Global South research priorities for neighbourhood sustainability assessment tools Free

Rapid global urbanisation statistics indicate that current urbanisation rates have exceeded expectations, with 55% of the world’s population currently living in cities and expected rates going up to 68% of the global population by 2050 (Cohen, 2017; Ameen et al., 2015; Michalina et al., 2021; UNDESA, 2018). Cities are considered the frontline of the battle for sustainable development goals (Sharifi and Murayama, 2013; Shwe et al., 2018). In this respect, cities are inherently dynamic organisms (He et al., 2018). Meanwhile, urban development is considered the primary tool shaping and affecting their future, which signifies that sustainable development assessment is indispensable for cities’ future growth (Ameen et al., 2015). According to Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 11 for sustainable cities, the common goal worldwide is to make “inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable cities” (Dizdaroglu, 2017; Sharifi et al., 2021a). The sustainability assessment has two significant benefits: measuring sustainability and identifying gaps for improvement (Kamble and Bahadure, 2020; Kamiya et al., 2020). Cities cannot contribute to overall sustainability if their constituent parts are not sustainable (Ali-Toudert et al., 2020; Choguill, 2008; UN-SDG, 2015). Using assessment tools on a neighbourhood scale is considered optimal for contributing to the cities’ overall sustainability goals (Ameen and Mourshed, 2017; He et al., 2018).

Historically, neighbourhood scale was one of the first analysed models to aim for sustainable cities ever since the garden city movement, Clarence Perry’s neighbourhood unit, modernism, neo-traditionalism, eco-urbanism and the eco-frontiers movement in the 2000s. Neighbourhoods have received particular attention since they are considered the basic urban unit large enough for a systematic approach to urban development; and simultaneously small enough to experiment with innovative models of planning and design (Moroke et al., 2019; Sharifi et al., 2021b; Yigitcanlar et al., 2015; Sharifi, 2016). Neighbourhood sustainability assessment tools (NSATs) are tools that evaluate and rate the performance of given neighbourhoods against a set of criteria to consider the neighbourhoods’ sustainability performance and goals’ achievement (Sharifi and Murayama, 2013). Despite their brief history, sustainability assessment tools have caught the interest of academics and industry (Ameen et al., 2015), particularly in recent years focusing on the neighbourhood scale of assessment (Arslan et al., 2016; Leach et al., 2017).

In the last three decades, three generations of international assessment systems have expanded from certifying green buildings to urban development and neighbourhood scale (Sharifi and Murayama, 2013, 2014; Sharifi et al., 2021a; Gil and Duarte, 2013). The five-year period between 2007 and 2012 witnessed the third generation’s development, including the Comprehensive Assessment System for the Built Environment (CASBEE) for urban development in 2007 and Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) for neighbourhood development in 2009 (LEED-ND), Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM), Estiadma Pearl Community Rating System (PCRS) in 2010, Green Star Communities, Global Sustainability Assessment System (GSAS) for the levels of districts in Qatar and Green Township.

One primary problem with sustainability challenges is that they vary by location, raising questions about the adaptability of the aforementioned assessment systems in Global South (Ameen et al., 2015; Cheshmehzangi et al., 2020; Gil and Duarte, 2013; Sharifi, 2016). The vast geographical area and regional differences, manifested in significant contextual differences between countries in the Global North and South, make global implementation of these systems problematic (Kamble and Bahadure, 2020). The understanding of cities in Global South is restricted and confined to specific geographies, with substantial blind spots in areas such as Africa and the Amazon. This is even more problematic because the global sustainability assessment tools have seen little application in third-world nations (Criterion Planners, 2014).

Another challenging problem which arises is that many sustainable city metrics and indicators were established from a top-down approach using data from European and North American cities, such indicators are said to have emerged incrementally without a formal framework or consensus on what constitutes urban sustainability, and many of the employed metrics are based on policymakers’ predetermined objectives, following concerns that now impact the community (AlWaer and Kirk, 2015; Cole, 1999; Malek and Grierson, 2016). Hence, they may not adequately account for the enormous differences in per-capita consumption levels between the North and South, as well as within the North where they were established initially (Nagendra et al., 2018; Dawodu et al., 2019). Due to the complexity and context diversity of urban challenges in the Global South regarding basic infrastructure, mobility, safety measures, urban form and environmental conditions, more contextualised and locally based information is required. That is, more studies from the Global South about NASTs in their territories (Michalina et al., 2021; Nagendra et al., 2018).

Literature discussed some of the contextual challenges that cities in the Global South face, such as access to finance, lack of basic facilities and infrastructure, sanitation issues, exposure to air, food and water pollution, general lack of technical skill in construction labour and awareness of sustainability concepts (Elshater et al., 2022). However, literature indicates insufficient fundamental information, such as reliable urban population censuses, which hinders the use of global sustainability indicators (Kamble and Bahadure, 2020).

The gap in literature indicates there is not much research on cities in Global South that tackles neighbourhood-level assessment tools. The relatively limited and scarce applications and analyses of NSATs in the Global South create significant blind spots for current Global South research priorities and themes for researchers and academics. The current research on environmental assessment systems for buildings is considered satisfactory, yet the body of research on the neighbourhood scale is still quite limited, specifically in cities of Global South ^[1] (Kamble and Bahadure, 2020; Momoh et al., 2021). Recent studies have divided this area of knowledge into two categories; case study-based studies on the efficiency of a single assessment indicator and second, comparative studies of different sustainability assessment standards, whether between rating systems, specific criteria, or to validate results between a given case study and a tool (Dang et al., 2020). However, the mentioned categorization relied primarily on studies based in a developed country context.

This gap in literature could be filled by focusing on NSATs within the context of the Global South. Two questions arise to map the emerging themes and research priorities: What topics in urban studies literature tackle NSATs for cities in the Global South context? What are the themes of research articles the NSATs for cities in Global South literature cover?

This research aims to map the literature offered for NSATs in the Global South since its emergence in literature through a thematic approach. The purpose is to recognize broad clusters of research themes, highlight the present exposure and future research priorities in the currently available data and create a reference guide for practitioners, researchers and academics. The study undertakes a systematic review applying a thematic synthesis to address the mentioned objectives.

The research design prepared a systematic review of research articles indexed in Scopus and Web of Science (WOS) published between 1990 and 2022. This review examines NSATs using articles from the Global South context through a two-step process. As a first step, we conducted a literature review by the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) protocol (Abusaada and Elshater, 2022; Elshater and Abusaada, 2022). The second step was to perform a thematic synthesis of 18 articles using content analysis to highlight future research priorities.

The contribution here demonstrates the need to market the sustainability assessment tools in the Global South that help promote city-wide sustainability among neighbourhoods. The added value of our mapping to the existing literature about NSATs is in facilitating the UN SDGs, which cannot be achieved without appropriate assessment tools with proper scale and provide future research priority themes and geographic areas within Global South studies.

This study presents a systematic review of the literature on neighbourhood sustainability assessment, conducted and reported by PRISMA (Cohen, 2017; Abusaada and Elshater, 2022; Sharifi et al., 2021b; Harsimran and Pushplata, 2019; Dawodu et al., 2022). This research uses PRISMA for conducting bibliometric data mining to answer questions about NSATs in Global South and investigate the gap in the literature in urban studies (Elshater and Abusaada, 2022; Moher et al., 2009). Following the literature search, this study performed content analysis to identify themes and synthesize qualitative data from the literature to recognize how far the body of research in NSATs across Global South contexts has advanced and identify priority themes and geographic areas for future study. Figure 1 shows the research scope of investigation of Global South.

This study conducted a comprehensive literature review from two databases using search terms (and their combinations using the Boolean connectives OR/AND), such as neighbourhood assessment, Global South, developing country assessment, urban sustainability assessment and NSAT. Scopus and WOS databases were selected to conduct the literature search, which considered journals, books and conference proceedings published between 1990 and 2022. The initial literature search was completed in January 2022 and revisited in July 2022 with a broad-based search string that includes multiple variations of phrases connected to NSA and titles of NSA tools commonly used in literature.

During the first screening, a significant number of articles on NSATs for the Global North were retrieved and used for the introduction section of this research. Other articles were added that were extracted from the references of the papers identified through the electronic search. The second phase used a combination of search queries in wide and narrow scopes. The following wide-scope search string was used in Scopus: TITLE-ABS-KEY(neighborhood AND assessment AND tool AND developing AND country) and in WOS: (((ALL=(Neighborhood)) AND ALL=(Assessment)) AND ALL=(tool)) AND ALL=(developing country). This phase included the search for NSATs for cities in the Global South but with a broader scope of results.

The data mining included studies from urban development to regional scales as well as cases from around the world. Eligibility criteria for articles included articles tackling neighbourhood scales in terms of sustainability assessment tools, checklists, methods and frameworks. Another eligibility criterion was context selection for Global South countries only to maintain relevance to the study’s geographic scope. The eligible articles were shortlisted for relevancy.

From the selected databases, the search retrieved a total of 34 publications for Scopus and 29 publications for WOS for the first query, and for the second query, the search retrieved a total of 434 manuscripts indexed in Scopus and 344 manuscripts indexed in WOS (total 841); after removing duplicates, remaining records were 745 manuscripts. Afterwards, based on the title and abstract, the publications were screened for relevance using the inclusion and exclusion criteria based on scale and context, resulting in 48 records. Five records could not be retrieved due to the inaccessibility of data. The remaining 43 records were read in full for qualitative analysis. Publications focusing on NSATs of cities in the Global South were included, whereas those works which delivered theoretical and generic concepts of NSATs were excluded. Based on the screening, eligibility and duplication in different search queries, 18 research articles offered explicit criteria for evaluation and were found to be relevant. Hence selected for qualitative content analysis.

Figure 2 illustrates the complete review process through a PRISMA flow diagram. Similar to previous studies, PRISMA was employed in systematic reviews to refine the quality of reporting (Abusaada and Elshater, 2022; Al-Hammadi and Grchev, 2022; Ball, 2017; Bouzguenda et al., 2019; Wamsler, 2006). The thematic coding of the research on NSATs was manually conducted, reaching five themes for Global South NSATs, which can yield overarching aspects relevant to the current gap in research. Due to the relatively modest resulting number of articles, a verification was required. Although several authors mentioned the limited research available for NSATs in Global South (Dang et al., 2020; Kamble and Bahadure, 2020) qualitatively, a verification of the round figure number of available data was also conducted by comparing the results presented by Dawodu et al. (2022). Dawodu et al. (2022) offered a review of an enormous scope of papers for global NSATs.

This study searched for publications with the NSATs-related search string using Scopus and WOS as well, and following PRISMA protocol, which resulted in a total of 112 reviewed papers, of which around 18 and 10 were related to cities in the Global South and emerging economies, respectively. Variations in the count of resulting publications could occur due to differences in search strings.

Information regarding NSATs applied in urban contexts or generically within the Global South context was recorded in spreadsheets. The selected articles were analysed in five steps. Once the 18 sources were selected for inclusion in the study, each source was read in full for qualitative content analysis.

• Step 1: All papers were reviewed to extract the necessary data.

• Step 2: Upon completion of the reviews, the collected data were summarized by content analysis, categorized and coded based on their commonalities into initial themes by thematic synthesis.

• Step 3: The second round of review was performed to ensure accuracy and incorporate modifications, if necessary.

• Step 4: The categories were developed by identifying recurring issues and information that fit within the scope of the research aim. Essentially, the focus was on NSAT topics linked to research directions and outcomes.

• Step 5: Frequency-based charts were drawn to illustrate descriptive characteristics and observed priority research actions.

The thematic coverage was obtained by taking note of recurring themes relevant to NSATs in recent years. The five deducted themes included:

1. Case study-based frameworks and tools,

2. Generic and regional frameworks,

3. UN-SDGs and Habitat III-based discussion,

4. Comparative studies of global NSATs to local NSATs in the Global South contexts and

5. Indicator-based articles focus on specific indicators in the NSATs.

According to Kamble and Bahadure (2020) and based on the given bibliometrics data analysis, insufficient and relatively scarce data and research could be found on NSATs in Global South. The results of the selection process described above, as presented by the PRISMA methodology, included a total of 18 articles. Table A1 in  Appendix ^[2] presents the articles included in the analysis. The content analysis of 18 papers shows that interest in Global South studies in terms of built environment scale is oriented toward the Asian context. The first screening also indicates that most Global South research articles tend to be oriented towards developing local tools or frameworks. This research classified articles tackling NSATs for Global South into thematic approaches. The first analysis looked at the NSAT topics presented across literature, coding them into thematic categories (see Table A1  Appendix). The second analysis shows a narrative, thematic synthesis of the reviewed articles. Each theme presents the inputs, methods and outputs and an overview of the used article relative to location.

The first theme includes articles on developing a framework concept, deducting indices or aspects through various methods, either “index generation using fuzzy logic,” the Delphi technique, or the participatory approach. The deduction approach to developing local tools is the most widely used thematic approach in Global South literature, particularly for context-sensitive indicators. The Delphi method creates a framework for indicators based on expert surveys.

Various studies of assessment tools tend to recommend an integrated strategy for selecting context-suitable indicators, but no technique demonstrates how this may be done through implementation. As a result, some literature was developed with more context-sensitive tools for assessment. Dawodu et al. (2019) state that the existing global NSATs were created using a top-down (professional-led) method, which has substantial contextual drawbacks. Their research establishes process instructions that demonstrate how to incorporate local individuals with expert opinions in the early, affordable and context-specific selection of indicators for NSATs to integrate the bottom-up (community-led) approach with the top-down approach. The paper resulted in eight rules for the early passage of NSATs, which tackles the process of developing NSATs.

Abousaeidi and Hakimian (2020), Yigitcanlar et al. (2015), Momoh et al. (2021), Moroke et al. (2019) and Ameen and Mourshed (2019) focused more on the product, where they developed frameworks/checklists utilizing numerous methods. The research products are always aimed at producing a context-sensitive tool, whether it is a framework, checklist, model, or other.

Yigitcanlar et al. (2015) and Momoh et al. (2021) used the Delphi method to create context-sensitive tools in their respective contexts. Momoh et al. (2021) conclude in their study with the SUCCEED tool for the Nigerian urban environment. Both papers using this method recommend its use for local-based modification of available assessment tools to fit the environmental needs to assess.

Meanwhile, using different tools, Abousaeidi and Hakimian (2020) tackle the neighbourhood scale. They propose a checklist of urban design qualities for residential complexes, which is weighed by an expert panel and applied to four case studies. The specific weights for the checklist are considered local, yet the generic nature of the list can be used in several contexts. Urban designers and planners can use the checklist to assess the urban design qualities of residential complexes in Iranian cities and similar developing countries.

Moroke et al. (2020) provide a framework application-based paper to apply their previously developed tool. Moroke et al. (2019) developed the Successful Neighbourhood Model (SNM) and assessed the degree of sustainability that low-income neighbourhood living spaces require for the urban system to attain an urban sustainability model in five case studies in South Africa. Their research results in measuring and ranking case studies in terms of sustainable development. The findings identify priority areas for neighbourhood development and conditions. This research serves as a continuance of empirical studies of a newly developed tool.

The developed tools are not yet implemented or profoundly studied; the results acquired from a follow-up search string were scarce. Follow-up research for the developed tools, such as SUCCEED, indicated that it is very recent because it originated in 2022; the SNM tool search included three papers, all by Moroke et al., the model developers and finally, CAMSUD, which resulted in two articles only. The developed tools are recommended to be further empirically studied in varying neighbourhoods. Table A2 in  Appendix summarizes this research theme’s geographic context, tools, methods and results.

The second theme includes Kamble and Bahadure (2020), Dawodu et al. (2017), Dawodu et al. (2018), which highly resemble the first theme but are more theoretical or do not include empirical research tied to a specific country, but rather a more global or regional generalised scope. The output consists primarily of guidelines for a regional or general area of developing countries, which can be replicated as a method for different objectives.

Dawodu et al. (2017) state that most developing nations lack a be-spoke tool for sustainable urban development. To address this issue, NSATs must be developed for these nations or areas with a complete understanding of the selected country’s effects, dynamics and context of sustainability initiatives. Hence, they created a relational model called the Sustainability Pathway Model, which categorises and investigates the successes and shortcomings of global NSATs to implement optimal NSATs that exploit these tools’ achievements while avoiding their pitfalls. Motivated by the shortage of African NSATs, their subsequent research in 2018 provides a systematic methodological framework for selecting a standard set of Headline Sustainability Indicators (HSIs) for NSATs, particularly in the African context (Dawodu et al., 2018). The research originality is shown in optimizing the current NSATs by developing a framework for HSI selection for African countries from predeveloped global tools to avoid an expensive and time-consuming process of developing context-based tools from scratch.

Another approach by Kamble and Bahadure (2020) undergoes a comparative study between Global North and South aiming to derive a guideline for formulating NSAT suitable for Global South. The study categorizes and describes the most widely used sustainability evaluation tools in developed and developing countries while determining NSA focus in each context. They concluded eight themes of focus in the Global North and three significant themes in the Global South. Their research provides general guidelines for types of inputs, evaluations and outputs for NSA tools for developing countries. Table A3 in  Appendix summarizes this research category’s geographic context, tools, methods and results.

The third theme includes the body of research integrating the SDGs with the NSATs’ indicators and aims. Arslan et al.’s (2016) article title suggests categorising NSATs within this given theme, yet the mention of SDG criteria or effects of the application of such a method on the SDG neighbourhoods is barely mentioned. Therefore, it was reviewed within the fourth thematic approach of comparative analysis-themed studies.

Diaz-Sarachaga et al. (2018) integrate the SDGs within their research; they assess LEED-ND and Envision tool for their application in cities in Global South with relevance to the SDGs and the New Urban Agenda objectives as a benchmark. The study undergoes a comparative analysis of the tools presenting the indicators and credits that tackle the SDGs.

The specific conclusions derived from this research are as follows:

1. The New Urban Agenda’s lack of metrics limits worldwide implementation. Its commitment to the SDGs is ambiguous and limited.

2. The New Urban Agenda emphasises organizational aspects, which are more intangible than SDGs’ triple bottom-line pillars.

3. LEED-ND and Envision focused most of their credits on a small range of SDGs, mostly national concerns in their own country, while key global challenges were ignored. Both frameworks favoured environmental and administrative over social and economic factors.

The fourth category focuses on comparative analysis methods that compare different sustainability assessment standards; however, it is mostly contextually focused on developing current NSAT local tools, new tools, or case study assessment.

Dang et al. (2020), Cheshmehzangi et al. (2020), Arslan et al. (2016) and Shwe et al. (2018) focused on Asian context and cities. Meanwhile, Blanco (2016) was the only study focusing on South America, specifically Chile. Cheshmehzangi et al. (2020) focused on the Asian scope of NSATS, specifically in the city of Ningbo, China. The study analyses eight Asian NSATs, with seven local tools. The article performs four comparative studies in a deductive manner to develop a new local tool called the pathway for developing NSAT in Chinese cities. Dang et al. (2020) also focused on the Chinese context. However, they compared LEED-ND, LEED cities, LEED communities and China’s new Assessment Standard for Green Eco-districts (ASGE). The study’s purpose is not to develop a new tool but to seek compatibility and commonalities and explore the advantages and disadvantages of ASGE. The logic behind selecting the LEED certification system for comparative analysis was not contextual, like Cheshmehzangi et al. (2020). The study’s output is to highlight the local tool’s strengths and weaknesses.

Similarly, Shwe et al. (2018) and Arslan et al. (2016) seek an output of recognizing strengths and weaknesses but not a specific tool like Dang et al. (2020). Nevertheless, instead of a particular context or case studies, they perform a series of comparative studies between NSATs. First, to analyse the best tools to utilize according to context, then another comparative analysis between different case studies to analyse strengths and weaknesses.

Shwe et al. (2018) select the top three globally used tools. LEED-ND, CASBEE-UD and BREEAM communities were used to assess three case studies in the Myanmar context using a comparative analysis of the different output of the three tools. The shortcomings of the selected tools and weaknesses of the case studies determined that there is no perfect tool from developed countries to demonstrate the sustainability performance of the cases in developing countries. Meanwhile, Arslan et al. (2016) deduced a single suitable global tool- LEED-ND-out of seven tools to use for the assessment of the case study area in Turkey, resulting in a binary assessment of strengths and weaknesses of the case study.

Blanco (2016) presented a comparative study like Dang et al. (2020) its purpose was to highlight the limitations and shortcomings of the current local tool. The study is initiated on building rating systems scope comparative analysis between LEED, BREEAM and CES, their locally developed device. Then the study expanded to the comparative research of neighbourhood scope assessment tools LEED-ND, BREEAM communities and the “I love my neighbourhood” program. The paper concludes by discussing critical criteria and adaptations for international standards to suit local contexts.

The primary purpose of such thematic research is either perform a comparative study to select the most suitable tool for a particular context or analysing strengths and weaknesses in the current local tool compared to global NSATs. The relative structure of previous studies is mentioned in Table A4 in  Appendix, which summarizes the geographic context, the scope of research, used NSATs, performed comparative studies and outputs presented in this research category.

The fifth category of studies focuses on measuring a particular indicator or criteria within one or several neighbourhood certification systems, then applying that to case studies. Sala Benites et al. (2020) focused mainly on the priorities of Sao Paulo’s climate change policy, which turned the study’s focus on GHG emissions and the limitations and potentials of NSATs in response to these environmental threats. The study was based on LEED-ND as a tool and its specific ecological indicators. Regardless of the article’s scope, the study can be reproduced as a method for different contexts. Meanwhile, the second paper presented by Gouda and Masoumi (2017) focuses on sustainable transportation indicators and investigates their measures in NSATs to discern how relevant these measures are to the varied local conditions, especially in developing countries. Table A5 in  Appendix summarizes the geographic context, tools, methods and results presented in this research category.

The screening results revealed the frequency of three significant aspects within Global South context literature including first, highly developed themes of research, second, geographical considerations such as studied geographic areas distribution, publication/affiliation origin; and third, frequency of NSATs used across different research themes.

First, regarding the research themes, out of the 18 reviewed articles, the theme: “case study-based framework or tools” seems to take up the most significant percentage of available and relevant literature, followed by the comparative theme of studies, while indicator- and SDG-based studies received minimal research as shown in Figure 3.

Secondly, in terms of geographical aspects, the African continent received a minor count for performed research in the subject area, which indicates a geographic imbalance in the distribution and frequency of research in this area. However, the publication affiliation origin and the focus of the geographic study zone differ in percentages, as compared in Figure 4. While the African context was studied in four papers, focusing on the Nigerian context, very few African affiliations were concerned with the NSATs topic. The Asian interest in NSATs’ development appeared consistent in both results. Simultaneously, the Middle East shared similar results of slow growth in terms of NSATs studies with very recent interest.

Third, regarding the tools used, the Global NSATs used within the literature indicate the frequency of use for LEED-ND, BREEAM communities and CASBEE-UD as the highest global tools, respectively. Meanwhile, the highest recorded tools for Global South research were PCRS and QSAS in the MENA region, Green Star communities in Africa and Green Mark and the Indian IGBC in Asia. The full chart for tools used can be found in Table A6 in  Appendix.

The frequency of the top used tools used in the analysed thematic categories is presented in Figure 5. The results indicate that the highest frequency of instruments used is consistently LEED-ND, BREEAM communities and CASBEE-UD, which are exclusively used within the studied indicator-based theme. In contrast, the case study-based tools theme and comparative analysis of the theme tend to frequently combine more rating tools due to the nature of both studies, the former involving locally based tools for development, while the latter comparing different rating tools for developing their local NSATs or assessing local case studies; the wide range of NSATs used in both themes are presented in Figure 6.

A common purpose for a wide range of studies was applicability and reproducibility. Most studies highlighted that NSATs in the Global South literature are limited. The approach of the reviewed papers was to create new tools, frameworks, checklists and criteria or to improve current local NSATs. The reviewed articles always mentioned how the output could be further studied or used in a vaster developing country or regional context. Our results revealed that cities in Global South have not yet created any internationally influential sustainability assessment standards, and their local standards are primarily based on the existing rating systems in developed countries.

The growth in research for Global South NSATs is very recent and has not exceeded a mere decade, yet it is very promising. LEED-ND popularity in use was detected in both Global North and South, not only in certified projects but also within the literature produced about Global South. The distribution of current Global South NSATs literature is considered to be in its infancy. This could imply that making broad recommendations for future research that focuses equally on Global South and Global North it is very critical.

As such, the recommended actions should be more regionalized. While Dawodu et al. (2022) recommend more field-based observations for tool development, one of the challenges facing the Global South is the lack of essential data availability, which must be used to perform such field application. Nevertheless, the application of field observations is crucial to the newly developed local NSATs. The conducted thematic synthesis and the developed frequency charts can be broadly categorised into four categories that highlight future research priorities in terms of priority research themes, priority-research geographical zones and priority local tools to be used within research about cities of the Global South.

Based on our results, a simple high and low-priority matrix can be derived, as shown in Figure 7. According to Category A, Themes 1 and 2 are highly developed and relatively spread across a wide range of geographical areas of Global South cities. Therefore, they are considered minor priority research topics, especially since several local tools have already been developed that lack further empirical research and follow-up applications. However, the MENA region is the only geographical area missing that can be seen as a high-priority research area in the first category. The second category, Category B, includes Theme 3, which tackles the SDGs and New Urban Agenda. However, they are considered relatively vague in measuring criteria, as previously addressed in the literature, and although they have not been thoroughly studied, they are still considered a low-priority topic for future studies.

Category C includes Theme 4, which is concerned with comparative studies conducted in Global North and South cities. Consequently, its success in achieving solid results can be replicated for cities in the Global South using locally developed tools instead of relying on the NSATs of Global North cities. The frequency charts in this study indicate a high potential for PEARL communities and QSAS in the Middle East, Green Star communities in Africa and Green Mark and IGBC in Asia. Research on this topic is considered a high priority, as are other geographical locations besides Asian countries, which have received considerable attention. A comparative study can be specifically conducted, like the study by AlWaer and Kirk (2012) comparing how well local NSATs in a specific geographic area, such as the MENA region, can satisfy principles of assessment objectives for the region. Finally, Category D includes Theme 5, which was regarded as a promising but underdeveloped research theme within cities of the Global South. Hence, Category D considers indicator/criteria-based studies a priority research theme for all geographical areas in the Global South.

In line with previous research addressed by Dawodu et al. (2022), their results present the most recent NSATs literature trends and research forecast. Our results were similar to Dawodu et al. (2022) in concluding the research directions regarding cities in Global South. The low research contribution was documented in developing regions. However, the reviewed articles indicate that although African institutions have insufficient research contributions, the area offered more studies than South America and the Middle East.

Yet, the geographic focus distribution of published articles reviewed by Dawodu et al. (2022) indicates that the Middle East region is studied more than Africa, constituting 7% and 4% of the reviewed articles, respectively ^[3]. Their distribution did not categorize America into North and South in the geographic scope either. Our results are also in line with the results from previous research mentioning that the global sustainability assessment tools have seen little application in third-world nations (Criterion Planners, 2014). The thematic distribution variance between Dawodu et al. (2022) and the current study shows new grounds regarding several research themes, such as smart locations and linkages, smart growth, smartness, resilience and climate change.

Despite the efforts to systematically assemble a sound set of studies, this research has four limitations. First, the study is limited to articles found in two databases, Scopus and WOS, without exposure to grey literature or other databases. Second, the content analysis relied on results reported by other authors, leaving limited space to control the quality, completeness and selective biases of the authors’ results. It also means that our study does not focus on specific case studies or considers a particular geographical context but rather presents a broad reading of the relevant literature.

Third, the variety of available NSATs worldwide and their different terminologies may have generated multiple additional studies through the endless possible combinations of search strings that would include different NSATs. However, the study could be further reproduced for NSATs such as LEED-ND, BREEAM communities and CASBEE-UD to verify the thematic concluded study areas and include the identified Global South tools recognized from this review ( Appendix) in new search strings. Finally, the limited number of acquired and reviewed articles (18) indicated that the specific nature of thematic synthesis and resulting frequencies could vary tremendously with a higher number of reviewed articles. Therefore, the study requires further verification and cannot be referred to quantitatively. Nevertheless, it highlights that available studies are scarce, and to reach solid results for future research areas, the Global South sustainability assessment studies should be tackled more frequently.

This article examines NSATs in Global South cities. According to our literature review, such devices are crucial to achieving sustainable development goals. This study used PRISMA to review NSAT-related literature in the Global South. A total of 18 articles were examined using content analysis, and critical thematic approaches were synthesized. Due to the limited number of publications reviewed and lack of data, this study used a qualitative approach in three stages: PRISMA data mining, content analysis and thematic synthesis.

The study’s main findings indicate that minimal research has been conducted on NSAT studies in cities of the Global South. There were only 18 eligible relevant articles among the 745 screened records and 48 reviewed articles. This highlights a significant deficiency in data within the cities of the Global South that impacts the precision of research outcomes quantitatively. The results illustrated five thematic approaches of relevant research. The primary theme is to develop an assessment framework/tool based on case studies relating to local contexts, neighbourhoods and cities due to the contextual drawbacks of Global NSATs, which created more context-sensitive tools to fit local contexts. However, it has been observed that such developed frameworks and tools don’t receive further empirical studies to build on them and generalize their use within the local context. Another highly used theme is the comparative analysis between global NSATs and local ones, which indicates a sound approach to enhance current local tools. Meanwhile, indicator-based articles are very scarce compared to studies conducted in the Global North, which may reflect the early stages of the use and development of NSATs in cities of the Global South. This theme, on the other hand, can be used as an inductive approach to developing sound and well-researched context-sensitive tools via a collective of indicator-based studies in Global South research studies.

This review article demonstrates that globally recognized tools such as LEED-ND are widely dominating Global South literature, compared to locally developed ones. However, the literature suggests that Global NSATs are not as transferable to the cities of the Global South. Geographic trends also show minor research participation, specifically from African institutions. Our results presented huge geographic research blind spots within Africa and the MENA region, even though developed tools from the MENA region, such as GSAS and Pearl community tools, are used in several comparative-based studies.

This research presents one of the first reviews of the available NSATs specifically for Global South cities’ literature. Our findings can be regarded as a guide for researchers on the studied content, an identification of tackled themes, gaps in current knowledge, research trends for cities of Global South NSATs as well as priority research themes and geographic areas for future research. Considering the limitations of the recent study, future research could investigate other data sources available in grey literature that could provide insight into the implementation of NSATs around the globe. Specific geographic regions such as the MENA region or Africa could also be explored, analysing their different local NSATs as recommended by the future research priority matrix. Another future research is to orient the NSATs of cities in Global South research toward more empirical testing of the locally and regionally advanced tools within NSATs of cities in Global South literature to allow more significant insights into the authentic local challenges, shortcomings and strengths of the developed tools and to open other research grounds to build on previously developed work, saving time and resources by not creating yet new unattempted and barely tested frameworks and tools.

The appendix files are available online for this article