Penilaian Kawasan Perumahan dengan Pendekatan Konsep Berkelanjutan (Greenship Neighborhood Assessment)

Global warming and environmental degradation are still being issues in various countries, including Indonesia. It has been causing the climate change. In 2015 the United Nations started a program called Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). One of the goals was to tackle climate change. In order to encourage the implementation of SDGs, an effort that could conduct was the realization of green housing areas. An assesment is needed to make sure that sustainable development in neighborhood is implemented well and correct. Green Building Council Indonesia (GBCI) has published a rating system called Greenship Neighborhood as a reference for assessing the concept of sustainable development neighbourhood. The purpose of this study was to find out how the implementation of Greenship Neighbourhood and how much value is achieved in Citraland residential area. The method that used were descriptive qualitative and quantitative. Descriptive qualitative was a description of the research object conditions, while descriptive quantitative was output assessments numbers based on the Greenship Neighborhood assessment tool. There were seven aspects that assessed i.e. land ecological enhancement, movement and connectivity, water management and conservation, solid and material waste, community wellbeing strategy, buildings and energy, and innovation future development. The results of research showed that there were six of the seven assessment categories have been applied in the object area. Generaly, the total value is 36 out of 124, with percentage achieved 29%. Based on these result, Citraland Pekanbaru residential area did not meet the minimum standard for the application of Greenship Neigborhood according to GBCI.

Interacting with place and mapping community needs to context: Comparing and triangulating multiple geospatial-qualitative methods using the Focus–Expand–Compare approach

Geospatial-qualitative methods, which combine both observation and interpretative accounts during data collection through extended exposure and movement in place, have been increasingly used to explore “person–place” interactions and assess communities of place. Despite their increased use, there is a lack of reflexive discussion on how they differ in capturing person–place interactions and ways to combine them. Drawing on our experiences using three related methods—Photovoice, Walking through Spaces, and interactive Participatory Learning and Action exercise-led community focus groups—we compared the methodological advantages that each method brings to the construction of “place” and in exploring person–place interactions among the community of older adults living in a neighborhood of Singapore for a neighborhood assessment. We then illustrated how using a Focus–Expand–Compare approach for methodological triangulation can add value in generating greater depth and breadth of perspectives on a topic of interest explored for intervention development.

Reviewing Neighborhood Sustainability Assessment Tools through Critical Heritage Studies

This article reports on a critical review of how cultural heritage is addressed in two internationally well-known and used neighborhood assessment tools (NSAs): BREEAM Communities (BREEAM-C) and LEED Neighborhood Design (LEED-ND). The review was done through a discourse analysis in which critical heritage studies, together with a conceptual linking of heritage to sustainability, served as the point of departure. The review showed that while aspects related to heritage are present in both NSAs, heritage is re-presented as primarily being a matter of safeguarding material expressions of culture, such as buildings and other artifacts, while natural elements and immaterial-related practices are disregarded. Moreover, the NSAs institutionalize heritage as a field of formal knowledge and expert-dominated over the informal knowledge of communities.

Neighborhood Incivilities, Perceived Neighborhood Safety, and Walking to School Among Urban-Dwelling Children

Background:Walking to school is an important source of physical activity among children. There is a paucity of research exploring environmental determinants of walking to school among children in urban areas.Methods:A cross-sectional secondary analysis of baseline data (2007) from 365 children in the “Multiple Opportunities to Reach Excellence” (MORE) Study (8 to 13 years; Mean 9.60 years, SD 1.04). Children and caregivers were asked about walking to school and perceived safety. Objective measures of the environment were obtained using a validated environmental neighborhood assessment.Results:Over half (55.83%) of children reported walking to school most of the time. High levels of neighborhood incivilities were associated with lower levels of perceived safety (OR: 0.39, 95% CI: 0.21 to 0.72). Living on a block above the median in incivilities was associated with a 353% increase in odds of walking to school (OR: 3.53; 95% CI: 1.68 to 7.39).Conclusions:Children residing in neighborhoods high in incivilities are more likely to walk to school, in spite of lower levels of perceived safety. As a high proportion of children residing in disadvantaged neighborhoods walk to school, efforts should be directed at minimizing exposure to neighborhood hazards by ensuring safe routes to and from school.