Madrid Río Park. Symbolic values and contingent valuation

Valori e Valutazioni

Volumn 2018, Issue 21, 2018, Pages 75-85

  Giannelli, Annalaura ^a   Giuffrida, Salvatore ^b   Trovato, Maria Rosa ^b  

^a Dottssa in Architettura   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CATANIA   (Italy)

Author keywords

Cost benefit analysis; T contingent valuation; Urban rehabilitation

Indexed keywords

EID: 85060955822     PISSN: 20362404     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. BATEMAN, I.J., CARSON R.T., DAY B., HANEMANN M.,. HANLEY N, HETT T., JONES-LEE M., LOOMES G., MOURATO S., OZDEMIROGLU E., PEARCE D.W., SUGDEN R., SWANSON J., Economic Valuation with Stated Preference Techniques: A Manual, Edward Elgar, Ltd. Cheltenham, 2002, ISBN: 1840649194.
2. BERTA, M., BOTTERO, M., FERRETTI, V., A mixed methods approach for the integration of urban design and economic evaluation: Industrial heritage and urban regeneration in China, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 2016, pp. 1-25, DOI: http//dx.doi. org/10.1177/0265813516669139.
3. BORGES J. L., Altre inquisizioni, Feltrinelli, Milano, 2005.
4. BOTTERO, M., The economic value of landscape: an application for a rural area in Northern Italy, In C. Rega (Ed.), Landscape Planning and Rural Development, 2014, pp. 89-104, Berlin: Springer,DOI:http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1007/978-3-319-05759-0_5.
5. BOTTERO, M., A multi-methodological approach for assessingsustainabilityofurban projects. Managementof Environmental Quality: an International Journal, 26(1), 2015, pp. 138-154, DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-06-2014-0088.
6. BOTTERO, M., MONDINI, G. (2016). Evaluation of social benefits of urban regeneration: a stated preferences approach, Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Innovation in Urban and Regional Planning. Torino (IT), 14-15 September 2016, 2016, pp. 447-452. ISBN 978-88-9052-964-1.
7. BOTTERO M., FERRETTI V., MONDINI G.,Valori ambientali, equità intergenerazionale e sostenibilità: una riflessione a partire dall’Analisi Costi e Benefici, Valori e Valutazioni, n.9, 2012, pp.91-103.
8. CHEN B., QI X., Protest response and contingent valuation of an urban forest park in Fuzhou City, China, Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, Vol. 29, 2018, pp. 68-76, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2017.11.005.
9. CIRIACY-WANTRUP SV., Capital returns from soil conservation practices, Journal of Farm Economics, 1947, 29:1181-96.
10. COMMISSIONE EUROPEA, Guide to Cost-Benefit Analysis of Investment Projects. Economic appraisal tool for Cohesion Policy 2014-2020, 2015 (scaricabile dal sito internet: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/studies/pdf/ cba_guide.pdf, consultato on line il 7 gennaio 2018).
11. COMUNE DI MADRID, Proyecto Madrid-Río, in Memoria de gestión 2006, Madrid, Área de Gobierno de Urbanismo y Vivienda, 2008, pp. 285-288.
12. COMUNE DI MADRID, Proyecto Madrid-Río, in Memoria de gestión 2007, Madrid, Área de Gobierno de Urbanismo y Vivienda, 2009, pp. 207-217.
13. COMUNE DI MADRID, Proyecto Madrid-Río, in Memoria de gestión 2008, Madrid, Área de Gobierno de Urbanismo y Vivienda, 2010, pp. 189-196.
14. COMUNE DI MADRID, Proyecto Madrid Río y otros planes y estudios complementarios, in Memoria de gestión 2009, Madrid, Área de Gobierno de Urbanismo y Vivienda, 2011a, pp. 229-258.
15. COMUNE DI MADRID, Proyecto Madrid Río y otros planes, in Memoria de gestión 2010, Madrid, Área de Gobierno de Urbanismo y Vivienda, 2011b, pp. 221-244.
16. GIANNELLI A., Analisi Costi Benefici e valutazioni interscalari: il valore sociale del Parco Madrid Río, Tesi di Laurea in Architettura, Relatori Salvatore Giuffrida e Maria Rosa Trovato, Università di Catania, Gennaio 2018.
17. GIUFFRIDA S., The True Value, in Stanghellini F., Morano P., Bottero M., Oppio A., Appraisal from Theory to Practice, Green Energy and Tecnology, Spriger, 2017, pp. 1-14.
18. GIUFFRIDA S. TROVATO M.R., The Monetary Measurement of Flood Damage and the Valuation of the proactive Policies in Sicily, Geosciences 2018, 8(4), 141; https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences8040141.
19. MALTESE I., MARIOTTI I., OPPIO A., BOSCACCI F., Assessing the benefits of slow mobility connecting a cultural heritage, Journal of Cultural Heritage 26, 2017, pp. 153-159, DOI: 10.1016/j.culher.2017.01.006.
20. MITCHELL R. C., CARSON R. T., Using Surveys to Value Public Goods. The Contingent Valuation Method, Washington DC, Resources for the Future, Washington, DC, USA, 1989.
21. NASELLI F., TROVATO M.R. and CASTELLO G. (2014). An evaluation model for the actions in supporting of the environmental and landscaping rehabilitation of the Pasquasia’s site mining (EN). In: Murgante B. et al., (eds.): ICCSA 2014, LNCS 8581, Part III, pp. 26-41, Springer International Publishing Switzerland, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-09150-1_3.
22. NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, Federal Register, Vol. 58, No. 10, 1993, pp. 4601-4614.
23. OPPIO A., BOTTERO M., FERRETTI V., Designing adaptive reuse strategies for cultural heritage with choice experiments, Green Energy and Technology, 2017, pp. 303-315, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-49676-4_23.
24. PEARCE, D.W., TURNER R.K., Economics of Natural Resources and the Environment. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1990, DOI:https://doi.org/10.2307/1242904.
25. RIZZO F., Economia del patrimonio architettonico-ambientale, Franco Angeli, Milano, 1989.
26. RIZZO F., Valore e valutazioni. La scienza dell’economia o l’economia della scienza, FrancoAngeli, Milano, 1999.
27. STELLIN G., ROSATO P., La valutazione economica dei beni ambientali. Metodologia e casi di studio, Cittàstudi, Torino, 1998.
28. TEMPESTA T., Appunti di estimo rurale e ambientale, CLEUP, Padova, 2005.
29. ZIZEK S., Evento, Utet, Torino, 2014.