# Sustainability Assessment on an Urban Scale: Context, Challenges, and Most Relevant Indicators
## 4 Discussion
Additionally, the analysis showed that some of the methods emphasized aspects related to the environmental dimension of sustainability, such as transportation infrastructure, energy-saving measures, and context and vulnerabilities, while they were neglected in other aspects, such as socio-economic dimensions of sustainability. Moreover, the way that the indicators were evaluated differs among the analysed methods. Some methods used a quantitative approach, while others used a qualitative approach or a combination of the two. An alternative approach was a mixed-methods approach, in which qualitative and quantitative indicators were combined to produce more evidence-based results. This could help to provide a more profound knowledge of the issues resulting from the sustainability assessment, which allows them to provide more impactful strategies on how to properly select appropriate planning and solutions. However, a further attempt is required to determine areas that need improvement and enhancement in sustainability assessment tools, according to the ever-changing concept of sustainability in the era of climate changes in urban development. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{p{113.8 pt} p{113.8 pt}} \hline \hline
**Categories** & **Indicators** \\ \hline Urban structure and form & Providing a comfortable outdoor environment \\ \cline{2-3}  & Smart locations and efficient urban network \\ \hline Transportation infrastructure & Availability and access to public transport service \\ \cline{2-3}  & Quality of pedestrian and bicycle network \\ \hline Basic services availability & Availability and proximity to public and local public services \\ \cline{2-3}  & Availability of recreational facilities \\ \cline{2-3}  & Availability of local food production \\ \hline Energy-saving measures & Infrastructure energy efficiency \\ \cline{2-3}  & Percentage of total end-use energy generated on-site, derived from renewable sources \\ \cline{2-3}  & Centralized energy management \\ \hline Water-saving measures & Efficient drinking water consumption \\ \cline{2-3}  & Effluent management \\ \cline{2-3}  & Rainwater harvesting and water body conservation \\ \hline Resource efficiency, recycling and waste measures & Resource efficiency and low-impact materials used in public spaces \\ \cline{2-3}  & Reused of the construction and demolition waste \\ \cline{2-3}  & Recycled urban solid waste derived from regularly collected solid waste \\ \hline Ecosystems and landscapes & Distribution of green spaces for public use \\ \cline{2-3}  & Enhancement of ecological value and conservation of imperfilled species \\ \hline  & Use the natural potential of land \\ \cline{2-3}  & Densification and flexibility of land use \\ \cline{2-3}  & Reuse of urban land \\ \cline{2-3}  & Reuse of buildings and infrastructure \\ \hline Outdoor environmental quality & Adaption for ambient air quality \\ \cline{2-3}  & Heat island effect in the local area \\ \cline{2-3}  & Ambient noise conditions \\ \cline{2-3}  & Light pollution reduction \\ \hline Employment and economic development & Economic viability \\ \cline{2-3}  & Local economy and employability \\ \hline  & Access to public spaces \\ \cline{2-3} Local and cultural identity & Valuing heritage \\ \cline{2-3}  & Social inclusion and integration \\ \hline Context and vulnerabilities & Adapting to climate change \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Proposed indicators for urban sustainability assessment that can be applied in different contexts.