IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envirb/v45y2018i2p208-232.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A mixed methods approach for the integration of urban design and economic evaluation: Industrial heritage and urban regeneration in China

Author

Listed:
  • Mauro Berta
  • Marta Bottero
  • Valentina Ferretti

Abstract

This paper presents the early results of a study aimed at experimenting an innovative approach to the design and the evaluation of complex urban transformation processes, based on the combined use of different design strategies and tools. The purpose of the paper is to illustrate, by means of a case study, a multi-level decision aiding process, able to support strategic urban design, with specific reference to regeneration processes for abandoned industrial sites in urban areas. The case study presented in the paper concerns different alternative proposals for the requalification of the former Shougang/Er-Tong mechanical factory in Beijing, China. The choice of a Chinese case study as a field test for an experimentation about mixed methods research approaches in the domain of urban transformation is related to the peculiar emerging conditions of that context, in which huge economic potentials are speeding up the transformation but a substantial lack of cultural and methodological instruments to manage a so fast modification exists. During the design process, three methods in particular have been combined according to a multi-phase design: (i) Stakeholders Analysis, (ii) Multicriteria Analysis, and (iii) Discounted Cash Flow Analysis. Each one of them has been applied in parallel to the evolution of the different design scenarios. The results of the performed study show that mixed methods approaches are a promising line of research in the field of environmental evaluation and urban design. Insights and guidelines for the replication of the proposed methodological approach in other territorial contexts are also proposed.

Suggested Citation

  • Mauro Berta & Marta Bottero & Valentina Ferretti, 2018. "A mixed methods approach for the integration of urban design and economic evaluation: Industrial heritage and urban regeneration in China," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 45(2), pages 208-232, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:envirb:v:45:y:2018:i:2:p:208-232
    DOI: 10.1177/0265813516669139
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0265813516669139
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0265813516669139?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ferretti, Valentina, 2016. "From stakeholders analysis to cognitive mapping and Multi Attribute Value Theory: an integrated approach for policy support," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 65737, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Azimi, Yousuf & Osanloo, Morteza & Esfahanipour, Akbar, 2013. "An uncertainty based multi-criteria ranking system for open pit mining cut-off grade strategy selection," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 212-223.
    3. Giuseppe Munda, 2005. "“Measuring Sustainability”: A Multi-Criterion Framework," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 117-134, January.
    4. JosÉ Figueira & Salvatore Greco & Matthias Ehrogott, 2005. "Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys," International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, number 978-0-387-23081-8, December.
    5. Kajanus, Miika & Leskinen, Pekka & Kurttila, Mikko & Kangas, Jyrki, 2012. "Making use of MCDS methods in SWOT analysis—Lessons learnt in strategic natural resources management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 1-9.
    6. Kurttila, Mikko & Pesonen, Mauno & Kangas, Jyrki & Kajanus, Miika, 2000. "Utilizing the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in SWOT analysis -- a hybrid method and its application to a forest-certification case," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 41-52, May.
    7. Benedetto Manganelli, 2015. "Real Estate Investing," Springer Books, Springer, edition 127, number 978-3-319-06397-3, June.
    8. Ferretti, Valentina, 2016. "From stakeholders analysis to cognitive mapping and Multi-Attribute Value Theory: An integrated approach for policy support," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 253(2), pages 524-541.
    9. 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.
    10. Munda, Giuseppe, 2004. "Social multi-criteria evaluation: Methodological foundations and operational consequences," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 158(3), pages 662-677, November.
    11. Schuwirth, N. & Reichert, P. & Lienert, J., 2012. "Methodological aspects of multi-criteria decision analysis for policy support: A case study on pharmaceutical removal from hospital wastewater," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 220(2), pages 472-483.
    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. Weiliang Chen & Xinjian Huang & Yanhong Liu & Yan Song, 2019. "Does Industry Integration Improve the Competitiveness of China’s Electronic Information Industry?—Evidence from the Integration of the Electronic Information Industry and Financial Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-18, May.
    2. Marta Bottero & Elena Comino & Federico Dell’Anna & Laura Dominici & Maurizio Rosso, 2019. "Strategic Assessment and Economic Evaluation: The Case Study of Yanzhou Island (China)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-19, February.
    3. Fang He & Wendong Wu & Taozhi Zhuang & Yuan Yi, 2019. "Exploring the Diverse Expectations of Stakeholders in Industrial Land Redevelopment Projects in China: The Case of Shanghai," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-27, August.
    4. Marta Bottero & Chiara D’Alpaos & Alessandra Oppio, 2019. "Ranking of Adaptive Reuse Strategies for Abandoned Industrial Heritage in Vulnerable Contexts: A Multiple Criteria Decision Aiding Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-18, February.

    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. Marta Bottero & Elena Comino & Federico Dell’Anna & Laura Dominici & Maurizio Rosso, 2019. "Strategic Assessment and Economic Evaluation: The Case Study of Yanzhou Island (China)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-19, February.
    2. Bottero, M. & Ferretti, V. & Figueira, J.R. & Greco, S. & Roy, B., 2018. "On the Choquet multiple criteria preference aggregation model: Theoretical and practical insights from a real-world application," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 271(1), pages 120-140.
    3. Parreiras, R.O. & Kokshenev, I. & Carvalho, M.O.M. & Willer, A.C.M. & Dellezzopolles, C.F. & Nacif, D.B. & Santana, J.A., 2019. "A flexible multicriteria decision-making methodology to support the strategic management of Science, Technology and Innovation research funding programs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 272(2), pages 725-739.
    4. Etxano, Iker & Villalba-Eguiluz, Unai, 2021. "Twenty-five years of social multi-criteria evaluation (SMCE) in the search for sustainability: Analysis of case studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    5. Pelenc, Jérôme & Etxano, Iker, 2021. "Capabilities, Ecosystem Services, and Strong Sustainability through SMCE: The Case of Haren (Belgium)," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Garmendia, Eneko & Gamboa, Gonzalo, 2012. "Weighting social preferences in participatory multi-criteria evaluations: A case study on sustainable natural resource management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 110-120.
    9. Munda, Giuseppe, 2009. "A conflict analysis approach for illuminating distributional issues in sustainability policy," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 194(1), pages 307-322, April.
    10. Paneque Salgado, P. & Corral Quintana, S. & Guimarães Pereira, Â. & del Moral Ituarte, L. & Pedregal Mateos, B., 2009. "Participative multi-criteria analysis for the evaluation of water governance alternatives. A case in the Costa del Sol (Málaga)," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(4), pages 990-1005, February.
    11. Ester Comas Argemí & Àngela D. Bosch Serra & Mamen Cuéllar Padilla & Gonzalo Gamboa Jiménez, 2012. "Sostenibilidad de la producción porcina en Cataluña (España). Aplicación del análisis multicriterio," Revista Iberoamericana de Economía Ecológica, Red Iberoamericana de Economía Ecológica, vol. 18, pages 1-19, Abril.
    12. Giuseppe Munda, 2014. "On the Use of Shadow Prices for Sustainable Well-Being Measurement," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 118(2), pages 911-918, September.
    13. Živan Živković & Djordje Nikolić & Marija Savić & Predrag Djordjević & Ivan Mihajlović, 2017. "Prioritizing Strategic Goals in Higher Education Organizations by Using a SWOT–PROMETHEE/GAIA–GDSS Model," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 829-846, July.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    17. Murrant, Daniel & Radcliffe, Jonathan, 2018. "Assessing energy storage technology options using a multi-criteria decision analysis-based framework," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 231(C), pages 788-802.
    18. Ciomek, Krzysztof & Ferretti, Valentina & Kadzinski, Milosz, 2018. "Predictive analytics and disused railways requalification: insights from a Post Factum Analysis perspective," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 85922, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    19. Eneko Garmendia & Gonzalo Gamboa, 2012. "Weighting social preferences in participatory multi-criteria evaluations: a case study on sustainable natural resource management," Working Papers 2012-06, BC3.
    20. Vieira, Ana C.L. & Oliveira, Mónica D. & Bana e Costa, Carlos A., 2020. "Enhancing knowledge construction processes within multicriteria decision analysis: The Collaborative Value Modelling framework," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).

    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:sae:envirb:v:45:y:2018:i:2:p:208-232. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.