Vol. 86 Suppl. 1, 2025
Original Articles - Urban, Land, Environmental Appraisal and Economics

Wasted roadscapes regeneration within Geodesign framework: a collaborative decision-making experience in Bacoli (Italy

PDF
  • Maria Somma,
  • Giuliano Poli,
  • Maria Cerreta
Maria Somma
Department of Architecture, University of Naples Federico II, Italy
Giuliano Poli
Department of Architecture, University of Naples Federico II, Italy
Maria Cerreta
Department of Architecture, University of Naples Federico II, Italy
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/aestim-17921

Published 2025-10-31

Keywords

  • geodesign,
  • collaborative spatial decision support system,
  • sustainable planning,
  • wasted roadscape,
  • impact assessment

Copyright (c) 2025 Maria Somma, Giuliano Poli, Maria Cerreta

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Abstract

This study explores the integration of wasted roadscapes into a Geodesign-based framework to enhance urban planning and regeneration strategies. Wasted roadscapes, including abandoned infrastructure landscapes, represent an opportunity for sustainable development. Through collaborative decision-making, the study investigates the potential of turning these underused spaces into functional assets. The methodology was applied to Bacoli, Southern Italy, focusing on adaptive urban strategies. The findings emphasise the importance of inclusive participation, with Geodesign facilitating stakeholder engagement and scenario planning. The project revealed how a participatory approach can inform decisions on landscape regeneration, promoting environmental, social, and economic sustainability. However, challenges remain regarding data complexity, impact assessment, and securing sufficient resources for implementation.

PDF

References

  1. Arciniegas, G., Šileryté, R., Dąbrowski, M., Wandl, A., Dukai, B., Bohnet, M., & Gutsche, J. M. (2019). A geodesign decision support environment for integrating management of resource flows in spatial planning. Urban Planning, 4(3), 32–51. https://doi.org/10.17645/UP.V4I3.2173
  2. Athanassiou, E. (2023). Participation as a Global Urban Strategy Towards Resilience. The Journal of Public Space, 8(3), 45–60. https://doi.org/10.32891/JPS.V8I3.1199
  3. Attardi, R., Bonifazi, A., & Torre, C. M. (2012). Evaluating sustainability and democracy in the development of industrial port cities: some Italian cases. Sustainability, 4(11), 3042–3065. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU4113042
  4. Ballal, H. (2015). Collaborative Planning with Digital Design Synthesis. Doctoral dissertation, University College London (UCL).
  5. Batty, M. (2009). Cities as complex systems: scaling, interaction, networks, dynamics and urban morphologies. In Meyers, R. A. (Ed.). Encyclopedia of Complexity and Systems Science. New York, Springer, 1041–1071. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-30440-3_69
  6. Brinkerhoff, D. W., & Wetterberg, A. (2016). Gauging the effects of social accountability on services, governance, and citizen empowerment. Public Administration Review, 76(2), 274–286. https://doi.org/10.1111/PUAR.12399
  7. Campagna, M., Steinitz, C., Di Cesare, E. A., Cocco, C., Ballal, H., & Canfield, T. (2016). Collaboration in planning: the Geodesign approach. Rozwój Regionalny i Polityka Regionalna, 35, 55–72. https://pressto.amu.edu.pl/index.php/rrpr/article/view/8574/8446
  8. Cecchini, M., Zambon, I., Pontrandolfi, A., Turco, R., Colantoni, A., Mavrakis, A., & Salvati, L. (2019). Urban sprawl and the ‘olive’ landscape: sustainable land management for ‘crisis’ cities. GeoJournal, 84(1), 237–255. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10708-018-9848-5/FIGURES/4
  9. Cerreta, M., Mazzarella, C., & Somma, M. (2020a). Opportunities and Challenges of a Geodesign Based Platform for Waste Management in the Circular Economy Perspective. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 12252 LNCS, 317–331. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-58811-3_23/FIGURES/8
  10. Cerreta, M., Poli, G., & Reitano, M. (2020b). Evaluating Socio-spatial Exclusion: Local Spatial Indices of Segregation and Isolation in Naples (Italy). Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 12253, 207–220. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-58814-4_15
  11. Cocco, C., Jankowski, P., & Campagna, M. (2019). An analytic approach to understanding process dynamics in geodesign studies. Sustainability, 11(18), 4999. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU11184999
  12. Duvernoy, I., Zambon, I., Sateriano, A., & Salvati, L. (2018). Pictures from the other side of the fringe: urban growth and peri-urban agriculture in a post-industrial city (Toulouse, France). Journal of Rural Studies, 57, 25–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JRURSTUD.2017.10.007
  13. Elliot, T., Goldstein, B., Gómez-Baggethun, E., Proença, V., & Rugani, B. (2022). Ecosystem service deficits of European cities. Science of The Total Environment, 837, 155875. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.155875
  14. Elmqvist, T., Bai, X., Frantzeskaki, N., Griffith, C., Maddox, D., McPhearson, T., Parnell, S., Romero-Lankao, P., Simon, D., & Watkins, M. (2018). Urban planet: knowledge towards sustainable cities. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
  15. Esposito, D., Zanin, G. M., Balena, P., & Monno, V. (2024). Achieving SDGs through Public Participation in Spatial Planning and Urban Governance: International Standards for Effective Implementation. In Marucci, A., Zullo, F., Fiorini, L., & Saganeiti, L. (Eds.). Innovation in Urban and Regional Planning. Cham, Springer Nature Switzerland, 396–407.
  16. Fregolent, L., & Tonin, S. (2016). Local public spending and urban sprawl: analysis of this relationship in the Veneto region of Italy. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 142(3), 05016001. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)UP.1943-5444.0000318
  17. Irvin, R. A., & Stansbury, J. (2004). Citizen participation in decision making: is it worth the effort? Public Administration Review, 64(1), 55–65. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1540-6210.2004.00346.X
  18. Koolhaas, R. (2006). Junkspace. Per un ripensamento radicale dello spazio urbano. Macerata, Quodlibet.
  19. Lami, I. M., & White, L. (2022). Are psms relevant in a digital age? Towards an ethical dimension. In Salhi, S., & Boylan, J. (Eds). The Palgrave Handbook of Operations Research. Cham, Palgrave Macmillan.781–801. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-96935-6_24/FIGURES/3
  20. Marin, J., & De Meulder, B. (2018). Interpreting circularity. Circular city representations concealing transition drivers. Sustainability, 10(5), 1310. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU10051310
  21. Medina, C. D., & Monclús, J. (2018). Urban Visions: From Planning Culture to Landscape Urbanism. Cham, Springer.
  22. Hall, C. M. (2013). The ecological and environmental significance of urban wastelands and drosscapes. In Zapata, M. J., & Hall, C. M. (Eds.). Organising waste in the city: international perspectives on narratives and practices. Bristol, UK, Policy Press, 21–40. https://doi.org/10.46692/9781447306382.002
  23. Newman, G., Park, Y., Bowman, A. O. M., & Lee, R. J. (2018). Vacant urban areas: causes and interconnected factors. Cities, 72, 421–429. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.10.005
  24. Nyerges, T., Ballal, H., Steinitz, C., Canfield, T., Roderick, M., Ritzman, J., & Thanatemaneerat, W. (2016). Geodesign dynamics for sustainable urban watershed development. Sustainable Cities and Society, 25, 13–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCS.2016.04.016
  25. Raffestin, C. (2003). Immagini e identità territoriali. In Dematteis, G., & Ferlaino, F. (Eds.). Il Mondo E I Luoghi: Geografie Delle Identità E Del Cambiamento. IRES, Torino. 3–11. Available at: https://www.byterfly.eu/islandora/object/librib:363225/datastream/PDF/content/librib_363225.pdf (Accessed 1 December 2024).
  26. Roggema, R. E., van den Dobbelsteen, A. A. J. F., Biggs, C., & Timmermans, W. (2011). Planning for climate change or: How wicked problems shape the new paradigm of swarm planning. WPSC 2011: 3rd World Planning Schools Congress, Perth, Australia, 4-8 July 2011. Available at: https://repository.tudelft.nl/islandora/object/uuid%3A96fb3d16-f94e-4e9f-a80a-6ff648c3309d (Accessed 1 December 2024).
  27. Russo, M., Amenta, L., Attademo, A., Cerreta, M., Formato, E., Remøy, H., van der Leer, J., Varjú, V., & Arciniegas Lopez, G. (2017). REPAiR: REsource Management in Peri-urban AReas: Going Beyond Urban Metabolism | TU Delft Repository. Available at: https://repository.tudelft.nl/record/uuid:e23a0980-558b-4963-ab1e-13e139867de1 (Accessed 1 December 2024).
  28. Somma M. (2022). CoDeSs – Collaborative Decision Support System in Spatial Planning. Method and tools to sustainable evaluated and co-design wasted roadscapes. PhD Thesis. University of Naples Federico II.
  29. Somma, M., Campagna, M., Canfield, T., Cerreta, M., Poli, G., & Steinitz, C. (2022). Collaborative and sustainable strategies through geodesign: the case study of Bacoli. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 13379 LNCS, 210–224. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10545-6_15/FIGURES/9
  30. Steinitz, C. (2012). A framework for geodesign: changing geography by design. Redlands, ESRI Press. https://books.google.com/books/about/A_Framework_for_Geodesign.html?hl=it&id=aF-J7WujMxQC
  31. Sydelko, P., Midgley, G., & Espinosa, A. (2021). Designing interagency responses to wicked problems: creating a common, cross-agency understanding. European Journal of Operational Research, 294(1), 250–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EJOR.2020.11.045
  32. Thomas, J. C. (1995). Public participation in public decisions: new skills and strategies for public managers. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.
  33. Tombolini, I., Zambon, I., Ippolito, A., Grigoriadis, S., Serra, P., & Salvati, L. (2015). Revisiting “Southern” sprawl: urban growth, socio-spatial structure and the influence of local economic contexts. Economies, 3(4), 237–259. https://doi.org/10.3390/ECONOMIES3040237