Advertisement

Web Potential to Promote Equity Planning Practices

  • Maria Giovanna Altieri
  • Francesco Rotondo
  • Carmelo Maria Torre
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8581)

Abstract

The concept of Urban Services, like the product between supply and demand in a city, dominates, although in an indirect way, urban planning. Nowadays we need to organize planning processes based on a study of actual needs, from which come down services to promote in urban center. It’s like a “matriosca” scheme: the first part, the bigger, is the city, and then we have a lot of subsystems connected together, who are Government, citizens, needs and services. This process comes down from the city’s change, that before the Modern Era was just a geographical place, where the walls were the limits. Today the city is the union between the geographical place and citizens, where social and urban polices are the basis for the economic, social and environmental growth. In the case study, concerning an urban regeneration plan in the city of Bari in Southern Italy, these aspects have been analyzed and practiced. It shows the integration between public participation and use of ICT, for its promotion.

Keywords

Community Impact Evaluation Web Participation Social Learning 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Marchi, G., Lenti, L.: La valutazione nei processi di piano – Strumenti di trasformazione urbana. Franco Angeli editore, Milan (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cellamare, C.: Progettualità dell’agire urbano. Processi e pratiche urbane. Carocci, Rome (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Caperna, A.: Elementi di ICT nella pianificazione e progettazione urbana. DIPSU, University of Rome 3 (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rotondo, F., Selicato, F.: ICT to evaluate participation in urban planning: remarks from a case study. In: Murgante, B., Gervasi, O., Misra, S., Nedjah, N., Rocha, A.M.A.C., Taniar, D., Apduhan, B.O. (eds.) ICCSA 2012, Part I. LNCS, vol. 7333, pp. 545–560. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Coleman, S., Gøtze, J.: Bowling Together: Online Public Engagement in Policy Deliberation. Hansard Society, London (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    De Cindio, D.: Guidelines for Designing Deliberative Digital Habitats: Learning from e-Participation for Open Data Initiatives. The Journal of community informatics 8(2) (2012)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Orlando, M.: Il ruolo dei sistemi informativi territoriali nel processo di recupero dei centri storici. Franco Angeli Editore Milan (2008)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fistola, R., La Rocca, R.A.: New technologies for Sustainable Energy in Smart City, the WET Theory. TeMa Journal of Land Use Mobility and Environment, 29–42 (2014)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nathaniel Lichfield, The Community Impact Evaluation (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fusco, G.L.: Sustainability, creativity, resilience: Toward new development strategies of port areas through evaluation processes. International Journal of Sustainable Development 13(1-2), 161–184 (2010)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ricoeur, P.: Lezioni. La persona. Morcellina, Brescia (1997)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bill Cooke, Uma Kothari Partecipation: The new Tiranny (2001)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Roy, B.: Classement et choix en présence de points de vue multiples (la méthode ELECTRE). La Revue d’Informatique et de Recherche Opérationelle (RIRO) 8, 57–75 (1968)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Munda, G.: Multicriteria Evaluation in a Fuzzy Environment. Physica, Heidelberg (1995)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maria Giovanna Altieri
    • 1
  • Francesco Rotondo
    • 1
  • Carmelo Maria Torre
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Civil Engineering and ArchitecturePolytechnic of BariBariItaly

Personalised recommendations