| |
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2010.04.007 |
|---|
| Web URL(s): | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169204610000769
Last checked: 01/31/2014
Access conditions: Item is within a limited-access website |
|---|
| Publication Type:
| Report |
|---|
| Author(s): | Pediaditi, Kalliope;
Doick, Kieron J.;
Moffat, Andrew J. |
|---|
| Author Affiliation: | Pediaditi: Department of Environmental Management, Mediterranean Agronomic Institute Chania, Crete, Greece; Doick and Moffat: Centre for Forestry and Climate Change, Forest Research, Surrey, UK |
|---|
| Title: | Monitoring and evaluation practice for brownfield, regeneration to greenspace initiatives: A meta-evaluation of assessment and monitoring tools |
|---|
| Source: | Landscape and Urban Planning. Vol. 97, No. 1, July 30 2010, p. 22-36. |
|---|
| Publishing Information: | Amsterdam: Elsevier |
|---|
| # of Pages: | 15 |
|---|
| Keywords: | TIC Keywords: Brownfields; Evaluative methods; Greenspace; Reclamation; Restoration; Sustainable land management
|
|---|
| Abstract/Contents: | "Brownfield regeneration and greenspace creation are increasingly promoted by national and EU policy in support of sustainable development principles. There is increasing pressure for the evaluation of brownfield greening initiatives because of their cost, competing funding priorities and evidence of unsustainable practice. Assessment of sustainability requires monitoring and evaluation throughout the life cycle of a project and requires commitment from the many different bodies involved. This paper examines whether tools are available to enable brownfield greening stakeholders to carry out sustainability evaluation for brownfield regenerated to greenspace. To this end, we present the criteria that an ideal brownfield greening sustainability monitoring and evaluation tool should fulfil, based on a study of stakeholder needs and the Bellagio Principles. The proposed criteria are used to evaluate 28 tools considered potentially relevant to brownfield regenerated greenspace. For each tool, the research identified limitations to its use for evaluation of brownfield regenerated greenspace sustainability. Recommendations are made for measures required for the greater adoption of monitoring and evaluation practice as well as directions for tool development." |
|---|
| Language: | English |
|---|
| References: | 66 |
|---|
| Note: | Tables |
|---|
| ASA/CSSA/SSSA Citation (Crop Science-Like - may be incomplete):
Pediaditi, K., K. J. Doick, and A. J. Moffat. 2010. Monitoring and evaluation practice for brownfield, regeneration to greenspace initiatives: A meta-evaluation of assessment and monitoring tools. Landscape Urban Plan. 97(1):p. 22-36. |
| Fastlink to access this record outside TGIF: https://tic.msu.edu/tgif/flink?recno=165251 |
| If there are problems with this record, send us feedback about record 165251. |
| Choices for finding the above item: |
|---|
| DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2010.04.007 |
| Web URL(s):
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169204610000769
Last checked: 01/31/2014
Access conditions: Item is within a limited-access website |
| 
MSU catalog number: b2322641 |
| Find from within TIC:
Digitally in TIC by record number. |
| Request through your local library's inter-library loan service (bring or send a copy of this TGIF record) |
