Building Research & Information

ISSN: 0961-3218 (Print) 1466-4321 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rbri20

Urban infrastructure: challenges for resource

efficiency in the building stock

Georg Schiller

To cite this article: Georg Schiller (2007) Urban infrastructure: challenges for resource
efficiency in the building stock, Building Research & Information, 35:4, 399-411, DOI:
10.1080/09613210701217171

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/09613210701217171

Published online: 08 Feb 2011.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 463

View related articles

Citing articles: 27 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rbri20
BUILDING RESEARCH & INFORMATION (2007) 35(4), 399 –411

Urban infrastructure: challenges for

resource ef¢ciency in the building stock

Georg Schiller

Department of Housing and Building Ecology, Leibniz Institute of Ecological and Regional Development
(IOER),Weberplatz 1, D-01217 Dresden,Germany
E-mail: g.schiller@ioer.de

Sustainable development has typically been framed in relation to the impacts of new buildings without adequately
considering the road and utility infrastructures. In addition, the pattern of investment and building work in most
industrialized countries is changing from new build to alterations to the existing housing stock. Therefore, any
discussion on sustainable development needs to include both the existing building stock and the urban infrastructure
(roads and utilities) to support them. The focus is on the demand for raw materials in future housing and
infrastructure construction, with the premise that the parameter ‘consumption of raw materials’ represents a diverse
group of factors detrimental to the environment. First, findings from empirical investigations on the material stock of
housing and infrastructure networks in building stock are presented and indicate a strong correlation between
material consumption and building density. The lower the building density in a selected area, the greater the share of
material stock absorbed by infrastructure. Second, a material flow model is used to estimate future demands for raw
materials in the development of stock, using the example of the building stock in Germany. These results indicate
that in certain scenarios the material flows for neighbourhood roads and supply infrastructure can be much greater
than material flows for buildings, underlining the importance that infrastructure should be accorded in the
sustainable development of building stock. The issues of urban infrastructure need to be included in both future
building and urban assessment tools. The influence on the demand for material from transport and utility networks
can only succeed when combined with a long-term and clear-sighted urban policy to resist a further expansion of
residential areas. Furthermore, insights gained from material flow modelling can help in the efficient deployment,
recycling and disposal of mineral raw materials form existing urban developments, thereby benefiting the environment.

Keywords: building stock, infrastructure, material flow, sustainability indicators, sustainable urban development, urban
design, urban fabric, urban typologies

Le développement durable a généralement été présenté en l’associant à l’impact des nouveaux bâtiments sans réellement
bien prendre en compte les routes et les infrastructures de services. En outre, dans la plupart des pays industrialisés, le
mode d’investissement et les travaux de construction concernent plus les modifications du parc immobilier existant
que les constructions nouvelles. En conséquence, toute discussion portant sur le développement durable doit inclure le
parc immobilier existant et les infrastructures urbaines (routes et services) nécessaires à leur soutien. L’accent est
placé sur la demande en matières premières en ce qui concerne les futurs logements et constructions d’infrastructures,
sachant que le paramètre ‘consommation de matières premières’ représente un groupe de facteurs variés ayant des
répercussions nuisibles pour l’environnement. Premièrement, les résultats des enquêtes empiriques sur les stocks de
matériaux pour la construction de logements et d’infrastructures immobilières sont présentés et indiquent une forte
corrélation entre la consommation des matériaux et la densité de l’habitat. Plus la densité de l’habitat est faible dans
une région donnée, plus grande est la proportion de matériaux absorbés par les infrastructures. Deuxièmement, on
utilise un modèle de circulation des matières pour estimer la future demande en matières premières pour constituer
des stocks, en prenant comme exemple le parc immobilier allemand. Ces résultats indiquent que dans certains
scénarios, les flux de matériaux pour les routes de voisinage et l’infrastructure d’approvisionnement peuvent être plus
importants que les flux de matériaux pour les bâtiments, soulignant l’importance qu’il faudrait accorder aux
infrastructures dans le développement durable du patrimoine bâti. La question des infrastructures urbaines doit être

Building Research & Information ISSN 0961-3218 print ⁄ISSN 1466-4321 online # 2007 Taylor & Francis
http: ⁄ ⁄www.tandf.co.uk ⁄journals
DOI: 10.1080/09613210701217171
Schiller

incluse dans les outils futurs de construction et d’évaluation urbaines. L’influence sur la demande en matériaux émanant
des réseaux de transport et de services ne peut aboutir que si elle est combinée à une politique urbaine à long terme et
claire pour résister à une nouvelle extension des zones résidentielles. De plus, la connaissance acquise grâce à la
modélisation des flux de matériaux peut aider au bon déploiement, au recyclage et à l’évacuation des matières
premières minérales en provenance des développements urbains existants, ce qui profiterait à l’environnement.

Mots clés: parc immobilier, infrastructure, flux de matériaux, indicateurs de durabilité, développement urbain durable,
conception urbaine, tissu urbain, typologies urbaines

Introduction Whilst the issue of sustainable construction in the

The residential building stock in Western industrialized
nations has grown continually over the last 50 years due
to increasing population and decreasing household size.
In addition, the per capita living space (e.g. in Germany)
has doubled since 1950 (Statistisches Bundesamt
(StaBu), 2000). At the same time, the land area for
settlements has also claimed ever more space. Figures
from Baden Württemberg help clarify the dynamic of
urban expansion. While settlement areas expanded
from 1952 to 2003 by 120%, the population increased
over the same period by a mere 60% (Wirtschafts-
ministerium Baden-Württemberg (Hg), 2005, p. 123).
In comparison with current building stock, rates of
new housing construction are fairly low (Table 1).
With this in mind, experts have been calling for efforts
towards sustainable and environmentally conscious
development to focus more on current building
stocks. Thus, the OECD (2003) criticized the one-
sided orientation of political instruments towards the
new housing sector, and demanded a strengthening of
sustainable development in current building stocks
(OECD, 2005). The question which then arises is:
which elements of the building stock are to be con-
sidered? Initially, of course, the buildings themselves,
with their various functions for habitation or business.
However, these buildings can only function when
connected to both road and supply/waste removal
networks. Buildings and their infrastructure networks
are closely intertwined and taken together form the
building stock. It is this integrated perspective that
should be taken into consideration.
housing sector has been thoroughly discussed (e.g.
Kohler et al., 1999a; Lowe, 2001; Rovers, 2004), inter-
est in the technical systems for transport and utilities
has so far been comparatively low. However, a
cursory glance at material flows in the construction
industry indicates that the areas of roads and utility
infrastructure should be accorded a greater importance
in the framework of a sustainable and environmentally
friendly housing development. In 1999 around half of
mass flow in the German construction industry was
in the areas of road building and other earth-moving
work (Kohler et al., 1999b, p. 5). Thus, the economic
arguments are compelling for a more intensive involve-
ment of transport and supply systems in discussions on
housing stock sustainability. Every year enormous
sums of public money are spent to ensure the function-
ing of networks, and it is not unusual to find this
important work neglected due to overstretched
budgets. In many parts of Germany, for example, the
lack of investment has reached dire proportions.
Nearly three-quarters of the Federal road network in
Berlin are damaged sufficiently to restrict use
(Wirtschaftswoche, 2004, pp. 22f.). Local authorities
frequently complain of the extensive damage to local
roads from winter frost. The cost of needed mainten-
ance and repairs often exceed available budgets and
therefore repairs are either temporary or partial.
An attempt has therefore been made in various studies
in which the author was involved to describe the
material requirements for roads and supply networks
in the housing stock, in order to be able to derive

Table 1 Housing starts/housing stock ratios in selected OECD countries

Housing starts (A) (‘000s) Housing stock (B) (‘000s) (A/B) (%)
(year) (year)

Australia 104 (2001) 7810 (2001) 1.3

Canada 182 (2002) 12 660 (2002) 1.4
France 310 (2001) 28 702 (1999) 1.1
Germany 259 (2002) 38 925 (2002) 0.7
Japan 1215 (1999) 43 922 (1997) 2.8
UK 183 (2002) 25 617 (2002) 0.7
US 1571 (2001) 116 038 (2001) 1.4

Source: OECD (2005, p. 7).

400

some conclusions regarding sustainable development.
Initial emphasis was placed on a consideration of
requirements for ‘construction and housing’. Taking
current housing stock and the demand for accommo-
dation as a base, the impact of future developments in
stock was to be determined while considering environ-
mental factors such as land use and demand for raw
materials. The methodological core of the research is
formed by the comparison and labelling of various
types of residential areas (urban structure types).
These provide a common standard to enable require-
ments for dwellings and infrastructure to be considered
jointly. Second, they form the basic unit used when
calculating expected future demands for raw materials
in various scenarios for stock development.
The use of natural resources is connected with a range
of environmental effects, and also affects climate
change factors. This paper will not discuss those
effects, but focus instead on drivers on material flow
in the building stock.
The paper provides excerpts from research, focusing on
material requirements for habitation. At first, results of
studies into the material stock in housing are given.
Future projections for material flows in housing stock
are then estimated using a material flow model. The
basic elements of this model will be presented as far
as necessary for a clear understanding of results. In
the presentation of results calculated from various
scenarios, the main focus will be on the comparison
of material consumption in the areas of house con-
struction as opposed to infrastructure. The paper
closes with a summary and evaluation of results.
Some conclusions are then drawn on how to encourage
the efficient use of mineral resources in current housing
stock and in its future growth and development.
Materials in housing stock
Studies such as that by Deilmann et al. (2001) have
examined the problem of estimating the mass of
materials stored in housing stock. Empirical studies
have first considered the mass of materials in the build-
ings themselves and, second, the material stock in
connected roads and supply utilities. To this end, 28
housing blocks in three cities1 were investigated,
which were chosen as typical representatives of urban
settlement structures.
Data were gathered on two levels. Building character-
istics were investigated using the construction details
of representative building types. Using the character-
istics ‘building size’ (number of flats), ‘construction
type’ (half-timbered, traditional heavy framed, indus-
trial) and ‘age’, the buildings in a selected block were
organized into an existing building typology (Schulze
and Walther, 1990). This typology was documented
Urban infrastructure
by planning documents such as floor plans and sec-
tions. Surveys of historical construction methods (e.g.
Ahnert and Krause, 1985) could also be incorporated
to allow inferences to be made about the dimensions
and composition of individual building elements,
aiding the differentiation into types.
Data on road and supply infrastructure were collected at
the level of blocks. Thus, the transit areas of the selected
housing blocks were initially measured (using planning
material). Data were collected on the relation of net
plot area to building dimensions. From this it was poss-
ible to determine building densities. A conversion of the
dimension ‘area’ into ‘material mass’ was possible by
assuming typical forms of construction for residential
streets (from Weise, 1997) in line with the respective
road surface (bitumen, cobblestone, concrete).
Building and infrastructure data were combined at the
level of residential blocks. The information require-
ments for infrastructure were already gathered at this
level. The material stock in the buildings was estimated
by applying the specific material properties of the
building types (based on floor space) to the houses of
a particular residential parcel. Here it was necessary
to take into account the building age, form of construc-
tion and size.
Figures 1A –1C show the results of these studies. In
line with the intention of this paper, the presentation
contrasts the total material mass from the dwellings
themselves with that of the accompanying infrastruc-
ture, shown here as total values calculated from the
individual material fractions.
If the material stock of the buildings is expressed as a
specific variable of floor space, then a clear reduction
in the intensity of material consumption can be seen
in more recently constructed buildings (Figure 1.1).
Dwellings constructed after 1970 require only two-
thirds of building materials to provide a given area of
floor space compared with houses constructed in the
late Victorian period. At the same time room
volumes have decreased for each unit of floor space.
The plotting of material stock required for infrastructure
against total floor space shows the expected correlation
between material mass and building density
(Figure 1B). As density becomes less, the material
stock in infrastructure increases exponentially (material
stock varies only minimally when calculated against the
areas of the residential parcels).2 The results are of little
surprise as this relationship has already been proven
empirically in various studies on the costs of infra-
structure and settlement structures (see also the discus-
sions in the following section). Thus, the results of this
study are confirmed elsewhere, while providing some
further insights by comparing the costs infrastructure
provision with the parameter building materials mass.
401
Schiller

This makes clear that roads,3 in particular, constitute a

large part of the total material mass in housing stock.
But what proportion of demand for raw materials is
determined in the future by buildings and infrastructure
respectively? This question was examined as part of a
project from the German Federal Ministry for the
Environment (Buchert et al., 2004)4 that considered
the development of the entire German housing stock.

Material £ows in the development

of housing stock
While the mass of material in current housing stock can
be investigated empirically, any analysis of future trends
requires a model capable of illustrating potential
material flows. Just such a model was developed and pre-
sented by Buchert et al. (2004). The main features of this
model will be first described as far as necessary to aid in
the understanding of the subsequently discussed results.

The basic idea of the model is to postulate the demand

for new apartments, and then illustrate various devel-
opment paths in housing stock and their impact on
the environment. The main point of interest is the
range of environmental effects in alternative scenarios.
Apart from illustrating material flows, the model can
predict environmental factors such as carbon emissions
and land use. However, these features will remain
outside the discussion.

The material flow model is constructed from various

modules. The core is a building-infrastructure module
capable of describing the stock of dwellings and infra-
structure as well as illustrating future changes. Figure 2
shows this module and its components, as will be
discussed in more detail below.

Urban structure types as a tool for combining

data on buildings and infrastructure
Figure 1 (A) Material stock within building types ^ evaluation of
data empirical from Deilmann et al. (2001) (B) Material stock of
A requirement of the building-infrastructure module is
streets and pavements within selected areas ^ evaluation of that it has to use available data on buildings and
data empirical from Deilmann et al. (2001) (C) Material stock
within the building stock of urban structure types ^ evaluation of
data empirical from Deilmann et al. (2001)

Much more informative are the results obtained by an

examination of the material stock of buildings and
access/supply infrastructure in a particular residential
parcel (Figure 1C). The intensity of materials in more
dense structures is highly determined by the material
mass of housing, in contrast to the increasing share of
materials for infrastructure in areas of lower building
density. Thus, up to 40% of building materials in
areas containing single-family houses are found in resi-
dential infrastructure, a percentage that is perhaps
higher than generally appreciated. Figure 2 Components of the building-infrastructure module

402
 Urban infrastructure

dwellings to make statements on material consumption

for infrastructure. This requirement arises from the
chosen area of interest: the focus is on the issue of
‘housing’. The difficulty here is that existing data on
building stock and on infrastructure cannot be harmo-
nized. Data on houses and apartments are object-
related, whereas data on infrastructure are generally
network-related. Thus, statements on infrastructure
provision from the point of view of a particular build-
ing cannot be easily determined from available data.
Similarly, information from statistics is lacking on the
structural forms of the housing stock which would
allow an indirect evaluation of accompanying
infrastructure.

These gaps in the data set are countered in the model

discussed by introducing a model level called Urban
Structure Types. These types must fulfil three central
requirements:

. A link must be made from these types to statistical

data on housing stock. This can be achieved using
the parameters ‘building age’ or ‘building size’
(number of apartments).

. The structures of the various settlement patterns

found in the housing stock must be clearly
defined. These types must be described in such a
way as to allow the necessary degree of abstraction
required by a national model.
. A connection to infrastructure provision must be
possible using the parameter building density (see
below).
In order to satisfy the first two requirements, the urban
structure types were defined so as to describe the
typical settlement forms of the last decades. Thus, for
the multiple unit construction form in Germany, a
typical heavily built-up block can be assumed for the
years before the First World War (1914 –18). Open
forms of blocks dominated since the 1920s with
linear forms in fashion until the end of the 1960s.
Thereafter, estates and detached tenements became
prevalent (Bundesamt für Bauwesen und Raumord-
nung (BBR), 2003).5 In contrast, the relationship
between age and structural form is much less clear
for single-family housing. Here the dominating factor
is rather the local building density as given by city or
regional settlement forms. Thus, detached single-
family houses are common in rural settlement areas,
whilst in urbanized areas one finds more dense types,
such as terraced housing.
Figure 3 shows the system of structure types as posited
in the model. In addition to descriptions of the form
and age, details on the densities of the urban structure
are given. These are the author’s own estimates, based
on an analysis of the literature on urban construction
Figure 3 Urban structural types to illustrate various forms of
structure in the building stock
(Kirschenmann and Muschalek, 1977, Geisendorf
et al., 1983, Gassner et al., 1986, Kleindienst and
Schatzer, 1991, etc.). Within the urban structure
types benchmarks for the characteristic densities can
be given. The value for density can be narrowed
more by recognizing regional factors. In order to incor-
porate these, three regional types were defined:
agglomeration, suburban areas and rural areas by
using an existing classification for district densities
(BBR, 1998). This allowed a feasible estimation of
values for building density.6
Estimating infrastructure provision using
parameters for density
The relationship between infrastructure and density
has already been indicated above. This is particularly
true for the residential areas under consideration. The
material requirements for infrastructure drop steeply
with increasing density up to a density of approxi-
mately FSI (Floor Space Index ¼ m2 floor space per
m2 net residential area) ¼ 0.5, and thereafter the
curve flattens out (e.g. Menkhoff et al., 1979;
Gassner et al., 1986). Data from numerous other
studies in the research fields of settlement structure
and infrastructure confirm, directly or indirectly, this
fundamental relationship (e.g. Real Estate Research
Corporation, 1974; Ecoplan, Wirtschafts- und
Umweltstudien, 2000; Speir and Stephenson, 2002).
403
Schiller
However, infrastructure costs and materials are
influenced by other factors. Thus, local factors such
as, for example, topographical conditions, the charac-
teristics of the foundation soil and reserve capacities in
local infrastructure all play a considerable role
(Schwarz, 2001; Biermann, 2002). The quality of
infrastructure planning also has a major influence
(Reinhardt, 2004). In the present paper, however, the
focus is primarily on the effect the general settlement
structure has on infrastructure costs and materials.
This is independent of the diverse local factors.
The model uses this fact to estimate the infrastructure
provision necessary for urban structure types. An evalu-
ation of data given by Menkhoff et al. (1979) provides a
basis for the model (Figure 4). The data set was gathered
from planning documents taken from 24 settlement
areas. The number of areas examined might at first
glance appear rather small to derive general values for
a national model. However, data taken from different
studies would prove difficult to compare and combine
– parameters may differ (floor space or apartments)
and the definitions of analysed areas differ (the distinc-
tion between net and gross housing lots). Pooling of
data from different sources would only have been poss-
ible by making further restrictive assumptions, thereby
undermining any qualitative improvement in the basic
data set. A further consideration also questioned the
benefit of trying to improve the underlying data. The
main intention of the model is to compare the outcomes
of alternative development paths. In this case the
importance of ensuring high-quality incoming data is
clearly lower than if the aim were to produce exact
and specific prognoses.
The requirements for transit areas as determined by the
density curve can be used to calculate the length of the
utility network, supposing the length of the road
network is known. Of course, supply and waste pipes
are generally laid along roadways. The road lengths
can be determined using average street widths of
transit areas. Here the road width norms from the
Figure 4 Density curve to model the provision of infrastructure
in urban structure types (author’s illustration using data from
Menkhoff et al.,1979)
404
respective construction eras can be assumed (Buchert
et al., 2004, pp. 42f.). Thus, in areas with multiple
unit residential buildings a street width of between
12 and 15 m can assumed, whilst in areas with
single-family housing, the width is approximately
10 m (in both cases width ¼ roadway þ pavement).
The infrastructure in urban structure types can thus
be described in the model using spatial or linear par-
ameters (m2 road/m2 floor space; or m pipe length/
m2 floor space).
A translation of these formulas into material masses
requires knowledge of the dimensions of roads and
supply pipes as well as the construction materials used.
Similar to the previously outlined studies (see the
second section above), typical roadway structures were
assumed in the development of this model that satisfy
the traffic loads of residential streets. Detailed calcu-
lations were carried out to estimate the cross-section of
utility pipes using standard unit plots of size 1 hectare.
A choice of commonly used materials was selected
from the relevant literature and with expert advice.
These dimensions and materials together describe the
infrastructure elements (e.g. steel pipe DN 100 as an
example of a construction elements in the drinking-
water supply system) which are linked to variables in
the mass flow model (m2 of roadway or m of piping).
Standard lifespans are assumed for these construction
elements (Table 2). This is of great importance when
estimating future costs and helps fix the cycles of repla-
cement. In the model, lifespans are so assumed as to
ensure satisfactory operation of the network section.
The model does not accommodate overdue mainten-
ance work, as often found in reality. Current regu-
lations are assumed for streets (RStO, 1997) and the
lifespans of utility networks are based on data collected
by the Institute for Urban Engineering Dresden (e.g.
Herz and Lipkow, 2001).
Thus, the model is capable of illustrating specific
material requirements for road and mains infrastruc-
ture for housing (m2 roadways or m piping for each
m2 floor space), including material specifications and
the lifespan of the construction elements.
Characterizing buildings using building types and
their components
In order to classify variations in the housing stock, the
material flow model uses a building typology based on
the specifics of construction, the building age and size.
This is similar to the previously described approach (see
above) and the characterization is based on construction
components.7 Building analyses performed by Buchert
et al. (1999) supply the necessary data, including both
that of historic dwellings and of recently constructed
buildings. While data on older buildings are obtained
from historical documents, the classification of
 Urban infrastructure

Table 2 Lifespan of infrastructure components. Model assumptions are according to RStO 1997 (roads) and Herz and Lipkow (2001)
(mains)

Roads Drinking water Sewage

Component Lifespan (roadway) (years) Lifespan Component Lifespan Component Lifespan

(pavement) (years) (years)
(years)
Upper layer Base layer

Concrete 20 50 55 Steel 75 Stone 120

road pipeline pipeline
Bitumen road 15 50 60 Cast-iron 100 Concrete 90
pipeline pipeline
Paved road 35 45 55 Cast-iron 110 Fibre- 65
pipeline cement
with inlay pipeline
Unsurfaced 5 30 25 Plastic 75 Plastic 75
road pipeline pipeline

contemporary types is realized by analysing a databank
of recently constructed projects (BKB, 1996).
It should be noted that only the building structure is
considered, not the interior fittings (wiring, flooring
materials). Materials for fittings vary widely in mass
and type, and thus the necessary degree of abstraction
to ensure a valid typology is scarcely possible.
As with the characterization of infrastructure com-
ponents, the replacement cycles of the building
components are adopted from commonly assumed
technical lifespans (for details, see Buchert et al.,
1999, pp. 147ff.). While some individual components
have a lifespan similar to that of roadway components
(e.g. windows, roofing, exterior plaster: 30 years),
other components constituting the main part of build-
ing mass (foundation, exterior walls, ceilings) have a
near unlimited lifespan. These components are gener-
ally not replaced before the building is demolished.
The material parameters of the building types are linked
to the dimensioning system (floor space as taken from
official building statistics) using the factors building
age and number of apartments. These factors are
included in order to accord the building a specific
urban density and thereby calculate the requirements
for roads/mains infrastructure, corresponding to the
previously determined urban structure type.
prognoses). This gives an input value for future
living space requirements for the building-infra-
structure module.
. Applying a tool to calculate the resource require-
ments inside the manufacturing process chains for
construction materials and elements. The computer
tool GEMIS (Global Emission Model of Integrated
Systems) is adopted here. It permits analysis of the
environmental impacts associated with energy,
material, and transport processes and the associ-
ated life cycles.8
. Definition of scenario variables on all model levels.
Relevant parameters influencing the size of mineral
resource requirements are, in particular, as follows:
. number of new dwellings and distribution of
new buildings to regions and building types
. distribution along building technology
. ratio of peripheral (undeveloped land)/central
development (developed land)
. demolition/merging of dwellings
. recycling ratio of building materials

Incorporating the building-infrastructure module into
a scenario-driven material £ow model
Incorporating the building-infrastructure model into a
scenario-driven material flow model (Figure 5) allows
the calculation of future material flows in alternative
patterns of settlement development. ‘Incorporating
the module’ means the following:
. Postulating a future demand for housing (in the
example given this is derived from available
The results of the alternative scenarios help develop an
idea about how environmental parameters evolve (e.g.
demand for mineral resources). The variations between
the scenario outcomes illustrate the degree to which
goals for environmental sustainability in construction
and living are realistic, and at what cost and effort (allow-
ing for discrepancies in the initial assumptions). This
allows, first, detection of negative trends and, second,
gives arguments to support political action towards
more environmentally friendly forms of settlement.
405
Schiller
Figure 5 Incorporating the building-infrastructure module into a scenario-driven material £ow model
The results presented below were calculated by using
two alternative scenarios for possible developments in
the German housing stock up to 2025. Calculations
were made with the aid of a software tool using the
building-infrastructure module and data from Buchert
et al. (2004). The scenario assumptions of a reference
development path and an alternative scenario (see
below) were adopted from the same paper. They arose
from an intensive discussion process with political and
scientific experts, and will not be further examined here.
Calculating future demand for mineral resources:
results
The same demographic changes are assumed for each
scenario, ensuring that the demand for housing (in
number of dwellings) remains constant, while assump-
tions regarding trends in dwelling – supply differs
between the two scenarios. Whilst the reference path
assumes a continuation of current trends in settlement
construction, the alternative scenario postulates a clear
rise in the social desirability of sustainable building.
This affects the assumptions on stock development in
numerous ways; Figure 6 illustrates the impact on the
demand for mineral resources.
406
A slight fall in demand for mineral resources can be
observed in the reference scenario to 2025
(Figure 6.1), explained by the relatively moderate pre-
dictions for new construction as well as currently
observed trends, namely the increasing orientation of
housing development on the existing stock. The pre-
dicted drop in demand for raw materials is much
greater for the alternative scenario. Here the annual
demand for raw materials in 2025 is only 70% of the
starting value from 2000. Even more interesting is the
gap that exists in 2025 between the reference and
alternative scenario, as this represents the span of rea-
lizable improvements in environmental load – assum-
ing the appropriate action by political and private
actors. The difference between the scenarios is around
25%, based on the reference prediction for 2025.
How do the sectors building and infrastructure contrib-
ute to demands for raw materials? Figure 6.2 illustrates
the demand for raw materials in the alternative devel-
opment paths. In start year 2000, 45% of demand can
be attributed to infrastructure requirements, rising to
almost 60% by 2025. While demand for raw materials
for building construction falls by 30% in the period
under investigation, the decrease for technical infra-
structure is only 15%. The resulting disparity between

Figure 6 Model calculations of material £ows in alternative scenarios for the German building stock, realized with the help of material
£ow model given by Buchert et al. (2004)
the scenarios (Figure 6.1) is therefore primarily due to
changes in the house building sector.
To explain this trend it is useful to examine new con-
struction, on the one hand, and maintenance, on the
other. Figure 6.3 provides an illustration of annual
consumption of material resources for three different
Urban infrastructure
cases: status quo 2000, reference 2025 and alternative
2025. The following can be observed:
. Mass flows variations in the three cases are primar-
ily a result of newly constructed buildings and
network sections (network extension). Here the
reductions in material intensity for buildings and
407
Schiller
infrastructure are almost the same: –13% (from
status quo 2000 to reference 2025) and –55%
(from status quo 2000 to alternative 2025). The
discrepancy between reference 2025 and alterna-
tive 2025 is around –48% in each case.
. Savings for maintenance and repairs are meagre in
comparison. For housing this is –8% (from status
quo 2000 to reference 2025) and –16% (from
status quo 2000 to alternative 2025). This gives a
discrepancy between reference 2025 and alterna-
tive 2025 of –8%. No savings are indicated for
the maintenance of the infrastructure network.
. The ratio of new construction to maintenance is
completely different for housing, on the one
hand, and for infrastructure, on the other. Thus,
70 –80% of the demand for raw materials for
housing comes from new housing projects. A
much lower proportion goes into building main-
tenance. For infrastructure the relationship is the
other way round, with three-quarters of demand
for resources coming from maintenance. In the
alternative scenario with a smaller network expan-
sion, this figure rises to almost 90%.
This explains the comparatively small reduction in the
demand for material resources for infrastructure over
the lifetime of the scenario (Figure 6.2). But how
does one explain the huge difference in the ratio of
construction/maintenance between housing and
infrastructure?
Maintenance work on buildings generally does not
touch the underlying structure or its store of mineral
components, instead treating merely the building
surfaces (e.g. plaster) or restricted areas of brickwork
(e.g. new doorways during renovation). Severely
damaged buildings are normally demolished and
thereby removed from the housing stock.
In contrast, maintenance work on road/mains net-
works necessarily requires deep excavation into the
road substance. Even if networks are often viewed as
relatively shallow constructions, in fact they are
massive three-dimensional structures, and mainten-
ance requires that large masses of material be shifted.
Unlike housing which can be ‘removed’ from stock at
the end of its lifespan (buildings are demolished or
abandoned), roads and mains are permanently inte-
grated parts of a large network. The demolition or
closure of sections of the network remains the
exception.
Without questioning the main outlines of these results,
it is worthwhile re-examining them with a particular
consideration of the scenario conditions assumed in
the modelling process. It was previously noted that dis-
cussions on sustainable construction tend to focus too
408
strongly on housing rather than on the accompanying
infrastructure, and this is reflected in the scenario con-
ditions. The parameters adopted tend to favour devel-
opments in house building, and this bias is made at all
levels of the modelling process. The effects on infra-
structure are indirect, and primarily influence the
extent of network expansion. The possible influence
on the extent of maintenance requirements is not con-
sidered in infrastructure networks. However, if the
scenarios allowed incorporation of material recycling
in road/mains work, then savings potentials in
network maintenance could be calculated (as could
savings in network expansion). For this it is important
that model assumptions reflect real-world conditions
to ensure that the modelling is realistic. For example,
although the technical potentials for using material
recycling in road construction are very large, experi-
ence suggests that recycled materials are not used for
road construction in residential areas9 (although they
are used for trunk roads). Alternative strategies for
infrastructure rehabilitation could also be considered
in the scenarios. Here the general condition of the
network has to be considered, with fundamental influ-
ence on the success and formation of the strategies
(Herz et al., 2003), so these would apply only to the
level of supply areas or of communities, and not at
the abstract level of a national model. It would also
be possible to consider more seriously other factors
affecting infrastructure in the formulation of develop-
ment strategies. Thus, in addition to the demolition
of buildings, the removal of network sections could
be incorporated. However, these cases are the excep-
tion, even in areas with large population loss, and
certainly have little influence on the overall results for
mass flow.
Conclusions
Viewing housing stock and infrastructure at the level of
urban structure types, or neighbourhoods, allows the
consumption of materials for buildings and connected
infrastructure to be compared and contrasted. Empiri-
cal studies on the material stock held in roads/mains
networks confirms, as expected, the strong correlation
between material consumption and building density.
Cost analyses have also reaffirmed this relationship.
Thus, it is of little surprise – while still comprising an
important empirical result – that the lower the build-
ing density in a selected area the greater the share of
material stock absorbed by infrastructure. Whilst the
specific infrastructure material mass is about 20% of
the specific building mass in heavily built-up areas,
this can make up to two-thirds of total material
resources in low-density built-up areas featuring
single-family housing and villas. The low attention
hitherto paid to roads/mains networks in discussions
on sustainable trends in the housing stock is therefore
questionable.

Models are necessary to analyse material flows in a
changing housing stock, and these must allow an inte-
gration of small-scale correlations between buildings
and infrastructure in various scenarios of settlement
development. Development scenarios taken from
Buchert et al. (2004) for Germany’s national housing
stock show that almost half of mineral material flow
goes into the construction of infrastructure – and the
ratio is rising. However, the size of material flows
into infrastructure construction varies little over the
scenario timeframe of 25 years, even when the scenario
assumes huge potentials for savings in the housing
sector. The main reason for this is that resources
absorbed by infrastructure go primarily towards main-
tenance work, and this varies little over time. Unlike in
the housing sector, where buildings may be demolished
at the end of their lifespan and thereby removed from
the housing stock, network sections are continually
maintained as long as they remain connected to the
main network so as not to compromise the functioning
of the entire system. Replacement work involves deep
excavation into the main substance of the system and
results in huge flows of materials.
Thus, the conclusion could be drawn that although the
demand for raw materials for infrastructure is high, it is
not subject to influence and therefore does not require
any special consideration. However, this would be
fatal reasoning, only encouraging the continual rise in
environmental loads from settlement areas. Rather,
the correct conclusion is that any influence on the
demand for resources for infrastructure can only be rea-
lized with careful long-term planning. The continual
growth and falling densities of urban residential struc-
tures must be halted in order to counteract the burgeon-
ing (and scarcely reversible) demand for associated
infrastructure. However, it is clear that the factor
‘mass flow’ receives only scant attention from relevant
actors at the local and regional level as an argument
for more compact settlement forms. Arguments focus-
ing on costs are much more convincing. Thus, in the dis-
cussion on urban sprawl, infrastructure costs are used
as the main argument against the development of dis-
perse settlement forms (e.g. Burchell et al., 1998). Con-
siderations of material flows do not particularly
strengthen these arguments. Conversely, arguments
on costs can help promote a more environmentally con-
scious handling of infrastructure. Refinements in the
modelling concept presented in the present paper deal
with the balancing of consequential costs from new
infrastructure (Siedentop et al., 2006). The parameter
‘cost efficiency’ is then an argument for more dense
and less resource-intensive settlement structures.
Material flow models as introduced in this paper can
provide other useful information on both the input
and output of resources. For example, planning
authorities responsible for securing the supply of raw
materials greatly depend on prognoses for future
Urban infrastructure
mineral demand in order to draw up efficient policies
for resource stockpiling (material input). In Germany,
regional planning authorities have the task of securing
the supply of minerals, and permits for excavation are
often quickly awarded based on previous resource esti-
mations. This frequently leads to overly generous
permits that allow the excavation of resources greatly
in excess of actual needs. Overcapacity is the end
result. This brings the accompanying danger that,
owing to cheap transport costs, high-quality stone is
employed inappropriately. If, however, a prior check
is made during the process of permit application
whether there exists a demand for different stone frac-
tions under current market conditions, then such poor
distribution of resources and unnecessary mineral
excavation can be more carefully controlled (for
discussions, see Barth et al., 2001).
In the area of waste materials (output), information on
the size, kind and distribution of waste materials is of
importance in order to be able to plan sufficiently
for treatment facilities and landfill sites. Clear
estimations of the expected demand for raw materials
could make a contribution here to design-efficient
recycling models.
One final question is whether the presented model can
find areas of application other than housing, e.g. retail
and business parks. One option is to refine the structure
type approach, e.g. with a broadening of the typology
to include the retail/business sector. Basic consider-
ations on the classification of non-domestic buildings
have already been considered (e.g. Steadman and
Bruhns, 2000). Furthermore, it can also be useful to
take existing whole-city approaches into consideration.
Lautso et al. (2004), for instance, view the develop-
ment of settlements from the perspective of transpor-
tation and traffic flows. This builds on traditional
traffic models to develop a combination of land-use
and transport models. The success or failure of those
approaches depends greatly on taking small-scale
factors into account (such as diverse expenditures
for network construction, maintenance and capacity
utilization). These must be given adequate consider-
ation when modelling the sustainable development of
building stock.
However, there is no doubt that the issue of infrastruc-
ture must be examined more closely to achieve a
sustainable development of building stock in the
future. The building-centred view needs to be
expanded considerably to include aspects of town
and regional planning. Existing assessment methods
and tools for the environmental evaluation of buildings
are generally insufficient to meet these requirements. It
is not enough simply to connect infrastructure modules
to building evaluation tools, without adapting the
system architecture accordingly. The required tools
should be able to model the ecological and economic
409
Schiller
consequences of long-term development strategies for
settlements, taking into account demands and opinions
issuing from all the relevant planning levels – from the
regional and town-planning level to the level of build-
ings and individual lots. Whether one tool can integrate
perspectives and issues from all levels in one system, or
whether different tools are necessary to address specific
levels and actors is irrelevant. The crucial factor is to
define clearly the interfaces that will allow inclusion
of a general level of dialogue to support the strategic
process of settlement development. In this way, the
prospects for success when facing future challenges in
the sustainable use of building stock are greatly
improved.
Acknowledgements
This research originates primarily from the SMWK
(Saxony Ministry of Science and Fine Arts) (Deilmann
et al., 2001) and the UBA (German Federal Ministry
for the Environment) (Buchert et al., 2004). Special
thanks is given to all participants in the project partner-
ing groups for the stimulating discussions. The author
is particularly grateful to Clemens Deilmann and Dr
Stefan Siedentop, both Leibniz Institute of Ecological
and Regional Development Dresden (IOER), for the
fruitful collaboration when developing the urban struc-
ture type approach. Thanks also to Adrian Lipkow,
Chair of Urban Engineering at the Dresden University
of Technology (TUD), for support in defining infra-
structure elements for the model calculations; and to
Karin Gruhler (IOER) for the useful contributions on
the analysis of building types. Last but not least,
special thanks to Dr Matthias Buchert, Dr Wolfgang
Jenseit and Lothar Rausch, all at the Institute for
Applied Ecology Darmstadt, for helpful collaboration
when developing the Material-flow Model, and par-
ticularly for adapting the model to the software tool
BASiS2.
References
Ahnert, R. and Krause, K (1985) Typische Baukonstruktionen
von 1860–1960, Teil 1: Gründungen, Wände, Decken,
Dachtragwerke; and Teil 2: Stützen, Treppen, Erker und
Balkone, Bogen, Fußböden, Dachdeckungen. VEB-Verlag
für Bauwesen. Berlin.
Barth, H.G., Claasen, H. and Mühl, G. (2001) Steigerung der
Ressourcenproduktivität von Rohstoffen durch Raumpla-
nung. Qualitative und quantitative Ermittlung des Han-
dlungspotentials am Beispiel einer Stoffstromanalyse für
Sand und Kies in der Region Hannover. Beitrag zur
räumlichen Planung 64. Uni Hannover, FB Landschaftsarch-
itektur. Hannover.
Biermann, S. (2002) Cost variation with density and distance and
implications for sustain-able urban form. Paper presented at
the 5th Symposium of International Urban Planning and
Environmental Association ‘Creating Urban Environments
– Future Forms for City Living’ (UPE5), Oxford Brookes
University, 23–26 September 2002, Oxford, UK.
BKB (1996) Baukostenberatung der Architektenkammer Baden
Württemberg, BKB, Stuttgart.
410
Buchert, M., Fritsche, U. and Gensch, C.-O. (1999) Stoffflussbe-
zogene Bausteine für ein nationales Konzept der Nachhalti-
gen Entwicklung. UBA-Texte, 47.
Buchert, M., Fritsche, U., Jenseit, W., Rausch, L., Deilmann, C.,
Schiller, G., Siedentop, S. and Lipkow, A. (2004) Material-
flow-related components for a national sustainable develop-
ment strategy – linking the construction and housing sector
with the complementary area of ‘public infrastructure. UBA-
Texte, 1. [Executive summary available in English at: ://
www.ioer.de]
Bundesamt für Bauwesen und Raumordnung (BBR) (1998)
Aktuelle Daten zur Entwicklung der Städte, Kreise und
Gemeinden. Berichte Band 1. Eigenverlag, Bonn.
Bundesamt für Bauwesen und Raumordnung (BBR) (2003) Stad-
tentwicklung und Städtebau in Deutschland. Berichte Band
5, Eigenverlag, Bonn.
Burchell, R.W., Shad, N.A., Listokin, D. and Phillips, H. (1998)
The Cost of Sprawl – Revisited. Report, TCRP, Washington,
DC.
Deilmann, C. (Projecktgesamtverantwortung) (2001) Nachhal-
tige Entwicklung des Wohnungsbestandes in sächsischen
Groß- und Mittelstädten: Entwicklungsszenarien ausge-
wählter Wohngebiete unter ressourcen- und nutzungsorien-
tierten Aspekten (NAWO). Final Report (available at: ://
www.ioer.de/Nawo).
Ecoplan, Wirtschafts- und Umweltstudien (2000) Siedlungsent-
wicklung und Infrastrukturkosten. Gutachten im Auftrag
des Bundesamtes für Raumentwicklung, des Staatssekretar-
iats für Wirtschaft und des Amtes für Gemeinden und Rau-
mordnung des Kantons Bern, Bern.
Gassner, E., Heckenbücker, B. and Thünker, H. (1986) Entwick-
lung des Erschließungsaufwandes nach
Flächeninanspruchnahme, Bau- und Bodenkosten: Eine
Untersuchung für Verhältnisse im Verdichtungsraum und
im ländlichen Siedlungsraum. Forschungsbericht. Informa-
tionszentrum Raum und Bau, Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft,
IRB. T 1845, IRB, Stuttgart.
Geisendorf, C., Schrepp, J., Stanescu, A. and Tünshoff, H. (1983)
Dichte individuelle Wohnformen: Eine systematische
Beispielsammlung. Verlag Arthur Niggli, Niederteufen.
Herz, R., Baur, R. and Kropp, I (2003) Rehabilitation manage-
ment of urban infrastructure networks, in Proceedings of
the 17th European Junior Scientist Workshop at Neunzehn-
hain, Dresden University of Technology, Chair of Urban
Engineering at the Dresden University of Technology.
Herz, R. and Lipkow, A. (2001) Life cycle assessment of water
mains and sewers. Paper presented at the World Water Con-
gress, Berlin, Germany, 2001.
Kirschenmann, J.C. and Muschalek, C. (1977) Quartier zum
Wohnen: bauliche und sozial-räumliche Entwicklung des
Wohnens. Wohnquartiere aus dem 3. Viertel des 20. Jahr-
hunderts als Stadtumbau, Stadterweiterung, Stadtneubau
mit Analyse der Wohnbaustrukturen, Deutsche Verlags-
Anstalt, Stuttgart.
Kleindienst, G. and Schatzer, E. (1991) Bebauungsformen für die
Stadterweiterung: Beispiele und städtebauliche Kennwerte.
Beiträge zur Stadtforschung, Stadtentwicklung und Stadtges-
taltung, Bd. 27. Magistrat der Stadt Wien, Magistratsabt. 18,
Stadtstrukturplanung, Vienna.
Kohler, N. and Hassler, U. (2002) The building stock as a
research object. Building Research & Information, 30(4),
226–236.
Kohler, N., Hassler, U. and Paschen, H. (eds) (1999b) Stoffströme
und Kosten in den Bereichen Bauen und Wohnen, Springer,
Berlin.
Kohler, N., Schwaiger B., Barth, B. and Koch, M. (1999a)
Mass Flow, Energy Flow and Costs of the German Build-
ing Stock (available at: ://www.ifib.uni-karlsruhe.de/
web).
Lautso, K., Spiekermann, K., Wegener, M., Sheppard, I., Stead-
man, P., Martino, A., Domingo, R. and Gayda, S. (2004)
PROPOLIS – Planning and Research of Policies for Land

Use and Transportation for Increasing Urban Sustainability.
Final Report, LT Consultants: Helsinki.
Lowe, R.J. (2001) Reducing carbon emission from the building
stock – a review of technical potential, barriers to change
and policy instruments. Paper presented at the IEA/OECD
Workshop on the Design of Sustainable Buildings Policies,
Paris, France, June 2001.
Menkhoff, H., Blum, A., Bendisch, E. and Wente, E. (1979)
Städtebauliche Verdichtung und ihre Bewertung.
Querschnittsuntersuchung von Demonstrativbauvorhaben.
Schriftenreihe ‘Versuchs- und Vergleichsbauten und
Demonstrativmaßnahmen’ des Bundesministers für
Raumordnung, Bauwesen und Städtebau. Heft 01.067,
Eigenverlag, Bonn.
OECD (2003) Environmentally Sustainable Buildings: Chal-
lenges and Policies. Policy Brief, June 2003, OECD, Paris.
OECD (2005) Towards the Sustainable Use of Building Stock:
Final Synthesis Report. GOV/TDPC/URB(2005)1, OECD,
Paris.
PAYT (2002) Variable Rate Pricing Based on Pay-As-You-Throw
as a Tool of Urban Waste Management. Deliverable Report
No. 11 (12–13) Summary on the Research on Urban
Structure and Household Related Aspects and Established
Conditions in the Project Reference Sites. Research Project
Under the Fifth Framework Programme Energy, Environ-
ment and Sustainable Development.
Real Estate Research Corporation (1974) The Costs of Sprawl:
Detailed Cost Analysis. Prepared for the Council on
Environmental Quality, the Office of Policy Development
and Research, the Department of Housing and Urban
Development, the Office of Planning and Management,
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
Reinhardt, W. (2004) Erschließungseffizienz in Baugebieten
in dörflichen und kleinstädtischen Gebieten.
Flächenmanagement und Bodenordnung, 1, S.8–S.13.
Rovers, R. (2004) Existing buildings, a hidden resource, ready for
mining. Paper presented at the OECD Workshop on
Sustainable Buildings, Tokyo, Japan, January 2004.
RStO (1997) Forschungsgesellschaft für Straßen- und Verkehrs-
wesen: Richtlinien für die Standardisierung des Oberbaus
von Straßenverkehrsflächen (RStO). FSGV, Cologne.
Schulze, H.-J. and Walther, P. (1990) Gebäudeatlas – Mehrfami-
lienwohngebäude der Baujahre 1880 bis 1980, Teil 1:
Fachwerkbauten und Wohngebäude in Mauerwerksbau-
weise; and Teil 2: Wohngebäude in Block-, Streifen-,
Platten- und Skelettbauweise. Bauakademie der DDR.
Schwarz, M. (2001) Aktuelle Probleme der Schaffung von
Baurechten in Kleinstädten und Dörfern – Baulandbereit-
stellung untererhöhtem Kostendruck. 420. Kurs des Instituts
für Städtebau Berlin ‘Schaffung von Baurechten in der
Praxis’. Vortragsmanuskript.
Siedentop, S., Schiller, G., Gutsche, J.M., Koziol, M. and
Walther, J. (2006) Siedlungsentwicklung und Infrastruktur-
folgekosten – Bilanzierung und Strategieentwicklung.
BBR-Reihe [online publication], 3.
Speir, C. and Stephenson, K. (2002) Does sprawl cost us all?
Isolating the effect housing patterns on public water and
sewer costs. Journal of the American Planning Association,
68(1), S.56–S.70.
Urban infrastructure
Statistisches Bundesamt (StaBu) (2000) 50 Jahre Wohnen
in Deutschland – Ergebnisse aus Gebäude- und
Wohnungszählungen, -stichproben, Mikrozensus-
Ergänzungserhebungen und Bautätigkeitsstatistiken,
Metzler-Poeschel, Stuttgart.
Steadman, P. and Bruhns, H. (2000) An introduction to the
national Non-Domestic Building Stock database. Environ-
ment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 27, 3–10.
Suen, I. (2003) Residential Development Pattern and its Impact
on Infrastructure Provision in an Urban Area. Department
of Community and Regional Planning, Iowa State
University, Ames, IA.
Weise, G. (1997) Straßenbau: Planung und Entwurf. 3. vollst.
gefasste Auflage, Verlag für Bauwesen, Berlin.
Wirtschaftsministerium Baden-Württemberg (Hg) (2005)
Landesentwicklungsbericht Baden Württemberg 2005
(LEB2005). Eigenverlag, Stuttgart.
Wirtschaftswoche (2004) Die Schlaglochrepublik. Wirtschafts-
woche, 30(15 July 2004), 20–24.
Endnotes
1
Leipzig, Freiberg and Zittau in Germany/Saxony.
2
This connection is not indicated in the Figure 1.2, but is observed
in reality. Confirmation comes from, for example, Suen (2003):
undulations in 40 residential areas of varying density and con-
struction type in the town of Ames, IA, US, lead to similar results.
3
A rough estimation of the material stock in supply and waste dis-
posal networks (water, sewage, gas) showed that these systems
comprised around 10% of the material stock in roads.
However, this figure varies considerably, owing to insufficient
hard data.
4
The project entitled ‘Sustainable Construction and Housing’ was
commissioned and financed by the German Federal Bureau for the
Environment. Implementation was a cooperative effort between
the Leibniz Institute of Ecological and Regional Development,
the Institute for Applied Ecology Darmstadt, as well as the
Chair for Urban Construction Dresden.
5
These processes could also be observed to a similar extent and at
the same periods in other European countries (PAYT, 2002).
6
The estimations for regional differences in density could also
have been realized directly at the level of districts. However, as
this would have undermined the validity of a national model,
an aggregation at the regional level was chosen.
7
Other studies have also adopted a similar approach based on
building elements. Thus, for example, the comprehensive ana-
lyses of mass flows in housing stock by Kohler and Hassler
(2002) also classify types using such elements.
8
GEMIS is available free of charge at: http://www.oeko.de
9
A rough estimate was performed as part of a student research
project. Other concrete studies are lacking or are unknown to
the author.
411