considered as a big district in the hypotheses of new masterplans of the Brussels
municipality. In this sense, the aforementioned districts are social mix collectors
characterized by the presence of many bottom-up social initiatives in which different
architectural and social characters exist. This contributed causing physical, architectural and social discomfort highlighting of the second immigrant generations living
in the districts. In particular, the decision problem conducted was devoted to identify
the most interesting criteria to reduce the physical discomfort improving the affordability of houses and the quality of the buildings, constructing massive
multifunctional buildings characterized by an external hard shell and a flexible use
of internal spaces.
4.3.2 MCDA Method
The MACBETH (Measuring Attractiveness by a Categorical-Based Evaluation
Technique) (Bana e Costa et al. 2010) method is a multicriteria analysis based on
the additive value model, requiring qualitative judgements about differences of value
to help a group of stakeholders quantify the relative attractiveness of alternatives.
The MACBETH method can be divided into three main phases: (i) the Model
Structuring phase, in which alternatives and values of concerns are defined;
(ii) the Evaluating phase, involving a series of pairwise comparisons, where the
stakeholder is asked to express his preferences according to the following semantic
categories, Extreme, Very strong, Strong, Moderate, Weak, Very Weak and No
(no differences between the elements); and (iii) the Analysis of the Results devoted to
discuss the results in the form of ranking.
For the case study in exam, two sets of criteria have been defined with the aim of
considering both the urban design and the architectural characters of the buildings.
The main criteria (economic value, buildings’ design, envelop performance and
accessibility) have been in turn detailed up to 12 sub-criteria. The criteria and
sub-criteria have been organized according to a value tree approach provided by
the method (Fig. 6.4).
4.3.3 Results and Role Played by the MCDA
The application of the MACBETH method allowed to identify a priority list among
both criteria and sub-criteria to be considered to support the decision process for the
case study in exam (Abastante and Lami 2018). The results showed that the
buildings’ design and the economic values of the transformation are the most
important criteria to be considered. In particular, according to the sub-criteria
identified, a proper design of the ground floor functions would be fundamental in
order to propose a sensible architectural project able to contribute reducing the
physical and social discomfort of the Tür und Taxis area. In this sense, the MACBETH method turned out to be useful to simultaneously consider the two levels of
the problem: the socioÀ/territorial and the architectural one.
104
I. M. Lami et al.
municipality. In this sense, the aforementioned districts are social mix collectors
characterized by the presence of many bottom-up social initiatives in which different
architectural and social characters exist. This contributed causing physical, architectural and social discomfort highlighting of the second immigrant generations living
in the districts. In particular, the decision problem conducted was devoted to identify
the most interesting criteria to reduce the physical discomfort improving the affordability of houses and the quality of the buildings, constructing massive
multifunctional buildings characterized by an external hard shell and a flexible use
of internal spaces.
4.3.2 MCDA Method
The MACBETH (Measuring Attractiveness by a Categorical-Based Evaluation
Technique) (Bana e Costa et al. 2010) method is a multicriteria analysis based on
the additive value model, requiring qualitative judgements about differences of value
to help a group of stakeholders quantify the relative attractiveness of alternatives.
The MACBETH method can be divided into three main phases: (i) the Model
Structuring phase, in which alternatives and values of concerns are defined;
(ii) the Evaluating phase, involving a series of pairwise comparisons, where the
stakeholder is asked to express his preferences according to the following semantic
categories, Extreme, Very strong, Strong, Moderate, Weak, Very Weak and No
(no differences between the elements); and (iii) the Analysis of the Results devoted to
discuss the results in the form of ranking.
For the case study in exam, two sets of criteria have been defined with the aim of
considering both the urban design and the architectural characters of the buildings.
The main criteria (economic value, buildings’ design, envelop performance and
accessibility) have been in turn detailed up to 12 sub-criteria. The criteria and
sub-criteria have been organized according to a value tree approach provided by
the method (Fig. 6.4).
4.3.3 Results and Role Played by the MCDA
The application of the MACBETH method allowed to identify a priority list among
both criteria and sub-criteria to be considered to support the decision process for the
case study in exam (Abastante and Lami 2018). The results showed that the
buildings’ design and the economic values of the transformation are the most
important criteria to be considered. In particular, according to the sub-criteria
identified, a proper design of the ground floor functions would be fundamental in
order to propose a sensible architectural project able to contribute reducing the
physical and social discomfort of the Tür und Taxis area. In this sense, the MACBETH method turned out to be useful to simultaneously consider the two levels of
the problem: the socioÀ/territorial and the architectural one.
104
I. M. Lami et al.