IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i9p2989-d165240.html

Values, Memory, and the Role of Exploratory Methods for Policy-Design Processes and the Sustainable Redevelopment of Waterfront Contexts: The Case of Officine Piaggio (Italy)

Author

Listed:
  • Cristina Coscia

    (Department of Architecture and Design, Politecnico di Torino, 10125 Torino, Italy)

  • Giulia Lazzari

    (Department of Architecture and Design, Politecnico di Torino, 10125 Torino, Italy)

  • Irene Rubino

    (Department of Architecture and Design, Politecnico di Torino, 10125 Torino, Italy)

Abstract

In the last few decades the renewal of waterfront contexts has been especially inspired by neoliberal approaches favoring the creation of residential units and entertainment facilities. However, sustainability frameworks suggest that the economic dimension should be interpreted in a way that goes beyond the profitability of the interventions and that takes into account non-monetary values as well. In light of the complex social value (CSV) theory—which considers as a fundamental value component the intrinsic values attributed by communities to environmental and cultural heritage resources—this article proposes the adoption of exploratory methods to firstly map and then integrate citizens’ points of view into the evaluation and design of redevelopment scenarios, selecting the ex-industrial complex of Officine Piaggio (Italy) as a case study. Survey results highlighted that discrepancies between the new functions advanced by official redevelopment proposals and citizens’ opinions were present, and that values such as memory and collective meaning need to be considered if multidimensional sustainability represents a goal. Coherent with these results, a new project scenario is then envisioned and implications related to the application of exploratory methods in the decision-making and policy-design processes are finally advanced.

Suggested Citation

  • Cristina Coscia & Giulia Lazzari & Irene Rubino, 2018. "Values, Memory, and the Role of Exploratory Methods for Policy-Design Processes and the Sustainable Redevelopment of Waterfront Contexts: The Case of Officine Piaggio (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-22, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:9:p:2989-:d:165240
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/9/2989/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/9/2989/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas H. Stevens & Jaime Echeverria & Ronald J. Glass & Tim Hager & Thomas A. More, 1991. "Measuring the Existence Value of Wildlife: What Do CVM Estimates Really Show?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 67(4), pages 390-400.
    2. Elena Fregonara & Roberto Giordano & Diana Rolando & Jean-Marc Tulliani, 2016. "Integrating Environmental and Economic Sustainability in New Building Construction and Retrofits," Journal of Urban Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(4), pages 3-28, October.
    3. Laure Kuhfuss & Nick Hanley & Russell Whyte, 2015. "Should historic sites protection be targeted at the most famous? Evidence from a contingent valuation in Scotland," Discussion Papers in Environment and Development Economics 2015-18, University of St. Andrews, School of Geography and Sustainable Development.
    4. Maria Franca Norese & Diana Rolando & Elena Fregonara, 2015. "Integration of Problem Structuring Methods: A Methodological Proposal for Complex Regional Decision-Making Processes," International Journal of Decision Support System Technology (IJDSST), IGI Global Scientific Publishing, vol. 7(2), pages 58-83, April.
    5. Fabiana Forte & Luigi Fusco Girard, 2009. "Creativity and new architectural assets: the complex value of beauty," International Journal of Sustainable Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 12(2/3/4), pages 160-191.
    6. Iva Mrak, 2013. "A Methodological Framework Based on the Dynamic-Evolutionary View of Heritage," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(9), pages 1-32, September.
    7. Luigi Fusco Girard, 2010. "Sustainability, creativity, resilience: toward new development strategies of port areas through evaluation processes," International Journal of Sustainable Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 13(1/2), pages 161-184.
    8. Diana Rolando, 2015. "Multicriteria decision problem structuring: the strategic choice approach in the context of public projects in Italy," International Journal of Multicriteria Decision Making, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 5(1/2), pages 4-38.
    9. Ståle Navrud & Richard C. Ready (ed.), 2002. "Valuing Cultural Heritage," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1759.
    10. Robert Newcombe, 2003. "From client to project stakeholders: a stakeholder mapping approach," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(8), pages 841-848.
    11. Luigi Fusco Girard & Pasquale Toro, 2007. "Integrated spatial assessment: a multicriteria approach to sustainable development of cultural and environmental heritage in San Marco dei Cavoti, Italy," 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. 15(3), pages 281-299, September.
    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. Maria Cerreta & Pasquale De Toro, 2012. "Strategic Environmental Assessment of Port Plans in Italy: Experiences, Approaches, Tools," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(11), pages 1-34, November.
    2. Fortuna De Rosa & Maria Di Palma, 2013. "Historic Urban Landscape Approach and Port Cities Regeneration: Naples between Identity and Outlook," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(10), pages 1-20, September.
    3. Luigi Fusco Girard, 2013. "Toward a Smart Sustainable Development of Port Cities/Areas: The Role of the “Historic Urban Landscape” Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(10), pages 1-20, October.
    4. Fredrik Carlsson & Mitesh Kataria & Elina Lampi, 2010. "Dealing with Ignored Attributes in Choice Experiments on Valuation of Sweden’s Environmental Quality Objectives," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 47(1), pages 65-89, September.
    5. Alexandre de A. Gomes Júnior & Vanessa B. Schramm, 2022. "Problem Structuring Methods: A Review of Advances Over the Last Decade," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 55-88, February.
    6. Raffaele Attardi & Alessandro Bonifazi & Carmelo M. Torre, 2012. "Evaluating Sustainability and Democracy in the Development of Industrial Port Cities: Some Italian Cases," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(11), pages 1-24, November.
    7. Verbic, Miroslav & Slabe-Erker, Renata, 2009. "An econometric analysis of willingness-to-pay for sustainable development: A case study of the Volcji Potok landscape area," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(5), pages 1316-1328, March.
    8. Ilde Rizzo & Anna Mignosa (ed.), 2013. "Handbook on the Economics of Cultural Heritage," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14326.
    9. repec:ipg:wpaper:13 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Andy Choi & Franco Papandrea & Jeff Bennett, 2007. "Assessing cultural values: developing an attitudinal scale," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 31(4), pages 311-335, December.
    11. Denise L. Stanley, 2005. "Local Perception of Public Goods: Recent Assessments of Willingness‐to‐pay for Endangered Species," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 23(2), pages 165-179, April.
    12. Stern, David I., 1997. "Limits to substitution and irreversibility in production and consumption: A neoclassical interpretation of ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 197-215, June.
    13. Jiaxin Huang & Shui Ming Li, 2024. "Data-Driven Analysis of Supply Chain Integration’s Impact on Procurement Performance in International EPC Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-32, December.
    14. DUMITRESCU Teodor Cristian, 2015. "Culture, Sustainable Urban Development And Urban Regeneration," Revista Economica, Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Faculty of Economic Sciences, vol. 67(Supplemen), pages 252-268, September.
    15. Pate, Jennifer & Loomis, John, 1997. "The effect of distance on willingness to pay values: a case study of wetlands and salmon in California," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 199-207, March.
    16. Venn, Tyron J. & Quiggin, John C., 2006. "Accommodating Indigenous Cultural Heritage Values in Resource Assessment," 2006 Conference (50th), February 8-10, 2006, Sydney, Australia 139919, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    17. Veisten, Knut, 2007. "Contingent valuation controversies: Philosophic debates about economic theory," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 204-232, April.
    18. Szabó, Zoltán, 2011. "Reducing protest responses by deliberative monetary valuation: Improving the validity of biodiversity valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 37-44.
    19. Merad, Myriam & Dechy, Nicolas & Serir, Lisa & Grabisch, Michel & Marcel, Frédéric, 2013. "Using a multi-criteria decision aid methodology to implement sustainable development principles within an organization," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 224(3), pages 603-613.
    20. Julien Milanesi, 2011. "Une histoire de la méthode d'évaluation contingente," Post-Print hal-01531153, HAL.
    21. L. E. Limonov & M. V. Nesena & A. A. Semenov, 2020. "Application of Cost-Benefit Analysis to Evaluate the Efficiency of Cultural Heritage Preservation Projects in Historic Towns of Russia," Regional Research of Russia, Springer, vol. 10(4), pages 530-537, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:10:y:2018:i:9:p:2989-:d:165240. 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 The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address (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.