This document describes a bottom-up assessment of the sustainability of Hokkaido University's campus conducted as a living lab. Focus groups were held with campus users to evaluate the campus's physical characteristics and landscape through SWOT analysis and strategic assessment. The individual results were combined to create a collective assessment. This led to a strategic choice analysis and multi-criteria decision making analysis to evaluate the campus's performance and identify options for future development and planning.

1. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
The
Sustainable
Campus
as
a
Living
Lab:
a
mul&-­‐criteria
assessment
of
value-­‐based
metrics
using
images
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

2. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
The
concept
of
sustainability
is
applied
to
community
daily
life
and
a
University
Campus
can
be
faced
as
a
living
laboratory
for
the
development
of
sustainable
prac1ces.
We
developed
a
mul1-­‐criteria
assessment
for
the
Campus
at
Hokkaido
University,
focused
on
the
contribu1ons
of
the
landscape
and
physical
condi1ons
for
its
performance
and
sustainable
development,
analyzing
how
the
goals
and
principles
defined
in
the
Campus
Plans
fit
the
needs
and
concerns
of
its
users.
This
boOom-­‐up
approach
aims
to
contribute
to
mobilize
the
community
of
users
of
the
Campus
for
a
sustainable
daily
life
with
a
high
academic
quality.
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

3. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
Two
focus
group
mee1ngs
have
been
organized
in
two
different
areas
of
the
Campus,
using
a
SWOT
analysis
methodology
followed
by
a
strategic
assessment
and
supported
by
visual
assessment.
The
individual
results
obtained
in
the
mee1ngs
have
been
evaluated
by
the
par1cipants,
crea1ng
a
collec1ve
assessment
on
the
performance
of
the
Campus,
focused
on
its
physical
characteris1cs
and
landscape.
This
process
leads
to
a
Strategic
Choice
Analysis
and
a
Decision
Making
Analysis
(Mul1
Criteria
Assessment
based
on
the
Regime
Method),
which
can
be
applied
in
other
planning
processes
in
the
future.
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

4. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
Methodology
Results
Conclusions
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

5. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
University
Campuses
are
spaces
where
thousand
of
persons
interact
everyday,
performing
different
tasks
with
diverse
purposes
and
mo1va1ons:
students,
researchers,
teachers,
managers,
other
professional
staff
and
visitors
use
a
common
space
for
their
daily
ac1vi1es,
requiring
a
wide
range
of
products
and
services,
consuming
energy,
circula1ng
in
public
spaces
and
using
common
facili1es.
The
importance
recently
given
in
many
Universi1es
to
sustainability
issues
in
the
planning
processes,
strategic
assessment
and
academic
programs,
makes
these
communi1es
specially
appropriate
to
be
analyzed
as
a
“living
lab”
for
the
evalua1on
of
ac1ons
and
policies
regarding
sustainable
behavior,
at
individual
and
collec1ve
levels.
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

6. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
In
this
case,
we
assume
that
a
Living
Lab
as
a
boOom-­‐up
approach
implying
a
process
of
evalua1on
and
co-­‐crea1on
of
strategies
and
scenarios
for
the
development
of
the
Campus
of
Hokkaido
University
by
its
community
of
users,
combining
research
and
informa1on
about
the
exis1ng
condi1ons
of
the
Campus
with
the
development
of
innova1ve
ideas
and
strategic
op1ons
for
its
future.
BoOom-­‐up
approaches
are
today
commonly
assumed
as
a
necessary
condi1on
for
the
successful
implementa1on
of
sustainable
ac1on
plans
at
community
level.
Advantages
of
a
boOom-­‐up
approach:
-­‐
mobilize
the
different
users
for
the
objec1ves
and
strategies
to
be
implemented;
-­‐
improve
the
collabora1on
between
users
and
managers;
-­‐
ensure
that
development
plans
consider
the
needs
and
problems
of
different
users;
-­‐
increase
the
chances
of
conflict
resolu1on
among
diverse
mo1va1ons
of
different
groups.
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

7. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
This
assessment
of
the
sustainability
of
the
University
Campus
aOempts
to
achieve
a
comprehensive
approach
to
the
different
func1ons
daily
performed
by
the
University,
systema1zing
different
domains
of
analysis
and
considering
the
users
of
the
Campus
as
a
community
of
different
persons
with
different
purposes
sharing
the
same
territory.
For
this
purpose,
a
conceptual
framework
is
defined,
in
order
to
envision
future
perspec1ves
for
the
Campus.
These
“Future
Images”
represent
4
“extreme
perspec1ves”
(or
4
ideal
representa1ons)
of
the
Campus:
Crea1ve,
Scien1fic,
Sustainable
and
Social
Campus.
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

8. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
Assessment
Factors
for
the
Campus:
Crea.ve
Scien.fic
Campus
Campus
Sustainable
Social
Campus
Campus
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

9. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
These
Assessment
Factors
include
different
aspects
(indicators)
to
be
quan1fied
according
to
a
hierarchical
decomposi1on
in
the
Mul1-­‐Criteria
Analysis
to
be
developed:
Crea1ve
Campus
is
focused
on
the
rela.on
with
the
regional
society,
including
academic
spin-­‐offs
(incubators),
Private
R&D,
Collabora.ve
R&D,
Connec.vity
(ICT
networks),
Ar.s.c
and
Crea.ve
professions
and
linkage
to
the
local
community;
Sustainable
Campus
is
focused
on
environmental
problems
and
in
the
use
of
resources,
including
ques.ons
related
to
Accessibility,
Mobility,
Energy
consump.on
and
produc.on,
Water
and
Waste
management,
CO2
Emissions
or
Biodiversity
and
public
spaces;
Scien1fic
Campus
is
focused
on
the
“tradi.onal”
domains
of
ac.vity
of
the
University,
including
Teaching
and
learning
condi.ons,
Research
condi.ons,
Libraries,
Conference
facili.es,
Special
educa.on
facili.es
or
Experimental
farms
and
produc.ons;
Social
Campus
includes
the
complementary
services
provided
to
the
users
of
the
Campus,
like
the
Financial
support
for
students,
Student
housing,
Bookstores,
Other
services,
Leisure,
recrea.onal,
cultural
and
spor.ve
ac.vi.es
or
projects
involving
the
local
community.
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

10. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
Hokkaido
University
has
65,000
hectares
of
campus
resources,
which
include
experimental
forests
and
a
variety
of
other
facili1es.
More
than
22,000
students
and
staff
members
use
the
1,776,248m2
of
the
Sapporo
Campus,
which
is
open
to
the
residents
of
the
city
and
tourists.
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

11. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
Two
“focus-­‐group”
mee1ngs
were
organized
for
these
different
territories
of
the
Campus
North
Campus
R&D
ac.vi.es,
collabora.on
with
private
and
public
en..es;
To
be
expanded
with
new
buildings,
infra-­‐structures
and
public
areas.
6
par.cipants
1
manager
in
a
private
ins.tu.on,
1
manager
in
an
academic
ins.tu.on,
2
researchers
and
2
PhD
students
(3
par.cipants
were
women;
1
person
was
coming
from
abroad)
South
Campus
Tradi.onal
University
Campus;
To
be
transformed
with
very
limited
physical
expansion.
16
par.cipants
10
students
from
different
facul.es,
1
Master
student,
3
academic
staff
and
2
other
staff
(7
par.cipants
were
women;
3
persons
were
coming
from
abroad).
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

12. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
Mee;ng
at
North
Campus
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

13. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
Mee;ng
at
South
Campus
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

14. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
Each
mee1ng
started
with
a
presenta1on
of
the
exis1ng
plans
for
the
development
of
Hokkaido
University,
using
visual
elements:
Master
Plan
(2006)
Ac1on
Plan
for
Sustainability
(2012)
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

15. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
Aher
this
general
presenta1on,
informa1on
related
to
the
issues
to
be
discussed
(Assessment
Factors)
was
provided
and
a
set
of
pictures
with
posi1ve
and
nega1ve
aspects
of
the
Campus
was
distributed.
An
open
discussion
among
the
par1cipants
(during
one
hour)
took
place,
addressing
the
main
aspects
of
the
Assessment
Factors
of
the
Campus
and
oriented
towards
a
SWOT
analysis
structure.
SWOT
analysis
is
a
tool
to
be
used
as
a
precursor
to
strategic
management
planning,
aiming
to
obtain
support
informa1on
for
strategic
choices,
taking
into
considera1on
posi1ve
and
nega1ve
factors
or
internal
and
external
aspects
that
might
have
an
impact
on
the
proposed
development.
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

16. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
The
outputs
of
this
discussion
were
organized
in
order
to
generate
a
Strategic
Choice
Analysis
and
a
Decision
Making
Analysis
(Mul1-­‐Criteria
Assessment)
based
on
the
following
elements:
SWOT
Analysis
(supported
by
Visual
Assessment)
Par1cipants
were
asked
to
write
their
sugges1ons
for
the
SWOT
analysis,
iden1fying
what
they
considered
to
be
the
most
relevant
Strengths,
Weaknesses,
Opportuni1es
and
Threatens
for
the
development
of
the
Campus.
Strategic
Assessment
(supported
by
Visual
Assessment)
Par1cipants
were
asked
to
propose
generic
strategic
ideas
for
the
future
of
the
Campus,
considering
the
possibility
to
be
implemented
in
the
short
run
and
the
consequences
in
the
long
run.
Visual
Assessment
Each
par1cipant
has
chosen
3
pictures
represen1ng
posi1ve
aspects
of
the
Campus
and
3
pictures
represen1ng
nega1ve
aspects
of
the
Campus.
This
innova1ve
process
of
assessment
complemented
the
informa1on
provided
in
the
SWOT
analysis
and
the
Strategic
Assessment,
showing
objec1ve
images
for
the
preferences
of
the
users.
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

17. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
Aher
each
focus-­‐group
mee1ng,
a
document
systema1zing
all
the
proposals
(SWOT
analysis
and
strategic
assessment
supported
by
visual
assessment)
has
been
sent
to
all
the
par1cipants.
Each
par1cipant
evaluated
according
to
a
Likert
scale
(1
to
5)
the
importance
of
each
element
in
order
to
rank
all
the
sugges1ons.
Only
the
most
important
proposals
were
considered
in
the
final
output,
represen1ng
a
collec1ve
process
evalua1on.
These
outputs
were
confronted
with
the
Campus
Foci
projected
by
the
main
development
plans
for
the
Hokkaido
University
Campus
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

18. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
Campus
Foci
Campus'Foci' Master'Plan'(2006)! Action'Plan''(2012)' Questions'considered'
Planning!open!space,! Development!of!! Social!interaction!
Experiential' frame,!place!making' public!space! and!non9academic!activities!
Facility!design!! Services!and!facilities!
Functional' Zoning! and!setting! for!academic!functions!
and!management!
Ecosystem!!
conservation!
Structure!of!natural! Biodiversity,!energy!production!and!
Energy!consumption!!
Ecological' and!ecological!
and!production!
consumption!or!waste!and!water!
environment! management!
Waste!and!water!
management!
Accessibility,! Transport,!parking,! Accessibility!!
Accessible' mobility,!circulation!! pedestrianism! and!mobility!
Collaborative' Collaboration!! Connection!with! Relations!with!!
' campus!9!city! regional!community! the!community!
!
As
the
Assessment
Factors,
these
Campus
Foci
are
not
“closed”
concepts
and
they
are
inter-­‐related
with
each
other.
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

19. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
A
Mul1
Criteria
Analysis
was
developed,
based
on
the
mul1-­‐aOribute
representa1on
of
the
mul1faceted
aspects
of
choice
alterna1ves.
The
Regime
Method
was
applied,
combining
a
matrix
of
Campus
Foci
and
evalua1on
criteria
(Assessment
Factors)
with
a
vector
defining
its
priority,
in
order
to
es1mate
the
rela1ve
dominance
of
each
Factor.
Following
the
hierarchical
decomposi1on
of
the
Assessment
Factors,
the
impact
of
each
indicator
on
the
Campus
Foci
was
quan1fied.,
in
order
to
obtain
a
Regime
Matrix.
The
importance
of
each
indicator
included
in
the
Campus
Archetypes
defines
a
vector
for
preference
intensity.
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

20. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
Overview
of
the
methodology
Fieldwork
Bibliography
Assessment
Focus
SWOT
Analysis
and
Factors
Groups
Strategic
Assessment
Experts
(with
visual
support)
Impacts
of
the
Fieldwork
Archetypical
Campus
Strategic
Experts
on
the
Choice
Alterna.ve
Campus
Models
Master
Plan
Campus
Ac.on
Plan
Foci
Preference
Intensity
Mul.
Criteria
Analysis
Regime
Method
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

21. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
Methodology
Results
Conclusions
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

22. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
North
Campus
Accessible
Campus
Ques1ons
related
to
accessibility
(from
the
city
to
the
North
Campus)
and
to
mobility
(connec1on
between
South
and
North
Campus)
have
been
men1oned
as
weak
aspects
in
the
SWOT
analysis.
Improvements
in
the
bus
services
were
proposed.
Posi.ve
image
for
mobility
Nega.ve
image
for
mobility
(conges.on)
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

23. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
North
Campus
Ecological
Campus
Energy
produc1on,
informa1on
about
the
energy
consump1on
or
waste
management
and
reu1liza1on
were
among
the
suggested
proposals.
The
responsibility
of
the
University
in
educa1on
for
sustainability
was
emphasized.
Lack
of
forest
to
protect
from
wind,
was
pointed
as
a
nega1ve
aspect
(with
important
implica1ons
on
the
“Experien1al”
and
Collabora1ve”
Images).
The
need
for
the
development
of
green
areas
has
been
men.oned
in
the
visual
assessment
(with
two
pictures
of
green
areas
from
the
South
Campus
selected
as
posi.ve
aspects)
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

24. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
North
Campus
Func1onal
Campus
Although
no
weakness
has
been
raised
regarding
the
working
condi1ons,
the
lack
of
other
facili1es
considered
necessary
at
the
Campus
was
considered
as
an
important
“weakness”
(restaurants,
convenience
store,
book
store
and
sports
facili1es).
The
development
of
new
facili1es
and
public
spaces
to
improve
the
“Func1onal”,
Experien1al”
and
“Collabora1ve”
Images
of
the
Campus
are
possible
through
its
development
and
expansion.
The
huge
land
s1ll
available
in
this
area
has
been
pointed
out
as
a
strength,
once
it
enhances
the
possibility
to
implement
new
buildings
and
infra-­‐structures
keeping
adequate
ecological
condi1ons.
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

25. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
North
Campus
Experien1al
Campus
The
weak
points
men1oned
enhance
the
lack
of
spaces
and
facili1es
for
leisure
and
sports
or
communica1on
and
non-­‐professional
mee1ngs.
The
crea1on
of
aOrac1ve
public
spaces
to
meet
is
an
important
demand,
with
relevant
implica1ons
on
the
“Collabora1on”
with
the
local
community.
Posi.ve
images
for
historical
buildings
and
public
spaces
to
increase
social
interac.on.
These
are
also
important
aspects
for
the
“Collabora.ve”
Campus.
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

26. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
North
Campus
Collabora1ve
Campus
University
support
to
big
projects
developed
by
private
companies
as
a
strength.
Five
opportuni1es
for
development
related
to
the
collabora1on
that
can
be
established
among
researchers
and
different
ins1tu1ons.
Proposals
to
increment
the
aOrac1veness
of
the
area
for
the
residents
and
to
reinforce
the
historical
aspects
of
the
University
were
suggested
to
increase
the
interac1on
with
the
local
community.
Pictures
of
historical
elements
(from
South
Campus)
were
selected
as
relevant
posi.ve
aspects.
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

27. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
South
Campus
Accessible
Campus
Accessibility
to
the
Campus
(from
city
center
or
public
transports)
is
a
strength
but
several
aspects
of
the
mobility
inside
the
Campus
(lack
of
transporta1on
services,
disconnec1on
between
North
and
South
Campus
or
traffic
conges1on),
and
their
consequences
on
the
public
space
were
men1oned.
Different
proposals
for
the
improvement
of
the
transport
system
were
suggested.
All
the
pictures
selected
as
bad
examples
of
the
Campus
were
related
to
mobility.
These
examples
suggest
the
concerns
with
car
traffic
and
excessive
quan.ty
of
bicycles.
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

28. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
South
Campus
Ecological
Campus
Problems
with
mobility
have
implica1ons
on
the
ecological
structure
of
the
Campus,
faced
as
an
extremely
important
aspect
by
its
users,
considering
the
quan1ty
of
strong
points
men1oned
in
the
SWOT
analysis
(farms
and
beau1ful
landscapes,
green
areas,
large
Campus
and
possibility
to
implement
long-­‐term
plans).
Concerns
with
excessive
energy
consump1on
and
the
lack
of
control
of
the
users
regarding
high-­‐consuming
systems
(like
lights
or
hea1ng)
were
also
expressed
and
complemented
with
relevant
proposals.
1
-­‐
green
areas
3
-­‐
green
areas
Pictures
of
green
areas
have
been
selected
to
show
posi.ve
aspects
of
the
Campus.
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

29. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
South
Campus
Func1onal
Campus
The
concerns
with
the
preserva1on
of
free
and
green
areas
have
been
expressed
regarding
the
“Func1onal
Campus”
and
a
proposal
to
develop
new
facili1es
preserving
free
spaces
being
men1oned
as
an
answer
to
the
threaten
of
decreasing
in
open
space
as
a
result
of
the
implementa1on
of
new
ac1vi1es.
The
problems
detected
in
this
area
are
mostly
related
with
ICT
systems
(Wi-­‐Fi
access
to
Internet
all
over
the
Campus
and
PC
area
with
café
open
24
hours)
or
to
new
educa1onal
programs
(combining
disciplines
from
different
courses),
not
requiring
physical
expansion
of
services
or
facili1es.
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

30. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
South
Campus
Experien1al
Campus
The
problems
regarding
the
“Experien1al
Campus”
require
a
more
difficult
approach,
as
many
weak
points
detected
relate
to
the
lack
of
facili1es
for
social
interac1on
(cafes,
restaurant
or
sports).
The
quietness
of
the
Campus
and
its
atmosphere
were
men1oned
as
strengths.
New
facili1es
and
services
should
be
implemented
through
the
reconversion
of
exis1ng
buildings,
ensuring
the
preserva1on
of
the
public
open
green
spaces.
7
-­‐
public
spaces
for
mee1ngs
10
–
historical
buildings
The
history
of
the
University
and
public
spaces
for
mee.ngs
were
selected
as
posi.ve
aspects.
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

31. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
South
Campus
Collabora1ve
Campus
The
openness
of
the
Campus
to
everyone
is
a
strength
but
the
lack
of
informa1on
about
cultural
heritage
is
a
weakness.
The
opportunity
created
by
the
proximity
between
business
and
academy
in
Sapporo
can
be
difficult
to
explore
considering
the
weak
economic
condi1ons
in
Hokkaido.
Other
proposals
and
opportuni1es
suggested
are
related
to
social
interac1on
among
Japanese
students,
interna1onal
students
and
local
residents.
12
–
historical
buildings
7
-­‐
public
spaces
for
mee1ngs
Historical
buildings
and
public
spaces
are
also
relevant
for
the
rela.on
with
the
local
community.
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

32. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
Mul1-­‐Criteria
Assessment
Regime
Analysis
! Creat.! Sust.! Sci.! Soc.!
The
“Preference
Intensity”
was
quan1fied
Experiential! 2,3$ 2,3$ 2,7$ 3,5$ based
on
the
Strategic
Choice
Analysis,
according
to
number
of
items
men1oned
Functional! 3,2$ 3,8$ 4,7$ 3,5$ in
the
SWOT
analysis
and
the
Strategic
assessment
for
each
indicator
considered
in
the
Campus
Archetypes:
Ecological! 1,5$ 4,2$ 2,0$ 1,2$
1
point
for
0
men.ons;
Accessible! 3,0$ 3,2$ 3,5$ 3,3$
2
points
for
1
or
2
men.ons;
Collaborative! 5,0$ 1,5$ 2,2$ 3,5$
3
points
for
3
or
4
men.ons;
4
points
for
5
or
6
men.ons;
Preference!
3,0! 3,7! 2,0! 3,2! 5
points
for
7
or
more
men.ons.
Intensity!
The
impact
of
the
“Campus
Archetypes”
on
each
“Alterna1ve
Campus
Model”
was
quan1fied
based
on
field
work,
exis1ng
literature
and
expert
assessment.
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

33. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
Mul1-­‐Criteria
Assessment
Regime
Analysis
Crea1ve
Campus
05
04
03
02
01
Sustainable
Social
Campus
00
Campus
Scien1fic
Campus
Experien.al
Func.onal
Ecological
Collabora.ve
Accessible
The
Alterna1ve
Campus
Models
according
to
the
impact
of
the
Campus
Archetypes.
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

34. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
Methodology
Results
Conclusions
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

35. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
Regarding
the
ques1ons
related
to
accessibility
and
mobility
inside
the
Campus,
the
disconnec1on
between
North
and
South
and
the
mobility
problems
in
winter
have
been
men1oned
in
both
mee1ngs.
Conges1on
is
a
major
concern
in
South
Campus
and
Isola1on
(difficult
access
from
inside
and
outside)
in
North
Campus.
A
renova1on
of
the
circula1on
infra
structure
is
already
defined
in
the
Plans
but
new
regula1ons
for
mobility,
an
improvement
in
the
transport
services,
beOer
infra-­‐structures
for
mobility
in
winter
and
beOer
accessibility
from
outside
to
the
North
Campus
are
required.
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

36. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
Facili1es
for
“tradi1onal”
academic
services
(related
to
educa1on
and
research)
or
to
basic
services
(like
food
or
convenience
stores)
seem
adequate
in
the
South
Campus
but
should
be
improved
in
the
North
Campus.
The
provision
of
Wi-­‐Fi
access
to
Internet
all
over
the
Campus
is
a
major
demand
of
the
users
of
South
Campus
and
it
is
not
included
in
the
Plans
for
the
development
of
the
Campus.
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

37. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
The
development
of
the
“Experien1al”
Campus
appears
like
an
important
priority
for
the
users
of
the
Campus,
both
at
North
and
South
areas.
Social
interac1on
in
public
spaces,
like
cafes,
dining
rooms,
entertainment
areas,
leisure
areas
or
sports
facili1es
are
not
enough
in
the
South
Campus
and
almost
inexistent
in
the
North
Campus.
Although
the
Plans
for
the
Development
of
the
Campus
clearly
express
these
concerns,
concrete
solu1ons
are
not
implemented.
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

38. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
The
dynamic
collabora1on
between
academy
and
industry
or
the
openness
of
the
University
to
the
local
community
and
tourists
are
very
posi1ve
aspects
men1oned
by
the
users
in
both
sides
of
the
Campus,
although
some
improvements
can
be
made
in
the
informa1on
and
services
provided
to
visitors.
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

39. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
This
process
of
assessment
has
been
extremely
mo1va1ng
for
the
par1cipants,
providing
interes1ng
results
concerning
the
evalua1on
of
the
Campus
by
its
users,
at
very
low
cost.
This
can
be
extremely
useful
for
the
“C”
(Check)
stage
of
the
process
of
Planning
for
Sustainability
(PDCA:
Plan
–
Do
–
Check
–
Ac1on)
Similar
ini1a1ves
can
be
applying
this
methodology.
The
range
of
users
contribu1ng
for
the
assessment
should
be
enlarged,
including
other
kind
of
“regular”
(like
other
workers
in
the
Campus)
and
“occasional”
users
(local
residents
or
tourists).
Considering
the
importance
of
the
Campus
in
the
context
of
the
city
and
the
necessary
interconnec1on
between
them,
other
agents
(like
urban
or
transport
planners)
should
also
be
involved.
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp

40. Sustainable
Campus
Interna1onal
Symposium
October
2012
This
study
has
been
developed
at
the
Sapporo
Campus
of
Hokkaido
University
with
a
very
important
support
from
Takao
Ozasa,
Takashi
Yokoyama,
Maki
Komatsu,
Tomohiro
Morimoto
and
Yuki
Matsubara
(Office
for
a
Sustainable
Campus
-­‐
Hokkaido
University)
between
July
and
October
/
2012.
This
work
would
not
have
been
possible
without
the
ac1ve
par1cipa1on
of
22
users
of
the
Campus
who
contributed
with
their
opinions
and
sugges1ons
in
the
focus
group
mee1ngs.
João
Romão
–
Karima
Kour1t
–
Eveline
van
Leeuwen
–
Peter
Nijkamp