ABSTRACT
Our methods and tools have not helped us to design net positive buildings or balanced environmental ows between cities and regions. We have seen the need for design tools and processes that instead help us re-conceive development (cities, buildings, farms and factories, infrastructure) in relation to each other, development, the bioregion and the life-support system. Systems design must better address social sustainability as well, not just a more fair distribution of pollution. Design should counterbalance or reverse inequitable resource transfers – in ways that make everyone better o. To do this, we have said, planning analysis tools are needed that, among other things:
• Identify social, environmental and ecological problems and inequities in existing development (resource transfers, internalities, costs of inaction and so on) • Track the transfer of resources through development and land-use allocation, including the transfer of space from public to private uses • Help nd ways in which ‘rurban’ development could improve upon these conditions (design
for eco-services) and restore environmental ows (eg river restoration, nature corridors and biodiversity habitats) • Provide a framework for prioritizing public and/or private investments in eco-innovations to turn vicious circles into virtuous cycles
In this chapter, we will outline a conceptual framework to guide methods to map resource ows and transfers, assess the eectiveness of planning policies, and prioritize investment in Positive Development.
