IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i17p12856-d1224951.html

Impact of Maker Movement on the Urban Resilience Development: Assessment Methodology and Analysis of EU Research and Innovation Projects

Author

Listed:
  • Lina Monaco

    (School of Engineering and Architecture, University of Zaragoza, C. María de Luna, 3, 50018 Zaragoza, Spain)

  • Carlos Herce

    (Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development (ENEA, DUEE-SPS-ESE), C.R. Casaccia, Via Anguillarese 301, 00123 Rome, Italy)

Abstract

Cities are the engine of human development, and increasing urban sustainability is crucial to ensure human prosperity. The development of smart cities generally increases the sustainability of the cities. However, technical and environmental aspects are generally developed in smart cities neglecting socio-economic dimensions. The urban resilience concept includes the complex interactions of environmental, economic, and societal pillars. In this context, the emerging maker movement proposes an economic paradigm shift, with the interaction of humans and technology at the center of urban evolution. This paper proposes a multi-criteria methodology to define and assess the main characteristics of the resilient approach of the projects involving maker practices applied to urban development. The proposed methodology is based on the application of computer-assisted qualitative text analysis and a subsequent classification according to 12 indicators (community and urban efficiency, co-creation and professional, making sense and problem-solving, network and site-specific, implementation and optimization, sustainability-oriented and market-oriented) that define different dimensions of a bottom-up project’s resilient approach in three main key principles: inclusiveness, complexity, and durability. The method has been tested in 94 EU-funded projects. This analysis reveals the evolution and orientation of EU-funded projects from economic, technical, and social perspectives. Specifically, the patterns of remediation of non-participatory practices, the weak presence of open innovation initiatives, and the development of activities focusing on co-creation as a participatory tool. The applied methodology could be subsequently implemented at different scales and integrated with LCA in order to evaluate the sustainability of bottom-up projects toward urban development.

Suggested Citation

  • Lina Monaco & Carlos Herce, 2023. "Impact of Maker Movement on the Urban Resilience Development: Assessment Methodology and Analysis of EU Research and Innovation Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-39, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:17:p:12856-:d:1224951
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/17/12856/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/17/12856/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jeremy Millard & Marie N. Sorivelle & Sarah Deljanin & Elisabeth Unterfrauner & Christian Voigt, 2018. "Is the Maker Movement Contributing to Sustainability?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-29, June.
    2. Hanna Saari & Maria Åkerman & Barbara Kieslinger & Jouko Myllyoja & Regina Sipos, 2021. "How Open Is the Maker Movement? Integrative Literature Review of the Openness Practices in the Global Maker Movement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-20, December.
    3. Guo, Qingbin & Zhong, Jinrong, 2022. "The effect of urban innovation performance of smart city construction policies: Evaluate by using a multiple period difference-in-differences model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    4. Catalin-Silviu Sararu, 2016. "Considerations on the public services in the XXI century," Juridical Tribune - Review of Comparative and International Law, Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, vol. 6(Special), pages 160-166, October.
    5. Sohail Ahmed Soomro & Hernan Casakin & Georgi V. Georgiev, 2021. "Sustainable Design and Prototyping Using Digital Fabrication Tools for Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-17, January.
    6. Yoon Ha Choi & Jana Bouwma-Gearhart & Cindy A. Lenhart & Idalis Villanueva & Louis S. Nadelson, 2021. "Student Development at the Boundaries: Makerspaces as Affordances for Engineering Students’ Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-23, March.
    7. Pessoa, S. & Guimarães, A.S. & Lucas, S.S. & Simões, N., 2021. "3D printing in the construction industry - A systematic review of the thermal performance in buildings," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    8. Haarstad, Håvard & Wathne, Marikken W., 2019. "Are smart city projects catalyzing urban energy sustainability?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 918-925.
    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. Georgi V. Georgiev & Vijayakumar Nanjappan, 2023. "Sustainability Considerations in Digital Fabrication Design Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-15, January.
    2. Han Zhu & Aili Zhang, 2024. "The Impact of Water Resource Tax Reform on Green Technology Innovation: Evidence from Chinese A-Share Listed Enterprises," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(4), pages 17630-17648, December.
    3. Quitzow, Leslie & Rohde, Friederike, 2022. "Imagining the smart city through smart grids? Urban energy futures between technological experimentation and the imagined low-carbon city," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 59(2), pages 341-359.
    4. Sharma, Gautam, 2024. "‘Making’ in India: Understanding Makerspaces and Fablabs in the Indian Informal Innovation Context," Papers in Innovation Studies 2024/2, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    5. Attour, Amel & Baudino, Marco & Krafft, Jackie & Lazaric, Nathalie, 2020. "Determinants of energy tracking application use at the city level: Evidence from France," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    6. Ming Wen & Xianghua Li & Huifeng Yan & Hong Zhou & Shuchen Luo & Yifan Wang, 2025. "Novel algorithm on the impact of urban informatization construction on green total factor productivity and economy in China," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 16(6), pages 2193-2203, June.
    7. Ibrahim Mutambik, 2024. "Culturally Informed Technology: Assessing Its Importance in the Transition to Smart Sustainable Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(10), pages 1-20, May.
    8. Balta, Münevver Özge & Balta, Mustafa Tolga, 2022. "Development of a sustainable hydrogen city concept and initial hydrogen city projects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    9. Zhong, Shen & Zhou, Zhicheng & Gao, Wei, 2025. "Impact of regional finance reform and innovation policies on green innovation in pilot cities: A quasi-natural experiment," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 888-911.
    10. Li, Xingwei & Yang, Jie & Yao, Yuhong & Ding, Zuoyi & Hao, Jiekuo & Yin, Wenjun & Shen, Qiong, 2024. "Boosting green technology innovation in China's construction industry: The power of energy-consuming rights trading policy," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 410-423.
    11. Yuying Luo & Juanfeng Zhang & Rui Han & Jun Xv, 2026. "Smart city strategy, China’s urban innovation and policy effectiveness," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 13(1), pages 1-16, December.
    12. Mrówczyńska, Maria & Skiba, Marta & Bazan-Krzywoszańska, Anna & Sztubecka, Małgorzata, 2020. "Household standards and socio-economic aspects as a factor determining energy consumption in the city," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 264(C).
    13. Tatiana Tucunduva Philippi Cortese & Jairo Filho Sousa de Almeida & Giseli Quirino Batista & José Eduardo Storopoli & Aaron Liu & Tan Yigitcanlar, 2022. "Understanding Sustainable Energy in the Context of Smart Cities: A PRISMA Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-38, March.
    14. Stanislav Avsec & Magdalena Jagiełło-Kowalczyk, 2021. "Investigating Possibilities of Developing Self-Directed Learning in Architecture Students Using Design Thinking," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-25, April.
    15. Gabriel Andy Szalkowski & Christian Johansen, 2024. "Defining and measuring the effects of digital technologies on social sustainability: A systematic literature review," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(3), pages 1678-1699, June.
    16. repec:bcp:journl:v:9:y:2025:i:10:p:8763-8775 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Da Gao & Qingshuo Wang & Qingjiang Han, 2025. "How Does Critical Peak Pricing Boost Urban Green Total Factor Energy Efficiency? Evidence from a Double Machine Learning Model," Energies, MDPI, vol. 18(18), pages 1-21, September.
    18. Lucia Corsini & James Moultrie, 2019. "Design for Social Sustainability: Using Digital Fabrication in the Humanitarian and Development Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-20, June.
    19. Raza, Muhammad Huzaifa & Kravchenko, Ekaterina & Besklubova, Svetlana & Lazorenko, Georgy & Markelov, Maxim & Kasprzhitskii, Anton & Zhong, Ray Y., 2025. "3D printing of recycled materials for sustainable construction: A comprehensive economic and life cycle assessment," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 223(C).
    20. Yuheng Wang & Sihan Chen & Zhicheng Zhou & Shen Zhong, 2025. "Has the Construction of National Intellectual Property Model Cities Reduced PM 2.5 Concentration and Standard Deviation? New Evidence from Counties in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-29, September.
    21. Hanna Saari & Maria Åkerman & Barbara Kieslinger & Jouko Myllyoja & Regina Sipos, 2021. "How Open Is the Maker Movement? Integrative Literature Review of the Openness Practices in the Global Maker Movement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-20, December.

    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:15:y:2023:i:17:p:12856-:d:1224951. 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.