Experimenting community impact evaluation (CIE) for assessing urban regeneration programmes: The case study of the area 22@ Barcelona

Cities

Volumn 99, Issue , 2020, Pages

  Bottero, Marta ^a   Bragaglia, Francesca ^a   Caruso, Nadia ^a   Datola, Giulia ^a   Dell'Anna, Federico ^a  

^a POLITECNICO DI TORINO   (Italy)

Author keywords

Decision making; Social benefits; Stakeholders analysis; Strategic assessment; Urban regeneration

Indexed keywords

ASSESSMENT METHOD; DECISION MAKING; STAKEHOLDER; STRATEGIC APPROACH; URBAN RENEWAL;

BARCELONA [BARCELONA (PRV)]; BARCELONA [CATALONIA]; CATALONIA; SPAIN;

EID: 85073794944     PISSN: 02642751     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cities.2019.102464     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Alexander, E.R., Evolution and Status: Where Is planning-evaluation today and how did It get here?. Alexander, E.R., (eds.) Evaluation in planning: Evolution and prospects, 2006, Ashgate., Burlington, VT, 3–18.
2. Angelidou, M., Smart city policies: A spatial approach. Cities 41:Supplement 1 (2014), S3–S11.
3. Blanco, I., Does a ‘Barcelona model’ really exist? Periods, territories and actors in the process of urban transformation. Local Government Studies 35:3 (2009), 355–369.
4. Bottero, M., Dell'Anna, F., Nappo, M., Evaluating tangible and intangible aspects of cultural heritage: An application of the promethee method for the reuse project of the Ceva–Ormea railway. Green Energy and Technology, 2018, 285–295.
5. Bottero, M., Bravi, M., Dell'Anna, F., Mondini, G., Valuing buildings energy efficiency through Hedonic Prices Method: are spatial effects relevant?. Valori e Valutazioni 21 (2018), 27–40.
6. Burchell, R., Listokin, D., The fiscal impact handbook, center for urban policy research. 1982, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ.
7. Cerreta, M., Daldanise, G., Community branding (Co-Bra): A collaborative decision making process for Urban regeneration. International conference on computational science and its applications, 2017, Springer International Publishing., Cham, 730–746, 10.1007/978-3-319-62398-6_52.
8. Charnock, G., Purcell, T.F., Ribera-Fumaz, R., City of Rents: The limits to the B arcelona model of urban competitiveness. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 38:1 (2014), 198–217.
9. Cohen, M., A systematic review of urban sustainability assessment literature. Sustainability, 9(11), 2017, 2048, 10.3390/su9112048.
10. Coscia, C., De Filippi, F., L'uso di piattaforme digitali collaborative nella prospettiva di un'amministrazione condivisa. Il progetto Miramap a Torino. Territorio Italia, 2016, 61–104, 10.14609/Ti_1_16_4i.
11. Crossa, V., Pareja-Eastaway, M., Barber, A., Reinventing the city: Barcelona, Birmingham and Dublin. Musterd, S., Murie, A., (eds.) Making competitive cities, 2010, Blackwell-Wiley, Oxford, 67–92.
12. Datola, G., Bottero, M., De Angelis, E., et al. How urban resilience can change cities: A system dynamics model approach. Misra, S., (eds.) Computational science and its applications – ICCSA 2019. ICCSA 2019. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 11622, 2019, Springer, Cham.
13. Degen, M., García, M., The transformation of the ‘Barcelona model’: An analysis of culture, urban regeneration and governance. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 36:5 (2012), 1022–1038.
14. Della Spina, L., Ventura, C., Viglianisi, A., A multicriteria assessment model for selecting strategic projects in urban areas. International conference on computational science and its applications, 2016, Springer International Publishing, Cham, 414–427, 10.1007/978-3-319-42111-7_32.
15. Dente, B., Understanding policy decisions. 2014, Springer, Berlin.
16. European Commission, Guide to cost-benefit analysis of investment projects. Bruxelles, 2007.
17. Greene, J.C., The art of interpretation, evaluation, and presentation. Norman, K., Denzin, Lincoln, Y.S., (eds.) Qualitative program evaluation: Practice and promise, 1994, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
18. Etzkowitz, H., Piqué, J.M., 22@ Barcelona: Una ciudad del conocimiento más allá de los Parques Científicos y tecnológicos. Revista Económica de Cataluña 64 (2011), 175–183.
19. Finsterbusch, K., State of the art in social impact assessment. Environment and Behavior 17:2 (1985), 193–221.
20. Gravagnuolo, A., Girard, L.F., Multicriteria tools for the implementation of historic urban landscape. Quality Innovation Prosperity 21:1 (2017), 186–201, 10.12776/qip.v21i1.792.
21. Guba, E.G., Lincoln, Y.S., Fourth generation evaluation. 1989, Sage, Newbury Park, CA.
22. Hill, M., A goals-achievement matrix for evaluating alternative plans. Journal of the American Institute of Planners 34:1 (1968), 19–28.
23. Guyadeen, D., Seasons, M., Evaluation theory and practice: Comparing program evaluation and evaluation in planning. Journal of Planning Education and Research 38:1 (2016), 98–110, 10.1177/0739456x16675930.
24. Humphrey, A., SWOT analysis for management consulting. SRI Alumni Newsletter. SRI International, United States., 2005.
25. Huxley, J., Value Capture Finance. Making urban development pay its way. 2009, Urban Land Institute.
26. Lami, I.M., Beccuti, B., Evaluation of a project for the radical transformation of the Port of Genoa-Italy. Management of Environmental Quality an International Journal 21:1 (2010), 58–77, 10.1108/14777831011010865.
27. Levin, H.M., McEwan, P.J., Cost-effectiveness analysis: Methods and applications. 2nd ed., 2000, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
28. Lichfield, N., Economics of planned development. 1956, Estates Gazette, London.
29. Lichfield, N., Economics in town planning: A basis for decision making. The Town Planning Review 39:1 (1968), 5–20.
30. Lichfield, N., Kettle, P., Whitbread, M., Evaluation in planning process. 1975, Pergamon Press, Elmsford, NY.
31. Lichfiled, N., Economics of urban conservation. 1989, Cambridge U.P., Cambridge.
32. Lichfield, N., Community impact evaluation. Planning Theory 6:12 (1994), 55–79.
33. Lichfield, N., Community impact evaluation. 1996, Routledge, London.
34. Lichfield, N., Towards social value for money. Miller, D., Patassini, D., (eds.) Beyond benefit cost analysis. Accounting for Non-market values in planning evaluation, 2005, Ashgate, Basingstoke, Hnants, 117–125.
35. Mambelli, T., La valutazione dei programmi strategici per lo sviluppo del territorio. Una proposta metodologica «community oriented». Aestimum, 7, 2009, 10.13128/aestimum-6498.
36. Mendelow, A.L., Environmental scanning-the impact of the stakeholder concept. 1981, ICIS (p. 20).
37. Molas, O., i Sabata, M.P., 22@: 10 anys de transformació económica. Revista econòmica de Catalunya 64 (2011), 13–21.
38. Monclús, F.J., The Barcelona model: And an original formula? From ‘reconstruction’ to strategic urban projects (1979–2004). Planning Perspectives 18:4 (2003), 399–421.
39. Morisson, A., A framework for defining innovation districts: Case study from 22@ barcelona. Retrived from:, 2017 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3065676.
40. Moroni, S., The ethics behind evaluation: Lichfield's approach and utilitarianism. Alexander, E.R., (eds.) Evaluation in planning: Evolution and prospects, 2006, Ashgate Publishing, Aldershot, 21–38.
41. Mrak, I., Evaluation methods in the protection of built heritage. Građevinar 66:02 (2014), 127–138, 10.14256/jce.940.2013.
42. Nicolini, E., Pinto, M., Strategic vision of a Euro-Mediterranean Port City: A case study of Palermo. Sustainability 5:9 (2013), 3941–3959, 10.3390/su5093941.
43. Oliveira, V., Pinho, P., Evaluating plans, processes and results. Planning Theory & Practice 10:1 (2009), 35–63.
44. Oliveira, V., Pinho, P., Bridging the gap between planning evaluation and programme evaluation: The contribution of the PPR methodology. Evaluation 17 (2011), 293–307.
45. Palazzolo Henkes, R., External forces and adaptive governance: The evolution of the 22@ Barcelona between regeneration and innovation. Master Thesis Urban management and development, 2016, Erasmus University Rotterdam.
46. Parés, M., Martínez, R., Blanco, I., Collaborative governance under austerity in Barcelona: A comparison between evictions and empty urban space management. City futures international conference, special session: Collaborative governance under austerity, 2014 Paris.
47. Ploegmakers, H., Beckers, P., Evaluating urban regeneration: An assessment of the effectiveness of physical regeneration initiatives on run-down industrial sites in the Netherlands. Urban Studies 52:12 (2015), 2151–2169.
48. Pareja-Eastaway, M., Piqué, J.M., Urban regeneration and the creative knowledge economy: The case of 22@ in Barcelona. Journal of Urban Regeneration & Renewal 4:4 (2011), 319–327.
49. Pareja-Eastaway, M., @22 Barcelona 2000-2015. Barcelona's innovation discrict. 2016, Ajuntament de Barcelona.
50. Roberts, P., The evolution, definition and purpose of urban regeneration. Urban regeneration, 2000, 9–36.
51. Saaty, T.L., The analytic hierarchy process. 1980, McGraw-Hill, New York.
52. Torre, C.M., Morano, P., Tajani, F., Experimenting CIE and CBA in Urban restoration. International Conference on Computational Science and Its Applications, Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2017, 639–650, 10.1007/978-3-319-62398-6_45.
53. Weerdt, J.D., Garcia, M., Housing crisis: The Platform of Mortgage Victims (PAH) movement in Barcelona and innovations in governance. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment 31:3 (2016), 471–493.
54. Yang, R.J., An investigation of stakeholder analysis in urban development projects: Empirical or rationalistic perspectives. International Journal of Project Management 32:5 (2014), 838–849.
55. Decidim Barcelona, https://www.decidim.barcelona/processes/Repensem22a/f/169/ Accessed 14 January 2019.
56. Taula Eix Pere Iv, http://eixpereiv.org/estudi-22/ Accessed 14 January 2019.
57. @ Barcelona, http://www.22barcelona.com Accessed 14 January 2019.