Quality of Life in Urban Landscapes

The concept of sustainability appears simple but is difficult to define. It can be at once an idea, a lifestyle, a production mode, or a way of “consuming”. As John Huckle writes, “…Like liberty, justice and democracy, sustainability has no single and agreed meaning. It takes on different meaning within different political ideologies and programmes underpinned by different kind of knowledge, values and philosophy” (Huchle 1996).

As mentioned in Chap. 1, the debate about the sustainable city and the quality of life of city inhabitants is like a large arena where heterogeneous approaches and contributions from different sectors meet, without ever converging on a common vision. Consequently, it is difficult to identify effective models to assess urban policies, plans, and projects to address the challenge of sustainability. The sectoral cultural approach to themes of urban sustainability and improving the quality of life in cities has extended from scientific research to plans and projects for transformation. A comparison of different possible project alternatives and monitoring of the results of policies and plans over time is often lacking, as well as an open dialogue between researchers and political and social actors (Bertuglia et al. 2004).

The subject of sustainability requires the integration of various areas of disciplinary knowledge and in particular, knowledge related to the overall management and dynamics of ecological and social systems. Traditionally, the different disciplines have addressed the theme of sustainability by developing mathematical models and using indicators to measure the different aspects. However, not all of these aspects can be measured in quantitative terms (Bell and Morse 2008; Pollesch and Dale 2015).

Despite the prolonged, unbridled process of urbanization that has concentrated 53% of the world’s population and more than 73% of the European population in cities, the confirmation of an Urban Agenda on the international level is still struggling to take off. As has been highlighted many times, this disappointing result stands in open contrast to the many initiatives assumed in recent decades by the United Nations and the European Commission, so that national governments have almost worked alone and in a convergent way over this period to maintain control of their respective urban policies (Boni 2016).

The quality of European landscapes and the quality of life of city inhabitants are closely related to economic, social, and cultural aspects that are manifest in time and space. This connection, interacting with the local economy, responds to the recreational, emotional, and spiritual needs and the sense of identity of the community, as the Mercer survey and Eurobarometer have highlighted. If our cities are unsustainable, as often happens, the urban landscape could/should become the litmus paper that allows the state of places to be synthetically interpreted and supports the delineation of indications to solve the problems (Benson and Roe 2007). When following this road, it is necessary to consider the technical aspects of sustainability policies—such as energy savings, recycling, environmental management, etc.—and non-technical aspects such as social behaviours and spatial organization. All of these aspects together, in addition to the way in which they interact, contribute to determining the characteristics of a given urban landscape and the quality of life of city inhabitants. The continuous “feedback” between sustainability and quality of the urban landscape and their interaction with the quality of life of city inhabitants have been the subject of numerous studies and reflections in the contemporary scientific panorama. In this respect, the 2010 book by Claudia Dinep and Kristin Schwab Sustainable Site Design Criteria, Process, and Case Studies for Integrating Site and Region in Landscape Design highlights how “…urban sustainability is fundamentally the sustainability of the urban landscape as a whole”. In a 2004 essay, MacKendrick and Parkins maintained that the sustainability of the urban landscape could be defined as the capacity of a landscape system to generate and maintain conditions for a safe, harmonious, and adequate environment of life that respects ecosystems (MacKendrick and Parkins 2004).

Landscape means an area, as perceived by people, whose character is the result of the action and interaction of natural and/or human factors. Unfortunately, this definition hides different criticalities in relation to landscape analyses. In this perspective, landscape ecology should begin to consider ownership types, labour relations, and social perceptions of quality of life, moving towards a concept that can be defined as social ecological green spaces (SEGS). The need for a change fits well with the Adriatic City, which is characterized by a highly fragmented and heterogeneous landscape. First attempts of research show that people’s perception is strictly related to thermal conditions which are strictly related to elements capable of reducing outdoor temperature such as green areas and green canopies. Multidisciplinary approach will help to characterize what could be defined as SEGS, relating the aesthetic, health, and emotional components of the urban quality of life to the shape, distribution, and species composition of green areas.

When we think about the concept of form, which the traditional city heralds, we commonly think about a finite design, a compact, organized space composed of elements and components that over time have generated interactions and defined social structures and lifestyles. New urban forms instead go beyond the concept of form intended as “finiteness” (Benevolo 2011). In fact, the modern city expands over the territory, and its borders are pushed beyond the “physical confines” and administrative limits of the consolidated settlement structure.

“Cities are a product of time. They are the molds in which men’s lifetimes have cooled and congealed, giving lasting shape, by way of art, to moments that would otherwise vanish with the living and leave no means of renewal or wider participation behind them

” (

Lewis Mumford 1938)

“Urban metabolism is […] the sum total of the technical and socio-economic processes that occur in cities, resulting in growth, production of energy, and elimination of waste”. (Kennedy et al. 2007)

It is now commonly accepted that urban degradation is one of the aspects that most affect the quality of life and, more generally, the quality of the urban landscape. It is very difficult to say with certainty whether the phenomenon of degradation in urban areas is an independent phenomenon or whether it is closely linked to other external factors, such as the decline in average per-capita income levels, the crisis in economic-productive sectors, the ineffectiveness of urban plans and policies, or even in relation to specific sectoral policies.

The concept of quality of life has changed in both significance and signifiers in recent years. Global, national, or regional problems have time and time again influenced the quality of life and well-being (Veleardi 2007). A greater knowledge of environmental issues and/or a greater sensitivity regarding certain social issues has led to the consideration of additional elements that can contribute to increasing the quality of life. Following the realization that economic growth is unsustainable (Meadows et al. 1972; IUSN, UNWP, WWF 1980), the concept of quality of life has become strongly linked to that of sustainable growth. In the long term, current needs cannot ignore the effect that satisfaction of them can have on future generations (WCED 1987: Brundtland Report).

In common sense, there is already a widespread awareness that the quality expressed by a city corresponds to a sum of its intrinsic values. These can be grouped synthetically into the presence of memories and pre-existing history, the concentration of economic fluxes, the concentration of political and administrative powers, the variety of educational opportunities, the presence of areas for free time and recreation, and the level of guaranteed safety. Following an increase in the fluxes—both inflow and outflow—that involve the urban environment on a daily basis, one of the factors that profoundly affects the sense of quality perceived by citizens and periodic or occasional users of the urban environment is the degree of ease in using and crossing the city with different types of mobility. Accessibility can therefore be defined as "the ease in meeting one's needs in locations distributed over space for a subject located in a given area" (Cascetta et al. 2013), and it is playing an increasingly important role in defining the image that the city projects to the external world. Based on these premises, it is clear that the accessibility a city offers its users through its forms, urban furniture, and the system of public transport can directly impact the perception of quality and the sense of well-being for individuals that live in and cross the urban environment (Rode and Floater 2014).

Social sustainability has only occasionally been examined in urban studies. In sociology and economics, social concepts (particularly “social capital”) are discussed in reference to actual civic participation, community empowerment, social interactions, and the development of a “sense of community” among residents (Putnam 2000; Mitlin and Satterthwaite 1996). This may be one of the leading reasons for uncertainty concerning social indicators here and in other studies.

The rapid growth of urban areas seen in recent decades has led those dedicated to protecting biodiversity to focus on the problem of the possible effects of urbanization on protected areas (Güneralp and Seto 2013). Created to protect territories in which anthropic pressure was absent or at least modest, protected areas have always been considered, along a scale of attention to the needs of biodiversity, as the polar opposite of urban areas and in some way substantially incompatible with them. In reality, this view of two separate worlds, beyond being irreconcilable, reached a crisis when expanding urban areas began to approach protected areas ever more closely. At the same time, often heightened value is recognized in biodiversity connected to traditional anthropic activities for which, in some way, protected areas reached the urban areas (Trzyna 2014).

Quality of life in urban areas is influenced by multiple factors such as home quality, availability of means of transport, water quality, solid and liquid waste disposal services, communication routes, public transport, green areas, availability of pubs and leisure spaces, etc. All these factors can impact not only the quality of life but also the health status of people living in these areas.Taking into account these considerations, the paper suggests water consumption, water quality, and air quality - both outdoor and indoor - as useful indicators to ensure the protection and promotion of human health.

The methodology adopted to classify and represent natural hazards and resources influencing the quality of land and of life is briefly reported.It aims to make as schematic and simple as possible the classification procedure, based upon available thematic maps, adopting only three levels of hazard (each subdivided into two sub-levels, depending upon the possibility to reclaim or recover the area) and two levels of resources (each subdivided into two sub-levels according to its exploitability).The proposed representation aims at simplifying the interpretation of the resulting map, where both the hazard and resources levels are displayed using full colors and hatchings, respectively.

“Sustainable development” can be defined as the basic principle of environmental rights (Fracchia 2010). Appearing for the first time in 1987 in the report “Our Common Future”, it is defined as development that “…meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. Since this definition is based on needs, which are naturally changeable and destined to expand throughout space and time, sustainability, in fact, does not only apply to the environmental/ecological level but also to the economic and social levels. This aspect has certainly contributed to moving from an idea of sustainability as “need for” to one of “right to” (Gilli 2010).

Acting amid uncertainty is a perennial situation in territorial planning, having always dealt with the inevitable relativity of assessments and choices regarding settlement transformations (Camagni and Lombardo 1999). Today, however, the complexity of territorial government when facing insecurity on different scales characterizes the historical period in which we live and requires a rethinking of the ways of carrying out territorial government activities that must deal with a continuous evolution situation. This not only requires rapidity and a capacity for updating and deciding between different options but also the willingness to address a multitude of new actors that have recently entered the decision-making process.

In recent decades, the city and the broader concept of the territory have experienced a metamorphosis: from usable physical resources and controllable, designable space to a new interpretation of the urban system. This system is complex, so the inadequacy of linear planning becomes clear when faced with an increasingly strong need for multiple intelligible responses. The ideal of the city as a “single element” has been substituted by the concept of “system city”, going beyond the model of a city that can be decomposed and simplified to attain an interpretation of the system as a “complex unit”.

The expectations and desires of populations regarding the quality of their living environment place them in a strategic position to plan urban choices in their territory. It is extremely important that actions to protect and enhance the landscape and to improve the quality of life in urban areas fall within an overall strategy of local development that identifies the priorities for intervention and the consequent actions to perform with the community’s contribution.

The economic/financial recession that has affected the cities and economy of the west is forcing a rethinking about the current model of development and planning a return to governance policies based on enhancing territorial, local, and urban capital. It is not possible for this to occur in terms of further growth, accumulation, and the consumption of scarce resources. Instead, it is necessary to design polycentric, denser cities, regulating the reuse of land to a multifunctional dimension, reconfiguring spaces, and producing more resilient, adaptive, and quality urban fabrics. Cities, in that they are social organizations created to be functional for humans’ many needs, could become the space in which citizens find answers to their demands for well-being and quality of life. In this sense, cities have found it necessary to address some substantial questions in new and creative ways. These questions relate to:Waste reduction and a more efficient use of resources (human capital, land, landscape worth, environmental quality, energy)Conservation and the hydrogeological balance of the landGreater sobriety and effectiveness in urban planningReorganization of material and immaterial infrastructure networksInvolving a larger number of subjects and new players in transformation and regeneration processesBuilding ethics of collective goods to ensure real sustainability in enhancement processes and the use of these goods to block their irreversible consumptionRedefining behaviours, habits, and lifestyles of inhabitants and operators imprinted with a more conscious, responsible use of their territory.

In Japanese poetry, haikus are characterized by a precise technique for their composition. These guidelines/rules define a method to generate synthetic images of reality evoked by places and figures in nature. The choice of synthesis and attachment to the state of things are also at the basis of the QLandQLife project. The analogy is obviously a little forced, but it could, however, appear like a revelation reading Bashō’s precise haiku, which echoes some keywords in the QLandQLife research: living, comfort, thermal hygrometric comfort. The use of the haiku as an epigraph to open this text is therefore a strategy to communicate the project, such that in the stupor due to the subversion of the language, the power of the image arrives strong and clear (Fig. 22.1).

This experimentation deals with the Adriatic city and the city of Ancona in particular, a city of about 100,000 inhabitants situated along the Adriatic coast in the Marche Region. This choice is related to the deep knowledge that the research group has of the territory and its landscape, which facilitated the collection of data and the understanding of characteristic phenomena. This does not mean that the research results are applicable only to this specific urban context. What we propose is a means of interpreting the city based on morphology, which can act as an intermediary between many other European urban contexts and as a point to begin applying the tool, as well as a basis on which the forum activities may be developed.

As illustrated in Part III, the decision-support system (DSS) is composed of two parts:An evaluation system relying on a mathematical algorithm that simultaneously and contextually assesses different indicators (composed of multiple variables) that can be formally defined and represented. For brevity, we refer to this first part of the output as “Tool”.An interpretation and assessment system that relies on the active participation of local communities and “interested populations” (European Landscape Convention/ELC 2000) and uses indicators that cannot be formalized in a mathematical algorithm. For brevity, we refer to this second part of the output as “Forum”.

The changes in the market economy and social context that have been widely described in this volume form the background and reference for innovations introduced as much in participatory processes as in the practice of urban planning. If we place the relationship between environmental sustainability and quality of life of citizens at the focus of urban policies, it is necessary to address questions ranging from the reduction of waste and efficient use of resources to the conservation and hydrogeological balance of the land and from the reorganization of infrastructure and immaterial networks to the formation of an ethic of collective goods. This is to ensure real sustainability in processes of enhancing and using the goods, avoiding irreversible consumption. All of this forces the behaviour, habits, and lifestyles of inhabitants and operators to be redefined, imprinting them with a more conscious, responsible use of the territory, etc.

Dense cities are often perceived as universal models for urban transition to sustainability (Williams et al. 2000). Of course, there is a strong case for considering high urban density as a requisite for sustainability, if only because sustainability usually means making a better use of what is already there—for example, recycling the urban fabric and urban functions without going through phases of degraded neighbourhoods (Whitehead 2003). This is all well and good, but it should be accepted nevertheless that low urban density offers some advantages as far as sustainability is concerned. It reduces the concentration of nuisances and pollution and lowers the density of urban centres that are sometimes on the brink of congestion (Neuman 2015). Besides, climate policies introduce new arguments for low-density urbanizations. Green neighbourhoods planted with trees presenting a high water loss coefficient can lower the local temperature (Boutefeu 2007). In low-density areas, more square metres of roof per household are available than in high-density areas; thus, generalized photovoltaic roofs can be significant. Such facts compel us to cast an eye without prejudice on the very notion of sustainable city, which does not consider from the start that “sustainable” means “dense”.

Based on input provided by the QLandQLife research, this contribution reflects on the potential of the content and devices contained in Law no. 10/2013, with particular reference to the national urban green plan. The questions asked by the research and its results highlight the importance of working with the open space of the contemporary city to improve environmental comfort and well-being in urban areas. Broadly speaking, these themes seek a renewed relationship between urban planning and health in which urban open/green space is only one of the structural elements addressed to promote better lifestyles and widespread well-being. In this view, the potential of the national urban green plan is seen not just as an additional tool for the sector but as an opportunity to reconsider urban green and open space as a possible incubator of new principles, functions, and activities. Reinterpreting some content and objectives expressed legislatively as matters of design inherent in ordinary planning tools seems indispensable. First of all, this means reconsidering the role of urban green areas as a necessary performance standard capable of overcoming the quantitative standard that arose at the end of the 1960s. This new interpretational key is capable of anchoring the principles of experimentation in the QLandQLife model with an existing and still-developing disciplinary debate regarding urban health and well-being. It favours the role that urban green areas can play in renewing consolidated approaches and paths in the city’s governance tools according to a perspective that favours a healthy city and a reciprocal interest in health and urban planning.

In the West, the basis on which the main institutions of economic and social power, which until a few years ago were deemed to be very solid, have begun to waver dangerously. A climate of uncertainty and concern is spreading in public opinion and in scholarly circles which risks obstructing the search for interpretations and rigorous, convincing treatments to deal with a particularly negative international framework. According to Ulrich Beck (2009), the systemic crisis triggered by the failure of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. definitively immersed us in a “global capitalism of uncertainty” such that the climate we are experiencing is characterized by a widespread awareness that unmistakable changes are about to arrive. Their direction, however, is still unknown.

This chapter discusses an approach to assist participatory governance for the sustainability of urban landscapes. Its scope and focus are on the first stages of the policy process, which concentrate on the problem characterization and policy objectives (Turnpenny et al. 2015). Hence, the focus of this chapter is on a family of participatory methods that help citizens and other stakeholders, including policymakers and experts, to articulate and understand the different views on issues concerning urban landscape quality. Section “Articulating Different Perspectives on Urban Landscape Quality” introduces a theoretical framework, which explains why participation is needed for urban sustainability governance. Section “An Example: Repertory Grid Technique” explores the challenges for articulating and understanding different perspectives on urban landscape quality and presents the repertory grid technique as an example of a proper method. Section “Discussion and Conclusions” summarizes this chapter’s main argument and discusses the implications thereof for the overall purpose of this book, a decision-support system for quality of life issues in urban landscapes.

The purpose of this communication is to show the thoughts of the Heritage Urbanism approach in the context of the QLand QLife project. Revival and new life of heritage increase the quality of landscape and quality of life. The question arising is how to turn the heritage into an active and living one. How to make heritage, often perceived as a burden, a resource and a generator of development. The goal is to promote the hypothesis that heritage should not be viewed as a static object (dead capital) but as an active subject.

Emanation is the effect that any system has on its environment. Emanation is an emission that generates an act of emitting, causing something to flow forth.The concept of urban emanation is seen as the impact of the city system on its own environment. The design models are associative landscape, walkspace, soundscape and touristscape, all of them forming high quality of urban lifescape.The design mode of a city is the choreography of motion, visual illusions and soundscape anticipation. The aim is to create a paradigm that is independent of location, content, scale, time and technology. It presents a network of key terms and concepts. It takes into account the context and program, and the consequence is a quality lifescape.

This contribution presents a research approach based on experiential and environmental simulations to assess urban design projects and city plans. I argue that the combined use of both methods, in parallel or together with other modes of investigation, can foster the design and evaluation process while reducing the risk of failure, thus supporting decision-making processes. The research outcomes presented are based on applied research carried out at the “Fausto Curti” Urban Simulation Laboratory at the Polytechnic University of Milan.

The international attention for climate change has marked a turn for urban planning, and demands for a radical change of direction. It is necessary to adopt an active approach aiming to an ecological urban reform that identifies natural alterations of urban settlements and works for the restoration of natural balance. Assuming such an approach is an even more difficult challenge in urban areas, where urbanization processes frequently modified natural cycles, erasing the bonds with natural environment.Recognizing the importance of the water cycle for the life of urban ecosystems entails leaving water disposal methods aside and working hard to bring the hydrographical system of urbanized areas back to the surface, allowing the retrieval of the whole complex of ecosystem services related to environment mosaics in which water is present.The research is concerned with the eastern plain of Naples - originally a marshland, progressively urbanized for industrial purposes during the XIX and XX centuries, nowadays degraded after the closure of most of the factories - where environmental decline can be interpreted as an opportunity for testing water-centered strategies of landscape restoration and naturalizing in urban contexts.

With the closing of an era of new urbanization and unceasing building growth, architecture will continue to matter, since the built environment still has many problems to address. However, to be operational, sustainable planning needs to be based on a better environmental balance as well as on each territory’s distinctiveness. In terms of spatial organization, this should lead to proposals for interventions, which should be both strong with regard to the technical aspects and rooted in the social and cultural context.

In the early 1300s, Ambrogio Lorenzetti created two cycles of frescoes about “good and bad governance” in the city hall in Siena’s Piazza del Campo (Fig. 35.1). The effects of good governance on the city are used to illustrate the quality of life in a medieval city, show some construction aspects of the housing, and show the historical state of a splendid urban context in which people lived joyfully in a climate of happy social coexistence. This historical period ranged from 1287 to 1348, during which time the learned Governo dei Nove (three representatives for each third of the city chosen for a rotation of a few months) favoured the wide, episodic participation of citizens in government. This allowed for a period of peace and splendour cut short only by the arrival of the black plague, which marked the end of an extraordinary historical period.