  Citation: Boschetto, P.; Bove, A.; Mazzola, E. Comparative Review of Neighborhood Sustainability Assessment Tools. Sustainability 2022, 14, 3132. https://doi.org/10.3390/ su14053132 Academic Editor: Georgina Santos Received: 13 January 2022 Accepted: 28 February 2022 Published: 7 March 2022 Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affil- iations. Copyright: © 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/). sustainability Article Comparative Review of Neighborhood Sustainability Assessment Tools Pasqualino Boschetto, Alessandro Bove and Elena Mazzola * Department of Civil, Architectural and Environmental Engineering (DICEA), University of Padua, 35131 Padova, Italy; pasqualino.boschetto@unipd.it (P.B.); alessandro.bove@unipd.it (A.B.) * Correspondence: elena.mazzola@unipd.it Abstract: The paper aims to evaluate criteria for appraising the existing urban transformation projects in view of the social dimension of sustainability. Within the case study of the recovery project of “G. Prandina” barrack in Padua, north-east of Italy, the paper compares two different Italian rating systems to evaluate neighborhood sustainability: “GBC Quartieri” and “ITACA Scala Urbana”. The GBC Quartieri rating system, with a point scheme, allots credits for neighborhood design features, and integrates the environment, infrastructures, and buildings for the creation of sustainable communities with a relationship net and a pre-existence connection. The “ITACA Scala Urbana” procedure consists of a multicriteria evaluation of the environmental sustainability and the compilation of a group of worksheets, one for each different internal performance indicator. The results show the main differences and analogies among the different tools, and this analysis confirms that new neighborhood protocols originating from building rating systems dedicate little space to social aspects and to the concept of inclusion, instead of the newly developed neighborhood protocols. Through this examination, the research can also conclude that the identification of common macro-areas is present, which highlights the different levels of importance given to the various features connected to social sustainability in neighborhood transformation. Keywords: neighborhood sustainability assessment; GBC Quartieri; ITACA Scala Urbana; sustainability 1. Introduction When we think about cities in developed countries, especially European cities, we imagine a compact, mixed, social, and diversified city model, in which the city district centers constitute a neighborhood’s identity. This seems to be a result of globalization, [1] which not only refers to the economic dimension, but also to some political, cultural, and environmental ones [2]. In fact, the de- velopment of cities is often associated with social and economic problems, such as poverty and segregation, tensions between different groups, economic vulnerability, and ecological problems related to pollution, resource use, congestion, and spatial competition [3]. It is also connected with economic and cultural wealth, and dynamic development that can provide opportunities for technological, organizational, and social innovation. In this way, cities in today’s developed countries have become industrial hubs, where most job opportunities are found along with a massive urbanization process. Today’s developing countries are replicating these same dynamics, while experiencing massive rural exodus leading to an exponential growth of their cities [4]. We can observe the urgent call to attention by governments and planners regarding climate change, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and keeping global warming within a safe trajectory, which is not being targeted or achieved [5]. According to United Nations forecasts [6], in 2050, most people will live in cities or urban centers, and the Directive 2010/31/CE shows that buildings consume 40% of energy in the European Union [7]. Therefore, it is increasingly vital to work towards a more sustainable urban environment and guarantee adequate public services that realize Sustainability 2022, 14, 3132. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14053132 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability