Reusing Built Heritage. Design for the Sharing Economy
317
innovation. The recovery and strategic management of the abandoned heritage can
significantly influence the entire “urban context due to its location in central and
valuable areas and to the possible historical and artistic value, thus constituting a
precious resource, not only in immediate monetary terms, but also as an element of
requalification and growth for large portions of the urban fabric which could increase
their value and become attractive for investment” (Baiani and Cangelli 2012).
In this scenario, the enhancement of the underutilized or disused public heritage,
implemented through the reuse of that which is built, in addition to being an opportunity in economic terms and rationalization of the expenditure of local administrations,
represents an opportunity to experiment regeneration interventions in urban centers.
By investing in aspects such as technological innovation and environmental design,
this real estate asset is the cornerstone on which to structure a broader strategy to
rethink the entire city through the definition of a new network of spaces within consolidated urban fabrics and of alternative functions to those now acquired over time
(Ottone et al. 2012).
By this logic, the local administrations are defining new destinations of use for the
high quantity of underused or abandoned buildings to give them new value (Manzo
2007) and to respond to the changing needs of the collectivity in terms of welfare,
culture, and work. With respect to the panel of possible new destinations, and in line
with European labor policies, the functions connected to the performance of “collaborative” work activities linked to a sharing economy emerge due to their innovative
nature. The collaborative economy does not propose “merely a new consumption
model, but also an alternative way to move (carsharing), to lend (crowdfunding),
to work (coworking), to learn, to travel, to be together, to eat and therefore to live”
(Maineri 2013).
The “containers” of the collaborative economy therefore provide, on the one hand,
a response to the need of public administration to assign a new functions and to make
assets that are disposed of or underutilized their own. On the other hand, they offer
emerging professionals the opportunity to use their skills in innovative work spaces
that allow them to “incubate” their ideas by putting them in a system with those
of others and then being able to propose them in a more competitive way to the
“outside.” The positive effects, following the activation of these containers for the
collaborative economy, are also to be sought in the “talent gardens” provided to local
companies, capable of encouraging the innovation in socioeconomic terms of the
territory.
317
innovation. The recovery and strategic management of the abandoned heritage can
significantly influence the entire “urban context due to its location in central and
valuable areas and to the possible historical and artistic value, thus constituting a
precious resource, not only in immediate monetary terms, but also as an element of
requalification and growth for large portions of the urban fabric which could increase
their value and become attractive for investment” (Baiani and Cangelli 2012).
In this scenario, the enhancement of the underutilized or disused public heritage,
implemented through the reuse of that which is built, in addition to being an opportunity in economic terms and rationalization of the expenditure of local administrations,
represents an opportunity to experiment regeneration interventions in urban centers.
By investing in aspects such as technological innovation and environmental design,
this real estate asset is the cornerstone on which to structure a broader strategy to
rethink the entire city through the definition of a new network of spaces within consolidated urban fabrics and of alternative functions to those now acquired over time
(Ottone et al. 2012).
By this logic, the local administrations are defining new destinations of use for the
high quantity of underused or abandoned buildings to give them new value (Manzo
2007) and to respond to the changing needs of the collectivity in terms of welfare,
culture, and work. With respect to the panel of possible new destinations, and in line
with European labor policies, the functions connected to the performance of “collaborative” work activities linked to a sharing economy emerge due to their innovative
nature. The collaborative economy does not propose “merely a new consumption
model, but also an alternative way to move (carsharing), to lend (crowdfunding),
to work (coworking), to learn, to travel, to be together, to eat and therefore to live”
(Maineri 2013).
The “containers” of the collaborative economy therefore provide, on the one hand,
a response to the need of public administration to assign a new functions and to make
assets that are disposed of or underutilized their own. On the other hand, they offer
emerging professionals the opportunity to use their skills in innovative work spaces
that allow them to “incubate” their ideas by putting them in a system with those
of others and then being able to propose them in a more competitive way to the
“outside.” The positive effects, following the activation of these containers for the
collaborative economy, are also to be sought in the “talent gardens” provided to local
companies, capable of encouraging the innovation in socioeconomic terms of the
territory.