CUS  Vol.8 No.2 , June 2020
Innovation through Urban Diversity and Achieving Comprehensive Sustainable Urbanism from a Community-Oriented Approach
Abstract: In current urban studies focused on pathways of sustainable urbanism, the main discourse is on the development of all-inclusive approaches or comprehensive methods that could encompass multiple factors of sustainability. As a result, a bigger emphasis has been given to other dimensions of “cultural” or “governance” (also known as institutional). In more recent years, more scholarly research studies refer to governance as the fourth pillar of sustainability, and more research studies analyse the multi-dimensional methods of socio-cultural, socio-economic, etc. These factors all have major impacts on the social, environmental, and economic aspects of the city. As a result, this research study aims to test the notion of “sustainable urbanism” from a behavioural perspective, which includes market development behavior and political economy (or mixed economy). This study promotes urban diversity from the multiplicity of diversity across the physical environment, social and economic systems, cultural attributes, people backgrounds, professions and sectors, etc. This then leads to discussions on innovation through urban diversity. Hence, it is important to evaluate how diversity promotes sustainable urbanism through specific economic and social systems in contemporary city development scenarios. The findings from this study feed into matters of urban diversity and urban innovation, and towards pathways of sustainable urbanism.
Cite this paper: Cheshmehzangi, A. , Aurelia Li, H. (2020) Innovation through Urban Diversity and Achieving Comprehensive Sustainable Urbanism from a Community-Oriented Approach. Current Urban Studies, 8, 222-240. doi: 10.4236/cus.2020.82012.

[1]   Adams, T. (2017). Transit-Oriented Development: Mixed-Use Zoning.

[2]   Adekola, A., & Sergi, B. S. (2007). The Significance and Paradox of Globalisation in the 21st Century: The Role of Three Major Global Institutions in Selected Areas. International Journal of Management and Enterprise Development, 4, 354-371.

[3]   Aiesha, R., & Evans, G. (2006). VivaCity: Mixed-Use and Urban Tourism. In M. K. Smith (Ed.), Tourism, Culture and Regeneration (pp. 35-48). Wallingford: CAB International.

[4]   Alonso, W. (1964). Location and Land Use. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

[5]   Blackson, H. (2013). Don’t Get Mixed Up on Mixed-Use. PlaceMakers.

[6]   Chapin, F. S., Matson, P. A., & Mooney, H. A. (2002). Principles of Terrestrial Ecosystem Ecology. New York: Springer.

[7]   Cherry, B., & Pevsner, N. (1998). London 4: North (Pevsner Architectural Guides: Buildings of England). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

[8]   Cheshmehzangi, A. (2014). Spatial Syntagma and Identity of a Place: Sensing, Relating to, and Knowing a Place. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 24, 799-810.

[9]   Cheshmehzangi, A. (2020). Identity of Cities and City of Identities. Singapore: Springer.

[10]   Cheshmehzangi, A., & Heath, T. (2012). Effects of Temporary Markets on Spatial Inter-Relations: A Behavioural Analysis of a Public Realm in the UK. Journal of Asian Behavioural Studies, 2, 41-52.

[11]   Cheshmehzangi, A., Zhu, Y., & Li, B. (2010). Integrated Urban Design Approach: Sustainability for Urban Design. Ningbo: Proceedings of International Conference on Green Manufacturing.

[12]   Cooper, R., & Boyko, C. (2010). VivaCity2020’s Process and Tools for Urban Design Decision Making? Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, 3, 253-273.

[13]   Dawodu, A., Akinwolemiwa, B., & Cheshmehzangi, A. (2016). A Conceptual Re-Visualization of Sustainability Pathways for the Development of Neighborhood Sustainability Assessment Tools (NSATs). Sustainable Cities and Society, 28, 398-410.

[14]   Evans, G. (2014). Living in the City: Mixed Use and Quality of Life in the City. In R. Cooper, E. Burton, & C. Cooper (Eds.), Wellbeing: A Complete Reference Guide, Wellbeing and the Environment. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.

[15]   Fachinelli, A. C., Carrillo, F. J., & D’Arisbo, A. (2014). Capital System, Creative Economy and Knowledge City Transformation: Insights from Bento Gonçalves, Brazil. Expert Systems with Applications, 41, 5614-5624.

[16]   Fan, P., Urs, N., & Hamlin, R. E. (2019). Rising Innovative City-Regions in a Transitional Economy: A Case Study of ICT Industry in Cluj-Napoca, Romania. Technology in Society, 58, Article ID: 101139.

[17]   Fiske, C. (2019). Mixed-Use Zoning: What Is It and Why Does It Matter? Northcoast Environmental Center.

[18]   Florida, R. (2013). Class-Divided Cities: New York Edition.

[19]   Florida, R., & Gates, G. (2001). Technology and Tolerance: The Importance of Diversity to High Technology Growth. Washington DC: The Brookings Institute.

[20]   Gertler, M. S., Florida, R., Gates, G., & Vinodrai, T. (2002). Competing on Creativity: Placing Ontario’s Cities in North American Context. A Report Prepared for the Ontario Ministry of Enterprise, Opportunity and Innovation and the Institute for Competitiveness and Prosperity.

[21]   Harrison, A., Wheeler, P., & Whitehead, C. (2004). Distributed Workspace: Sustainable Work Environments. London: Routledge.

[22]   Hawkes, J. (2001). The Fourth Pillar of Stability: Culture’s Essential Role in Public Planning. Melbourne: Cultural Development Network and Part of University Press.

[23]   Huston, S., & Mateo-Babiano, I. (2013). Vertical Mixed-Use Communities: A Solution to Urban Sustainability? Review, Audit and Developer Perspectives. Vienna, Austria: The 20th Annual European Real Estate Society Conference.

[24]   Hutton, T. (2010). The New Economy of the Inner City: Restructuring, Regeneration and Dislocation in the 21st Century Metropolis. London: Routledge.

[25]   Hutton, T. (2011). Cultural Production in the Transnational City. In A. C. Pratt, & P. Jeffcutt (Eds.), Creativity, Innovation and the Cultural Economy. Routledge Studies in Global Competition, London and New York: Routledge.

[26]   Jacob, J. (1969). The Economy of Cities. New York: Vintage.

[27]   Komeily, A., & Srinivasan, R. S. (2015). A Need for Balanced Approach to Neighborhood Sustainability Assessments: A Critical Review and Analysis. Sustainable Cities and Society, 18, 32-43.

[28]   Krebs, C. J. (2009). Ecology: The Experimental Analysis of Distribution and Abundance (6th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Benjamin Cummings.

[29]   Liang, Y., Du, M., Wang, X., & Yu, X. (2020). Planning for Urban Life: A New Approach of Sustainable Land Use Plan Based on Transit-Oriented Development. Evaluation and Program Planning, 80, Article ID: 101811.

[30]   Liu, C. Y., Hu, F. Z., & Jeong, J. (2019). Towards Inclusive Urban Development? New Knowledge/Creative Economy and Wage Inequality in major Chinese Cities. Cities, Article ID: 102385. (In Press)

[31]   Live Oak Contracting (2015). Sustainable Mixed-Use Development: Designing Economically and Socially Healthy Communities. Live Oak News.

[32]   Millott, E., & Tournois, N. (2010). The Paradoxes of Globalisation. New York and London: Palgrave Macmillan.

[33]   Molles, M. C. (1999). Ecology: Concepts and Applications. Boston, MA: WCB/McGraw-Hill.

[34]   Perdikogianni, I., & Penn, A. (2005). Measuring Diversity: A Multivariate Analysis of Land Use and Temporal Patterning in Clerkenwell. Proceedings of the 5th International Space Syntax Symposium, 2, 742-761.

[35]   Rhule, J. (2017). Richard Florida, the Creative Class and Gentrification, The Shifting Human City: Essay Series on Current and Future Policy Trends in Cities.

[36]   Rushing, W. (2009). Memphis and the Paradox of Place: Globalization in the American South. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.

[37]   Sadeghi, G., & Li, B. (2019). Urban Morphology: Comparative Study of Different Schools of Thought. Current Urban Studies, 7, 562-572.

[38]   Spangenberg, J. H., Pfahl, S., & Deller, K. (2002). Towards Indicators for Institutional Sustainability: Lessons from an Analysis of Agenda 21. Ecological Indicators, 2, 61-77.

[39]   Speck, L. (2014). The Importance of Mixed Use. The 2014 Symposium of Sustainability on the UT Campus, Short Essay.

[40]   Valentin, A., & Spangenberg, J. H. (2000). A Guide to Community Sustainability Indicators. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 20, 381-392.

[41]   Willis, A. J. (1997). The Ecosystem: An Evolving Concept Viewed Historically. Functional Ecology, 11, 268-271.

[42]   Wilson, E. O. (1992). The Diversity of Life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

[43]   Xie, L., Cheshmehzangi, A., Tan-Mullins, Flynn, A., & Heath, T. (2020). Urban Entrepreneurialism and Sustainable Development: A Comparative Analysis of Chinese Eco-Development. Journal of Urban technology, 27, 3-26.

[44]   Zamorano, L., & Kupla, E. (2014). People-Oriented Cities: Mixed-Use Development Creates Social and Economic Benefits.

[45]   Zhang, J. (2005). Shaping the Pattern: A Historical Perspective on the Interaction between Space and Function in Clerkenwell. Proceedings of the 5th International Space Syntax Symposium, 2, 635-653.