Governance and Urban Development Processes: Evaluating the Influence of Stakeholders Through a Multi-criteria Approach—The Case Study of Trieste

  • Mauro CrescenzoEmail author
  • Marta Bottero
  • Mauro Berta
  • Valentina Ferretti
Conference paper
Part of the Green Energy and Technology book series (GREEN)


The proposed study focuses on the investigation of the role of evaluation approaches in the governance of urban-regeneration operations with particular reference to the Multicriteria Analysis methods (Figueira et al. in Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys. Springer, New York, 2005). There is, in fact, a strong need to take into account the various aspects involved in regeneration processes and programs, in order to contrast social decline, increase the inhabitants’ quality of life, enhance the cultural resources, valorize buildings and public spaces, protect the environmental system, stimulate economic development and so on. In particular, this paper considers the case of Cittavecchia, the historic centre of Trieste, where new investments are required due to several past recovery plans that left various problems unsolved, causing identity and trust issues. This study shares the framework with a wider research project where three regeneration scenarios for Cittavecchia have been evaluated and compared through a multicriteria approach (Crescenzo and De Matteis in Ri-centro: valutazione di scenari di riqualificazione urbana per il centro storico di Trieste attraverso l’Analisi Multicriteri. MS thesis, Politecnico di Torino, 2016) based on the Multi-Attribute Value Theory (MAVT) (Keeney and Raiffa in Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and values trade-offs. Wiley, New York, 1976). MAVT enables the evaluation of the proposed alternatives and the identification of a successful network of planning and design strategies, thanks to its flexible framework that better simplifies, structures and sorts the existing fragmentation. MAVT is useful to support complex development processes because it considers multiple points of view, from the local communities’ needs, to governance and political ones. In particular, this paper is focused on the examination of the influence of socio-political aspects on decision-making processes, illustrating the calculation of the Coalition Index: an indicator that has been developed through the application of the NAIADE technique (Munda in Eur J Oper Res 158:662–677, 2004). This index makes it possible to consider the various actors’ opinions and to investigate the strength of the coalitions among the stakeholders involved in the transformation. Furthermore this method enables, with the contribution of local experts, the identification of the influence of stakeholders on the performance of the results and on the overall procedure, aiding decision makers to properly evaluate consequences and priorities, thus enhancing the transparency of the whole procedure. This study is a starting point for the evaluation of complex urban regeneration processes thanks to the ability of the proposed method to influence governance and urban planning procedures and even to adapt its framework to changes of conditions, objectives, criteria and needs.


Stakeholders analysis NAIADE Urban planning Weight assessment MAVT 



The present paper, for which is responsible Mauro Crescenzo with the contribution of Marta Bottero, Mauro Berta and Valentina Ferretti, is the result of further research and developments of the methods that have been proposed in the master’s thesis of Mauro Crescenzo and Sara De Matteis at Politecnico di Torino, supervised by Marta Carla Bottero, Mauro Berta and Valentina Ferretti.


  1. Arienzo, A. (2013). La governance. Roma: Ediesse.Google Scholar
  2. Barbier, E. B. (1987). The concept of sustainable economic development. Environmental Conservation, 14(2), 101–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berta, M., Bottero, M., & Ferretti, V. (2016). 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 & Design, 23, 1–25.Google Scholar
  4. Bottero, M., Armando, A., Bonino, V., Frassoldati, F., Bruno, E., & Federighi, V. (2016). A Hybrid evaluation approach for designing complex urban scenarios: Application for the T.I.T. area (China). Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 23, 931–935.Google Scholar
  5. Bottero, M., & Mondini, G. (Eds.). (2009). Valutazione e sostenibilità. Piani, programmi, progetti (p. 29). Turin: Celid.Google Scholar
  6. Bourne, L., & Walke, D. (2008). Project relationship management and the stakeholder circle. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 1, 125–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Crescenzo, M., Bottero, M., & Buzzacchi, L. (2017). Public and private interests in urban regeneration programs: The case study of Trieste historic centre. In G. Osvaldo (Ed.), Computational science and its applications—ICCSA 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Vol. 10406). Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  8. Crescenzo, M., & De Matteis, S. (2016). Ri-centro: valutazione di scenari di riqualificazione urbana per il centro storico di Trieste attraverso l’Analisi Multicriteri. MS thesis, Politecnico di Torino.Google Scholar
  9. Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  10. De Montis, A., De Toro, P., Droste-Franke, B., Omann, I., & Stagl, S. (2005). Assessing the quality of different MCDA methods. In G. Michael, L. Spash Clive, & S. Sigrid (Eds.), Alternatives for Environmental Valuation (pp. 99–133). Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Dente, B. (2014). Understanding policy decisions. New York: Springer, Polimi Springer Briefs.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Etxano, I., Garmendia, E., Pascual, U., Hoyos, D., Díez, M. A., Cadiñanos, J. A., et al. (2012). Towards an integrated and participatory assessment approach for European Natura 2000 sites. BC3 Working paper series. Accessed at: October 21, 2016, from
  13. Ferretti, V. (2012). Verso la valutazione integrata di scenari strategici in ambito spaziale. I modelli MC-SDSS (p. 65). Turin: Celid.Google Scholar
  14. Figueira, J., et al. (Eds.). (2005). Multiple criteria decision analysis: State of the art surveys. New York: Springer.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. Funtowicz, S. O., & Ravetz, J. R. (1992). The good, the true and the post-modern. Futures, 24(10), 963–976.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gerber, J.-F., Rodríguez-Labajos, B., Yánez, I., Branco, V., & Roman, P. (2012). Guide to multicriteria evaluation for environmental justice organisations. EJOLT Report No. 8.Google Scholar
  17. Gill, L., Lange, E., Morgan, E., & Romano, D. (2013). An analysis of usage of different types of visualisation media within a collaborative planning workshop environment. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 40(4), 742–754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. JRC—Ispra site. (1996). NAIADE manual and tutorial, version 1.0. ENG. Ispra: Joint Research Centre of the European Commission—Ispra site.Google Scholar
  19. Kallis, G., et al. (2006). Participatory methods for water resource planning. Environment Planning Part C, 24(2), 235–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa, H. (1976). Decisions with multiple objectives: Preferences and values trade-offs. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  21. Maggi, P., Merlatti, R., & Petrucci, G. (Eds.). (2009). Sotto Trieste. Percorsi nella città tra storia e archeologia. Opicina, Trieste: Tipografia Villaggio del Fanciullo.Google Scholar
  22. Mayntz, R. (1999). La teoria della governance: sfide e prospettive. Rivista Italiana di Scienza Politica, 29(1), 3–22.Google Scholar
  23. Morselli, C. (Ed.). (2007). Trieste antica. Lo scavo di Crosada. Editreg: Trieste.Google Scholar
  24. Munda, G. (1995). Multicriteria evaluation in a fuzzy environment: Theory and applications in ecological economics. Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Munda, G. (2004). Social multi-criteria evaluation: Methodological foundations and operational consequences. European Journal of Operational Research, 158, 662–677.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Munda, G. (2008). Social multi-criteria evaluation for a sustainable economy. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mondini, G., Bottero, M., & Ferretti, V. (2014). Tecniche valutative di supporto alla decisione: le Analisi Multicriteri. In R. Riccardo (Ed.), Manuale di Estimo. Valutazioni Economiche ed esercizio della professione (pp. 227–266). Novara: De Agostini—UTET.Google Scholar
  28. Ombuen, S. (2006). Governance e Government. In P. Stanghellini, V. Stefano, & P. Donatella (Eds.), Rapporto Dal Territorio 2005 (pp. 41–43). Roma: Inu Edizioni.Google Scholar
  29. Robinson, F., Shaw, K., & Davidson, G. (2005). On the side of the angels: Community involvement in the governance of neighbourhood renewal. Local Economy, 20(1), 13–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Salgado, P., Quintana, C. S., Pereira, A. G., del Moral Ituarte, L., & Mateos, B. P. (2009). Participative multi-criteria analysis for the evaluation of water governance alternatives: A case in the Costa del Sol (Malaga). Ecological Economics, 68, 990–1005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Scuderi, A., & Sturiale, L. (2016). Multi-criteria evaluation model to face phytosanitary emergencies: The case of citrus fruits farming in Italy. Agricultural Economics—Czech, 62, 205–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Stratigea, A., & Papadopoulou, C. A. (2013). Multicriteria evaluation in spatial planning: A participatory methodological approach. Accessed at: October 10, 2015, from
  33. Wenzel, V. (2004). An epistemic approach applied for integrated water quantity and quality problems—Case study of Berlin. Bridging Scales and Epistemologies: Proceedings of Linking Local Knowledge and Global Science in Multi-Scale Assessments, 17–20 March 2004. Alexandria, Millennium Ecosystem Assessment.Google Scholar
  34. Yang, X. (2014). An investigation of stakeholder analysis in urban development projects: Empirical or rationalistic perspectives. International Journal of Project Management, 32(5), 838–849.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mauro Crescenzo
    • 1
    Email author
  • Marta Bottero
    • 2
  • Mauro Berta
    • 3
  • Valentina Ferretti
    • 4
  1. 1.ArchitectTriesteItaly
  2. 2.Department of Regional and Urban Studies and PlanningPolitecnico di TorinoTurinItaly
  3. 3.Department of Architecture and DesignPolitecnico di TorinoTurinItaly
  4. 4.Department of ManagementLondon School of Economics and Political ScienceLondonUK

Personalised recommendations