Designing a certification system for sustainable urban areas: Key considerations and their implications for the development of Citylab Post-Construction

In future development dealingwith ongoing global urbanisation and sustainability challenges,urban development is often seen asa key component. To support urban development, various certification systems that define 'sustainable'buildingsor urban areashave been developed world-wide.For a Swedishcontext, Sweden Green Building Council (SGBC) has developed Citylab as asupporttool forsustainable urban development. This tool contains several certification systems and a guiding document forthe planning and construction phasesof urban development. The intention from start has been to include also a certification systemfocusing on follow-up requirementspost-construction inurban development projects, butthe role and function of thiscertification system havenotbeenspecifiedby SGBC. Inthis licentiate thesis,Researchthrough Design (RtD) and a transdisciplinary approachwere appliedto contribute to thedevelopment ofa credibleandready-to-use certification system for sustainable urban areas in a post-construction phase, called Citylab Post-Construction.Through that process the thesis also identifieskey considerations when designing such a certification system.There is little information on how existingcertification systemsfor sustainable urban development were developed,andthere is no well-known and widely used framework for their development. To guide the development of Citylab Post-Construction,a framework of key considerations was formulated,based on a literature review. The framework defines(1) benefits a certification system should provide, (2) principles it needs to fulfil in order to provide those benefits and (3) how to handle the principlesin the developmentprocess. Using theframework in the research presentedinthis thesis madeit clearer what was at stake in each decision and thus the development process more transparent.To identify needs and ideas forCitylabPost-Construction, potential future users of the certification systemwere interviewed. No consensus was reached regarding the role and function the certification system should have,but fouralternatives wereformulated. By comparing thesealternatives with the principles in the framework, differences and shortcomingswere identified. Situationsin whichdifferent principles within the framework may conflict with each otherwere also identified, e.g.the most scientifically credible solution may not always be practically feasible. Thus,the principles cannot all be fulfilled simultaneouslyand mustbe prioritisedand balan