IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v114y2022ics0264837721006578.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A stakeholder-based approach managing conflictual values in urban design processes. The case of an open prison in Barcelona

Author

Listed:
  • Dell’Anna, Federico
  • Dell’Ovo, Marta

Abstract

An urban intervention has to deal with a pre-existing context. It follows that the design phase must be preceded by a careful and in-depth preliminary analysis addressing historical, morphological, topographical, and geographical reasons. Besides, subjective requests prove to be decisive in the design process in the face of the heterogeneity and multiplicity of possible responses from the actors involved. The contribution aims to support Decision-Makers in the preliminary stages of the project, to provide a global vision of the multidimensionality of the urban context and the feedback of the different subjects that come into play. The main objective is to create an evaluation framework capable of supporting the decision-making process in urban transformation problems starting from the needs of the stakeholders. The approach integrates the analysis of the stakeholders with the SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) to compose an impact matrix based on the Community Impact Evaluation (CIE). The methodology has been tested to develop an open prison in the city of Barcelona (Spain). The framework made it possible to obtain an overall vision of the area's transformation process, consistent with the project's objectives, intending to support strategies definition valid from multiple points of view.

Suggested Citation

  • Dell’Anna, Federico & Dell’Ovo, Marta, 2022. "A stakeholder-based approach managing conflictual values in urban design processes. The case of an open prison in Barcelona," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:114:y:2022:i:c:s0264837721006578
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105934
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837721006578
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105934?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. Maria Cerreta & Alessia Elefante & Ludovica La Rocca, 2020. "A Creative Living Lab for the Adaptive Reuse of the Morticelli Church: The SSMOLL Project," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-20, December.
    2. Caprioli, Caterina & Bottero, Marta, 2021. "Addressing complex challenges in transformations and planning: A fuzzy spatial multicriteria analysis for identifying suitable locations for urban infrastructures," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    3. Gamboa, Gonzalo & Munda, Giuseppe, 2007. "The problem of windfarm location: A social multi-criteria evaluation framework," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 1564-1583, March.
    4. Bernard Roy, 2005. "Paradigms and Challenges," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys, chapter 0, pages 3-24, Springer.
    5. Washbourne, Carla-Leanne & Goddard, Mark A. & Le Provost, Gaëtane & Manning, David A.C. & Manning, Peter, 2020. "Trade-offs and synergies in the ecosystem service demand of urban brownfield stakeholders," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    6. Noreen Brennan & Thomas M Van Rensburg & Cyril Morris, 2017. "Public acceptance of large-scale wind energy generation for export from Ireland to the UK: evidence from Ireland," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 60(11), pages 1967-1992, November.
    7. Engwall, Mats, 2003. "No project is an island: linking projects to history and context," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 789-808, May.
    8. Ferretti, V., 2021. "Framing territorial regeneration decisions: Purpose, perspective and scope," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    9. Marta Bottero & Chiara D’Alpaos & Alessia Marello, 2020. "An Application of the A’WOT Analysis for the Management of Cultural Heritage Assets: The Case of the Historical Farmhouses in the Aglié Castle (Turin)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-17, February.
    10. Athena Yiannakou, 2020. "Urban regeneration as a perpetual planning process: Understanding the role of stakeholders in property-led regeneration projects in Greek cities," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 35(2), pages 83-104, March.
    11. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    12. Hung-Ming Tu, 2020. "Sustainable Heritage Management: Exploring Dimensions of Pull and Push Factors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-17, October.
    13. Siyu Chen & Jian Lin, 2021. "Making with Shenzhen (Characteristics)—Strategy and Everyday Tactics in a City’s Creative Turn," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-13, April.
    14. Meinard, Y. & Tsoukiàs, A., 2019. "On the rationality of decision aiding processes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 273(3), pages 1074-1084.
    15. Alexis Tsoukiàs & Gilberto Montibeller & Giulia Lucertini & Valérie Belton, 2013. "Policy Analytics: An Agenda for Research and Practice," Working Papers hal-00874307, HAL.
    16. Marco Rossitti & Alessandra Oppio & Francesca Torrieri, 2021. "The Financial Sustainability of Cultural Heritage Reuse Projects: An Integrated Approach for the Historical Rural Landscape," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-22, November.
    17. Glen Searle & Crystal Legacy, 2021. "Locating the public interest in mega infrastructure planning: The case of Sydney’s WestConnex," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 58(4), pages 826-844, March.
    18. Ludovico Centis & Ezio Micelli, 2021. "Regenerating Places outside the Metropolis. A Reading of Three Global Art-Related Processes and Development Trajectories," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-23, November.
    19. Valentina Anzoise & Debora Slanzi & Irene Poli, 2020. "Local stakeholders’ narratives about large-scale urban development: The Zhejiang Hangzhou Future Sci-Tech City," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(3), pages 655-671, February.
    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. Marco Gola & Marta Dell’Ovo & Stefano Scalone & Stefano Capolongo, 2022. "Adaptive Reuse of Social and Healthcare Structures: The Case Study as a Research Strategy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-18, April.
    2. Marta Dell’Ovo & Federico Dell’Anna & Raffaella Simonelli & Leopoldo Sdino, 2021. "Enhancing the Cultural Heritage through Adaptive Reuse. A Multicriteria Approach to Evaluate the Castello Visconteo in Cusago (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-29, April.
    3. Margherita Pazzini & Rachele Corticelli & Claudio Lantieri & Cecilia Mazzoli, 2022. "Multi-Criteria Analysis and Decision-Making Approach for the Urban Regeneration: The Application to the Rimini Canal Port (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-28, December.
    4. Choudhary, Devendra & Shankar, Ravi, 2012. "An STEEP-fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS framework for evaluation and selection of thermal power plant location: A case study from India," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 510-521.
    5. Devesh Kumar & Gunjan Soni & Rohit Joshi & Vipul Jain & Amrik Sohal, 2022. "Modelling supply chain viability during COVID-19 disruption: A case of an Indian automobile manufacturing supply chain," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 1224-1240, December.
    6. Pelenc, Jérôme & Etxano, Iker, 2021. "Capabilities, Ecosystem Services, and Strong Sustainability through SMCE: The Case of Haren (Belgium)," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    7. Iker Etxano & Itziar Barinaga-Rementeria & Oihana Garcia, 2018. "Conflicting Values in Rural Planning: A Multifunctionality Approach through Social Multi-Criteria Evaluation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-29, May.
    8. Stanislav Edward Shmelev (ODID), "undated". "Multi-criteria Assessment of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: New Dimensions and Stakeholders in the South of France," QEH Working Papers qehwps181, Queen Elizabeth House, University of Oxford.
    9. Kurka, Thomas & Blackwood, David, 2013. "Selection of MCA methods to support decision making for renewable energy developments," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 225-233.
    10. Marta Bottero & Giulia Datola & Daniele Fazzari & Roberta Ingaramo, 2022. "Re-Thinking Detroit: A Multicriteria-Based Approach for Adaptive Reuse for the Corktown District," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-22, July.
    11. Antoine Richard & Brice Mayag & François Talbot & Alexis Tsoukias & Yves Meinard, 2020. "What does it mean to provide decision support to a responsible and competent expert?," EURO Journal on Decision Processes, Springer;EURO - The Association of European Operational Research Societies, vol. 8(3), pages 205-236, November.
    12. Ishizaka, Alessio & Siraj, Sajid, 2018. "Are multi-criteria decision-making tools useful? An experimental comparative study of three methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 264(2), pages 462-471.
    13. Hyland, Marie & Bertsch, Valentin, 2018. "The Role of Community Involvement Mechanisms in Reducing Resistance to Energy Infrastructure Development," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 447-474.
    14. Meinard, Y. & Cailloux, O., 2020. "On justifying the norms underlying decision support," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 285(3), pages 1002-1010.
    15. Maria LopezDeAsiain & Vicente Díaz-García, 2020. "The Importance of the Participatory Dimension in Urban Resilience Improvement Processes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-25, September.
    16. Itziar Barinaga-Rementeria & Artitzar Erauskin-Tolosa & Pedro José Lozano & Itxaro Latasa, 2019. "Individual and Social Preferences in Participatory Multi-Criteria Evaluation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-18, October.
    17. Nikos Tsotsolas & Spiros Alexopoulos, 2019. "Towards a holistic strategic framework for applying robust facilitated approaches in political decision making," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 501-541, June.
    18. Cem Iskender Aydin & Gokhan Ozertan & Begum Ozkaynak, 2011. "Should Turkey Adopt GM Crops? A Social Multi-Criteria Evaluation for the Case of Cotton Farming in Turkey," Working Papers 2011/07, Bogazici University, Department of Economics.
    19. Fontana, Veronika & Ebner, Manuel & Schirpke, Uta & Ohndorf, Markus & Pritsch, Hanna & Tappeiner, Ulrike & Kurmayer, Rainer, 2023. "An integrative approach to evaluate ecosystem services of mountain lakes using multi-criteria decision analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PA).
    20. Shmelev, Stanislav E. & Rodríguez-Labajos, Beatriz, 2009. "Dynamic multidimensional assessment of sustainability at the macro level: The case of Austria," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(10), pages 2560-2573, August.

    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:eee:lauspo:v:114:y:2022:i:c:s0264837721006578. 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: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    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.