Susta-Info Methodology

Susta-Info Validation - How does it work?

In brief, the validation methodology represents a major added value and is developed:

  1. To select and present UN-HABITAT practices, case-studies and publications, seen as relevant for local authorities and for the EU 6th Framework Programme, and regarded as 'very valuable' for actors in sustainable urban development worldwide. 'Very Valuable' needs to be interpreted in several ways; as really exceptionally good, as very interesting (considering e.g. methodology, relevance on some selected aspects, etc.), or even as controversial but with interesting lessons to be learned.
  2. To select and present EU FP5 and FP6 research documents, regarded as valuable and relevant for the EU 6th Framework Programme and for various urban actors worldwide.

I. Selection of UN-HABITAT practices and publications

This method, developed by the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (KULeuven) in Belgium, with ICLEI as designated 'reference group' of the Susta-Info Consortium, is used to validate and select exemplary and valuable practices from the UN-HABITAT Best Practices database, and to select relevant UN-HABITAT publications and research documents. The validation is based on 2 different sets of criteria. One set assesses the level of sustainability of the practices, and the other set defines the Susta-Info focus.

UN-HABITAT practices: In order to select valuable practices from the large pool of UN-HABITAT Best Practices, Susta-Info has developed the following procedure:

  1. Inclusion of only the UN-HABITAT practices that are qualified as Promising Practices, Good Practices, Best Practices, or Award Winners.
  2. Composition of a rough list of pre-selected practices, based on general Susta-Info relevance and experience.
  3. Narrowing down of the list using 4 basic selection criteria related to its relevance for Susta-info:
    1. evidence of well-defined role of local authorities
    2. indication of sustainable land use (land/space as a resource)
      (FP6 EU research topic global change and eco-systems)
    3. cross-sectoral partnerships & community support
    4. clear presence of capacity building activities
  4. Systematic and thorough assessment of the practices using 6 major validation criteria:
    1. Strategic
    2. Participatory
    3. Replicable
    4. Localised
    5. Inclusive
    6. Empowering

Each criterion obtains a 'score' or a 'degree of fulfilment', the minimum score being 0 and maximum 5. The score depends on the extent to which each of the 5 sub-criteria is fulfilled (download full assessment form showing sub-criteria [PDF 1.46 MB]). The differences between the intended and the actual achievements and results (impact) of the project are taken into account For each practice, this score is translated into a shade of brown, which illustrates to what extent each of the criteria is fulfilled. A darker shade of brown corresponds to a higher score. The practices that are considered to be 'very valuable' are labelled with a ''Susta-Info Very Valuable Practice' stamp. The brown bar below shows the extent to which each of the criteria is met, providing a comparison of the 'scores' allocated to each Practice.

UN-HABITAT publications: The selection of UN HABITAT publications and research documents is based on the above-mentioned 4 basic criteria for the Susta-Info relevance, as well as their electronic access and availability.

II. Selection of EU FP5 and FP6 documents

When it comes to the EU documents, not all of the FP5 and FP6 projects were necessarily relevant to Susta-Info. In order to select which of these projects were most relevant for Susta-Info, GHK applied several criteria:

  • Projects must have an explicit 'urban' dimension
  • Projects must not be too technical, e.g. 'hybrid geophysical technology'
  • Projects must not be concerned solely with dissemination/exchange of experience and must not be events such as one-off conferences, or courses
  • Projects must not be very theoretical in nature, i.e. should have a practical application of some sort.

Using these criteria, a list of FP5 and FP6 projects considered most relevant to sustainable urban development was generated, which was then reviewed, amended and finalised by POLIS, a Susta-Info partner and designated 'reference group', forming a final list of EU projects to be abstracted and validated for Susta-Info.