How to Reinterpret an Alpine Eco-monster. Application of the Method of Choice Experiments for The Design of A Reuse Project

How to Reinterpret an Alpine Eco-monster. Application of the Method of Choice Experiments for The Design of A Reuse Project

Marta Bottero Antonio De Rossi Andrea Ponzetto Davide Viano 

Politecnico di Torino, Department of Regional and Urban Studies and Planning

Politecnico di Torino, Department of Architecture and Design

Page: 
260-272
|
DOI: 
https://doi.org/10.2495/SDP-V14-N3-260-272
Received: 
N/A
|
Accepted: 
N/A
|
Published: 
9 September 2019
| Citation

OPEN ACCESS

Abstract: 

This paper deals with the role of evaluation methods for supporting the design process of sustainable urban and territorial transformations. In particular, the article considers the technique of Choice Experiments (CE) and it proposes a real application of the method for driving the decision-making process related to the reuse project of an abandoned building located in the Italian Alps. The evaluation model is based on different attributes of the reuse project, both tangible and intangible, including internal organization, external areas, accommodation structures and cost. In the evaluation, a questionnaire has been developed for the investigation of the preferences of potential users with reference to alternative reuse scenarios. The results of the application allowed us to determine the importance of the different attributes for the definition of the reuse strategy as well as the economic value of the selected strategy. The study proposed in this paper represents an innovative context of application of the CE method, regarding the economic evaluation of architectural buildings and landscape. A second innovative ele- ment of the present research concerns the use of the Choice Experiments approach for supporting the design of alternative solutions for a complex decision making problem.

Keywords: 

Decision making, Strategic design, Adaptive reuse, Stated preferences, Regeneration processes, Mountain

  References

[1] Bottero, M. & Mondini, G., Assessing socio-economic sustainability of urban regeneration programs: An integrated approach. Smart and Sustainable Planning for Cities and Regions, pp. 165–184, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44899-2_10

[2] Tyler, P., Warnock, C., Provins A. & Lanz, B., Valuing the benefits of urban regeneration. Urban studies, 50(1), pp. 169–190, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098012452321

[3] Lancaster, K.J., A new approach to Consumer Theory. The Journal of Political Economy, 74(2), pp. 132–157, 1966. https://doi.org/10.1086/259131

[4] Adamowicz, W., Boxall, P. & Williams, M., Stated preference approaches for measuring passive use values. Choice experiments and contingent valuation. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 80(1), pp. 64–75, 1998. https://doi.org/10.2307/3180269

[5] Alvarez-Farizo, B. & Hanley, N., Using conjoint analysis to quantify public preferences over the environmental impacts of wind farms. An example from Spain. Energy Policy, 30(2), pp. 107–116, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0301-4215(01)00063-5

[6] Tagliaferro, C., Longo, A. & Van Eetvelde, V., Landscape economic valuation by integrating landscape ecology into landscape economics. Environmental Science & Policy, 32, pp. 26–36, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2012.12.001

[7] European Commission, Guide to Cost Benefit Analysis for investment projects, DG Regional and Urban Policy, European Commission: Brussel, 2015.

[8] Louviere, J.J., Flynn, T.N. & Carson, R.T., Discrete Choice Experiments are not Conjoint Analysis. Journal of Choice Modelling, 3(3), pp. 57–72, 2010. https://doi. org/10.1016/s1755-5345(13)70014-9

[9] McFadden, D., The choice theory approach to market research. Marketing Science, 5(4), pp. 275–279, 1986. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.5.4.275

[10] Rosato,. P. & Rotaris, L., La scarsa diffusione delle coperture verdi in Italia: bassa disponibilità a pagare o poca informazione? Valori e Valutazioni, 13, pp. 57–66, 2014.

[11] Rambonilaza, M., & Dachary-Bernard, J., Land-use planning and public preferences: What can we learn from choice experiment method. Landscape and Urban Planning, 83(4), pp. 318–326, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.05.013

[12] Sayadi, S., Gonzalez-Roa, M.C. & Calatrava Requena, J., Ranking versus scale rating in conjoint analysis: Evaluating landscapes in mountainous regions in southeastern Spain. Ecological Economics, 55(4), pp. 539–550, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ecolecon.2004.12.010

[13] De Rossi. A., Architettura alpina moderna in Piemonte e Valle d’Aosta, Umberto Allemandi & C.: Torino, 2005.

[14] De Rossi & A., Dini,. R., Architettura alpina contemporanea, Umberto Priuli & Verlucca: Scarmagno, 2012.

[15] Manganelli, B., Real Estate Investing. Market Analysis, Valuation Techniques And Risk Assessment, Springer: Berlin, 2015.

[16] Adelman, S., Orthogonal main effects plans for asymmetrical experiments. Technometrics, 4(1), pp. 21–46, 1962. https://doi.org/10.2307/1266170

[17] Haneman W.M., Discrete/Continuous models of consumer demand. Econometrica, 52(3), pp. 541–561, 1984. https://doi.org/10.2307/1913464

[18] Oppio A. & Bottero M., Conflicting values in designing adaptive reuse for cultural heritage. A case study of social multicriteria evaluation. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 10406 LNCS, pp. 607–623, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62398-6_43

[19] Misirlisoy, D. & Gunce, K., Assessment of the adaptive reuse of castles as museums: Case of Cyprus. International Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning, 11(2), pp. 147–159, 2016. https://doi.org/10.2495/sdp-v11-n2-147-159

[20] Tsoukias, A., Aiding to decide and evaluation: challenges for the future. Valori e Valutazioni, 13, pp. 33–36, 2014.

[21] Figueira, J., Greco, S. & Erghott, M. (eds), Multicriteria Decision Aiding, State of the Art Survey, Springer: Berlin, 2005.

[22] Bottero, M., A multi-methodological approach for assessing sustainability of urban projects. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 26(1), pp. 138–154, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1108/meq-06-2014-0088

[23] Sala, S., Ciuffo, B. & Nijkamp, P., A systemic framework for sustainability assessment. Ecological Economics, 119, pp. 314–325, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ecolecon.2015.09.015

[24] 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. Integrated Evaluation for the Management of Contemporary Cities, pp. 285–295, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78271-3_23

[25] Becchio, C., Bottero, M.C., Corgnati, S.P. & Dell’Anna, F., Decision making for sustainable urban energy planning: an integrated evaluation framework of alternative solutions for a NZED (Net Zero-Energy District) in Turin. Land Use Policy, 78, pp. 803–817, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.06.048

[26] Yung, E.H.K. & Chan, E.H.W., Implementation challenges to the adaptive reuse of heritage buildings: Towards the goals of sustainable, low carbon cities. Habitat International, 36(3), pp. 352–361, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2011.11.001

[27] Bottero, M., Bravi, M., Dell’Anna, F. & Mondini, G., Valuing building energy efficient through Hedonic Prices Method: are spatial effects relevant? Valori e Valutazioni, 21, pp. 27–40, 2018.

[28] Brunetta, G., Salizzoni, E., Bottero, M., Monaco, R. & Assumma, V., Measuring resilience for territorial enhancement: An experimentation in Trentino. Valori e Valutazioni, 20, pp. 69–78, 2018.