IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v8y2016i3p238-d65234.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Management of Stakeholders in Urban Regeneration Projects. Case Study: Baia-Mare, Transylvania

Author

Listed:
  • Corina M. Rădulescu

    (Department of Economics, Technical University of Cluj-Napoca, Bulevardul 21 Decembrie 1989 128-130, Cluj-Napoca 400604, Romania
    Department of Economics, Northern University Center of Baia-Mare, 76 Victoriei street, Baia-Mare 430122, Romania)

  • Ovidiu Ştefan

    (Terrestrial Measurements and Cadastre Department, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Technical University of Cluj-Napoca, 72 Observatorului street, Cluj-Napoca 400641, Romania)

  • Gheorghe M.T. Rădulescu

    (Terrestrial Measurements and Cadastre Department, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Technical University of Cluj-Napoca, 72 Observatorului street, Cluj-Napoca 400641, Romania)

  • Adrian T.G.M. Rădulescu

    (Terrestrial Measurements and Cadastre Department, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Technical University of Cluj-Napoca, 72 Observatorului street, Cluj-Napoca 400641, Romania)

  • Mihai V.G.M. Rădulescu

    (Terrestrial Measurements and Cadastre Department, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Technical University of Cluj-Napoca, 72 Observatorului street, Cluj-Napoca 400641, Romania)

Abstract

The process of regeneration of abandoned areas or deteriorated structures in the cities of Romania has become a strategy of urban-integrated development. Conversions and/or regeneration of facilities in the form of assets, with different destinations, are part of the new trend of urban regeneration and a strategy used to attract investment capital. The disappearance of mining industry sites in Maramures County, Romania, has allowed the expansion and planning of new spaces for public use and/or semipublic, and most cities have opened new development perspectives. The study is based on empirical research conducted on the brownfields of Baia-Mare City. This research investigates how stakeholders of an urban regeneration project can be more actively involved in the decision-making processes with regard to the strategic elements of the renewal project of Cuprom, as a former mining industry area. This research contributes to the development of the investigation of new types of knowledge of stakeholder analysis and improves the available practices for stakeholder salience. Social networks created and consolidated by stakeholders of an urban regeneration project are the object of analysis, evaluation, and monitoring of the equilibrium between project management and grant of resources and capital. This paper studies the salience of stakeholders of the SEPA-CUPROM project from Baia-Mare using the social networking approach. Visualization by graphical methods of social networking analysis is a useful instrument in the decision-making process of brownfield projects as part of sustainable strategies in Romania.

Suggested Citation

  • Corina M. Rădulescu & Ovidiu Ştefan & Gheorghe M.T. Rădulescu & Adrian T.G.M. Rădulescu & Mihai V.G.M. Rădulescu, 2016. "Management of Stakeholders in Urban Regeneration Projects. Case Study: Baia-Mare, Transylvania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-22, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:8:y:2016:i:3:p:238-:d:65234
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/3/238/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/8/3/238/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Corina Rădulescu & Rita Toader & Gratiela Boca & Madela Abrudan & Cristian Anghel & Diana Cezara Toader, 2015. "Sustainable Development in Maramures County," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(6), pages 1-22, June.
    2. Sandra Alker & Victoria Joy & Peter Roberts & Nathan Smith, 2000. "The Definition of Brownfield," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(1), pages 49-69.
    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. Diana-Cezara Toader & Grațiela Boca & Rita Toader & Mara Măcelaru & Cezar Toader & Diana Ighian & Adrian T. Rădulescu, 2019. "The Effect of Social Presence and Chatbot Errors on Trust," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-24, December.
    2. Kagan Dogruyol & Zeeshan Aziz & Yusuf Arayici, 2018. "Eye of Sustainable Planning: A Conceptual Heritage-Led Urban Regeneration Planning Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-22, April.
    3. Guiwen Liu & Zhiyong Yi & Xiaoling Zhang & Asheem Shrestha & Igor Martek & Lizhen Wei, 2017. "An Evaluation of Urban Renewal Policies of Shenzhen, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-17, June.
    4. Jue Wang & Yi Yang & Huan Huang & Fan Wang, 2022. "Stakeholder Management in Government-Led Urban Regeneration: A Case Study of the Eastern Suburbs in Chengdu, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-17, April.
    5. Corina M. Rădulescu & Svitlana Slava & Adrian T. Rădulescu & Rita Toader & Diana-Cezara Toader & Grațiela Dana Boca, 2020. "A Pattern of Collaborative Networking for Enhancing Sustainability of Smart Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-23, February.
    6. Chahardowli, Mehrdad & Sajadzadeh, Hassan, 2022. "A strategic development model for regeneration of urban historical cores: A case study of the historical fabric of Hamedan City," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    7. Marija Burinskienė & Vytautas Bielinskas & Askoldas Podviezko & Virginija Gurskienė & Vida Maliene, 2017. "Evaluating the Significance of Criteria Contributing to Decision-Making on Brownfield Land Redevelopment Strategies in Urban Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-17, May.
    8. Zhengqi He & Dechun Huang & Changzheng Zhang & Junmin Fang, 2018. "Toward a Stakeholder Perspective on Social Stability Risk of Large Hydraulic Engineering Projects in China: A Social Network Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-15, April.
    9. Zhang, Jiayu & Yang, Xiaodong & Wang, Hao, 2021. "Age-friendly regeneration of urban settlements in China: Game and incentives of stakeholders in decision-making," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    10. Yiming Wang & Pengcheng Xiang, 2019. "Investigate the Conduction Path of Stakeholder Conflict of Urban Regeneration Sustainability in China: the Application of Social-Based Solutions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-18, September.
    11. Tao Zhou & Yulin Zhou & Guiwen Liu, 2017. "Key Variables for Decision-Making on Urban Renewal in China: A Case Study of Chongqing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-19, March.
    12. Eduardo Natividade-Jesus & Arminda Almeida & Nuno Sousa & João Coutinho-Rodrigues, 2019. "A Case Study Driven Integrated Methodology to Support Sustainable Urban Regeneration Planning and Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-16, July.

    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. J.W.R. Whitehand & N.J. Morton, 2006. "The Fringe-belt Phenomenon and Socioeconomic Change," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 43(11), pages 2047-2066, October.
    2. Anna Alberini & Dennis Guignet, 2008. "Voluntary Cleanups and Redevelopment Potential: Lessons from Baltimore, Maryland," Working Papers 2008.87, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    3. Meg Holden & Andy Scerri & Azadeh Hadizadeh Esfahani, 2015. "Justifying Redevelopment ‘Failures' Within Urban ‘Success Stories': Dispute, Compromise, and a New Test of Urbanity," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(3), pages 451-470, May.
    4. Perić Ana, 2016. "Institutional Cooperation in the Brownfield Regeneration Process: Experiences from Central and Eastern European Countries," European Spatial Research and Policy, Sciendo, vol. 23(1), pages 21-46, June.
    5. Marjorie Tendero & Cécile Bazart, 2018. "" Empty lands " ? Social representations of contaminated brownfields in France," Working Papers halshs-01709548, HAL.
    6. Han, Qingye & Zhu, Yuming & Ke, Ginger Y. & Hipel, Keith W., 2019. "Public private partnership in brownfield remediation projects in China: Identification and structure analysis of risks," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 87-104.
    7. Kronenburg García, Angela & Meyfroidt, Patrick & Abeygunawardane, Dilini & Sitoe, Almeida A., 2022. "Waves and legacies: The making of an investment frontier in Niassa, Mozambique," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 27(1).
    8. Ricardo J. G. Mateus & João C. Bana e Costa & Pedro Verga Matos, 2017. "Supporting Multicriteria Group Decisions with MACBETH Tools: Selection of Sustainable Brownfield Redevelopment Actions," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 495-521, May.
    9. Liviu Jigoria-Oprea & Nicolae Popa, 2017. "Industrial brownfields: An unsolved problem in post-socialist cities. A comparison between two mono industrial cities: ReÅŸiÅ£a (Romania) and PanÄ evo (Serbia)," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 54(12), pages 2719-2738, September.
    10. B Glumac & Q Han & W Schaefer, 2018. "A negotiation decision model for public–private partnerships in brownfield redevelopment," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 45(1), pages 145-160, January.
    11. Hunter Bacot & Cindy O’Dell, 2006. "Establishing Indicators to Evaluate Brownfield Redevelopment," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 20(2), pages 142-161, May.
    12. Naveed Ahmad & Yuming Zhu & Muhammad Ibrahim & Muhammad Waqas & Abdul Waheed, 2018. "Development of a Standard Brownfield Definition, Guidelines, and Evaluation Index System for Brownfield Redevelopment in Developing Countries: The Case of Pakistan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-22, November.
    13. Hongli Lin & Yuming Zhu & Jiahe Zhou & Bingxu Mu & Caihong Liu, 2022. "Stakeholder Engagement Behavior(s) in Sustainable Brownfield Regeneration: A Network Embeddedness Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(10), pages 1-21, May.
    14. Bianca Avram-Pop & Simona Sabou & Stelian Brad, 2017. "The Influence Of Demographic Aspects Upon Business Ethics In Romanian Individuals," Annals of Faculty of Economics, University of Oradea, Faculty of Economics, vol. 1(2), pages 23-31, December.
    15. Raul P. Lejano & Anne Taufen Wessells, 2006. "Community and Economic Development: Seeking Common Ground in Discourse and in Practice," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 43(9), pages 1469-1489, August.
    16. Mellor, P. & Lord, R.A. & João, E. & Thomas, R. & Hursthouse, A., 2021. "Identifying non-agricultural marginal lands as a route to sustainable bioenergy provision - A review and holistic definition," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    17. Tonin, Stefania & Bonifaci, Pietro, 2020. "Assessment of brownfield redevelopment opportunities using a multi-tiered approach: A case in Italy," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    18. Donaldson, Ross & Lord, Richard, 2018. "Can brownfield land be reused for ground source heating to alleviate fuel poverty?," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 116(PA), pages 344-355.
    19. Saul Estrin & Klaus E. Meyer, 2011. "Brownfield Acquisitions," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 51(4), pages 483-509, August.
    20. Pasqualino Boschetto & Alessandro Bove & Elena Mazzola, 2022. "Comparative Review of Neighborhood Sustainability Assessment Tools," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-14, March.

    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:8:y:2016:i:3:p:238-:d:65234. 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.