Scholarly record
A MULTI-DIMENSIONAL INCLUSIVE EVALUATION PROCEDURE TO CLASSIFY THE LEVEL OF CRITICALITY OF DISTRESSED URBAN AREAS
Abstract
One tenth of the European population lives in distressed areas where physical and economic plight is aggravated by social problems. In urban renewal, two emerging problems require attention: a) the inclusion of the local communities in making choices for land administration; b) the complex nature of the interventions due to the multiplicity, diversity and conflict of the elements involved. With the aim of providing an evaluation procedure able to aid public choice, to involve the community and to reach a shared choice, the paper proposes a multi-criteria, social and inclusive evaluation procedure that reinterprets the multi-dimensional process from the top-down to a bottom-up approach. The procedure was tested in an experimental case regarding a group of Roman urban distressed areas, applied in order to generate unidimensional and multidimensional ranking of criticality level of the areas based on the direct participation of stakeholders and community. After explaining the evaluation procedure, the paper shows the results of the experimental application.
Publication Impact Profile
Publication details
References13
Alpopi C., Manole C., Integrated Urban Regeneration – Solution for Cities Revitalize, Procedia Economics and Finance, 6, 178–185, 2013.
Miccoli S., Finucci F., Murro, R., Measuring Shared Social Appreciation of Community Goods: An Experiment for the East Elevated Expressway of Rome. Sustainability, 7(12), 15194–15218, 2015.
Lichfield, N., Evaluation in planning: facing the challenge of complexity. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1998.
Miccoli S., Finucci F., Murro R., A new generation of urban areas: Feasibility elements. In Advances in Energy Equipment Science and Engineering, 2015.
Miccoli S., Finucci F., Murro R., A Direct Deliberative Evaluation Method to Choose a Project for Via Giulia, Rome. Pollack Periodica, 10(1), 2015.
Moretti L., Di Mascio P., Bellagamba S., Environmental, human health and socio-economic effects of cement powders: the multicriteria analysis as decisional methodology. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 16;14(6), 2017.
Barabas J., How Deliberation Affects Policy Opinions. The American Political Science Review, 98(4), 687–701, 2004.
Mitchell R. K., Agle, B. R., Wood D. J., Toward a Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853–886, 1997.
Fishkin J., Luskin R., Jowell R., Deliberative polling and public consultation. Parliam Aff, 53(4), 657–666, 2000.
McNamara M. W., Morris J. C., Deliberative Democratic Evaluation. Public Works Management & Policy, 19(1), 51–66, 2014.
Mendelberg T., The deliberative citizen: Theory and evidence. Political Decision Making, Deliberation and Participation, 6, 151–193, 2002.
Miccoli S., Finucci F., Murro R., Feeding the Cities Through Urban Agriculture The Community Esteem Value. Agriculture and Agricultural Science Procedia, 8, 128–134, 2016.
Fishkin J., Farrar, C., Deliberative polling: From experiment to community resource. The Deliberative Democracy Handbook: Strategies for Effective Civic Engagement in the Twenty-First Century, i, 68–79, 2005.
View or Download full articleAccess options
SWS access login
Login as SWS Scientific CommitteeLogin as SWS Scientific PartnerLogin as SWS AuthorAuthors and approved SWS contributors will read and export their own linked papers after identity matching by SWS profile, email and SGEM GlobalID.
For librarian assistance: [email protected]
Purchase Instant Access
- Article can be downloaded after successful payment.
- Article may be used according to SWS library access terms.
- Article cannot be redistributed.
