IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/annopr/v312y2022i2d10.1007_s10479-017-2738-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing urban quality: a proposal for a MCDA evaluation framework

Author

Listed:
  • A. Oppio

    (Politecnico of Milano)

  • M. Bottero

    (Politecnico of Torino)

  • A. Arcidiacono

    (Politecnico of Milano)

Abstract

The paper focuses on the assessment of urban design quality and sustainable urban spaces. In particular, the study is concentrated on the evaluation of urban quality provided by a good design of open spaces, including green areas, walkable areas and squares. In fact, despite the advancement of research during the past two decades and empirical evidence about the relationship among quality of life, quality of open spaces and urban sustainability, there is still a lack of studies on urban quality assessment. This paper brings forward a multidimensional methodology for assessing the quality of open spaces. More precisely, the contribution of this research is the proposal of a multidimensional and multi-methodological framework for assigning a numerical score to the quality of open spaces. The Multi-Attribute Value Theory has been used for addressing the problem under investigation with the aim of defining a synthetic index for the measurement of the urban quality of open spaces on the basis of different attributes, namely (a) accessibility; (b) liveability; (c) vitality and (d) identity. The methodology has been applied on a recently renovated district in the city of Milan, Italy. The proposed multi-methodological framework provides a robust basis for running different kind of analysis and for supporting policy and investment decisions both in the private and in the public sector.

Suggested Citation

  • A. Oppio & M. Bottero & A. Arcidiacono, 2022. "Assessing urban quality: a proposal for a MCDA evaluation framework," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 312(2), pages 1427-1444, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:312:y:2022:i:2:d:10.1007_s10479-017-2738-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s10479-017-2738-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10479-017-2738-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10479-017-2738-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Edwards, Ward & Barron, F. Hutton, 1994. "SMARTS and SMARTER: Improved Simple Methods for Multiattribute Utility Measurement," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 306-325, December.
    2. Marta Bottero & Valentina Ferretti & Giulio Mondini, 2015. "How to Support Strategic Decisions in Territorial Transformation Processes," International Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Information Systems (IJAEIS), IGI Global, vol. 6(4), pages 40-55, October.
    3. Kadziński, MiŁosz & Greco, Salvatore & SŁowiński, Roman, 2012. "Extreme ranking analysis in robust ordinal regression," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 488-501.
    4. Silvia Angilella & Marta Bottero & Salvatore Corrente & Valentina Ferretti & Salvatore Greco & Isabella M. Lami, 2016. "Non Additive Robust Ordinal Regression for urban and territorial planning: an application for siting an urban waste landfill," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 245(1), pages 427-456, October.
    5. Bottero, M. & Ferretti, V. & Figueira, J.R. & Greco, S. & Roy, B., 2015. "Dealing with a multiple criteria environmental problem with interaction effects between criteria through an extension of the Electre III method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 245(3), pages 837-850.
    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. Yueyi Tan & Jusheng Song & Lei Yu & Yunxi Bai & Jianfeng Zhang & Man-Ha (Sylvia) Chan & Jeroen van Ameijde, 2024. "The Mechanism of Street Markets Fostering Supportive Communities in Old Urban Districts: A Case Study of Sham Shui Po, Hong Kong," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-26, February.
    2. Francesco Sica & Francesco Tajani & Maria Rosaria Guarini & Rossana Ranieri, 2023. "A Sensitivity Index to Perform the Territorial Sustainability in Uncertain Decision-Making Conditions," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-21, February.

    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. Francesco Sica & Francesco Tajani & Maria Rosaria Guarini & Rossana Ranieri, 2023. "A Sensitivity Index to Perform the Territorial Sustainability in Uncertain Decision-Making Conditions," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-21, February.
    2. Mehmet Pinar, 2022. "Choquet-Integral Aggregation Method to Aggregate Social Indicators to Account for Interactions: An Application to the Human Development Index," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 159(1), pages 1-53, January.
    3. Francesco Tajani & Maria Rosaria Guarini & Francesco Sica & Rossana Ranieri & Debora Anelli, 2022. "Multi-Criteria Analysis and Sustainable Accounting. Defining Indices of Sustainability under Choquet’s Integral," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-15, February.
    4. Podinovski, Vladislav V., 2010. "Set choice problems with incomplete information about the preferences of the decision maker," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(1), pages 371-379, November.
    5. Corrente, Salvatore & Figueira, José Rui & Greco, Salvatore, 2014. "The SMAA-PROMETHEE method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(2), pages 514-522.
    6. Tom Koch & Mark Ridgley, 2000. "The Condorcet's Jury Theorem in a Bioethical Context: The Dynamics of Group Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 9(5), pages 379-392, September.
    7. repec:cup:judgdm:v:17:y:2022:i:6:p:1255-1286 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Ahrens, Heinz & Kantelhardt, Jochen, 2007. "Integrating Ecological And Economic Aspects In Land Use Concepts: Some Conclusions From A Regional Land Use Concept For Bayerisches Donauried," 81st Annual Conference, April 2-4, 2007, Reading University, UK 7986, Agricultural Economics Society.
    9. Jamie P. Monat, 2009. "The benefits of global scaling in multi-criteria decision analysis," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 4(6), pages 492-508, October.
    10. Yang, Taho & Wen, Yuan-Feng & Wang, Fang-Fang, 2011. "Evaluation of robustness of supply chain information-sharing strategies using a hybrid Taguchi and multiple criteria decision-making method," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(2), pages 458-466, December.
    11. Podinovski, Vladislav V., 2020. "Maximum likelihood solutions for multicriterial choice problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 286(1), pages 299-308.
    12. Adiel Teixeira Almeida & Eduarda Asfora Frej & Lucia Reis Peixoto Roselli, 2021. "Combining holistic and decomposition paradigms in preference modeling with the flexibility of FITradeoff," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 29(1), pages 7-47, March.
    13. Beynon, Malcolm J. & Wells, Peter, 2008. "The lean improvement of the chemical emissions of motor vehicles based on preference ranking: A PROMETHEE uncertainty analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 384-394, June.
    14. Loetscher, Thomas & Keller, Jurg, 2002. "A decision support system for selecting sanitation systems in developing countries," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 267-290, December.
    15. P P Sutton & R H Green, 2007. "Choice is a value statement. On inferring optimal multiple attribute portfolios from non-optimal nominations," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(11), pages 1526-1533, November.
    16. Ana Sara Costa & Isabella M. Lami & Salvatore Greco & José Rui Figueira & José Borbinha, 2021. "Assigning a house for refugees: an application of a multiple criteria nominal classification method," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 2651-2687, December.
    17. Kadziński, Miłosz & Wójcik, Michał & Ciomek, Krzysztof, 2022. "Review and experimental comparison of ranking and choice procedures for constructing a univocal recommendation in a preference disaggregation setting," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    18. Frank Hanssen & Roel May & Jiska van Dijk & Jan Ketil Rød, 2018. "Spatial Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Tool Suite for Consensus-Based Siting of Renewable Energy Structures," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(03), pages 1-28, September.
    19. Deparis, Stéphane & Mousseau, Vincent & Öztürk, Meltem & Huron, Caroline, 2015. "The effect of bi-criteria conflict on matching-elicited preferences," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(3), pages 951-959.
    20. Bottero, M. & Ferretti, V. & Figueira, J.R. & Greco, S. & Roy, B., 2018. "On the Choquet multiple criteria preference aggregation model: Theoretical and practical insights from a real-world application," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 271(1), pages 120-140.
    21. Hayashi, Kiyotada, 1998. "Multicriteria aid for agricultural decisions using preference relations: methodology and application," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 58(4), pages 483-503, December.

    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:spr:annopr:v:312:y:2022:i:2:d:10.1007_s10479-017-2738-2. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.