ABSTRACT
All the contributions in the previous chapters go a long way to develop the so-called ‘co-evolutionary approach’ to environmental assessment, and manage to overcome the limitations of the past methodologies by focusing attention on the so-called ‘hard’ certainties of the bio-physical science underlying the less certain, risky and ‘softer’ social relations of SUD. Set within the BEQUEST framework and protocols, the contributions making up this volume provide a detailed account of much current practice in the application of environmental assessment methods key to this transformation. This has illustrated the toolkit supporting the evaluation of SUD and provided an account of the environmental assessment methods key in building the environmental capacity needed to qualify the ecological integrity of urban development, and provide the techniques of analysis required to evaluate whether this brings about an equitable distribution of resources. Those assessment methods and techniques of analysis also required to evaluate if the distribution of resources is the outcome of public participation based on socially inclusive decisions taken about the future of cities.
