Integrated Assessment for a Sustainable Valorization Project

Journal title SCIENZE REGIONALI
Author/s Francesca Ziller
Publishing Year 2014 Issue 2014/1 Suppl. Language Italian
Pages 22 P. 71-92 File size 1095 KB
DOI 10.3280/SCRE2014-S01004
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

The interaction of assessment and planning can be an effective tool for defining design strategies that implement sustainable development principles. In this case study of the town of Buccino, in the Province of Salerno, in Southern Italy, an integrated decision-making process focusing on the cultural and landscape potential that associates Buccino with the Roman town of Volcei was used to determine a scenario for sustainable development. The study’s main goal was to understand how multi-criteria and multi-group assessment can interact with design and development to become both valid supports for the decision-making process as well as continuous assessment tools that can play a key role in conscious and shared design choices. J

L’interazione tra valutazione e progettazione può rappresentare un efficace strumento per la definizione di strategie di intervento tese ad attuare i principi dello sviluppo sostenibile. Nel caso oggetto di studio, il comune di Buccino, in Provincia di Salerno, nel Sud Italia, si è giunti a configurare uno scenario di sviluppo sostenibile strutturando un processo decisionale integrato, incentrato sulle potenzialità culturali e paesaggistiche che legano il piccolo centro alla città romana di Volcei. L’obiettivo principale è stato quello di comprendere come la valutazione, attraverso un approccio multicriterio e multigruppo, possa interagire con la progettazione e la valorizzazione del territorio, divenendo un supporto al processo decisionale e un continuo strumento di verifica, e assumendo un ruolo fondamentale nella costruzione di scelte progettuali consapevoli e condivise.

Keywords: Soft systems methodology, multi-criteria and multi-group analysis, integrated assessment.

Jel codes: D81, O21, R52.

  1. Bana e Costa C. A, De Corte J. M., Vansnick J. C. (2005a), M-MACBETH Software. European Working Group Multiple Criteria Decision Aiding, 3, 12.
  2. Bana e Costa C. A., Beinat E. (2005), Model-structuring in Public Decision-aiding. London: London School of Economics.
  3. Bana e Costa C. A., De Corte J. M., Vansnick J. C. (2005b), On the Mathematical Foundations of MACBETH. New York: Springer-Verlag. 409-442.
  4. Bana e Costa C. A., Fernandesc T. G., Correia P. V. D. (2006), Prioritisation of Public Investments in Social Infrastructures Using Multicriteria Value Analysis and Decision Conferencing: A Case Study. International Transactions in Operational Research, 13, 4: 279-297. DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-3995.2006.00549.x
  5. Bohman J., Rehg W. (eds.) (1997), Deliberative Democracy. Essay on Reason and Politics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  6. Cerreta M., De Toro P. (2001), Towards the Construction of a Complex Evaluation Model for Ecological and Social Ecosystems. CD-Proceedings of the First International Conference on Ecology and the City. Universitat Politecnica de Catalunya, Centre de Politica de Sol i Valoracions, held in Barcelona, March.
  7. Cerreta M., De Toro P. (2010), Integrated Spatial Assessment for a Creative Decisionmaking Process: A Combined Methodological Approach to Strategic Environmental Assessment. International Journal of Sustainable Development, 13, 1-2: 17-30.
  8. Cerreta M., Mele R. (2012), A Landscape Complex Value Map: Integration among Soft Values and Hard Values in a Spatial Decision Support. Lecture Notes in Computer Science n. 7334. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. 653-659.
  9. Cerreta M., Panaro S., Cannatella D. (2012), Multidimensional Spatial Decision-making Process: Local Shared Values in Action. Lecture Notes in Computer Science n. 7334. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. 54-70.
  10. Checkland P., Tsouvalis C. (1996), Reflecting on SSM: The Link between Root Definitions and Conceptual Models. Systems Research and Behavioural Science, 14, 3: 153-168. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1743(199705/06)14:3<153::AIDSRES134>3.0.CO;2-
  11. Dente B. F., Fareri P., Ligteringen J. (1998), A Theoretical Framework for Case Study Analysis. In: Dente B. F., Fareri P., Ligteringen J. (eds.) The Waste and the Backyard. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. DOI: 10.1007/978-94-015-9107-2_8
  12. Funtowicz S., O’Connor M., Ravetz J. (1999), Scientific communication, International Cooperation and Capacity Building for Sustainable Development. International Journal of Sustainable Development, 2, 3: 363-367. DOI: 10.1504/IJSD.1999.004336
  13. Fusco Girard L. (1987), Risorse architettoniche e culturali: valutazioni e strategie di conservazione: un’analisi introduttiva. Milano: FrancoAngeli. 415-461.
  14. Fusco Girard L., Cerreta M., De Toro P., Forte F. (eds.) (2003), L’uomo e la città. Verso uno sviluppo umano e sostenibile. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  15. Fusco Girard L., Nijkamp P. (1997), Le valutazioni per lo sviluppo sostenibile della città e del territorio. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  16. Fusco Girard L., Nijkamp P. (eds.) (2004), Energia, bellezza, partecipazione: la sfida della sostenibilità. Valutazioni integrate tra conservazione e sviluppo. Milano: FrancoAngeli. 11-119.
  17. Keeney R. (1992), Value-Focused Thinking: A Path to Creative Decision-Making. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  18. Monk A., Howard S. (1998), Methods & Tools: The Rich Picture: A Tool for Reasoning about Work Context. Interactions, 5, 2: 21-30. DOI: 10.1145/274430.274434
  19. Montibeller G., Franco L. A., Lord E., Iglesias A. (2009), Structuring Resource Allocation Decisions: A Framework for Building Multi-criteria Portfolio Models with Area-grouped Options. European Journal of Operational Research. 199, 3: 846-856. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2009.01.054
  20. Munda G. (1995), Multicriteria Evaluation in a Fuzzy Environment: Theory and Applications in Ecological Economics. Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-49997-5
  21. Munda G. (2008), Social Multi-Criteria Evaluation for a Sustainable Economy. New York: Springer-Verlag. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-73703-2
  22. Neves L. P., Dias L. C., Antunes C. H., Martins A. G. (2009), Structuring an MCDA Model Using SSM: A Case Study Energy Efficency. European Journal of Operational Research, 199, 3: 834-845. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2009.01.053
  23. Nijkamp P., Rietveld P., Voogd H. (1990), Multicriteria Evaluation in Physical Planning. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
  24. Perchinunno P., Rotondo F., Torre C. M. (2012), The Evidence of Links between Landscape and Economy in a Rural Park. International Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Information Systems, 3, 2: 72-85. DOI: 10.4018/jaeis.2012070105
  25. Petkov D., Petkova O., Andrew T., Nepal T. (2007), Mixing Multiple Criteria Decision Making with Soft Systems Thinking Techniques for Decision Support in Complex Situations. Decision Support Systems, 43, 4: 1615-1629. DOI: 10.1016/j.dss.2006.03.006
  26. Ravetz J. R., Sardar Z. (1997), Rethinking Science. Futures, 28, 6: 467-470. DOI: 10.1016/S0016-3287(97)00023-2
  27. Selicato M., Torre C. M., La Trofa G. (2012), Prospect of Integrate Monitoring: A Multidimensional Approach. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 7334. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. 144-156.

Francesca Ziller, Integrated Assessment for a Sustainable Valorization Project in "SCIENZE REGIONALI " 1 Suppl./2014, pp 71-92, DOI: 10.3280/SCRE2014-S01004