Developers Guide to ISO 37101
An overview of the proposed developers guide to ISO 37101
ISO 37109 - Practical guidance for project developers - Meeting ISO 37101 framework principles (the "developers guide to ISO 37101"), has been described in the following presentations:
- ISO TC268 meeting, Paris, April 2019 PDF
- ISO TC268 meeting, Wuhan, October 2019 PDF
- ISSCC Conference, Hangzhou, October 2019 PDF
Presentations dealing with ISO 37101 and other ISO standards in the ISO3 7101 series are available.
A working group organised by FIDIC, the International Federation of Consulting Engineers, and France's Fédération Nationale des Travaux Publics has arranged for a project developers' guide to the ISO 37101 standard to be proposed to the International Standards Organization (ISO) as a new work item proposal at a meeting in Moscow in December 2018 of ISO Technical Committee 268 that is charged with developing the ISO 37100 series of standards for community and urban sustainability management.
A note prepared before the meeting that describes the the need for an ISO 37101 project guide for use by developers of essentially urban projects, both new build and renovation, is available PDF. The note includes an outline of the proposed guide.
The proposal was accepted at the April 2019 of the ISO TC268 and a task group (ISO TC268 WG1 TG3) chaired by Jean Félix was formed to carry out the drafting. The process starts with a Working Draft (WD index 1, circulated in December 2019) with a Committee Draft (CD) scheduled for early-2021 in view of issuing a DIS (Draft International Standard) in early-2022, and a FDIS (final DIS) in mid- to end-2022.
The official ISO general information is available and included on the list of ISO Sustainable Cities and Communities standards as supporting SDG11 .
ISO 37101 - USF framework
Urban frameworks that aim to support cities as they progress along the path to sustainability received a major impetus with the publication in 2017 of the ISO 37101 international standard. A more recent addition is the Global Environmental Facility - World Bank Urban Sustainability Framework (USF) guide that was released in February 2018. The USF complements the ISO 37101 framework by separating out those components of action in specific areas which deal with the enabling environment as opposed to performance outcomes. A text describing a common ISO 37101 - USF framework is available PDF and the GPSC website summarises the USF.
The USF supports GEF's Sustainable Cities Integrated Approach Pilot PDF and is seen as a "comprehensive methodology to support cities to adopt an integrated approach to urban planning and management and improve their urban sustainability status over time." The USF was launched at the 2018 World Urban Forum (press release; announcement).
A recent concept paper Integrating a City’s Existing Infrastructure Vulnerabilities and Carbon Footprint for Achieving City-Wide Sustainability and Resilience Goals PDF describes tools that support the USF and USM in general.
The proposed developers guide to ISO 37101 envisages the incorporation of USF concepts, methodologies and tools.
The Global Platform for Sustainable Cities (GPSC), a network of 28 cities which is managed by the World Bank and supported by the Global Environment Facility (GEF) initiated the Sustainability Outlook Diagnostic pilot to assist Melaka State, Malaysia, in achieving a high level of integrated urban sustainability. The pilot was "guided" by the GPSC’s USF and should support the next steps in achieving goals.
An overview report released in late-2019 is available (PDF) covering a detailed assessment, with a separate "supporting report" for each of several areas (economic success; environmental plans; services and housing; urban form; mobility; fiscal sustainability).
The pilot also undertook an input policy-focused benchmarking against Izmir (Turkey), Lisbon (Portugal), Recife (Brazil), and Singapore analyzed 65 indicators to determine a holistic urban sustainability profile for each city for the six USF dimensions (Governance and Integrated Urban Planning; Fiscal Sustainability; Urban Economies; Natural Environment and Resources; Climate Action and Resilience; and Inclusivity and Quality of Life) based on a framework having four different maturity levels. The diension corresspond zto ISO 37101 action areas, and they can be grouped into three groups of action areas as follows:
- Government & integrated planning (Governance, Culture, Mobility, Living and Working Environment)
- Urban economics & Fiscal sustainability (Education, Innovation, Living together, Economy)
- Climate action, Inclusivity & Natural environment (Health, Safety/security, Infrastructure, Biodiversity)
For benchmarking using 34 qualitative (input) indicators and 31 quantitative (output/outcome) indicators, the four comparator cities were identified as falling along a policy development continuum (based on demographics, geography, economic activities, cultural affinity,and sustainability ambitions) that serves as a roadmap for sustainable urban planning. Policy inputs included strategies, programmes, regulations, and institutions that should be considered to promote integrated urban development.
The benchmark scores for each dimension were classified using a policy continuum composed of four steps (emerging; consolidating; advanced; sustainable).
The overview report claims that "the findings of the assessment and benchmarking are analogous, confirming the efficacy of this approach". This conclusion arises because the assessment highlighted the following needs:
- Economic productivity (mainly leverage competitive advantages)
- Integrated urban planning (mainly shape a compact and human-centric urban form)
- Fiscal sustainability (mainly inprove creditworthiness)
while benchmarking gave the following ratings for the dimensions:
- Fiscal Sustainability
- Climate Action and Resilience
- Urban Economies
- Governance and Integrated Urban Planning
- Natural Environment and Resources
- Inclusivity and Quality of Life
The report says that "the expectation is that more cities in the GPSC network and beyond will benefit from this benchmarking process", suggesting that benchmarking against the six USF dimensions without assessment reports may be adequate in order to identify pathways for urban sustainability development.