Keywords Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis · Urban and territorial
transformations · Infrastructural transport planning · Urban planning · Urban energy
retrofitting
1 Introduction
Territorial transformations refer to complex systems (Simon 1960) composed by a
number of interacting aspects characterized by dynamics which cannot be faced
separately. It has been generally agreed that MCDA can provide a useful support in
order to structure decision processes related to territorial transformations, allowing
several aspects to be considered in a complex situation (Roy and Bouyssou 1993;
Figueira et al. 2005). The MCDAs help the decision-makers (DMs) considering
qualitative and quantitative aspects and different point of views and integrate
different options. However, as the MCDA are countless, it is necessary to deeply
reflect on the most suitable method for the decision context in exam (Roy and
Slowinski 2013).
The chapter illustrates a selection of methodologies applied to territorial and
urban transformation projects, where the “sustainability question” takes on a
socio-technical character, challenging the experts to provide the most appropriate
methodology to support the DM. It is important to highlight how, in this specific
context, the “most appropriate” sometimes means the one that allows a simpler
understanding by the DM and the more communicable one, in order to allow the
biggest participation in the decision process.
The reflections provided by this chapter come from a critical analysis of different
case studies faced by the Turin research group (Politecnico di Torino,
InterUniversity Department DIST) composed by the authors, in some case in
collaboration with other academics. Specifically, the case studies analysed in this
chapter refer to seven contexts: (i) infrastructural transport planning strategies;
(ii) location of undesirable facilities; (iii) strategic urban planning; (iv) urban energy
retrofitting; (v) real estate investments; (vi) cultural adaptive reuse of abandoned
buildings; and (vii) environmental systems. The aforementioned case studies cover
different geographical scales of intervention (local, national and transnational)
offering here the opportunity to reflect around the use of several MCDA, such as
Analytic Network Process (ANP), ANP and Spatial Decision Support Systems
(SDSS), Dominance Based Rough-Sets Approach (DRSA), Measuring Attractiveness by a Categorical Based Evaluation Technique (MACBETH), Preference Ranking Organization METHod for Enrichment of Evaluations (PROMETHEE),
CATegorization by Similarity-Dissimilarity (CAT-SD) and Elimination Et Choix
Traduisant La Realité (ELECTRE).
The chapter is divided in four sections. After the introduction, the second section
is aimed at giving a synthetic overview of the various MCDA used, with a specific
focus on the decision-making and sustainability relevance. The third one briefly
describes seven case studies, following a tripartite scheme (decision problem,
94
I. M. Lami et al.
transformations · Infrastructural transport planning · Urban planning · Urban energy
retrofitting
1 Introduction
Territorial transformations refer to complex systems (Simon 1960) composed by a
number of interacting aspects characterized by dynamics which cannot be faced
separately. It has been generally agreed that MCDA can provide a useful support in
order to structure decision processes related to territorial transformations, allowing
several aspects to be considered in a complex situation (Roy and Bouyssou 1993;
Figueira et al. 2005). The MCDAs help the decision-makers (DMs) considering
qualitative and quantitative aspects and different point of views and integrate
different options. However, as the MCDA are countless, it is necessary to deeply
reflect on the most suitable method for the decision context in exam (Roy and
Slowinski 2013).
The chapter illustrates a selection of methodologies applied to territorial and
urban transformation projects, where the “sustainability question” takes on a
socio-technical character, challenging the experts to provide the most appropriate
methodology to support the DM. It is important to highlight how, in this specific
context, the “most appropriate” sometimes means the one that allows a simpler
understanding by the DM and the more communicable one, in order to allow the
biggest participation in the decision process.
The reflections provided by this chapter come from a critical analysis of different
case studies faced by the Turin research group (Politecnico di Torino,
InterUniversity Department DIST) composed by the authors, in some case in
collaboration with other academics. Specifically, the case studies analysed in this
chapter refer to seven contexts: (i) infrastructural transport planning strategies;
(ii) location of undesirable facilities; (iii) strategic urban planning; (iv) urban energy
retrofitting; (v) real estate investments; (vi) cultural adaptive reuse of abandoned
buildings; and (vii) environmental systems. The aforementioned case studies cover
different geographical scales of intervention (local, national and transnational)
offering here the opportunity to reflect around the use of several MCDA, such as
Analytic Network Process (ANP), ANP and Spatial Decision Support Systems
(SDSS), Dominance Based Rough-Sets Approach (DRSA), Measuring Attractiveness by a Categorical Based Evaluation Technique (MACBETH), Preference Ranking Organization METHod for Enrichment of Evaluations (PROMETHEE),
CATegorization by Similarity-Dissimilarity (CAT-SD) and Elimination Et Choix
Traduisant La Realité (ELECTRE).
The chapter is divided in four sections. After the introduction, the second section
is aimed at giving a synthetic overview of the various MCDA used, with a specific
focus on the decision-making and sustainability relevance. The third one briefly
describes seven case studies, following a tripartite scheme (decision problem,
94
I. M. Lami et al.