UBS/
Articles/
2606004149
  • Open Access
  • Review

Towards Dynamic Carbon Management: A Structured Analytical Review and Multi-Scale Framework for Urban Carbon Accounting

  • Akram A. N. Alabsi 1,*,   
  • Auwalu Faisal Koko 2,   
  • Khaled Mohammed Alshareem 3,   
  • Ahmed Abdurabu Ali Al-Nehmi 3

Received: 11 Feb 2026 | Revised: 18 May 2026 | Accepted: 04 Jun 2026 | Published: 30 Jun 2026

Abstract

As cities increasingly become central arenas for achieving climate mitigation and carbon neutrality targets, the capacity to actively manage urban carbon rather than merely quantify emissions has emerged as a critical challenge for urban planning, design, and environmental governance. Despite substantial advances in quantifying urban emissions, existing studies frequently exhibit fragmented treatment of urban carbon processes, limited coupling across spatial scales, and insufficient integration of carbon storage and sequestration mechanisms, particularly those associated with nature-based solutions. These limitations constrain the capacity of urban planning and design to engage with carbon as a dynamic and spatially embedded urban system. This study aims to address these challenges through a structured analytical review of urban carbon research, employing an adapted PRISMA-informed protocol combined with process- oriented and scale-sensitive coding to systematically examine how carbon generation, accounting, storage, sequestration, and mitigation are conceptualised and operationalised in the literature. Comparative synthesis of the reviewed literature reveals persistent methodological and conceptual patterns, including the dominance of emission-centric accounting logics, the marginalisation of ecological and biogenic carbon processes, weak cross-scale integration between buildings and urban systems, and a prevailing reliance on static representations of carbon dynamics. Building on this analytical synthesis, the paper introduces Dynamic Carbon Management (DCM) as a conceptual framework that reframes urban carbon as an integrated, multi-process, and multi-scale system requiring coordinated management rather than isolated accounting. DCM framework formally links carbon flows across buildings, urban form, and nature-based interventions, providing an operational logic for understanding interactions between carbon generation, mitigation, storage, and sequestration over time. By shifting the analytical focus from static inventories toward dynamic management perspectives, this study contributes a theoretically grounded framework that advances urban carbon research and establishes a foundation for future empirical validation, modelling efforts, and policy-oriented applications aimed at supporting more adaptive, integrated, and multi-scale urban decarbonisation strategies.

Graphical Abstract

Image Viewer
Open in new tab
Download Image

References 

  • 1.

    Mi, Z.; Guan, D.; Liu, Z.; et al. Cities: The core of climate change mitigation. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 207, 582–589. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.034.

  • 2.

    Chen, S.; Chen, B. Modelling carbon-energy metabolism of cities: A systems approach. Energy Procedia 2016, 88, 31–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2016.06.009.

  • 3.

    Rech, S.; Schut, A.G.; Corner, R. On the Potential for Carbon Sequestration in Australia’s Urban Forest for the Next Decade. In Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium, Munich, Germany, 22–27 July 2012. https://doi.org/10.1109/IGARSS.2012.6351998.

  • 4.

    Jo, H.K.; Kim, J.Y.; Park, H.M. Carbon reduction and planning strategies for urban parks in Seoul. Urban For. Urban Green. 2019, 41, 48–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2019.03.009.

  • 5.

    Fan, J.L.; Xu, M.; Wei, S.; et al. Carbon reduction potential of China’s coal-fired power plants based on a CCUS source-sink matching model. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2021, 168, 105320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.105320.

  • 6.

    Du, X.; Meng, C.; Guo, Z.; et al. An improved approach for measuring the efficiency of low carbon city practice in China. Energy 2023, 268, 126678. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2023.126678.

  • 7.

    Li, P.; Shi, T.; Bing, L.; et al. Calculation method and model of carbon sequestration by urban buildings: An example from Shenyang. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 317, 128450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128450.

  • 8.

    Pulselli, R.M.; Marchi, M.; Neri, E.; et al. Carbon accounting framework for decarbonisation of European city neighbourhoods. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 208, 850–868. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.102.

  • 9.

    Mirabella, N.; Allacker, K. Urban GHG accounting: Discrepancies, constraints and opportunities. Build. Cities 2021, 2, 21–35. https://doi.org/10.5334/bc.50.

  • 10.

    Yue, W.; Li, Y.; Su, M.; et al. Carbon emissions accounting and prediction in urban agglomerations from multiple perspectives of production, consumption and income. Appl. Energy 2023, 348, 121445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2023.121445.

  • 11.

    Chen, G.; Shan, Y.; Hu, Y.; et al. Review on City-Level Carbon Accounting. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2019, 53, 5545–5558. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.8b07071.

  • 12.

    Canadell, J.G.; Schulze, E.D. Global potential of biospheric carbon management for climate mitigation. Nat. Commun. 2014, 5, 5282. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms6282.

  • 13.

    Schile, L.M.; Kauffman, J.B.; Crooks, S.; et al. Limits on carbon sequestration in arid blue carbon ecosystems. Ecol. Appl. 2017, 27, 859–874. https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.1489.

  • 14.

    Elliot, T.; Levasseur, A. System dynamics life cycle-based carbon model for consumption changes in urban metabolism. Ecol. Model. 2022, 473, 110010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2022.110010.

  • 15.

    Bjånesøy, S.; Kinnunen, A.; Einarsdóttir, H.; et al. Carbon storage in the built environment: A review. Environ. Res. Infrastruct. Sustain. 2023, 3, 042003. https://doi.org/10.1088/2634-4505/ad139f.

  • 16.

    Zamarripa, M.A.; Eslick, J.C.; Matuszewski, M.S.; et al. Multi-objective Optimization of Membrane-based CO2 Capture. Comput. Aided Chem. Eng. 2018, 44, 1117–1122. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-64241-7.50181-6.

  • 17.

    Andrade, J.C.S.; Dameno, A.; Pérez, J.; et al. Implementing city-level carbon accounting: A comparison between Madrid and London. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 172, 795–804. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.10.163.

  • 18.

    Velasco, E.; Roth, M.; Norford, L.; et al. Does urban vegetation enhance carbon sequestration? Landsc. Urban Plan. 2016, 148, 99–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.12.003.

  • 19.

    Varshney, K.; Zari, M.P.; Bakshi, N. Decarbonisation of the urban built environment through vegetation-based carbon sequestration. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2022, 1101, 062025. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1101/6/062025.

  • 20.

    Fang, Y.; Zhang, X.; Cao, Y. Digital technologies framework and future trends of carbon sequestration research in urban green spaces: A review. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2025, 22, 13277–13296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-025-06607-x.

  • 21.

    Mirzaei, N.; Hajinezhad, A.; Yousefi, H.; et al. Biochar at the Core of Nature-Based Carbon Management: A Comparative Review Bridging Environmental Sustainability and Economic Feasibility. Energy Sci. Eng. 2026, 14, 611–624. https://doi.org/10.1002/ese3.70350.

  • 22.

    Liu, T.; Zhou, C. Urban Building Carbon Sinks Under the Carbon Neutrality Goal: Research Hotspots, Measurement Frameworks, and Optimization Strategies. Buildings 2025, 15, 4445. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15244445.

  • 23.

    Lal, R.; Augustin, B. (Eds.) Carbon Sequestration in Urban Ecosystems; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2366-5.

  • 24.

    Schröder, C.; Mancosu, E.; Roerink, G.; et al. Methodology proposal for estimation of carbon storage in urban green areas. 2013. Available online: https://edepot.wur.nl/300981 (accessed on 1 September 2025).

  • 25.

    Gratani, L.; Varone, L.; Bonito, A. Carbon sequestration of four urban parks in Rome. Urban For. Urban Green. 2016, 19, 184–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2016.07.007.

  • 26.

    Andreucci, M.B.; Marvuglia, A.; Baltov, M.; et al. (Eds.) Future City 15: Rethinking Sustainability towards a Regenerative Economy; Springer Nature: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2021; Volume 15. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71819-0.

  • 27.

    Ramachandra, T.V. Decentralised carbon footprint analysis for opting climate change mitigation strategies in India. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2012, 16, 5820–5833. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2012.05.035.

  • 28.

    Dilling, L.; Doney, S.C.; Edmonds, J.; et al. The role of carbon cycle observations and knowledge in carbon management. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2003, 28, 521–558. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.28.011503.163443.

  • 29.

    Sharifi, A.; Wu, Y.; Khamchiangta, D.; et al. Urban carbon mapping: Towards a standardized framework. Energy Procedia 2018, 152, 799–808. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2018.09.193.

  • 30.

    Li, T.; Nie, L.; He, W.; et al. Analysis of carbon emission characteristics and driving factors at sub-municipal level. Environ. Res. Commun. 2026, 8, 011013. https://doi.org/10.1088/2515-7620/ae366d.

  • 31.

    Xin, L.; Li, S.; Rene, E.R.; et al. Prediction of carbon emissions peak and carbon neutrality based on life cycle CO2 emissions in megacity building sector: Dynamic scenario simulations of Beijing. Environ. Res. 2023, 238, 117160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2023.117160.

  • 32.

    Zhao, S.; Ma, J.; Xu, H.; et al. Research on high-accuracy methods for estimating carbon emissions in Hefei City. Atmos. Pollut. Res. 2026, 17, 102943. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apr.2026.102943.

  • 33.

    Kennedy, S.; Sgouridis, S. Rigorous classification and carbon accounting principles for low and Zero Carbon Cities. Energy Policy 2011, 39, 5259–5268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.05.038.

  • 34.

    Dong, Y.; Zhao, Y.; Zhang, J.; et al. Development of a framework of carbon accounting and management on the township level in China. J. Environ. Manag. 2022, 318, 115609. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.115609.

  • 35.

    Hoxha, E.; Passer, A.; Saade, M.R.M.; et al. Biogenic carbon in buildings: A critical overview of LCA methods. Build. Cities 2020, 1, 504–524. https://doi.org/10.5334/bc.46.

  • 36.

    Ariluoma, M.; Ottelin, J.; Hautamäki, R.; et al. Carbon sequestration and storage potential of urban green in residential yards: A case study from Helsinki. Urban For. Urban Green. 2021, 57, 126939. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126939.

  • 37.

    Liu, C.; Li, X. Carbon storage and sequestration by urban forests in Shenyang, China. Urban For. Urban Green. 2012, 11, 121–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2011.03.002.

  • 38.

    Uniyal, S.; Purohit, S.; Chaurasia, K.; et al. Quantification of carbon sequestration by urban forest using Landsat 8 OLI and machine learning algorithms in Jodhpur, India. Urban For. Urban Green. 2022, 67, 127445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127445.

  • 39.

    Russo, A.; Escobedo, F.J.; Timilsina, N.; et al. Assessing urban tree carbon storage and sequestration in Bolzano, Italy. Int. J. Biodivers. Sci. Ecosyst. Serv. Manag. 2014, 10, 54–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/21513732.2013.873822.

  • 40.

    Pouyat, R.V.; Yesilonis, I.D.; Nowak, D.J. Carbon Storage by Urban Soils in the United States. J. Environ. Qual. 2006, 35, 1566–1575. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2005.0215.

  • 41.

    Ostle, N.J.; Levy, P.E.; Evans, C.D.; et al. UK land use and soil carbon sequestration. Land Use Policy 2009, 26, S274–S283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2009.08.006.

  • 42.

    Zhang, S.; Zhuang, Y.; Tao, R.; et al. Multi-objective optimization for the deployment of carbon capture utilization and storage supply chain considering economic and environmental performance. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 270, 122481. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122481.

  • 43.

    Zhang, Y.; Li, J.; Fath, B.D.; et al. Analysis of urban carbon metabolic processes and a description of sectoral characteristics: A case study of Beijing. Ecol. Model. 2015, 316, 144–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2015.08.008.

  • 44.

    Burke, T.; Rowland, C.; Whyatt, J.D.; et al. Achieving national scale targets for carbon sequestration through afforestation: Geospatial assessment of feasibility and policy implications. Environ. Sci. Policy 2021, 124, 279–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2021.06.023.

  • 45.

    Xia, C.; Li, Y.; Xu, T.; et al. Quantifying the spatial patterns of urban carbon metabolism: A case study of Hangzhou, China. Ecol. Indic. 2018, 95, 474–484. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.07.053.

  • 46.

    Chen, J.; Xu, C.; Wang, Y.; et al. Carbon neutrality based on vegetation carbon sequestration for China’s cities and counties: Trend, inequality and driver. Resour. Policy 2021, 74, 102403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2021.102403.

  • 47.

    Page, J.; Kåresdotter, E.; Destouni, G.; et al. A more complete accounting of greenhouse gas emissions and sequestration in urban landscapes. Anthropocene 2021, 34, 100296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ancene.2021.100296.

  • 48.

    Souza Leão, E.; Nascimento, L.F.M.D.; Andrade, J.C.S.D.; et al. Carbon accounting approaches and reporting gaps in urban emissions: An analysis of the Greenhouse Gas inventories and climate action plans in Brazilian cities. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 245, 118930. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118930.

  • 49.

    Iftikhar, Y.; He, W.; Wang, Z. Energy and CO2 emissions efficiency of major economies: A non-parametric analysis. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 139, 779–787. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.08.072.

  • 50.

    Huang, Y.; Rebennack, S.; Zheng, Q.P. Techno-economic analysis and optimization models for carbon capture and storage: A survey. Energy Syst. 2013, 4, 315–353. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12667-013-0086-0.

  • 51.

    Li, S.; Chen, W. Regional carbon inequality and its impact in China: A new perspective from urban agglomerations. J. Clean. Prod. 2024, 480, 144059. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.144059.

  • 52.

    Chen, S.; Chen, B.; Feng, K.; et al. Physical and virtual carbon metabolism of global cities. Nat. Commun. 2020, 11, 182. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-13757-3.

  • 53.

    Pittau, F.; Lumia, G.; Heeren, N.; et al. Retrofit as a carbon sink: The carbon storage potentials of the EU housing stock. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 214, 365–376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.12.304.

  • 54.

    Strohbach, M.W.; Haase, D. Above-ground carbon storage by urban trees in Leipzig, Germany: Analysis of patterns in a European city. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2012, 104, 95–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.10.001.

  • 55.

    Bherwani, H.; Banerji, T.; Menon, R. Role and value of urban forests in carbon sequestration: Review and assessment in Indian context. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2024, 26, 603–626. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-022-02725-5.

  • 56.

    McPherson, E.G.; Xiao, Q.; Aguaron, E. A new approach to quantify and map carbon stored, sequestered and emissions avoided by urban forests. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2013, 120, 70–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.08.005.

  • 57.

    Xia, L.; Zhang, Y.; Sun, X.; et al. Analyzing the spatial pattern of carbon metabolism and its response to change of urban form. Ecol. Model. 2017, 355, 105–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2017.03.002.

  • 58.

    Zhao, S.; Zhu, C.; Zhou, D.; et al. Organic Carbon Storage in China’s Urban Areas. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e71975. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0071975.

  • 59.

    Kinnunen, A.; Talvitie, I.; Ottelin, J.; et al. Carbon sequestration and storage potential of urban residential environment—A review. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2022, 84, 104027. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2022.104027.

  • 60.

    Guo, Q.; Su, S.; Gan, V.J.L.; et al. Daily construction carbon emissions and costs assessment from an interaction perspective: Integration of BIM and agent-based modeling. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2026, 116, 108109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2025.108109.

  • 61.

    Romero-García, A.G.; Ramírez-Corona, N.; Sánchez-Ramírez, E.; et al. Sustainability assessment in the CO2 capture process: Multi-objective optimization. Chem. Eng. Process. Process Intensif. 2022, 182, 109207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cep.2022.109207.

  • 62.

    Nader, S. Paths to a low-carbon economy-The Masdar example. Energy Procedia 2009, 1, 3951–3958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2009.02.199.

  • 63.

    Ma, L.; Xiang, L.; Wang, C.; et al. Spatiotemporal evolution of urban carbon balance and its response to new-type urbanization: A case of the middle reaches of the Yangtze River Urban Agglomerations, China. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 380, 135122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.135122.

  • 64.

    Jo, H.K.; Mcpherson, E.G. Carbon Storage and Flux in Urban Residential Greenspace. J. Environ. Manag. 1995, 45, 109-133.

  • 65.

    Shen, F.; Cao, Z.; Zhang, C.; et al. City-scale assessment of green-roof carbon: High-frequency chamber fluxes and district inventories reveal microclimate-driven sinks and seasonal resilience. Build. Environ. 2026, 294, 114431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2026.114431.

Share this article:
Download PDF
DOI
10.53941/ubs.2026.100016
Issue
Online First
How to Cite
Alabsi, A. A. N.; Koko, A. F.; Alshareem, K. M.; Al-Nehmi, A. A. A. Towards Dynamic Carbon Management: A Structured Analytical Review and Multi-Scale Framework for Urban Carbon Accounting. Urban and Building Science 2026. https://doi.org/10.53941/ubs.2026.100016.
RIS
BibTex
Copyright & License
article copyright Image
Copyright (c) 2026 by the authors.