that people adopt 
(e.g. in urban areas, the choice between driving or using 
public transport is often more a question of time rather 
than price or thinking sustainably). 

Existing infrastructures for transport or energy supply 
can 'lock' people into unsustainable behaviour. 
therefore municipalities have to facilitate a change 
in behaviour by a significant group of people by the 
following measures (Backhaus et al., 2012):

•  making sustainable lifestyles easier, cheaper 

and more enjoyable by developing appropriate 
infrastructure and solutions adapted to the context; 

•  providing solutions and a range of options, taking 
into account the diversity of the population and its 
needs (age, gender, socio-economic group, level of 
education); 

•  developing systemic and holistic approaches 
focused on end users and tailored to the city 
through strong multi-stakeholder participation;

•  supporting local innovation and small-scale 

sustainable initiatives.

2.7.2  Preventing resource consumption 

Consumption has increased dramatically, generating 
waste causing damage to the environment. Today, 
consumers have more choice, and products are 
designed to have shorter lifespans (e.g. single-use and 
disposable products). Owing to rapid technological 
progress, people own and use more personal devices 
and replace them more often. High levels of material 
consumption are accepted as the norm and are 
associated with well-being and success. 

In consumption-driven society, successful sustainability 
initiatives need to go beyond the 'one-size-fits-all' 
approach. It is crucial to understand how to motivate 
and facilitate a change in behaviour across ages, 
socio-economic groups and groups with different 
levels of knowledge, awareness and interest. Solutions 
and combinations of solutions have to fit specific 
contexts and target groups (Backhaus et al., 2012). 
Beyond an awareness-raising campaign, municipalities 
can help people to make decisions and take action by 
providing advice and support.

Not all spending generates the same level of waste. 
For example, we assume that buying more expensive 
organic food would lead to the same amount of 
household food waste per unit food but result in less 
household food waste per euro spent. We also assume 
that spending on material goods should generate more 
waste than spending on non-material services. This 
is particularly the case in urban areas, where access 
to culture and other opportunities for non-material 
expenditure is considerably greater than it is in a rural 
setting. Some initiatives that seek to shift spending from 
material goods to non-material services include the 
way in which some supermarkets design their loyalty 
schemes to favour payback in terms of cultural services 
rather than material products. Another example is the 
growth in 'experience giving', whereby one can give a 
cultural experience in place of a physical present. 

Waste prevention
Waste prevention is the first step in the waste 
hierarchy. By avoiding waste generation, one avoids all 
of the other steps in waste management. Preventing 
waste also minimises the material input to the 
economy. All EU member states have to develop 
national waste prevention programmes in accordance 
with the Waste Framework Directive (EU, 2008), and 
the EEA reviews these programmes on a regular basis 
(EEA, 2014b). Multiple waste policies and targets set 
at European level include minimum requirements 
for managing certain waste types. The most relevant 
targets for municipal waste are the Landfill Directive's 
landfill-diversion targets for biodegradable municipal 
waste (EU, 1999); the Packaging and Packaging Waste 
Directive's recycling targets (EU, 1994); and the Waste 
Framework Directive's recycling target for household 
and similar wastes.

Waste prevention has both quantitative and qualitative 
aspects:

•  Quantitative waste prevention can be achieved 

by reducing the quantity of material used in the 
manufacture of products and increasing the 
efficiency with which products, once manufactured, 
are used. Waste can be avoided by limiting 
unnecessary consumption and by designing and 
consuming products that generate less waste. 
Quantitative waste prevention also encompasses 
actions that can be undertaken before a product 
reaches the end of its life; rather than discarding the 
product as waste, the end user should be able to 
consider reuse, repair or refurbishment. Extending 
a product's life or considering options such as reuse 
before it enters the waste management system are 
forms of prevention that can be realised through 
the diversion of waste flows (EC, 2012). 

41

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceAvoiding, preventing and reducing

•  Qualitative waste prevention is defined as reducing 
its hazardous content (Article 3 (12) of the Waste 
Framework Directive). This helps reduce human and 
environmental exposure to hazardous materials 
(EC, 2012). 

• 

• 

Waste can be prevented at different steps of the 
production–consumption system: 

in the distribution phase by, inter alia, good 
planning of supply and stocks and choosing less 
waste-intensive packaging options; 

in the consumption phase by choosing products that 
are less waste intensive over their life cycle, keeping 
products in use for a longer period; repairing, 
sharing or hiring products; or through reducing 
consumption levels.

• 

in the production phase by improving material 
efficiency, using processes that generate less waste 
and product and service innovations; 

Urban areas are generally well suited to waste 
prevention activities as many of these activities require 

Figure 2.7  Municipal waste generated per capita in 36 European countries (2004 and 2012)

Switzerland 

Denmark 

Cyprus 

Luxembourg 

Germany 

Malta 

Ireland 

Austria 

Netherlands 

France 

Italy 

Finland 

Greece 

Norway 

United Kingdom 

Lithuania 

Spain 

Sweden 

Bulgaria 

Belgium 

Portugal 

Hungary 

Croatia 

Turkey 

former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, the 

Serbia 

Slovenia 

Bosnia and Herzegovina 

Iceland 

Slovakia 

Poland 

Czech Republic 

Latvia 

Estonia 

Romania 

Albania 

0 

100 

200 

300 

400 

500 

600 

700 

800 

2012 

2004 

Note:  

The recycling rate is calculated as the percentage of municipal waste generated that is recycled and composted. Changes in the 
reporting methodology means that 2012 data are not fully comparable with 2004 data for Austria, Cyprus, Malta, Slovakia and Spain. 
2005 data have been used instead of 2004 data for Poland because of changes in methodology. Owing to data availability, instead 
of 2004 data, 2003 data were used for Iceland; 2007 data were used for Croatia; and 2006 data were used for Serbia. For the former 
Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, 2008 data were used for 2004, and 2011 data used for 2012. 

Source:   Eurostat. Municipality waste statistics.

42

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceAvoiding, preventing and reducing

a large potential market and/or the higher level of 
participation that high-density urban areas provide. 
High-density housing, with its limited storage space, 
may also act as a disincentive to hoard old or unused 
items and encourage their return to the marketplace. 

Waste prevention includes a wide range of activities 
throughout the whole life cycle of a product, from the 
initial design phase, through the production process 
to packaging, retail and use and reuse. In households, 
waste prevention can, for example, be promoted by 
reusing and preparing for reuse (fixing, swapping, 
reselling, and borrowing), minimising packaging 
(refillable packaging, reduced packaging), reducing 
ownership without reducing use (e.g. product service 
systems, leasing, short-term rental), and improving 
consumption (e.g. buying low-material-content and 
high-value items). Such approaches can be supported by 
new networks and neighbourhood initiatives. Retailers 
(particularly food retailers), cafes and restaurants can 
also contribute to preventing municipal waste. 

Waste prevention in commercial enterprises has a 
different set of drivers and therefore requires quite 
different types of initiatives. 

481 kg of municipal waste per capita (EU-28) was 
generated in 2013 (54);  municipal waste generation 

totals varied considerably, ranging from 747 kg per 
capita in Denmark to 272 kg/capita in Romania. 
The variations reflect differences in consumption 
patterns and economic wealth, but they also depend 
considerably on how municipal waste is reported, 
collected and managed. Households generate between 
60% and 90% of municipal waste, while the remainder 
can be attributed to commercial sources and 
administration (55). 

Working with individual retailers could be a way 
of reducing the amount of packaging used for 
bulk products. Similarly, there are also initiatives 
from individual take-away restaurants to reduce 
the packaging associated with their food. These 
include, for example, (slightly) discounted food when 
customers bring their own packaging.

Eco-design is a way of preventing waste by improving 
manufacturing methods. Eco-friendly products, for 
example, avoid the use of hazardous substances, 
use recycled secondary raw materials, or use less 
energy and packaging. Even if city authorities 
cannot control the manufacturing process, they can 
launch awareness-raising campaigns and encourage 
consumers to demand goods that produce less waste 
and drive the creation of a more resource-efficient 
market (Promoting ZeroWaste, 2014). 

Box 2.14  Waste generation in European cities

Data on the generation and management of waste in urban areas is considerably scarcer than data at the national 
level. However, Eurostat's 2011 update of the Urban Audit (56) statistics database provides some incomplete data on the 
generation of household and commercial waste in European cities. The data on municipal waste includes household and 
commercial waste. There is no guarantee that the same waste types are covered in all cities in the database, as waste 
collection is managed differently by different Member States and regional authorities. Nevertheless, by covering both 
household and commercial waste, the data set reflects the quantities of waste that authorities must regularly manage. 
Commercial waste, in particular, is often more concentrated in urban areas. 

Based on data from Urban Audit — for the 294 cities for which both waste and population data are available — the 
generation of household and commercial waste in 2011 ranged between 166 kg/capita in Tomaszów Mazowiecki in Poland 
and 748 kg/capita in's-Hertogenbosch in the Netherlands. 

Waste and affluence

Affluence — measured by gross domestic product (GDP)/capita — is a significant factor determining the generation of 
municipal and commercial waste, although the relationship is not linear. Waste generation is generally lower in less affluent 
countries. However, Germany and Portugal, countries with very different economic conditions, infrastructure and cultural 
practices, cover a similar range of waste generation – from around 650 kg/capita to about 350–400 kg/capita (see Figure 2.8). 
Finland and the Czech Republic provide interesting examples of countries in which waste generation in cities tends to be 
near uniform throughout the country.

(54)  http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Municipal_waste_statistics.
(55)   http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Municipal_waste_statistics.
(56)  Urban Audit data are submitted voluntarily — there is no European obligation to provide Eurostat with Urban Audit data. There are data for 
some or all cities in: Belgium, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Hungary, Latvia, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, 
Slovenia and Norway. There are no data for any cities in: Austria, Croatia, Denmark, France, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, 
Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom, Switzerland and Turkey. There are only larger urban zone (LUZ) waste data available for 
some German and Portuguese LUZs.

43

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
Avoiding, preventing and reducing

Box 2.14  Waste generation in European cities (cont.)

Figure 2.8 

Waste generation per capita by city and country

Kg per capita 

800 

700 

600 

500 

400 

300 

200 

100 

0 

Belgium 

Czech Republic 
Bugaria 

Germany

Estonia 

Hungary 
Finland 
Latvia 
Netherlands

Norway

Poland 

Portugal

Note:  

Includes only cities for which data were available; waste data are from 2011; some city population data has been synthesised 
from the preceding or following year where necessary.

Source:    Eurostat Urban Audit.

Factors other than affluence play a role in determining the quantity of waste generated. For example, Vidin in Belgium and 
Frankfurt in Germany both generate around 410 kg/capita per year of household and commercial waste (see Figure 2.9). 
However, Vidin has the lowest GDP per capita (the point furthest to the left) and Frankfurt the highest GDP per capita 
(the point furthest to the right).

Figure 2.9 

Waste generation and GDP per capita in European cities by country

Household and commercial waste: kg/capita 2011 

800 

700 

600 

500 

400 

300 

200 

100 

0 

0 

10 000 

20 000 

30 000 

40 000 

50 000 

60 000 

70 000 

80 000 

GDP per capita in 2007 in EURO ppp  

Belgium 

Bugaria 

Czech Republic 

Germany

Estonia 

Finland 

Hungary 

Latvia 

Netherlands

Portugal

Poland 

Note:  

Includes only cities for which data were available; GDP data are from 2007; waste data are from 2011; some city population data 
have been synthesised from the preceding or following year where necessary.

Source:   Eurostat Urban Audit.

44

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
 
 
Avoiding, preventing and reducing

Box 2.14  Waste generation in European cities (cont.)

Waste and the size of cities

It seems that large cities generate less waste for an increase in GDP than smaller cities, but the relationship is difficult to 
interpret because big cities are also the ones with the highest GDP (see Figure 2.10).

Figure 2.10 

Waste generation and GDP per capita by size of European city

Household and commercial waste: 
kg/capita 2011 

Waste generation in European Cities  
(for which data exists in Eurostat Urban Audit) 

800 

700 

600 

500 

400 

300 

200 

100 

0 

0 

10 000 

20 000 

30 000 

40 000 

50 000 

60 000 

70 000 

80 000 

90 000 

GDP per capita in 2007 in EURO ppp  

> 1 000 000

> 500 000

> 100 000

< 100 000

Note:  

Includes only cities for which data were available; GDP data are from 2007; waste data are from 2011; some city population data have 
been synthesised from the preceding or following year where necessary.

Source:    Eurostat Urban Audit.

Comparison between cities and countries 

There is also a distinct clustering of cities from the same country. For example, although German cities span a large range of 
GDP per capita, in terms of waste generation, they tend to be clustered in a relatively narrow band from about 400 kg/capita 
to 500 kg/capita (with some outliers). Cities in the Netherlands and Portugal cover far narrower bands of GDP per capita but 
wider bands of waste generation per capita (the spread of cities extends vertically rather than horizontally in Figure 2.10. The 
clustering of Czech cities, with the exception of Prague, also indicates a relatively uniform waste generation and affluence in 
urban areas outside the capital. 

The average amount of waste generated per capita in urban areas and at the national level generally seems quite similar (57), 
probably due to the convergence of standards of living and habits between rural and urban areas. The urbanisation process 
is associated with the diffusion of new lifestyles, new social perceptions and new habits that relate to waste generation.

Source:  ETC-SCP study for EEA: 'Waste in Urban Areas' (58).

(57)  Except for German urban areas that produce almost 25% less waste per capita than the national average — probably related to the way in 

which garden waste is managed in urban and non-urban areas, but without considerably more research it is not possible to be more precise.
(58)  ETC/SCP study 'Waste in urban areas' for EEA, prepared and compiled by David McKinnon, Andrea Rispo, Leonidas Milios, Tamas Kallay, Peter 

Szuppinger, Christian Löwe.

45

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
 
Avoiding, preventing and reducing

Box 2.15  Waste prevention measures in accordance with the life cycle approach 

Annex IV of the Waste Framework Directive categorises examples of waste prevention measures into 16 classes that are 
addressed under three areas: 

Framework conditions related to the generation of waste: 

1. 

supporting efficient use of resources; 

2.  promotion of research and development; 

3.  development of indicators; 

Design, production and distribution phase: 

4.  promotion of eco-design; 

5.  provision of information on waste prevention techniques; 

6.  organising training to include waste prevention in permits; 

7.  prevention of waste production at installations; 

8.  use of awareness campaigns and other ways of supporting businesses; 

9.  helping businesses to establish their own waste prevention plans; 

10.  promotion of environmental management systems; 

Consumption and use phase: 

11. 

introducing economic instruments (subsidies, charges) to prevent waste; 

12.  provision of information for consumers; 

13.  promotion of eco-labels; 

14.  agreements with industry; 

15. 

integration of environmental and waste prevention criteria into calls for tenders and contracts; 

16.  promotion of reuse and repair.

Box 2.16   Labels for ecodynamic companies in Brussels

As part of the waste prevention programme in Brussels, an 'ecodynamic company' label has been developed to give official 
recognition of good environmental management practices of public and private companies. It rewards their environmental 
dynamism and progress in waste management, reducing energy consumption and the rational use of raw materials. It also 
encourages the introduction of an environmental management system — the EMAS or ISO 14001. The label has a three-star 
rating, depending on the level of environmental performance within the organisation. 

Source:    EEA, 2014c.

Box 2.17   Eco-labelling for packaging in Poland

The Polish waste prevention programme supports the development and implementation of an eco-labelling scheme for 
packaging that allows consumers to identify products that meet ecological criteria, including performance criteria and 
restrictions on the use of hazardous substances in packaging. The underlying rationale is to provide consumers with 
information on waste prevention when making a purchase. 

Source:    EEA, 2014c.

46

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
 
 
Avoiding, preventing and reducing

Box 2.18  Waste avoidance: from information to action

A campaign in Brussels encouraged people to 'Buy wisely and throw less away'. 

In the Piedmont region in Italy, the 'Self-service detergents' project plans to reduce the packaging used in the purchase 
and use of detergents, through the sale of on-tap detergents in retail chains, making use of reusable bottles. The result of 
collaboration between the region, the retail sector and the detergent producers, the project will address the bulk sale of 
detergents such as dish-washing liquids, fabric conditioners, laundry liquids and all-purpose cleaners.

In the Umbria region in Italy, citizens can collect purified drinking water from water fountains, which can also be refrigerated. 
The fountains are usually installed in strategic places in town and cities, easily accessible by the public. The public fountains 
offset the common practice of buying water exclusively in plastic bottles and therefore contribute to decreasing waste.

These examples show that measures can be taken at both local and regional level.

Source:    Promoting ZeroWaste, 2014.

Food waste
Reducing food waste would decrease the 
environmental impact associated with resource use 
and waste generation along the food value chain:

•  GHG emissions caused by the use of mineral 

fertilisers, synthetic pesticides, livestock farming, 
transport, and energy used in the packaging and 
processing of food, cooling and cooking; 

• 

land usage and soil degradation related to crop 
cultivation and livestock farming;

•  water consumption due to irrigation but also to 

the increasing consumption of meat; for example, 
bovine meat production requires roughly 
8–10 times more water than cereal production 
(Schaffnit-Chatterjee, 2011);

•  eutrophication caused by the use of fertilisers and 
emissions of ammonia and nitrogen oxide from 
livestock farming;  

•  biodiversity damaged by intensive farming.

Food waste is a major issue in developed countries. 
Around 100 million tonnes of food is wasted annually in 

Box 2.19  Municipalities acting to prevent food waste

Municipalities can raise the awareness of city residents of the environmental problems related to food waste. Many 
innovative solutions are being developed. For example, in the United Kingdom, WRAP (Waste and Resources Action 
Programme) (59) launched its 'Love Food Hate Waste (60)' campaign, which is designed to support local authorities. The 
objective was to reduce the amount of food wasted in households by making inhabitants more aware of it. Kent County 
Council has involved local independent grocers in the campaign; grocers now work directly with their own customers to 
reduce food waste. 

In Halmstad in Sweden, the municipality organises competition among schools to decrease food wastage in school canteens. 

To decrease organic waste, the city of Brno (61) in the Czech Republic has developed a comprehensive strategy based on 
composting and reduction of waste food (e.g. the cooking of leftovers). Individual and collective composting bins have been 
installed in private and public organisations (e.g. schools, social centres) and composting demonstration sites developed. 
Promotion of and training on composting at home (individual and collective housing) and on site (schools, cafeterias and 
restaurants, catering services, etc.) has been also undertaken.

(59)  WRAP was set up in 2000 and works throughout England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland to help businesses and individuals to reduce 

waste, develop sustainable products and use resources in an efficient way: http://www.wrap.org.uk/ (accessed 23 November 2015).

(60)  http://www.lovefoodhatewaste.com/ (accessed 23 November 2015).
(61)  http://www.miniwaste.eu/en/the-partners/brno.html and http://www.miniwaste.eu/index.php?lang=EN (accessed 1 March 2014).

47

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
 
Avoiding, preventing and reducing

Table 2.4 

Causes of food waste in households and the food service sector

Lack of 
awareness

Lack of 
knowledge

Household

Food service sector

Wholesale/retail sector

Little perception of the amount of food waste and the resulting environmental problems

Little knowledge on how to use food 
efficiently in order to reduce waste 
(e.g. cooking leftovers)

Attitudes

Underestimate the value of food

Taking leftovers from restaurants is 
not common practice

Preferences

Some food is wasted due to personal 
preference (e.g. apple skins)

Food offered may not meet 
customer  expectation

Planning 
issues

Buying more than is needed

Difficulties in anticipating the 
number of clients leading to 
overstocking

Difficulties in anticipating 
demand resulting in 
overstocking

Date issues

Stringent adherence to expiry dates 

Storage 

Inadequate storage conditions

Portion sizes

Portions often too large 

Portions often too large 

Marketing 

Supply chain

Source:   Adapted from Bio Intelligence Service et al., 2010.

Meat and dairy products 
reliable on very strict 
temperatures for storage 

Encourage customers to 
purchase more than is needed 

Products are rejected for 
aesthetic issues or packaging 
defects

Need for better coordination 
along the supply chain

Europe (estimation 2014 — European Commission) (62). 
One-third of the food for human consumption is 
wasted globally (Esnouf et al., 2011). The recent 
Communication from the European Commission, 
Towards a circular economy: A zero waste programme 
for Europe (EC, 2014) proposes a non-binding target to 
reduce food waste by at least 30% by 2025, in addition 
to the development, inter alia, of national food waste 
prevention strategies. 

Food waste is generated throughout the food 
chain, from farmers to consumers. The causes are 
multiple and include lack of awareness, oversupply, 
planning shopping, standard portion sizes, difficulty 
in anticipating the number of clients, unsuitable 
storage and packaging, inadequate storage and 
inadequate packaging (Table 2.5). Food waste can be 
avoided upstream during cultivation, processing and 
distribution. Downstream, it is highly dependent on 
individual behaviour and habits, and it can be avoided 
by private households and the food service sector. 

Water saving in buildings
Residential water consumption was estimated at 
125 litres/capita per day in a benchmarking study in 
Germany, 135 declining to 129 litres/capita per day 
(2010–2012) for 31 large utility suppliers in geographical 
Europe and 151 litres/capita per day for 3 700 utility 
suppliers serving 32 million people (EEA, 2014a). 

Many things can be done at the final consumer 
level to reduce the quantity of water used. Up to 
30% of the water consumed in buildings in some 
regions could be saved. A study commissioned by 
the EU executive claims that a number of specific 
technological and technical changes to taps, toilets, 
showers and water-using equipment such as 
dishwashers could reduce water demand and result 
in water savings of up to 80% (63). A study in Spain 
found that indoor water use could be reduced by as 
much as 30% by regulating the water flow in taps and 
installing low-flush toilets (Sauri, 2013). A water-saving 
campaign in Frankfurt in the 1990s, which promoted 

(62)  EUROPA — Food safety — Sustainability of the food chain (http://ec.europa.eu/food/food/sustainability/index_en.htm) accessed 20 October 

2014.

(63)  Euractiv, sustainable development news, EU to table directive on water savings in buildings (http://www.euractiv.com/sustainability/

commission-table-directive-water-efficiency-buildings-news-399420) accessed 22 November 2015.

48

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceAvoiding, preventing and reducing

water-saving devices, achieved its goal of a 20% 
reduction in water use in 1998 (64).

Toilet flushing accounts for up to 25–30% of total 
domestic water use and, as such, considerable overall 
water savings can be achieved by reducing flush 
volumes. The amount of water used by a single toilet 
flush has dropped considerably in some countries in 
recent decades, particularly as dual-flush and low-flush 
(less than 6 litres per flush) toilets have come onto 
European markets. In some cases, regulation has driven 
changes. For example, under United Kingdom building 
standards,, the maximum cistern volume allowed has 
fallen from over 12 litres in the 1950s to just over 4 litres 
today (EEA, 2009). Both waterless and vacuum toilets 
are relatively recent technologies, but they are currently 
neither practical nor cost-effective for domestic use, as 
they are too expensive. Water use by showers can be 
reduced considerably by aerating the water flow, which 
helps to simulate the feel of a power shower without 
the need for high volumes of water. Such aeration can 
also be applied to tap water and can reduce water 
consumption up to 50%. Thermostatic mixing valves in 
both showers and taps maintain selected temperatures 
and have been shown to result in considerable savings 

of both water and energy. Taps with infra-red sensors 
provide water only when an object is detected beneath 
them, resulting in water savings of 70% or more (EEA, 
2009).

However, water-saving technologies may also have 
undesired effects. One such effect is the so-called 
off-setting behaviour, meaning that consumers may 
inadvertently adopt a behaviour that cancels the 
potential savings associated with presumably more 
efficient devices. For example, some experience with 
ultralow-flush toilets in the United Kingdom and the 
United States have shown that consumers may not 
believe that cleaning is sufficient with one flush and 
may tend to flush two or even three times, resulting 
in increased water use compared with the older 
less-efficient toilet (Saurí, 2013). 

To sum up, the adoption of water-efficient appliances 
and devices, which is related to economic and 
behavioural factors, is an expanding component of urban 
water conservation (Millock and Nauges, 2010). It should 
be stressed, as well, that the proactive use of domestic 
water-saving devices is very much linked to public 
awareness of water scarcity and the need to save water. 

Box 2.20  The role of demand-side policies in Barcelona's water crisis

The main measures put in place to resolve the drought were adopted under a law passed by the Regional Government of 
Catalonia (65). The aim of this law was to promote exceptional and emergency measures to rationalise and make economies in 
the use of water throughout the territory of Catalonia, in order to secure the water supply for human consumption. The law 
included both supply- and demand-side measures. The area was almost at the point of making domestic cuts. Water was being 
shipped by tanker from various places along the Mediterranean coast. 

During the drought, restrictions were placed on outdoor water uses such as watering gardens or filling swimming pools. 
Managing the demand for water was crucial. Awareness campaigns were launched asking citizens to reduce water 
consumption. Technology devices such as aerators for taps were distributed to reduce water consumption. The average 
savings in the period from March 2007 to January 2009 were around 14.5%. The Catalan Water Agency states that on average 
the region retained an approximately 5% water saving after the drought. 

The drought opened up a debate on the demand for water in Barcelona and this was extended to the question: how can 
we provide the extra flow needed when dams and transporting water have been severely criticised? To face this challenge, 
unconventional water sources were considered. A big seawater desalinisation plant was installed. A few municipalities 
experimented with projects on the reuse of greywater and rooftop rainwater harvesting (e.g. Sant Cugat del Vallès) and 
distributing the reclaimed water for irrigating public and private parks (e.g. Viladecans). 

A centralised water infrastructure (water transport, desalination plants) is considered by some authors to create a 
techno-institutional lock-in (Domènech et al., 2013). Decentralised water supply systems, such as rainwater harvesting and 
reuse of greywater, are seen as the best options for new developments of eco-neighbourhoods, municipalities or suburban 
areas. Some municipalities in Barcelona area are promoting these unconventional systems as part of water conservation 
and efficiency programmes that are integrated into urban planning. These systems are rarely used in more traditionally built 
environments. Despite their apparent simplicity, they need to be designed specifically for the building and adapting them to 
existing buildings requires a lot of work.

Source:    Martin-Ortega and Markandya, 2009; Domènech et al., 2013. 

(64)  http://www.frankfurt-greencity.de/fileadmin/Redakteur_Dateien/05_gca_umweltindikatoren_english/08_water_consumption_frankfurt.pdf 

(accessed 20 November 2015).

(65)  Decree 84/2007, 3 April, on the adoption of exceptional and emergency measures regarding the use of water resources.

49

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
Avoiding, preventing and reducing

Box 2.21   Thames Water's water efficiency programme (66)

Save Water Swindon' is a project aimed at challenging domestic and non-household customers to reduce their daily water 
use. In 2013, a media campaign was launched. This was combined with direct mailings to over 50 000 homes in Swindon 
offering water-saving devices and free home water makeovers. Water audits and leak detection checks were also undertaken 
for a number of schools and non-household properties in the town.

A range of free water-saving products are on offer to customers. The calculator 'Waterwisely' (67) gives tailored advice on 
water use and how customers can save water, as well as identifying the most suitable products for their homes. As a result, 
around 5.19 million litres per day have been saved compared with the target figure of 4.42 million litres per day. 

The programme includes both household and non-household customers via a progressive metering programme. It also 
includes partnership projects with third parties to help deliver engagement, water audits and water efficiency retrofits 
and installations. Water efficiency has been promoted to a number of secondary schools in order to encourage the use of 
water-saving devices, leak detection equipment and 'smart' water meters, as well as engaging pupils with the importance of 
saving water.

 Source:   http://www.thameswater.co.uk (accessed 10 July 2014).

Learning by doing
Smart metering gives consumers near-real-time 
information on their energy or water consumption 
to help them reduce it. It also helps consumers to 
estimate their bills. For suppliers, it gives access to 
accurate data for billing and to improve customer 
service. It also provides additional data that gives them 
a better understanding of customer behaviour and 
peak demand.

or water consumption is excessive. Feedback from 
suppliers is the most successful strategy to change 
consumer behaviour and achieve resource savings. 
Direct feedback includes information received via 
smart meters combined with in-home displays or 
internet portals. Indirect feedback could include 
more informative and frequent bills containing 
historical and/or comparative information on energy 
consumption (EEA, 2013a). 

To achieve a change in behaviour, the EU Directive 
on Energy End-use Efficiency and Energy Services 
(EU, 2006) encourages the introduction of smart 
metering where feasible and cost-effective. It is 
considered to be a way of leading consumers 
to adopt long-term energy-saving attitudes. The 
directive also requires energy billing to be based on 
real consumption and to provide complementary 
information on historical energy consumption. 
Since 2009 a number of directives and regulations (68) 
require transparency in energy billing information and 
encourage the introduction of smart meters. 

Consumers and users need appropriate frames of 
reference in order to determine whether their energy 

The in-building display is critical to bringing about a 
change in behaviour. Smart meters need to provide 
information that is easy to understand and information 
on time of day when it is cheaper to run certain 
equipment, in order to reduce peak consumption 
and thus cost. Generally, projects on smart metering 
are developed by the energy or water suppliers. For 
example, the Danish utility Nord Energi — NRGi —
installed 210 000 smart meters between 2009 and 2012 
(EEA, 2013a). Some countries have defined a national 
programme, for example in the United Kingdom, the 
roll-out of smart metering (69)will see the installation 
of 53 million meters (electricity and gas meters) in 
households and smaller non-domestic premises by 
2020 (DECC, 2013).  

(66)  'Thames water' provides tap water for 9 million customers and sewerage services for 15 million customers across London and the Thames 

Valley.

(67)  http://secure.thameswater.co.uk/waterwisely/index.htm#!/calculate.htm (accessed 20 November 2015).
(68)  For details, see the European Commission website: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+IM-PRESS+20080616F

CS31737+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN (accessed 20 November 2015).

(69)  https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/smart-meters-statistics (accessed 20 November 2015). 

50

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
Avoiding, preventing and reducing

Box 2.22   Smart City Cologne

'A Smart City is a city seeking to address public issues via ICT-based solutions on the basis of a multi-stakeholder, municipally 
based partnership' (European Parliament, 2014). The city of Cologne, in cooperation with RheinEnergie, other urban partners 
and local industry, launched the Smart City Cologne concept in 2013. 

Around 30 000 smart meters have been installed in 350 larger apartment buildings in Cologne. The devices record electricity, 
gas and water data. This advanced metering infrastructure allows customers to keep an eye on their current and previous 
energy consumption at all times, to control their consumption and to use energy more efficiently to protect the environment 
and save money.

Source:    European Parliament, 2014: http://www.smartcity-cologne.de/smartmeter/ (accessed 20 November 2015).

Box 2.23  Learning to save energy

Building Denmark's first ZERO+ home in Sønderborg has had a major impact on changing citizens' perceptions of a home 
to one of a net producer of energy instead of merely a consumer of energy. Strong citizen participation proved to be crucial 
to the success of the project. Initiatives have been developed for different sectors of the population to strengthen their 
participation and the impact of the initiatives. 

Among the most successful have been the ZEROfamily and the ZEROhome programmes, focused on learning how to save 
energy in everyday life through awareness. The average energy saving was 25% and the average water saving was 45%, 
indicating that there is a lot to be saved simply by paying more (family) attention. 

Source:    Ministry of Housing, Urban and Rural Affairs and Danish Energy Agency, 2014.

Box 2.24  Learning to lead a green lifestyle 

Based on the Swedish waste prevention programme, a feasibility study will investigate the possibilities scaling the Leva 
Livet (Living Life) project. In 2010, the Leva Livet project in Gothenburg challenged eight families to try out a new, more 
pleasurable green lifestyle for one year, helped by coaching from municipal experts. As far as wastes were concerned, 
the families reduced their food waste by a quarter, newspaper waste by a tenth and regular waste by approximately 40%. 
A central objective was to learn how to introduce sustainable living to ordinary people (p. 26). 

Source:    EEA, 2014c.

2.7.3  Sharing or borrowing rather than owning 

population density of urban areas provides an excellent 
basis for these types of initiatives. 

The potential offered by ICT has made sharing 
practices and service provision easier for consumers 
and businesses alike. Buying products is more and 
more being replaced by buying services (car sharing, 
bike sharing). In this 'functional economy', customer 
satisfaction is achieved by acquiring the function of 
the product rather than the product itself and/or by 
increasing the service component of the offer (Stahel, 
2008; Akyelken et al., 2013). This approach includes a 
range of formal and informal, free and paid, services 
allowing the temporary use of products. This minimises 
waste generation, and reduces the number of items 
required for a given population. It also encourages 
the use of better, longer lasting products. The high 

Local governments can boost innovative partnerships 
and networks, encourage the emergence of new 
participants, facilitate the development of the 
supporting infrastructure and regulatory frameworks, 
and promote smart ICT software solutions to optimise 
systems, communicate with citizens and change 
society's perception of these services. 

Borrowing and lending
Borrowing and lending can be more or less formal. It 
includes peer-to-peer borrowing from people in the 
immediate vicinity, semi-formal borrowing networks 

51

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
 
 
Avoiding, preventing and reducing

Box 2.25  Sharing clothes instead of owning them

Fashion has always been characterised by seasonal and swift changes that lead to increased consumption. Lånegarderoben 
is a grassroots initiative that started up in response and as a counter-measure to the high consumption of clothing, and with 
a desire to promote the reuse of clothing. 

The Lånegarderoben initiative introduces the renting and reusing of clothes by consumers, who thereby avoid buying new 
clothes and other fashion items. The objectives of the initiative are to instigate the idea of collaborative consumption and 
drive waste prevention in the fashion sector. 

The project was started in 2010 by four young people who put their creativity to good use to modify and repair used 
clothes and offer them as second-hand and vintage clothing as an alternative to the current buying culture in Stockholm. 
Lånegarderoben works just like a library where people can borrow clothes instead of books.

Source:    http://www.lanegarderoben.se (accessed 20 October 2014). 

Box 2.26  Lending tools instead of owning them

The Instrument Hake Association, which acts in accordance with the principles of a 'resource-based economy', seeks to put into 
practice the concept of accessing use without possession. Consumers often have to purchase expensive tools that it makes no 
sense to own because they are used only a few times a year. The association has sets up a kind of 'library' that lends household 
tools free of charge. The association also offers workshops based on the interests and needs of its members. 

Lending tools free of charge contributes to fighting poverty, preventing wastage of raw materials and overconsumption, 
encouraging efficient use of resources, and strengthening social cohesion and interaction (in particular through workshops).

Sources:   http://www.instrumentheek.be (accessed 20 November 2015).

  http://www.oaklandlibrary.org/locations/tool-lending-library (accessed 20 January 2015).

  http://www.today.com/video/today/52839801#52839801 (accessed 20 January 2015).

(in which communally owned goods can be used by all 
members) and open lending libraries. 

Libraries are the most visible form of formal lending 
and were traditionally for the lending of books. 
However, an increasing number of initiatives are 
adding other lending services to libraries, such as 
power tools, consumer electronics and digital media, 
musical instruments and other equipment for hobbies 
and pastimes. There are also examples of housing 
associations and cooperatives that hold communally 
owned tools and equipment that can be borrowed by 
members. City authorities can support and promote 
these kinds of initiatives.

Leasing product service systems
Product service systems provide the use of a good 
without the necessity of owning it. The primary 
example of product service system is leasing, whereby 
one has the use of a product on a fixed or rolling 

contract. Any problems that arise with the functioning 
of the product are the responsibility of the leasing 
company rather than the customer. As the leasing 
company maintains ownership of the item, it is in 
its interest to keep the product in active service as 
long as possible. It is a driver for better and regular 
maintenance and the development of reliable 
and robust products. This business model is well 
established and is becoming relevant to a growing 
number of sectors. 

Leasing contracts are usually framed in terms of 
months or years. However, other appliances can be 
rented for shorter periods (e.g. a camera (70)). This is 
particularly useful for items that are seldom used. 
Hardware shops renting out do-it-yourself equipment, 
for example, provide consumers with access to a wide 
range of tools without the need to own them. Again, 
these tools tend to be more robust than those actually 
on sale, as their active lifetime needs to be longer. In 
theory, this leads to a lower throughput of materials.

(70)  http://www.hireacamera.com/ (accessed 20 November 2015).

52

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
 
 
 
Avoiding, preventing and reducing

Car sharing
Owing to the increasing negative impacts of car 
ownership and rising personal transport costs, the 
concept of sharing cars has emerged worldwide. It is 
a radical socio-cultural change with regard to ownership 
and consumption and in terms of business model. 

those who already use cars less (Akyelken et al., 2013) 
and travel short distances; this observation was also 
made in Switzerland and Berlin. In Milan, five operators 
(including one using only electric cars) have more 
than 190 000 subscribers, about 15% of the whole 
population (77). 

Car-sharing systems can be based on fixed stations, and 
users have to bring the car back to their pick-up point 
or designated parking space (e.g. the services provided 
by Zipcar (71)). Free-floating car-sharing systems 
concern one-way trips of any length without a booking 
requirement; users take and leave vehicles at any 
point within the city limits (e.g. car2go (72)). Car pooling 
refers to a system in which people are encouraged 
to pick up others while driving to certain destinations 
including work and school (e.g. BlaBlaCar (73)); it can 
be organised by companies for their employees or it 
can be arranged by local governments. Car renting is 
operated by agencies and companies that rent cars for 
short periods of time; car owners and customers can 
find each other through a smartphone app or a website 
(e.g. Getaround (74)). 

Some example are famous, such as Bremen's 
car-sharing scheme, with 42 sites scattered around the 
city and 160 rental cars estimated to have replaced more 
than 1 000 private cars in 2010 (Akyelken et al., 2013). 
Autolib' is the e-car-sharing programme in Paris that has 
around 110 000 subscribers (as at end of 2014) (75).In 
London, the involvement of Transport for London in the 
development of the London Car Club Consortium is a 
good example of the role of government in encouraging 
the establishment of car clubs (e.g. City Car Club (76)). In 
contrast, the Finnish City Car Club is a small-scale system 
that follows the traditional car-sharing concept with 
additional technology innovations to facilitate use by the 
customer. 

The environmental impacts of car sharing arise from 
the reduction in car ownership and kilometres driven. 
Studies of several car-sharing schemes show a reduction 
in the average number of vehicles per household using 
car-sharing programme (Martin et al., 2010). After 
becoming car share members, some of them cancelled 
a car purchase (Akyelken et al., 2013) or at least sold one 
car (Loose, 2010). In the United Kingdom, the Carplus 
2012 survey shows that car-sharing schemes attract 

Car sharing brings environmental benefits and seems 
to be an efficient way of changing people's attitude. 
It reduces car ownership rates and distance travelled 
and therefore road congestion. It has good potential 
to reduce emissions because of the choice of car 
(e.g. Autolib' uses electric vehicles using green energy). 
Car-share vehicles have lower carbon dioxide emissions 
than private cars (Agence parisienne du climat, 2013; 
Carplus, 2013). It is also a way of promoting electric and 
other low-emission vehicles. However, one criticism 
of car-sharing schemes is that they provide affordable 
and easy access to a car for those who do not currently 
own a car, and therefore could encourage increased 
motoring (EEA, 2013b). Furthermore, walking, cycling, 
using public transport (buses, metro) and in certain 
cases increasing vehicle occupancy rates have a better 
potential environmental benefit than car sharing. 

Bike sharing
Bike-sharing schemes are systems in which bicycles 
are provided for short-term rental between docking 
stations, enabling point-to-point trips to be made 
by bicycle without having to own one. The concept 
of bike sharing is almost five decades old. Most of 
the innovations concerning bike sharing are mainly 
interoperability with other modes of transport and 
the introduction of ICT solutions to better inform 
the cyclist. For example, ReKola (78) in Prague uses a 
smartphone app that enables users to find a bicycle 
and receive a code to unlock the bicycle (the investment 
is relatively low cost).

The motivation for the majority of cities is to make 
urban areas more sustainable. The benefits of 
bike-sharing programmes are flexible mobility, 
reduction in emissions, individual financial savings, 
reductions in congestion and fuel use, health benefits 
and support for multimodal transport connections 
(Shaheen et al., 2010). The involvement of local 
governments is important in terms of safety and 

(71)  http://www.zipcar.com/ (accessed 20 November 2015).
(72)  https://www.car2go.com/ (accessed 20 November 2015).
(73)  http://www.blablacar.com/ (accessed 20 November 2015).
(74)  https://www.getaround.com/ (accessed 20 November 2015).
(75)   http://www.avere-france.org/Site/Article/?article_id=6213 (accessed 20 November 2015).
(76)  http://www.citycarclub.co.uk/ (20 November 2015).
(77)  Communication from Lorenzo Bono AmbianteItalia (http://www.ambienteitalia.it/).
(78)  http://www.rekola.cz/en/ (accessed 20 November 2015).

53

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceAvoiding, preventing and reducing

connectivity with other transport modes, incentives 
and pricing, and regulation. The provider and the local 
government are jointly responsible for the density 
of stations, the comfort and availability of the bikes, 
and smart systems (e.g. integrated global positioning 
systems, smartphone apps).

The majority of the users combine bike sharing with the 
use of the metro and bus systems. In London, in 2010, 
Transport for London found that around one-third of 
scheme members use public transport rather than 
bikes during peak hours (Transport for London, 2010). 

Bike sharing modifies people's behaviour. In London, 
17% of people decided to buy their own bicycles 
following their experience with London Cycle Hire, and 
48% of people were not cycling at all before the London 
scheme was introduced (Akyelken et al., 2013). 

2.8 

In a nutshell

Table 2.5 presents the opportunities for the local 
authorities to prevent and reduce the consumption of 
resources.

Table 2.5 

The role of local authorities in preventing and reducing the consumption of resources

Local authorities

Supply side

Avoiding 
urban sprawl

Elaborating better integrated spatial and urban planning to 
encourage dense and compact cities 

Cooperating with surrounding areas

Emphasising urban design and green infrastructure 
supporting quality of life

Demand side

Developing a sense of community

Moving 
sustainably

Developing a long-term sustainable strategy (definition of 
targets)

Developing car and bike sharing to change 
behaviour

Elaborating better integrated urban planning to encourage 
dense and compact cities with mixed use in order to reduce 
commuting distances 

Promoting to citizens and businesses 
eco-driving techniques and combining trips to 
reduce distance travelled

Improving the participation of end users in 
the decision-making process (e.g. involving 
cyclists in decisions related to the cycling 
infrastructure)

Developing affordable, accessible, frequent, reliable and 
low-carbon public transport 

Developing tax policies to support sustainability

Developing non-incentive car-parking policies 

Developing safe, interconnected and continuous walkways 
and cycle lanes to encourage zero-carbon transport 

Encouraging low-carbon interconnections between cities 
(e.g. train, boat for freight) 

Regulating and organising freight traffic in the city centre and 
giving priority to low-emission modes of transport

Promoting travel alternatives (e.g. videoconferences, 
teleworking)

Leading by example: using a fleet of low-carbon municipality 
vehicles 

Saving energy Developing a long-term sustainable strategy (definition of 

targets, elaboration of the vision)

Promoting collective action for retrofitting of energy efficiency 
measures (insulation, upgrading heating and hot water 
systems, etc.) oriented towards households and businesses

Developing low-carbon district heating

Leading by example: regulating the temperature of public 
buildings, retrofitting of public buildings and social housing, 
developing flagship energy-saving projects, making public 
information on the energy consumption of public buildings, 
using local food in canteens, reducing energy for the supply of 
drinking water, etc. 

Promoting retrofitting of residential and 
non-residential buildings for all types of 
owners

Supporting the dissemination of information 
(to household and businesses) on energy 
saving (campaigns, information services, 
participative processes, etc.)

Encouraging the installation of smart 
metering in public buildings and social 
housing (and more if possible)

54

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceAvoiding, preventing and reducing

Table 2.5 

The role of local authorities in preventing and reducing the consumption of resources (cont.)

Local authorities

Supply side

Demand side

Saving water

Elaborating better integrated urban planning to encourage 
dense and compact cities with mixed use (e.g. reducing the 
size of the lots, developing land recycling), the aim being to 
reduce the length of the pipe network

Developing dialogue with all stakeholders,

Developing dialogue with users beyond the 
city limits (agriculture, industry, tourist areas)

Reducing leakages 

In public gardens, using plants adapted to the local climate 
that do not need watering

Adapting the quality of water required to the type of use 
(reusing water when it is possible)

Developing a decentralised water treatment plan and a 
wastewater plan where possible

Promoting low-tech solutions based on natural systems 
where possible

Managing storm water as a resource

Promoting information on water-saving 
measures and stimulating change 
(e.g. water-saving washing machines, 
low-flush toilets, drought-tolerant gardens)

Encouraging the installation of smart 
metering in public buildings and social 
housing (and more if possible)

Reducing 
waste

Facilitating cooperation between retailers to allow bulk sales 
and reusable containers

Raising the awareness of citizens of the 
consequences of hyperconsumption

Encouraging the inclusion of the end-of-life phase in the 
design of buildings

Promoting local and seasonal food without 
packaging

Developing farmers' food markets

Using the 
benefits of 
green areas

Developing green areas (horizontally and vertically) in 
order to reduce the heat island effect and the need for air 
conditioning, to reduce the need to travel at the weekend 
and to improve air quality 

Organisation 
and 
governance

Using local vegetation in public spaces to avoid the need for 
watering

Developing training on resource efficiency for city managers

Engaging in a participation process with stakeholders 
(homeowners and home occupiers, all groups of citizens, 
businesses, non-governmental organisations)

Coaching families to investigate the potential 
for waste reduction and disseminating good 
practice

Distributing guidance on how to prevent 
household waste 

Encouraging the use of locally adapted plants 
in gardens and the development of green 
roofs

Improving participation of citizens in the 
decision-making process regarding green 
areas

Encouraging the participation and the 
involvement of stakeholders (including 
researchers, children, people working but 
not living in the city)

Organising the dissemination of information

55

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceReusing, recycling, harvesting and producing

3  Reusing, recycling, harvesting and 

producing 

Most cities ignore the potential offered by their own 
territory for providing resources. Some urban outflows 
and stocks are still considered to be waste, despite 
their remaining quality. However, city authorities can 
improve the way in which resources are supplied and 
reduce the demand for them through a wide range of 
measures. There is also a huge potential to improve 
the reuse, recycling and harvesting of local resources 
and the self-production of resources and energy. 
The efficiency of these different options depends 
on the scale, local conditions, urban pattern, city 
characteristics (e.g. activities) and technology. 

The use of local renewable resources is one option 
to become less dependent on the external supply of 
water, energy, nutrients and other materials. The built 
environment and city surroundings can be seen as 
areas for self-production and reservoirs of secondary 
resources. Outflows can be reused or recycled; useful 
substances can be recovered from stocks, waste or 
emissions; energy can be recovered from waste or 
produced by solar roofs or windmills; and food can be 
locally produced in urban gardens and farms. 

Major obstacles to developing this 'productive' 
approach in the urban system are the temporal 
variations in quantity and quality that affect the 
supply and the demand of resources and the need 
for scaling up from block to city scale and beyond 
(each scale is associated with boundaries, activities 
and flows). Urban planning is crucial to allow efficient 
harvesting and self-production by reducing the 
distance between the source and the demand and 
by identifying all potential resource flows in the 
urban tissue (including those from industry: the 
high density of enterprises in urban environments 
creates opportunities for industrial symbiosis 
programmes (79)). Another major challenge is moving 
from a centralised system — with one-site and end-
of-pipe utilities driven by municipalities or the private 
sector (e.g. energy companies) — to decentralised 
systems in which users are owners and producers — 
'prosumers' — in particular for renewable energy and 
water harvesting. However, the improvement of utility 

infrastructures and their management, in particular 
ICT-enabled infrastructures (e.g. smart power systems 
with intelligent management of energy mixes, smart 
grids, smart metering, heat storage), is also a major 
challenge.

This chapter explores how a city can become more 
self-sufficient in terms of resources and energy.

3.1  Reusing and recycling 

Reusing, recycling and cascading mean finding value 
in a resource or a product that that has already 
been used. It means converting costs into revenues 
by finding alternative uses for losses and waste. In 
this context, all the decisions taken by municipalities 
(e.g. urban planning and design, innovation in utility 
management) are different from those in traditional 
urban management. All the flows entering and leaving 
the urban system have to be considered. 

Because of the complexity of the system and the 
diversity of stakeholders, actors and sectors, recycling 
and reusing need to be analysed and implemented 
at a sufficiently large scale to take into account all the 
opportunities of the territory (industry, municipalities in 
the neighbourhood, potential users, etc.) and to cover a 
sufficiently large catchment area of potential providers 
and users. Projects for recycling and reusing resources 
are overall territorial projects in which each participant 
has a different role. Municipalities define resource 
efficiency targets, lead discussions with stakeholders, 
raise awareness of participants and support the 
implementation of the projects. Industrial companies 
reinforce their competitiveness by producing in a 
sustainable manner — they are mainly interesting in 
measures that reduce costs, emissions and losses. 
Researchers propose innovative solutions. Civil 
society participates in the debate and takes initiatives 
(e.g. grassroots associations). Cities have opportunities 
to develop and implement projects in many domains: 
water, energy, materials, waste management and 
buildings.

(79)  For examples, s ee the European Industrial Symbiosis Association: http://eur-isa.org/ (accessed 22 November 2015).

56

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceReusing, recycling, harvesting and producing

Box 3.1  What does it mean?

Harvesting 

This refers to an efficient resource management approach that considers cities as reservoirs of resources and producers 
of secondary resources. Local resources are harvested to meet local demand (e.g. using renewable sources of energy, food 
from urban farming, rainwater harvesting). The main challenge is to scale up urban harvesting from the building to the city 
scale or beyond (see Figure 3.1). 

Reusing

This is the use of products or components in their original 
form (e.g. the use of glass bottles after being sterilised and 
refilled for resale). 

Cascading

This refers to the direct use of outputs but generally 
with reduced quality. The resource is reintroduced into 
the system at a lower quality and the remaining quality 
of the resource is used (e.g. using waste heat from 
industry for households, using grey water for non-potable 
requirements).

Recycling

This refers to reusing a resource after upgrading its 
quality, which generally requires energy. The high-quality 
resource can then be reintroduced to the system upstream 
(e.g. plasterboard recycling).

Recovery

Figure 3.1 

Scaling up urban harvesting from block 

to city scale

l

y
t
i
x
e
p
m
o
c
m
s
i
l

o
b
a
t
e
m
n
a
b
r
u
g
n
i
s
a
e
r
c
n

I

Only residential function

Mix of functions (residential, commercial, 
oﬃce, etc.)

Optimising urban metabolism starting at the lowest scale possible 

l

y
t
i
x
e
p
m
o
c

l

s
r
e
d
o
h
e
k
a
t
s
g
n
i
s
a
e
r
c
n

I

s
t
e
s
s
a
f
o
e
m

i
t
e
f
i
l

g
n
i
s
a
e
r
c
n

I

Building 

Block 

Neighbourhood

City 

City + hinterland

Increasing spatial scale

This refers to the extraction of useful substances or energy 
from waste flows that can be reintroduced into the system 
at their remaining quality (e.g. nutrients and heat from wastewater, recovery from a biodigester used for biogas production).

Source:    Adapted from Agudelo-Vera et al., 2012.

Multi-sourcing

This refers to the harvesting of primary and secondary sources — with different levels of quality — that are locally available 
and renewable. 

3.1.1  Energy losses

Energy losses represent an opportunity for 
more advanced and increasingly efficient energy 
systems. They are mainly linked to three activities: 
energy production processes, energy supply and 
self-consumption, and distribution. In 2009, in the 
EU-27 only 71.6% of the total energy consumption 
reached the end users (80): 22% was lost in 
transformation, 5% in the energy supply sector and 
1.4% in distribution. 

Energy losses are associated upstream with energy 
generation, distribution and conversion and 
downstream with waste heat, flared gases and 
wastewater. Distribution losses include losses in gas 
and heat distribution, electricity transmission and 

distribution, and transport of coal. They depend on 
factors such as network design, operation, maintenance 
and population density. Minimising the transformation 
steps and optimising the length of power lines are key 
to reducing network losses. Distribution losses are 
in general small at the European level but there is a 
significant variation across countries.

The first issue to address is energy production. 
Significant effort is being made to tackle energy 
losses such as the closure of old inefficient plants 
and improvements in existing technologies, often 
combined with a switch from coal-powered plants 
to more efficient combined cycle gas turbines. In 
production activities, major losses are derived from 
energy conversion during the transformation of 
energy into electricity, being up to 58% of fuel input 

(80)  Indicator ENER 36: http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/energy-efficiency-in-transformation/energy-efficiency-in-

transformation-assessment-3#toc-1 (accessed 20 January 2015).

57

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Reusing, recycling, harvesting and producing

Box 3.2   CitInES (City and Industry Energy Strategy)

The objective of the 7th Framework Programme project CitInES is to design and develop a multi-scale, multi-energy 
decision-making tool to optimise the energy strategy of cities and large industrial complexes by enabling them to define 
sustainable, reliable and cost-effective long-term energy plans. Demonstrations of tools are being developed for different 
cities and organisations: Cesena and Bologna in Italy and Turkey's only oil refiner, Tüpraş.

Innovative energy system modelling and optimisation algorithms are designed to allow end users to optimise their energy 
strategy through detailed simulations of local energy generation, storage, transport, distribution and demand, including 
demand-side management and functionalities enabled by smart grid technologies. All energy vectors (electricity, gas, 
heat), uses (heating, air conditioning, lighting, transport) and sectors (residential, industrial, tertiary, urban infrastructure) 
are considered in drawing up a holistic map of the city's/industry's energy behaviour.

As economic and technical situations are constantly evolving, a relevant energy strategy has to be robust under different 
prospective scenarios. 

Source:    www.citines.com (accessed 23 November 2015).

lost (EEA, 2013c). However, this type of energy loss is 
declining with the increasing efficiency of power plants 
and the popularity of renewables (81). 

the Energy Efficiency Plan 2011 (EC, 2011d). Combined 
heat and power and district heating should be 
combined with electricity generation wherever possible.

Waste energy losses, currently unused, might be 
reused. The recovery of heat losses from electricity 
and industrial production processes can solve thermal 
energy needs for heating and cooling in residential, 
commercial or industrial buildings. An increase in the 
use of cogeneration, in particular from municipal waste 
treatment plants, and district heating and cooling can 
significantly contribute to energy efficiency, as stated in 

Energy stored in water
There is also a large amount of energy stored in the 
water cycle, especially thermal energy. In some cities, 
a large part of the electrical energy for treatment 
plants is self-generated, and heating requirements for 
wastewater treatment are largely covered through the 
conversion of biogas. 

Box 3.3 

Stockholm biogas for vehicle transport 

Two sewage treatment plants in Stockholm — Bromma (184 000 p.e. (population equivalent)) and Henriksdal (750 000 p.e.) 
— upgrade the biogas they produce to vehicle fuel quality. A pilot-scale upgrading plant started operating in Bromma 
as early as 1996. Large-scale upgrading started in 2000, and an upgrading plant began operating at Henriksdal in 2003. 
A number of biogas filling stations have opened and more and more biogas cars are being bought. Currently, 130 biogas 
buses are refuelled at a filling station connected via a direct supply line from nearby Henriksdal wastewater treatment plant. 

Source:    EEA, 2014a.

Box 3.4  Micro-turbines in a drinking water treatment plant in Nice 

Some parts of the Nice (France) water supply network are higher than the customers leading to an excess pressure at 
domestic network inlets. Micro-turbines installed in the drinking water supply network convert the hydraulic potential energy 
loss into electric energy. The installation of four micro-turbines in the drinking water supply network generates 4.5 million 
kWh/year. The payback period is 6 years.

Source:    Markopoulos et al., 2012.

(81)  Renewables are more efficient, as the primary energy form of wind, hydro and solar photovoltaic power is electricity, so there are no 

transformation losses associated with conversion.

58

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
 
 
Reusing, recycling, harvesting and producing

Box 3.5  New technologies for heat recovery from wastewater

The goals of the project INNERS — Innovative Energy Recovery Strategies in the Urban Water Cycle, funded by Interrreg IVB 
and started in 2011 — are to investigate both how to reduce energy consumption and how to increase energy production in 
the urban water cycle. 

The pilot project developed by the municipality of Leuwen (82) in 2014 is focused on the realisation of a heat exchanger 
to recover heat from municipal sewage water for heating 100 nearby houses (Vlario (83)). If the project proves to be 
cost-effective, the city of Leuven will use this technology for other buildings as well. 

Source:    http://inners.eu/ (accessed 20 August 2014).

The full energy balance for water utilities goes beyond 
electricity consumption; heat recovery, for instance, 
may contribute significantly to energy savings if 
connected to district heating systems. The full energy 
balances may be taken into account by calculating 
'carbon footprints' in the context of life cycle analysis.

There is also a great potential for heat recovery in 
wastewater: 

•  Organic matter from sewage sludge can be converted 
into a methane-rich 'biogas' by anaerobic digestion. 
The biogas can be captured and used to generate 
electricity and heat. It can be used directly by 
vehicles, engines and combined heat and power 
plants.   

•  Micro-turbines can be installed in the drinking water 

supply network to convert the hydraulic potential into 
electrical energy. A micro-turbine installed at the 
lowest point of the water or sanitation distribution 
network will rotate in response to water pressure. 

The thermal heat contained in wastewater may be 
captured by heat pumps for low-energy uses such as the 
heating of buildings. 

3.1.2  Water cascading 

Greywater is water from bathroom sinks, showers, 
tubs and washing machines. It is not water that has 
come into contact with faeces, either from the toilet or 

Box 3.6 

Learning to use greywater in the metropolitan area of Barcelona

In mid-2011, about 50 Catalan municipalities (84) — totalling some 1.2 million people — had approved local ordinances on 
water conservation. About half of these municipalities included specifications on greywater use in buildings, which were 
considered to be interesting for use in high-density urban areas. 

Greywater — essentially water from showers — may be treated and reused on site for a series of uses not requiring 
drinking water quality. It is generated on a daily basis following a regular production pattern that makes this resource very 
suitable for everyday uses such as toilet flushing. Replacing potable water used in toilets with greywater results in a saving 
of between 13% and 21% of domestic water consumption. These figures can be increased by using greywater for other 
secondary uses such as watering gardens and laundry. 

Adequate treatment of water and ongoing maintenance of the system are needed to avoid health problems. The use of 
membranes is an easy solution to improve the quality of water and avoid health issues. 

These experiences show that the role of the large public and private water supply companies decreases (the end-of-pipe 
model) and in contrast the role of individuals increases. New institutional arrangements for water management emerge. 
Residents — often organised in small associations gathering together owners/tenants of flats in a building — become the 
owners of the greywater reuse system and they become responsible for its correct operation and maintenance. 

Source:    Domènech and Saurí, 2011.

(82)  http://inners.eu/news/leuven-first-municipality-belgium-recovers-heat-sewage-water (accessed 20 November 2015).
(83)  http://inners.eu/project/vlario (accessed 20 November 2015).
(84)  Most of them located in the metropolitan region of Barcelona.

59

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
 
Reusing, recycling, harvesting and producing

from washing diapers. Greywater may contain traces of 
dirt, food, grease, hair and certain household cleaning 
products. 

 Aside from the obvious benefits of saving water and 
of reducing people's water bills, reusing greywater 
keeps it out of the sewer or septic system, thereby 
reducing the chance that it will pollute local water 
bodies. In addition, reusing greywater for irrigation 
reconnects urban residents and their backyard gardens 
to the natural water cycle (85). The use of greywater for 
watering gardens and flushing toilets was successfully 
implemented in Cyprus, reducing per capita water use by 
up to 40% (EEA, 2009)

While greywater may look 'dirty,' it is a safe and even 
beneficial source of irrigation water in parks and gardens. 
If released into rivers, lakes or estuaries, the nutrients 
in greywater become pollutants but, to plants, they are 
valuable fertiliser. However, the problem with greywater 
is that without proper treatment it may retain increased 
levels of elements that are harmful to the soil and the 
crops or trees that grow in it. One particular concern 
is sodium, which in higher concentrations can damage 
soil permeability and structure, ultimately reducing crop 
yields (86). Furthermore, it is not suitable for watering 
salad crops and vegetables, for instance, if they are not 
going to be cooked before eating. A study carried out 
in Germany (Nolde, 2005) suggested that investments 
in greywater treatment plants within buildings can be 
amortised over a 5- to 7-year period and concluded that 
biological treatment is indispensable to avoid technical 
problems and health risks, as well as to promote public 
acceptance. Those treatments are typically carried out 
through underground recycling tanks.  

3.1.3  Recovery of nutrients from wastewater 

Recently, a new category of processes has emerged 
that extracts specific chemical compounds, with a 
market value, from wastewater treatment streams. 
One of the challenges is not only identifying resources 
but also assessing the practicality of recovering 
resources from wastewater. This is still basically a 
research topic, apart from some pilot studies, but it 
shows a promising future. 

3.1.4  Waste challenges

Waste generation (quantity and composition) is a 
complex process depending on various factors such 
as demography and characteristics of the population 
(income, age, consumption, lifestyle), land use 
(type of buildings, density), productive activities and 
policy measures (e.g. rate of home composting).

Solid waste management is one of the most 
challenging issues for cities as places where people 
and activities are concentrated. Yet, city authorities 
have demonstrated considerable resilience in 
finding solutions that reduce overall waste and 
increase recycling and in pioneering new forms of 
environmentally friendly waste treatment. The main 
objective is to follow the waste hierarchy, which 
prioritises waste prevention, followed by reuse, 
recycling, other recovery and finally disposal or 
landfilling as the least desirable option. 

Waste management has strong links with urban 
planning and economic development. Developing 
efficient waste management requires integrating it into 
mainstream sustainable urban planning. In particular, 
new city developments should have waste generation 
and the impacts of its disposal integrated into their 
planning. 

Nowadays wastewater is being viewed not only as 
waste and a problem but also as a potential resource 
based on recoverable components, in addition to 
water and energy, such as nutrients, carbon and 
inorganic materials. Given the progress made in the 
recovery of nutrients, wastewater will be more and 
more recognised as a 'renewable' resource. It will 
be also a way of improving environmental quality at 
least cost to the community and contributing to the 
local economy. However, more research is needed to 
identify the full range of nutrient-extracting processes 
and how this resource can be commodified (Pramanik 
and Burn, 2014).

Municipalities can act at different points in the waste 
management process:

•  They can separate waste into fractions from one 

homogeneous collection (e.g. paper and cardboard, 
metal, glass, plastic, multilayer packaging, 
biowaste, wood, textiles, tyres, used cooking oils, 
waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE), 
batteries, medicine, hazardous waste).

•  They can collect separated waste (e.g. door-to-door 

collections, bring banks, civic amenity sites, 
collections by request, collections from shops). 

(85)  Only a few countries (Denmark, Germany, Sweden) seem to have regulations in this respect. In general, it is a topic not yet regulated.
(86)  'Is greywater safe for irrigation?', Science for Environment Policy, Environment Directorate-General News Alert Service, 17 June 2010:  

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/integration/research/newsalert/pdf/200na6_en.pdf (accessed 25 March 2015).

60

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceReusing, recycling, harvesting and producing

A waste collection service is one of the most 
visible responsibilities of local authorities; it largely 
depends on the characteristics of the buildings and 
their density. The separate collection of recyclable 
wastes is the first step of recycling, and cities play a 
very important role in organising effective separate 
collection systems and in setting incentives for 
citizens to participate in such systems.

•  They can provide sorting facilities to segregate 

recyclables from bulky waste or residual waste. 

•  Finally, they can provide treatment facilities such 
as mechanical–biological treatment, composting 
for biodegradable waste, anaerobic digestion, and 
recycling facilities whereby specific waste fractions 
are recycled or reprocessed for reuse).

Box 3.7   Research on the zero waste index 

The concept of the 'zero waste index' has been proposed by some researchers to forecast the amount of virgin materials, 
energy, water and GHG emissions offset by the resources that are recovered from waste streams. They argue that the zero 
waste concept should go beyond zero landfill and aim for 'zero depletion of natural resources'. 

The zero waste index they propose quantifies solid waste flows and measures the extent to which materials may be reused 
as substitutes for virgin materials. In addition to the overall percentage of material recovery and substitution, the approach 
calculates other 'savings' made, including energy saved, GHG emissions avoided and water saved (regarding the use of water 
within material supply chains). 

The researchers first calculated the generation of domestic waste materials, specifically paper, glass, metal, plastic, organic 
and mixed solid municipal waste for three cities, all of which are working towards becoming the world's first zero-waste city 
(see Figure 3.2). 

According the zero waste index, a city generating less waste per capita but making a lot of use of incineration (therefore 
losing large amounts of raw materials) will not perform well. The index is based on the value of material that can potentially 
replace virgin material inputs. The offsetting of energy, water and GHG emissions is also taken into account as material 
substitution. The result is based only on the recovered resources and not on the resources used in and emissions arising 
from the production of goods that then become waste. This example demonstrates the limits of the index.

Source:     EC, DG Environment, News Alert Service, 2013; Zaman and Lehmann, 2013. 

Figure 3.2   Drivers for transforming cities into zero waste cities

Awareness, 
zero-waste education 
and research 

ZERO-WASTE CITY

Sustainable consumption,
behaviour change,
sustainable living

New infrastructure, 
new technology and 
smart urban management

System thinking
and
zero-waste governance

Transformed industrial 
design and 
clean production

Reducing, repairing, 
reusing, recycling 
and recovery

Zero waste
legislation and policies

Source:    Adapted from Zaman and Lehmann, 2013.

61

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
Reusing, recycling, harvesting and producing

Box 3.8 

'Pay as you throw' in Flemish municipalities

Owing to the increasing cost of collecting and treating municipal solid waste, municipalities have had to find new ways of 
financing those costs. The Flemish government introduced for the whole region the principle of sorting municipal solid waste 
from households at source. 

The initial question was: how to motivate households to sort their waste at source? The response was the creation of 
financial incentives or different tariffs for the separate collection of those waste streams that can be recycled, reused or 
composted, instead of ending in landfill or in an incinerator. The 'pay as you throw' principle makes the producer of the 
waste financially responsible for the collection and treatment of the waste he or she produced. Households are charged for 
the collection and treatment of municipal solid waste, based on the amount they throw away. This principle is combined 
with differential tariffs to make residual and bulky waste more expensive than selective collected waste streams.

The enabling factors were a clear legal framework (mandatory separate collection schemes for the municipal solid 
waste), financial support for local governments from the regional government for the initial costs and installation of the 
infrastructure for separate waste collection, measures to make recycling financially more compelling, permanent awareness 
raising and information campaigns directed at citizens to familiarise them with the principles of 'pay as you throw', and 
continuous and active dialogue with the municipalities, associations of municipalities and the key players in the chain of 
waste management (citizens, private waste service providers (collectors), waste treatment companies). 

Monitoring has shown an increase in the separate collection of municipal solid waste and a marked reduction in residual 
waste.

Source:    R4R, 2014.  

Box 3.9 

Pay-per-weight charging system

Under the pay-per-weight charging system, householders pay for the amount of waste they produce. An electronic 
micro-chip is fixed to each wheelie bin, which identifies the customer and allows the bins to be weighed on collection. The 
primary aim of this charging system is to prevent waste generation and thereby reduce the quantity of waste going to landfill 
and/or energy recovery. This system encourages householders to dispose of items (especially WEEE, which can be heavy) 
through the proper channels without charge. An Environmental Protection Agency (EPA, Ireland) study published (87) in 2011 
concluded that this system is highly effective.

Source:    R4R, 2014.

Box 3.10  Eco Shop in the Greater Oporto Area

The Eco Shop is a free loyalty card delivered to citizens that rewards their cooperation with the recycling process. The reward 
comes in the form of points that are accumulated on the card and can later be exchanged for goods and services. The 
project aims to increase citizens' participation in the recycling process and reward citizens for good practice. The allocation 
of points is based on the number of deliveries made to drop-off sites. Each kind of waste has a specific number of points 
based on its value and importance to the recycling process.

Source:    R4R, 2014.

(87)  EPA, 2011, Study of pay-by-use systems for maximising waste reduction behaviour in Ireland, Environmental Protection Agency, Dublin, Ireland.

62

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
 
 
Reusing, recycling, harvesting and producing

Economic instruments
Economic instruments help municipalities in 
implementing policy to improve their recycling 
performance, for example a waste tax (for waste 
collections) will increase the cost putting waste to landfill 
or incineration and therefore provide an incentive to 
prevent, recycle or reuse. Users can also be charged 
depending on their use of the service. Municipalities can 
also use specific instruments, for example giving citizens 
money (or a coupon for a shop or a discount) when 
they bring back recyclable goods, consumers buying 
a product are charged on extra fee (for the packaging 
material) that is refunded when they return the empty 
packaging, and changing engine oil free of charge in car 
service centres. 

Targeted communication
Municipalities have an important role to play in 
communicating with households and small companies 
through advertising campaigns in the different 
media (TV, radio, newspaper, website, smartphone 
apps, leaflets) to promote and provide guidance 
on recycling. To be effective, the communication 
needs to be addressed to targeted recipients and 
the message personalised, for example from a local 
ambassador in charge of direct communication with the 
population (e.g. during special events, training sessions, 
door-to-door visits), or through an interactive help line 
(internet or phone) providing guidance for citizens on 
sorting and waste collection. Awards can also highlight 
good practice on the part of individuals or organisations.

need to be established). They can also make the 
producer responsible for the collection, recycling and 
final treatment of his product, the packaging and the 
associated cost when the product becomes a waste 
material; by this obligation, the producer is stimulated to 
think about the life cycle of his product. 

Collection in multi-family dwellings
Householders in multi-family dwellings recycle less 
than householders in single-family dwellings, because 
drop-off stations involving storage, time and transport 
costs for individuals can stifle recycling (Miafodzyeva and 
Brandt, 2012). The waste collection system in a multi-
family dwelling is mainly limited by the storage capacity 
in the building. One of the difficulties with kerbside 
collection is that there is less sense of ownership of 
the system, as the elements of waste management are 
not part of the household. Generally, a household's 
tendency to recycle decreases with increasing physical 
constraints and with the perceived value of the added 
effort associated with choosing to sort recyclable 
materials (Ando and Gosselin, 2005).

However, the recycling infrastructure can be improved 
in flats. For example, to achieve the targets in London's 
Municipal Waste Strategy (88) (89), a range of measures 
were taken to increase recycling, such as the installation 
of small internal recycling containers, better infographics 
on the materials accepted, better provision of recycling 
banks, delivery of bags to encourage internal storage 
and facilitate transport to bins, community events, and a 
campaign run through various media channels.

Legal instruments
Local, and more often national and regional, authorities 
can ban the use of incineration or the use of landfill 
for several waste fractions, making it impossible for 
waste collectors. They can make mandatory to sort 
out waste by households (clear sorting instruction 

Collection in single-family dwellings
Single-family dwellings generate different (and often 
more) waste than multi-family dwellings. The primary 
additional waste type is garden waste. Home 

Box 3.11  Door-to-door information campaign in Elefsina (Greece)

In order to enhance its recycling rate, the municipality implemented a door-to-door information campaign. A number of 
young citizens visited households after attending a training seminar and receiving leaflets and questionnaires. They provided 
information on the recycling facilities available and they also recorded citizens' opinions of how waste was being managed. 
The objective of the campaign was to engage the population at a personal level and create a sense of commitment towards 
the community. The key success factor was the number of households that were visited. This successful campaign was 
financed by the municipality, which has benefited in terms of reduced waste and thereby reduced costs.

Source :   R4R — Region for recycling, 2014.

(88)  London's Municipal Waste Strategy intends to achieve zero municipal waste going directly to landfill by 2025, to reduce household waste by 

20% by 2031 compared with 2009/10 levels, to recycle or compost at least 45% of municipal waste by 2015 and 60% by 2031, and to reduce the 
city's GHG emissions.

(89)  www.minutes.haringey.gov.uk (accessed 20 November 2015); www.london.gov.uk (accessed 20 November 2015).

63

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
Reusing, recycling, harvesting and producing

composting can largely avoid this waste type entering 
the waste management system. 

Participation and capture of materials are usually higher 
in residential areas with detached, semi-detached 
and terraced houses rather than in centralised or 
communal residences (Williams, 2013). Generally 
collection costs are higher in these schemes, but this 
may be compensated by the increased quantity and 
quality of recovered materials returned to the market 
(Williams, 2013). 

It has been demonstrated that changing the residual 
waste collection frequency from weekly to fortnightly 
and introducing separate kerbside collection of 
organic waste increases the probability of reaching 
waste minimisation goals (Gellynck et al., 2011). The 
introduction of fortnightly (90) collection schemes leads 
to an increase in the amount of recyclable materials 
collected from households (Williams and Cole, 2013). 
This collection frequency scheme improves recycling 
rates, helps to achieve landfill diversion targets, and 
reduces the environmental impacts of the service and 
its operational costs (Williams and Cole, 2013). As an 
example, Newcastle City Council in the United Kingdom 
in 2013 introduced such a scheme, estimating increased 
levels of recycling and savings by 2016 of GBP 100 
million (91) as a consequence of increased sales of 
recyclable materials and reducing landfill tax payments. 

Public collection points
Collection systems vary with the urban context. In the 
main, there are two groups of recycling schemes for 
source-separated materials, one requiring residents 
to bring the materials to a certain point and the 
other providing a kerbside door-to-door collection 
(Williams, 2013). Generally, collection systems in Europe 
are a combination of both types, with large variations 
between municipalities and even within countries. 

Some European cities in Denmark, Portugal, Spain 
and Sweden have implemented complementary 
underground vacuum collection systems (Williams, 
2013), generally in areas of cities where there is a 
shortage of public space available for waste facilities, 
either due to physical limitations (such as narrow 
streets) or for development reasons (regeneration of 
urban centres). In this case, residents and commercial 
premises are expected to deposit waste at drop-off 
points (inlets) from where it is transported through a 
system of compressed air pipes to a central point. This 
system allows for the separate collection of different 
materials. Some of the drawbacks of this technology 
are related to the energy costs incurred by its operation 
and also the high investment costs in the early stages of 
implementation. From a life cycle analysis perspective, 
this system has the greatest environmental impact 
compared with door-to-door and street multi-container 
collection schemes (Iriarte et al., 2009).

Box 3.12  The Treynntstadt Berlin initiative to increase participation in waste separation 

BSR (Berliner Stadtreinigungsbetriebe — Anstalt nach Berliner Betriebsgesetz) is the publicly owned waste management 
company of the city of Berlin. The company's objective is to make waste and resource management a fundamental part of 
sustainable urban development. For this work, BSR has received many national, European and international awards in the 
areas of innovation, sustainable development, corporate social responsibility, design and public communication. 

In 2010 BSR initiated the Trenntstadt Berlin initiative to further increase public awareness and household participation 
in waste separation and recycling activities. The key objective was to mobilise public institutions, companies and private 
households to become participate in increasing the separation levels in the various waste streams. This initiative is based 
on innovative communication and participative approaches. Waste management and recycling are promoted as part of the 
trend-setting image of Berlin. 

The initiative uses a new, modern narrative of waste separation, recycling and prevention to motivate private households 
to become more intensely involved in the city's strategy for resource management and achieving a circular economy. 
Innovative communication techniques are complemented by infrastructure measures and increased management capacity. 

As a result, the quantities of waste in Berlin are continuously decreasing while the population continues to grow. 

Source:    http://www.trenntstadt-berlin.de; http://www.bsr.de (accessed 20 November 2015).

(90)  In southern European countries, the collection frequency for residual waste cannot be fortnightly because of the warmer weather conditions, 

which can lead to odour and vermin. To avoid this, residual waste collection tends to be on a daily basis (e.g. Palermo, Italy) (Williams, 2013).
(91)  Newcastle City Council, 2013. Changes to bin collections: http://www.newcastle.gov.uk/environment-and-waste/rubbish-waste-and-recycling 

(accessed 15 December 2014).

64

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
Reusing, recycling, harvesting and producing

For some other materials that are not collected in street 
containers or in kerbside collections, local authorities 
have established civic amenity sites, also known as 
household recycling centres. These facilities usually 
allow residents to dispose of all types of waste, such as 
residual waste, paper, cardboard, glass, construction 
and demolition waste, plastics, garden waste, textiles, 
combustible materials, electronic scrap, bulky waste 
and hazardous waste. The location of these centres 
represents a challenge for local authorities, as these 
facilities take up considerable space in the densely 
populated areas of cities where land values are high.

3.1.5  Organic waste

Organic wastes are food waste and garden waste 
produced by households and by others sources in cities 
(e.g. canteens, restaurants, retail sector, factories). 
There are several technical options for the treatment of 
organic wastes, which are at the same time cost saving 
and resource efficient (Al Seadi et al., 2013):

•  Anaerobic digestion: This industrial process 

takes place in a digester tank. The output of the 
process is biogas (a methane-rich gas that can 
be used as renewable fuel for direct combustion 
or cogeneration or upgraded to biomethane 
and injected into the gas grid) and the digestate 
(the residues left after the decomposition of the 
organic waste, which can be used as fertiliser). 

•  Composting: This is the decomposition process 
that occurs naturally in the environment, in the 
presence of atmospheric oxygen. Compost is used 
as a fertiliser and soil improver. Composting can be 
done on a small scale (home composting) or on an 
industrial scale. 

•  Mechanical–biological treatment: This is a 

combination of mechanical and biological 
processes to separate and transform the residual 
waste into several outputs. It is not a final 
disposal solution and can be considered as a 
mechanical-biological pre-treatment (frequent in 
Austria and Germany). The main aim is to reduce 
the biodegradable content of the waste, to extract 
further value from the waste and to recover 
the energy it contains. The mechanical process 
separates out some dry recyclables (e.g. glass, 
metals). The biological process reduces the water 
content and handles the organic-rich fraction, 
which can be further composted or treated by 
anaerobic digestion. The outputs of this process 
are of considerably lower quality than that of 
separately collected recyclables.

Food waste
Over 100 million tonnes (92) of food are wasted 
annually in the EU (2014 estimate). If nothing is 
done, food waste is expected to rise to about 
126 million tonnes by 2020. At the same time, 
the Food and Agriculture Organization estimates 
that about 805 million people (93) were chronically 
undernourished in 2012–2014. Even in Europe, 
a number of households suffer from poverty. In 
2013, 10% of the EU-28 population was severely 
materially (94) deprived (Eurostat, 2014). In addition, in 
developed countries, obesity is one of the main public 
health challenges and the number of obese people 
continues to rise. 

Food waste occurs at every stage of the food chain: 
manufacturing, wholesale/retail, food service sectors, 
household. Wasting food is not only an ethical and 
economic issue but it also depletes our limited natural 
resources.

Box 3.13  Two types of compost in Odense

At Odense Environmental Centre (Denmark), two types of compost are produced: one is for gardens and contains only 
garden and park waste; and the other is for agricultural purposes and contains a mixture of garden waste, sewage sludge 
and straw. A plant for composting from the three wastewater treatment plants in the municipality has been established. The 
annual production is about 35 000 tonnes of final biocompost, most of which is used as fertiliser for crops, such as cereals.

Source:    http://www.environmental-expert.com/services/composting-services-361314 (accessed 25 June 2015).

(92)  http://ec.europa.eu/food/safety/food_waste/index_en.htm (accessed 15 March 2015).
(93)  FAO, 2014, In brief: State of food insecurity in the world: http://www.fao.org/3/a-i4037e.pdf (accessed 15 March 2015).
(94)  Severely materially deprived persons have their living conditions constrained by a lack of resources and experience at least four out of the 

nine following deprivation conditions: cannot afford (1) to pay rent/mortgage or utility bills on time, (2) to keep their home adequately warm, 
(3) to face unexpected expenses, (4) to eat meat, fish or a protein equivalent every second day, (5) a 1-week holiday away from home, (6) a car, 
(7) a washing machine, (8) a colour TV, or (9) a telephone (including a mobile phone).

65

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
Reusing, recycling, harvesting and producing

The design and organisation of food waste collection 
systems are particularly important depending on how 
biodegradable waste will be treated. The main issue 
is how to accommodate the infrastructure required 
to collect food waste and to enhance participation. 
Municipalities have an important role to play, not 
only in the collection of food waste but also in raising 
awareness of the issue of food waste. 

high-quality material (free of contamination) to produce 
high-quality fertiliser. Residents need additional bins 
and liners or multi-compartment bins for collecting 
food waste. In Sweden, the oldest and most common 
system for food waste collection uses separate bins 
(Al Seadi et al., 2013); the size and the design vary 
depending on the collection source (multi-apartment 
building, apartment, single house). 

The waste can be collected directly from properties 
(residential, institutional, commercial) or from 
municipal collection points. It is necessary to collect 

Communication with households and others potential 
users is vital to ensure that the collection service is 
used properly in order to minimise contamination 

Box 3.14  Waste food collection, the United Kingdom's experience

Two case studies of door-to-door food waste collection in multi-occupancy dwellings in the United Kingdom (Newtownabbey 
and Kingston-upon-Thames) showed that when residents were required to keep their food waste within their properties for 
a week, either with or without the provision of kitchen caddies and compostable liners, the system achieved average food 
waste yields of around 0.5 kg per household served per week (WRAP, 2009a,b). 

On the other hand, in Hackney, where residents were required to take food waste to communal bins next to the recycling 
bins, lower values were achieved ranging from 0.24 to 0.34 kg per household per week (WRAP, 2009a). In comparison, it is 
estimated that kerbside food waste collection from single-family dwellings ranges from 1 to 1.7 kg per household per week. 
This illustrates the limitations on achieving high separation values in this kind of dwelling, considering the barriers faced by 
residents in participating in a complex collection system.

Results from these experiences indicate that access to properties requires coordination between collection crews and 
management agents. In communal bin schemes, the design of the bin and its location will influence residents' participation.

Source:    WRAP, 2009a,b.

Box 3.15  Collection and treatment of food waste in Malmö

Since 2003 the Swedish government has recognised food waste as a very important waste stream with considerable 
potential for recovery of nutrients and energy. In 2003, the parliament decreed, as a national environmental objective, that 
35% of food waste should be recycled or biologically treated (including home composting) by 2010. In the new Swedish 
Waste Management Plan, the target for food waste has been extended to 50% being recycled by 2018.

In order to achieve the national targets at city level, the authorities of Malmö and Burlöv decided in 2012 to make 
compulsory separate food waste collection from all households and businesses in their municipalities. They adopted the 
target of 40% of food waste collected and treated biologically by 2015. In addition, the regional council of Scania has adopted 
the target that all city buses will use only biogas by 2015; this also applies in Malmö. 

The collected food waste is redirected to peri-urban bio-processing plants for biogas production. The biogas can be used 
for either electricity or heat production, as well as fuel for local public transport (buses, garbage trucks, taxis and cars). 
The entire Malmö bus fleet has been engineered to run on gaseous energy sources: approximately 200 city buses run on 
a mixture of biogas and compressed natural gas. 

The system is financed through municipal fees for waste management. The fee for maintaining a separate food waste bin 
is more than three times lower than that for a residual waste bin, therefore making it a more attractive option for citizens, 
because by sorting out food waste it is possible to replace one residual bin with one food waste bin and save a lot of money 
annually. 

Source:    http://malmo.se/English/Sustainable-City-Development/Recycling.html (accessed 24 February 2015).

66

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
 
Reusing, recycling, harvesting and producing

Box 3.16  Milan: door-to-door food waste collection 

The door-to-door household organic waste collection plan was extend to the whole city in 2014. Brown bins and 
compostable bags are used for collection and small kitchen bins in apartments.

The information campaign used multiple communication channels: direct marketing sent to families, letters and posters sent 
to public administrations, a free smartphone app for exchanging information, and a website. In three-quarters of the city the 
recycling rate has risen from 34.5% in 2011 to 48.3% in 2014 (95). Food waste recycled per capita is estimated at 90 kg/year.

Source :   R4R, 2014)

in the collected material. How to do the separation 
needs to be clearly explained. Verbal instructions on 
recycling food waste can be given by door-stepping 
in high-density residential areas. In Sweden, this 
approach has proved to be effective to reduce the 
amount of residual waste, although over time the 
source-separated ratio has decreased, suggesting 
that the effect of these campaigns is not long lived 
(Bernstad et al., 2013). In Norway, it was found that 
awareness and communication campaigns for food 
waste collection required long-term objectives and 
repetition in order to retain support over the long term 
(Refsgaard and Magnussen, 2009).

Garden waste
People living in towns and cities produce large 
amounts of garden waste such as grass cuttings, hedge 
clippings, weeds, dead plants. The municipality itself 
also produces organic waste from the maintenance 
of urban areas. Composting is the best environmental 
option and a low-cost solution (e.g. reduced collection, 
reduced transport, production of compost) to manage 
household organic waste at source. Urban garden waste 
can be composted locally or at source in the garden. 

The compost must have certain physical, chemical 
and biological properties to be fit for purpose, 
in particular it must be safe for humans and the 
environment. Compost brings a number of benefits; it 
improves the soil biodiversity and the structure of the 
soil and is a source of nutrients. More and more cities 
offer free home composters to households and advice 
on composting and gardening. 

Some innovative cities have proposed keeping chickens 
in the backyard (e.g. Mouscron in Belgium, Châtillon in 
France). The objective is to feed chickens with kitchen 

scraps. In addition, chickens eat insects and can serve 
as an organic pest control agent; they also eat many 
weeds, making the gardener's work easier, and provide 
eggs every day.

3.1.6  Reusing products and preparing for reuse  

Waste is a symbol of inefficiency and represents 
misallocated resources. Disposable products (e.g. food 
cans foods, safety razors, packaging), designed to be 
thrown away after a brief use, were introduced in 
the last century with the rise of consumerism. Usable 
products and components (e.g. devices, electric and 
electronic products, textiles, shoes, furniture, tyres, 
toys, books, bikes) are scrapped. Repair costs are 
often higher than the cost of a new product that 
offers technical improvements or is more fashionable. 
Products need to be replaced early because of their 
short lifespan (96). 

To address this challenge, many smart initiatives from 
local authorities, non-profit organisations or individual 
citizens are emerging. They encourage and organise 
reusing, sharing, borrowing, exchanges, lending goods 
and tools, etc. Social media and the internet generally 
have largely contributed to the success of this creative 
initiative. 

Selling
Peer-to-peer selling of used items is not a new 
phenomenon, but it has exploded with the advent of 
the internet and often area-specific internet services. 
eBay is one international example, but there are 
many local examples. These are often online versions 
of existing classified newspapers, such as Loot (97) in 
London and den blå avis (98) in Copenhagen. These 

(95)  The first 3 months of 2014.
(96)  The obsolescence of products is planned and built in at their conception (the so-called 'planned obsolescence'). Therefore, the consumer feels 

the need to purchase new products and services that manufacturers bring out as replacement.

(97)  http://loot.com (accessed 20 November 2015).
(98)  http://www.dba.dk (accessed 20 November 2015).

67

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
Reusing, recycling, harvesting and producing

Box 3.17  Developing a local market for reusing and recycling materials in Ferrara

The LIFE+ project LOWaste in Ferrara is developing a circular economy based on prevention, reuse and recycling of waste 
through public–private partnerships. Starting from some pilot tests it is creating the foundations for a green circular 
economy.

The main objective is to reduce urban waste by developing a local market for recycled or reused materials. Measures are 
focused on:

• 

• 

 The supply side: The objective is to create a market by collecting and adding value to recyclable waste. Technical 
protocols have been established on waste management procedures, on the characteristics of products for reuse and 
on eco-design innovations.

 The demand side: The objective is to create demand through green public procurement policies in public bodies and 
green buying procedures in companies. The demand side is strengthened through the development of LOWaste 
technical protocols that include quality criteria for second-life products in green public procurement and green buying 
quality criteria for second-life products. 

The project aims to persuade at least 10 companies to commit to purchasing products to be reused and will involve at least 
three social cooperatives, giving disadvantaged people the opportunity to learn technical skills.

Source:    http://www.lowaste.it/ (accessed 20 November 2015).

Box 3.18  The swap market — Byttemarked

The swap market stops used products such as toys, films, electronics and clothes ending up as waste. It prolongs products' 
lifespan and gives them new value. It is a grassroots innovation initiated by and for local citizens. 

The non-profit organisation Byttemarked works as a facilitator for swap markets in Denmark. The swap markets are mainly 
arranged by volunteers. At the start, the idea was to set up a user collaboration without involving money, but to make it 
economically sustainable the organisers have applied to committees and communities for funding.

The platform Byttemarked facilitates the arrangement of a swap market by providing advice, experience and help to find 
location. On the web page there is contact information and guidelines on how to arrange a swap market. It also provides a 
calendar for upcoming swap market events. 

Source:    http://www.byttemarked.nu/ (accessed 25 July 2014).

types of initiative tend to be entirely self-generating 
and self-financing.

Flea markets and car boot sales also provide people 
with the opportunity to pass on their unwanted 
but undamaged items rather than allowing them to 
become waste. Local authorities can help facilitate 
this type of selling by including such events in facility 
schedule planning and making them available. 

Second-hand shops also provide an excellent outlet for 
certain types of goods. Clothes and books, for example, 
are both ideal for the second-hand market, as they tend 
to be discarded long before their functional lifetime has 
expired.

Swapping
More or less formal swapping networks and events 
also provide an excellent way of satisfying the need 
for different products without needing to buy new and 
having to bin the old. These tend to be self-generating 
and self-funded (although little finance is really 
required — often only a venue if an event is being held). 
Some examples (e.g. Danish Swap Thing) shows that a 
significant amount of waste can be prevented through 
this type of activity.

Less formal examples of swapping networks include 
the establishment of a swap room in the waste facility 
of apartment buildings, where items can be left for 
others to take if they so wish. Online versions have also 
had limited success, but are in direct competition with 
direct peer-to-peer selling. 

68

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
 
Reusing, recycling, harvesting and producing

Box 3.19  Vienna Repair Network 

The Vienna Repair Network was established to strengthen repair services and offer an alternative to disposal by developing 
sustainable consumption and repair services for different kinds of electrical and electronic equipment. The network 
comprises about 60 small enterprises that, under the umbrella of the network, drive an economically sustainable business.

The initiative has both social and environmental objectives, such as to help the community to repair rather than buying 
new goods, to help long-term unemployed and older people to reintegrate into the job market, and to give low-income 
households access to good-quality second-hand household electronic items.

The repair network offers good-quality repair services for a variety of electronic appliances and other household equipment, 
such as furniture and bicycles. By offering good-quality services and guarantees for the life of the repaired products, the 
network has been successful in attracting many customers and the attention of large percentage of the population in Vienna 
and beyond. A major strength of the initiative is its flexibility, which allows it to meet consumers' changing demands. 

The repair network is becoming increasingly popular and serves more than 14 000 customers every year. A representative 
brand recognition survey resulted in 24% name recognition in Vienna. Since 1998, more than 10 000 tonnes of WEEE 
have been prevented from going to landfill. It is estimated that the lifetime of electric equipment is extended by 25% and 
the average household saves about EUR 75 per appliance. The network has also created a repair 'industry' in Vienna, 
which promotes the local economy and creates added value. It has also launched its own eco-design label for household 
appliances.

Sources:   http://www.reparaturnetzwerk.at and http://www.prewaste.eu/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=272&Itemid=101 

(accessed 20 December 2013).

Box 3.20  Repair and reuse centre in the city of Graz

A repair and reuse centre in Graz brings together all reuse activities, namely the acquisition, treatment (repair) and sales of 
items, in the same place. The centre deals with reusable electrical and electronic items and other non-hazardous reusable 
products such as furniture, textiles and accessories. Items come through direct delivery by citizens, direct collection from 
households and companies and a house-clearing out service. The items are first stored then sorted by reuse experts and 
checked and repaired. Materials that are not suitable for reuse are reserved for the upcycling laboratory. As the functioning 
of the repair and reuse centre depends on the general public as customers, a professional promotion campaign, including 
the development of a brand and a marketing plan, has been undertaken. The broad awareness-raising and promotion 
campaign was launched via regular events, the website, posters, flyers and newspaper announcements and a press 
conference.

Source:    R4R, 2014.

Fixing
Improving the reliability and quality of second-
hand goods is key to developing a sustainable 
formal market for them. This is particularly true for 
items such as furniture and electric and electronic 
appliances, and it allows a potentially larger range 
and number of second-[hand items to re-enter the 
marketplace. While this used to be, and still is in 
many locations, achieved by the informal sector, 
some initiatives have been launched in recent years 
to provide a more coordinated and formal approach 
to repairing used items for resale. These often 
provide certification or a guarantee for a product for 
a fixed period and a recognisable brand to reassure 
customers. They also often work as both repair 
workshops for broken goods (where one can take a 

broken item for repair) and as a resale point for items 
that have already entered, or would otherwise enter, 
the waste management system. 

While these initiatives do generate revenue, they also 
tend to require some form of financial support from 
municipalities or regional government. This is often 
justified by the inclusion of other social goods in the 
initiative concept, for example, the employment of 
long-term unemployed or those with a minor disability 
or impairment. 

As with many waste prevention initiatives, repair 
workshops and repairing for resale require a high 
population density to function effectively, and so are 
ideally suited to urban areas. 

69

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
 
Reusing, recycling, harvesting and producing

Repurposing and upcycling
It is also possible to create new products from 
discarded products, both within the product group 
and in other product groups. This can include, for 
example, the use of potential waste items as inputs 
for art and cultural activities in schools or other 
institutions or interest groups. Another example 
is the use of clothing to create new clothing rather 
than breaking down the clothes into textiles and 
using that as input material, which would be more 
akin to recycling. This type of initiative creates 
new designs from old clothes (e.g. the Upcycling 
Academy in London explores textile waste, upcycling 
and introduces people to better fashion industry 
practices (99)). Clothes are not a minor challenge. 
According to a  WRAP report, 30% of the clothing 
hanging in the closet of an average United Kingdom 
household has not been worn in a year and 80% of 
people own clothing that has never been worn. It is 
estimated that the average global footprint of a United 
Kingdom household's clothing exceeds 200 000 litres 

per year (WRAP, 2011). Over 90% of the water 
footprint of the clothes bought in the United Kingdom 
is overseas, often in countries where there is water 
stress and scarcity.

3.1.7  Recycling waste from construction and 

demolition

Housing represents a significant amount of the total 
material flows. Around 22% of the total European 
material flows are directly related to housing and, when 
furnishing and household appliances are included, 
the share rises to 38% of the European resource use 
(EEA, 2012a). About 857 million tonnes of construction 
and demolition waste was generated in 2010 in the EU-
27 (1 708 kg per capita) with large variations between the 
EU countries (100). The composition of construction and 
demolition wastes varies greatly. The European Concrete 
Platform (101) estimates the amount of concrete waste to 
be around 320–380 million tonnes (102).

Box 3.21  Examples of good practice in national waste prevention programmes

Austria: 'Building material passes' 
The Austrian waste prevention programme contains a bundle of measures related to 'building material passes' as a planning 
instrument to support repair, reuse and high-quality recycling in the construction sector. The plan is to develop standards 
for these building passes and to incorporate core information into the central building register run by Statistics Austria. In 
future, the details of the material composition and the contents of potentially hazardous substances will also be recorded. 

Hungary: Coordinating body for prevention of construction and demolition waste 
Following a significant increase in construction and demolition waste over the last 10 years in combination with a rather 
low recycling rate, the Hungarian waste prevention programme will create a coordinating body for the prevention of 
construction and demolition waste. The main purpose of this new institution will be to support research and development 
activities in the field and to exploit synergies between different ongoing research projects more efficiently.

Finland: Environmental classification system for buildings 
In Finland, the waste prevention programme promotes aspects of waste prevention and material efficiency in the 
construction phase of new buildings by applying an environmental classification system. The aim is to put an increased 
emphasis on building convertibility, durability of structures, prevention of water and module damage, and the updatability 
of building automation when designing, constructing and supervising buildings. 

Wales: Agreement on the use of recycled materials in buildings 
The Welsh Government will encourage designers and architects to design for the end of life of buildings. This will ensure 
that materials used in the construction contain a high percentage of recycled materials and that, throughout the life of the 
building, the materials can be either reused or recycled. This agreement aims to raise awareness of the importance of the 
end of life of buildings and to create a market for material-efficient construction and recycled materials and products (p. 52). 

Source:    EEA, 2014c.

(99)  http://fabrications-hackney.blogspot.dk/2012/10/the-upcycling-academy.html (accessed January 2014).
(100)  ETC/SCP, 2013, Housing assessment, Final report, ETC/SCP Working Paper No 4/2013: http://scp.eionet.europa.eu/publications/wp2013_4/wp/

wp2013_4 (accessed 1 March 2015).

(101)  http://www.europeanconcrete.eu/ (accessed 20 November 2015).
(102)  BIOIS, ARCADIS, IEEP, 2011, Service contract on management of construction and demolition waste — SR1, Final report: http://www.eusmr.eu/

cdw/docs/BIO_Construction%20and%20Demolition%20Waste_Final%20report_09022011.pdf (accessed 5 December 2012).

70

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
Reusing, recycling, harvesting and producing

Concrete, aggregates, bricks, tiles and asphalt are the 
main recycled materials from all construction and 
demolition waste, while soil recycling plays a large role 
in some countries. Materials used for building houses 
(concrete, bricks and tiles), are specifically targeted by 
the recyclers, creating a market for these materials. 
Road construction, recycled concrete aggregates and 
civil engineering applications, all of which use mainly 
aggregates, are the main users of all construction and 
demolition waste. In the Netherlands, 93% of recycled 

construction and demolition is used in road base 
construction (ETC/SCP, 2013). 

The recycling of concrete aggregates, whereby the waste 
is crushed and used as inert aggregate material in new 
concrete, is the most relevant application of recycled 
construction and demolition waste for housing. Gypsum 
products such as plasterboards and blocks can also be 
counted among the very few construction materials for 
which 'closed-loop' recycling is possible. 

Box 3.22  The recycling of plasterboard waste

Plasterboards and blocks are made of gypsum, an abundant mineral rock commonly found in the earth's crust. Gypsum 
powder (103), is a natural substance that can be restored to its original rock-like state by the addition of water, formed into 
shape and hardened. Gypsum products can be counted among the very few construction materials for which 'closed-loop' 
recycling is possible, that is, where the waste is used to make the same product again. Gypsum can be reused because the 
chemical composition of the raw material always remains the same in the application and in the raw material. 

The largest market for recycled gypsum is incorporation into new plasterboard. Recycled gypsum, as with virgin gypsum, can 
also be used for cement manufacture and road construction, as a soil improver and stabiliser or as a replacement for clay 
block manufacture. 

The gypsum industry, gypsum recyclers, demolition companies and universities are engaged in the GtoG project (104), which 
aims to develop more recycling of gypsum. 

The recycling route involves demolishers, recyclers and manufacturers. With non-regulatory government incentives, 
recycling can be organised on a private basis (e.g. Belgium, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom). It can also be pushed 
by manufacturers (e.g. France) who see recycling as the gypsum source of the future. Cities and regions have a key role 
in implementing recycling, as collection and sorting centres for household plasterboard waste should be carried out at 
municipal level (e.g. Denmark is a good example of organising this type of collection).

Deconstruction is a key step in the feasibility of waste recycling. To properly manage construction and demolition 
waste during construction works, separation and selection of recyclable wastes must be done on the construction and 
demolition sites. In the countries usually practising deconstruction (Belgium, France, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom), 
plasterboard is stripped out on site by hand and undesirable materials are removed on site (e.g. screws, nails, cables, various 
plastics). A cost–benefit analysis of deconstruction in Paris (a refurbishment operation in 2000 (105) shows that dismantling is 
cost-effective. 

In Europe the recycling route is mature only in Belgium, France, the Netherlands, Scandinavia and the United Kingdom. 
The average reincorporation rate in plasterboard for the four countries/regions is 19%. The gypsum waste re-incorporated 
includes production waste and construction and demolition waste. In the other countries considered in the project 
(Germany, Greece, Poland and Spain ), only around 5% of the gypsum waste produced is re-incorporated. 

For successful re-incorporation in the manufacturing process and to avoid impacts on human health (e.g. traces of 
heavy metal), manufacturers will only accept a certain quality of recycled gypsum that can be re-incorporated during the 
manufacturing process. The cost of recycling is more or less equal to the cost of landfilling, depending on the landfill costs 
of each country (106).

Source:    http://gypsumtogypsum.org/ (accessed 20 July 2014).

(103)  Hydrated calcium sulphate.
(104)  The GtoG is a Life+ project involving 17 partners and co-financed by the EC, Environment Directorate-General. It spanned 3 years, starting in 

January 2013 and ending in December 2015. Website: http://gypsumtogypsum.org/ (accessed 20 July 2014).

(105)  Life11 ENV/BE/001039: Deliverable 1 of the GtoG project — report-inventory of current practices for dismantling, recycling and re-incorporating 

recycled gypsum in the manufacturing process.

(106)  Life11 ENV/BE/001039: Deliverable 1 of the GtoG project — report-inventory of current practices for dismantling, recycling and re-incorporating 

recycled gypsum in the manufacturing process.

71

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
Reusing, recycling, harvesting and producing

3.2  Harvesting and producing 

Cities rely on imported energy, water, food and 
materials. However, urban areas could sites of 
production instead of consumption of resources. 
Primary resources, such as rain, sunlight and water, 
can be captured and harvested. Secondary resources, 
such as organic waste or wastewater, can be captured 
and reused. As cities grow and urban delineations 
blur, the potential for them to be productive places 
is increasing. Some researchers are studying the 
feasibility of self-reliant cities, reaching net productivity 
by combining reduction of consumption, reusing, 
recycling, harvesting and production possibilities mainly 
for energy, water, and food. 

Decentralised renewable energy production at city 
and regional levels can be provided by wind power, 
biomass production, solar rooftop installations and 
biogas production. Besides the more commonly used 
renewable energy sources such as solar energy or 
geothermal energy, there are many other sources 
of energy at the local scale that should be explored. 
For example, the city of Paris launched a call for 
contribution that was open to all citizens to identify 
the energy potential of its territory: heat generated 
by data centres, the coolness of quarries, rainwater, 
pedestrians' kinetic energy and heat from bakery ovens 
or underground stations, and as many others as can 
be imagined (EnergyCities, 2013). All this information 
will be the foundation for local energy action plans. 
In addition, cities can play a key role in developing 
appropriate measures to require property developers 
to adopt best practice and to encourage their tenants 
to save on energy bills and to reduce GHG emissions.

Cities need a large amount of food provided from 
outside the city limits and increasingly from the global 
hinterland. For example, London has a surface of 
around 159 000 ha, but it requires over 50 times (107) 
its own surface area to feed it. Some cities have 

developed food strategies, such as Amsterdam — the 
'Proeftuin Amsterdam' — that aims to create a more 
environmentally friendly food chain that will benefit 
urban and rural dwellers alike (108). Many examples 
demonstrate that is possible to develop urban 
agriculture within and around cities and towns and to 
market the products. Urban and peri-urban agriculture 
is seen by some authors as an efficient way of feeding 
cities and an important component of urban living 
(Girardet, 2010). 

Most cities depend on water imported from their 
hinterland and sometimes from afar. However, water 
can be harvested in cities. The harvesting begins at 
the building unit, because that is where the major 
consumption occurs; then the harvesting needs to be 
organised at the block level and neighbourhood to city 
level (Agudelo-Vera et al., 2012). 

3.2.1  Local energy production

Cities have to create agreed long-term strategies to 
frame their energy transition and ensure its viability 
and execution, independently of the elected party. 
In this way, long-term investments will ensure 
the promotion of renewable production in cities 
(whatever the means: solar, wind, geothermal energy, 
waste incineration, biomass).

A mix of sources of energy makes it independent 
of availability and provides stability to the system 
and security for the energy supply. There are many 
potential combinations of photovoltaic solar panels, 
wind farms, biogas plants, wood-fired boilers, district 
heating systems, cogeneration or combined heat and 
power plants, and geothermal heat pumps. Local 
electricity production with renewable energy sources 
and with distributed energy generation is a step on the 
way to self-sufficient cities that are strongly dependent 
on the local energy sources. Combined heat and power 

Box 3.23  A cooperative for producing renewable energy

A REScoop (Renewable Energy Sources Cooperative) is a group of citizens who cooperate in the field of renewable energy, 
developing new production, selling renewable energy or providing services to new initiatives, with the aim of speeding up 
local renewable energy projects in order to achieve the European 20-20-20 energy targets through the direct involvement of 
citizens.  More than 400 local and regional groups and cooperatives of citizens have already developed projects.

Source:    http://www.rescoop.eu (accessed 20 November 2015).

(107)  http://www.worldfuturecouncil.org/fileadmin/user_upload/PDF/Towards_Regenerative_Cities_web_01.pdf (accessed 20 January 2015).
(108)  The Amsterdam Food Strategy: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/archive/conferences/urban_rural/2008/doc/pdf/6a_iclei_amsterdam.pdf 

(accessed 20 February 2015).

72

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
Reusing, recycling, harvesting and producing

and district heating and cooling have been proven to 
be cost-effective because of their enhanced energy 
supply efficiency and use of waste heat and low-carbon 
renewable energy resources (IEA, 2009). District 
heating takes advantage of local energy production and 
economies of scale. 

Producing energy closer to consumers is a way of 
minimising the effects of distribution losses by reducing 
the length of power lines. Moreover, investing in local 
energy production also keeps the money spent on 
energy consumption in the territory that is served. 

In Europe, depending on the country, local authorities 
may or may not be directly responsible for the energy 
supply in their territories. In Scandinavian and federal 
countries, municipalities are responsible for their 
territories' energy supply and set up local energy 
utilities to do this. This contributes to developing 
a sense of responsibility among local authorities, 
while providing them with a source of income (109). 
In other western, eastern and southern European 
countries, local authorities do not have such power or 
responsibility Some cities own their energy networks 
and are allowed to build heating networks, even using 
combined heat and power. However, large energy 

companies always have the upper hand and get all the 
added value. 

Some cities and towns have their own municipal 
energy company, like the town of Montdidier (around 
6 500 inhabitants), in France. In other cases, citizens' 
cooperatives take the role of distributing renewable 
energy, such as the earliest Schönau cooperative 
founded in 1999 in Germany, or more recently 
SomEnergia (110) in Spain. However, this is not the usual 
situation, especially in southern countries, where local 
authorities do not have the power to decide what 
type of energy is supplied in their territories. In some 
of these countries, a state monopoly has evolved 
into private oligopolies or monopolies (EnergyCities, 
2014b). Moreover, in this context, when these powerful 
companies' and local authorities' interests are not 
heading in the same direction, such an organisation 
becomes an obstacle to defining local energy efficiency 
strategies. On the contrary, in countries where local 
authorities have control of the energy supply, innovation, 
mobilisation of local resources and combined heat and 
power development are clearly forging ahead, as is the 
case in Scandinavian countries (EnergyCities, 2014b) and 
seen at its best in Växjö (Sweden), with a project that 
aims to make it a '100% fossil fuel-free' city.

Box 3.24  Ambitious goals are achievable, even for a medium-sized city

The 'ProjectZero' vision of the city of Sønderborg is to achieve carbon dioxide neutrality by 2029, including the emissions 
attributable to citizens. The project is mainly based on a combination of energy efficiency improvements, conversion of 
energy sources to renewables and creating a dynamic energy system with flexible pricing. 22% of the carbon reduction had 
been achieved by 2012 (baseline 2007 comparison), and the next milestone is focused on achieving a 50% carbon reduction 
by 2020 (Ministry of Housing, Urban and Rural Affairs and Danish Energy Agency, 2014).

A public–private partnership, the ProjectZero Company, was created from industry (111), the national energy company (112), 
regional utility companies (113), banks (114) and the municipality. The objective was to assist stakeholders in planning activities, 
drive stakeholder participation, implement solutions, and monitor the impact on climate and society. Strong stakeholder 
participation has been developed in the process of transition, including citizens, corporations, utility companies, schools and  
universities. 

Cross-sector planning for energy and climate has been developed. The potential for utilising local resources has been 
analysed and an energy policy strategy was elaborated in 2008. Today energy and climate considerations are an integral part 
of municipal long-term planning. 

The planning crosses municipal borders. Strong regional cooperation among clusters of adjacent municipalities has been 
developed to coordinate their energy and climate actions in order to optimise solutions. 

Source:    Ministry of Housing, Urban and Rural Affairs and Danish Energy Agency, 2014.

(109)  http://www.energy-cities.eu/wiki/index.php/Proposal_1.1 (accessed 1 March 2015).
(110)  http://www.somenergia.coop/welcome-to-som-energia (accessed 1 March 2015).
(111)  The Danfoss Group.
(112)  DONG Energy, formerly Dansk Olie og Naturgas.
(113)  Sønderborg Heat Company.
(114)  The Nordea Bank Foundation.

73

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
Reusing, recycling, harvesting and producing

External factors should be incorporated into the 
costs of producing and distributing energy, following 
the 'polluter–payer' principle. In this way consumers 
become more aware and take responsibility for their 
choices and the consequences. It is also important to 
include investment decisions made by local authorities, 
especially those related to new infrastructure, likewise 
accounting for the operating and maintenance costs. 
Both producing energy locally and applying resource 
efficiency measures will increase local savings. This is a 
good opportunity for investing in sustainable projects 
within the urban context that can improve resource 
efficiency of the city in a positive loop. 

Energy efficiency investments are most often 
cost-effective, but the execution of those projects can be 
impeded by financial and regulatory barriers (EC, 2011d). 
Solid financial structures must be consolidated by 
local authorities, together with innovative solutions to 
facilitate investment in cost-effective measures. 

3.2.2  Producing heating and power 

District heating is not a new technology; for example, the 
first combined heat and power plant in Denmark was 
built back in 1903 (Danish Energy Agency, 2013). In some 
countries, district heating is a very important part of the 
heating supply. In Finland, in 2011, approximately half of 
the population was served by district heating (IEA, 2013). 

The European Energy Efficiency Directive calls for an 
assessment of the potential for increasing deployment 
of this technology (EU, 2012).

A district heating system comprises a network of 
insulated pipes used to deliver heat, in the form of hot 
water or steam, from the point of generation to a large 
number of individual buildings or houses. This system 
can be adapted to a large variety of energy central 
sources such as gas, biomass and waste. The extent of 
a network can be readily extended by simply adding 
more providers of heat, or 'heat sources', along the 
way. District heating is often combined with a cooling 
system that distributes cold water to buildings in need 
of cooling in summer. The coolant is supplied through a 
coherent system of pipes, similar to the existing system 
for the distribution of heating. 

A district heating plant is also often a combined heat 
and power plant that is also commonly referred as 
cogeneration. By co-producing heat and power in 
the same process, the heat that would otherwise be 
wasted in electricity production is utilised. Thermal 
power plants achieve a conversion efficiency of 
36% compared with 58% for cogeneration (IEA, 
2014). State-of-the-art cogeneration units can reach 
conversion efficiencies of as much 90% (IEA, 2014). In 
2011, in Finland, combined heat and power accounted 
for about 36% of the country's overall electricity 
generation (IEA, 2013).

Box 3.25  The London Energy Master Plan

Currently, electrical power in the United Kingdom is generally supplied from a relatively small number of very large 
power stations, most of which are in remote locations away from population centres. This approach creates a variety of 
inefficiencies in the overall energy system, of which the greatest is the inability to use the waste heat from power stations 
for beneficial purposes. By locating a generating station close to where the energy is used, decentralised energy offers the 
potential for the waste heat to be captured and distributed to buildings or industrial processes that need it. 

The objectives of the current mayor's Climate Change Mitigation and Energy Strategy are to achieve a reduction of 60% in 
London's carbon dioxide emissions by 2025 and to ensure that 25% of London's energy is delivered through a more efficient 
decentralised energy system by 2025. The decentralised energy — the generation and distribution of energy closer to the 
locations where energy is consumed – is seen as 'low and zero carbon power and/or heat generated and delivered within 
London.' 

In the Decentralised Energy Master Planning (DEMaP) programme, opportunities for new networks in an area are identified 
in order to set out a long-term vision for district heating developments (Mayor of London, 2013). This definition covers 
a wide range of technology and scales, from single building schemes using microgeneration technologies to wide-area 
schemes connected to local power stations and large energy centres serving thousands of customers. 

The programme is focused on delivering decentralised energy at a scale that is sufficient to maximise market 
competitiveness. Even small projects have to be designed from the start to enable their growth and connection into larger 
systems in order to operate efficiently.

Sources:   London Borough of Haringey, 2012: https://www.london.gov.uk/priorities/environment/tackling-climate-change  

(accessed 1 March 2015).

74

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
Reusing, recycling, harvesting and producing

Managing the off-peak period
Heat accumulators can be used to store heat during 
off-peak periods and supply heat at times of peak heat 
demand, reducing the total installed capacity of plant 
required. By storing the heat generated, they can be 
used with combined heat and power plants to allow 
electricity generation when the demand for heat is not 
high. 

also stimulate developments in the field of energy 
planning and management. Generally, they have lower 
costs of energy generation and reduced maintenance 
costs compared with individual systems. To facilitate 
investment to improve existing district networks and 
to develop new networks, it is important to ensure the 
long-term stability of policies and market regulation to 
secure investments (IEA, 2014). 

For example, to optimise the district heating of 
Copenhagen, two accumulator tanks (with a total 
capacity of 44 000 m3) collect any surplus hot water and 
keep it in reserve for times of the day when demand 
is the highest (Metropolitan Copenhagen Heating 
Transmission Company, 2012). Without heat storage, 
heat production is governed by the present heat 
demand. However with heat storage, the cogenerated 
heat can be stored and the plant can operate when there 
is a low demand for heat. In the case of Copenhagen, 
there is also a balancing measure to integrate a high 
proportion of renewable wind energy into the supply, 
as the velocity of the wind is always fluctuating (Sievers 
et al., 2006). With the introduction of renewable energy 
there is a need for a more flexible energy system — 
a smart grid — that provides the optimum balance 
between energy generation and energy consumption. 

Controlling emissions
District heating and cooling networks provide 
environmental benefits. They replace small uncontrolled 
sources of air pollution with a fully controlled central 
source. They use energy more efficiently (IEA, 2014), in 
particular they allow waste heat to be used. They can 
use a variety of fuels and benefit from local carbon-free 
energy sources such as solar thermal heat or waste 
heat recovered from industrial processes that can be 
injected into a district heating network or converted 
into cooling capacity using absorption chillers. 
Natural cooling sources, such as water from lakes, 
seas and rivers, can also be used (115) — for example, 
Copenhagen uses seawater (Copenhagen Cleantech 
Cluster, 2012). Owing to their energy efficiency, they 
provide opportunities for the deployment of renewable 
technologies that otherwise would not be viable. 
They can also operate as energy-balancing tools by 
incorporating other technologies such as heat pumps 
and thermal storage capacity. District heating is a basis 
for cooperation among city governments (e.g. the 
Metropolitan Copenhagen Heating Transmission 
Company is a partnership of the municipalities of 
Frederiksberg, Gentofte, Gladsaxe, Copenhagen and 
Tårnby), utility companies, industry, building owners 
and residents. District heating and cooling networks 

The social dimension
However, district heating may have social 
consequences if it is not properly managed. Energy 
poverty can be associated with district heating due to 
disproportionately high heating costs (Tirado Herrero 
and Ürge-Vorsatz, 2012). Consumers are trapped in 
the system and obliged to pay elevated heating costs. 
First, consumers cannot change their supplier or fuel 
type because of technical and institutional constraints. 
Second, they cannot significantly reduce their heating 
costs through individual efficiency improvements. 
Many cities are threatened with bankruptcy as a result 
of district heating debts (IEA-OECD, 2004). In many 
cases, rehabilitating ageing district heating systems 
is economically viable because district heating has 
comparative advantages in urban areas with cold 
winters. However, careful city-specific economic 
analysis is needed before new investments are made.

The specificity of Nordic cities
Districts heating plays an important role in the energy 
supply strategy of cities with cold climates in eastern 
Europe and the Nordic regions. Most cities focused 
on ambitious low-carbon objectives have developed 
district heating and incorporated a high proportion 
of renewable energy in the system. They vary in size 
depending on the scale of the city served and the local 
climatic conditions. In 2011, more than three-quarters 
of Swedish district heating systems were small-scale 
systems with an annual district heat production of less 
than 100 GWh heat per year (Truong and Gustavsson, 
2014). In contrast, some district heating systems serve 
a large number of buildings (e.g. the main networks: 
Warsaw, Bucharest, Berlin, Copenhagen, Stockholm, 
Helsinki, Paris, Vienna, Hamburg, Prague, Sofia, 
Gothenburg). 

Smart thermal grids
A smart thermal grid is a way of developing a heating 
system that is more flexible, reliable and efficient. 
Smart thermal grids can be distinguished from 
conventional district heating by their greater energy 

(115)  The use of natural cooling sources will need to comply with local environmental regulation and required impact assessments.

75

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceReusing, recycling, harvesting and producing

Box 3.26  From consumer to 'prosumer'

In June 2012, a project to transform Kalundborg into a smart city was launched. Behind the project is the municipality of 
Kalundborg, the Danish Energy Association and a private smart grid company. 

The project aims to turn energy distribution in Kalundborg into an open platform. This means that the city's energy system 
will be able to incorporate solar energy, wind, biogas and many other sources, and that citizens will be able to choose from a 
range of different energy solutions.

This approach will make the citizens of Kalundborg 'prosumers'. They will be involved as consumers of energy, but also as 
suppliers of electricity back into the energy grid. Citizens will be able to control the time at which their electrical devices are 
recharged (e.g. electric cars can be recharged at times when there is surplus energy or at times when there is low pressure 
on the electricity network). 

In order to ensure optimum exploitation of the various energy sources without any negative impact on the stability of 
supply, suppliers are collaborating on intelligent consumption management. If the energy from wind power is unstable 
because of a lack of wind, the missing power in the electricity grid will be counterbalanced by decentralised energy 
installations and through intelligent consumption management. Furthermore, the consumption management system 
will also exploit surplus heat in the heating network to achieve a balance without overloading the transmission system 
(Copenhagen Cleantech Cluster, 2014). 

Sources:   www.kalundborg.dk (accessed 20 November 2015); www.spirae.dk (accessed 20 August 2014).

efficiency through making wider use of all types of 
energy sources (combined heat and power systems, 
all types of renewable energy — including small-scale 
installations and those utilising industrial waste heat, 
waste incineration and geothermal, biomass and solar 
thermal resources), including decentralised electricity 
generated from renewable sources that can result 
in an unpredictable supply of electricity (Smart Cities 
— Stakeholders Platform, 2013). Smart thermal grids 
can adapt to changes in supply and demand and 
facilitate the participation of end users, for instance 
by supplying heating or cooling back to the network. 
They also allow maximum exploitation of available local 
energy resources through cascade usage and therefore 
contribute to improving the efficiency of urban heating 
and cooling. 

The smart thermal grid can range from neighbourhood 
to city level. The grid needs to be spatially integrated 
into the whole urban energy system and interact 
with other urban infrastructure such as networks for 
electricity, sewage, water and ICT. State-of-the-art 
solutions have already been developed in some cities 
(e.g. Heerlen and Delft in the Netherlands, Sunstore 4 
in Marstal, Denmark, the geothermal district heating in 
the Paris basin, Gothenburg in Sweden).

3.2.3  Urban water harvesting

Rainwater harvesting systems provide water close 
to where it is used. Systems can be owned by the 
consumer or operated and managed by utilities. 

Rainwater can be collected on existing infrastructures 
(e.g. rooftops, parking lots, playgrounds, parks, ponds, 
flood plains, etc.). There is no negative environmental 
impact compared with other technologies such as 
water recycling and reusing. Rainwater is relatively 
clean and the quality is usually acceptable for many 
purposes with little or even no treatment (UNEP, 2004). 

There are multiple benefits in rainwater harvesting. 
Besides avoiding drinking water being used for, for 
example, flushing toilets, the diversion of rainwater 
for use becomes an increasingly important advantage 
of rainwater harvesting. This means a reduction in the 
rainwater finding its way into the sewerage system 
during rainfall, cutting the peak load and avoiding 
overloading the system, which might result in flooding 
in city streets and serious health problems. Rainwater 
harvesting can co-exist with other water sources 
and utility systems and can provide supplementary 
water in the event of water crisis (e.g. the water 
crisis in Barcelona). Moreover, rainwater harvesting 
technologies are flexible and their construction and 
maintenance are not labour intensive. 

Even if urban areas consume far more water than 
is available within their own city limits, they can still 
provide part of their water requirement. For example, 
the suburb Stenløse Syd, in the municipality of Egedal in 
Denmark, consists of 750 dwellings. Around one-quarter 
of the water needed is provided by rooftop collection 
of rainwater while the remainder is imported from the 
public water supply (Rygaard et al., 2011). To meet future 
needs, the reliability of urban water supplies rests more 

76

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
Reusing, recycling, harvesting and producing

and more on improvements in resource efficiency, 
focused on the management of demand, the multi-
sourcing of resources (including urban harvesting) and 
reallocation of water among users. 

Collecting rainwater is relatively easy and cost-efficient, 
although rainwater systems may not provide as much 
mains water saving as greywater systems, as they are 
dependent on local rainfall patterns, catchment size 
and size of rainwater collection tanks. The main uses 
are toilet flushing and watering of gardens, taking into 
account that plants prefer rainwater to tap water. 

The users of rainwater are usually the owners who 
operate and manage the catchment system; therefore, 
they are more likely to conserve water because they 
know how much water is in storage, and they will try to 
prevent the storage tank from drying up. 

In Europe, Germany is the leading country in terms of 
rainwater harvesting, and developments can also be 
found in Austria, Belgium, Denmark and Switzerland, 
whereas in the southern European countries, such 
as Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain , there are few 
initiatives in that regard.

Box 3.27  Water harvesting in Berlin

The well-known flagship example of the Daimler Chrysler Potsdamer Platz Project demonstrates the importance of 
integrating all aspects of urban sustainability from the very start of the planning process, such as energy-efficient buildings 
and a water management system. Since 1998, rainwater utilisation systems have been used in Berlin as part of large-scale 
urban redevelopments to control urban flooding, save water and create a better microclimate. 

Rainwater falling on the rooftops (32 000 m²) of 19 buildings has been collected and stored in a 3 500 m3 rainwater basement 
tank. It is then used for toilet flushing, watering of green areas (including roofs with vegetative cover) and the replenishment 
of an artificial pond.

In another project at the Belss-Luedecke-Strasse estate in Berlin, rainwater from all roof areas (with an approximate area 
of 7 000 m²) is discharged into a separate public rainwater sewer and transferred into a cistern, together with the runoff 
from streets, parking spaces and pathways. The water is treated in several stages and used for toilet flushing as well as for 
garden watering. The design of the system ensures that the majority of the pollutants in the initial flow are flushed out of the 
rainwater sewer into the sanitary sewer for proper treatment in a sewage plant. 

It is estimated that 58% of the rainwater can be retained locally through the use of this system. Based on a 10-year 
simulation, the savings of potable water through the utilisation of rainwater are estimated to be about 2 430 m3 per year, 
thus preserving the groundwater reservoirs of Berlin by a similar amount.

These systems not only conserve the city's water but also reduce the potential for pollutant discharges from sewerage 
systems into surface waters that might result from storm-water overflows. 

Source:    UNEP, 2004; Schmidt, 2008. 

Box 3.28  Rainwater harvesting in the metropolitan area of Barcelona

After suffering recurrent droughts threatening the domestic water supply between 1999 and 2008, around 40 municipalities 
of the metropolitan area of Barcelona area approved water-saving regulations to promote the use of local sources such as 
rainwater, greywater and groundwater. Their building codes mandate the installation of rainwater harvesting systems in new 
buildings and offer subsidies to households installing rainwater harvesting systems on their own initiative. 

A study in the municipality of Sant Cugat del Vallès shows that, despite low precipitation and a high variability in precipitation 
in the area, the water demand for toilet flushing of a single family house can be practically met with a relatively small tank. 
Rooftop rainwater can also meet more than 60% of the demand for landscape irrigation in both single- and multi-family 
buildings. 

The main drawback is the long payback period of rainwater harvesting systems. 

Source:    Domènech and Saurí, 2011.

77

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
 
Reusing, recycling, harvesting and producing

3.2.4 

Urban food production

The daily basic need for food is met almost exclusively 
from importation. Every day, large amounts of food 
are brought into urban areas from the hinterland, 
often from a considerable distance. Production and 
consumption are more and more separated by physical 
distance. The production and supply chains become 
more and more specialised and separate. The place of 
production loses its influence on the quality and nature 
of products (except for some products for which quality 
is very important).

The issue of food is generally regarded as 
both an agricultural and rural issue and a 
regional-national-international issue. The urban 
food system is less visible than other urban systems 
(e.g. transport, housing). However, despite its 
low visibility, the urban food system contributes 
significantly to community health and welfare, to the 
metropolitan economy and to the impact of urban areas 
(e.g. land use, retailing and food distribution systems 
rely on motorised transport and, increasingly, on 
airfreight). 

Most cities cannot be self-sufficient in food and a 
local food supply can be one of the sources but not 
the only one. Many cities are considering reviving 
agricultural production in urban areas or on the urban 
fringe to reduce their urban footprint, in particular the 
demand for land for their sustenance on the global 
scale. Urban and peri-urban agriculture is considered 
to be one additional source of food and become an 
important driver for many other urban policies such as 
health, nutrition, education, planning, social cohesion, 
economic development, transport, environment, and 
waste and water management. 

Urban agriculture can be defined as the production, 
processing and distribution of edible agricultural 
products through intensive crop cultivation and 
animal husbandry in urban and peri-urban areas, in 
response to the daily demand from consumers in the 
city or metropolis. Food production inside and around 
cities can take many forms: farms, market gardens, 
orchards, backyard poultry production, home gardens, 
community gardens, market gardens, school gardens, 
rooftop hydroponic gardens, windowsill gardens, and 
aquaculture. 

Currently, most city residents buy food and do not grow 
it themselves and they have only rare contact with 
food producers. Not all city dwellers want to grow food 

themselves but at least they want a supply of fresh 
and healthy food and to know where it comes from 
(Deelstra and Girardet, 2000). This generates new ways 
of marketing such as farmers' markets, vegetable box 
schemes, community gardens. 

A close relationship between the producer and 
consumers encourages the production of food in a 
sustainable manner. The benefits of urban or local 
agriculture are mainly (Grewal and Grewal, 2012):

•  a reduction in human impact on the environment 
(e.g. less freight transport, promotion of organic 
agriculture, use of storm water if rainwater is 
redirected to gardens, development of green areas 
reducing the urban heat island effect, development 
of composting); 

•  a change in people's perception of food (e.g. better 
perception of the seasonal cycle leading to the 
consumption of seasonal vegetables and fruits, less 
food waste and improved food literacy (116)); 

•  a sense of community (e.g. community gardens 

cut across social barriers, food-friendly 
neighbourhoods, alternative food networks 
reconnecting producers and consumers); 

• 

• 

improved resilience and liveability of the city 
(e.g. food security, improvement of a poor-quality 
environment, recreational activities);

improved access to healthy, fresh and nutritious 
food (in terms of quality and diversity) and 
dietary changes (more vegetables are eaten) 
(Blaine et al., 2010);

•  an increase in the amount of physical exercise taken 

(important in fighting obesity); 

•  economic benefits (e.g. creation of local jobs 

through the food sector for producing, marketing, 
and processing, abandoned lots acquiring new 
value);

•  social justice (e.g. fighting food poverty, provision of 
affordable healthy food, fairness in the food chain); 

• 

territorial benefits (e.g. connecting the city with 
the surrounding countryside, preservation of the 
surrounding agricultural landscapes, maintaining 
vegetation in cities, city as part of the regional food 
system). 

(116)  Food literacy is the ability to organise one's everyday nutrition in a self-determined, responsible and enjoyable way:  

http://www.foodliteracycenter.org/ (accessed 24 November 2015).

78

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceReusing, recycling, harvesting and producing

Until recently, little attention has been paid to the urban 
food system in urban planning and there has been little 
provision of space in recent decades. However, it is 
connected to other urban systems, in particular housing 
and transport. The food system is often perceived by 
planners as a rural policy because farms are generally 
located outside cities and they have not recognised other 
parts of the food chain, for example, food processing, 
wholesaling, retailing, consumption and waste disposal 
(Pothukuchi and Kaufman, 2000). In addition, planners 
have considered the food system to be dominated by the 
private sector, thereby limiting their role. 

The lack of space available for growing food in cities 
is seen to be a major obstacle. Access to land for 
self-provisioning, small-scale growing and commercial 
activities is a problem that is not simply satisfied by the 
state owning and controlling land (Reed et al., 2013). 
However, many cities have experienced industrial decline 
and vacant lots in derelict areas are opportunities 
for urban agriculture projects (except if the land 
is contaminated). In addition, many places can be 
cultivated, such as roofs, balconies, small areas between 
buildings, containers on patios, areas waiting for new 
development and playgrounds in schools. It is mainly a 
planning and regulation problem at the local level. 

However, municipalities play a key role in promoting 
urban farming and gardening. There is a need to shift the 
scale from isolated projects to larger scale programmes 
(e.g. metropolis and city-region scale) including urban 
and rural areas around cities and many stakeholders (117). 
The food system needs to be integrated into land use 
planning and city development planning (118). To facilitate 
local implementation, municipalities can support citizens' 
initiatives by providing places for farming, places for 
direct marketing, providing training on how to cultivate 
vegetables, buying the produce for its canteens, 
providing financial incentives and forming strategic 
partnerships. They can also work with farmers and 
retailers commercialise of local produce. 

Urban agriculture produces many benefits; in particular, 
it helps by reducing and recycling waste and wastewater. 
Food produced locally does not need packaging to 
protect it for long-distance transport. Organic waste from 
households can produce compost to fertilise gardens. 
The use of recovered wastewater for food production 
can improve water efficiency, in particular in countries 
with limited water resources. In addition, collective 
food-growing sites develop a sense of community and 
social interaction; they can also be the repositories of 

reusable household waste and places for the promotion 
of sustainable behaviour. Urban farming and gardening 
can be associated with environmental training and 
campaigns or educational programmes on sustainability. 

The urban food strategy
The urban food strategy is how a city envisages changing 
its food system and how it strives to achieve this change 
(Moragues et al., 2013). Urban food strategies embrace 
various policy domains, including land use planning, 
health and well-being, environment (water, waste, 
biodiversity), economy and community development, 
transport and energy systems, social and cultural 
development, and education. They consider all the 
aspects of the food system: production, processing, 
storage, transport, retail, consumption, and waste. 
Overall, they are based on holistic approach that 
strengthen the connection between rural suppliers and 
urban consumers. 

Municipalities can use different instruments to influence 
the food system: 

• 

spatial and urban planning to support short supply 
chains and diversity of food retailers (e.g. zoning to 
protect land for urban agriculture and gardening, 
opening up land around housing for gardening);

•  public procurement (e.g. more healthy, organic, 
vegetarian, local, culturally appropriate food);

• 

communal infrastructure: creating facilities 
that support short food supply chains 
(e.g. slaughterhouses, storage facilities, food hubs);

•  demand-side policies (e.g. developing maps indicating 
where to buy and eat healthy local food, supporting 
grassroots food initiatives and local networks, 
delivering advice on gardening, teaching people how 
to cook vegetarian or seasonally, promoting food 
growing in schools (119)). 

Integrated urban planning is vital for developing urban 
farming and gardening, in particular for finding spaces 
in urban areas. The development of urban farming 
and gardening can be part of a regeneration process 
(e.g. Malmö's Policy for Sustainable Development and 
Food (120)). Most municipal policies are included; for 
example, the municipal responsibility for school meal 
procurement can be a way of reducing GHG emissions 
(e.g. Malmö).

(117)  http://beras.eu (accessed 20 November 2015).
(118)  http://www.iclei.org/index.php?id=1348 (accessed 25 March 2015).
(119)  http://skolehave.dk/kbhskolehaver/School%20gardens%20Copenhagen.pdf (accessed 25 March 2015).
(120)  http://malmo.se/download/18.d8bc6b31373089f7d9800018573/Foodpolicy_Malmo.pdf (accessed 25 March 2015).

79

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceReusing, recycling, harvesting and producing

More and more local governments have already 
developed or are developing a food strategy or specific 
policies regarding food (often associated with action 

to reduce food waste) adapted to the local context, 
for example Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Bristol, London, 
Brussels Capital Region.  

Box 3.29  Bristol's Food Policy Council 

The strong food culture in Bristol is at the same time the 
cause and consequence of its flourishing 'green' urban civil 
society. 

A Food Policy Council, inspired by Canadian and American 
examples, has been set up (Moragues et al., 2013). This is 
a network of stakeholders who investigate food issues at 
the city level, make recommendations on how to improve 
it (in particular its connection with existing programmes). It 
is an independent body including representatives from the 
local government and a board of local key players. Its role 
can be summarised as 'validating, influencing, connecting, 
communicating and creating visibility' of all aspects of the 
sustainable food agenda (Jegou and Carey, 2015).

The work of the Food Policy Council is based on three 
principles: 

 Good for people: Everyone should have access to 
information, training and resources that enable them 
to grow, buy, cook and enjoy good food. 

 Good for places: The public and policymakers should 
support and value food enterprises that promote local 
jobs, prosperity and diversity and that treat workers 
well. 

• 

• 

• 

Figure 3.3  

Bristol has designed a Good Food Plan to 
coordinate its food system 

Transform 
food culture

Support 
community 
food

Safequard the 
diversity of 
food retail

Increase the 
market 
opportunities 
for local food 
producers 
and suppliers

Bristol
′Good Food′ Plan

Safequard 
land for food

Protect key 
infrastructure 
for local 
food supply

Redistribute, 
recycle and 
compost food 
waste

Increase 
urban food 
production

Source:    Adapted from Food Policy Council, 2011.

 Bristol Food Policy Council, 2011; Moragues et al., 2013.

 Good for the planet: Food should be produced, 
processed, distributed and disposed of in ways that benefit nature.

The Food Policy Council (see Figure 3.4) acts as a hub for information and plays an important role in fostering coordination, 
building up an important body of knowledge and providing a platform for discussion (Reed et al., 2013).

Box 3.30  The potential for production in rooftop gardens in Bologna

In Bologna there are 29 ha of vegetable gardens, about 2.5% of the total public green area of the city: 16 ha are communal 
gardens, assigned to 2 600 people, while 13 ha represent different types (vegetable gardens in schools, spontaneous 
gardens, etc.). In 2010, Bologna became the first Italian city to test rooftop vegetable gardens on public buildings as part of 
a project led by the local authority, the university and a non-profit organisation.

Researchers followed the trial over 3 years between 2012 and 2014, carrying out a study to quantify the potential for rooftop 
vegetable production in the city. Besides its contribution to the food security of the city, the potential benefits to urban 
biodiversity and ecosystem service provision were also estimated. They found that rooftop gardens could provide more than 
12 000 tonnes of vegetables annually, satisfying 77% of the inhabitants’ requirements. The study also advances a hypothesis 
to implement biodiversity roofs, connecting biodiversity-rich areas across and around the city: these would form a network 
of green corridors over 94 km in length with a density of about 0.67 km/km2.

Source:    Orsini et al., 2014.

80

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
 
 
 
Reusing, recycling, harvesting and producing

Box 3.31  Creating space for sustainable food systems in urban communities

An Urbact thematic network, 'Sustainable Food in Urban Communities', has been created to develop low-carbon and 
resource-efficient urban food systems. Ten European cities have worked together and exchanged ides for 3 years (121). From 
their experience, a handbook has been prepared that gives examples of promising local practices shared by the partners. It 
highlights the most powerful policies that cities have at their disposal as:

• 

• 

 procurement policy (the power of purchase);

 urban planning (e.g. increasing the food retail outlets that are accessible by foot, bicycle or public transport, facilitating 
access to allotments and to agriculture in and around cities, offering community growing spaces and underutilised 
public and private spaces, recycling food waste);

• 

 collaborative partnership with local business, social enterprises and civil society. 

Creating space for food in the city is a governance issue, and therefore a planning issue. To achieve their goals, local 
authorities have to raise awareness among decision-makers of the strategic dimensions of food in the urban context in 
order to foster food-oriented leadership and to explore synergies between food and other sectors (see Figure 3.4). 

Figure 3.4 

Some opportunities for action at city level

-  Food-oriented leadership
-  Food-oriented urban development 
-  Food-oriented urban planning 
  saving land for food production
-  Promotion of city food identify 
  and labels
-  Organisation of food waste 
  recycling and composting

Sustainable 
food governance

Food literacy 
and resilience

-  Increasing awareness of  population
  on food issues in general
-  Educating people about the food 
-  Preventing food waste (e.g. cooking 
  leftovers, buying just what is needed) 
-  Reducing food poverty among the 
  low-income population

Sustainable related 
entrepreneurship 
and community 
initiatives

-  Developing urban farming
-  Developing opportunities for food 
  suppliers and producers 
-  Developing local and accessible markets
- Supporting grassroots intiatives

Source:    Adapted from Jegou and Carey, 2015.

This project shows that each city has to find its own pathway to improve its food system: 

• 

• 

• 

• 

 Valdemone Messina promotes 'slow food': a good, fresh and flavoursome seasonal diet based on a system of production 
that does not harm the environment. Traditional specialities that were no longer produced have been revived and taste 
ateliers providing an educational sensory experience have been set up.

 In Amersfoort, food is grown on temporarily unused land in the city (around 8 ha). The produce find its way to consumers 
in the city thanks to direct sales and sales to farm shops and a food-purchasing group. 

 In Ourense, the 'gardens bank' project relies on cooperation between landowners and potential producers (in particular 
the unemployed). In order to boost suburban food production, the municipality is focusing on the rehabilitation of two 
traditional markets as 'food hubs'. 

 In Brussels, a programme encourages residents to grow their own vegetables. Many citizens have a small space in which 
they can grow herbs, fruits or vegetables at home (balcony, terrace, small garden, pots) but they do not know how to. 
Tools to help have been developed such as training courses, a network of gardening experts and a grow-your-own kit (122).

• 

 In Athens, organic farmers' markets have been established to provide access to local and organic food at affordable prices. 

Source:   

Jegou and Carey, 2015.

(121)  The 10 cities were Amersfoort (Netherlands), Athens (Greece), Brussels Capital Region (Belgium), Bristol (United Kingdom), Gothenburg 

(Sweden), Lyon (France), Messina (Italy), Ourense (Spain), Vaslui (Romania), Oslo (Norway).

(122)  A cardboard box containing seeds and guidance.

81

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
 
 
Reusing, recycling, harvesting and producing

Box 3.32  Sustainable urban gardening in Berlin

In the last decade, urban gardening has become a popular activity in Berlin that has seen an increase in both the number of 
people participating and the area of land devoted to gardening. The emergence of urban gardening in Berlin started in 2003 
with a project on community and intercultural gardens (123) that became a pilot project in its Local Agenda 21. Ten years later 
in 2013, there were around 100 non-commercial garden initiatives (124).

Most people involved in urban gardening have an interest in connecting to nature — 'getting their hands dirty’ — and 
sharing knowledge on how food is grown and what to eat. Beyond their individual motivations, many people also have 
community-centred motivations. They share a desire to influence the quality of life in their neighbourhood, to be involved 
and to make a contribution through a 'do-it-yourself’ approach. Some community gardens are important for social groups 
such as refugees, ethnic minorities or unemployed persons; the production of food through a shared labour is a way of 
building friendships and to developing inter-generational relationships. 

Based on Berlin’s experience, the 7th Framework Programme Solinsa research project identified the key factors in 
the success of such programmes, such as the availability of land and the supply of temporary land in the future, the 
relationships forged, and the importance of cooperation between the administration and urban gardening activists. 

Source:    Wunder, 2013; http://www.solinsa.net/ (accessed 20 November 2015).

3.3 

In a nutshell

Table 3.1 presents the role of citizens, businesses and 
local authorities in reusing, recycling, harvesting and 
producing resources in urban areas

(123)  Stiftung Interkultur.
(124)  This category excludes traditional allotment gardens, children farms and school gardens. Urban gardening is also different from urban 

agriculture, which relates to conventional farms close to the city that are more sales oriented.

82

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice 
Reusing, recycling, harvesting and producing

Table 3.1 

The role of citizens, businesses and local authorities in reusing, recycling, harvesting and 
producing resources in urban areas

Land recycling

Energy recycling and 
producing 

Water reusing and 
harvesting 

Waste: collection, 
reusing, recycling

Local authorities
Supply side
Elaborating strong integrated spatial and urban 
planning to create dense and compact cities 

Recycling land for new development 
(densification) or green areas 
Developing a long-term sustainable strategy 
(definition of targets, elaboration of the vision)

Developing cross-sector planning, including the 
production of decentralised renewable energy 

Recycling thermal losses from electricity and 
industrial processes (e.g. energy stored in 
wastewater) through district heating and cooling

Producing biogas from organic matter 
(e.g. sewage sludge, food waste, garden waste, 
industrial waste)

Developing cogeneration

Developing decentralised local production of 
renewable energy (e.g. windmills, biomass)

Developing a structure to enable the production 
of renewable energy (e.g. public–private 
partnership)
Changing the building code so that rainwater 
harvesting becomes compulsory in new buildings 
and in renovations if possible 

Promoting the reuse of greywater in new 
buildings

Encouraging the recovery of nutrients from 
wastewater
Organising efficient separate waste collection 
in both high- and low-density parts of the city, 
including waste food 

Developing good conditions for a local market for 
reusing and recycling materials (e.g. plasterboard 
waste)

Collecting garden waste or developing individual 
composting at source

Food system

Facilitating cooperation between retailers to allow 
bulk sales and reusable containers

Providing guidance for restaurants and canteens 
on portion size to reduce food waste

Integrating the food system into urban planning 

Facilitating access to land for food production 
(urban farming and urban gardens), including 
temporary vacant land

Organisation and 
governance

Developing training on resource efficiency for city 
managers 

Engaging in a participation process with 
stakeholders (homeowners and home 
occupiers, all groups of citizens, businesses, 
non-governmental organisations) 

Demand side
Using abandoned land for community gardens 

Supporting the dissemination of information 
(household and businesses) on the production of 
decentralised renewable energy 

Removing legal barriers in order to enable 
decentralised local production of renewable 
energy

Developing dialogue with all stakeholders 
(e.g. utility suppliers) and end users (households, 
businesses)

Organising collection of organic waste for biogas 
production

Providing guidance for owners and constructors 
on how to develop rainwater harvesting 
and greywater reuse systems; developing 
demonstration pilot projects 

Removing legal barriers 

Supporting grassroots initiatives regarding 
peer-to-peer selling, swapping and reuse 
of second-hand goods (e.g. repair services) 
to make things last longer

Developing demonstration pilot projects

Providing information on local initiatives to create 
demand

Raising the awareness of citizens of the 
consequences of hyperconsumption
Running a communications campaign targeting 
households (e.g. avoiding food waste, information 
on seasonal products, promotion of local food 
production, label information), organising a taste 
day

Supporting grassroots initiatives (e.g. teaching 
people how to use leftovers,, how to grow 
vegetables)

Facilitating the distribution of locally produced 
food by opening a market
Encouraging the participation and involvement 
of stakeholders (including researchers, children, 
people working but not living in the city)

83

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceThe key lessons learnt

4  The key lessons learnt

Each city is different and the potential for action 
depends on the characteristics of the city and the 
context — size, function (national or regional capital), 
presence of high-tech firms and universities, wealth 
and funding potential, and territorial capital. 

There is no optimal size of city or scale
All sizes of cities can find a way of becoming more 
resource efficient. Even small towns can develop 
consistent policies and achieve ambitious goals. Local 
specifics, not only the available natural resources but 
also the dynamics and initiatives of local participants, 
are taken into consideration to define appropriate 
solutions and strategies. For example, concerning the 
production of renewable energy, it is usually easier for 
a small town in rural surroundings to achieve a high 
proportion of its energy from renewables than it is for 
a large city. The small rural town of Güssing in Austria 
produces its entire energy requirement — electricity, 
heating/cooling, transport fuels — from renewable 
resources using the abundant biomass from the 
surrounding forests.

Urban planning beyond the limit of the core city
The city has been transformed by increasing mobility. 
Generally, the delineation of the core city no longer 
matches the 'real' city. People live, work and move in 
a wider functional area, the 'real' city, extending far 
beyond the limits of the core city. Urban planning, 
which is crucial to addressing resource efficiency 
challenges, is generally developed at the relevant 
scale in successful cities. For example, 'The Metropolis 
of Greater Paris', a new global plan for the Paris 
metropolitan region, has a new transport master plan 

for the Paris region and includes plans to develop 
several areas around Paris. 

Cross-sector planning and management
To be more resource efficient and minimise costs, urban 
authorities need to improve efficiency in all aspects 
of urban planning, development and management. 
They must develop an integrated way of thinking at the 
appropriate scale, find synergies between policies and 
develop innovative approaches, not only technological 
but also organisational, financial and knowledge 
management. For example, many cities, such as 
Copenhagen, have developed cross-sector planning 
(energy, climate, transport, housing, green areas).

Goal-oriented policy and leadership
Successful resource-efficient cities have generally 
chosen an ambitious goal, one that all stakeholders 
can get behind, and then found a way of achieving it, 
even when, at the start, nobody knew how to do so. 
It seems crucial to set long-term targets as a starting 
point. For example, in the case of the 'fossil fuel-free 
strategy' of the city of Växjö, elaborated in 1996, the 
measures that needed to be taken were determined 
step by step. And, overall, the adoption of ecoBUDGET, 
a sustainability-oriented environmental management 
system, provided valuable information for political 
decision-making and city managers. If we reflect on 
this example, the main challenge was not related to 
technical problems (most solutions were already on the 
market) but more related to organisation — thinking 
differently and in an integrated way — and governance 
— keeping the same objective (125) and motivating 
stakeholders.

(125)  The real objective was to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels per inhabitant by at least 50% by the year 2010 and by at least 70% 

by the year 2025 compared with 1993 (Växjö Kommun, 2011) .

84

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceBibliography

Bibliography

Agudelo-Vera, C. M., Mels, A., Keesman, K., Rijnaarts, H. 
and Marcella, C., 2012, 'The urban harvest approach as 
an aid for sustainable urban resource planning', Journal 
of Industrial Ecology, 16(6) 839–850.

Akyelken, N., Anderton, K., Plepys, A., Mont, O. and 
Kaufman, D., 2013, Mobility sector report — FP7 
project: SPREE (Servicizing Policy for Resource Efficient 
Economy), Report of research project delivrable 5.1, 
FP7 SPREE. http://www.spreeproject.com/wp-content/
uploads/2013/04/D5.1-Mobility-sector-report_website.
pdf (accessed 20 November 2015).

Al Seadi, T., Owen, N., Hellström, H. and Kang, H., 2013, 
Source separation of MSW, IEA Bioenergy, Paris.

American Institute of Architects, 2007, Integrated project 
delivery: A guide, American Institute of Architects, 
Washington, DC.

Ando, A. W. and Gosselin, A. Y., 2005, 'Recycling in 
multifamily dwellings: Does convenience matter?', 
Economic Inquiry, 43(2) 426–438.

ArchDaily, 2014, 'Montreal's Mirabel Airport Terminal 
to be demolished' (http://www.archdaily.com/502638/
montreal-s-mirabel-airport-terminal-to-be-demolished/) 
accessed 20 November 2015.

Atanasiu, B., Despret, C., Ecnomidou, M., Malo, J., 
Nolte, I. and Rapf, O., 2011, Europe's building under the 
microscope, Buildings Performance Institute Europe 
(BPIE), Brussels.

Atanasiu, B. and Kouloumpi, I., 2013, Boosting building 
renovation. An overview of good practices, Buildings 
Performance Institute Europe (BPIE), Brussels.

Backhaus, J., Breukers, S., Mont, O., Paukovic, M. and 
Mourik, R., 2012, Sustainable lifestyles: Today's facts & 
tomorrow's trends, Sustainable lifestyles baseline report,  
FP7 research project (http://www.sustainable-lifestyles.
eu/fileadmin/images/content/D1.1_Baseline_Report.
pdf) accessed 24 November 2015.

Barles, S., 2010, 'Society, energy and materials: 
the contribution of urban metabolism studies to 

sustainable urban development issues', Journal of 
Environmental Planning and Management, 53(4) 439–455.

Bernstad, A., La Cour Jansen, J. and Aspegren, A., 
2013, 'Door-stepping as a strategy for improved food 
waste recycling behaviour: Evaluation of a full-scale 
experiment', Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 
73, 94–103.

Bettgenhäusser, K., de Vos, R., Grözinger, J. and 
Boermans, T., 2014, Deep renovation of buildings. 
An effective way to decrease Europe's energy import 
dependency, Ecofys, Cologne.

Bio Intelligence Service, Umweltbundesamt and AEA 
Energy & Environment, 2010, Preparatory study on 
food waste across EU 27, Technical report 2010-054, 
European Commission, Brussels.

BIOIS, ARCADIS and IEEP, 2011, 'Service contract on 
management of construction and demolition waste 
— SR1', Final report (http://www.eusmr.eu/cdw/docs/
BIO_Construction%20and%20Demolition%20Waste_
Final%20report_09022011.pdf) accessed 5 December 
2012.

Blaine, T. W., Grewal, P. S., Dawes, A. and Snider, 
D., 2010, 'Profiling community gardeners' (http://
www.joe.org/joe/2010december/a6.php) accessed 
16 March 2015.

Bourdic, L. and Salat, S., 2012, 'Building energy models 
and assessment systems at the district and city scales: 
a review', Building Research & Information, 40(4) 518–526.

Bouzarovski, S., 2014, 'Energy poverty in the 
European Union: landscapes of vulnerability', Wiley 
Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, 
3(3) 276–289.

BPIE, 2014, Alleviating fuel poverty in the EU. Buildings 
Performance Institute Europe, Brussels.

Bristol Food Policy Council, 2011, A good food plan for 
Bristol (http://bristolfoodpolicycouncil.org/wp-content/
uploads/2013/03/Bristol-Good-Food-Plan_lowres.pdf) 
accessed 17 November 2015.

85

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceBibliography

Carbon Disclosure Project, 2012, Seven climate change 
lessons from the cities of Europe. Carbon Disclosure 
Project, London.

dac.dk/media/37489/Danish%20smart%20cities_
report.pdf) accessed 22 November 2015.

Carplus, 2013, 'Carplus — Rethinking car use' (http://
www.carplus.org.uk/) accessed 3 October 2014.

Chapulut, J. N. and Taroux, J. P., 2006, Rapport sur les 
bilans LOTI des LGV Nord Europe et Interconnexion Ile 
de France (http://www.ladocumentationfrancaise.fr/
rapports-publics/064000666/index.shtml) accessed 
25 August 2014.

City of Copenhagen, 2009, A metropolis for people — 
Visions and goals for urban life in Copenhagen 2015 
(http://kk.sites.itera.dk/apps/kk_pub2/pdf/646_
mIr0dQ6Wdu.pdf) accessed 20 November 2015.

City of Copenhagen, 2011, Copenhagen climate 
adaptation plan (http://en.klimatilpasning.dk/
media/568851/copenhagen_adaption_plan.pdf) 
accessed 20 November 2015.

City of Copenhagen, 2012a, Copenhagen climate plan 
2025 (http://www.energycommunity.org/documents/
copenhagen.pdf) accessed 22 November 2015.

City of Copenhagen, 2012b, European Green Capital 
Award — Copenhagen's application (http://ec.europa.
eu/environment/europeangreencapital/winning-
cities/2014-copenhagen/index.html) accessed 
22 November 2015.

City of Hamburg, 2011, European Green Capital 
Award — application of Hamburg (http://ec.europa.
eu/environment/europeangreencapital/winning-
cities/2011-hamburg/index.html) accessed 
22 November 2015.

City of Vancouver, 2009, Passive design toolkit (http://
vancouver.ca/files/cov/passive-home-design.pdf) 
accessed 20 November 2015.

City of Westminster, 2013, Retrofitting historic buildings 
for sustainability (http://transact.westminster.gov.uk/
docstores/publications_store/Retrofitting_Historic_
Buildings_for_Sustainability_January_2013.pdf) accessed 
22 November 2015.

Copenhagen Cleantech cluster, 2012, District cooling 
— Keeping the city cool during summer periods (http://
dbdh.dk/download/member_contries/district_cooling/
District%20cooling_HOFOR_experience.pdf) accessed 
22 November 2015.

Copenhagen Cleantech Cluster, 2014, Danish smart 
cities: Sustainable living in an urban world (http://www.

Copenhagen Economics, 2012, Multiple benefits of 
investing in energy efficient renovation of buildings 
impact, Copenhagen Economics, Copenhagen.

CSO, 2011, Census 2011 report. Central Statistical 
Office of Ireland, Dublin.

CSTB, 2012, Guide-Concilier efficacité énergétique et 
acoustique dans le bâtiment, Centre Scientifique et 
Technique de Bâtiments, Champs-sur-Marne.

Cushman and Wakefield (2014). MarketBeat office 
snapshot: Hungary (http://www.cushmanwakefield.
com/~/media/marketbeat/2014/02/hungary_off_4q13.
pdf) accessed 30 January 2015.

Danish Energy Agency, 2013, District heating — Danish 
and Chinese experience. Danish Energy Agency, 
Copenhagen.

DECC, 2013, Smart metering implementation 
programme, Department of Energy & Climate 
Change, London (https://www.gov.uk/government/
publications/smart-metering-implementation-
programme-information-leaflet) accessed 
22 November.

Decker, E., Scott, E., Smith, F. A., Blake, D. and 
Rowland, S., 2000, 'Energy and material flow through 
the urban ecosystem', Annual Review of Energy and the 
Environment, 25, 685–740.

Deelstra, T. and Girardet, H., 2000, Growing 
cities, growing food urban agriculture on the policy 
agenda — Thematic paper 2: Urban agriculture and 
sustainable cities, Deutsche Stiftung für internationale 
Entwicklung, Bonn.

DEFRA, 2011, The sustainable lifestyle framework 
(http://archive.defra.gov.uk/environment/economy/
documents/sustainable-life-framework.pdf) accessed 
8 April 2014.

Didier, M. and Prud'homme, R., 2007, Infrastructures 
de transport, mobilité et croissance, La Documentation 
Française, Les rapports du conseil d'analyse 
économique, Paris.

Dixon, T., 2011. Sustainable urban development to 2050: 
Complex transitions in the built environment. WP2011/5, 
Oxford Institute for Sustainable Development, Oxford 
(http://www.retrofit2050.org.uk/sites/default/files/
resources/WP20115.pdf) accessed 11 November 
2015.

86

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceBibliography

Doepel, D., 2012, Creating comfortable climatic cities, 
Rotterdam University Press, Rotterdam.

Domènech, L. and Saurí, D., 2011, 'A comparative 
appraisal of the use of rainwater harvesting in single 
and multi-family buildings of the Metropolitan Area 
of Barcelona (Spain): social experience, drinking 
water savings and economic costs', Journal of Cleaner 
Production, 19(6–7) 598–608.

EC, 2011d, Communication from the Commission to the 
European Parliament, the Council, the Economic and 
Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions 
'Energy efficiency plan 2011' (COM(2011) 109 final of 
8.3.2011).

EC, 2012, Connecting smart and sustainable growth 
through smart specialisation, Publications Office of the 
European Union, Luxembourg.

Domènech, L., March, H. and Saurí, D., 2013, 
'Degrowth initiatives in the urban water sector? 
A social multi-criteria evaluation of non-conventional 
water alternatives in Metropolitan Barcelona', Journal 
of Cleaner Production, 38 44–55.

EC, 2014, Communication from the Commission to 
the European Parliament, the Council, the European 
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of 
the Regions 'Towards a circular economy: A zero waste 
programme for Europe' (COM(2014) 398 final).

Dörfliger, N. and Perrin, J., 2011, 'Ressources en eau: 
Une gestion nécessairement locale dans une approche 
globale', Géosciences, 13, 94–101.

Duffy, A., 2009, 'Land use planning in Ireland — 
a life cycle energy analysis of recent residential 
development in the Greater Dublin Area', The 
International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 14(3), 
268–277.

EC, 2007, 'Green Paper — Towards a new culture for 
urban mobility' ({SEC(2007) 1209} /* COM/2007/0551 
final).

EC, 2009, Directive 2009/72/EC of the European 
Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 
concerning common rules for the internal market 
in electricity and repealing Directive 2003/54/EC 
(OJ L 211, 14.8.2009, p. 55–93).

EC, 2011a, Communication from the Commission to 
the Council, the European Parliament, the European 
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee 
of the Regions 'Analysis associated with the Roadmap 
to a Resource Efficient Europe' (COM(2011) 571 final 
of 20.9.2011) (http://ec.europa.eu/environment/
resource_efficiency/pdf/working_paper_part1.pdf) 
accessed 13 March 2014.

EC, 2011b, Communication from the Commission to 
the European Parliament, the Council, the European 
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee 
of the Regions 'A resource-efficient Europe — Flagship 
initiative under the Europe 2020 Strategy' (COM(2011) 
21 of 26.1.2011).

EC, 2011c, Communication from the Commission to 
the European Parliament, the Council, the European 
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of 
the Regions 'Roadmap to a resource efficient Europe' 
(COM(2011) 571 final).

EC, Environment Directorate-General, 2010, Science for 
Environment Policy News Alert Service, 'Is greywater 
safe for irrigation?', 17 June 2010 (http://ec.europa.
eu/environment/integration/research/newsalert/
pdf/200na6_en.pdf) accessed 25 March 2015.

EC, Environment Directorate-General, 2013, Science 
for Environment Policy News Alert Service, 'Zero waste 
index proposed for improving city waste management' 
(http://ec.europa.eu/environment/integration/
research/newsalert/pdf/324na3_en.pdf) accessed 
20 November 2015.

EEA, 2006, Urban sprawl in Europe: The ignored 
challenge, EEA Report No 10/2006, European 
Environment Agency.

EEA, 2009, Water resources across Europe — Confronting 
water scarcity and drought, EEA Report No 2/2009, 
European Environment Agency.

EEA, 2012a, Consumption and the environment — 2012 
update: The European environment state and outlook 
2010, European Environment Agency.

EEA, 2012b, Urban adaptation to climate change in 
Europe, EEA Report No 2/2012, European Environment 
Agency.

EEA, 2012c, Towards efficient use of water resources in 
Europe, EEA Report No 1/2012, European Environment 
Agency.

EEA, 2013a, Achieving energy efficiency through behaviour 
change what does it take?, EEA Report No 5/2013, 
European Environment Agency.

EEA, 2013b, A closer look at urban transport — TERM 
2013: Transport indicators tracking progress towards 
environmental targets in Europe, EEA Report No 11/2013, 
European Environment Agency. 

87

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceBibliography

EEA, 2013c, 'Progress on energy efficiency in Europe 
(ENER 037) — Assessment published March 2013, 
European Environment Agency (http://www.eea.
europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/progress-on-
energy-efficiency-in-europe/assessment) accessed 
26 September 2014.

EEA, 2014a, Performance of water utilities beyond 
compliance, EEA Report No 5/2014, European 
Environment Agency. 

EEA, 2014c, Waste prevention in Europe — The status in 
2013, EEA Report No 9/2014, European Environment 
Agency (http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/
waste-prevention-in-europe-2014) accessed 
20 November 2015.

modules/catalogue/pdf/66/zdb_b2_pallium-jardins-db_
rapport_final-120603.pdf) accessed 22 November 2015.

EPA, 2006, Growing toward more efficient water use: 
Linking development, infrastructure, and drinking water 
policies, United States Environmental Protection Agency, 
Washington, DC.

EPA, 2010, Evaluation of energy conservation measures 
for wastewater treatment facilities, United States 
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.

EPA, 2011, Study of pay-by-use systems for maximising 
waste reduction behaviour in Ireland, Environmental 
Protection Agency, Ireland, Dublin.

EEA, 2015, Urban sustainability issues — What is a 
resource-efficient city?, EEA Technical report No 23/2015 
(http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/resource-
efficient-cities).

Esnouf, C., Russel, M. and Bricas, N., 2011, Dualine — 
Durabilité de l'alimentation face à de nouveaux enjeux 
(http://www.cirad.fr/en/publications-resources/
publishing/studies-and-documents/dualine) accessed 
22 November 2015.

Effinergie, 2008, Low-consumption building: the 
achievement of a project, Effinergie, Paris.

Empty Home Agency, 2008, New tricks with old bricks 
— How reusing old buildings can cut carbon emissions, 
Empty Home Agency, London.

EnergyCities, 2009, 'Fossil fuel free Växjö — the story' 
(http://www.energy-cities.eu/IMG/pdf/Fossil_Fuel_Free_
Vaxjo_-_the_story.pdf) accessed 17 November 2015.

Energy-cities, 2010, 'Energy Cities — Eco-district in 
Grenoble, France: Top-down or bottom-up eco-district 
development' (http://www.energy-cities.eu/Eco-District-
in-Grenoble-France,2149) accessed 16 September 2014.

Energy Cities, 2013, 'Identify local energy potential in 
order to live within our means' (http://energy-cities.eu/
wiki/index.php/Proposal_2.2) accessed 5 May 2014.

Energy Cities, 2014a, 'Prepare an energy retrofitting 
plan for the whole building stock — Energy Cities Wiki' 
(http://www.energy-cities.eu/wiki/index.php/Prepare_
an_energy_retrofitting_plan_for_the_whole_building_
stock) accessed 25 September 2014.

EnergyCities, 2014b, 30 EnergyCities' proposals for 
the energy transition of cities and towns (http://www.
energy-cities.eu/IMG/pdf/cahier_short_jan2014_en.pdf) 
accessed 17 November 2015.

Enertech, 2011, Evaluation par mesure des performances 
énergétiques des 8 bâtiments construits dans le cadre du 
programme européen Concerto (http://www.enertech.fr/

ETC/SCP, 2013, Housing assessment, Final report,  
ETC/SCP Working Paper No 4/2013 (http://scp.eionet.
europa.eu/publications/wp2013_4/wp/wp2013_4) 
accessed 1 March 2015.

EU, 1994, European Parliament and Council Directive 
94/62/EC of 20 December 1994 on packaging and 
packaging waste (OJ L 365, 31.12.1994, p. 10–23).

EU, 1999, Council Directive 1999/31/EC of 26 April 1999 
on the landfill of waste (OJ L 182, 16.7.1999, p. 1–19).

EU, 2006, Directive 2006/32/EC of the European 
Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2006 on energy 
end-use efficiency and energy services and repealing 
Council Directive 93/76/EEC (OJ L 114, 27.4.2006, p. 
64–85).

EU, 2008, Directive 2008/98/EC of the European 
Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 
on waste and repealing certain Directives (OJ L 312, 
22.11.2008, p. 3–30).

EU, 2012, Directive 2012/27/EU of the European 
Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on 
energy efficiency, amending Directives 2009/125/EC 
and 2010/30/EU and repealing Directives 2004/8/EC 
and 2006/32/EC (OJ L 315/1, 14.11.2012, p. 1–56).

EU, 2013, Decision No 1386/2013/EU of the European 
Parliament and of the Council of 20 November 2013 
on a General Union Environment Action Programme 
to 2020 'Living well, within the limits of our planet' 
(OJ L 354, 20.12.2013, p. 171–200).

88

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceBibliography

EU, 2014, EU Energy in figures — Statistical pocketbook 
2014, Publications Office of the European Union, 
Luxembourg.

European Parliament, 2014, Mapping Smart Cities in the 
EU, European Parliament, Luxembourg.

Eurostat, 2013, Eurostat regional yearbook 2013, 
Publications Office of the European Union, 
Luxembourg (http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/
documents/3217494/5784301/KS-HA-13-001-EN.PDF/
ec68c62e-0ca9-40af-83c2-949e152f9269) accessed 
20 November 2015. 

Gellynck, X., Jacobsen, R. and Verhelst, P., 2011, 
'Identifying the key factors in increasing recycling and 
reducing residual household waste: A case study of the 
Flemish region of Belgium', Journal of Environmental 
Management, 92(10) 2 683–2 690.

Girardet, H., 2010, Regenerative cities, World Future 
Council, Hamburg.

Global Cement, 2011, 'Future Cement — Looking 
beyond OPC' (http://www.globalcement.com/magazine/
articles/315-future-cement-looking-beyond-opc) 
accessed 16 September 2014.

Eurostat, 2014, 'At risk of poverty or social exclusion in 
the EU28', Newsrelease 168/2014, 4 November.

Grewal, S. S. and Grewal, P. S., 2012, 'Can cities become 
self-reliant in food?', Cities, 29(1) 1–11.

Eurostat, 2015, Eurostat regional yearbook 2015, 
Publications Office of the European Union, 
Luxembourg (http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/en/web/
products-statistical-books/-/KS-HA-15-001) accessed 
20 November 2015.

HELCOM, 2010, Ecosystem health of the Baltic Sea 
2003–2007: HELCOM initial holistic assessment, Baltic 
Sea Environment Proceedings 122, Helsinki (http://
helcom.fi/Lists/Publications/BSEP122.pdf) accessed 
18 November 2015.

FAO, 2014, In brief: State of food insecurity in the 
world (http://www.fao.org/3/a-i4037e.pdf) accessed 
15 March 2015.

Houses of Parliament, 2012, 'Water resource resilience', 
Houses of Parliament PostNote No 419, Houses of 
Parliament, London.

Federal Ministry for Transport, Innovation and 
Technology, 2014, Energy Innovation Austria 
(http://www.bmvit.gv.at/en/service/publications/
downloads/downloads_ftb/ftb_2014_en.pdf) accessed 
20 November 2015.

Filcak, R., Rubik, F., Kuhn, J., Sabo, S., Gossen, M. 
and Sedlacko, M., 2013, Towards sustainable mobility 
in European cities: Insights and issues for policy 
makers and researchers — RESPONDER FP7 research 
project, Background paper, Bratislava (http://
www.scp-responder.eu/pdf/knowledge/papers/
RESPONDER_2013%20Background%20Paper%20
on%20urban%20mobility.pdf) accessed 22 November 
2015.

Forestry Commission England, 2010, Barnsley 
biomass — Working towards carbon emissions reduction 
in Yorkshire (http://www.forestry.gov.uk/pdf/yh-
casestudies-barnselybiomass.pdf/$FILE/yh-casestudies-
barnselybiomass.pdf) accessed 12 October 2014.

Fumagalli, B., 2013, Energy performance assessment of 
collective housing buildings, Master of Science Thesis, 
KTH School of Industrial Engineering and Management, 
Stockholm.

ICLEI, 2014, 'Study for EEA on urban governance and 
resource efficiency', unpublished.

IEA, 2009, Cities, towns & renewable energy, International 
Energy Agency, Paris (http://www.iea.org/publications/
freepublications/publication/Cities2009.pdf) accessed 
20 November 2015.

IEA, 2013, The IEA CHP and DHC collaborative — 
Countryscorecard: Finland, Insights Series 2013, 
International Energy Agency, Paris.

IEA, 2014, Linking heat and electricity systems, 
International Energy Agency, Paris.

IEA-OECD, 2004, Improving district heating policy in 
transition economies, International Energy Agency 
and Organisation for Economic Co-operation and 
Development, Paris.

InContext, 2013, How to create space for change? 
Key insights for policymakers and grassroots activists, 
InContext Research Project (FP7), InContext, Berlin 
(http://www.incontext-fp7.eu/sites/default/files/
InContext-KeyMessages-eng-screen-final.pdf) accessed 
20 November 2015.

Garcia-López, M.-À., 2010, 'Population suburbanization 
in Barcelona, 1991–2005: Is its spatial structure 
changing?', Journal of Housing Economics, 19(2) 119–132.

Iriarte, A., Gabarrell, X. and Rieradevall, J., 2009, 'LCA 
of selective waste collection systems in dense urban 
areas', Waste Management, 29(2) 903–914.

89

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceBibliography

Isocarp, 2014, 'International summer school “Planning 
for the post-speculative city” ' (http://www.isocarp.org/
index.php?id=planningthepost-speculativeci) accessed 
27 August 2014.

Jegou, F. and Carey, J., 2015, Handbook: Creating space 
for sustainable food systems in urban communities — 
Practical approach and examples for cities, Urbact, 
Saint-Denis.

Joss, S. and Cowley, T. and R., 2011, Eco-Cities — A global 
survey 2011, University of Westminster, London.

Kasanko, M., Barredo, J. I., Lavalle, C., McCormick, N., 
Demicheli, L., Sagris, V. and Brezger, A., 2006, 'Are 
European cities becoming dispersed?: A comparative 
analysis of 15 European urban areas', Landscape and 
Urban Planning, 77(1–2) 111–130.

Kitchin, R., Gleeson, J., Keaveney, K. and O'Callaghan, C., 
2010, 'A haunted landscape: Housing and ghost estates 
in post-Celtic Tiger Ireland', NIRSA Working Paper 
Series No 59 (http://eprints.nuim.ie/2236/) accessed 
28 August 2014.

Krausmann, F., Fischer-Kowalski, M., Schandl, H. and 
Eisenmenger, N., 2008, 'The global socio-metabolic 
transition: past and present metabolic profiles and 
their future trajectories', Journal of Industrial Ecology, 
12(5–6) 637–656.

Lehmann, S., 2010, 'Green urbanism: Formulating 
a series of holistic principles', SAPIENS. Surveys and 
Perspectives Integrating Environment and Society, 3(2).

road freight hauliers — A Nordic comparison', Energy 
Policy, 67, 378–387.

Locasso, M. and D'Ambrosio, V., 2012, 'Eco-districts and 
social housing in northern Europe', TECHNE — Journal 
of Technology for Architecture and Environment, 44–52, 
October 2012.

London Borough of Haringey, 2012, Decentralised 
energy masterplanning — A manual for local authorities 
(http://www.londonheatmap.org.uk/Content/uploaded/
documents/EMP_Manual_lo.pdf) accessed 18 November 
2015.

Loose, W., 2010, 'The state of European car-sharing', 
Final report D2.4 (http://www.motiva.fi/files/4138/WP2_
Final_Report.pdf) accessed 2 October 2014.

López Moreno, E. and González Blanco, Z., 2014, 'Ghost 
cities and empty houses: Wasted prosperity', American 
International Journal of Social Science, 3(2), 207–216.

Lorenzoni, I., Nicholson-Cole, S. and Whitmarsh, L., 2007, 
'Barriers perceived to engaging with climate change 
among the UK public and their policy implications', 
Global Environmental Change, 17, 445–459.

Ma, Z., Cooper, P., Daly, D. and Ledo, L., 2012, 'Existing 
building retrofits: Methodology and state-of-the-art', 
Faculty of Engineering — Papers (Archive), 889–902 
(DOI: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.08.018).

McKinsey & Company, 2010, Impact of the financial crisis 
on carbon economics, McKinsey & Company, New York.

Lehmann, S., 2014, 'Low carbon districts: Mitigating the 
urban heat island with green roof infrastructure', City, 
Culture and Society, 5(1), 1–8.

McMunn, A., Nazroo, J. and Breeze, E., 2009, 'Inequalities 
in health at older ages: A longitudinal investigation of the 
onset of illness and survival effects in England', Age and 
Ageing, 38(2), 181–187 (DOI: 10.1093/ageing/afn236).

Lepoutre, J., Dentchev, N. A. and Heene, A., 2007, 
'Dealing with uncertainties — When governing CSR 
policies', Journal of Business Ethics, 73, 391–408.

Les Echos, L., 2014, 'Voies sur berges: Paris rêve 
désormais de piétonniser la rive droite' (http://www.
lesechos.fr/politique-societe/regions/0203563198394-
voies-sur-berges-paris-reve-desormais-de-pietonniser-
la-rive-droite-1012566.php#Xtor=AD-6000) accessed 
22 August 2014.

Lewis, J. O., Hogain, S. N. and Borghi, A., 2013, Building 
energy efficiency in European cities, Urbact II, Saint-
Denis.

Liimatainen, H., Nykänen, L., Arvidsson, N., Hovi, I. B., 
Jensen, T. C. and Østli, V., 2014, 'Energy efficiency of 

Markopoulos, C., Rozos, E., Bruaset, S., Fruns, J. and 
Van der Zouwen, M., 2012, Best practices for sustainable 
urban water cycle systems, Trust D 11.1 (http://www.
trust-i.net/downloads/index.php?iddesc=67) accessed 22 
November 2015.

Martin, E., Shaheen S. and Lidicker, J., 2010, 'Impact 
of carsharing on household vehicle holdings. Results 
from North American shared-use vehicle survey', 
Transportation Research Record, 2143, 150–158.

Martin-Ortega, J. and Markandya, A., 2009, The costs of 
drought: The exceptional 2007–2008 case of Barcelona, 
Working paper BC3 2009–09, Basque Centre for Climate 
Change, Bilbao.

90

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceBibliography

Mayor of London, 2013, District heating manual for 
London (http://www.londonheatmap.org.uk/Content/
uploaded/documents/DH_Manual_for_London_
February_2013_v1.0.pdf) accessed 18 November 2015

Membrado, J. C., 2012, 'Urban sprawl and housing 
bubble (1997–2007) in València (Spain) according to 
Corine and Siose data', Bolletino AIC, (http://www.
academia.edu/5093295/Urban_Sprawl_and_Housing_
Bubble_1997-2007_in_Val%C3%A8ncia_Spain_
according_to_CORINE_and_SIOSE_Data) accessed 
23 November 2015.

Miafodzyeva, S. and Brandt, N., 2012, 'Recycling 
behaviour among householders: Synthesizing 
determinants via a meta-analysis', Waste and Biomass 
Valorization, 4(2) 221–235.

Millock, K., Nauges, C., 2010, Household adoption 
of water-efficient equipement: the role of socio-
economic factors, environmental attitudes and policy, 
European Association of Environmental and Resource 
Economistsy 46 (4), 539-565. 

Ministry of Housing, Urban and Rural Affairs and 
Danish Energy Agency, 2014, Low carbon and new 
energy — Cities in Denmark, , Copenhagen (http://www.
cnrec.org.cn/english/publication/2014-09-26-447.html) 
accessed 20 November 2015.

Moragues, A., Morgan, K., Moschitz, H., Neimane, 
I., Nilsson, H., Pinto, M., Rohracher, H., Ruiz, R., 
Thuswald, M., Tisenkopfs, T. and Halliday, J., 
2013, 'Urban food strategies: The rough guide to 
sustainable food systems', Document developed in 
the framework of the FP7 project FOODLINKS ( http://
www.foodlinkscommunity.net/fileadmin/documents_
organicresearch/foodlinks/publications/Urban_food_
strategies.pdf) accessed 22 November 2015.

Newcastle City Council, 2013. 'Changes to bin 
collections' (http://www.newcastle.gov.uk/
environment-and-waste/rubbish-waste-and-recycling/
household-waste-collection/changes-to-bin-
collections) accessed December 2013.

Nolde, E., 2005, 'Greywater recycling systems in 
Germany — results, experiences and guidelines', Water 
Science and Technology, 51(10) 203–210.

Nordic Energy Municipality, 2011, Nominated to 
Nordic Energy Municipality 2011 (http://www.norden.
org/sv/nordiska-ministerraadet/ministerraad/
nordiska-ministerraadet-foer-naeringsliv-energi-och-
regionalpolitik-mr-ner/nordiske-energikommuner/
nominerade-kommuner/vaexjoe-kommune-factsheet) 
accessed 20 November 2015.

Odyssee-Mure, 2013, Energy efficiency: Trends in the 
EU — Lessons from the ODYSSEE MURE project (http://
www.odyssee-mure.eu/publications/br/synthesis-
energy-efficiency-trends-policies.pdf) accessed 
20 November 2015.

Orsini, F., Gasperi, D., Marchetti, L., Plovene, C., 
Draghetti, S., Ramazzotti, S., Bazzochi, G. and 
Gianquinto, G., 2014, 'Exploring the production 
capacity of rooftop gardens (RTGs) in urban 
agriculture: The potential impact on food and 
nutrition security, biodiversity and other ecosystem 
services in the city of Bologna', Food Security Journal, 
6(6) 781–793.

Penttilä, H., 2006, 'Describing the changes in 
architectural information technology to understand 
design complexity and free-form architectural 
expression' (http://www.itcon.org/cgi-bin/works/
Show?2006_29) accessed 6 October 2014.

Polyak, L., 2013, The recycled city: New uses in old 
settings, European 13 (http://europan-europe.eu/
media/default/0001/09/e13_themecontr_38_lpolyak_
pdf.pdf) accessed 22 November 2015.

Portland Sustainability Institute, 2012, The building 
blocks of sustainable cities, Portland Sustainability 
Institute, Portland, OR.

Pothukuchi, K. and Kaufman, J., 2000, 'Food system: 
Stranger to the planning field' (http://www.cityfarmer.
org/foodplan.html) accessed 16 March 2015.

Power, A., 2007, City survivors: Bringing up children in 
disadvantaged neighbourhoods, Policy Press, Bristol.

Power, A., 2010, 'Housing and sustainability: 
Demolition or refurbishment?', Urban Design and 
Planning, 163(DP4) 205–2016.

Pramanik, A. and Burn, S., 2014, Resource recovery 
from wastewater: A research agenda, Water 
Environment Research Foundation, Alexandria, VA.

Promoting ZeroWaste, 2014, Guide on green solutions 
for waste for and from public administrations, 
Promoting ZeroWaste, Attiki

PUCA, 2008, 'Concevoir un éco-quartier', Le journal 
d'information du PUCA, 16.

R2Cities, 2014, 'The project' (http://r2cities.eu/Project/
The_Project.kl) accessed 6 October 2014.

R4R, 2014, Good practice Flanders: PAYT, Regions for 
Recycling (http://www.regions4recycling.eu/upload/

91

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceBibliography

public/Good-Practices/GP_OVAM_PAYT.pdf) accessed 
18 November 2015.

Ramaswami, A., Weible, C., Main, D., Heikkila, T., 
Siddiki, S., Duvall, A., Pattison, A. and Bernard, M., 2012, 
'A social-ecological-infrastructural systems framework 
for interdisciplinary study of sustainable city systems', 
Journal of Industrial Ecology, 16(6) 801–813.

Reed, M., Curry, N., Keech, D., Kirwan, J. and Maye, 
D., 2013, City-region report synthesis. Research Project: 
SUPURBFOOD, Work package 2/Deliverable 2.3  
(http://www.ruaf.org/sites/default/files/Synthesis%20
report%20Innovative%20experiences%20with%20
%28peri-%29%20urban%20agriculture%20and%20
urban%20food%20provisioning%3B%20lessons%20
to%20be%20learned%20from%20the%20global%20
South%20RUAF-SUPURBFOOD.pdf) accessed 
22 November 2015.

Refsgaard, K. and Magnussen, K., 2009, 'Household 
behaviour and attitudes with respect to recycling 
food waste — experiences from focus groups', 
Journal of Environmental Management, 90(2), 760–771 
(DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.01.018).

Roorda, C. and Wittmayer, J., 2014, Transition 
management in five European cities — An evaluation, 
Dutch Research Institute for Transitions, Rotterdam.

dbresearch.com/PROD/DBR_INTERNET_EN-PROD/
PROD0000000000270746/Where+are+food+prices+he
ading%3F+Short-term+drivers,+trends+and+implicatio
ns.pdf) accessed 18 November 2015.

Schmidt, M., 2008, 'Rainwater harvesting in Germany 
— New concepts for the substitution of drinking 
water, flood control and improving the quality of the 
surface waters', paper presented at the Third Brazilian 
Symposium on Capture and Rainwater Management.

Schwarz, N., 2010, 'Urban form revisited — Selecting 
indicators for characterising European cities', 
Landscape and Urban Planning, 96(1) 29–47.

Seltzer, E., Smith, T. W., Cortright, J., Bassett, E. M. and 
Shandas, V., 2010, Making ecodistricts. Concepts and 
methods for advancing sustainability in neighborhoods, 
Portland Sustainability Institute, Portland, OR.

Sievers, J., Puchta, M. and Faulstich, S., 2006, Guidelines 
to promote CHP concepts with heat accumulators — 
Research project DESIRE (https://www.f07.th-koeln.de/
imperia/md/content/fakultaet07/iet/laboratorien/
regenerativeenergien/unterlagen/d2_4_final.pdf) 
accessed 22 November 2015.

Smart Cities, 2013, Smart thermal grids (https://
eu-smartcities.eu/content/ki-smart-thermal-grids) 
accessed 18 November 2015.

Rubik, F., Gossen, M., 2011. CORPUS Discussion Paper 
2 on Policy Instruments for Sustainable Mobility 
(http://www.scp-knowledge.eu/sites/default/files/
Rubik%20and%20Gossen%202011%20Sustainable%20
Mobility%20-%20Policies.pdf) Accessed 15 March 2013.

Stahel, W. R., 2008, 'The performance economy: 
Business models for the functional service economy', 
in: Misra, P. K. B. (ed.), Handbook of performability 
engineering, Springer, London, pp. 127–138.

Rygaard, M., Binning, P. J. and Albrechtsen, H.-J., 2011, 
'Increasing urban water self-sufficiency: New era, new 
challenges', Journal of Environmental Management, 92(1) 
185–194.

Suzuki, H., Dastur, A., Moffatt, S., Yabuki, N. and 
Maruyama, H. (eds), 2010, Eco2 cities: Ecological cities 
as economic cities, World Bank, Washington, DC.

Røpke, I., 2009, 'Theories of practice — New inspiration 
for ecological economic studies on consumption', 
Ecological Economics, 68(10) 2 490–2 497.

TCPA and CHPA, 2008, Community energy: Urban 
planning for a low carbon future, Town and Country 
Planning Association and Combined Heat and Power 
Association, London.

Saurí, D. and del Moral, L., 2001, 'Recent developments 
in Spanish water policy. Alternatives and conflicts at the 
end of the hydraulic age', Geoforum, 32(3) 351–362.

Sauri, D. , 2013, Water Conservation: Theory and 
Evidence in Urban Areas of the Developed World, 
Annual Review of Environment and Resources, Vol. 38: 
227-248.

Schaffnit-Chatterjee, C., 2011, 'Where are food 
prices heading? Short-term drivers, trends and 
implications', Deutsche Bank Research (https://www.

Tillie, N., Aarts, M., Marijnissen, M. and Sternhuijs, 
L., 2012, 'Rotterdam – people make the inner 
city', Fifth International Architecture Biennale, 
Rotterdam (https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/
view/25864843/rotterdam-a-people-make-the-inner-
city-gemeente-rotterdam) accessed 22 November 
2015.

Tirado Herrero, S. and Ürge-Vorsatz, D., 2012, 
'Trapped in the heat: A post-communist type of fuel 
poverty', Energy Policy, 49 60–68.

92

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceBibliography

Transport for London, 2010, Travel in London — Report 
3 (http://content.tfl.gov.uk/travel-in-london-report-3.
pdf) accessed 19 November 2015.

WHO, 2007, Housing, energy and thermal comfort — 
A review of 10 countries within the WHO European Region, 
World Health Organization, Geneva.

Truong, N. L. and Gustavsson, L., 2014, 'Cost and 
primary energy efficiency of small-scale district 
heating systems', Applied Energy, 130 419–427.

Williams, I. D. and Cole, C., 2013, 'The impact of 
alternate weekly collections on waste arisings', Science 
of the Total Environment, 445–446 29–40.

TRUST, 2014, Baseline and best in urban water cycle 
services, Transitions to the Urban Water Services of 
Tomorrow (https://www.trust-i.net/downloads/index.
php) accessed 22 November 2015.

UNEP, 2004, 'Rainwater harvesting and utilisation — 
An environmentally sound approach for sustainable 
urban water management: An introductory guide 
for decision-makers', United Nations Environment 
Programme (http://www.unep.or.jp/ietc/publications/
urban/urbanenv-2/1.asp) accessed 30 March 2015.

UN-Habitat, 2012, Optimizing infrastructure — Urban 
patterns for a green economy, UN-Habitat, Nairobi.

Urbact, 2013, LINKS: Future-proof historic centres — Local 
action plans, Urbact, Saint-Denis (http://urbact.eu/sites/
default/files/import/Projects/LINKS/outputs_media/
urbact_links_final_report.pdf) accessed 20 November 
2015.

URB Energy, 2011a, Holistic strategies for energy efficient 
refurbishment of the housing stock and renewal of the 
related energy supply system, URB Energy, Berlin.

URB Energy, 2011b, Integrated urban development 
approach — Targeting at energy efficient residential areas, 
URB Energy, Berlin.

Växjö Kommun, 2011, Climate strategy of Växjö 
(http://www.vaxjo.se/upload/www.vaxjo.se/Kommu
nledningsf%C3%B6rvaltningen/Planeringskontoret/
Milj%C3%B6dokument%20och%20broschyrer/
Energiplan_eng_webb_2011.pdf) accessed 22 
November 2015.

Vidal, M., Domene, E. and Saurí, D., 2011, 'Changing 
geographies of water-related consumption: Residential 
swimming pools in suburban Barcelona', Area, 43(1) 
67–75.

Walker, R., Thomson, H. and Liddell, C., 2013, Fuel 
poverty 1991–2012 — Commemorating 21 years of action, 
policy and research, Ulster University, Londonderry.

WERF, 2011, Energy production and efficiency research 
— The roadmap to net-zero energy, Water Environment 
Research Foundation, Alexandria, VA.

Williams, P. T., 2013, Waste treatment and disposal, 
John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.

Wong, A. And Hallsworth, A., 2012, 'Farm-to-fork: 
A proposed revision of the classical food miles concept', 
International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 3(1) 
74–81.

WRAP, 2009a, Case study food waste collection trials — 
food waste collections from multi-occupancy dwellings, 
WRAP, Banbury (http://www.wrap.org.uk/sites/
files/wrap/Case_study_-_multi-occupancy_housing.
a7a6067a.5879.pdf) accessed 20 November 2015.

WRAP, 2009b, Evaluation of the WRAP separate food 
waste collection trials, WRAP, Banbury (http://www.
wrap.org.uk/sites/files/wrap/Evaluation_of_the_WRAP_
FW_Collection_Trials_Update_June_2009.pdf) accessed 
20 November 2015.

WRAP, 2011, Valuing our clothes — The true cost of how 
we design, use and dispose of clothing in the UK, WRAP, 
Banbury  (http://www.wrap.org.uk/sites/files/wrap/
VoC%20FINAL%20online%202012%2007%2011.pdf) 
accessed 20 November 2015.

WssTP, 2010, Strategic research agenda, The European 
Technology Platform for Water, Brussels (http://wsstp.
eu/wp-content/uploads/sites/102/2013/11/SRA2010.
pdf) accessed 20 November 2015.

WssTP, 2011, Leakage management. Strategic vision and 
research needs, The European Technology Platform for 
Water, Brussels.

Wunder, S., 2013, learning for sustainable agriculture: 
Urban gardening in Berlin, Solinsa. (http://www.ecologic.
eu/10308) accessed 22 November 2015. 

Zaman, A. U. and Lehmann, S., 2013, 'The zero waste 
index: A performance measurement tool for waste 
management systems in a 'zero waste city' ', Journal of 
Cleaner Production, 50 123–132.

Zaucha, J. and Świątek, D., 2013, Place based territorially 
sensitive and integrated approach, Ministry of Regional 
Development, Warsaw.

93

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practiceEuropean Environment Agency

Urban sustainability issues — Resource-efficient cities: good practice

2015 — 93 pp. — 21 x 29.7 cm

ISBN 978-92-9213-711-3
doi:10.2800/69420

HOW TO OBTAIN EU PUBLICATIONS

Free publications:

•  one copy: 

via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu);

•  more than one copy or posters/maps: 

from the European Union's representations (http://ec.europa.eu/represent_en.htm); 
from the delegations in non-EU countries (http://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/index_en.htm);  
by contacting the Europe Direct service (http://europa.eu/europedirect/index_en.htm) or calling 
00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (freephone number from anywhere in the EU) (*).

(*)  The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may charge you).

Priced publications:

• 

via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu).

d
o

i
:

.

1
0
2
8
0
0
/
6
9
4
2
0

T
H
-
A
K
-
1
5
-
0
2
4
-
E
N
N

-

European Environment Agency
Kongens Nytorv 6
1050 Copenhagen K
Denmark

Tel.: +45 33 36 71 00
Web: eea.europa.eu
Enquiries: eea.europa.eu/enquiries