The management of such complex territorial transformation processes requires a
“governance of knowledge” (Mondini 2008) able to maximize the objectives of the
biological system (resilience, bio-productivity), of the economic system (the fulfilment of basic needs, the strengthening of equity and the increase of goods and
services) as well as the objectives related to the social system (cultural difference,
institutional sustainability, justice and participation) (Barbier 1987).
Against this challenge, the MCDAs are suitable to reason with different stakeholders investigating a number of point of views and “needs” which are no longer
clear, shared and declared. According to this perspective, the discussion around a
territorial transformation always implies understanding if the territory needs for a
specific route of the railway line, a specific waste treatment technology, a new
building or the adaptive reuse of existing heritage, to satisfy our needs.
In this context, territorial transformation has to define the appropriate policy to
tackle the interactions among the problems and the nexuses that led to a decline of
the cities (De Magalhaes 2015).
3 MCDA and Case Studies
An urban and territorial transformation could be seen as a “search to balance needs,
institutional and financial constraints and market responses, within a perspective of
sustainability” (Lami 2014, p. 89).
In this perspective, the evaluation approaches progressively try to consider the
complexity of the context, moving from an approach mainly based on the analysis of
the urban/territorial factors and the real estate value to a more integrate approach, in
which not only the spatial and the financial aspects of the project are considered but
also the social implications and the environmental effects. Facing the new trends in
the context of public participation at a European level, it is necessary to be more
inclusive in the evaluation process, considering the use of specific tools enabling the
involvement of the population in the decision process and to take the different
opinions into account (Lami 2014).
Starting from this perspective, we have created a summary table of the cases
hereinafter illustrated, with their main characteristics, in order to emphasize the
decision-making relevance of the method and the sustainability relevance of the
case study (Table 6.1).
In the first case study, concerning the evaluation of Corridor 24 with a mixed
method combining ANP, Interactive Maps and Strategic Assessment (Abastante
et al. 2014), the decision-making relevance of the method is extreme because,
from the methodological point of view, the experiment represented a groundbreaking activity. In order to help the actors involved to understand spatial issues, each
question of ANP was supported by the visualization of the symbolic positioning of
the expected effects. The dynamic maps were displayed to participants showing, in
real-time, the behaviour of maps if the given weight was 1 or 9 for one element or
another. The workshops proved to be able to consolidate and enhance the
96
I. M. Lami et al.
“governance of knowledge” (Mondini 2008) able to maximize the objectives of the
biological system (resilience, bio-productivity), of the economic system (the fulfilment of basic needs, the strengthening of equity and the increase of goods and
services) as well as the objectives related to the social system (cultural difference,
institutional sustainability, justice and participation) (Barbier 1987).
Against this challenge, the MCDAs are suitable to reason with different stakeholders investigating a number of point of views and “needs” which are no longer
clear, shared and declared. According to this perspective, the discussion around a
territorial transformation always implies understanding if the territory needs for a
specific route of the railway line, a specific waste treatment technology, a new
building or the adaptive reuse of existing heritage, to satisfy our needs.
In this context, territorial transformation has to define the appropriate policy to
tackle the interactions among the problems and the nexuses that led to a decline of
the cities (De Magalhaes 2015).
3 MCDA and Case Studies
An urban and territorial transformation could be seen as a “search to balance needs,
institutional and financial constraints and market responses, within a perspective of
sustainability” (Lami 2014, p. 89).
In this perspective, the evaluation approaches progressively try to consider the
complexity of the context, moving from an approach mainly based on the analysis of
the urban/territorial factors and the real estate value to a more integrate approach, in
which not only the spatial and the financial aspects of the project are considered but
also the social implications and the environmental effects. Facing the new trends in
the context of public participation at a European level, it is necessary to be more
inclusive in the evaluation process, considering the use of specific tools enabling the
involvement of the population in the decision process and to take the different
opinions into account (Lami 2014).
Starting from this perspective, we have created a summary table of the cases
hereinafter illustrated, with their main characteristics, in order to emphasize the
decision-making relevance of the method and the sustainability relevance of the
case study (Table 6.1).
In the first case study, concerning the evaluation of Corridor 24 with a mixed
method combining ANP, Interactive Maps and Strategic Assessment (Abastante
et al. 2014), the decision-making relevance of the method is extreme because,
from the methodological point of view, the experiment represented a groundbreaking activity. In order to help the actors involved to understand spatial issues, each
question of ANP was supported by the visualization of the symbolic positioning of
the expected effects. The dynamic maps were displayed to participants showing, in
real-time, the behaviour of maps if the given weight was 1 or 9 for one element or
another. The workshops proved to be able to consolidate and enhance the
96
I. M. Lami et al.