‘This is a wonderful book that should be on the desk of every architect and planner. It shows how

But don’t we need measurable benchmarks for sustainability assessment?
In this new design review process, the baseline would be the pre-existing site or building conditions, 
rather than estimates of negative impacts of standard buildings performing the same functions.
22
This 
‘ecological benchmark’ recognizes that every site is different and every building project has different 
functions in relation to surrounding development. Seeking improvements over pre-development 
conditions would favour retrofitting and remediation projects, but it would also encourage net positive 
initiatives. One way to meet the standard would be to restore the health of the environment 
beyond
the site boundaries – for which there is currently little or no incentive. If, for example, a surrounding 
area is a ‘brown field’ or contaminated site, or a run-down sewage treatment facility or abattoir, the 
new development could convert the waste from these neighbouring areas into a useful or marketable 
resource. As we have seen, bioconversion is being achieved in industrial ecology projects. There is 
no reason why it cannot be achieved in urban development [Boxes 32 and 47]. The requirement that 
eco-logical design strategies be explored would also make the designer think about finding better 
energy 
sources
, rather than just specifying more efficient fossil fuel equipment. Instead of measuring 
the potential reductions in energy consumption compared to that of a typical building, 
any
use of 
fossil fuels would have to be justified. Thus the eco-design report would help to avoid the existing 
bias against passive solar design by making it necessary to justify the 
source
of energy, whether from 
fossil or solar resources. If the proponents argued that ‘the payback period of solar resources is too 
high’, they would have to show that the payback period of fossil fuel resources is lower.