ANNUAL CONGRESS 2025

Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis in multi-risk urban context: a methodological and operational framework for co-test phase of Return Urban Living Labs

Not scheduled

20m

Yildiz Technical University, Istanbul

Oral Track 05 | ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE

Speakers

Prof. Martina Bosone (University of Naples Federico II)Prof. Pasquale De Toro (University of Naples Federico II)Dr Pasquale Galasso (University of Naples Federico II)

Description

This paper outlines a specific phase of the whole methodology and initial findings of the RETURN Urban Living Lab (ULL) implemented in the Bagnoli-Coroglio area of Naples, Southern Italy. Developed as part of the Extended Partnership PE3 RETURN project within the Spoke TS1-Urban and Metropolitan Settlements activities, the initiative aims to foster collaboration among stakeholders to guide the transformation of an urban environment exposed to multiple risks. The overarching goal is to enhance resilience and sustainability in response to climate change, creating adaptive and inclusive communities. The RETURN Bagnoli-Coroglio ULL methodology follows a dynamic, iterative process structured into three key phases: co-exploring, co-design, and co-testing. The co-exploring phase focuses on gathering in-depth knowledge of the area, analyzing socio-environmental factors, and understanding community needs. The co-design phase facilitates the development of shared visions, conceptual strategies, policies, and planning solutions in collaboration with relevant actors. Finally, the co-test phase critically evaluates the proposed strategies and solutions using a participatory and evidence-based approach. This contribution is focused on methodological framework and first findings of the co-test phase.As an essential step within the ULL framework, the co-test phase ensures that proposed solutions are applied and assessed in real-world conditions. It aims to determine their effectiveness, relevance, and overall impact, utilizing both qualitative and quantitative data collection methods (Bosone et al., 2021). Active participation from key stakeholders—including local authorities, businesses, and citizens—enables a comprehensive evaluation, incorporating direct observations and feedback. This iterative process allows for continuous refinement, ensuring that solutions remain adaptable and viable in the long term. The co-test phase employs a structured five-step evaluation methodology. The first step involves defining an evaluation framework based on the Circular Urban Metabolism (CUM) concept, establishing objectives and criteria for assessment. Next, stakeholders engage in prioritizing these objectives through Simos’ card method, ranking strategies based on their preferences. In the third step a Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) is used to analyze and compare the proposed solutions (De Montis et al., 2005). The fourth step consists of a participatory co-evaluation process that enables stakeholders to re-assess and refine their preferences dynamically (Fusco Girard, 2021). Finally, a sensitivity analysis is conducted to verify the robustness of results, examining how different weight allocations impact the ranking of strategies. The co-test phase is closely linked to other project activities, such as a masterclass and an inter-task workshop, where stakeholders assess regeneration strategies against predefined objectives, criteria, and indicators. Additionally, this methodology is integrated with broader project tasks, including risk scenario evaluations and urban systemic vulnerability assessments. By iteratively testing and adjusting proposed strategies, the co-test phase plays a key role in shaping resilient urban solutions tailored to the evolving context of Bagnoli-Coroglio. The RETURN Bagnoli-Coroglio ULL highlights the effectiveness of participatory and iterative urban transformation approaches. It emphasizes the importance of stakeholder involvement and data-driven decision-making in addressing complex urban challenges and fostering sustainable development.
Acknowledgements: This study was carried out within the RETURN Extended Partnership and received funding from the European Union Next-GenerationEU (National Recovery and Resilience Plan – NRRP, Mission 4, Component 2, Investment 1.3 – D.D. 1243 2/8/2022, PE0000005.

References

1. De Montis, A., De Toro, P., Droste-Franke, B., Omann, I. & Stagl, S. (2004) 'Assessing the quality of different MCDA methods', in Alternatives for environmental valuation, Routledge, pp. 115-149.

2. Bosone, M., De Toro, P., Fusco Girard, L., Gravagnuolo, A. & Iodice, S. (2021) 'Indicators for ex-post evaluation of cultural heritage adaptive reuse impacts in the perspective of the circular economy', Sustainability, 13(9), p. 4759. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/su13094759.

3. Girard, L.F. (2021) 'The evolutionary circular and human centered city: Towards an ecological and humanistic “re-generation” of the current city governance', Human Systems Management, vol. 40, no. 6, pp. 753-775, 2021. DOI: 10.3233/HSM-211218