SUMÁRIO

1 FICHAMENTO 04 .................................................................................................. 2
2 FICHAMENTO 05 .................................................................................................. 5
3 FICHAMENTO 06 ................................................................................................ 10
1 FICHAMENTO 04

Tipo:
Artigo
Título do trabalho (Original):
SUSTENTABILIDADE DE BAIRROS: UMA ANÁLISE EM CAMPO MOURÃO-PR, BRASIL
Título do traduzido (Original):
-
Autores:
Maristela Denise Moresco Mezzomo, Marcos Antonio Borges Junior, Artur Jorge de Jesus
Gonçalves (MEZZOMO; BORGES JUNIOR; GONÇALVES, 2018)
Local de publicação:
Geo UERJ | E-ISSN 1981-9021
Referência Bibliográfica:
MEZZOMO, M. D. M.; BORGES JUNIOR, M. A.; GONÇALVES, A. J. D. J.
SUSTENTABILIDADE DE BAIRROS: UMA ANÁLISE EM CAMPO MOURÃO-PR, BRASIL
/ SUSTAINABILITY OF NEIGHBORHOODS: AN ANALYSIS IN CAMPO MOURÃO-PR,
BRAZIL. Geo UERJ, n. 32, p. e30480, 2018.

https://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/index.php/geouerj/article/view/30480
Observações importantes
Temática se conversa muito com o que pretendo desenvolver na minha proposta de TCC. Muitos
procedimentos metodológicos podem ser seguidos e adaptados para Campo Grande, MS.
PONTOS IMPORTANTE DO TRABALHO
Introdução:
• Neste mesmo sentido de investigação, surge na Europa na década de 1980, a ideia de
sustentabilidade de bairros, a qual foi moldada e estabelecida com base em parâmetros para
identificar a sustentabilidade de um projeto de urbanização, levando em consideração
questões relacionadas à participação das comunidades nas decisões públicas, morfologia e
tipologia urbana, mobilidade, tecnologias sustentáveis, infraestrutura social e geração de
renda (ROSSI; BARBOSA; ARAGÃO, 2012).
• Esta forma de considerar a sustentabilidade na escala dos bairros, torna possível
desenvolver projetos de infraestrutura urbana local mais eficientes e sustentáveis, incluindo
edifícios, transporte, áreas verdes, saneamento, entre outros aspectos que considerem as
especificidades dos mesmos.
• Para Silva e Romero (2013), os caminhos para uma cidade sustentável são extremamente
difíceis, pois requerem o entendimento e a ação social em conjunto com as ações públicas.
Segundo Detroz, Pavez e Viana (2011), uma cidade sustentável deve ser projetada
considerando os impactos socioambientais e, nessas cidades, o modelo e a dinâmica de
desenvolvimento respeitam e cuidam dos recursos naturais.
• Uma cidade não pode ser sustentável isoladamente, pois faz parte de um sistema global
urbano, onde uma única cidade pode afetar outras em certo grau. Ao mesmo tempo,
nenhuma cidade pode contribuir para a sustentabilidade global, se os seus próprios
componentes não são sustentáveis (CHOGUILL, 2008). Esta é concepção quando se volta
para a escala dos bairros.
• Para se alcançar a sustentabilidade técnica, a questão mais importante é como o bairro se
encaixa na comunidade em geral. Um bairro com limites claros, tais como estradas principais
nas periferias, facilita a interação social dentro do mesmo. Se o tráfego interno é minimizado
pela redução do número de estradas que atravessam ou passam pelo bairro, a segurança é
maior (CHOGUILL, 2008).
 • A Nova Agenda Urbana, assinada em 2016 durante a Habitat III, Conferência das Nações
Unidas sobre Habitação e Desenvolvimento Urbano Sustentável em Quito, no Equador,
estabelece alguns princípios no âmbito social, focados no combate a segregação,
disponibilidade de serviços de saúde, educação e segurança, no âmbito econômico promove
a disponibilidade de emprego, para a área da sustentabilidade ambiental, promove a ideia
da utilização de energias limpas, o uso sustentável da terra, proteção à biodiversidade, a
promoção de padrões de consumo e produção sustentáveis (HABITAT III, 2016).
• A resolução da Organização das Nações Unidas intitulada Transforming our world: the 2030
Agenda for Sustainable Development, apresenta 17 objetivos para o desenvolvimento
sustentável, desdobrados em 169 metas. Foi aprovada pelos líderes mundiais durante uma
assembleia na sede da organização em 2015. De forma geral, a resolução apresenta metas
para se alcançar os direitos humanos, a igualdade de gênero e o equilíbrio das três
dimensões do desenvolvimento sustentável: o econômico, social e ambiental (ASSEMBLEIA
GERAL DA ONU, 2015).
Materiais e Métodos:
• Campo Mourão é um município brasileiro localizado na Regia ̃o Sul do pai ś , no estado do
Parana ́ e na Mesorregião Centro Ocidental Paranaense. O município tem área total de 757
km2. Sua população de acordo com o censo demográfico do IBGE, realizado em 2010, é de
87.194 habitantes, e o mesmo possui uma densidade demográfica de 115, 05 hab/Km2
(MORIGI e MORIGI, 2013).
• Os bairros estudados foram Jardim Santa Cruz e Jardim Gutierrez (Figura 1), tendo como
base territorial os setores censitários utilizados pelo Instituto Brasileiro De Geografia e
Estatística – IBGE.
• Após análise dos princípios apresentados nos documentos acima descritos, os indicadores
selecionados foram Cobertura da Terra, Proximidade a Escolas, Proximidade aos Serviços
Médicos, Porcentagem de Domicílios Conectados ao Sistema de Tratamento de Esgoto,
Porcentagem de Domicílios Conectados ao Sistema de Distribuição de Água, Porcentagem
de Domicílios Conectados ao Sistema de Coleta de Resíduos e Coleta Seletiva e
Proximidade a Pontos de Ônibus.
• A aplicação do indicador Cobertura da Terra foi feita por meio de mapeamento utilizando
imagens de satélite disponibilizadas por Bing Aerials e o software livre QGis na versão 2.14.
O mapeamento seguiu uma legenda de itens basedos na metodologia proposta por Valaski
(2013), Nucci, Ferreira e Valaski (2014) e Ferreira (2015), com algumas adaptações que se
referem a inclusão da quantidade de área verde por lote urbano. Entende-se que quanto
mais distribuídas as áreas verdes, maiores são os benefícios junto à população. Para tanto,
a definição de porcentagem de área verde por lote urbano levou em consideração critérios
de diferentes referências:
• Alguns indicadores foram aplicados utilizando metodologias semelhantes, como é o caso
dos indicadores Proximidade a Escolas, Proximidade aos Serviços Médicos e Proximidade
a Pontos de Ônibus. Baseados em metodologias da Agência de Ecología Urbana de
Barcelona, que define raios de influência para esses serviços básicos (Quadro 1), foram
elaborados mapas utilizando o software livre QGis na versão 2.14, com os pontos de
interesse e suas respectivas áreas de influência. Os dados para a elaboração destes foram
obtidos por imagens de satélite disponibilizadas por Bing Aerials, visitas a campo e
demarcações com auxílio de um GPS.
• Também foram utilizadas metodologias semelhantes para os indicadores Porcentagem de
Domicílios Conectados aos Sistema de Tratamento de Esgoto, Distribuição de Água, Coleta
de Resíduos e Coleta Seletiva (Quadro 2). Estes indicadores, baseados na metodologia do
Programa Cidades Sustentáveis (2017) foram aplicados com dados obtidos junto ao
endereço eletrônico do Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística (2010), seguindo o
recorte espacial de setores censitários. Os mesmos serviram como base para mapeamentos
utilizando o software livre QGis na versão 2.14.
Resultados e discussões:
• Os resultados encontrados, demonstraram que, embora no mesmo contexto urbano, os dois
bairros estudados apresentam características diferentes em termos de sustentabilidade,
conforme pode ser verificado nos dados e informações obtidas (Quadro 3).
 • Em relação a cobertura da terra, o mapeamento aponta, quanto às áreas com edificações,
que 20,6% do bairro possui vegetação em mais de 20% da área construída. Estas áreas
estão localizadas, principalmente na parte sul do bairro, que é a mais antiga em termos de
ocupação. A parte ao norte apresenta diversificação maior quanto as classes de cobertura,
com presença de áreas com solo exposto, vegetação e áreas sem vegetação, por se tratar
de uma área ainda em processo de ocupação.
• Os dois bairros apresentam solo exposto (terrenos baldios). Conforme Sukopp e Werner
(1991), espaços assim são potenciais biótopos, sendo superfícies urbanas únicas com a
possibilidade de vegetação espontânea. A porcentagem de terrenos baldios nos
assentamentos urbanos é surpreendentemente alta e se encontram principalmente na
periferia das cidades, onde não são utilizados para a agricultura devido à previsão da
expansão urbana.
• Levando em consideração o indicador aplicado, 47,2% da área total no bairro Santa Cruz
possui vegetação ou é composta por solo permeável. Levando em consideração a presença
da área rural, equivalente a 16,7%, os outros 36,1% são de áreas impermeáveis e sem
vegetação. Com isso, o bairro apresenta uma percentagem boa quanto as áreas verdes,
acima de 33%.
• Os dois bairros apresentam quantidade considerável de áreas verdes, o que favorece a
qualidade ambiental dos mesmos, trazendo benefícios como conforto térmico, estabilização
de superfícies por meio da fixação do solo pelas raízes das plantas, atenuação da poluição
do ar, sonora e visual, além de abrigo para fauna. Tendo ainda benefícios para a saúde e o
bem-estar da população, partindo-se da premissa de que estas áreas ao desenvolverem
funções ecológicas (MAZZEI, COLESANTI; SANTOS, 2007; NUCCI, 2008).
• Quanto a infraestrutura de saneamento, que inclui o abastecimento de água potável,
esgotamento sanitário e o sistema de coleta de resíduos, pode-se observar características
distintas entre os bairros estudados.
• O bairro Santa Cruz (Figura 2 e Quadro 5) não apresenta esgotamento sanitário em 98% de
suas moradias, sendo que no Setor 1 o valor soma 1,3%, no Setor 2, 1,6% e no Setor 3, 0%.
Há presença de fossas negras e sépticas. A base de dados do IBGE utilizada não identifica
a distribuição das fossas, apenas indica a quantidade.
• Os dois bairros apresentam abastecimento de água quase que satisfatório, com mais de
98% atendidos. Segundo Martins et al. (2000), vale ressaltar a importância de um
abastecimento com água de qualidade, pois mesmo a disponibilização de água em
quantidade suficiente, por sistemas de abastecimento precários, em termos de qualidade,
evita a propagação de doenças, principalmente em crianças nos primeiros anos de vida,
quando estas apresentam baixa imunidade.
• O bairro Santa Cruz (Figura 4) apresenta pontos de ônibus em grande parte da extensão da
rota, e as áreas de influência cobrem uma significativa área, atendendo boa parte população
local em termos de localização. O bairro Guitierrez (Figura 5) apresenta uma rota de ônibus
curta e apenas em duas ruas, deixando a maior parte do bairro sem a disponibilidade do
serviço de transporte público, e as áreas de influência não cobrem uma significativa área,
entretanto a rota possui horários diversos.
• Para o indicador de proximidade a serviços de saúde e educação, somente o bairro Santa
Cruz apresentou resultados, com a presença de uma escola (Figura 6), enquanto o bairro
Gutierrez não possui escolas ou unidades de saúde.
Conclusões:
• Estudos relacionados a sustentabilidade urbana e de bairros tem crescido em termos
científicos em muitos países devido, principalmente, ao potencial de se desenvolver
diagnósticos. Este crescimento, está relacionado as diretrizes e considerações
estabelecidas em documentos oficiais como a Carta do Novo Urbanismo, a Nova Carta de
Atenas, Nova Agenda Urbana e a resolução Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for
Sustainable Development, da Organização das Nações Unidas.
• Atualmente, o processo de urbanização na maior parte do Brasil é baseado em bairros
residenciais populares, com moradias de baixo custo e rápida construção, onde o
planejamento destes, muitas vezes, não inclui espaços para escolas e postos de saúde.
Ainda, mesmo que presente em leis municipais, muitos desses bairros não apresentam
espaços verdes por lote, ou mesmo áreas verdes públicas.
 • Algumas destas realidades foram verificadas nos bairros analisados. No caso da presença
da vegetação, verificou-se que em ambos os bairros Santa Cruz elas são repesentativa
quando somadas, porém, não necessariamente se contitui em áreas verdes públicas ou
estão bem distribuidas.
• O bairro Santa Cruz possui alguns aspectos importantes, como o acesso a transporte e
educação, mas não apresenta acesso a serviços de saúde, enquanto que o bairro Gutierrez
não apresenta serviços de saúde e educação.
• Em relação aos indicadores de infraestrutura de saneamento, ambos os bairros não
apresentam o foramto ideal. Estas situações indicam que, diante dos indicadores utilizados,
os bairros não se apresentam como sustentáveis.
• A aplicação dos indicadores demonstrou ser uma interessante metodologia para avaliar
aspectos relacionados a sustentabilidade de bairros. Para tanto, utilizar outros indicadores
torna-se importante para enriquecer e ampliar a análise, contribuindo na perspectiva de
diagnosticar situações que possam ser melhoradas na escala do bairro e,
consequentemente, a nível municipal.
• Entende-se que estes aspectos são importantes para um bom planejamento urbano,
atendendo de forma direta as premissas da sustentabilidade, tão debatida na teoria e tão
complexa de se colocar na prática.

2 FICHAMENTO 05

Tipo:
Artigo
Título do trabalho (Original):
Neighborhood Sustainability Assessment: Evaluating Residential Development Sustainability in a
Developing Country Context
Título do traduzido (Original):
Avaliação da sustentabilidade de bairros: Avaliando a sustentabilidade do desenvolvimento
residencial em um contexto de país em desenvolvimento
Autores:
Tan Yigitcanlar, Md. Kamruzzaman and Suharto Teriman (YIGITCANLAR; KAMRUZZAMAN;
TERIMAN, 2015)
Local de publicação:
Sustainability 2015, 7, 2570-2602; doi:10.3390/su7032570
Referência Bibliográfica:
YIGITCANLAR, T.; KAMRUZZAMAN, M.; TERIMAN, S. Neighborhood sustainability assessment:
Evaluating residential development sustainability in a developing country context. Sustainability
(Switzerland), v. 7, n. 3, p. 2570–2602, 2015.
Observações importantes
Ideias muito interessantes e aplicáveis no contexto de países em desenvolvimento
PONTOS IMPORTANTE DO TRABALHO
Introdução:
• Rapid urbanization, improved quality of life, and diversified lifestyle options have collectively
led to an escalation in housing demand in our cities, where residential areas, as the largest
portion of urban land use type, play a critical role in the formation of sustainable cities.
• This paper aims to evaluate and compare sustainability levels of residential types by focusing
on their layouts. The paper scrutinizes three different development types in a developing
country context—i.e., subdivision, piecemeal, and master-planned developments
• In this paper, neighborhood sustainability is defined as the process of developing a
neighborhood level urban form or built environment that meets the needs of its residents
 whilst avoiding unacceptable social and environmental impacts both locally and in a broader
context [5].
• By urban form, we refer to the spatial distributions of different land uses connected together
with physical infrastructures and associated transport networks [6].
• The way these features are distributed within a neighborhood has profound impact on
sustainability both locally and globally. For example, research has shown that the availability
of goods and services (e.g., diverse land uses) within local areas enables residents to
participate fully in society (i.e., meets the local needs for jobs, recreation, social, health
activities), and in turn, contributes to economic and social sustainability locally [7].
• In contrast, a lack of local opportunities encourages motorized travel and thereby affects the
environmental sustainability both locally (e.g., noise, habitat fragmentation, increased
impervious surface and consequent damages in water quality and the formation of urban heat
island) and globally (e.g., air pollution and climate change) [8,9]
• Neighborhoods are considered as the building blocks of cities where most development (e.g.,
new buildings) takes place, and therefore, the overall sustainability of a city depends on the
sustainability of its neighborhood [12].
• However, past studies on sustainability assessment have focused on either the city level e.g.,
[13,14] or building level e.g., [15]; whereas the assessment of neighborhood sustainability,
an intermediate level, has received very little attention in general and in the context of
developing countries in particular [10,16].
• Neighborhood sustainability assessment (NSA) tools are defined as a set of criteria and
themes; and are used to: (a) Evaluate and rate the performance of a given neighborhood; (b)
Assess the neighborhoods’ position on the way towards sustainability, and; (c) Specify the
extent of neighborhoods’ success in approaching sustainability goals [16].
• These tools have broadly been categorized into: (a) Third-party assessment tools, which are
spin-offs of building assessment tools and assess the sustainability beyond a single building
(see, [22]), and; (b) Tools, which are embedded into neighborhood-scale plans and
sustainability initiatives to assess their sustainability performance [16]
• They have also noted that most of these tools possess ambiguities in terms of criteria
weighting, scoring, and rating system with no mechanism for local adaptability and
participation. Furthermore,
• In addition, many internationally available NSA tools do not sufficiently explain how and why
the criteria were chosen, and the methodology used to determine the requirements is also
not clear [20]. For example, Smith et al. [22] have identified that the inclusion of landscape
related criteria are often ignored in these tools
• These findings imply that any realistic and reliable assessment should take account of the
specificities of local context and varying needs of different stakeholders [19].
• Since then various neighborhood development models have emerged and practiced in
different contexts and branded as, for example, cohousing, the common interest
development, the gated community, the smart community, traditional neighborhoods, neo-
traditional neighborhoods, conventional suburban neighborhood, eco-community, ranchette
development, subdivision development, piecemeal development, and master-planned
development [21,25,30–32]
• Although the main purpose of all these models is to provide housing, their urban forms differ
significantly, particularly in terms of layout design (e.g., density, street network, pedestrian
access to transit and commercial stores, land use mix, gardens, parks and other attributes
that characterizes spaces between homes) [30,33].
• The research reported in this paper aims to contribute to the efforts in bridging the
sustainability assessment knowledge gap by investigating the sustainability outcomes of
three popular residential development models (i.e., subdivision, piecemeal, and master-
planned developments) from an exemplar developing country context—i.e., Malaysia
• The study develops a NSA tool to assess and/or compare sustainability levels of
abovementioned residential development models. The main rationale behind developing a
new assessment tool is to factor in local characteristics most appropriately—by involving a
mixture of local and international experts in the formation of the tool—in sustainability
evaluation, and thus provide a more reliable output to inform decision makers for effective
and efficient actions and solutions. The tool is not only helpful in assessing the sustainability
 of current practices, but also potentially can act as an integrated residential design and
development guide and expedites a fundamental shift in where and how people live in
developing countries.
Materiais e Métodos
Overview of Residential Development in the Case Study Context

• This research operationalizes a NSA tool using three residential development models
selected from Malaysia as a representative of developing countries.
• Population migration has become one of the contributing factors to the speedy progress of
urbanization, in the form of rapid development of residential neighborhoods to accommodate
the increasing number of urban dwellers. In addition, the expansions of city-regions,
increases in the standard of living, and changing lifestyles have collectively led to an increase
in housing demand.

Selection of Case Studies

• The research develops a NSA tool to evaluate the sustainability of three most common
residential development models from Malaysia.
• To operationalize the NSA tool, this study requires three representative residential
developments, one from each development model type—i.e., subdivision, piecemeal, and
master-planned. The following criteria were used for the selection of case studies: (a) Located
in the same local government area—to make sure they are subjected to the same planning
and development regulations, and also have access to the same municipal services and
amenities; (b) An appropriate case of the residential development type—to make sure the
representativeness of each cases; (c) Have a minimum of 80% completion and take up rate—
to make sure the maturity of developments—and; (d) Have data and information availability,
local council support and body corporation collaboration with the research team—to make
sure access to adequate data for a sound analysis. After a thorough examination of the
potential cases all across Malaysia, we selected the following three residential developments
from Ipoh City, Perak, Malaysia (Figure 1)
Formation of a Set of Sustainability Indicators

• A thorough review of the literature was conducted in order to identify a pool of relevant
indicators as used in prior studies for the measurement of neighborhood level sustainability.
• A similar method was used in a number of previous research studies (e.g., [21,69–74]).
• The initial search identified a total of 128 sustainability indicators in three major sustainability
categories of environmental, social and economic (see Table A1). The use of such a vast
array of indicators is not uncommon in the literature. However, Frame and Vale [33] have
suggested that the use of such a big number of indicators is difficult to interpret and integrate.
Consequently, the list was reduced to 38 indicators (see Table A2).
• In this reduction process, we evaluated each of the 128 indicators based on the criteria of
soundness, measurability, robustness, relevance, resilience, availability, and cost-
effectiveness in consideration to our case study local context [23].

Normalization of the Indicator Scores

• The indicator scores were normalized based on the categorical normalization technique [43].
Using the technique, each indicator score was transformed into a numerical scale ranging
from 1 to 5. Indicator values of less than 30% received a normalized scale of 1, indicator
values between 30% and 50% received a normalized scale of 2, indicator values between
50% and 70% received a normalized scale of 3, indicator values between 70% and 90%
received a 4, and values of 90% and higher received a scale of 5.

Resultados e discussões:

Conclusões:
• The literature findings revealed that rapid urbanization has brought environmentally, socially,
and economically great challenges to cities and societies. To build a sustainable
neighborhood, these challenges need to be faced efficiently and successfully. In this regard
the first step of action is to determine the sustainability levels of neighborhoods [84]. From
this perspective the literature points to a number of NSA tools. However, as the critique of
these tools suggests they have limitations in their indicator systems and adaptation in the
developing country context is challenging.
• This research contributes to the literature in two ways. A primary contribution of this research
is the development of a NSA tool with an intention to be applied in the context of developing
countries.
• Although there are quite a few NSA tools available in practice, these are built focusing on
developed countries. As a result, their direct applications were found to be difficult in this
research (i.e., developing country context) where the meaning and definition of sustainability
vary substantially. For example, an affordable house in a developed country might be
extremely unaffordable in this research.
• Similarly, a 1% reduction in car-based travel might be a significant shift towards sustainability
in a developed country whereas this makes no difference in a developing country context
where car is not the main mode of transport. In addition, currently available NSA tools often
comprise of numerous indicators that requires the availability of extensive database to
process and operationalize, which are rarely available to the researchers and/or planning
authorities in developing countries.
• Moreover, research has highlighted several methodological weaknesses of the existing NSA
tools as discussed earlier in the paper. These issues necessitate the development of a NSA
tool suitable to operationalize in the context of this research.
• As a result, the assessment focused only on the design aspects of residential neighborhood
types (e.g., layout, road network, buildings, and community facilities). Consequently, some
important themes that might be important for other type of assessment were ignored in this
research—such as building energy and water efficiency, water and waste management. Comentado [MCJ1]: Eu poderia considerar este estudo e
• The findings, within Malaysia as a representative context for developing countries, somar indicadores de inteligência na sustentabilidade,
demonstrated that master-planned development is the most sustainable residential incrementar com informações de disponibilidade de serviços
development form followed by subdivision and piecemeal development models. This provides públicos de água e coleta de resíduos.
justification for policymakers and built environment (planning and development) agencies to
encourage future residential neighborhoods to be developed based on the master-planned
concept. The finding substantiates the claims by planners that such comprehensive
development of master-planned estates or communities by a single agent has the
advantages of providing greater design flexibility, better neighborhood environments,
exclusive open spaces, various sustainable development practices, and community facilities
for the residents [85]
3 FICHAMENTO 06

Tipo:
Artigo
Título do trabalho (Original):
Evaluating Urban Quality: Indicators and Assessment Tools for Smart Sustainable Cities
Título do traduzido
Avaliação da qualidade urbana: indicadores e ferramentas de avaliação para cidades inteligentes e
sustentáveis
Autores:
Chiara Garau & Valentina Maria Pavan (GARAU & PAVAN, 2018)
Local de publicação:
Revista Sustainability 2018, 10(3), 575; https://doi.org/10.3390/su10030575
Referência Bibliográfica:
GARAU, C.; PAVAN, V. M. Evaluating urban quality: Indicators and assessment tools for smart
sustainable cities. Sustainability (Switzerland), v. 10, n. 3, 2018.

https://doi.org/10.3390/su10030575
Observações importantes
-
PONTOS IMPORTANTE DO TRABALHO
Introdução:
• The concept of smart cities has attracted significant attention in the context of urban
development policies. Although there is not a general consensus on what the concept of a
smart city is, at its core, the notion is premised on the networking of human capital, social
capital, and information and communications technologies (ICTs).
• It is, moreover, supported by the level of infrastructure needed to promote sustainability
challenges (economic, environmental, and social development) and lead to a better quality
of life
• Scholars started to consider the term “Smart Sustainable Cities”, so as to incorporate the
different aspects of sustainability in the classical “smart cities” paradigm.
• Ensuring liveable conditions in the context of rapid global urbanisation demands a deeper
understanding of the smart city concept, and many cities are finding smarter ways to manage
them. So, what makes a city ‘smart’ and ‘sustainable’ is the capacity to systematise processes
that, thanks to ICTs, optimize the functionality of the city in all sectors, by protecting the
environment, by stimulating economic growth in the local context, and by improving the
quality of life of people.
• Cities have recently become aware of this concept, by producing data particularly in terms of
energy and transport and developing smart management strategies for using the cities’
resources more effectively and for decreasing the costs and waste that urban living
generates, also in term of wellbeing and inclusion;
• Many researchers argue that the quality of life may not represent a separate dimension of a
smart sustainable city, given that all the actions undertaken in the other areas of city
management should also have the objective of raising the quality of life and urban
competitiveness.
• Governments at all levels are now embracing the both notion of sustainability and smartness,
by developing specific policies and programs that target sustainable development, economic
growth, a better quality of life for citizens, and the creation of happiness (BALLAS, 2013);
• Until now, researchers have used two basic approaches to examine the quality of urban life:
the objective approach, which is typically confined to analysing and reporting secondary
data—usually aggregate data that are mainly available from official government data
 collections, including the census, at different geographic or spatial scales—and the subjective
approach, which uses social survey methods to collect primary data at the disaggregate or
individual level, and focuses on peoples’ behaviours and assessments, or their qualitative
evaluations of different aspects of urban life;
• The city must become a powerful generator of value, beginning with its own spatial, social,
cultural, and relational resources. The new creative city has to provide opportunities for real
development that are not only quantitative but also increasingly qualitative that positively
influence the domains of collective assets and economic and social capital (CARTA, 2012);
• This research aims to document an accurate and flexible procedure for evaluating the urban
quality of medium-density neighbourhoods, using an approach that combines both objective
and subjective approaches, because the authors consider it imperative that both dimensions
of urban quality be considered simultaneously
Materiais e Métodos:
Methodology and Objectives of Urban Quality Evaluation
• The methodology developed in this study synthesises theoretical and conceptual aspects of
urban quality under the smart sustainable paradigm. Most of the dimensions that affect citizen
satisfaction are determined by state policies, and regional planners need best practices to
facilitate local planning and management;
• The key objective of this study was to develop a new scientific methodology that can be used
to support cities’ transformation into smart sustainable cities and to evaluate the validity of
this performance measurement framework for monitoring and comparing the implementation
of smart city solutions. Though performance measurement is a key component of both
planning and implementing smart city solutions [30,42], cities have not yet widely adopted or
implemented performance measurement systems;
• The evaluation of urban quality of life can be undertaken at various scales [43], from the city
level to the neighbourhood or building level, thus enabling the integration of different aspects.
Indicators should monitor progress over time [44]. For this reason, city indicators should be
formulated in such a way that they can be easily incorporated into a city’s on-going
programme of gathering statistics, and their measurements should be summarised and
integrated into the city’s planning processes.

Designing ofthe Indicators Criteria

• Starting from the analysis of the criteria used by these two frameworks, the authors have
constructed the list of criteria for the selection of the indicators that they consider most
effective for their study;
• Following these considerations, indicators in the study were selected on the basis of following
criteria: objectivity (clear, easy to understand, precise, and unambiguous); relevance,
measurability, and reproducibility (quantitative, systematic observable); validity (with the
possibility of verification and data quality control); representativeness (at the city level);
comparability (over time); and accessibility (available databases, use of existing data);
• According to Delsante, Bertolino, Bugatti, and Cristina [59], the set of indicators used should
include references to housing, social, and collective services at the neighbourhood scale, as
well as references to the landscape and its environmental features.
• The choice of a shortlist of quantitative and qualitative indicators is a delicate process that
first requires the identification of the case study, because the indicators are strictly connected
with the territory. For that reasons, authors describe the case study, which in this case is the
historic centre of Cagliari and its peripheral areas.

The Case Study of Cagliari (Italy)

• Cagliari is the capital city of the Sardinian Region in Italy. Located on the southern coast of
the Island of Sardinia, it is considered the island’s political, economic, cultural, and tourism
centre.
 • The city covers 85 km2, has a population of 154,460, and has a population density of 1817
people per square km. A value of urban density of approximately 2000 inhabitants is
considered an optimal value [54], and Cagliari was selected as the case study for this
research due to its urban density value, referred to as the number of people who inhabit a
given urbanised area. It is considered ideal for evaluating the urban quality of medium-density
neighbourhoods;
• Following these considerations, for the development of our case study, two neighbourhood
were taken into account, located in two different areas: the first area is the city’s historic
centre, the neighbourhood called ‘Villanova’, and the second is in the city’s peripheral area,
the neighbourhood called ‘Sant’ Elia’
• Once the case study has been identified, it is necessary to identify the most significant list of
indicators for our area of intervention.

Identification of a Shortlist of Indicators

• The choice of indicators is closely related to the achievement of the desirable goals for smart
cities, referred to its six components: smart living, smart economy, smart environment, smart
mobility, smart governance and smart people.
• A smart and sustainable city has goals to be achieved in an adaptable, scalable, accessible
way, such as improve quality of life of its citizens; ensure economic growth; improve well-
being of its citizens by ensuring access to social and community services; establish an
environmentally responsible and sustainable approach to development; ensure efficient
service delivery of basic services and infrastructure such as public transportation, water
supply, telecommunication and other utilities; and provide an effective regulatory and local
governance mechanism ensuring equitable policies (DHINGRA; CHATTOPADHYAY, 2016);
• Smart cities are developed urban areas designed with a perspective of creating high quality
of life and sustainable economic development by through advancement in several key sectors
including environment, mobility, people, economy, government and technology.
• In light of this consideration, the indicators are grouped into six categories (Table 1): the Use
and Fruition group is related to accessibility, the quality and presence of services, the
infrastructure, and mobility; the Health andWell-being group represents the area’s quality of
life, citizens’ priorities, needs, and levels of satisfaction; the Appearance group refers to
architectural and environmental values; the Management group considers the efficiency with
which maintenance activities are undertaken; the Environment group is linked to the quality
of the landscape and the environmental system; and the Security group relates to perceptions
of personal safety and security. Assessing the level of urban quality involves a thorough and
critical analysis of the context and is conducted using a series of checklists that represent the
investigation’s specific requirements (Table 2; Figures 2 and 3)
• The sub-indicators used in the methodology do not correspond to those used in the planning
process, as they refer not only to quantitative but also qualitative dimensions. The set
describes the urban context with completeness. A significant tool for assessment is
represented by the information forms (Figure 3), one for each sub-indicator, filled with general
descriptions, aiming to reduce subjectivity during the evaluation process.
• The categories and indicators are products of the sum of the sub-indicators, and each is
expressed by a numeric value. The sum of the values of the aggregated indicators produce
what we have called the Indicator of Smart Urban Quality (ISUQ). The ISUQ is based on a
general layout (structure of the procedure) from which categories, indicators, and sub-
indicators are created. This indicator ISUQ is considered smart because it combines
traditional aspects of urban quality with smart and sustainable aspects related to the quality
of life, health, and well-being.
• The point system used to define the rating is based on a system of a 5—point scale, that was
set out as follows: 0 points are given for an insufficient quantitative assessment, 2 points are
given for a sufficient quantitative assessment, 4 points for a good assessment, and 5 points
for an excellent assessment;
• The value of the ISUQ index is scored by adding up the score on each item of sub-indicators.
• A total of 760 points are available, representing the maximum value of the ISUQ index. The
quality relating to the census section under analysis is considered sufficient if the value of the
 calculated index is between 380 and 570 points. Below the average score of 380 points you
have poor quality; between 381 and 570 sufficient quality; between 571 and 700 good quality;
and over 700 excellent quality. For the assessed sections of poor urban quality it will be
necessary to provide for redevelopment actions to be implemented in a short time.
• It is possible, therefore, to create a rating for each neighbourhood census area and identify
aspects that present the greatest problems for each area, after which planners can design
interventions aimed at improving the neighbourhood’s environmental quality. This proposed
model is a technical tool that will produce a concise evaluation of a neighbourhood’s urban
quality expressed as a numeric value. Because it is flexible, modifiable, and open, new or
updated indicators can be added easily, and this evaluation model can be adapted to a single
case study;
• The application of the methodology proposed to our case studies, in relation to two different
types of urban realities, the central neighbourhood of Villanova, the recent object of
redevelopment policies, on the one hand, and the peripheral neighbourhood of Sant’Elia on
the other, allowed to highlight the various problems present in the two areas.
•

Resultados e discussões:
• The evaluation process has shown that the overall smart urban quality index differs between
the two neighbourhoods. The scores in some sections are similar, but that does not mean
the scores are equally close to each other for each indicator, some of which scored very
differently due to specific local features. The analysis of the single evaluation sheets allowed
us to deepen the factors’ influence on the total score. As can be seen, the majority of the
census sections in the historic district of Villanova are of sufficient and good quality, and
mostly poor in the peripheral area. No section reported an excellent evaluation. The problems
encountered are obviously different in the two neighborhoods;
 • The proposed methodology is a tool that is effective in evaluating urban environmental
quality, as its outputs are expressed in numeric values. It reduces subjectivity in the
evaluation process and, most importantly, can be related to other data (e.g., environmental,
health, and well-being);
• The final outcome of the assessment procedure is meaningful for the disciplines of
architecture and urban design. Although the methodology is meaningful for obtaining an
overall Smart Urban Quality Index, what is important is not the numerical value in absolute
terms but its progress over time and its comparison with other locations.
• The selected indicators, according to the authors, fit quite well within the framework of
smart sustainable cities. In fact, the following attributes of smart sustainable cities are
observed: sustainability, quality of life and intelligence. Sustainability relates to governance,
pollution and other factors. Quality of life is about emotional wellbeing. Intelligence is the
ambition to improve economic, social and environmental standards.
• Citizen engagement has a critical role to play. Public Administration should make space for
citizen involvement in planning and responsive policies and in finding solutions and
improving services. Public participation in decision-making processes represents an added
value in the objective of increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of urban policies. It
improves the quality of life and the wellbeing of its inhabitants and ensures higher standards
of living and employment opportunities.
Conclusões:
• Quality of life in urban areas is becoming a strategic issue for city planners. In fact, cities can
have excellent tools for the implementation of urban planning policies in terms of smartness,
sustainability, in order to move toward a smart and sustainable urbanism. Assessments of
the quality of urban life represent a multidisciplinary concept that encompasses
environmental, social, and urban planning features, and a subjective estimation.
• The general objective of this paper has been to document a process that will standardise the
evaluation of urban quality levels and contribute to the optimisation of its performance. The
method used was based on six categories, classified by 11 indicators and 38 sub-indicators
that represent a large number of variables characteristic of the urban contexts studied.
• Analysis was conducted by using checklists and questionnaires that made it possible to
highlight the most critical aspects of the two neighbourhoods analysed. Moreover, use of the
checklists and thematic maps enabled the assessment and individualisation of urban,
environmental, and building problems, and made it possible to get an instant picture of the
areas that need more attention from policy makers. These tools provide inputs that can be
used to start the process of regeneration, improve smart urban quality, and design innovative
policies and urban projects that promote quality of life, especially in peripheral urban areas.
• This paper has shown that the methodology used can be applied to evaluate various
elements of smartness—such as the health, well-being, environment, and governance of
cities—to make life in the city easier, more convenient, and secure. The measurement of the
level of smartness in the city allows public authorities and city planners to promote integrated
urban governance by monitoring governance actions, and to assess the effectiveness of
these interventions for improving the quality of life, which is the central theme of contemporary
political development in the urban field of smart cities.