From SDGs to Positive Energy Districts: A Multidisciplinary Approach

Positive Energy Districts (PEDs) are often discussed in terms of energy efficiency, renewable energy production, and climate neutrality. Yet, creating districts that generate more energy than they consume is only part of the challenge. For PEDs to succeed, they must also respond to social needs, environmental priorities, economic realities, governance structures, and the unique characteristics of the urban environments in which they are implemented.

This complexity is at the heart of the SDG-BASED project, which seeks to translate the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) into a practical and measurable rating system for Positive Energy Districts and Positive Energy Buildings. Achieving this requires expertise from many fields and close collaboration between researchers, engineers, planners, sustainability experts, policy specialists, and stakeholders.

In this article, partners from across the SDG-BASED consortium share their perspectives on why multidisciplinary collaboration is essential, how different disciplines contribute to the development of the rating system, and what challenges and opportunities emerge when transforming global sustainability ambitions into real-world urban solutions.

Why Are Multiple Disciplines Necessary?

SWECO: From an urban planning and architectural perspective, a credible assessment of PED and PEB cannot rely on a single technical lens, because these environments are shaped by the interaction of end users, spatial form, building typology, urban morphology, energy systems, urban mobility and environmental performance. PED must be integrated into land-use planning, transport networks, public space systems, and social infrastructure so that walking becomes a practical and attractive choice for everyone, supporting goals such as reduced inequality, better health, and sustainable cities. For example, from an architect’s perspective, pedestrian-friendly design shapes the everyday experience of streets and buildings through human-scale frontage, active ground floors, accessibility, shade, safety, and comfort, which encourages social interaction and supports local urban life. When planners, architects, energy  and building engineers, digitalization experts, and communities work together, PED can connect policy with design and turn SDG ambitions into built environments that are equitable, livable, and environmentally responsible. 

CitySync Solutions AB: Positive Energy Districts are inherently complex systems that require solutions from diverse perspectives. Beyond the technological performance of PEDs, the SDG-BASED project integrates national SDG policy prioritisation and weighted stakeholder priorities into the evaluation framework. CitySync contributes by providing the systemic integration of diverse fields of knowledge into a validated rating system that can be applied across different contexts.

University of Catania: SDG-BASED involves several complementary disciplines, including energy engineering, building physics, urban planning, environmental assessment, social sciences, stakeholder engagement, digital tool development, policy analysis, and sustainability evaluation. These disciplines are necessary because PEDs combine energy performance, renewable energy integration, social inclusion, climate resilience, governance, and spatial planning into one interconnected system.

University of Palermo: The development of the rating system also requires expertise in environmental assessment, urban-scale modelling, life-cycle thinking, and building physics. These disciplines ensure that sustainability objectives are translated into technically measurable and scientifically grounded criteria that can be applied to real districts and buildings.

AIT Austria: Multiple disciplines are required to address the social, economic, and environmental dimensions of sustainable development and the intersections between the SDGs that are relevant for monitoring PED performance. Expertise in physics, energy engineering, urban energy planning, renewable energy engineering, and monitoring and evaluation is essential to ensure that PEDs are assessed comprehensively and accurately.

Dalarna University: From Dalarna University’s perspective, SDG-BASED brings together energy systems analysis, building energy engineering, Positive Energy District planning, data-driven modelling, sustainability assessment, policy interpretation and stakeholder-oriented urban development. These disciplines are all necessary because a PED is not only a technical energy balance, but an integrated district-level transformation. Energy expertise is needed to assess demand reduction, renewable generation, flexibility and interactions with district heating, electricity grids and mobility. Urban planning and policy expertise are needed to understand how these solutions fit within real neighbourhoods, regulations and development processes. Social and stakeholder perspectives are needed to ensure that the rating system reflects affordability, acceptance, local priorities and long-term usability. Dalarna University contributes especially through its experience in PED concepts, energy system modelling, Swedish and Nordic urban energy transition, and the translation of technical performance into practical assessment indicators.

How Do Researchers, Engineers, and Planners Collaborate?

University of Catania: Researchers, engineers, and planners collaborate through an iterative process. Researchers identify SDGs, targets, indicators, and KPIs, while engineers translate them into measurable technical parameters. Urban planners then contextualise these indicators within real urban environments, taking into account spatial constraints, development plans, and stakeholder priorities.

SWECO: From Sweco’s perspective, collaboration is carried out through interactive approaches such as workshops and interviews, which create opportunities for dialogue, knowledge exchange, and co-creation. Urban planners contribute by bringing an overarching and systems-oriented way of thinking, and they can serve as coordinators and communicators between different stakeholders. This helps identify synergies and address potential conflicts among disciplines and actors at an early stage, leading to more integrated and effective outcomes. 

University of Palermo: Collaboration also takes place through the continuous exchange between methodological development and case-study application. Real projects help identify limitations, test data availability, and validate indicators, allowing different disciplines to refine the framework through evidence-based feedback.

CitySync Solutions AB: Since no consortium partner possesses the full spectrum of expertise required to develop the SDG-BASED rating system, continuous dialogue is essential. The framework relies on the interdependence of experts from social sciences, engineering, urban planning, sustainability, and policy fields to ensure coherence between development and implementation.

AIT Austria: Collaboration is reflected in the identification of KPIs across different dimensions and levels of assessment. Researchers, engineers, and planners work together to define, quantify, score, and validate indicators, ensuring that the assessment framework captures the complexity of Positive Energy Districts while remaining operational and measurable.

Dalarna University:  Collaboration takes place through an iterative exchange between conceptual development, technical modelling and practical planning interpretation. Researchers help structure the relationship between SDGs, PED principles, indicators and assessment logic. Engineers examine which energy and environmental parameters can be quantified through simulations, monitoring data or district-level calculations. Planners and urban experts help determine whether these parameters are meaningful in real spatial contexts, where building typologies, land use, infrastructure, ownership, renovation cycles and local governance all influence what can be implemented. For Dalarna University, this collaboration is important because PED solutions must be evaluated not only as isolated technologies, but as part of a wider urban energy system. The dialogue with other partners helps ensure that technical indicators remain understandable, comparable and useful for municipalities, consultants and district developers.

The Challenge of Translating SDGs into Practical Solutions

University of Catania: One of the main challenges is that SDGs are broad and policy-oriented, while Positive Energy Districts require measurable, context-specific solutions. Translating goals such as affordable and clean energy, sustainable cities, and climate action into indicators demands a careful interpretation process.

University of Palermo: A rating system requires measurable, verifiable, and context-sensitive criteria. This means defining indicators, assessment methods, data sources, thresholds, scoring rules, and performance benchmarks that remain comparable while still adapting to different national and local contexts.

SWECO: From an urban planning perspective, one of the main challenges is that the goals are broad, interconnected, and often abstract, while planning decisions must be specific, local, and implementable. Many SDGs overlap and can create trade-offs, for example between energy efficiency and social equity. Urban planners also face the challenge of aligning different scales of action, from international sustainability targets to municipal plans, zoning, infrastructure design, and everyday public space. In addition, technical solutions alone are not enough; success depends on governance, stakeholder coordination, political priorities, and long-term maintenance. This means urban planning must translate the SDGs into place-based strategies that balance environmental, social, and economic objectives while responding to local conditions, regulations, and community needs. 

AIT Austria: One practical challenge is balancing comprehensiveness with usability. Too many KPIs can make assessment processes overly complicated, creating difficulties for implementation and data collection. The framework must therefore identify the most relevant indicators without losing sight of the broader sustainability objectives.

Dalarna University:  A main challenge is that the SDGs are broad global objectives, while a PED rating system requires measurable, transparent and locally applicable criteria. For example, SDG 7 on clean and affordable energy needs to be translated into indicators for energy efficiency, renewable production, flexibility, affordability and access to sustainable energy services. SDG 11 on sustainable cities needs to be connected to district planning, public space, mobility, renovation and liveability. SDG 13 on climate action needs to be linked to measurable emissions reduction and resilience. Another challenge is scale. Some indicators are meaningful at building level, while others only become relevant when buildings, infrastructure, users and energy networks are assessed together at district level. Data availability is also a challenge, because different cities and countries may have different levels of access to energy data, GIS data, building information and stakeholder input. Therefore, the rating system needs to be scientifically robust, but also flexible enough to work across different national and urban contexts.

Project-wide perspective: Another challenge is scale. Some indicators are meaningful at building level, while others only become relevant at district level. Balancing comprehensiveness and usability is therefore critical for creating a practical and effective rating system.

How Does Interdisciplinary Dialogue Improve the Rating System?

CitySync Solutions AB: The SDG-BASED rating system integrates technical performance, national SDG priorities, and stakeholder-defined priorities. This layered architecture ensures that no single discipline can dominate the assessment process. Engineers, planners, environmental experts, social scientists, and policy specialists all contribute to different aspects of the framework.

University of Palermo: Interdisciplinary dialogue helps ensure that indicators remain scientifically robust while also being understandable and usable within planning and decision-making processes. It prevents indicators from becoming overly technical or difficult to interpret.

SWECO: Interdisciplinary dialogue between different expertises, stakeholders, and municipalities plays a key role in the formalization of the rating system from the earliest initiative stages through to the final evaluation phase. Rather than being developed in isolation, the SDG-based indicators are drafted, discussed, reviewed, refined, tested, and evaluated through an iterative dialogue process involving researchers, practitioners, and municipal actors. This collaborative approach helps ensure that the indicators are not only theoretically sound, but also practical, context-sensitive, and relevant to real planning and governance needs. It also supports better alignment between sustainability goals and local implementation, while allowing different perspectives to identify gaps, resolve ambiguities, and improve the overall quality and legitimacy of the rating system. 

University of Catania: Multiple perspectives allow each criterion to be reviewed before being integrated into the final framework. This leads to a more balanced system that addresses environmental, social, economic, governance, and energy dimensions simultaneously.

AIT Austria: Interdisciplinary dialogue helps ensure that all needs and requirements are considered throughout the development process. By bringing together different perspectives, the consortium can identify gaps, improve indicator selection, and create a more comprehensive and reliable rating system.

Dalarna University:  Interdisciplinary dialogue improves the rating system by testing each indicator against several forms of knowledge before it is formalised. An energy indicator may be technically correct, but it may be difficult for a municipality or planner to use if the required data are unavailable or the meaning is unclear. A social or governance indicator may be important for SDG alignment, but it needs a clear assessment method to become comparable. Through dialogue among energy experts, environmental analysts, planners, policy specialists, digital tool developers and stakeholder engagement experts, the rating system becomes more balanced and operational. From Dalarna University’s perspective, this is particularly important for PED assessment because energy performance, flexibility, climate impact, affordability and urban quality need to be considered together rather than in separate evaluation silos.

Examples of Cross-Disciplinary Influence

University of Catania: Urban planners influence energy engineering by identifying where renewable energy solutions can realistically be implemented, taking into account urban morphology, heritage constraints, and spatial planning requirements. At the same time, engineering simulations influence planning decisions by highlighting areas with the highest energy potential.

University of Palermo: Energy modelling and life-cycle assessment frequently shape each other's work. While energy analysis may identify strategies that improve operational performance, environmental assessment highlights the embodied impacts associated with materials, manufacturing, and end-of-life processes.

CitySync Solutions AB: Stakeholder engagement directly influences the design of the project's digital tools. The development of hybrid consultation methods combining workshops and digital surveys requires expertise from user experience design, social sciences, and technical development. Continuous feedback from project partners and stakeholders helps improve usability and relevance.

SWECO: One clear example is the way urban function planning can enable the recycling of excess energy within a district through a fifth-generation heating and cooling system. At an early planning stage, urban planners can designate compatible land uses, such as housing, offices, schools, and public facilities, in a way that creates a balanced mix of energy demand and supply. This spatial arrangement makes it easier to capture surplus heat from buildings, data centers, commercial activities, or industrial processes and redistribute it locally through a low-temperature district energy network. In this case, urban planning influences engineering design by shaping the district structure, density, and proximity between energy producers and consumers. By planning for compact development, mixed functions, and phased growth from the outset, planners create the conditions needed for fifth-generation systems to operate efficiently. This early integration reduces energy waste, supports circular energy flows, and strengthens the overall sustainability performance of the district.

AIT Austria: A clear example is the interaction between urban planning and energy engineering. Urban planners may identify social or spatial requirements that influence engineering solutions for energy infrastructure, while energy engineers may identify technical constraints that shape urban design decisions. Sustainability experts and social scientists can also influence the selection of KPIs, ensuring that social equity and stakeholder engagement are considered alongside technical performance.

Dalarna University:  One example is the interaction between energy system modelling and urban planning. From an energy perspective, a district may have strong potential for photovoltaic generation, heat pump integration, demand reduction or energy flexibility. However, urban planning perspectives show where these solutions can realistically be implemented, considering roof orientation, building ownership, heritage constraints, renovation plans, public space, district heating availability and future land-use development. At the same time, modelling results can influence planning discussions by identifying which buildings or areas have the greatest potential to reduce demand, increase renewable generation or support district-level flexibility. This exchange helps the rating system move beyond a simple checklist of technologies and towards an assessment framework that reflects both technical potential and spatial feasibility.

Why Is a Multidisciplinary Approach Essential for Positive Energy Districts?

CitySync Solutions AB: Positive Energy Districts are not only energy systems; they are places where people live. Technical innovations affect energy bills, mobility patterns, public spaces, and housing conditions. Without meaningful stakeholder involvement, even technically successful solutions may face resistance or fail to gain acceptance.

University of Palermo: A PED is not simply an energy-positive system but an urban transformation process. Environmental sustainability, technical feasibility, economic viability, regulatory coherence, and social acceptance must all be considered together.

University of Catania: If PEDs are viewed only through a technical lens, important social, policy, and spatial dimensions may be overlooked. A multidisciplinary approach ensures that districts are evaluated as integrated urban systems that contribute not only to energy performance but also to climate neutrality, social inclusion, and sustainable urban development.

AIT Austria: Positive Energy Districts are about much more than generating more energy than they consume. They must also be economically feasible, socially accepted, environmentally responsible, and well integrated into the surrounding urban environment. No single discipline can address all these aspects alone. By combining expertise from multiple fields, it becomes possible to develop solutions that are technically effective, socially valuable, and aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals.

Dalarna University: A multidisciplinary approach is essential because Positive Energy Districts are system-of-systems solutions. They combine buildings, renewable energy technologies, district heating and cooling, electricity networks, storage, mobility, public space, governance, business models and everyday user behaviour. If PEDs are assessed only from an engineering perspective, social acceptance, affordability, planning feasibility and policy constraints may be missed. If they are assessed only from a planning or policy perspective, measurable energy and environmental performance may remain too weak. The SDG-BASED project therefore needs a multidisciplinary approach to ensure that PEDs are evaluated as both technical energy systems and liveable urban districts. This makes the rating system more credible for researchers, more practical for planners and more useful for cities aiming to connect climate neutrality with broader sustainable development goals.

SWECO: From an urban planning perspective, Positive Energy Districts are not only technical energy projects, but also spatial, social, and governance challenges. A district that produces more energy than it consumes depends on the interaction between land use, urban form, mobility, building design, infrastructure, renewable energy systems, and human behavior. Urban planners help connect these elements by shaping compact and mixed-use neighborhoods, coordinating mobility and public space, and ensuring that energy goals are integrated into wider urban development objectives. At the same time, collaboration with engineers, architects, energy experts, policymakers, and local communities is necessary to address trade-offs, such as density versus liveability, or energy efficiency versus affordability. A multidisciplinary approach therefore makes it possible to develop Positive Energy Districts that are technically feasible, spatially coherent, socially accepted, and aligned with long-term sustainable city goals. 

Conclusions

The development of Positive Energy Districts is far more than a technical exercise. As highlighted by the SDG-BASED partners, creating sustainable urban districts requires balancing energy performance with environmental responsibility, social acceptance, economic viability, governance priorities, and spatial planning considerations.

The perspectives shared by CitySync Solutions AB, the University of Catania, the University of Palermo, and AIT Austria demonstrate that no single discipline can address the complexity of sustainable urban transformation alone. Engineers, planners, environmental experts, policy specialists, social scientists, and digital tool developers each contribute essential knowledge that strengthens the overall framework.

Through continuous dialogue, shared learning, and collaborative problem-solving, the SDG-BASED consortium is developing a rating system that not only measures performance but also reflects the diverse priorities of cities, stakeholders, and communities. By bringing together different perspectives, the project helps ensure that Positive Energy Districts are not only energy-positive, but also resilient, inclusive, practical, and aligned with the broader ambitions of the Sustainable Development Goals.

Ultimately, multidisciplinary collaboration is not simply a feature of the SDG-BASED project—it is a prerequisite for creating the sustainable cities of the future.