IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i4p2335-d503300.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Adaptive Reuse of a Historic Building by Introducing New Functions: A Scenario Evaluation Based on Participatory MCA Applied to a Former Carthusian Monastery in Tuscany, Italy

Author

Listed:
  • Agnese Amato

    (Department of Energy, Systems, Territory and Construction Engineering, University of Pisa, 56100 Pisa, Italy)

  • Maria Andreoli

    (Department of Agricultural, Food and Agri-Environmental Sciences (DAFE), University of Pisa, 56124 Pisa, Italy)

  • Massimo Rovai

    (Department of Civil and Industrial Engineering (DCIE), University of Pisa, 56126 Pisa, Italy)

Abstract

The lack of financial resources and the constraints about interventions are threatening the survival of built heritage and the multiple benefits it can provide. In time, the role of building conservation has changed from preservation to being part of a sustainable strategy where adaptive reuse may allow to protect built heritage, while promoting it as a resource. This paper presents the results of a multicriteria analysis applied to the case study of Certosa di Pisa in Calci (Tuscany), a former Carthusian Monastery currently run as a publicly owned museum center. Based on information gathered from literature and the involvement of the two main stakeholders, a SWOT analysis was performed to identify three scenarios in which new functions were introduced with the aim to cover restoration and maintenance costs. Scenarios were compared by using a participatory MCA, taking into account not only economic performances but also cultural, territorial integration and restoration co-impacts. Results show that it is possible to reach economic sustainability while conserving heritage values, but several criticalities may hinder the process. Conclusions discuss the suitability of the method in identifying sustainable reuse solutions and highlight the role of governance bodies and the problems related to their public and/or private composition.

Suggested Citation

  • Agnese Amato & Maria Andreoli & Massimo Rovai, 2021. "Adaptive Reuse of a Historic Building by Introducing New Functions: A Scenario Evaluation Based on Participatory MCA Applied to a Former Carthusian Monastery in Tuscany, Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-22, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:4:p:2335-:d:503300
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/4/2335/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/4/2335/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Francesca Torrieri & Marina Fumo & Michele Sarnataro & Gigliola Ausiello, 2019. "An Integrated Decision Support System for the Sustainable Reuse of the Former Monastery of “Ritiro del Carmine” in Campania Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-21, September.
    2. Lucia Della Spina, 2020. "Adaptive Sustainable Reuse for Cultural Heritage: A Multiple Criteria Decision Aiding Approach Supporting Urban Development Processes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-20, February.
    3. Victor Ginsburgh & David Throsby, 2006. "Handbook of the economics of art and culture," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/1673, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    4. Luigi Dolores & Maria Macchiaroli & Gianluigi De Mare, 2020. "A Dynamic Model for the Financial Sustainability of the Restoration Sponsorship," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-27, February.
    5. Maria Rosaria Napolitano & Alessandro De Nisco, 2017. "Cultural heritage: the missing “link” in the place marketing literature “chain”," Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 13(2), pages 101-106, May.
    6. Chiara Dalle Nogare & Matteo Galizzi, 2011. "The political economy of cultural spending: evidence from Italian cities," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 35(3), pages 203-231, August.
    7. Costanza, Robert & de Groot, Rudolf & Braat, Leon & Kubiszewski, Ida & Fioramonti, Lorenzo & Sutton, Paul & Farber, Steve & Grasso, Monica, 2017. "Twenty years of ecosystem services: How far have we come and how far do we still need to go?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PA), pages 1-16.
    8. Antonio Nesticò & Piera Somma, 2019. "Comparative Analysis of Multi-Criteria Methods for the Enhancement of Historical Buildings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-19, August.
    9. Mara Cerquetti & Concetta Ferrara, 2018. "Marketing Research for Cultural Heritage Conservation and Sustainability: Lessons from the Field," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-16, March.
    10. Paola Dubini & Ludovica Leone & Laura Forti, 2012. "Role Distribution in Public-Private Partnerships," International Studies of Management & Organization, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(2), pages 57-75, January.
    11. Rizzo, Ilde & Throsby, David, 2006. "Cultural Heritage: Economic Analysis and Public Policy," Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture, in: V.A. Ginsburgh & D. Throsby (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 28, pages 983-1016, Elsevier.
    12. V.A. Ginsburgh & D. Throsby (ed.), 2006. "Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture," Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1, December.
    13. Sabine Gennai-Schott & Tiziana Sabbatini & Davide Rizzo & Elisa Marraccini, 2020. "Who Remains When Professional Farmers Give up? Some Insights on Hobby Farming in an Olive Groves-Oriented Terraced Mediterranean Area," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-21, May.
    14. Francesco Calabrò & Lucia Della Spina, 2019. "The Public–Private Partnership for the Enhancement of Unused Public Buildings: An Experimental Model of Economic Feasibility Project," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-25, October.
    15. Mayrhofer, Jan P. & Gupta, Joyeeta, 2016. "The science and politics of co-benefits in climate policy," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 22-30.
    16. Hanson, Helena I. & Wickenberg, Björn & Alkan Olsson, Johanna, 2020. "Working on the boundaries—How do science use and interpret the nature-based solution concept?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    17. Thomas L. Saaty & Luis G. Vargas, 2012. "Models, Methods, Concepts & Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, edition 2, number 978-1-4614-3597-6, September.
    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. Andrea Sarcina & Rubina Canesi, 2023. "Renewable Energy Community: Opportunities and Threats towards Green Transition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-21, September.
    2. Ghazy Abdullah Albaqawy & Mohammed Mashary Alnaim & Mohammed Abdulfattah Bay & Mabrouk Touahmia, 2023. "Assessment of Saudi Arabia’s Classification and Selection Criteria for Heritage Sites: A Case Study of Barzan Heritage Area in Hail City," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-27, January.
    3. Erman Berkay & Beser Oktay Vehbi, 2022. "Conservation Proposals for Monasteries in Karpas Peninsula, Northern Cyprus," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-34, December.

    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. Bertacchini, Enrico & Dalle Nogare, Chiara, 2014. "Public provision vs. outsourcing of cultural services: Evidence from Italian cities," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 168-182.
    2. Victor Ginsburgh & Olivier Gergaud, 2013. "Measuring the effect of cultural events with special emphasis on music festivals," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/152437, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    3. David Throsby, 2011. "Cultural Capital," Chapters, in: Ruth Towse (ed.), A Handbook of Cultural Economics, Second Edition, chapter 20, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Bruno S. Frey & Paolo Pamini, 2009. "World Heritage: Where Are We? An Empirical Analysis," CREMA Working Paper Series 2009-31, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    5. Olivier Gergaud & Victor Ginsburgh, 2017. "Measuring the Economic Effects of Events Using Google Trends," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/277406, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    6. Mihaela IACOB & Felicia ALEXANDRU & Meral KAGITCI & Georgiana Camelia CRETAN & Filip IORGULESCU, 2011. "Evaluation Of Cultural Heritage – From The Epistemological Precautions To Pragmatic Approaches," International Conference Modern Approaches in Organisational Management and Economy, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 5(1), pages 218-223, November.
    7. Enrico Bertacchini & Federico Revelli, 2021. "Kalòs kai agathòs? government quality and cultural heritage in the regions of Europe," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 67(2), pages 513-539, October.
    8. David Throsby, 2010. "Measuring the Economic and Cultural Values of Historic Heritage Places," Environmental Economics Research Hub Research Reports 1085, Environmental Economics Research Hub, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    9. Christian Barrère, 2016. "Cultural heritages: From official to informal [Patrimoines culturels : des patrimoines officiels aux patrimoines informels]," Post-Print hal-02569029, HAL.
    10. Bruno S. Frey & Paolo Pamini, 2009. "Making World Heritage Truly Global: The Culture Certificate Scheme," CREMA Working Paper Series 2009-13, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    11. Yan Zhang, 2012. "Towards an Institutional Approach of Self-governance on Cultural Heritage," Chapters, in: Enrico Bertacchini & Giangiacomo Bravo & Massimo Marrelli & Walter Santagata (ed.), Cultural Commons, chapter 8, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. Patrizia Riganti, 2022. "Embedding Effects in Contingent Valuation Applications to Cultural Capital: Does the Nature of the Goods Matter?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-17, May.
    13. Maija Halonen-Aktawijuka & Evanjelos Parfilis, 2022. "Who Should Own the Past?," Bristol Economics Discussion Papers 22/758, School of Economics, University of Bristol, UK.
    14. Guccio, Calogero & Mazza, Isidoro, 2014. "On the political determinants of the allocation of funds to heritage authorities," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 18-38.
    15. Manfred J. Holler & Isidoro Mazza, 2013. "Cultural heritage: public decision-making and implementation," Chapters, in: Ilde Rizzo & Anna Mignosa (ed.), Handbook on the Economics of Cultural Heritage, chapter 2, pages i-i, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    16. 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.
    17. Victor Martínez-de-Albéniz & Ana Valdivia, 2019. "Measuring and Exploiting the Impact of Exhibition Scheduling on Museum Attendance," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 21(4), pages 761-779, October.
    18. Roberto Cellini & Tiziana Cuccia, 2013. "Museum and monument attendance and tourism flow: a time series analysis approach," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(24), pages 3473-3482, August.
    19. Sittichok Plaiphum & Roengchai Tansuchat, 2023. "Cultural Capital of Sea Salt Farming in Ban Laem District of Phetchaburi Province as per the Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (GIAHS)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-27, August.
    20. Francisco Alcalá & Miguel González‐Maestre, 2012. "Artistic Creation and Intellectual Property: A Professional Career Approach," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(3), pages 633-672, September.

    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:4:p:2335-:d:503300. 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.