The anticipated increase in urban population of 2.5 billion people by 2050 poses significant environmental challenges. While the various environmental impacts of urbanisation have been studied individually, integrated approaches are rare. This study introduces a spatially explicit model to assess urbanization’s effects on ecosystem services (green infrastructure availability, cooling, stormwater retention) and the environmental impact of building construction (material demand, greenhouse gas emissions, land use). Applied to the Netherlands from 2018 to 2050, our results show that integrating green infrastructure development with building construction could increase green areas by up to 5% and stabilize or increase ecosystem service provisioning. Dense building construction with green infrastructure development is generally more beneficial across the Netherlands, reducing resource use and enhancing ecosystem services. Conversely, sparse construction with green infrastructure is more advantageous for newly built areas. These findings offer insights into the environmental consequences of urbanization, guiding sustainable urban planning practices.

Buildings are an important part of society's environmental impacts, both in the construction and in the use phase. As the energy performance of buildings improve, construction materials become more important as a cause of environmental impact. Less attention has been given to those materials. We explore, as an alternative for conventional buildings, the use of biobased materials and circular building practices. In addition to building design, we analyze the effect of urbanization. We assess the potential to close material cycles together with the material related impact, between 2018 and 2050 in the Netherlands. Our results show a limited potential to close material cycles until 2050, as a result of slow stock turnover and growth of the building stock. At present, end-of-life recycling rates are low, further limiting circularity. Primary material demand can be lowered when shifting toward biobased or circular construction. This shift also reduces material related carbon emissions. Large-scale implementation of biobased construction, however, drastically increases land area required for wood production. Material demand differs strongly spatially and depends on the degree of urbanization. Urbanization results in higher building replacement rates, but constructed dwellings are generally small compared to scenarios with more rural developments. The approach presented in this work can be used to analyze strategies aimed at closing material cycles in the building sector and lowering buildings' embodied environmental impact, at different spatial scales.

Green infrastructure (GI) is increasingly addressed in urban planning and research to enhance urban sustainability and resilience through the provisioning of ecosystem services (ES). Yet, few applications exist of planning models for multifunctional GI in high spatial and thematic detail that simultaneously align with stakeholder interests. We address these gaps by developing and presenting a spatially explicit model to inform urban planners on priority areas for multifunctional GI development. This model was made possible by spatial analyses on multiple scales, enabling us to assess ES in sufficient detail, while simultaneously matching the preferences for scale and ES-indicators of decision makers and urban planners. The model involves a novel weighting scheme based upon the local capacity of GI to mitigate problems. We applied our model to the city of The Hague using a set of three policy-relevant problems: air pollution, the urban heat island effect and storm water flooding. Our results show that the capacity of GI to mitigate these problems varies spatially, both within and between ES, and depends on local characteristics of GI and the environmental context. We illustrate the relevance of using a multi-scale approach in spatial ES analysis, and underline that GI planning measures should be assessed in high spatial detail due to their often locally distinct ES capacity. Our approach makes important strides towards the deployment of nature-based solutions for urban challenges in the light of demands for increasing resilience and sustainability.