The initial phase of the project has been devoted principally to the review, both of the academic literature and the main programs for urban sustainability developed by the EU over the last two decades.
The second phase has been based on the empirical investigation and comparison of the two cities. The investigation has been pursued by mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: institutional analysis (qualitative), analysis of socio-economic data (quantitative), ethnographic research (qualitative).
a)The case studies of Copenhagen is helpful for focusing on some possible unexpected social consequences of policies oriented towards sustainability. A strong orientation towards a more environmentally friendly context has contributed to urban growth, most especially through a huge increase in real estate values. It has also been possible as a result of the strong commitment of the “new inhabitants” of the cities to sustainability practices, and to being involved in decision-making processes. However, the urban patterns of sustainable development experienced in Copenhagen have negatively affected the social vulnerability of many low income and socially excluded people, decreasing the availability of hard and soft infrastructures in their areas. In Copenhagen the leading mechanism for the shift from “city of welfare” to the “cool green city” has been the privatization of public housing stock and the many processes of urban renewal promoted by local and national institutions in order to attract investment and medium-high income inhabitants.
b) The example of Vienna shows, however, that the patterns of urban sustainability characterizing Europe are diverse as far as the social impacts fostered by these programs are concerned. The main issue is obviously related to the role of the local authorities in managing urban development, especially through housing policies oriented to both environmental innovation and the preservation of housing affordability, but also the agency of other actors such as local committees and social housing providers.
However, in many European cities the effect of such strategies have been different from Vienna. Sustainability, in the field of urban policies, has played an uncertain role, fostering in many cases a green growth with negative effects on urban social inequalities, promoting processes such as the replacement of the most vulnerable social groups from the cities and, in some cases, more severe conditions of segregation in the most deprived housing stock. It is clear that these phenomena represent something far removed from the basic principle expressed in the Brundtland Report. This report was one of the first documents promoting the concept of sustainable development at an international level, including from the beginning equitable resource distribution as a central sustainability issue, and arguing that “a world in which poverty and inequality are endemic will always be prone to ecological and other crises”. Unfortunately the achievement of a more equitable society is largely disregarded at the global level, if not somewhat paradoxically at risk of worsening as a consequence of some policies of sustainability themselves.
