Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Assessing urban quality: a proposal for a MCDA evaluation framework

  • S.I.: MCDM-SD
  • Published:
Annals of Operations Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The paper focuses on the assessment of urban design quality and sustainable urban spaces. In particular, the study is concentrated on the evaluation of urban quality provided by a good design of open spaces, including green areas, walkable areas and squares. In fact, despite the advancement of research during the past two decades and empirical evidence about the relationship among quality of life, quality of open spaces and urban sustainability, there is still a lack of studies on urban quality assessment. This paper brings forward a multidimensional methodology for assessing the quality of open spaces. More precisely, the contribution of this research is the proposal of a multidimensional and multi-methodological framework for assigning a numerical score to the quality of open spaces. The Multi-Attribute Value Theory has been used for addressing the problem under investigation with the aim of defining a synthetic index for the measurement of the urban quality of open spaces on the basis of different attributes, namely (a) accessibility; (b) liveability; (c) vitality and (d) identity. The methodology has been applied on a recently renovated district in the city of Milan, Italy. The proposed multi-methodological framework provides a robust basis for running different kind of analysis and for supporting policy and investment decisions both in the private and in the public sector.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Angilella, S., Bottero, M., Corrente, S., Ferretti, V. Greco, Lami, S., & Lami, I. (2016). Non additive robust ordinal regression for urban and territorial planning: An application for siting an urban waste landfill. Annals of Operations Research, 245(1), 427–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beinat, E. (1997). Value functions for environmental management. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Belton, V., & Stewart, T. J. (2002). Multiple criteria decision analysis: An integrated approach. Boston: Kluwer Academic Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bosselman, P. (2008). Urban transformation. Understanding cities design and form. Washington: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bottero, M. (2011). Assessing the economic aspects of landscape. In C. Cassatella & A. Peano (Eds.), Landscape indicators. Assessing and monitoring landscape quality (pp. 167–192). Dordrecht: Springer.

  • Bottero, M., Ferretti V., Figueira J., Greco S., & Roy, B. (2015b), Dealing with a multiple criteria environmental problem with interaction effects between criteria through an extension of the Electre III method. European Journal of Operational Research, 245(3), 837–850.

  • Bottero, M., Ferretti, V., & Mondini, G. (2015a). How to support strategic decisions in territorial transformation processes. International Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Information Systems, 6(4), 40–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CABE. (2001). The value of urban design. London: Thomas Telford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Capolongo, S., Battistella, A., Buffoli, M., & Oppio, A. (2011). Healthy design for sustainable communities. Annali di igiene: medicina preventiva e di comunità, 23(1), 43–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carmona, M., Heath, T., Oc, T., & Tiesdell, S. (2001). Public places–urban spaces: A guide to urban design. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carmona, M., De Magalhães, C., & Edwards, M. (2002). Stakeholder views on value and urban design. Journal of Urban Design, 7(2), 145–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, D. W., & Larkham, P. J. (1999). Urban design, urban quality and the quality of life: Reviewing the department of the environment’s urban design campaign. Journal of Urban Design, 4, 211–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corrente, S., Greco, S., & Slowinski, R. (2012). Multiple criteria hierarchy process in robust ordinal regression. Decision Support Systems, 53(3), 660–674.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daly, H. E., & Cobb, J. B. (1989). For the common good: Redirecting the economy toward community, the environment, and a sustainable future. Boston: Beacon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, W., & Hutton Barron, F. (1994). SMARTS and SMARTER: Improved simple methods for multiattribute utility measurement. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 60(3), 306–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, W., Von Winterfeldt, D., & Moody, D. L. (1988). Simplicity in decision analysis: An example and discussion. In D. Bell, H. Raiffa, & A. Tversky (Eds.), Decision making: Descriptive, normative and prescriptive interactions (pp. 443–464). Cambridge: Cambridge Univesrity Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gehl, J. (2001). New city spaces. Copenhagen: Danish Architectural Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gehl, J. (2010). Cities for peoples. London: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greco, S., Kadzinski, M., & Slowinski, R. (2012). Extreme ranking analysis in robust ordinal regression. Omega, 40(4), 488–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hancock, T., & Duhl, L. (1986). Healthy cities: Promoting health in the urban context. Copenaghen: WHO Regional Office Europe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, J. (1961). The death and life of great American cities. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keeney, R. L. (1992). Value focused thinking. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa, H. (1976). Decisions with multiple objectives: Preferences and value trade-offs. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lahdelma, R., Hokkanen, J., & Salminen, H. P. (1998). SMAA—stochastic multiobjective acceptability analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 106(1), 137–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, K. (1960). The image of the city. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manganelli, B. (2017). A proposal for a synopsis in real estate appraisal between the italian doctrine and international valuation standards. Valori e Valutazioni, 18, 9–16.

  • Mondini, G. (2017). Integrated assessment for the management of new social challenges. Valori e Valutazioni, 17, 15–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montibeller, G., & Franco, A. (2007). Decision and risk analysis for the evaluation of strategic options. In F. A. O’Brien & R. G. Dyson (Eds.), Supporting strategy: Frameworks, methods and models. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Munda, G. (1995). Multicriteria evaluation in a fuzzy environment. Theory and applications in ecological economics. Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oppio, A., Bottero, M., Giordano, G., & Arcidiacono, A. (2016). A multi-methodological evaluation approach for assessing the impact of neighbourhood quality on public health. Epidemiologia e Prevenzione, 40(3–4), 249–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paolillo, P. L. (2010). Sistemi informativi e costruzione del piano. Rimini: Maggioli.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowely, A. (1998). Private property decision-makers and the quality of urban design. Journal of Urban Design, 3(2), 151–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sepe, M., Martone, A., & Micheletti, S. (2015). The people oriented approach to public spaces: The case of Adelaide. Urbanistica Informazioni, 261, 130–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, T., Nelischer, M., & Perkins, N. (1997). Quality of an urban community: A framework for under-standing the relationship between quality and physical form. Landscape and Urban Planning, 39, 229–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Southworth, M. (2003). Measuring the liveable city. Built Environment, 29(4), 343–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tiesdell, S., Oc, T., & Heat, T. (1996). Revitalizing historic urban quarters. London: Butterworth-Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Herwijnen, M. (1999). Spatial decision support for environmental management. Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit.

  • Van Kamp, I., Leidelmeijer, K., Marsman, G., & De Hollander, A. (2003). Urban environmental quality and human well-being. Towards a conceptual framework and demarcation of concepts; a literature study. Landscape and Urban Planning, 65, 5–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitehead, M., & Dahlgren, G. (1991). What can be done about inequalities in health? The Lancet, 338, 1059–1063.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. Oppio.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Oppio, A., Bottero, M. & Arcidiacono, A. Assessing urban quality: a proposal for a MCDA evaluation framework. Ann Oper Res 312, 1427–1444 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-017-2738-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-017-2738-2

Keywords

Navigation