IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i18p10349-d637011.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Planning Perspectives and Approaches for Activating Underground Built Heritage

Author

Listed:
  • Carlos Smaniotto Costa

    (CeiED Interdisciplinary Research Centre for Education and Development, Universidade Lusófona, 1749-024 Lisbon, Portugal)

  • Marluci Menezes

    (LNEC-National Laboratory of Civil Engineering, 1700-066 Lisbon, Portugal)

  • Petja Ivanova-Radovanova

    (CAWRI-BAS-Climate, Atmosphere and Water Research Institute at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, 1784 Sofia, Bulgaria
    Association for Integrated Development and Sustainability, 1408 Sofia, Bulgaria)

  • Tatiana Ruchinskaya

    (TVR Design Consultancy, Willingham CB24 5JA, Cambridgeshire, UK)

  • Konstantinos Lalenis

    (Department of Planning and Regional Development, University of Thessaly, 38334 Volos, Greece)

  • Monica Bocci

    (Department of Agriculture, Food Sciences and Environment, Università Politecnica delle Marche, 60131 Ancona, Italy
    Unione Montana del Catria e Nerone, 61043 Cagli, Italy)

Abstract

This paper delivers actionable recommendations towards building a rationale for activating and promoting Underground Built Heritage (UBH) based on the nexus heritage, territory and society, and making use of existing literature and findings from five international cases. The research was conducted in the framework of the working group on Planning Approaches of the COST Action Underground4value. The analysis of the cases aims to provide guidelines for this working group and to benchmark good practices in activating UBH. It highlights the importance of community-led initiatives, leadership and dialogue and power sharing between the local/regional authorities and communities aiming for better understanding of the potential of UBH. The successes and/or failures of the five cases emphasise the importance of knowledge and experience in participatory approaches. Success was verified, when effectiveness and democratic principles were combined in the planning process, and local history is integrated with citizen science, co-creation and placemaking. The analysed approaches stimulate a new hybrid layer for activating UBH, provide mechanisms of mediation between people and heritage, and contribute to cultural and social dimensions of sustainability. This is a highly challenging endeavour, as it seeks to support and advance a sound understanding of UBH as a sustainable resource, backed by strategic stakeholder dialogue and contextual knowledge. Such effort requires a dynamic understanding of UBH values, knowledge, abilities and skills, towards creating more effective coalitions of “actors” within localities, by developing structures, which encourage long term collaborative relationships.

Suggested Citation

  • Carlos Smaniotto Costa & Marluci Menezes & Petja Ivanova-Radovanova & Tatiana Ruchinskaya & Konstantinos Lalenis & Monica Bocci, 2021. "Planning Perspectives and Approaches for Activating Underground Built Heritage," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-15, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:18:p:10349-:d:637011
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/18/10349/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/18/10349/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lea Fuenfschilling & Niki Frantzeskaki & Lars Coenen, 2019. "Urban experimentation & sustainability transitions," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(2), pages 219-228, February.
    2. Timo von Wirth & Lea Fuenfschilling & Niki Frantzeskaki & Lars Coenen, 2019. "Impacts of urban living labs on sustainability transitions: mechanisms and strategies for systemic change through experimentation," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(2), pages 229-257, February.
    3. Kinga Kimic & Carlos Smaniotto Costa & Mihaela Negulescu, 2021. "Creating Tourism Destinations of Underground Built Heritage—The Cases of Salt Mines in Poland, Portugal, and Romania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-23, August.
    4. Paul Kantor & H.V. Savitch, 2005. "How to Study Comparative Urban Development Politics: A Research Note," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(1), pages 135-151, March.
    5. Francesca Nocca, 2017. "The Role of Cultural Heritage in Sustainable Development: Multidimensional Indicators as Decision-Making Tool," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-28, October.
    6. Richards, Greg, 2020. "Designing creative places: The role of creative tourism," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sanja Kovačić & Tatjana Pivac & Müge Akkar Ercan & Kinga Kimic & Petja Ivanova-Radovanova & Klodiana Gorica & Ermelinda Kordha Tolica, 2023. "Exploring the Image, Perceived Authenticity, and Perceived Value of Underground Built Heritage (UBH) and Its Role in Motivation to Visit: A Case Study of Five Different Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-21, July.

    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. Lindsay P. Galway & Charles Z. Levkoe & Rachel L. W. Portinga & Kathryn Milun, 2021. "A Scoping Review Examining Governance, Co-Creation, and Social and Ecological Justice in Living Labs Literature," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-16, December.
    2. Devon McAslan & Farah Najar Arevalo & David A. King & Thaddeus R. Miller, 2021. "Pilot project purgatory? Assessing automated vehicle pilot projects in U.S. cities," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-16, December.
    3. Rachel Greer & Timo Wirth & Derk Loorbach, 2023. "The Circular Decision-Making Tree: an Operational Framework," Circular Economy and Sustainability,, Springer.
    4. Frans Sengers & Bruno Turnheim & Frans Berkhout, 2021. "Beyond experiments: Embedding outcomes in climate governance," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 39(6), pages 1148-1171, September.
    5. Waes, Arnoud van & Nikolaeva, Anna & Raven, Rob, 2021. "Challenges and dilemmas in strategic urban experimentationAn analysis of four cycling innovation living labs," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    6. Daniel Black & Susanne Charlesworth & Maria Ester Dal Poz & Erika Cristina Francisco & Adina Paytan & Ian Roderick & Timo von Wirth & Kevin Winter, 2023. "Comparing Societal Impact Planning and Evaluation Approaches across Four Urban Living Labs (in Food-Energy-Water Systems)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-20, March.
    7. Paula Kivimaa & Karoline S. Rogge, 2020. "Interplay of Policy Experimentation and Institutional Change in Transformative Policy Mixes: The Case of Mobility as a Service in Finland," SPRU Working Paper Series 2020-17, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    8. Tim Strasser & Joop de Kraker & René Kemp, 2020. "Three Dimensions of Transformative Impact and Capacity: A Conceptual Framework Applied in Social Innovation Practice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-40, June.
    9. Fedoua Kasmi & Ferney Osorio & Laurent Dupont & Brunelle Marche & Mauricio Camargo, 2022. "Innovation Spaces as Drivers of Eco-innovations Supporting the Circular Economy: A Systematic Literature Review," Post-Print hal-03590438, HAL.
    10. Inés Aquilué & Angélica Caicedo & Joan Moreno & Miquel Estrada & Laia Pagès, 2021. "A Methodology for Assessing the Impact of Living Labs on Urban Design: The Case of the Furnish Project," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-29, April.
    11. Kelly Bronson & Rachana Devkota & Vivian Nguyen, 2021. "Moving toward Generalizability? A Scoping Review on Measuring the Impact of Living Labs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-16, January.
    12. Kivimaa, Paula & Rogge, Karoline S., 2022. "Interplay of policy experimentation and institutional change in sustainability transitions: The case of mobility as a service in Finland," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    13. Uyarra, Elvira & Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, Jon Mikel & Flanagan, Kieron & Magro, Edurne, 2020. "Public procurement, innovation and industrial policy: Rationales, roles, capabilities and implementation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    14. Chris McPhee & Margaret Bancerz & Muriel Mambrini-Doudet & François Chrétien & Christian Huyghe & Javier Gracia-Garza, 2021. "The Defining Characteristics of Agroecosystem Living Labs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-25, February.
    15. Wenwei Huang & Gui Xiong & Lei Zhong & Keqing Li & Hongyang Li & Martin Skitmore & Nima Talebian, 2022. "Research into Satisfaction with Industrial Heritage Renewal Based on the SEM-IPA Model: A Case Study of the Dongguan Jianyuzhou Park," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-20, March.
    16. Wilde, Kerstin & Hermans, Frans, 2021. "Deconstructing the attractiveness of biocluster imaginaries," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 23(2), pages 227-242.
    17. Rutger de Graaf-van Dinther & Anne Leskens & Ted Veldkamp & Jeroen Kluck & Floris Boogaard, 2021. "From Pilot Projects to Transformative Infrastructures, Exploring Market Receptivity for Permeable Pavement in The Netherlands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-13, April.
    18. Kristiaan P. W. Kok & Alanya C. L. den Boer & Tomris Cesuroglu & Marjoleine G. van der Meij & Renée de Wildt-Liesveld & Barbara J. Regeer & Jacqueline E. W. Broerse, 2019. "Transforming Research and Innovation for Sustainable Food Systems—A Coupled-Systems Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-23, December.
    19. Shahryar Sarabi & Qi Han & A. Georges L. Romme & Bauke de Vries & Rianne Valkenburg & Elke den Ouden & Spela Zalokar & Laura Wendling, 2021. "Barriers to the Adoption of Urban Living Labs for NBS Implementation: A Systemic Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-15, November.
    20. Marina Van Geenhuizen & Razieh Nejabat, 2021. "Municipalities’ Policy on Innovation and Market Introduction in Sustainable Energy: A Focus on Local Young Technology Firms," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-18, February.

    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:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:18:p:10349-:d:637011. 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.