IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v11y2022i5p607-d798603.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Indicators as Mediators for Environmental Decision Making: The Case Study of Alessandria

Author

Listed:
  • Alessandra Battisti

    (Department of Planning, Design and Technology of Architecture, University of Rome—La Sapienza, 00185 Rome, Italy)

  • Maria Valese

    (Department of Planning, Design and Technology of Architecture, University of Rome—La Sapienza, 00185 Rome, Italy)

  • Herbert Natta

    (Department of Planning, Design and Technology of Architecture, University of Rome—La Sapienza, 00185 Rome, Italy)

Abstract

The design of urban public open spaces plays a key role in the development of micro-scale reactions to global phenomena (pandemic, climate change, etc.) that are currently reshaping the human habitat. Their transformability and healthy influence on the urban environment make them strategic nodes for acupunctural regeneration with systemic effects. Several methods, models, and indicators have been developed to face the complexity of these spaces, made up of tangible and intangible layers; however, there is a gap between theoretical investigation and the need for public administrations to devise feasible solutions, strategies, and guidelines. The paper focuses on this mediation, presenting, as a case study, an adopted methodology and the first results achieved according to guidelines for the regeneration of the system of squares in the historical center of Alessandria (Piedmont, Italy). In this case, a multidisciplinary approach and a Multi-Criteria Analysis (MCA) method, supported by geospatial analysis and GIS technology, have been employed to work as mediators for a participatory process which will involve public administration, stakeholders, experts, and researchers. The paper presents an overview of the workflow, with a focus on the first set of thematic indicators and an open conclusion. It will explain how they have been defined, integrated, and turned into a dialogic tool, with the aim of laying the foundation for the next stage of involvement by the public administration and stakeholders. Specific attention will be paid to the key role of vegetational and environmental parameters, which represents the requalification strategy’s backbone, for both local and systemic scales.

Suggested Citation

  • Alessandra Battisti & Maria Valese & Herbert Natta, 2022. "Indicators as Mediators for Environmental Decision Making: The Case Study of Alessandria," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-23, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:5:p:607-:d:798603
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/5/607/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/5/607/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ainhoa Gonzalez & Álvaro Enríquez-de-Salamanca, 2018. "Spatial Multi-Criteria Analysis in Environmental Assessment: A Review and Reflection on Benefits and Limitations," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(03), pages 1-24, September.
    2. Damiano Cerrone & Jesús López Baeza & Panu Lehtovuori, 2020. "Optional and necessary activities: operationalising Jan Gehl's analysis of urban space with Foursquare data," International Journal of Knowledge-Based Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 11(1), pages 68-79.
    3. Helen Pineo & Nici Zimmermann & Michael Davies, 2020. "Integrating health into the complex urban planning policy and decision-making context: a systems thinking analysis," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 6(1), pages 1-14, December.
    4. Ferretti, Valentina & Geneletti, Davide, 2020. "Does the spatial representation affect criteria weights in environmental decision-making? Insights from a behavioral experiment," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    5. Badland, Hannah & Whitzman, Carolyn & Lowe, Melanie & Davern, Melanie & Aye, Lu & Butterworth, Iain & Hes, Dominique & Giles-Corti, Billie, 2014. "Urban liveability: Emerging lessons from Australia for exploring the potential for indicators to measure the social determinants of health," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 64-73.
    6. Jesús López Baeza & José Carpio-Pinedo & Julia Sievert & André Landwehr & Philipp Preuner & Katharina Borgmann & Maša Avakumović & Aleksandra Weissbach & Jürgen Bruns-Berentelg & Jörg Rainer Noennig, 2021. "Modeling Pedestrian Flows: Agent-Based Simulations of Pedestrian Activity for Land Use Distributions in Urban Developments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-17, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Suzanne J Carroll & Michael J Dale & Theophile Niyonsenga & Anne W Taylor & Mark Daniel, 2020. "Associations between area socioeconomic status, individual mental health, physical activity, diet and change in cardiometabolic risk amongst a cohort of Australian adults: A longitudinal path analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(5), pages 1-16, May.
    2. Shiqin Liu & Carl Higgs & Jonathan Arundel & Geoff Boeing & Nicholas Cerdera & David Moctezuma & Ester Cerin & Deepti Adlakha & Melanie Lowe & Billie Giles-Corti, 2021. "A Generalized Framework for Measuring Pedestrian Accessibility around the World Using Open Data," Papers 2105.08814, arXiv.org.
    3. Hannah Badland & Allison Milner & Rebecca Roberts & Billie Giles-Corti, 2017. "Are Area-Level Measures of Employment Associated with Health Behaviours and Outcomes?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 134(1), pages 237-251, October.
    4. Badland, Hannah & Pearce, Jamie, 2019. "Liveable for whom? Prospects of urban liveability to address health inequities," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 232(C), pages 94-105.
    5. Mirko Guaralda & Greg Hearn & Marcus Foth & Tan Yigitcanlar & Severine Mayere & Lisa Law, 2020. "Towards Australian Regional Turnaround: Insights into Sustainably Accommodating Post-Pandemic Urban Growth in Regional Towns and Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-13, December.
    6. Duncan, Michael, 2023. "The influence of pedestrian plans on walk commuting in US municipalities," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    7. Marttunen, Mika & Haara, Arto & Hjerppe, Turo & Kurttila, Mikko & Liesiö, Juuso & Mustajoki, Jyri & Saarikoski, Heli & Tolvanen, Anne, 2023. "Parallel and comparative use of three multicriteria decision support methods in an environmental portfolio problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 307(2), pages 842-859.
    8. Giuseppe Salvia & Irene Pluchinotta & Ioanna Tsoulou & Gemma Moore & Nici Zimmermann, 2022. "Understanding Urban Green Space Usage through Systems Thinking: A Case Study in Thamesmead, London," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-24, February.
    9. Jana, Arnab & Sarkar, Ahana & Bardhan, Ronita, 2020. "Analysing outdoor airflow and pollution as a parameter to assess the compatibility of mass-scale low-cost residential development," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    10. Guoxin Fu, 2021. "Toward achieving sustainable development goal 3: Determinants, innovations, and reactions from 110 countries with different income levels," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(4), pages 607-623, July.
    11. Pereira, Mauro F. & Vale, David S. & Santana, Paula, 2023. "Is walkability equitably distributed across socio-economic groups? – A spatial analysis for Lisbon metropolitan area," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    12. Germán Vargas-Cuervo & Yolanda Teresa Hernández-Peña & Carlos Alfonso Zafra-Mejía, 2024. "Challenges for Sustainable Urban Planning: A Spatiotemporal Analysis of Complex Landslide Risk in a Latin American Megacity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-20, April.
    13. Cristiano, S. & Ulgiati, S. & Gonella, F., 2021. "Systemic sustainability and resilience assessment of health systems, addressing global societal priorities: Learnings from a top nonprofit hospital in a bioclimatic building in Africa," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    14. Harris, Patrick & Kent, Jennifer & Sainsbury, Peter & Thow, Anne Marie, 2016. "Framing health for land-use planning legislation: A qualitative descriptive content analysis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 42-51.
    15. Jessica Weber & Johann Köppel, 2022. "Can MCDA Serve Ex-Post to Indicate ‘Winners and Losers’ in Sustainability Dilemmas? A Case Study of Marine Spatial Planning in Germany," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(20), pages 1-30, October.
    16. Georgia Pozoukidou & Zoi Chatziyiannaki, 2021. "15-Minute City: Decomposing the New Urban Planning Eutopia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-25, January.
    17. Furlong, Casey & Phelan, Kath & Dodson, Jago, 2018. "The role of water utilities in urban greening: A case study of Melbourne, Australia," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 25-31.
    18. Silvio Cristiano & Samuele Zilio, 2021. "Whose Health in Whose City? A Systems Thinking Approach to Support and Evaluate Plans, Policies, and Strategies for Lasting Urban Health," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-19, November.
    19. Joep Tijm & Thomas Michielsen & Raoul van Maarseveen & Peter Zwaneveld, 2018. "How Large are Road Traffic Externalities in the City? The Highway Tunneling in Maastricht, the Netherlands," CESifo Working Paper Series 7089, CESifo.
    20. Joep Tijm & Thomas Michielsen & Peter Zwaneveld & Raoul van Maarseveen, 2018. "How large are road traffic externalities in the city? The highway tunneling in Maastricht, the Netherlands," CPB Discussion Paper 379, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:5:p:607-:d:798603. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.