A report done by the Dr. Ioan CIUMANSU on Eco-Cities for the International Master students from UVSQ for their research work on "Railway Station and the City". Report describes how different angle of innovation describes the Sustainability and Eco-Innovation means to the project. The three proposed themes was as follows; Multi-Innovation, Climate Change and Technology.

1. Is there a Future for eco-cities?
Prospective roles of Versailles Chantiers within the
Greater Paris: A hub of multi-modal communication
Versailles, 2013
1

2. This is a first global report of the Integration Seminar – a module of innovation and learning within the
International Professional Master in Management of Eco-Innovation. This is a graduate program managed by
the Econoving Chair in Generating Eco-Innovation – a cluster of academic, industrial and government actors
focused on urban sustainability.
Counting for the Work Package 3 – Anticipation of the Econoving’s Rail Station Program (Programme Gare,
2011-2013), this report is the result of the joint work carried out by the Econoving researchers and graduate
students in collaboration with the industrial partners.
Coordination of work, research, text & design: Dr. Ioan M. Ciumasu – ioan.ciumasu@uvsq.fr
The views expressed here are of the author, and do not necessarily
represent those of the institutions
© 2013 Econoving
Acknowledgements – the following have contributed to this work:
Econoving 2011-2012 students: Anna Aghvanyan, Adrian Carrillo, Krishna Chandran, Boubacar Coly, Fanny Courry, Maxim Doubrouski,
Elodie Gonthier, Sirin Hamsho, Alejandra Hoyos, Xiaochao Huang, Collins Ihedioha, Natalia Kozdra, Anna Lomteva, Javad Mahmoodirad,
Ravi Nakulan, Alexandra Ostrovskaya, Kevin Ramirez, Marcel Roquette, Dina Salakhova, Maria Stoica, Sandra Velasco.
Econoving 2012-2013 students: François Apicella, Gabriel Bermeo, Zoheir Haghighi, Ludmila Kobyakova, Renan Le Tohic, Habib Liamidi,
Hélène Luciani, Diego Martinez, Mingyan Meng, Teodora Morar, Surya Muraleedharan-Nair, Julian Muriel, Marina Nikitina, Kalliopi
Ntanou, Maria Lucia Portocarrero, Cécile Tchoubaev.
Expert coaches, jury or institutional support: Jean-Louis Jourdan, Alain Adrianssens, Thierry Lafont (SNCF), Agnes Roux (City of Versailles),
Bernard Blez, Etienne Drouet (GDF Suez), Laurent Schmitt (Alstom Grid), Frédéric Cuq (Saur), Christophe Lombard (Italcementi),
Dominique Agrech (X-Ange), Sylvie Faucheux, Keith Culver, Beat Bürgenmeier, Christelle Hue, Rachel Guilloteau, René Audet, Sophie
Némoz, Caroline Gans-Combe, Quentin Courtier, Frédéric Louradour, Amélie Coulbaut-Lazzarini, Guillaume Bailly (UVSQ).
2

3. TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. OVERVIEW
II. EXERCISE DESCRIPTION
III. LESSONS OF THE 1st YEAR
IV. REVIEW OF ECO-CITY RESEARCH & LITERATURE
V. RESULTS & PROPOSITIONS AFTER THE 2nd YEAR
VI. CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS
UVSQ – Guyancourt Campus. Photo: Ioan M. Ciumasu
VII. THE ROAD AHEAD
3

4. I. OVERVIEW
The Integration Seminar (IS) is an exercise of collaborative integration and application of knowledge
gained in individual course modules – a student-expert interaction. This is a hands-on undertaking,
organized in the form of a simulation of an eco-innovation consulting firm responding to a call for
project proposals launched by a local community – Building the best European eco-innovation hub:
From Versailles Chantiers railway station to the eco-city of the future.
By 2030 and 2050 Versailles Chantiers should become:
1. A Multi-modal pole (“pôle multimodal”) – a hub of combined persons and value exchanges
2. A development engine of the City of Versailles and a global reference for urban sustainability
This community of innovators and learners is organized in three teams (consulting firms), each with a
different angle of approach: Multi-Innovation, Climate Change, and Technology Push. The students-
experts interaction took the form of lectures, coaching, presentations and jury evaluations. The IS
allows a realistic exploration of the links and creative tensions between topics and between
innovation factors; identification of the main drivers of change; co-definition of problems and of the
potential solutions. The work took place at the Econoving locations in Guyancourt.
UVSQ – Guyancourt Campus. Photo: Ioan M. Ciumasu
4

5. II. EXERCISE DESCRIPTION
The IS exercise has been iterated two university years in a row – 2011-2012 & 2012-2013. Each year,
the work went through two phases – vision building and implementation plan, as illustrated below.
1st Phase – Vision building
ORGANISATION
- similar projects
INTERNATIONAL
- methods
TEAM
SURVEY & - context
BENCHMARKING - project dynamics
& structure
DIAGNOSIS OF VISION
VERSAILLES
CHANTIERS & Main Objectives
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2nd Phase – Developing the implementation plan
QUALITY PROJECT & ECO-INNOVATION
MANAGEMENT INNOVATION ENGINE
INDICATORS MANAGEMENT & SOLUTIONS
5

6. III. LESSONS FROM THE 1st YEAR
Participants have engaged in lively professional feedbacks, notably in two deliveries by the students
in front a jury of academics, industrials, financial experts and public authorities.
UVSQ – Guyancourt Campus – Interactions between 2011-2012 students and experts.
Photos: Elodie Gonthier
Some first patterns and challenges have emerged:
 It is very difficult to collect reliable, coherent information – in deed, a world-wide known challenge
 Trans-sectorial understanding of a city is a heavy task, due to traditional divisions between disciplines
 New types of knowledge management are needed, which requires sustained effort and learning by all
 The historical heritage and the context of the Greater Paris represent both opportunities & challenges
 Scenarios can address: technology choices, social acceptability, environmental concerns, costs & risks
 Higher spatial scales are important: a train station can only function as embedded in its city context
6

7. The method has worked very well. It appears that this type of exercise is a very useful tool for
foresight and anticipation in terms of eco-innovation and eco-city development. The approach allows
the people involved in the works, both graduate students and experts, to grasp the project reality at
the city level and to build a solid foundation for future solutions. Various options and scenarios have
been analyzed, so as to link local context with global issues.
Further, the set of three angles of view has proven to be very insightful, as each of them can be taken
autonomously or/and in complementarity with the other two: multi-innovation, climate change and
technology push.
The three perspectives have thus been continued in the 2nd year. The iteration of the exercise two
years in a row is also meant to allow the confirmation and consolidation of the method, and to
further develop the initial results and lessons – to enhance the overall value of the work.
This 2nd run of the exercise was therefore planned using:
- The lessons and materials obtained by the 1st year
- The recent advances of the researchers in the Railway Station Program
- The newest advances and insights on eco-innovation and eco-city in the literature
The 2011-2012 Econoving students & experts have passed the relay over to the next Generation.
7

8. IV. REVIEW OF ECO-CITY RESEARCH & LITERATURE
Cities are becoming the drivers of change. The place and role of Econoving
Cities are veritable “growth machines” for their hinterlands (Molotch 1976), which may explain why
humanity is mostly urban already. The global urbanization rate is accelerating, as do environmental
degradation. Urban transformation is now an ecological research topic in its own right (McDonald
2008). The success or the failure of the transition to sustainability will be determined in cities.
In the globalizing world of the 21st century, global fluxes of matter-energy, information and people
can be understood in terms of exchanges within a global network of interconnected cities – some
“world cities” being more influential than others (Sassen 1991, 2002; Beaverstock et al. 2000). In the
same time, cities are the product of their local context, and are dependent on the natural resources
which they extract from their hinterland (“ecosystem goods and services” which together form the
“ecosystem carrying capacity”; Wackernagel et al. 2006). The sustainability of a city is therefore a
matter of how advanced that city is in the transition from a local identity to a double, local-and-
global identity (Ciumasu & Culver 2011). In deed, this is the core challenge for city planners and
managers for the next years and decades.
Since 2009-2010, Econoving has engaged in its own eco-city development and employs Versailles
Chantiers – a communication hub within Greater Paris – as a pivot and experimental platform for
collaborative innovation for urban sustainability (Culver et al. 2011; Ciumasu 2013a,b). The Greater
Paris has its own global weight: a concept launched by the French President (2007) as an overarching
objective of re-imagining Paris as a world’s mega-city promoting sustainability and competitiveness.
This is the largest project of Paris since G.E. Haussmann has re-organized the city in the 19th century
(as commissioned by Napolen III). The institutional context at Econoving is a university-industry-
government consortium supporting a research and post-graduate education program.
City managers experience the need of knowledge integration
In their quest for sustainable development, many urban communities and research institutions have
pioneered urban foresight, sometimes followed by policies for urban development. But the decision-
making process tended to favor trade-offs which avoided controversy and thus have changed
nothing in the end (Weber et al. 2009). Even a strong political will was not enough. On the other
hand, we now live in a knowledge society, and the fundamental question now towards city
sustainability is: How to develop a functional relation between science and decision makers?
This question may seem straightforward, and yet there is another challenge before us: all disciplines
contributing to sustainability have their distinct understanding of a sustainable city – an ecologist, a
sociologist, an economist, an engineer or an architect talks about what the concept of urban
sustainability means for her/him and there is no real common language (Williams 2010). This causes
mismatches and intricacies that drive effective decision making into a halt. Consequently, it’s easy to
declare aims of urban sustainability, but much more difficult to make it real. This can only commence
with federative efforts – notably the creation of agoras of learning and knowledge co-generation by
various experts. Such efforts often result in great collections of knowledge but this is still not enough:
they stop short of integration (Wheeler and Beatley 2009). As a result, for city managers, an essential
question still awaits answers: How to actually use all this heterogeneous body of knowledge?
8

9. The hard but necessary way of experimentation. The role of cityports
Innovation is the most effective way to bridge science and society, both in terms of transforming
industrialized societies (a good start is the 1st Innovation Convention of the European Commission,
05-07 December 2011, http://ec.europa.eu/research/innovation-union/ic2011/index_en.cfm) and in
terms of city systems (Han et al 2012). However, we are facing a set of paramount challenges.
Firstly, the need for trans-disciplinarity (problem solving-oriented research) is widely recognized, but
there is no such thing as a unified theory of sustainability. Secondly, as we speak, we are already
over-consuming the Earth’s carrying capacity, which means that simply “innovation for sustainability”
is not sufficient – we need to innovate fast or face the “perfect storm” within decades (Beddington
2009). Thirdly, having in mind the first two points, postponing decisions is already a ‘worse’ decision,
which means that we often have to act even before we fully understand the process. In summary,
the only practical way towards sustainability is experimentation, i.e., learning and doing in the same
time. In effect, the process of innovation itself is describable as a learning cycle (Ciumasu 2013c). In
terms of the transition management theory, such active generation of innovation is understood as a
double process of learning-by-doing and doing-by-learning (Geels 2010).
In terms of urban renewal initiative types, communities are scattered on a gradient from whole-city
commitments to (only) sectorial developments to plain ignorance and disinterest (Portney 2003; Flint
& Raco 2012). Interestingly, even in the absence of a dedicated national policy, many cities have
major sustainability initiatives, e.g., Seattle, Portland, Chicago, New York, San Francisco (among the
large American cities) (Fitzgerald 2010) or Grand Rapids - Michigan among the smaller cities. Some
key patterns are detectable. One is the re-thinking of the various functions of the city areas so as to
promote walkable neighborhood. Another one is the use of a “city port” (seaport or airport) as a hub
of development and renewal of metropolitan areas (Van Wijk 2007). This reminds the historic role of
railway stations for urban and economic development in the 19th century (Conticelli & Tondelli 2011).
They were initially located outside the town (due to public health considerations) but have gradually
melted into the urban shape and functions (Reusser et al. 2008). Today, in the European context of
good public transportation, high population densities and the arrival of high-speed trains, a strong
competition has emerged between air and train travels across medium-long distances (300-500 km),
with important consequences on cities (e.g. Terrin 2009). Such developments, together with many
other details of modern life, notably the revival of passive urban transportation (walking and cycling)
and the new communication technologies, are generating a great deal of interest in the concept of
“multi-modal transportation”. Stakeholders include citizens, industry and public authorities.
It is in this context that Econoving runs its own foresight exercise and collaborative learning cycles.
V. RESULTS & PROPOSITIONS AFTER THE 2nd YEAR
The following options have been developed by the 2012-2013 generation of students and experts, as
summarized in the remainder of this reports:
a. URBAN RENEWAL: Integrative planning for radical progress in Versailles Chantiers
b. URBAN RESILIENCE: Smart adaptation & mitigation of climate changes in Versailles Chantiers
c. URBAN TECHNOLOGY: Integrative solutions for augmenting Versailles to the status of all-times
International Hub of Innovation
9

10. Current station. Source: http://www.monversailles.com/transports/ca-coince-sur-la-ligne-ter-paris-chartres/
URBAN RENEWAL: Integrative planning for radical progress in Versailles Chantiers
DIAGNOSIS:
There is an important gap between current situation & the true potential of VC
VISION: We want to change that!
Source: bluewaterindia.com/renewable-energy.htm
Source: http://www.ecochunk.com/
Current station. Original photos
Source: bluewaterindia.com/renewable-energy.htm
10

11. Conference Centre
Versailles Chantiers should take better advantage of its prominent place within the Greater Paris. To
become a multi-modal hub of transport and communications, Versailles Chantiers station should re-
invent itself together with its neighborhood, become a Global Reference for Eco-Innovative Solutions.
A great number of solutions are now available, and all modern needs of the people should be met in
the same time and in the same place. The key to achieving this has two complementary facets:
1. Forward-looking, transdisciplinary and problem solving oriented thinking
2. Pro-active communications to a local, national, European and Global audience
How? The proposition is to mobilize energies and intelligence via transforming Versailles Chantiers
into an International Showroom and Conference Centre by 2020. This should serve as an exhibition
place, and the station itself should be part of the “live exhibition” of new options for sustainable
living through multi-modal communication. Investment required: 1.3-4.1 bn € depending on the
chosen scale (cf. benchmarking), through a financial mix: partnerships, contracts and loans.
A conference space can also be organised nearby the station for: exhibitions, public dialogue, expert
meetings, tourist offices, educational media. Many cities have chosen to build a powerful conference
centre as a strategic way to generate visibility and to attract investments (e.g. Bak et al. 2012, DOI:
10.1007/978-3-642-23550-4_2, available online at http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-
3-642-23550-4_2?LI=true; and Ramirez-Pasillas 2010, DOI: 10.1080/08985620902815106, available
online at http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08985620902815106).
11

12. URBAN RESILIENCE:
Smart adaptation & mitigation of climate changes in Versailles Chantiers
DIAGNOSIS. Versailles Chantiers train station has a vast, unused potential to function as a pivot of
technology and innovation in the Greater Paris and a socio-economic engine for the city of Versailles.
Station today Impacts to be expected
1. Higher t°C, Frequency & Poor thermal regulation - Heat stress; Lower productivity
Duration of heat waves - Higher energy consumption
2. More days of droughts No water management - Water scarcity & higher cost
during summer - Higher health risks
3. Extreme precipitations Low platforms Insuficient - Operations vs. flood risks
and natural disasters shelters - Passengers discomfort & risks
- Power shortage risk
VISION: By 2050, Versailles Chantiers plays a leading global role as:
 Sustainability reference
 Benchmark of the best climate-related solutions
How? By establishing a Technology Validation Laboratory (to be
functional by 2030, nearby the station) which will be recognized by
world’s experts as a place where the latest technological solutions
are tested for viability, system integration, and climate relevance.
Rationale: Technology goes through stages of development from
proof-of-concept to demonstrators and commercial prototypes.
The bottleneck of a technological solution is the test of its capacity
to function as part of a system of various technologies: technology
readiness (Azizian et al. 2011, DOI: 10.1002/sys.20186, online at
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/sys.20186/full).
FINANCE & IMPLEMENTATION SNCF / RFF
12% 6%
Initial investment: 110-130 M€ PARTNERS & private investors
20%
Financial participation based on current ADEME
renovation & others projects Local Authorities (Versailles, Grand Parc) 25%
in the Greater Paris area 10%
European Commission
Mechanisms: Partners investments 30%, Régional governance (IDF, Dept..)
Tax return/Community grants 30%, 12% 15%
Public subsidies 25%, Loans 15% State
12

13. Energy
Green
Water
Areas
VC
station
Green
Services
Mobility
Air
Waste
Quality
A series of topics are important and inter-related. But the most prominent and urgent topics are
related to energy and indoor air quality (related to health and physiological comfort). Therefore, two
major objectives are forerunning in our approach and proposition:
st
1. Versailles Chantiers should become the 1 carbon-neutral city district in the European Union
2. Green walls & related biotechnologies need to be tested as main solution to indoor pollution &
comfort in stations
Proposed for VC building:
- Indoor air cooling by 4-6°C
- Cold air cools the building
- Water reuse (toilets, etc)
Original photos
Proven Technology - shower tower:
The air is cooled via reversed heat
transfer (City of Melbourne 2004)
13

14. Future Avenue de Sceaux – Versailles. Artwork: Teodora Morar
URBAN TECHNOLOGY: Integrative solutions for augmenting Versailles to
the status of All-times International Hub of Innovation
DIAGNOSIS. Versailles Chantiers train station has a vast, unused potential to function as a pivot of
technology and innovation in the Greater Paris and a socio-economic engine for the city of Versailles.
VISION. Avenue de Sceaux will become a strategic axis: an inspiring journey connecting the historical
heritage of Versailles Castle and the multi-modal pole of communication of Versailles Chantiers. This
will magnify the profile of Versailles as a European and world eco-city reference.
Tramway on green path. Source:
http://orangerie-strasbourg.e-
Policemen on segways in Versailles. monsite.com/pages/au-tour-du-parc.html
http://www.flickr.com/photos/86749403
@N08/7944172282/
Info panels in parks. Original
First launch of Montgolfier Balloon in
Versailles. Source: http://www.france-
pittoresque.com/spip.php?article6561
14

15. Milestones and scenarios
Future VC and Avenue de Sceaux – Versailles
Artwork: Teodora Morar
FINANCE & IMPLEMENTATION
The estimated investment is: 70.8 M€
[0.8 M for studies & communication, 10 M
for services, 40 M for clean technologies,
20 M for mobility and accessibility].
A Committee of stake-holders & experts
would insure the project governance:
SNCF, GDF Suez, Alstom, Italcementi, Saur,
UVSQ, HEC, Versailles City, other
industrial, academic & public partners
The proposed process of achieving success
is the candidature of the city of Versailles
to become a European Green Capital by
2050, with the technical advice made by a
Technology Committee composed of:
- SNCF as an involved sponsor (also having
a certain expertise in large projects)
- City of Versailles as coordinator
- Scientists from UVSQ and HEC in Saclay
- Users of transport infrastructure
- Residents of VC eco-district
- Industrial local partners in mobility
15

16. UVSQ – Guyancourt Campus – Interactions between 2012-2013 students and experts.
Photo: Teodora Morar
VI. CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS
i. The Integration Seminar has proven to be a right tool for the Econoving’s objectives to pursue
innovation hand in hand with learning and experimentation. This report is a summary of the
extended report which will be presented in April 2013 and counting for the Work Package 3 –
Anticipation of the Railway Station Programe (Programme Gare). The method is suited for
prospective work and learning and should be continued and enhanced. Three approaches have
been identified as useful: “multi-innovation”, the generalist approach focused on horizontal
integration and governance; “climate change”, which strategically addresses the issue of climate
challenges and opportunities; and the “technology push”, as creative rethinking of the role of
recent technological advances within the societal transformations towards sustainability.
ii. A city district can be an activity hub, but it must be treated as part of a wider system – the city
itself. A district cannot be a strict managerial unit, because it lacks some essential functions of a
community. A key recommendation for future developments is therefore to strengthen the role
of Versailles Chantiers – and that of similar train stations – by augmenting its role within the city.
iii. Versailles Chantiers has the potential to become a European reference in urban sustainability
and eco-innovation. The raison d’être of the rail station can be more than “just the place where
you take the train”. Not all train stations can be nodes of multi-modal communications and
exchanges, because this depends on the position within the wider network. Versailles Chantiers
has this vocation, due to its role as communications hub within Greater Paris. But this train
station has some unique advantages which can make it a very powerful point of convergence of
urban socio-economic life – for the people of Versailles and for the global citizens.
16

17. UVSQ – Guyanco
VII. THE ROAD AHEAD
Aside from the essential conclusions and recommendations resulted from the exercise, the most
valuable outcome of the Integration Seminar is perhaps the progress up the learning curve. We have
a tried-out modus operandi which enables the Econoving’s Master and the cluster itself to address
further challenges and opportunities – other stations and other cities in France and in Europe.
The development of this method has been made possible by a very large number of people since the
establishment of Econoving, and the development of this method is due to all of them (full list on the
second page of this document), most notable Prof. Sylvie Faucheux, Prof. Keith Culver and two of the
core team members so far, Christelle Hue and Rachel Guilloteau.
As our graduate students and industrial and academic experts have shown in their work, this is only
the beginning. The long-term idea is the commitment to using cluster intelligence to transform
sectorial actors into innovation engines – a bottom-up process and dynamics that is capable of
generating system innovation and green jobs.
17

18. References
Beaverstock JV, Smith RG, Taylor PJ (2000) World-City Network: A New Metageography? Annals of the Association of
American Geographers 90(1): 123-134.
Beddington J (2009) Food, energy, water and the climate: A perfect storm of global events? UK Government Office for
Science, http://www.bis.gov.uk/go-science/news/speeches/the-perfect-storm, accessed 28/03/2012.
Ciumasu IM (2013a) We need large-scale experimentation platforms for cross-sector innovation in Europe.
Science|Business, http://www.sciencebusiness.net/news/76003/We-need-large-scale-experimentation-platforms-for-
cross-sector-innovation-in-Europe
Ciumasu IM (2013b) Dynamic decision trees for building resilience into future eco-cities. Technological Forecasting & Social
Change. Doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2012.12.010., http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162512003253
Ciumasu IM (2013c) What is Eco-Innovation? (under review by Research Policy)
Ciumasu IM, Culver KC (2011) Eco-cities in a globalized future - from Constantinopolis to "Cosmopolis"? At ESEE 2011:
Advancing Ecological Economics: Theory and Practice, 14-17 June, Istanbul,
http://www.esee2011.org/registration/fullpapers/esee2011_d254c8_1_13049637762012_2354.pdf
Conticelli E, Tondelli S (2011) Railway Station Role in Composing Urban Conflicts. TeMA - Trimestrale del Laboratorio
Territorio Mobilità e Ambiente - TeMALab, 4: 47-58. ISSN 1970-9870
Culver K, Guilloteau R, Hue C (2011) Hard nodes in soft surroundings: A ‘dream of islands’ strategy for urban sustainability.
Development 54(3): 336-342.
Flint J, Raco M (2012) The Future of Sustainable Cities: Critical Reflections. Policy Press, Bristol, UK.
Fitzgerald J (2010) Emerald Cities: Urban Sustainability and Economic Development. Oxford University Press,
http://www.amazon.com/Emerald-Cities-Sustainability-Economic-Development/dp/0195382765/ref=pd_sim_b_1
Geels FW (2010) Ontologies, socio-technical transitions (to sustainability), and the multi-level perspective. Research Policy
39, 495-510.
Han J, Fontanos P, Fukushi K, Herath S, Heeren N, Naso V, Cecchi C, Edwards P, Takeuchi K, 2012. Innovation for
sustainability: toward a sustainable urban future in industrialized cities. Sustainability Science 7 (Suppl. 1): 91-100.
McDonald RI (2008) Global urbanization: can ecologists identify a sustainable way forward? Frontiers in Ecology and the
Environment 6: 99-104.
Molotch H (1976) The City as a Growth Machine: Toward a Political Economy of Place. American Journal of Sociology 82(2):
309-332.
Portney KE (2003) Taking Sustainable Cities Seriously: Economic Development, the Environment, and Quality of Life in
American Cities, MIP Press, http://www.amazon.com/dp/0262661322/ref=rdr_ext_sb_ti_sims_2
Reusser DE, Loukopoulos P, Stauffacher M, Scholz RW (2008) Classifying railway stations for sustainable transitions-
balancing node and place functions. Journal of Transport Geography 16: 191-202.
Sassen S (1991) The Global City: New York, London, Tokyo, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
Sassen S (2002) Locating cities on global circuits. Environment & Urbanization 14: 13-30.
Terrin JJ (2011) Railway stations and urban dynamics. High-speed issues. Editions Paranthèses, Marseilles, ISBN 978-2-
86364-227-6
Van Wijk M (2007) Airports as Cityports in the City-region: Spatial-economic and institutional positions and institutional
learning in Randstad-Schipol (AMS), Frankfurt-Main (FRA), Tokyo Haneda (HND) and Narita (NRT). PhD thesis published by
KNAG/Faculteit Geowetenschappen Universiteit Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Wackernagel M, Kitzes J, Moran D, Goldfinger S, Thomas M (2006). The Ecological Footprint of cities and regions: comparing
resource availability with resource demand. Environment & Urbanization 18(1): 103-112.
Weber KM, Kubeczko K, Kaufmann A, Grunewald B (2009) Trade-offs between impacts of future-oriented analysis:
experiences from innovation policy foresight and strategy process of the City of Vienna. Technology Analysis and Strategic
Management 21(8): 953-969.
nd
Wheeler SM and Beathley T (2009) The Sustainable Urban Development Reader. 2 edition, Routledge, London, UK.
Williams K (2010) Sustainable cities: research and practice challenges. International Journal of Urban Sustainable
Development 1(1-2): 128-132.
18

19. 19

20. contact: econoving@uvsq.fr
20